WECHSLER ADULT PERFORMANCE

INTELLIGENCE SCALE

AIM: To assess the individual intellectual functioning using Wechsler adult performance
intelligence scale (WAPIS).

INRODUCTION

WHAT IS INTELLIGENCE?

 Intelligence is what intelligence test measures(Alfred Binet,1904)

 The ability to judge well, to understand well and to reason well (Binet & Simon,1905)
 The aggregate capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally and to
deal effectively with the environment(David Wechsler,1939)
 The ability or skill to solve problems or fashion products which are valued within one or
more cultural settings (Howard Gardner,1986).

Intelligence test

Intelligence testing is used to determine the patient’s level of cognitive functioning and consists
of a series of tasks asking the patient to use both verbal and nonverbal skills. Intelligence tests
are a series of tasks designed to measure the capacity to make abstractions, to learn, and to deal
with novel situations.

The most widely used intelligence tests include the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and the
Wechsler scales.

1. STANDFORD-BINET INTELLIGENCE SCALE :

 The Stanford-Binet is the American adaptation of the original French Binet-Simon

intelligence test; it was first introduced in 1916 by Lewis Terman, a psychologist at
Stanford University. The individually administered test—revised in 1937, 1960, 1973,
1986, and 2003—evaluates persons two years of age and older and is designed for use
primarily with children. It consists of an age-graded series of problems whose solution
involves arithmetical, memory, and vocabulary skills.
 The test is scored in terms of intelligence quotient, or IQ, a concept first suggested by
German psychologist William Stern and adopted by Lewis Terman in the Stanford-Binet
Scale. 
 The IQ was originally computed as the ratio of a person’s mental age to his chronological
(physical) age, multiplied by 100. Thus, if a child of 10 had a mental age of 12 (that is,
performed on the test at the level of an average 12-year-old), then the child was assigned
an IQ of (12/10) X 100, or 120. A score of 100, for which the mental age equaled the
chronological age, was average; scores above 100 were above average, scores below 100
were below average. 
 Intelligence test scores follow an approximately “normal” distribution, with most people
scoring near the middle of the distribution curve and scores dropping off fairly rapidly in
frequency away from the curve’s center. For example, on the IQ scale about 2 out of 3
scores fall between 85 and 115 and about 19 out of 20 scores fall between 70 and 130. A
score of about 130 or above is considered gifted, while a score below about 70 is
considered mentally deficient or intellectually disabled.

2. The WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALES :

They are among the most widely used assessment instruments for determining a child’s
intellectual abilities and particular strengths and weaknesses in cognitively understanding
his or her world (Cohen, Swerdlik, & Smith, 1992). The Wechsler Scales provide an
estimate of global intellectual ability (Full Scale IQ) and four Composites: 

 Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), which measures the application of verbal skills and
information to problem solving;
  Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI), which measures the ability to engage in nonverbal
reasoning using visual images;
  Working Memory Index (WMI), which measures working memory, short-term memory,
sustained attention, and auditory processing; and
  Processing Speed Index (PSI), which measures visual-motor coordination, attention,
concentration, and the speed of mental processing. 

Other Intelligence Tests

The Wechsler Intelligence Scales, Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, the Bayley Scales
of Infant and Toddler Development, and the Kauffman Assessment Battery for Children,
Second Edition are four standardized and clinically and legally accepted measures of
intellectual function. 

THEORITICAL BACKGROUND
Theories of intelligence:

There are mainly two approaches to understanding intelligence. One is the factorial approach and
the other is based on the process involved in the intellectual ability. The two important theories
pertaining to WAPIS are –

Spearman's two factor theory : Charles Spearman (1904) proposed a two factor theory of
intelligence, he viewed intelligence as a general United capacity. A single dimension along
which people vary. He believed that performance or any cognitive test depended on primary
general factor and specific factor relating to the particular tasks. The 'g' factor involves all
intelligence performances. He believed that each individual's intellectual tasks taps both general
intelligence and specific ability for that particular task. Spearman later reviewed this theory and
divided 'g' factor into :

Education ability: Deducing relationship between two things.

Reproductive ability: Reproducing something one has just learned.

