Kinetic Family Drawing

History of the Kinetic Family Drawing

           The Kinetic Family Drawing (KFD) was developed by Burns and Kaufman in 1970.  Children are asked to draw their family doing something rather than given the general instruction to just draw their family; the difference of asking a child to include the family acting or doing something was a huge development to this assessment tool.  This tool is supposed to help the therapist understand what attitudes the child has toward his or her family and also see what the family dynamics are like in general.

Reliability and Validity Factors 

        It is difficult to determine the reliability and validity of the KFD because of its subjectivity; different therapists can interpret a drawing in different ways based on the questions they ask and how they see the drawings specifically.  According to Herson (2004), the test-retest reliability of the KFD is "good" (pg 328).  It is hard to measure the validity because of the inconsistent use of various scoring systems, but the KFD has been popularly used abused and maltreated children and children with serious medical illnesses.

Where to Obtain and Cost 

        The Kinetic Drawing System for Family and School is available at this site: <http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2834/kinetic-drawing-system-for-family-and-school>.  The entire kit, which includes a manual and 25 scoring booklets, costs $92.00.  The contents can be bough individually for $54.00 and $43.50, respectively.

Administration and Interpretation 

            This test can be administered by any therapist or counselor and takes approximately 20 minutes.  The child is given the following instructions: "Draw everyone in your family, including you, doing something."  After the client is finished drawing, the therapist will then ask questions about the drawing to clarify the meaning (i.e. what each member of the family is doing).  The manual includes a list of questions to help guide the conversation if the therapist decides to use it.  The therapist will also take the scoring booklet and check the drawing for the presence or absence of specific characteristics, and "score" the drawing.  There are hypotheses in the manual with case examples to help the therapist interpret the drawing, too.

Article 

           This article aimed to study the how sibling relationships can be seen in the results of kinetic family drawings.  In the study, 51 children were administered the kinetic family drawing test individually.  The results showed that the drawings were reflective of sibling relationships-- siblings who are distant in real life were shown in the drawing further apart from each other.  In addition to proximity, the actual way the sibling figure(s) were drawn were different (i.e. smaller/bigger than other family members, features, gender presentation, etc.).  The conclusion of this article went on to say that the order of family members being drawn may indicate how important that person is to the child; those drawn first are more significant than those drawn last.  When siblings are drawn far away from the family, there may be some issues in their relationships.  


Metin, O. & Ustun, E. (2009). Reflection of sibling relationships into the kinetic family drawings during the preschool period. Department of Early Childhood Education 2. Retrieved from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1877042810003915/1-s2.0-S1877042810003915-main.pdf?_tid=e79086ee-655d-11e4-9d41-00000aab0f26&acdnat=1415241652_a969469e2a2202b245e5d31c4508f4d7

Image 

Sample Kinetic Family Drawing

References 

Hersen, M. (Ed.). Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment (Vol 2). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

LaJudice, C.M. (2012). Examining family functioning in pediatric bipolar disorder through kinetic family drawings.  (Dissertation). Retrieved from http://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2386&context=theses

WPS: Unlocking Potential. (2014). Kinetic drawing system for family and school.  Retrieved at http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2834/kinetic-drawing-system-for-family-and-school

House-Tree-Person

History of the House-Tree-Person

        The House-Tree-Person (HTP) was first developed by John Buck in 1948 and then updated in 1969.  It was originally based on the Goodenough scale which was used to assess intellectual functioning.  The HTP is usually used with children, and they are instructed to draw a house, tree, and person on three pieces of plain white paper.  Buck believed that through these drawings, the client's unconscious difficulties would be objectified.  

Reliability and Validity Factors 

       There is little evidence that shows that the HTP is reliable and valid.  The HTP is mostly subjective so it is nearly impossible for different therapists to interpret the drawings in the same way and reach the same conclusion.  There are some studies that show that HTP can accurately measure brain damage, and is used in assessing schizophrenic patients who suffer from brain damage.

