Stefan C. Dombrowski

Protecting Children From Online Sexual Predators: Technological, Psychoeducational, and Legal Considerations.

Professional psychologists should more fully understand the dangers of online sexual solicitation andways in which to protect youth from sexual predators who use the Internet. Although the Internet hasmany positive aspects, one of the most pernicious aspects is its potential use for online sexual predation.The Internet represents a medium that allows sexual predators access to countless children in a relativelyanonymous environment. This article reviews the general strategies of sexual perpetrators and theircharacteristics, as well as the online strategies and characteristics of the cyber sexual predator. Infor-mation on how to protect children from this crime through a review of technological, psychoeducational,and legal considerations is provided. A description of the relevant laws as they relate to online solicitationand practicing psychologists is also provided.

An Exploratory Investigation of the Factor Structure of the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS)

This study investigated the factor structure of the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS) using rigorous exploratory factor analytic and factor extraction procedures. The results of this study indicate that the RIAS is a single factor test. Despite these results, higher order factor analysis using the Schmid—Leiman procedure indicates that all subtests are aligned with their theoretically consistent factors. All analyses in this study, including the minimum average partial test, parallel analysis, the Schmid—Leiman procedure, as well as principal factors with orthogonal and oblique rotation, support interpretation at the composite intelligence index level and suggest caution when moving to interpretation at the verbal and nonverbal index levels. The memory subtests should continue to be separated from the main IQ battery because of poor g-loadings and contribution to cross loadings of the intelligence subtests. Interpretation at the subtest level should be eschewed.

Investigating the Theoretical Structure of the Stanford-Binet-Fifth Edition

The fifth edition of the Stanford-Binet test went through significant reformulation of its item content, administration format, standardization procedures, and theoretical structure. Additionally, the test was revised to measure five factors important to intelligence across both verbal and nonverbal domains. To better understand these substantial revisions, the underlying factor structure of the instrument was investigated using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis procedures across five age groups tested by the publishers. Analyses were conducted using 4,800 cases included in the instrument standardization. Results suggested that the verbal/nonverbal domains were identifiable with subjects younger than 10 years of age whereas a single factor was readily identified with older age groups.

Exploratory and higher order factor analysis of the WJ-III full test battery: a school-aged analysis.

Development of the Woodcock-Johnson (3rd ed.; WJ-III; Woodcock, McGrew & Mather, 2001a) was guided in part by Carrolls (1993) 3-stratum theory of cognitive abilities and based on confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), even though Carroll used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to derive his theory. Using CFA, McGrew and Woodcock (2001) found a 9-factor model across all age ranges. To determine if the 9-factor structure holds for the full WJ-III battery, we applied currently recognized best practices in EFA to 2 school-aged 42-subtest correlation matrices (ages 9–13 and 14–19 years). Six factors emerged at the 9–13 age range, while 5 factors were indicated at the 14–19 age range. The resulting 1st-order factors displayed patterns of both convergence with and divergence from the WJ-III results presented in the Technical Manual. These results also revealed a robust manifestation of general intelligence (g) that dwarfed the variance attributed to the lower order factors. It is surprising that this study represents the first time the WJ-III full battery was subjected to EFA analyses given the instruments significant use by practitioners and that it served as the initial evidentiary basis for Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory. The lack of confirmation of CFA results with EFA methods in the current study permits questioning of the structure of the WJ-III and its relationship with CHC theory. Additional independent, structural analyses are clearly indicated for the WJ-III full test battery before we can be confident in its structure.

Investigating the structure of the WJ-III Cognitive at school age.

During its development, the Woodcock-Johnson, Third Edition Cognitive (WJ-III Cognitive; McGrew & Woodcock, 2001) was never subjected to structural analysis using exploratory and higher order factor analyses. Instead, confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on separate sets of WJ-III correlation matrices, yielding a seven-factor model across all age ranges. To see whether the structure holds for the WJ-III Cognitive, currently recognized best practice exploratory factor analysis (EFA) procedures were applied to two school-aged correlation matrices (ages 9-13; 14-19) from the normative sample. Using EFA and higher order factor analysis, four factors emerged at age 9 to 13 and three factors emerged at age 14 to 19. The results of this analysis indicated a robust manifestation of general intelligence (g) that exceeded the variance attributed to the lower order factors. An additional analysis was conducted that disregarded factor extraction rules and forced the seven-factor fit. The resulting solution was only partially aligned (i.e., Gc, Ga, and Gsm) with the theoretical structure posited in the WJ-III Technical Manual. Surprisingly, this study represents the first time to my knowledge that the WJ-III Cognitive has been subjected to EFA analyses given the instruments significant use by practitioners and that it has served as the initial evidentiary base for Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory.

Factor structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition: Exploratory factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests.

