A CLINICAL PROFILE FOR THE STANFORD-BINET

ROBF-~T E. VALETT
Sacramento City Unified School District
California

One of the major tools of the practicing school psychologist is the

1960 revision of the Stanford-Binet (Terman and Merrill, 1960). Al-
though the Binet has long been regarded as one of the more valid indi-
cators of general intelligence, the absence of sub-test categories has
made the interpretation of test performance a difficult clinical task.
In the school situation some indication of individual strengths and
weaknesses together with their possible educational implications is an
important part of the psychological report. What is needed is some
system of item classification on the basis of logical constructs which is
meaningful for a more detailed representation of measured intellectual
functioning. The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children serves as one
model which permits such differential diagnosis even though pattern
analysis must be utilized with caution due to its questionable validity
( Littell, 1960).
When item success and failure on the Binet is evaluated relative to
other information available on the subject, such as school achievement
and performance records, the test results become more powerful. An
attempt has been made here to construct an individual profile form
as an aid to the clinical interpretation of Binet test results.

Procedure
Following a consideration of the various factors of intellect as pro-
posed by Binet (1916), Thurstone (1938), and Guilford (1959) among
others, the following item classifications were made: sensory and per-
ceptual discrimination, comprehension, motor coordination, judgment,
comparisons, imagery, vocabulary, memory, arithmetic reasoning, and
speed of response. Six credentialed and experienced psychological exam-
iners then proceeded to classify each item and the degree of agreement
and disagreement was discussed. The following categories were then
finally agreed on as basic logical test constructs which allowed some
meaningful differentiation of Binet items:
49
 1. General Comprehension: Ability to conceptualize and integrate
components into a meaningful total relationship.
2. Visual-Motor Ability: Ability to manipulate materials in problem
solving situations, usually requiring integration of visual and
motor skills.
3. Arithmetic Reasoning: Ability to make appropriate numerical
associations and deal with mental abstractions in problem solving
situations.
4. Memory and Concentration: Ability to retain, requiring moti-
vation as well as attention.
5. Vocabulary and Verbal Fluency: Ability to correctly use words
in association with concrete or abstract material; the understand-
ing of words and verbal concepts; the quality and quantity of
verbal expression.
6. Judgment and Reasoning: Ability to comprehend and respond
appropriately in specific situations requiring discrimination, com-
parison, and judgment in adaptation.

A further classification of items was then made b y ten graduate students

in a class on individual intelligence testing. T h e final classification of
items was made b y the writer upon consideration and comparison of
prior sortings (See Table 1). The Individual Profile form was then
developed as shown in Table 2.

Table 1

STANFORD-BINET L-M ITEM CLASSIFICATIONS

General Comprehension: The ability to conceptualize and integrate
components into a meaningful total relationship.
II, 3. Parts of body VIII, 4. Similaritiesand differences
II, A. Identifying objects by name VIII, 5. Comprehension IV
II-6, 1. Identifying objects by use XI, 6. Similarities:three things
II-6, 2. Parts of body XII, 3. Picture absurdities II
II-6, 6. Simple commands XII, 6. Minkuscompletion I
III-6, 6. Comprehension I XIII, 4. Problems of fact
IV, 4. Picture identification XIV, 5. Direction I
IV, 6. Comprehension II AA, 5. Proverbs I
IV-6, 4. Materials AA, 6. Direction II
IV, 6, 6. Comprehension III AA, 7. Essential differences
IV-6, A. Picture identification SA-I, 6. Essential similarities
VII, 2. Similarities:two things SA-II, 3. Proverbs II
VII, 4. Comprehension IV SA-III, 2. Proverbs III
VII, 5. Opposite analogies III SA-III, 4. Directions III
50
Visual Motor Ability: The ability to manipulate materials in problem
solving situations usually requiring integration of visual and motor skills,
II, 1. Form board V, 4. Copying square
II, 4. Block tower V, 6. Patience: rectangles
II, 6, A. Form board: rotated V, A. Knot
III, 1. Stringing beads VI, 6. Maze
III, 3. Block bridge VII, 3. Copying diamond
III, 5. Copying circle IX, 1. Paper cutting
III, 6. Vertical line IX, 3. Designs I
III-6, 2. Patience: pictures X, 2. Block counting
III-6, 5. Sorting buttons XI, 1. Designs I
V, 1. Picture completion: man XII, A. Designs II
V, 2. Folding triangle XIII, A. Paper cutting
AA, A. Binet paper cutting

Arithmetic reasoning: The ability to make appropriate numerical asso-

ciations and deal with mental abstractions in problem solving situations.
VI, 4. Number concepts AA, 2. Ingenuity I
IX, 5. Change AA, 4. Arithmetic reasoning
XIV, 4. Ingenuity I SA-I, 2. Enclosed boxes
XIV, A. Ingenuity II SA-II, 4. Ingenuity I

Memory & Concentration: The ability to attend and retain, requiring

motivation as well as attention.
II, 2. Delayed response IX, 6. 4 digits reversed
II-6, 5. Picture memories X, 6. 6 digits
III, 4. 2 digits XI, 1. Designs I
III, A. 3 digits XI, 4. Memory for sentences II
IV, 2. Objects from memory XII, 4. 5 digits reversed
IV, A. Memory for sentences I XII, A. Designs II
IV-6, 5. 3 commissions XIII, 3. Memory for sentences III
VII, 6. 5 digits XIII, 6. Copying a bead chain from
VII, A. 3 digits reversed memory
VIII, 2. Wet Fall SA-I, 4. 6 digits reversed
VIII, 6. Days of week SA-II, 6. Passage I: Value of Life
IX, 3. Designs I SA-III, 6. Repeating thought of
passage II