Where to Obtain and Cost 

       The HTP is available at this website: <http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2796/house-tree-person-h-t-p-projective-drawing-technique>. The kit costs $215.50 and includes a copy of "The House-Tree-Person Projective Drawing Technique: Manual and Interpretive Guide", a copy of "House-Tree-Person Drawings: An Illustrated Diagnostic Handbook", a copy of Catalog for the Qualitative Interpretation of the House-Tree-Person (H-T-P), 25 H-T-P interpretation booklets, and 25 H-T-P drawing forms.  All of the parts of this kit can be purchased individually in case more booklets or forms are needed.

Administration and Interpretation 

          As mentioned above, the HTP is usually administered to children and adolescents because it requires the client to draw pictures.  It takes approximately 150 minutes to complete, although it does depend on the person (i.e. an adult may finish more quickly, or a neurologically impaired individual may take longer).  Clients are given the task of drawing a house, a tree, and a person on three pieces of paper, and will be asked a series of questions about the drawings.  There are 60 questions in the interpretation catalog (available in the HTP kit above), but the administrator can come up with their own follow-up questions.  Based on the drawings and the the answers to the questions, the counselor or therapist can interpret what is going on with the client, although different counselors/therapists will come up with varying interpretations.

Article 

         This article had a study which explored the characteristics of the HTP test in children with high-functioning autism (HFA).  The study included 35 children with HFA and 70 children without it.  Four elements of the assessments were evaluated: the evaluation, house, tree, and person items.  In the results, there were significant difference between the two groups of children on some of the items in the drawings.  Different items reflect different traits of the children, including social interaction, family relationships, unconscious and conscious self-concept, and interpersonal relationships.  The HFA children were shown to be lower in social interaction, were more likely to draw a person outside the house, had more simplified trees, and were less likely to draw more than one person.  The article concluded that the HTP drawing could possible reflect the deficiency of social interaction in HFA children wich consists of social interaction, interpersonal relationship, self-concept, and family relationships.  

Li, X., Cao, B., Yang, W., Qi, J., Liu, J., & Wang, Y. (2014). Characteristic of the synthetic house-tree-person test in children with high-functioning autism. Chinese Mental Health Journal,28(4), 260-266.

Image 

Sample House-Tree-Person

References 

Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. (2014). House-tree-person test. Retreived from http://www.minddisorders.com/Flu-Inv/House-tree-person-test.html

Niolon, R. (2003). House tree person drawings. Retrieved from http://www.intelligentietesten.com/house_tree_person_drawings.htm

WPS: Unlocking Potential. (2014). House-tree-person (H-T-P) projective drawing technique. Retrieved from http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2796/house-tree-person-h-t-p-projective-drawing-technique

Genogram

History of the Genogram 

        The genogram was first introduced by Dr. Murray Bowen in 1978 as a replacement for the term "family diagram."  Bowen used the genogram  in the late 1960's and by the 1970's its use by Bowen Systems Therapists increased.  Monica McGoldrick and her colleagues at the Multicultural Family Institute of New Jersey officially created the genogram as a diagnostic tool and as a method to help families recognize patterns in their lives-- past and present.  McGoldrick and Randy Gerson published their first book, "Genograms in Family Assessment," in 1985 which made the use of genograms especially popular.  The North American Primary Care Research Group worked in collaboration with leading family therapists to make symbols and a standardized format.  Not only do genograms show who is related to who, but it goes on to include family relationships, emotional relationships, social relationships, medical history, and various other information to help therapists and counselors get to know a family in depth.

Common Genograms 

        - Family Genogram
        - Cultural Genogram
        - Socio-economic Genogram
        - Ethical Genogram
        - Career/Work Genogram
        - Educational/Academic Genogram
        - Professional Genogram
        - Spiritual Genogram
        - Sexual Genogram

     

Reliability and Validity Factors 

       According to Rogers and Holloway (1990), there is a high degree of test-retest reliability with assessments completed two times, 3 months apart.  The fact that the format and symbols are standardized does increase its validity because of the consistency in making a genogram generally the same each time its being used.  Overall, though, it's really quite difficult to determine the reliability and validity of the genogram because of the nature of this assessment tool.

