three-factor solution, only one test, PICTURE COMPLETION, was found to
load on the third factor. On the basis of this, as well as only minimal changes in
variance accounted for, the two-factor solution was determined to most parsi-
moniously fit the data.
Analysis of the WPPSI-R subtests yielded a performance factor accounting
for 37.6% of the variance in WPPSI-R subtest scores, and a verbal factor ac-
counting for 33.0% of the variance; the two factors together account for 70.6%
of the variance in raw WPPSI-R subtest scores. The performance factor loaded
the five performance tests as well as the ARITHMETIC test, and the verbal
factor loaded the five verbal tests, with ARITHMETIC loading slightly more
heavily on the performance factor. There is also clear evidence of a general
intelligence factor. All subtests loaded positively on the first unrotated factor,
with loadings ranging from .671 (for PICTURE COMPLETION) to .858 (for
ARITHMETIC). Loadings of the WPPSI-R subtest scores on the first unrotated
factor and on the two rotated factors can be found in Table 14. It is worth noting
that principal components analysis of the scaled WPPSI-R subtest scores yielded
highly similar results and interpretations.
Principal Components Analysis of All Three Batteries Combined
Principal components analysis, with varimax rotation, of all three batteries com-
bined was performed in order to determine the number and nature of the factors
underlying a combination of RT, memory, and intelligence measures. On the
basis of the analyses reported earlier for each independent battery, it would be
reasonable to anticipate the existence of four factors underlying the complete set
of tests: an RT factor, a memory span factor, a performance ability factor, and a
verbal ability factor. A general factor, as revealed by positive, nonzero loadings
on the first unrotated factor, would also be anticipated. The Scree Plot was used
to determine the number of factors, and varimax rotation was used to rotate the
three-factor solution, only one test, PICTURE COMPLETION, was found to
load on the third factor. On the basis of this, as well as only minimal changes in
variance accounted for, the two-factor solution was determined to most parsi-
moniously fit the data.
Analysis of the WPPSI-R subtests yielded a performance factor accounting
for 37.6% of the variance in WPPSI-R subtest scores, and a verbal factor ac-
counting for 33.0% of the variance; the two factors together account for 70.6%
of the variance in raw WPPSI-R subtest scores. The performance factor loaded
the five performance tests as well as the ARITHMETIC test, and the verbal
factor loaded the five verbal tests, with ARITHMETIC loading slightly more
heavily on the performance factor. There is also clear evidence of a general
intelligence factor. All subtests loaded positively on the first unrotated factor,
with loadings ranging from .671 (for PICTURE COMPLETION) to .858 (for
ARITHMETIC). Loadings of the WPPSI-R subtest scores on the first unrotated
factor and on the two rotated factors can be found in Table 14. It is worth noting
that principal components analysis of the scaled WPPSI-R subtest scores yielded
highly similar results and interpretations.
Principal Components Analysis of All Three Batteries Combined
Principal components analysis, with varimax rotation, of all three batteries com-
bined was performed in order to determine the number and nature of the factors
underlying a combination of RT, memory, and intelligence measures. On the
basis of the analyses reported earlier for each independent battery, it would be
reasonable to anticipate the existence of four factors underlying the complete set
of tests: an RT factor, a memory span factor, a performance ability factor, and a
verbal ability factor. A general factor, as revealed by positive, nonzero loadings
on the first unrotated factor, would also be anticipated. The Scree Plot was used
to determine the number of factors, and varimax rotation was used to rotate the
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..