PERFORMANCE OF NEGRO AND WHITE CHILDREN AND PROBLEM

AND NONPROBLEM CHILDREN ON T H E STANFORD B I N E T SCALE

JULIA R. VANE

JONATHAN WEITZMAN

Hojatra University

Port o j New York Authority

AND

ADRIAN P. APPLEBAUM

Bwrd o j Cooperdive Educational Services,

Patchoque, N. Y.

PROBLEM
This study investigated the Stanford Binet performance of matched groups
of (a) white and Negro children, and (b) problem and nonproblem children, t o
determine whether the subtest items would show significant differences between
the respective groups. I n addition, Stanford Binet results of white suburban
children stratified according t o socioeconomic status were collected to determine
whether the mean IQ of this group would differ significantly from the theoretical
Stanford Binet Mean IQ of 100. Stanford Binet results of Negro suburban children
stratified according to socioeconomic status were collected t o compare these with
the Stanford Binet results of 1800 Southern Negro children tested by Kennedy,
Van De Riet and White
PROCEDURE
White and Negro Children. Records of 110 white and 110 Negro children were
selected from a sample of Stanford Binet L-M tests administered in a suburban
New York school district as part of a survey of school intelligence. Children with
behavioral problems, severe retardation or brain damage were not included.
Problem and Nonproblem Children. Records of 76 problem children, all of
whom had displayed problem behavior severe enough to warrant referral to a district psychological center, were selected from the files of a suburban New York
school system. Records of 76 nonproblem children were chosen from the same
school district from which the white and Negro samples had been drawn, and 49
of the nonproblem children were included in the sample of 220 white and Negro
children. Those with severe retardation or brain damage were not included.
The white and Negro children and the problem and nonproblem children
comprised pairs matched within three months for mental and chronological age.
The great majority were also matched for sex. All pairs were in the same socioeconomic category as measured by occupation of the father. The children ranged
in age from 6 to 10 years. The groups selected were not representative for, in
order to obtain close matches, many white children with superior IQs, many Negroes
from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and many problem children with below
average IQs could not be included.
Normative White Group. Records of 113 white children were drawn so that
representation in each socioeconomic category, as defined by occupation of the
father, was proportional to the 1960 United States Census figures for urban whites.
Direct comparison with the Stanford Binet standardization population was not
possible, because Terman and Merrill ( 8 * 9 , report only combined percentages for
urban and rural children. There were 32 six and 32 seven year olds and 49 eight
year olds, as compared to the Terman and Merrill sample of 100 children at each
of these age levels.
Normative Negro Group. Records of 100 Negro children were selected so that
representation in each socioeconomic category was proportional to the 1960 United
States Census figures for occupations of urban Negroes. There were 33 six, 33
seven and 34 eight year olds.
RESULTS
White and Negro Children. Table 1 indicates that the white group was superior
to the Negro with respect to Vocabulary Age. There was a significant difference

432

JULIA R. VANE, JONATHAN WEITZMAN AND ADRIAN P. APPLEBAUM

between the white and blue collar groups with respect to test scatter, which was
measured by counting the number of subtest items from the first failure up to
and including the last success.
Table 2 shows significant differences in favor of the white group on Vocabulary (VI-1), Analogies (VI-5), Copying a Diamond (VII-3) and Vocabulary (X-1).
When the white collar group was compared with the blue collar group there were
differences significant a t the .05 level, in favor of the blue collar group on Comprehension (VII-4), Comprehension (VIIId), and Memory for Designs (XI-1). No
differences were found between boys and girls as a whole, but the 54 white boys
were superior to the 48 Negro boys on Analogies (VI-5) and Memory for Designs
(XI-1). The 56 white girls were higher than the 62 Negro girls on Vocabulary
(VI-1), but the Negro girls were superior on Absurdities (VIII-3) and Similarities
(XI-6). All these subgroup differences were significant a t the .05 level.
Problem and Nonproblem Children. Table 1 indicates that although the two
larger groups were closely matched, the boys had a significantly higher I& and
lower chronological age than the girls, and the white collar group had a significantly
TABLE 1. MEANSAND STANDARD
DEVIATIONS
OF I&, CHRONOLOGICAL
AGE,VOCABULARY
AGE'AND SCATTER
AND MEANSOCIOECONOMIC
INDEX^ OF WHITEAND NEGRO
AND PROBLEM
AND NONPROBLEM
CHILDREN
CHILDREN

