EXAMINING THE CULTURAL LOADING AND LINGUISTIC DEMAND OF THREE NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT BATTERIES FOR CHILDREN IN A MIXED CLINICAL POPULATION A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE TEXAS WOMAN’S UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES BY PAMELA E. CIOFFI, B.A. DENTON, TEXAS DECEMBER 2015 DEDICATION For my loving family, friends, and for my boyfriend, Chad Hensley, all of whom have provided unconditional support and inspiration throughout this arduous journey. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and extend a thank you to all of the individuals who contributed to the creation of this dissertation. The support and guidance of my academic advisor and committee chair, Dr. Maricle, has been instrumental in my completion of this dissertation, as well as in my overall growth as a professional. I would like to thank Dr. Miller for allowing me the opportunity to use data collected from the KIDS, Inc.’s School Neuropsychology Post-Graduate Certification Program for this dissertation, as well as his assistance through constructive feedback and thoughtful advice throughout the writing process. A special thanks also goes out to the other members of my dissertation committee, Dr. DeOrnellas and Dr. Scott, both of whom provided invaluable support throughout this process. The time and endless encouragement imparted by the members of my dissertation committee is most appreciated, as it was with their support that the completion of this dissertation was made possible. I would also like to express my gratitude to the dear friends I made during my graduate school journey. For it was the special bond we shared that gave me the strength and confidence to persevere even in times of self doubt. Finally, I am thankful for the ongoing support that my family has provided during the production of this dissertation. iv ABSTRACT PAMELA E. CIOFFI EXAMINING THE CULTURAL LOADING AND LINGUISTIC DEMAND OF THREE NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT BATTERIES FOR CHILDREN IN A MIXED CLINICAL POPULATION DECEMBER 2015 There are a disproportionate number of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children and adolescents referred for and placed in special education programs (Guthrie, 2004). These CLD individuals are tested using neurocognitive measures and methods plagued with issues ranging from culturally loaded test content and linguistically loaded test instructions to psychometric issues caused by poor normative reference samples and/or failure to remove error variance attributed to differences in performance for reasons other than cognitive ability level (i.e., level of acculturation or level of language proficiency; Ortiz, Ochoa, & Dynda, 2012). There is a need to examine the influence of cultural loading and linguistic demand on the test performance of CLD individuals. The Culture-Language Test Classifications (C-LTC) and the Culture-Language Interpretive Matrix (C-LIM) are an integrated system that uses classifications of cognitive test batteries on the two dimensions of cultural loading and linguistic demand to determine whether a given test performance reflects differences on these dimensions or a true measurement of ability (Flanagan, Ortiz, & Alfonso, 2007, 2013). However, research on the validity of the C-LTC and C-LIM is limited. A study was conducted using archival v data from a mixed clinical sample (n = 520) of children and adolescents from school neuropsychology case studies. This sample included test scores obtained by the participants for selected tests from three standardized neuropsychological test batteries: the Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities, Normative Update (WJ III COG NU; McGrew & Woodcock, 2001); the NEPSY-II: A Developmental Neuropsychological Assessment (NEPSY-II; Korkman, Kirk, & Kemp, 2007); and the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS; Delis, Kaplan, & Kramer, 2001a). A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) revealed differences in performance existed between ethnicity groups on selected subtests from the WJ III COG NU, NEPSY-II, and D-KEFS. A discriminant function analysis (DFA) was used as a post-hoc measure. Findings appear to suggest that the C-LTC ratings have some validity for use in CLD individuals. However, there were instances in which subtests rated highly for both cultural loading and linguistic demand were not found to be statistically different across ethnicity in this study. Limitations and implications of this study are presented. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DEDICATION ............................................................................................................ iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................... iv ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. v LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... x LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... xi Chapter I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 Rationale and Purpose for this Study ..................................................................... 7 Research Questions and Hypotheses ................................................................ 8 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ........................................................................ 9 Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Individuals in the Field of Psychology .... 10 Definitions .................................................................................................... 10 Disproportionality in Special Education ........................................................ 16 Disproportionality Among Professionals ....................................................... 18 History of Intellectual Testing with CLD Individuals ......................................... 19 Theories of Intelligence .................................................................................. 19 Test Development .......................................................................................... 21 Current Issues in Test Batteries and Assessment ................................................. 25 Biased Theories of Intelligence ...................................................................... 26 Lack of Appropriate Tests/Procedures for CLD Individuals ......................... 30 Inappropriate Decision-Making ..................................................................... 33 Methods to Assess CLD Individuals .................................................................... 35 “Nonverbal” Testing ...................................................................................... 36 Native Language ............................................................................................ 37 Alternate Forms .............................................................................................. 39 vii Norm Sampling .............................................................................................. 40 Cross-Battery Approach ................................................................................. 41 C-LIM/C-LTC .................................................................................................... 42 Development ................................................................................................. 42 Associated Research ....................................................................................... 43 Rationale and Purpose of this Study .................................................................... 44 III. METHODS .......................................................................................................... 45 Research Design ................................................................................................. 45 Participants .......................................................................................................... 46 Measures/Materials .............................................................................................. 47 NEPSY-II ...................................................................................................... 48 D-KEFS ......................................................................................................... 55 WJ III COG NU ............................................................................................. 60 Procedures .......................................................................................................... 67 Research Questions and Hypotheses .................................................................... 71 Data Analyses ...................................................................................................... 72 Power and Error ............................................................................................. 72 Statistical Methods ............................................................................................... 73 Preliminary Descriptive Statistics .................................................................. 73 Primary Statistical Analyses ........................................................................... 73 Conclusion .........................................................................................................