Vocabulary & Verbal Fluency: The ability to correctly use words in

association with concrete or abstract material; the understanding of
words and verbal concepts; the quality and quantity of verbal expression.
II, 5. Picture vocabulary V, 3. Definitions
II, 6. Word combinations VI, 1. Vocabulary
II, A. Identifying objects by name VI, A. Response to pictures
II-6, 3. Naming of objects VIII, 1. Vocabulary
II-6, 4. Picture vocabulary IX, 4. Rhymes; new form
III-2. Picture vocabulary IX, A. Rhymes; old form
III-6, 4. Response to pictures X, 1. Vocabulary
IV, 1. Vocabulary X, 3. Abstract Words I
51
 X, 5. Word naming AA, 3. Difference abstract words
XI, 3. Abstract words AA, 8. Abstract words III
XII, 1. Vocabulary SA-I, 1. Vocabulary
XII, 5. Abstract words SA-I, 3. Minkus Completion II
XII, 6. Minkus completion I SA-I, 5. Sentence building
XIII, 2. Abstract words II SA-II, 1. Vocabulary
XIII, 5. Dissected sentences SA-III, 1. Vocabulary
XIV, 1. Vocabulary SA-III, 3. Opposite analogies IV
AA, 1. Vocabulary SA-III, A. Opposite analogies V

Judgment & Reasoning: The ability to comprehend and respond appro-

priately in specific situations requiring discrimination, comparison, and
judgment in adaptation.
II-6, 1. Identifying objects by use XI, A. Finding reasons II
III-6, 1. Comparison of balls XlI, 2. Verbal absurdities II
III-6, 2. Patience: pictures XIII, 1, Plan of search
III-6, 3. Discrim. of animal pictures XIII, 4. Problems of fact
III-6, A. Comparison of sticks XIII, 5. Dissected sentences
IV-3. Opposite analogies I XIII, A. Paper cutting
IV-4. Pictorial identification XIV, 2. Induction
IV-5. Discrimination of forms XIV, 3. Reasoning
IV-6, 1. Aesthetic comparison XIV, 4. Ingenuity I
IV-6, 2. Opposite analogies I XIV, 5. Direction I
IV-6, 3. Pictorial sim. & diff. I XIV, 6. Recon. of opposites
IV-6, A. Pictorial identification XIV, A. Ingenuity II
V, 5. Pictorial sim. & diff. II AA, 2. Ingenuity I
V, 6. Patience: rectangles AA, 3. Difference abstract words
VI, 2. Differences AA, 6. Direction II
VI, 3. Mutilated pictures AA, 7. Essential differences
VI, 5. Opposite analogies II AA, A. Binet paper cut.
VI, A. Response to pictures SA-I 2. Enclosed boxes
VII, 1. Pictorial absurdities I SA-I 6. Essential similarities
VII, 2. Similarities II SA-I A. Recon. of opposites
VII, 4. Comprehension IV SA-II 2. Finding reasons
VII, 5. Opposite analogies III SA-II 3. Proverbs II
VIII, 3. Verbal absurdities I SA-II 4. Ingenuity I
VIII, 4. Similarities & differences SA-II 5. Essential differences
IX, 1. Paper cutting SA-II 6. Passage I
IX, 2. Verbal absurdities II SA-II A. Codes
IX, 4. Rhymes: new form SA-III. 2. Proverbs III
X, 2. Block counting SA-III 4. Direction III
X, 4. Finding reasons SA-III. 5. Reasoning II
X, A. Verbal absurdities III SA-III 6. Passage II
XI, 2. Verbal absurdities IV SA-III A. Op. anal. V
XI, 6. Similarities

52
 im~ c1~ OO

c~

~O

c~

C~

v~

c~

c~

c~

~O

o~ p~ c~

53
Use of the Profile
The Individual Profile makes possible a schematic presentation of
test results and their further consideration. It is suggested that a verti-
cal red line be drawn through the year level for the obtained basal age
and that all test items successfully passed beyond this be encircled in
red. This allows for a comparison of successes and failures relative to
chronological age together with a consideration of what possible indi-
vidual strengths and weaknesses might be reflected in these items.
It will be noted that some items have been judged to reflect
more than one test construct. This is particularly true with many of
the items placed within the General Comprehension and Judgment-
Reasoning classifications. Of course, this overlap exists in reality to a
considerable extent for all items and the actual significance of an item
must still be clinically deduced upon consideration of marginal successes
and failures, the nature of the item relative to maturational differences,
cultural expectations and total test performance, and the usual qualita-
tive-associational aspects of test interpretation (Valett, 1963).
The Profile should be useful in three major ways: (a) in stimulating
the psychologist to give further thought to individual differences and
intra-test performance prior to reporting results, (b) in presenting a
graphic picture of test results to parents and teachers, and (e) as an
aid to students or beginning psychometrists in studying the psychological
constructs underlying the Binet test items.

Summary
The development and use of an Individual Profile to facilitate
clinical interpretation of the Stanford-Binet L-M test has been presented.
It has been emphasized that the test constructs presented include over-
lapping items and that interpretation must be made with due caution.
Some possible uses of the Profile were also presented.

REFERENCES
Binet, A., & Simon, T. The development of intelligence in children. Vineland, N. J.:
The Training School at Vineland, 1916.
Guilford, J. P. Three faces of intellect, American Psychologist, 1959, 14, 469-479.
Littell, W. M. The Wechsler Intelligence Seale £or Children: Review of a decade
of research. PsychologicalBulletin, 1960, 57, 132-156.
Terman, L. M., & Merrill, Maud A. Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1960.
Thurstone, L. L. Primary mental abilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1938.
Valett, R. E. The practice of school psychology. New York: John Wiley, 1963,
124-131.

54