Where to Obtain and Cost 

       Creating a genogram is extremely easy because the few materials you need are a paper and pencil and a list of genogram symbols.  There are online tools that will create an organized genogram for you, including programs such as the Genogram Analytics 6.0, Genogram-Maker Millennium Version 3.0, Geno-Pro 1.70, Relativity, and SmartDraw.  Geno-Pro 1.70 is available for download at this website <http://genopro.software.informer.com/1.7/>, and is free.

Administration and Interpretation 

        A genogram can be created by anyone-- self-administered, with a family, or by a counselor or therapist.  In my opinion, it would be beneficial to have a counselor mediate and facilitate the making of a genogram so that it can be interpreted throughout the process and the client(s) can explore things in depth as they come up or as they draw it out on paper (or online).  Having a counselor facilitating the process will allow the counselor to recognize patterns and help the client(s) also understand what might be going on in the family system.  

Article 

         There has been much research that supports how genograms have been beneficial in career counseling with adults, but there is not much data on how it works with children.  This article shows that comprehensive developmental guidance programs in public schools do allow school counselors to use genograms with students of all levels, and it gives students the opportunity to learn how to self-assess and examine family career themes that affect career decision-making.  Having this assessment available to children is important because understanding the child's background--parent's career history and such-- and how it has influenced them gives the student an opportunity to increase their life career development.  Career family trees and genograms are a part of the school counseling program standards and competencies and can be used to impact children positively in their career development.  

Gibson, D. M. (2005). The use of genograms in career counseling with elementary, middle, and high school students. The Career Development Quarterly, 53(4), 353-362. Retrieved from https://login.ezproxy.etsu.edu:3443/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/219545165?accountid=10771

Image 

Sample Genogram

References 

Hays, D. G. (2013). Assessment in counseling: A guide to the use of psychological assessment procedures (5th ed.). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Kennedy, V. (2010). Genograms. MAI Review, 3. Retrieved from http://www.review.mai.ac.nz/index.php/MR/article/viewFile/370/528

McGoldrick, M., Gerson, R., & Petry, S. S. (2008). Genograms in family assessment (3rd ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Assessments of Interpersonal Relationships

History of Interpersonal Relationship Assessments 

        The Taylor-Johnson Temperament Analysis (TJTA) actually started at the JTA in 1941 when Dr. Roswell H. Johnson published this test to determine compatibilitly, personality traits, attitudes, and behavior tendencies which influence various relationships in a person's life.  35,000 couples took the analysis as a part of Johnson's research between 1941 and 1962.  Then in 1963, there were revisions made to the JTA and it was re-published as the TJTA in 1966.
        The Marital Satisfaction Inventory, Revised is a complete revision and restandardization of the Marital Satisfaction Inventory developed by Snyder in 1981.  This assessment is frequently used with couples who are experiencing relationship distress.  The revision includes a larger and more representative standardization sample, less inventory items, and a scale assessing the individual's concerns about aggression in the relationship.

Common Interpersonal Relationship Assessments 

        - Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
        - Taylor-Johnson Temperament Analysis (TJTA)
        - Marital Satisfaction Inventory-Revised (MSI-R)
        - Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (DSFI)
        - Couples PreCounseling Inventory (CPCI)
        - Family Environment Scale (FES, 3rd ed.)
        - Family Assessment Measure-III (FAM-III)
        - Sternberg's Triangular Love Scale (STLS)

        - Dyadic Adjustment Scale
        - Assessments of Intimate Partner Violence
        - Assessments of Child Abuse
        - Checklist of Interpersonal Transactions (CLOIT)
        - Checklist of Psychotherapy Transactions
        - Interpersonal Compass
        - Impact Message Inventory
        - Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS)

        - Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument 

     

Reliability and Validity Factors 

       The MSI-R has been considered to be a valid test because it generally shows reasonable correlations with other measures of relationship satisfaction.  In addition, there is an internal consistency coefficent and test-retest reliability coefficient in the .90-.95 range.
        Studies of the TJTA show that there is a high correlation and marked relationship, indicating high validity.  Its reliability was .83, computed by analysis of variance.

Where to Obtain and Cost 

       The MSI-R is available online at this website: <http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2870/marital-satisfaction-inventory-revised-msi-r>.  The entire kit costs $135.50, although various components can be purchased individually for a smaller price.

