Abstract
The Cerebrals Cognitive Abilities Test (CCAT) is a psychometric test battery comprising three subtests: Verbal Analogies (VA), Mathematical Problems (MP), and General Knowledge (GK). The CCAT is designed to assess general crystallized intelligence and scholastic ability in adolescents and adults. This study aimed to investigate the reliability, criterion-related validity, and norm establishment of the CCAT. The results indicated excellent reliability, strong correlations with established measures, and suitable age-referenced norms. The findings support the use of the CCAT as a valid and reliable measure of crystallized intelligence and scholastic ability.
Keywords: Cerebrals Cognitive Ability Test, CCAT, psychometrics, reliability, validity, norms
Introduction
Crystallized intelligence is a central aspect of cognitive functioning, encompassing acquired knowledge and skills that result from lifelong learning and experiences (Carroll, 1993; Cattell, 1971). The assessment of crystallized intelligence is vital for understanding an individual’s cognitive abilities and predicting their performance in various academic and professional settings. The Cerebrals Cognitive Abilities Test (CCAT) is a psychometric test battery designed to assess general crystallized intelligence and scholastic ability, divided into three distinct subtests: Verbal Analogies (VA), Mathematical Problems (MP), and General Knowledge (GK).
As a psychometric instrument, the CCAT should demonstrate high levels of reliability, validity, and well-established norms to be considered a trustworthy measure. The current study aimed to evaluate the CCAT’s psychometric properties by examining its reliability, criterion-related validity, and the process of norm establishment. Furthermore, the study sought to establish the utility of the CCAT for predicting cognitive functioning in adolescents and adults.
Method
Participants and Procedure
A sample of 584 participants, aged 12–75 years, was recruited to evaluate the reliability and validity of the CCAT. The sample was diverse in terms of age, gender, and educational background. Participants were administered the CCAT alongside established measures, including the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scale (RIAS; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2003), Scholastic Assessment Test—Recentered (SAT I; College Board, 2010), and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III (WAIS-III; Wechsler, 1997). The data collected were used to calculate reliability coefficients, correlations with other measures, and age-referenced norms.
Reliability Analysis
The reliability of the full CCAT and its subtests was assessed using the Spearman-Brown corrected Split-Half coefficient, a widely accepted measure of internal consistency in psychometric tests (Cronbach, 1951). This analysis aimed to establish the CCAT’s measurement error, stability, and interpretability.
Validity Analysis
Criterion-related validity was assessed by examining the correlations between the CCAT indexes and established measures, including the RIAS Verbal Index, SAT I, and WAIS-III Full-Scale IQ and Verbal IQ. High correlations would indicate the CCAT’s validity as a measure of crystallized intelligence and scholastic ability.
Norm Establishment
Norms for the CCAT were established using a subsample of 160 participants. The CCAT scales were compared with the RIAS VIX and WAIS-III FSIQ and VIQ to develop age-referenced norms. The RIAS VIX changes over time were applied to adjust the CCAT indexes, ensuring up-to-date and relevant norms.
Results
Reliability
The full CCAT demonstrated excellent reliability, with a Spearman-Brown corrected Split-Half coefficient of .97. This result indicates low measurement error (2.77 for the full-scale index) and good measurement stability. The Verbal Ability scale, derived from the combination of VA and GK subtests, also displayed a high level of reliability, with a coefficient of .96, supporting its interpretation as an individual measure.
Validity
The criterion-related validity of the CCAT was confirmed through strong correlations with established measures. The full CCAT and Verbal Ability scale demonstrated high correlations with the RIAS Verbal Index (.89), indicating a strong relationship between these measures. Additionally, the CCAT was closely related to the SAT I (.87) and both the WAIS-III Full-Scale IQ (.92) and Verbal IQ (.89), further supporting the CCAT’s validity as a measure of crystallized intelligence and scholastic ability.
Discussion
The findings of this study provide strong evidence for the reliability and validity of the CCAT as a psychometric tool for assessing general crystallized intelligence and scholastic ability. The high reliability coefficients indicate that the CCAT yields consistent and stable results, while the strong correlations with established measures support its criterion-related validity.
Moreover, the established age-referenced norms allow for accurate interpretation of CCAT scores across various age groups, making it suitable for adolescents and adults up to 75 years old. The computerized version of the CCAT provides raw scores for each subtest, further facilitating the assessment process and interpretation of results.
Despite these strengths, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of the current study. The sample was limited in size and diversity, which may affect the generalizability of the findings. Future research should aim to replicate these results in larger and more diverse samples, as well as explore the predictive validity of the CCAT in real-world academic and professional settings.
Conclusion
The Cerebrals Cognitive Abilities Test (CCAT) is a reliable and valid psychometric instrument for measuring general crystallized intelligence and scholastic ability in adolescents and adults. The study findings support the use of the CCAT in educational and psychological assessment contexts and contribute to the growing body of literature on psychometric test development and evaluation.
References
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571312
Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. Houghton Mifflin.
College Board (2010). Scholastic Assessment Test. Retrieved from https://www.collegeboard.org/
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2003). Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS) and the Reynolds Intellectual Screening Test (RIST), Professional Manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Third Edition. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