Cattell Theory:

He proposed that general intelligence can be broken down into relatively independent elements :

F: Fluid intelligence

C: Crystallized intelligence

Fluid intelligence: Involves the ability to think creatively to reason abstractly, to make inference
from the data and to understand relationships.

Crystallized intelligence: involves the knowledge already acquired and the ability to access that
knowledge, to make decisions or to solve problems. Cattell regarded as what a person
accomplishes through his potential capacities and GC as about his accomplishment through the
use of his GF. Fluid intelligence may peak in early adulthood while crystallized intelligence
increases across to life span.
 HISTORY OF THE TEST

Wechsler began work on his first that in 1932 solely to device an instrument capable for testing
the diverse patients restored to the psychiatric section of Belomise Hospital in New York. The
Wechsler Belluve Intelligence Scale (1939), the first of the Wechsler tests, was a milestone
moment in the history of intelligence assessment since it combined both verbal and performance
measures. A version with revised norms has been published 16 years after the publication of the
term - I of Wechsler Bellimse (W-B). In 1955, the Wechsler adult intelligence scale, or WAPIS,
was published, yielding a verbal IQ, a performance IQ, and a whole scale IQ. Soon after, the
demand for a more current norm group arose, prompting a test revision known as WAIS – R. It
retained 80% of the original items.

Wechsler (1977) was the author of the WAIS-II, which included updated and categorise content
as well as norms. Due to greater life expectancy, it was expanded to include people aged 14 to
89. Its descendant, the WAIS-III, contained a set of rules that contribute to overall IQ scores. The
most recent edition of the WAIS, issued in 1997, has 14 scales and 7 subtests in the verbal scale
and the remaining 7 in the performance scale. The Wechsler Adult Performance Scale is an
attempt to adapt the Wechsler Adult Performance Scale to Indian conditions and establish norms
for the Indian population. It would have been difficult to produce assessments in all 14 major
Indian languages, given the country's 14 major languages.

Taking into account the pressing necessity for the creation of an individual intelligence scale. It
was one of the cultural free tests. Thus the final form of WAPIS presented here was the
performance scale of WAIS. The subtests comprising of performance scale are picture
completion, digit symbol, coding, block design, picture arrangement and object assembly.
WECHSLER ADULT PERFORMANCE INTELLIGENCE SCALE

This test is the Indian adaptation of WAIS performance scale by Prabharamalingaswamy

(1974). It is widely used in clinical settings in India because it is the first Indian adaptation of
WAIS performance scale. The construct validity, factorial validity determines the test to be
Valid in Indian population in age range 15 – 45. The test has five subtests.

 Picture Completion (PC)

 Digit Symbol (DS)
 Block Design (BD)
 Picture Arrangement (PA)
 Object Assembly (OA)

1. Picture Completion (PC)

 The picture completion test consists of pictures, each of which has an important part
missing. The examinee studies each picture and has to indicate what the missing
part is within 20 seconds of time.
 This test measures visual perception and ability to determine if the missing part is
essential or a function of the object. To sum up it measures ability to quickly perceive
visual details.
 The total of raw score was used to measure visual perception and is addressed as Picture
Completion measure (PC). Higher score suggest better performance.

2. Digit Symbol (DS)

 This test assesses perceptual processing speed.

 Participants were presented with a coding key pairing nine numbers (1 through 9) with
nine different symbols. Printed under the coding key were rows of randomly ordered
numbers with empty boxes below. Participants were given 90 seconds to transcribe as
many symbols as possible into the empty boxes based on the digit–symbol associations
specified in the coding key. The number of correctly completed items represented the
outcome measure.
 For the purpose of the present study the raw score that is the total number of correctly
completed items measured perceptual processing and motor speed.
 The measure is represented as Digit Symbol Score (DSS), higher the score better
the performance. The errors made on Digit Symbol test represented as Digit symbol
 Error (DSE) is the measure derived to assess attention concentration (Wechsler D.1997).
Higher numbers of errors suggest poor attention and concentration.