Administration and Interpretation 

        This test must be administered by a psychologist with a Master's degree in psychology or related field.  If the administrator has a bachelors in the related field listed above, they must also be licensed or certified from an agency or organization that requires training and experience in assessment. It is a self-report assessment that takes approximately 20-25 minutes.  Concerning interpretation, there is computer scoring software available (Scoring/Interpretation CD).

Article 

        This article studies the validity of the MSI-R test for non-traditional couples using 31 gay male couples and 28 lesbian couples in comparison to 36 cohabiting heterosexual couples.  Results showed that the scales' internal consistency and factor structure supported the construct validity of this assessment with non-traditional couples.  Cohabiting opposite-gender and same-gender couples were more alike than different, and were more similar to non-distressed samples of married heterosexual couples from the general community than to couples in therapy.  


Means-Christensen, A., Snyder, D. K., & Negy, C. (2003). Assessing nontraditional couples: Validity of the marital satisfaction inventory--revised with gay, lesbian, and cohabiting heterosexual couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 29(1), 69-83. Retrieved from https://login.ezproxy.etsu.edu:3443/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/220968947?accountid=10771

Image 

MSI-R

References 

Hays, D. G. (2013). Assessment in counseling: A guide to the use of psychological assessment procedures (5th ed.). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Taylor, R. M. & Morrison, L. P. (2014). About the T-JTA. Psychological Publications, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.tjta.com/abouttjta.htm 

Watkins, A. (2014). Taylor-Johnson temperament analysis (T-JTA). Retrieved from http://prezi.com/wlpr8ai9c1m5/taylor-johnson-temperament-analysis-t-jta/

WPS: Unlocking Potential. (2014). Marital satisfaction inventory, revised (MSI-R). Retreived from http://www.wpspublish.com/store/p/2870/marital-satisfaction-inventory-revised-msi-r  

Assessments of Personality

History of Personality Assessments 

        Sigmund Freud, Alfred Adler, and Carl Jung were three major influences on the development of personality assessments.  Freud published the book The Interpretation of Dreams in 1900, and Jung devised one of the earliest personality instruments: the automated word association test (which influenced the development of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator).  These early personality assessments were less empirical and modern assessments emerged around World War I when Robert Woodworth was commissioned by the US Army to develop an instrument to assess army recruits' emotional stability.  The Personal Data Sheet, created in 1919, consisted of 116 yes or no questions.  There was the issue of credibility because recruits could easily lie in their answers, thus Louis Leon Thurstone developed the Thurstone Personality Schedule in 1930 to assess neurotic symptoms in civilian and military populations. 
        One of the most common personality assessments is the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), as mentioned earlier.  It was first published in 1943 by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers.  Briggs was inspired to research personality type theory when she first met her daughter's future husband because of how differently he saw the world in compared to her and her family.  After Jung's publication of Psychological Types, Briggs saw the similarities between her theory and Jung's, which influenced her to create the MBTI questionnaire.

Common Personality Assessments 

        - Five Factor Model of Personality (FFM)
        - Neo Personality Inventory, Revised (NEO PI-R)
        - Sixteen Personality Factor (16 PF)
        - Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI)
        - Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
        - Rorschach Inkblot Test
        - PA Preference Inventory (PAPI)
        - RIASEC Holland Codes (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional)
        - DISC Assessment (Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, Compliance)
        - Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)

Reliability and Validity Factors 

        There are a lot of contradicting literature on the reliability of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).  Some online articles say that it is as reliable as any other personality test and the test-retest reliability shows that people usually get the same or close to the same type 75%-90% of the time.  on the other hand, there are articles that state that as many as 50% of the people who take this test the second time will be classified into a different type than the first time.  The MBTI has been revised numerous time, and Form Q, published in 2001, has the median internal consistency of .77, according to a nationally representative sample of 1,378 people.  
        There seems to be little support for the validity of the MBTI, as one article states that "the MBTI does not conform to many of the basic standards expected of psychological tests" (Pittenger, 1993, pg. 6). Despite this fact, the MBTI has been translated into 21 different languages and is used by people all around the world for various personal and interpersonal reasons. 
       