Group

Whites
Negroes
Boys
Girls
Whitecollar
Bluecollar

I&

110
110
102
118
74
146

CA

Mean

SD

108.8
107.5
108.6
108.2
107.9
108.7

13.0
14.4
12.5
14.4
12.7
13.3

Mean

90.4
89.6
89.6
90.3
87.7
91.2

VA
SD

11.2
10.9
11.4
10.7
11.1
10.9

Mean

93.9*
87.1*
90.5
90.8
89.5
91.3

Scatter

SD
17.1
19.8
16.5
20.4
18.7
17.9

Mean

9.4
9.2
9.1
9.4
8.4**
9.9**

SD

5.1
5.2
3.7
5.5
5.1
5.0

SEI
Mean

3.8
3.8
3.9
3.7
2.2*
4.6*

Problem
76 104.9
14.5
88.4 11.5
91.9
21.8
9.1** 4.9
3.8
14.5
88.4
11.3
87.9
19.4
7.4** 4.7
3.9
Nonproblem 76 105.1
87.5* 10.8 88.9 19.1
8.4
4.9
3.9
Boys
113 106.3* 15.3
10.9
91.0, 12.5
92.7 24.7
39 100.9'
8.1
4.8
3.8
Girls
10.5
94.5** 18.7
7.0** 4.5
1.8*
Whitecollar 46 113.1* 12.3 86.4
89.2
11.6
87.9** 21.3
8.9** 4.8
4.7*
Bluecollar
106 101.4* 13.9
*Differencesignificantat the .Ollevel; ** at the .05level.
'Method developed by Cureton (2)for determining Vocabulary Age.
Bocioeconomic index based upon U. S. Census Occupational categories and classified as: 1.
professional, technical; 2. managers, owners; 3. sales, clerical; 4. craftsmen, foremen,operatives,
semiskilled; 5. service; 6. laborers, unskilled. White collar: categories 1, 2, 3; Blue collar:
categories 4, 5, 6.
_ ~
. _ .

higher mean I& than the blue collar group. The problem children showed significantly greater scatter than their nonproblem matches, and the blue collar
group showed significantly greater scatter than the white collar group.
Table 2 shows significant differences in favor of the nonproblem children on
Vocabulary (VI-1) and Digits Forward (VII-6), and in favor of the problem children
on Copying a Diamond (VII-3) and Vocabulary (VIII-1). The same differences
in the same direction were found between the 56 problem boys and the 57 nonproblem boys. I n addition, the nonproblem boys were significantly higher on Comprehension (VIII-4). The 20 nonproblem girls were significantly higher than the
19 problem girls on Absurdities (VIIIS), but the problem girls were higher on
Comprehension (VIII-4). All subgroup differences were significant a t the .05
level. No figures were computed for the white and blue collar groups or for the
total boys and girls, because significant differences in I& between these groups
made comparisons meaningless.

433

PERFORMANCE ON T H E STANFORD B I N E T SCALE

TABLE
2. PERCENTAGE
OF DIFFERENT
GROUPSPASSING
EACHSUBTEST
ITEM
Subtest

White

Negro

Problem

VI-1
VI-2
VI-4
VI-5

99*
96
97
94**

90*
95
95
85**

88**
93
91
89

VII-2
VII-3
VII-4
VII-6

77
85**
85
75

75
74**
85
75

VIII-1
VIII-3
VIII-4
VIII-5

80
42
62
66

IX-3
IX-4
IX-5
IX-6

White
Norm

Negro
Norm

Negro
Southern

96**
93
93
92

100
98
97
90

90
95
92
85

61
78
91
81

67
86**
83
55**

68
74**
79
68**

76
86
90
77

67
74
83
69

56
61
61
68

70
48
63
66

75**
29
51
51

64**
39
54
51

78
46
64
67

59
52
59

34
31
41
41

38
60
35
30

28
58
32
33

29
41
26
24

29
46
30
25

36
63
33
32

20
49
25
24

33
29
46
35

x-1

26**
22
27
29

15**
20
27
31

21
13
21
21

21
16
17
12

26
19
27
29

11
13
16
27

12
12
28
23

XI-1
XI-2
XI-3
XI-6

10

9
9
5
20

8
7
5
17

13
8

5
24

6
6
8
25

25

5
5
16

12
6
8
10

XII-1
XII-2
XII-5
XII-6

1
9
3
7

5
9
3
5

4
8
1
1

1
5
3
3

1
15
4
7

4
6
2
4

2
6
3
6

XIII-1
XIII-2
XIII-4
XIII-5

6
2
3

2
2
6
2

3
1
3
0

3
1
0
2

7
2
4
4

2
2
4
2

3
2
4
3

x-3
x-5
X-6

*Difference significant at the .01 level;

Nonprob.

