Holland T R, Wadsworth H M
Percept Mot Skills. 1976 Dec;43(3 pt. 1):951-7. doi: 10.2466/pms.1976.43.3.951.
Five concept-formation scores for 20 brain-damaged and 20 schizophrenic inpatients were factor analyzed, along with WAIS Vocabulary and Block Design. One factor emerged from this analysis, suggesting that these concept-formation tests do not measure an ability which is greatly different from general intelligence when administered to patients of the type studied. None of the single concept-formation scores discriminated between the brain-damaged and schizophrenic groups independently of general intellectual level, although an exploratory analysis of the subtests of the Halstead Category Test indicated that differential performance on Subtest IV versus Subtest V produced valid criterion variance beyond that attributable to Vocabulary and Block Design alone. The findings were discussed in terms both of the factors underlying the performance of the present subjects versus those from different patient populations, and the need for refining ability-oriented diagnostic strategies when studying impaired patients who do not manifest highly specific psychological deficits on standard clinical tests yielding single scores.
对20名脑损伤住院患者和20名精神分裂症住院患者的五项概念形成分数，以及韦氏成人智力量表（WAIS）的词汇和积木图案分测验进行了因素分析。该分析得出了一个因素，这表明当对所研究类型的患者进行测试时，这些概念形成测验所测量的能力与一般智力并无太大差异。尽管对霍尔斯特德类别测验的子测验进行的探索性分析表明，第四子测验与第五子测验的差异表现产生了有效的标准方差，且超出了仅归因于词汇和积木图案分测验的方差，但没有一个单一的概念形成分数能够在不考虑一般智力水平的情况下区分脑损伤组和精神分裂症组。研究结果从当前受试者与不同患者群体表现背后的因素，以及在研究那些在产生单一分数的标准临床测试中未表现出高度特异性心理缺陷的受损患者时，完善以能力为导向的诊断策略的必要性这两个方面进行了讨论。