Where to Obtain and Cost 

        The MBTI can be taken in several ways, and all the information is available at this website: <http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/take-the-mbti-instrument/>.  People interested in taking this assessment can have it administered to them by a professional either online or with paper and pencil.  The cost will vary according to the professional.  To take it in the comfort of one's home, the test is available online where a certified professional interprets the results and follows up the test with an hour-long phone consultation.  This option costs $150 in the US and Canada, and $175 for all other countries.  There are other reports available for a small fee, including the MBTI Career Report ($15) and the KGI Team and Leadership Assessment ($25 per team member, minimum of three; or $30 for individuals).  Finally, there is the MBTI Complete which involves taking the MBTI assessment online, learning about your type, and receiving a comprehensive description of your type.  This opportunity costs $49.95 without the one-on-one interpretation session.

Administration and Interpretation 

        As mentioned above, the assessment can be taken either online or with paper and pencil.  Either way, this multiple choice questionnaire is administered by a certified professional.  The results are given either in person or by phone, although with the MBTI Complete, the self-guided feedback system is designed to verify the accuracy of your results and provides information on your type.  Scored results come in the form of an MBTI Profile Report either delivered through the web or in printed form.  Everything is completely confidential.  A qualified MBTI professional is needed to interpret the results of the assessment. 

Article 

         Personality type differences among high school band, string orchestra, and choir students were examined in this study.  The 335 participants who were involved had been in their school's band, orchestra, or choir for at least one year.  Each student was given the MBTI to determine their personality type, and these were compared among the three ensembles as well as with published MBTI high school norms.  The results showed that there were differences among the three ensembles, as well as significant differences in comparison to the MBTI norms.  Orchestra and choir students were especially different in their Extroversion-Introversion dichotomy, with the indication that choir students were likely more extroverted than the orchestra students.  The other dichotomies did not differ as much among the ensembles, but compared to high school norms the students were significantly more likely to be Intuitive and Feeling.  Band students were likely more Perceiving, while Choir student (again) were significantly more likely to be Extroverted.

MacLellan, C. R. (2011). Differences in Myers-Briggs Personality Types among high school band, orchestra, and choir members. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59(1), 85-101. 

Image 

MBTI Indicator Chart

References 

CPP. (2009). History, reliability, and validity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) instrument. Retrieved from https://www.cpp.com/Products/mbti/mbti_info.aspx

OPP. (2014). The history of the MBTI assessment. Retrieved from http://www.opp.com/en/tools/MBTI/Myers-Briggs-history#

The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.myersbriggs.org/

Personality test free. (2014). Personality tests: The main personality tests. Retrieved from http://www.personalitytestfree.net/personality-tests.php

Pittenger, D. J. (1993). Measuring the MBTI... and coming up short.  Journal of Career Planning & Placement. Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~jobtalk/Articles/develop/mbti.pdf

Assessments of Intelligence

History of Intelligence Assessments 

        The first IQ test was developed by Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon in the early 20th century and is referred to as the Binet-Simon Scale.  Binet was requested by the French government to find a way to organize students in a way that would identify those who would likely experience difficulty in schools so that children who needed specialized assistance would receive the attention they needed.  Binet and Simon focused on questions that were not taught in school, including attention, memory, and problem-solving skills which allowed them to observe how some children could answer more advanced questions and others could not.  This produced the concept of a mental age, although Binet did emphasize that the test had limitation and intelligence could not be measured by as ingle number.
     When this IQ test reached America, psychologist Lewis Terman adapted it to American standards and published it in 1916, calling it the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale.  This became the standard intelligence test used in the US.  The intelligence quotient, IQ, was used to represent an individual's score on the test.  This single number was calculated by dividing the test taker's mental age by their chronological age, then multiplying this number by 100.  Again, this is a test that is used in this day and age despite its many revisions over the years.