41

** a t the .05 level.

Despite the differences shown between the white and Negro groups and between
the problem and nonproblem groups, Table 2 indicates that the patterns of both
matched groups resembled one another closely, and there were more similarities
.95 was found between the perthan differences. A rank order correlation of
centage of white and Negro children passing each subtest item, and a correlation
of + .96 between the problem and nonproblem children.
When the percentages for all the groups passing each subtest item reported
in Table 2 are compared, it is evident that all are similar and roughly comparable
to the order established by Terman and Merrill(g). There were consistent exceptions, however, which show that the Similarities item (VII-2) is more difficult
than the two items following it, namely, Copying a Diamond (VII-3) and Comprehension (VII-4). Absurdities (VIII-3) is more difficult than three items following
it, namely, Similarities (VIII-4), Comprehension (VIII-5) and Rhymes (1X-4).
Abstract Words (X-3) is more difficult than three items following it, namely,
Word Naming (X-5), Digits Forward (X-6) and Similarities (XI-6). Similarities
(XI-6)
is easier than three itenis preceding it, namely, Memory for Designs (XI-l),
Absurdities (XI-2) and Abstract Words (XI-3). Since these variations occurred

434

JULIA R. VANE, JONATHAN WEITZMAN AND ADRIAN P. APPLEBAUM

in almost every one of the seven groups reported, it would appear that the differences are characteristic of the test and not specific to the groups under study.
Test Scatter. The meaningfulness of test scatter as an index of emotional
disturbance and/or inefficient intellectual functioning is di5cult to assess in view
of the results obtained. Although the problem children, with a mean scatter index
of 9.1, were more variable than the nonproblem children who had a mean scatter
index of 7.4, the mean scatter index of the white and Negro groups was 9.4 and 9.2
respectively, and was 9.4 for the 113 children of the white normative group and
8.6 for the 100 children of the Negro normative group. The blue collar children
consistently showed greater variability than the white collar children, but the
mean scatter of the blue collar children was closer to that of the normative groups
than was the mean scatter of the white collar children. It would appear that scatter
as a diagnostic concept should be used with caution, a conclusion reached by Schneider and Smillie() who found no significant differences in scatter on the Stanford
Binet Scale when they compared a group of 27 emotionally disturbed children
with a matched group of 27 normal children.
Normative White Group. The mean I& of the 113 children in the normative
white group was 112.7, SD 14.1. When the records of all the white children between
six and ten years of age who had been tested for routine educational purposes were
divided into white and blue collar groups, the mean I& for the 103 white collar
children was 115.4, SD 16.4, and for the 109 blue collar children was 108.1, SD 15.2.
If severely retarded and brain injured children had been included in the sample,
the means of the groups might have been slightly lower, but not significantly so
in view of the fact that according to Terman and Merrills data(g),children with
IQs below 70 comprise only 2% of the population.
A major factor enabling the children in the normative sample to obtain a
mean IQ considerably above the theoretical norm of 100 undoubtedly was residence
in an area of higher than average income and educational level. This does not
appear to be an isolated instance, for studies by Lehman(6)in Wisconsin, Mehlman(6)
in Ohio, and Caplan and Siebert) in Ohio all indicate such a trend. The standardizing group of Terman and Merrill@#
p. a 6 ) drawn from California showed mean I@
of 104.5 and 104.7. Although the authors attributed the higher than expected
IQs t o sampling bias, it is possible that the I& of 100 as applied to the population
of the United States may no longer be valid and a mean I& closer to 105 is more
likely to be appropriate. Even higher IQs might be expected in communities where
superior educational and socioeconomic opportunities enhance the development
of intellectual potential. Another interpretation is that as the result of increased
public awareness of tests, schools and parents in communities that are strongly
oriented toward achievement have been exposing their children to items similar
to those that appear on intelligence tests.
Normative Negro Group. The mean I& of the 100 children in the normative
suburban Negro group was 103.3, SD 15.2. This is comparable to the mean of the
white standardizing group of Terman and Merrill (9). It is significantly higher than
that of the southern Negro group of similar chronological age tested by Kennedy
et a,?.(4),whose mean IQs ranged from 84.4 for the 227 six year olds to 80.1 for the
281 nine year olds. A direct comparison with this group is not valid, for although
the occupation of the parent was used as a socioeconomic index, the southern
sample included substantially more children from the lowest classes and from large
families than was warranted by the census data. The fact that the mean I& of the
southern Negro children in the highest occupational category was 105.0(~P. 80)
and 79.4 in the lowest occupational category suggests that the mean IQs would
have been higher had a representative sample been used.
The influence of occupational status on the Stanford Binet results was also
indicated by a study of Higgins and Sivers@). They found a mean I&of 90.6 for
440 white children and 90.3 for 349 Negro children from the lowest socioeconomic