The factor structure of the 16 Primary and Secondary subtests of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014a) standardization sample was examined with exploratory factor analytic methods (EFA) not included in the WISC-V Technical and Interpretive Manual (Wechsler, 2014b). Factor extraction criteria suggested 1 to 4 factors and results favored 4 first-order factors. When this structure was transformed with the Schmid and Leiman (1957) orthogonalization procedure, the hierarchical g-factor accounted for large portions of total and common variance while the 4 first-order factors accounted for small portions of total and common variance; rendering interpretation at the factor index level less appropriate. Although the publisher favored a 5-factor model where the Perceptual Reasoning factor was split into separate Visual Spatial and Fluid Reasoning dimensions, no evidence for 5 factors was found. It was concluded that the WISC-V provides strong measurement of general intelligence and clinical interpretation should be primarily, if not exclusively, at that level. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Neurobiological Foundations of Giftedness

Case studies of extremely gifted individuals often reveal unique patterns of intellectual precocity and associated abnormalities in development and behavior. This article begins with a review of current neurophysiological and neuroanatomical findings related to the gifted population. The bulk of scientific inquiries provide evidence of unique patterns of right prefrontal cortex and inferior frontal activation implicated in gifted intelligence, although additional studies suggest enhanced neural processing and cerebral bilateralism. Geschwind, Behan, and Galaburda (GBG) first hypothesized the possible neurodevelopmental factors that account for unique brain development. This article explores more recent findings taken from the prenatal exposure literature and offers a proposed model for explaining aberrant developmental forces that may be at work in precocious individuals.

Structural validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition: Confirmatory factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests.

The factor structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014a) standardization sample (N = 2,200) was examined using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) with maximum likelihood estimation for all reported models from the WISC-V Technical and Interpretation Manual (Wechsler, 2014b). Additionally, alternative bifactor models were examined and variance estimates and model-based reliability estimates (&ohgr; coefficients) were provided. Results from analyses of the 16 primary and secondary WISC-V subtests found that all higher-order CFA models with 5 group factors (VC, VS, FR, WM, and PS) produced model specification errors where the Fluid Reasoning factor produced negative variance and were thus judged inadequate. Of the 16 models tested, the bifactor model containing 4 group factors (VC, PR, WM, and PS) produced the best fit. Results from analyses of the 10 primary WISC-V subtests also found the bifactor model with 4 group factors (VC, PR, WM, and PS) produced the best fit. Variance estimates from both 16 and 10 subtest based bifactor models found dominance of general intelligence (g) in accounting for subtest variance (except for PS subtests) and large &ohgr;-hierarchical coefficients supporting general intelligence interpretation. The small portions of variance uniquely captured by the 4 group factors and low &ohgr;-hierarchical subscale coefficients likely render the group factors of questionable interpretive value independent of g (except perhaps for PS). Present CFA results confirm the EFA results reported by Canivez, Watkins, and Dombrowski (2015); Dombrowski, Canivez, Watkins, and Beaujean (2015); and Canivez, Dombrowski, and Watkins (2015).

Investigating the Structure of the WJ-III Cognitive in Early School Age Through Two Exploratory Bifactor Analysis Procedures

Two exploratory bifactor methods (e.g., Schmid–Leiman [SL] and exploratory bifactor analysis [EBFA]) were used to investigate the structure of the Woodcock–Johnson III (WJ-III) Cognitive in early school age (age 6-8). The SL procedure is recognized by factor analysts as a preferred method for EBFA. Jennrich and Bentler recently developed an alternative EBFA procedure. They claim that EBFA more readily produces independent cluster structure and overcomes the proportionality constraint experienced by the SL. The results of both analyses support the preeminence of the g factor at age 6 to 8. Examination of omega coefficients, the divergent factor structure, and the small amount of variance accounted for by the lower order factors suggests caution when interpreting beyond the higher order factor. Implications for interpretation of the WJ-III Cognitive at age 6 to 8 are discussed.

Exploratory Bifactor Analysis of the WJ-III Cognitive in Adulthood via the Schmid–Leiman Procedure

The Woodcock–Johnson-III cognitive in the adult time period (age 20 to 90 plus) was analyzed using exploratory bifactor analysis via the Schmid–Leiman orthogonalization procedure. The results of this study suggested possible overfactoring, a different factor structure from that posited in the Technical Manual and a lack of invariance across both age ranges under study. Even when forcing the seven-factor fit, the structure was problematic. The results from the 20 to 39 age group displayed patterns of convergence with and divergence from the Technical Manual’s structure. The results from the 40 and above age group were generally consistent with the Technical Manual’s structure except for retrieval fluency. This study is consistent with the body of exploratory factor analysis structural validity evidence suggesting that contemporary tests of cognitive ability, particularly those based on Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory, are overfactored and lack alignment with their respective Technical Manual’s presented structure.