3. Block Design (BD)

 It is a subtest on many intelligence tests that measures visuospatial and motor skills.
 The testee is required to take blocks that have all white sides, all red sides, and red and
white sides and arrange them according to a pattern. Ten patterns need to be duplicated
within stipulated time.
 The measures derived from Block Design test were
o Block Design Score (BDS) the raw score obtained on performance of each item
was summed up. The total score depicting the performance of visuospatial
ability was one measure, higher the score better the performance.
o The total time taken to complete the ten patterns presented as Block Design Time
(BDT) assessed motor speed.

4. Picture Arrangement (PA)

 The PA test entails arranging pictures in order to tell a story. The examinee is required to
sequence the picture in the shortest amount of time.
 It broadly measure social Intelligence (Campbell & McCord, 1996) that includes social
sequencing, planning, ability to form and test hypothesis.
 Two measures were derived from PA test, namely Picture Arrangement Score (PA) and
Picture Arrangement Timing (PAT). Each one of these measures assesses social
intelligence. High score suggest high social intelligence.

5. Object Assembly (OA)

 It is a subtest which measures visual perception, visual motor integration and visual
imagery.
 Object Assembly: A set of 4 puzzles of common objects each presented in a standardized
configuration that the examinee assembles to form a meaning to whole. Time limit ranges from
120-180 seconds.
VERSIONS AND ADAPTATIONS

 The original WAIS (Form I) was published in February 1955 by David Wechsler, as a
revision of the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale
 The fourth edition of the test (WAIS-IV) was released in 2008 by Pearson.
 The Wechsler-Bellevue tests were innovative in the 1930s because they gathered tasks
created for nonclinical purposes for administration as a "clinical test battery". Because the
Wechsler tests included non-verbal items (known as performance scales) as well as
verbal items for all test-takers, and because the 1960 form of Lewis Terman's Stanford-
Binet Intelligence Scales were less cautiously developed than previous versions, Form I
of the WAIS surpassed the Stanford-Binet tests in popularity by the 1960s.

 
WAIS

  The WAIS was initially created as a revision of the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence

Scale (WBIS), which was a battery of tests published by Wechsler in 1939.
  The WBIS was composed of subtests that could be found in various other intelligence
tests of the time, such as Robert Yerkes' army testing program and the Binet-Simon scale.
The WAIS was first released in February 1955 by David Wechsler.

WAIS-R

 The WAIS-R, a revised form of the WAIS, was released in 1981 and consisted of six
verbal and five performance subtests.
  The verbal tests were: Information, Comprehension, Arithmetic, Digit Span, Similarities,
and Vocabulary. 
 The Performance subtests were: Picture Arrangement, Picture Completion, Block Design,
Object Assembly, and Digit Symbol.
  A verbal IQ, performance IQ and full scale IQ were obtained.
 This revised edition did not provide new validity data, but used the data from the original
WAIS; however new norms were provided, carefully stratified.

WAIS – III
 The WAIS-III, a subsequent revision of the WAIS and the WAIS-R, was released in
1997.
  It provided scores for Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, and Full Scale IQ, along with four
secondary indices (Verbal Comprehension, Working Memory, Perceptual Organization,
and Processing Speed
Verbal IQ (VIQ)
Included seven tests and provided two subindexes; verbal comprehension and working memory.
The Verbal comprehension index included the following tests:
 Information
 Similarities
 Vocabulary
The Working memory index included:
 Arithmetic
 Digit Span
Letter-Number Sequencing and Comprehension are not included in these indices, but are used as
substitutions for spoiled subtests within the WMI and VCI, respectively

 Performance IQ (PIQ)
Included six tests and it also provided two sub indexes; perceptual organization and processing
speed.
The Perceptual organization index included:
 Block Design
 Matrix Reasoning
 Picture Completion
The Processing speed index included:
 Digit Symbol-Coding
 Symbol Search
Two tests; Picture Arrangement and Object Assembly were not included in the indexes. Object
Assembly is not included in the PIQ.

WAIS – IV

Composed of 10 core sub-tests and five supplemental subtests.

 The verbal and performance subscales from previous versions were removed and
replaced by index scores.
 Verbal IQ and Performance IQ were removed and only Full Scale IQ is calculated.  

There are four index scores representing major components of intelligence.

 Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI)

 Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI)
 Working Memory Index (WMI)
 Processing Speed Index (PS)
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children

 WISC – V developed in 2014.

 Administered to children between the age of 6 and 16.
 5 primary index scores
o Verbal comprehension
o Visual spatial
o Fluid reasoning
o Working memory
o Processing speed

Other test variants and uses:

 The WAIS-IV measure is appropriate for use with individuals aged 16–90 years. For
individuals under 16 years, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC, 6-16
yrs) and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI, 2 1/2-7yrs, 3
months) are used.
 A short, four-subtest version of the WAIS-III battery has been released, allowing
clinicians to form a validated estimate of verbal, performance and full scale IQ in a
shorter amount of time.
 The Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) uses vocabulary, similarities,
block design and matrix reasoning subtests similar to those of the WAIS to provide an
estimate of full scale IQ in approximately 30 minutes.
 Intelligence tests may also be utilized in populations with psychiatric illness or brain
injury, in order to assess level of cognitive functioning, though some regard this use as
controversial. Some neuropsychologists use the technique on people suffering brain
damage as it leads to links with which part of the brain has been affected, or use specific
subtests in order to get an idea of the extent of the brain damage. For example, digit span
may be used to get a sense of attentional difficulties. Others employ the WAIS-R NI
(Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised as a Neuropsychological Instrument), another
measure published by Harcourt.
 Each subtest score is tallied and calculated with respect to non-normal or brain-damaged
norms. As the WAIS is developed for the average, non-injured individual, separate norms
were developed for appropriate comparison among similar functioning individuals.
PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF THE SCALE

Reliability- The reliability was carried out by using Cronbach coefficient alpha.
 Reliability for Picture Completion assessed through test retest method found to be 0.83.
 Reliability Digit Span Test assessed through test retest method found to be 0.91.
 Reliability for Block design assessed through test retest method found to be 0.82.
 Reliability for Picture Arrangement assessed through test retest method found to be 0.74
 Reliability for object assembly ( 0.65-0.75)

Validity: Construct validity was established by taking the mean scores of persons belonging to
different groups, age, Sex, education and socio-economic status were examined. The differences
between the mean scores of these various groups were found to be significant at 0.01 levels
thereby indicating construct validity.

Norms - The norms are based on the population from the following Indian states: Uttar Pradesh,
Delhi, Punjab, Rajasthan, West Bengal, and many more. The males and females age ranging
from 15-19, 20-24, 24-34, 35-40 years.

LIMITATIONS OF THE TEST

1. WAPIS neglects non academic skilss such as creativity, motivational level,

imagination, social acumen and success in dealing with people that may be an
advantage for success.
2. The full scale IQ/ Performance IQ/ Verbal IQ scores can be used to obtain the
relative position of a person compared with his or her age related peers however it
cannot give a complete picture.
3. IQ are not, unchangeable or an exact measurement or innate score cannot be
determined but maybe influenced by variety of factors such achievement
orientation, curiosity, culture and the person’s interest.
4. There is a time limit for every subtest due to which the subject might get strained
out or may not perform well.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

 Pawar et al (2006) conducted a research in which they evaluate the changes in

cognitive profile and depression in renal transplant recipients. The results
revealed 86.7% prevalence of depression in ESRD patients as compared to 56.7%
in post renal transplant patients. Analysis of neurocognitive functions on LNNB
did not reveal any significant impairment. Furthermore, analysis of the Life
satisfaction scale revealed most of the patients scored high satisfaction levels
despite the stress of their disease. Results on WAPIS brought out significant
improvement in intelligence quotient (IQ) after renal transplantation.

 John and Kuruvilla (1992) conducted a research in which Cognitive Dysfunction'

was assessed in 30patients diagnosed to have Major Depression (DSM III R),
using the PCI memory scale and the Wechsler Adult Performance Intelligence
Scale, form PR both of which have been developed and standardised in India. On
attention and concentration tests, as well as immediate and delayed recall on
memory tests (PCI), depressed patients showed significant impairment, whereas
performance tests (WAPIS) revealed widespread impairment. With the recovery
from depression, this impairment was reversed. While improved test scores were
associated with decreased depression, there was no direct relationship between the
two, meaning that the degree of improvement in WAPIS/PGI total scores was not
proportional to the degree of change in depression scores.
Aim: To assess the individual intellectual functioning using Wechsler adult performance
intelligence scale (WAPIS).

Basic concept: According to Wechsler, intelligence can be classified as the global capacity that
involves dimensions such as the individual ability to perceive the world around them, accurately
act with purpose, find solutions to the problems they face in life.

Material required:

 WAPIS kit
 Stop watch
 Screen
 Pencil eraser
 Response sheet

Precautions :

 The aim of the test was not revealed.

 Laboratory conditions were controlled and maintained.
 All the tasks were given in same sequence as given in the manual.
 Time interval was carefully noted.

Procedure :

 Arrangement of material - All the materials were arranged and kept on the table. The
chair was kept on the non preferred side. The screen was used to cover the kit, manual
and response sheet.
 Rapport formation - The subject was made to feel comfortable with the light headed
conversation. He was told about the test and was motivated to pay attention.

Instructions :

Standard instructions for each subtest was read out from the manual for the subject.

1. PICTURE COMPLETION

Start with card 1 and give each item to all subjects. Before presenting the final picture,
say:“I am going to show you some pictures in which there is some important part is
missing.”Show the subject the first card and say “Now look at the picture, what important
part is missing”If the correct response is given, continue with succeeding pictures. In
presenting each one, say:“Now what is missing in the picture?”If the subject fails the first
item, say: “You see, the tail of the horse is missing.” If he also fails the second item say,
“You see, part of the nose is missing.”Beginning with the third item, give no further
help .In case when subject mentions unessential missing part. And may ask what the point
in mentioning the missing part is. We should name the essential parts present. Say:“Yes,
but what is the most important thing missing.” This should be done only for the first time
and do not repeat this for the rest of the pictures. The subject need not give the correct
name as long as he mentions the correct feature. In some situations subject may not
verbally respond but point to a missing part, in that case the examiner should consider the
item passed. Time limit is 20 seconds for each item.

2. DIGIT SYMBOL

The material for this test is on the record form. Place the test before the subjectand
pointing to the key say: “ Look at these boxes. Notice that each has a number in the
upper part and a mark in the lower part, Every number has a different mark. Now look
here, (pointing to the sample, where the numbers with empty boxes for each digit is
given) say: “You have to put in each of these squares the mark that should go there,
symbols as demonstrated above.”Point to the key then to the samples, say “Here is 2 so
you would put in this mark. Here is 4 so you would put in this mark.” Write in the first
three as demonstrating.After the demonstration and practice, point the first square
following the samples and say: “Now when I tell you to begin, start here and fill as
many squares as you can without skipping any. Ready, Begin.” If the subject starts to
omit squares or do only one type of figures say: “Do them in order and don’t skip
them.”Time limit is 90 seconds. Start timing when the subject is told to begin after the
sample items have been answered.

3. BLOCK DESIGN

Start with design 1 for all subjects. Take 4 blocks and say: "You see these blocks, they
are all alike, some sides are all white, some are all red, and some half red and half
white. Turn the blocks to show the different sides. Then say: "I am going to put this
block together to make the design, watch me."Demonstrate for the 1st design, leaving
the examiners model intact and without exposing the card to the subject. Now produce
them with 4 other blocks and ask them to arrange the blocks themselves. If they are
able to do so within time limit, score 4 points and proceed to card 2.If the subject fails
to complete the design within the time limit, and arranges the blocks incorrectly, say:
"watch me again" and demonstrate it using subject's block, now mix them well still
keeping the examiner's model intact and say "Now you try it and be sure to make it just
like mine.Reversal of design, inversion of pattern of the blocks on design 1 is
considered an error. If in second trial he persist on his reversal it is considered as fail. If
he corrects his reversal he is allowed a second trial score of 2 points.
 Design 2: Remove the blocks that served as model for design 1 Now produce the card 2
and say: " This time we are going to arrange the blocks according to this picture, and
demonstrate it. Now produce the blocks to the subject and say : " Now look at the
picture and make one just like that in the picture with these blocks, now go ahead and
tell me when you have finished."If the subject success in this trial then proceed to
design 3. If he fails, demonstrate the second time saying, "watch me again". Then after
demonstration mix the block well and say " Now try it again." Whether or not the
subject succeeds in the second trial, proceed to design 3.