PERFORMANCE ON THE STANFORD BINET SCALE

435

areas of a northeastern city. Although the results were low, the mean I& of the
Negro children was considerably above that of the 1800 Negro children tested
by Kennedy et al. ( I ) ,suggesting that children of lower socioecomonic backgrounds
may perform at a higher level in northern cities.

SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS
The results of the present study indicate that performance on the subtest
items of the Stanford Binet Scale by matched groups of white and Negro children
and matched groups of problem and nonproblem children is very similar. A few
subtest items differentiated the groups, but the overall picture was one of similar
test patterning. Vocabulary was one of the subtests that tended to show differences
between both sets of groups. Although Vocabulary is often considered to be one
of the most reliable indicators of intelligence, it appears to be more vulnerable
to the influence of cultural and psychological factors than some of the other subtests.
The results also suggest that a number of subtest items are placed incorrectly
with respect to order of difficulty. This, combined with the contradictory results
with respect to the variability of the different groups studied, suggest that Terman
p . 5 9 ) were correct in saying,
Though many attempts have been
and Merrill(io~
made to attach diagnostic significance to scatter, we have never found evidence
to justify its use as a diagnostic sign.
The results also indicate that it is possible that the general tested I&of children
in the United States has risen somewhat above the theoretical mean I& of 100,
and that particularly high levels of tested intelligence may be found in areas of
widespread educational and cultural enrichment. Although this points to the strong
influence of environment on tested intelligence, it is not felt that it renders the
Stanford Binet or other intelligence tests invalid as measures of intellectual potential. It indicates that results must be interpreted within a framework that includes
a n awareness of the environmental factors to which the child is exposed.

REFERENCES
1. CAPLAN,
N. S. and SIEBERT,
L. A. Distribution of juvenile delinquent intelligence test scores
over a thirty-four ear period. J . clzn. Psychol., 1964, 20,242-47.
2. CURETON,
E.
Mental age equivalents for the Revised Stanford Binet vocabulary test. J .
~ n ~ u lPS.ychol.,
t.
1954, 18, 381-83.
3. HIGQINS,
C. and SIVERS,CATHRYNE,
H. A com arison of Stanford Binet and Colored Raven
Progressive Matrices intelligence quotients for chil&en with low socioeconomic status. J . consult.
Psychol., 1958, 2.2,405-408.
W. A., VAN DE RIET,V. and WHITE,J. C. A normative sample of intelligence and
4. KENNEDY,
achievement of Negro elementary school children in the southeastern United States. Monogr.
Soc. Res. Child Develpm. 1963,.$8, no. 6:
5. LEHMAN,
J. Rural-urban differences in intelligence. J . Educ. Res., 1959, 63, 62-68.
6. MEHLMAN,
B. Childrearing practices in Kent, Ohio. Child Deuelpm., 1962, 33, 391-401.
JENNYand SMILLIE,
D. The use of scatter on the Stanford Binet. Psychol. Sm.
7. SCHNEIDER,
Cent. J . , 1959, 11, 73-75.
8. TERMAN,
L.M. and MERRILL,
M. A. Measuring Inlelligem. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1937.
9. TERMAN,
L. M. and MERRILL,
M. A. Slanford-Bimt Intelligence Scab. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1960.

E?: