Dear Colleagues,

Contemporary IQ testing in the United States—a century after Lewis Terman published the Stanford–Binet in 1916—has evolved in ways that even David Wechsler could not have envisioned. Several of the early pioneers in the 1910s, including Terman, were fans of eugenics, and some were decidedly despicable. Henry Goddard of the Vineland Training School (and author of the Goddard–Binet) was a pioneer in the fields of clinical psychology and special education. He was also a strong proponent of eugenics, segregation, and racial inferiority; he argued vehemently that four out of five Jewish, Hungarian, Italian, and Russian immigrants were “feebleminded.” He even coined the term moron to give these immigrants a label!

Furthermore, all of these American pioneers were devotees of Spearman’s g theory and had absolute certainty that global intelligence was not only unitary but was “fixed” at birth (Alfred Binet and Henri Simon, who developed the original Binet in Paris in 1905, by contrast, believed neither in g nor fixed intelligence). IQ tests were psychometric instruments whose only claim to fame was to yield a single score; the main voice on how to interpret the Stanford–Binet IQ was Terman’s personal statistician, Quinn McNemar.

Wechsler gave IQ testing a new spin when he published the Wechsler–Bellevue in 1939. He offered Verbal, Performance, and Full-Scale IQs, along with reliable scores on nearly a dozen subtests. He believed IQ to be an aspect of personality and transformed psychometric testing into clinical assessment. The Stanford–Binet reigned supreme in the 1940s and 1950s, but the emergence of the burgeoning fields of learning disabilities and neuropsychology in the 1960s put Wechsler’s scales—by then the WISC and WAIS—in the driver’s seat. These new fields needed profiles of cognitive strengths and weaknesses to diagnose and treat specific learning disabilities and neurological dysfunction. Wechsler’s scales filled this need.

Yet, into the 1980s, the thousands of research studies on learning and intelligence failed to make a dent in the field of IQ testing; neither did the dozen or so major theories of learning, cognitive development, or intelligence. The latest innovations in psychometric theory, such as Rasch latent-trait modeling, were immediately put into the IQ test mix, but not the theories that defined the constructs that these tests were supposed to be measuring. The decade of the 1980s saw movement in that direction with the publication of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), Stanford–Binet—4^th edition, and Woodcock–Johnson—Revised (WJ-R). However, it was not until the decades of the 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s that the theoretical framework of the underlying constructs began to match the sophistication of the statistical theories.

Both the growth and acceleration of theory-based test development and interpretation has been geometric during the past three decades and continues its ascent. Diagnosis of specific learning disabilities, neurological disorders, intellectual disabilities, ADHD, autism spectrum disorders, giftedness, and the like—and the instruments used to make these diagnoses within bilingual populations, for people of color, those with sensory or motor disabilities, and for mainstream children and adults—are built upon a strong foundation of theory and empirical research. The goal of every clinical, neuropsychological and psycho-educational evaluation is to make a difference in the lives of the children and adults referred for evaluation by translating test results and clinical observations to action, often in the form of educational interventions. 

This Special Issue is devoted to the assessment of human intelligence in the present day. Terman’s psychometric testing gave way to Wechsler’s clinical assessment in the 1960s. Wechsler’s scales never lost their popularity, but his clinical approach was supplanted in the 1990s by sophisticated theory-based test development and cutting-edge theory-driven test interpretation.

The major aim of this Special Issue is to define the breadth and scope of cognitive assessment in the 2020s, from infancy to adulthood, as a testament to how far the field has advanced in the century since IQ testing was synonymous with g and its pioneers included some bigots. This issue attests to the array of instruments that have joined Wechsler’s and Terman’s scales in the clinician’s toolbox; the diversity of theories that have impacted cognitive assessment over the past generation and continue to be refined and redefined, including the innovative research that continually shapes the direction for future generations. Even the pandemic has changed the way we assess children and adults. Furthermore, contemporary society in the U.S. has had no less of an impact on clinical research and practice than the latest theories or statistical procedures.

Similar to how society and the scholars in the field have moved on from eugenics, g theory, and fixed intelligence, the landscape of modern assessment has moved toward a framework that is more equitable and socially just in concert with a society that increasingly emphasizes the importance of diverse viewpoints. Assessment-related legislative mandates tend to echo this push for diversity. In essence, test theory, test development, empirical research, and clinical practice must inherently be equitable in order to be strong over time.

We invited a handful of articles from giants in the field, namely the theorists, researchers, and test developers who transformed cognitive assessment and test interpretation into the dynamic, influential field that it is today. We also asked a few rising stars to contribute articles.

We are eager to solicit articles from other professionals who have special interest and expertise in cognitive assessment. The articles will be consistent with the goals and themes of the Special Issue—most notably equitable assessment based on a topnotch research-based and theory-driven foundation—spanning the gamut from clinical to theoretical to statistical to practical. 

Illustrations of topics that would be welcomed are:

• non-discriminatory assessment;
• diagnosis and treatment of learning disabilities;
• forensic use of cognitive testing in capital punishment cases;
• tablet-based testing;
• remote assessment;
• technological advances in assessment;
• advances in school neuropsychological assessment;
• latest research on working memory; 
• clinical assessment of the elderly; 
• cognitive referencing relative to the diagnosis and treatment of language disorders;
• any relevant topic in which you have particular expertise

Please note that the “Planned Papers” Section on the webpage does not imply that these papers will eventually be accepted; all manuscripts will be subject to the journal’s normal and rigorous peer review process.

Dr. Alan S. Kaufman
Dr. Jacqueline M. Caemmerer
Prof. Dr. Melissa A. Bray
Dr. Johanna DeLeyer-Tiarks
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Intelligence is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

• IQ testing
• cognitive assessment
• Wechsler scales
• intelligence theories
• theory-based test interpretation
• clinical assessment
• Cattell–Horn–Carroll (CHC) theory