Design 3-10 : Place the card for design 3 and provide him with 4 blocks, and say :
"Now make it like this, and tell me when you have finished." When the subject
indicates that he is finished or at the end of the time limit, mix up these block and
present design 4. Follow the procedure for all succeeding designs.When card 7 is
reached, take out the five other blocks and say: "Now make one like this using 9
blocks. Be sure to tell me when you have finished."For design 10, do not permit the
subject to rotate the card to give it a flat base, however give fully credit if his
reproduction of the design is rotated not more than 45 degree.

Time limit:

Design 1-2 : 60 seconds (time each trial seperately)

Design 3-6: 60 seconds

Design 7-10: 120 seconds

Discontinue: After 3 consecutive failure. Failure on both trails of either design 1 or

design 2 is considered one failure.

4. PICTURE ARRANGEMENT

For all subjects present three cards of item 1, NEST, in the order indicated by the
numbers on the back of the card. Reading from subject's left to right say: " These
pictures tell a story about a bird building a nest, but they are in wrong order. Put them
in right order so they will tell a story."If the subject arranges them correctly within the
time limit score 4 points and proceed to the other items saying: "I have some other sets
of pictures for you to arrange. In each case they are mixed up and you are to arrange it
in an order so as they make a most sensible story." If the subject fails the next item,
demonstrate the correct solution while saying: "The order of cards should be like this;
first the bird is building the best, the next pictures shows the eggs which bird has laid,
and the last picture shows the bird feeding it's young ones, which has been hatched."
Rearrange the cards in the original missed order and say: "Now you arrange them in
 right order." Score 2 if the subject is able to do it correctly, 0 if ge doesn't. In either
case go on to the next item. Present the three cards of item 2, HOUSE, as indicated on
the order of the back of the card and say: " Now try this set, put these cards in the
correct order." If the subject arranges them correctly within the time limit, he proceeds
to the other items of the test.If the subject fails at both items 1 and 2, stop the test,
otherwise administer the rest of the items. For series 3-8 present the cards in the order
indicated each time saying: " Now try this set, put these cards incorrect order. Tell me
when you have finished. For Time limit refer the table below, record the exact time
taken by subject to arrange. Since bonuses are given to rapid performances.

5. OBJECT ASSEMBLY

Present to the subject, Manikin, profile, hand and elephant, in that order. Arrange the
pieces of the each item as indicated in the diagram on pp. Screening the arrangement
from the subject.(a shield for this purpose is provided in kit of the materials). Having
laid out the pieces of manikin say: " If these pieces are put together correctly they will
make something(a meaningful picture). Go ahead and put them together as quickly as
you can."

Time limit is :

Manikin and profile: 120 seconds

Hand and elephant: 180 seconds

Scoring and interpretation:

1. Picture completion:

One point is given to each correct response,the maximum point is 26.

2. Digit symbol:
1point for each square is given for filling it correctly. Half score is given for any reversed
symbol. The ten sample items are not considered while scoring. The maximum score
obtained is 90.
3. Block design:
The time limit for designs 1-2 is 60 seconds, designs 3-6 is 60 seconds, and designs 7-10
is given 120 seconds. Record time of the subject for completing each design if it is done
correctly within the time limit; Bonus time is given for rapid performance on design 7-10.
Designs 1-2 in the first trial is given 4-poinys for each and for second trial 2- points each
is given. For designs 3-6 four points is given for each. For designs 7-10 four points is
given for successful completion of each design. Scores are based on correct solutions
 within the time limit. No credit is given for partially correct or incomplete designs.
Maximum score that is obtained is 48.

4. PICTURE ARRANGEMENT:
Table is referred to for recording the exact time for the subject taken to arrange the series
2&9. Series 1-2 four points is given for first trial. For the second trial two points are
given. In series 3-9 four point is given for correct arrangement within the time limit.
Maximum score obtained is 42.

