Measurement Invariance of the Woodcock-Johnson ® V Achievement Battery: An Exploratory Graph Analysis Approach

Abstract

The Woodcock-Johnson V (WJ V) test evaluates general intelligence and cognitive abilities using the Cattell–Horn–Carroll (CHC) theory framework. While measurement invariance is often tested using structural equation modeling (SEM), few studies have applied exploratory graph analysis (EGA), particularly in intelligence assessments. This study addresses that gap by examining configural and metric invariance of the WJ V achievement battery across age, race, and gender using normative data and a novel EGA approach. Results show that the WJ V maintains a consistent structure across diverse groups, supporting its validity in measuring the same constructs. Stability analyses further supported these findings, with test-to-community assignments remaining highly consistent in bootstrapped samples. Minor variation was observed only in the Oral Language Sample, which showed slightly lower but acceptable stability above 0.70.

Keywords

measurement invariance exploratory graph analysis Woodcock-Johnson V validity measurement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

M. J.

Yen

W. M.

(1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education . (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Becker

A. B. C.

Maurer

Daseking

Pauls

(2024). Measurement invariance of the WISC-V across a clinical sample of children and adolescents with ADHD and a matched control group. Journal of Intelligence, 12(6), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence12010006

Benjamini

Hochberg

(1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x

Bulut

Cormier

D. C.

Aquilina

A. M.

Bulut

H. C.

(2021). Age and sex invariance of the Woodcock-Johnson IV tests of cognitive abilities: Evidence from psychometric network modeling. Journal of Intelligence, 9(3), Article 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence9030035

Byrne

B. M.

(2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Elbaum Associates.

Camarata

Woodcock

(2006). Sex differences in processing sped: Developmental effects in males and females. Intelligence, 34(3), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2005.12.001

Chen

F. F.

(2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834

Chen

Zhang

Raiford

S. E.

Zhu

Weiss

L. G.

(2015). Factor invariance between genders on the wechsler intelligence scale for Children−Fifth edition. Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.020

10.

Chen

Zhu

(2012). Measurement invariance of WISC-IV across normative and clinical samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(2), 161–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.006

11.

Christensen

A. P.

Garrido

L. E.

Guerra-Pena

Golino

(2023). Comparing community detection algorithms in psychometric networks: A Monte Carlo simulation. Behavior Research Methods, 56(3), 1485–1505. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02106-4

12.

Christensen

A. P.

Golino

(2021a). Estimating the stability of psychological dimensions via bootstrap exploratory graph analysis: A Monte Carlo simulation and tutorial. Psych, 3(3), 479–500. https://www.mdpi.com/2624-8611/3/3/32.

13.

Christensen

A. P.

Golino

(2021b). On the equivalency of factor and network loadings. Behavior Research Methods, 53(4), 1563–1580. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01500-6

14.

Dombrowski

S. C.

Watkins

M. W.

McGill

R. J.

Canivez

G. L.

Holingue

Pritchard

A. E.

Jacobson

L. A.

(2020). Measurement invariance of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition 10 −Subtest primary battery: Can index scores be compared across age, sex, and diagnostic groups? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 39(1), 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282920954583

15.

Edwards

O. W.

Oakland

T. D.

(2006). Factorial invariance of woodcock-johnson III scores for african Americans and caucasian Americans. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24(4), 358–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282906289595

16.

Fortunato

(2010). Community detection in graphs. Physics Reports, 486(3-5), 75–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002. https://www-sciencedirect-com-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/science/article/abs/pii/S0370157309002841?via%3Dihub

17.

Friedman

Hastie

Tibshirani

(2008). Sparse inverse covariance estimation with graphical lasso. Biostatistics, 9(3), 432–441. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxm045

18.

Garcia-Pardina

Abad

F. J.

Christensen

A. P.

Golino

Garrido

L. E.

(2024). Dimensionality assessment in the presence of wording effects: A network psychometric and factorial approach. Behavior Research Methods, 56(6), 6179–6197. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02348-w

19.

Gates

K. M.

Henry

Steinley

Fair

D. A.

(2016). A Monte Carlo evaluation of weighted community detection algorithms. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 10, Article 45. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2016.00045

20.

