Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised: An Appraisal and Review
- 1 March 1984
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in School Psychology Review
- Vol. 13 (1) , 49-60
- https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1984.12085079
Abstract
Numerous reliability and validity studies have appeared since publication of the Revised Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. This article is a one-year review of available research to data and an appraisal of the PPVT-R. The PPVT-R consistently demonstrates adequate alternate form equivalence across samples, and consistently evidences significantly lower standard scores than its earlier version (PPVT) and traditional cognitive tests (WISC-R and Stanford-Binet).Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of the PPVT and PPVT-R as Possible Instruments for Screening Gifted ChildrenPsychological Reports, 1982
- Performance of gifted children on the PPVT and PPVT-RPsychology in the Schools, 1982
- Comparison of the PPVT, PPVT-R, and intelligence tests used for the placement of black, white and hispanic EMR studentsJournal of School Psychology, 1982
- Comparison of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised for a Referred PopulationPsychological Reports, 1981
- Alternate Form Reliability of the Revised Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test for Head Start ChildrenPsychological Reports, 1981
- McCarthy Scales as a Learning Disability Diagnostic Aid: A Closer LookJournal of Learning Disabilities, 1981
- Comparison of McCarthy General Cognitive Indexes and Stanford-Binet IQS for Educable Mentally Retarded ChildrenPerceptual and Motor Skills, 1979
- A comparison of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities with preschool childrenPsychology in the Schools, 1978
- Relationship among McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities, WPPSI, and Columbia mental maturity scalePsychology in the Schools, 1978
- Effectiveness of parents of Head Start children as administrators of psychological tests.Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967