5. OBJECT ASSEMBLY:
The time limit foe completing manikin and profile is 120 seconds and for completing
hand and elephant 180 seconds is given.
One point for each correct juxtaposition made within the time limit (Small displacements
of not more than a quarter of an inch are acceptable) junctures to be scored are designed
by an ‘x’ on the accompanying diagram. Give credit for a correct juxtaposition even
though it appears in a partial assembly. For eg: If the two ear pieces of the profile are
assembled outside the head, one point is credited , of they are not correctly put in place in
the figure, three points are earned or if two parts of the element are correctly joined, one
point is thereby earned even though they are not assembled if any part of the body.
Scores for perfect performance without time bonusesincluded is manikin-5, profile -9,
hand -7, elephant -8. Beneath each diagram are shown the scores with the time bonuses
included. Maximum score obtained is 4.

Table no.1

S.NO TEST RAW SCORE SCALED SCORE Interpretation

1. PICTURE COMPLETION 18 13
2. DIGIT SYMBOL 53 12
3. BLOCK DESIGN 46 16
4. PICTURE ARRANGEMENT 16 10
5. OBJECT ASSEMBLY 32 13
64 IQ= 117 High average
intelligence

DISCUSSION:

The test was conducted on subject MM who is 22 year old girl currently pursuing masters
degree. The subject lives in Bangalore. She belongs to a upper class family and is the second
child. The languages known by her was English and Hindi.

She was a normal born child and had no history of psychiatric illness. She performs good in
academics and is always devoted towards reading books and listening to music. Her mother was
a homemaker and her father owns a business.

The purpose of the test is to assess the individual intellectual functioning using Wechsler adult
performance intelligence scale (WAPIS).

The subject was well groomed and neatly dressed. Her mood was pleasant. The subject was
made to feel comfortable with the light headed conversation. She was told about the test and was
motivated to pay attention. The subject was calm and engaged throughout the test. She was
maintaining eye contact and had a normal posture and psychomotor activity. She followed the
instructions clearly. Her speech was clear and comprehensive. Her insight was normal.

The test was administered and it took approximately 1 hour to complete. The responses on each
subtest were score according to the scoring given in the manual. The scores were then converted
into scaled scores and then total of the scaled score was found and this scores were then referred
to the norms developed for every age. Then with the help of that IQ was obtained.

The subject has a scaled score 64 corresponding to an IQ level of 117 which can be interpreted as
“high average intelligence”.

As indicted from table no.1 her performance is excellent on Block design subtest which means
that very good at replicating the blocks. And can mentally imagine, rotate, combine and reason
about visual information. And her performance was average in picture completion which means
that she has average ability to comprehend and evaluate the total stimulus without language
usage and, alertness to visual details, average performance in digit symbol which means Thus the
subject is keeping average speed at writing or pattern copying the symbols used is good enough
at visual motor coordination, working memory, visuo spatial processing, and attention, average
performance in Picture arrangement which indicates that the subject ability ability to anticipate
the consequences of initial acts or situations, as well as the ability to interpret social situations is
average and in object assembly the subject has actively developed processing.
The introspective report of the subject was, “the test was quite interesting, but a bit long”.

Summary and recommendation:

The subject's total scaled score is 64 which corresponds to an IQ of 117. Thus the subject falls in the
category higher average intelligence. The data signifies that the subject is higher than average in fluid
intelligence, spatial reasoning. No recommendations were necessary.
REFERENCES

• John, S., & Kuruvilla, K. (1992, January). Cognitive dysfunction in depression.

Indian journal of psychiatry. Retrieved June 1, 2022, from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2980980/
• Pawar, A .A., Rathod, J., Chaudhury, S.,Saxena, S.K., Saldanha, D., Ryali, V.S., &
Srivastava, K.(2006). Cognitive and emotional effects of renal transplantation. Indian
journal of psychiatry. Retrieved June 1, 2022, from
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20703410/
• Scribd. (n.d.). Search. Scribd. Retrieved June 1, 2022, from
https://www.scribd.com/search?query=wapis .
• The Pros and cons of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale example. GraduateWay.
(2021, March 2). Retrieved June 1, 2022, from https://graduateway.com/the-pros-and-
cons-of-the-wechsler-adult-intelligence-scale/
• Ramalingaswamy, P(1974). Manual of Indian Adaptation of WAPIS performance scale.Delhi