Golino

Christensen

A. P.

(2025). EGAnet: Exploratory graph analysis: A framework for estimating the number of dimensions in multivariate data using network psychometrics. R package version 2.2.0.

21.

Golino

H. F.

Epskamp

(2017). Exploratory graph analysis: A new approach for estimating the number of dimensions in psychological research. PLoS One, 12(6), Article e0174035. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174035

22.

Hajovsky

D. B.

Chesnut

S. R.

(2022). Examination of differential effects of cognitive abilities on reading and mathematics achievement across race and ethnicity: Evidence with the WJ IV. Journal of School Psychology, 93(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.05.001

23.

Hoyle

R. H.

(1995). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

24.

Jamison

Christensen

A. P.

Golino

H. F.

(2024). Metric invariance in exploratory graph analysis via permutation testing. Methodology, 20(2), 144–186. https://doi.org/10.5964/meth.12877. https://meth.psychopen.eu/index.php/meth/article/view/12877

25.

Kane

M. T.

(2006). Validation. In Brennan

R. L.

(Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 18–64). Westport: Praeger Publishers.

26.

Keith

T. Z.

Reynolds

M. R.

Patel

P. G.

Ridley

K. P.

(2008). Sex differences in latent cognitive abilities ages 6 to 59: Evidence from the Woodcock-Johnson III tests of cognitive abilities. Intelligence, 36(6), 502–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2007.11.001

27.

LaForte

E. M.

Dailey

McGrew

K. S.

(2025). Technical Manual. Woodcock-Johnson V. Riverside Assessments, LLC.

28.

Mather

McGrew

K. S.

LaForte

E. M.

Wendling

B. J.

(2025a). Woodcock-johnson V tests of achievement. Riverside Assessments, LLC.

29.

Mather

McGrew

K. S.

LaForte

E. M.

Wendling

B. J.

(2025b). Woodcock-johnson V virtual test library. Riverside Assessments, LLC.

30.

McGrew

K. S.

Mather

LaForte

E. M.

(2025). Woodcock-johnson V tests of cognitive abilities. Riverside Assessments, LLC.

31.

McGrew

K. S.

Schneider

W. J.

Decker

S. L.

Bulut

(2023). A psychometric network analysis of CHC intelligence measures: Implications for research, theory, and interpretation of broad CHC scores “beyond g”. Journal of Intelligence, 11(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11010019

32.

Kim

J. P.

(2024). Measurement invariance of the WJ IV in clinical samples. In Poster presented at the annual meeting of the international psychometric society. Prague, Czech Republic.

33.

Pauls

Daseking

Petermann

(2020). Measurement invariance across gender on the second-order five-factor model of the German Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children– Fifth edition. Assessment, 27(8), 1836–1852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191119847762

34.

Putnick

D. L.

Bornstein

M. H.

(2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review: Developmental Review, 41, 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004

35.

Reynolds

M. R.

Kieth

T. Z.

(2017). Multi-group and hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis of the Wechsler intelligence scale for children – fifth edition: What does it measure? Intelligence, 62, 31–47.

36.

Schmacker

R. E.

Lomax

R. G.

(1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

37.

Schneider

W. J.

McGrew

K. S.

(2018). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In Flanagan

D. P.

McDonough

E. M.

(Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 73–163). Guilford Press.

38.

Schroeders

Gnambs

(2020). Degrees of freedom in multigroup confirmatory factor analyses. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 36(1), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000500

39.

Vandenberg

R. J.

Lance

C. E.

(2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002

40.

Westfall

P. H.

Young

S. S.

(1993). Resampling-based multiple testing: Examples and methods for p-value adjustment. John Wiley & Sons.

41.

Wilson

C. J.

Bowden

S. C.

Vannier

L. C.

Byrne

L. K.

Weiss

L. G.

(2023). Measurement invariance of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for children, in Australian and New Zealand and US standardization samples. Psychological Assessment, 35(6), 510–521. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001221

42.

McGrew

(2025). Measurement invariance of the Woodcock johnson assessments. Unpublished white paper.