OK. I didn't have any multiple choice testing, but I did get the analogy one.
Which one do you think better applies here? I mean, I want to believe the psych since he's the one that did the testing and sat down with me, plus, he hit the memory thing right on the nose which no one ever caught before...
Should I believe him?
I may have complicated things more & sorry if I did! I just meant to address your prior question about "ability" testing only being IQ tests. There are non-IQ tests that still use the term "ability" in their wording (and then go on to specify that they aren't intelligence tests to make it more confusing!). What you were given was an IQ test, so the multiple choice, group ability test thing
does not apply in your instance.
It is just a less familiar IQ test for most of us and it is shorter than many IQ tests. It does seems reasonable to assume from the combo of what you see in real life and those test scores, that short term memory is a personal weakness.
As to whether to believe what the psych wrote, I see no reason not to. I also believe that it is possible that s/he is defining gifted differently than I usually do (high IQ). IQ tests are imperfect, though. I hate to make them the be all end all. I just see them as the best measure we have at this point and less subject to false positives than other measures such as achievement and behavioral scales.
I also absolutely believe that IQ scores can be depressed by learning disabilities and that they can be off for a variety of other reasons. It is possible that either applies in your situation. However, with just the little info you were given, I don't see anything specific that is saying that appears to be extremely likely. I'd expect to see more than a low memory score in a 2e person, but it sounds like you are saying that the subtest scores were figured without having been given all of the tests within those subtests. That really should not have been done if that was the case.
Now you've got me motivated so I went a grabbed my dd's very old RIAS results. So, my understanding here is that, if you have wild variation w/in subtests of the RIAS, the publisher's instructions say that you
cannot figure a composite score for the subtest. You, consequently, won't be able to figure a composite intelligence score. That would be the type of thing I'd expect to see when dealing with an invalid IQ score that was thrown by a LD or ADD, for instance. If your tester figured composite scores despite significant scatter, that could make the scores much more suspect.
The VIX (verbal index) should have had two subtests: Guess What and Verbal Reasoning.
The NIX (nonverbal index) should include Odd-item out and What's missing.
Memory subtests are Verbal and Nonverbal memory.
My dd's NIX scores were about two standard deviations from one another, so the NIX could not be figured. The CIX also could not be figured as a result.
I don't know what any of these subtests look like. I don't know if the names of the subtests are enough for you to know if you were given them all.
