ABSTRACT: Personality assessment and the general history of the development of the 16PF are briefly discussed. An overview of the history of the 16PF in South Africa is subsequently given including the development and psychometric properties of older versions of the questionnaire and of related questionnaires. This is followed by a detailed discussion of two versions of the questionnaire, namely the SA92 version and the SA fifth edition. Both versions are locally used and supported by test publishers (although the form SA92 is being phased out in favour of the SA fifth edition). The latter represents current local and international developments and the former is important in terms of the associated research results both from a practical and a methodological point of view. The versions are described in terms of their development and the subsequent research conducted in South Africa. The emphasis is on critical discussion/examination of the instruments in the local context, focusing on cross-cultural research. In addition to comparisons across groups, issues such as the understanding of items, the role of language proficiency and translation difficulties are discussed. Issues related to the 16PF in practice are discussed and the chapter concludes with ideas on the future of the questionnaire in South Africa. Reliability, validity and bias issues are highlighted as far as possible.
ABSTRACT: The K-ABC was published in 1983 (revised and re-standardised, K-ABC ll, in 2004) as a measure of cognitive ability in children aged 2-12:6 years. The revised edition appropriately extends the age band to 18:11 years and modifies, subtracts and adds subtests. The K-ABC measures fluid and crystallised abilities, short and long term memory and visual processing and aligns with the Cattell-Horn-Carroll hierarchically organized model. The battery is based on Luria’s model of mental processing and has correlated significantly with scholastic achievement. Of greatest relevance is that the K-ABC was designed to have a reduced language and cultural load and the second edition has altered two sub-scales that were shown to load differently for diverse cultures. The degree to which the K-ABC is able to offer a reduced cultural load test is debatable. Cross-cultural research, in Zaire and South Africa predominantly, has demonstrated that the K-ABC has value in cross-cultural settings but with specific caveats. Importantly the Sequential and Simultaneous processing scale offer more value that the Mental Processing Composite which has a knowledge basis that is culturally specific. The few studies have been conducted on the K-ABC in South Africa, have demonstrated its assessment value in a diagnostic, remedial and dynamic assessment framework, especially in comparison to alternate intelligence tests. However, caution is raised due to the absence of a strong South African normative basis.