Common Intelligence Assessments 

        - Cognitive Assessment System
        - Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT)
        - Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (KABC-II)
        - Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (KBIT)
        - Leiter International Performance Scale (LEITER-R)
        - Multidimensional Aptitude Battery (MAB-II)
        - Raven Standard Progressive Matrices
        - Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scale (RIAS)
        - Reynolds Intellectual Screening Test (RIST)
        - Slosson Intelligence Test
        - Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale-5th Edition (SB5)
        - Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales for Early Childhood
        - Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test
        - Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test (WAIS-III or WAIS-IV)
        - Wechsler Intelligence Test for Children (WISC-III or WISC-IV)
        - Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-III)
        - Wide Range Intelligence Test
        - Woodcock Johnson Test of Cognitive Skills

Reliability and Validity Factors 

        The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale-5th Edition (SB5) is a comprehensive test of intelligence and cognitive abilities that can be applied to people 2 years and above.  There are several key features of this 5th edition, including the ability to adjust items to the cognitive level of participants which enhances precision.  In addition, five factors apart from overall intelligence, verbal intelligence, and performance intelligence are measured: fluid reasoning, knowledge, quantitative reasoning, visual-spatial processing, and working memory.  Alongside this feature, these five factors is available in a nonverbal mode.  The overall reliability for all factors exceeds .90 as estimated from the split-half method.
        The Reynolds Intellectual Screening Test (RIST) actually has two subtests: verbal and nonverbal.  The internal consistency is approximately .95 and the test-retest reliability exceeds .84.  This shows that in comparison to the SB5, RIST may not be as reliable.  The RIST is consistent, though, as shown above it is about .95.

Where to Obtain and Cost 

        If I wanted to take the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales for Early Childhood (Early SB5), it is available for purchase at this site: <http://www.proedinc.com/customer/productView.aspx?ID=4606>.  The complete test kit costs $405.00, but there are various ordering options: The Record Forms for $74.00; a Canvas Carrying Case for $68.00; the Complete Test Kit and ScoringPro Software COMBO $529.00; the Examiner's Manual for $68.00; the Item Book 1 and 2 for $195.00 each; and the ScoringPro Software for $154.00.

Administration and Interpretation 

        The Early SB5 is more affordable than the SB5 and includes child-friendly toys, manipulatives, and brightly colored illustrations that help engage younger clients.  It also includes a non-verbal (or low-verbal) section so that children who have a limited ability to speak, are deaf or hard of hearing, and/or otherwise have difficulty using language can still use this tool.  As a Test Observation Checklist is included, behavior can be documented during testing so that the administrator can organize notes effectively.  In addition, there is a Parent Report which helps facilitate communication with the child's parent, guardian, or caregiver.  The Item Books are designed as easels which have one side showing the child the illustrations and stimuli and the other side having directions, facing the examiner.
          The Early SB5 can be hand-scored or scored using the ScoringPro software.  There are various scores available, too, including the 10 subtest scores, broad ability and IQ composite scores, percentile, optional change-sensitive scores, and age-equivalents.  The availability of online scoring does make it easier for the administrator, as it can be done quickly and automatically.  In addition, the Test Observation Checklist identifies behaviors that can affect the client's performance on the test and his/her adaptation outside the testing situation.  These behaviors should be followed up through additional assessment including observation, interview, or contact with the child's parent(s), guardians, or caregivers.  This option allows the test to be more personal and accurate, although it may take more time and effort.

Article 

        This article focused on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, 5th Edition, and gave a study that provides information on the cognitive profiles of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and whether the abbreviated battery is representative of the full scale.  It reached the conclusion that these children had significantly stronger nonverbal skills in comparison to verbal skills.  It was not related to Full Scale IQ, age or diagnostic subgroup.  The abbreviated battery can misrepresent actual ability in some cases, though, so caution is warranted.

Coolican, J., Bryson, S. E., & Zwaigenbaum, L. (2008). Brief report: Data on the stanford-binet intelligence scales (5th ed.) in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(1), 190-7. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-007-03682

Image 

The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales for Early Childhood

References 

Cherry, K. History of intelligence testing: The history and development of modern IQ testing. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/psychologicaltesting/a/int-history.htm 

Moss, S. (2008). Common intelligence tests. Retrieved from http://www.psych-it.com.au/Psychlopedia/article.asp?id=226 

Pro-Ed, Incorporated. (2012). Intelligence and aptitude. Retrieved from http://www.proedinc.com/customer/productView.aspx?ID=4606