Test of NonVerbal

Intellingence
(TONI)
Evaluating Performance Quality with Subjective
and Objective Measures

Introduction
Test Model
Built to fill a gap in cognitive testing avaialble tests
Free of:
Language requirements
Motor requirements
Cultural influence
Brief

Thus, needed to measure intelligence as a global inclusive construct

al Construct of Intelligence Definition of Measured Construct

Problem solving
Historically considered essence of intelligence
Now recognized, while not necessarily the only underlying
construct, is a good representation of g and fluid intelligence

Test Development

Dr. Trainor and Sarah Lade

Editions
Current edition TONI IV
Previous Editions

First edition
Second edition
Third edition Strongly influenced design of TONI IV

All editions contained similar items

Vast number of critical reviews and research evidence
See Test of Nonverbal Intelligence Johnsen, Brown, & Sherbenou

Test Development
4th Edition - 2010

Normative Data
cular attention paid to variations in:
hnicity
ce
ographic region
rental education
S
hy are subtle variations in these factors particularly important
r this test?

Psychometric Data for New Normed Data

d new items which improved floor of both Forms A and B

s A and B items reordered and balanced to sort difficulty and

tested

Uses
TONI-IV
Estimating aptitude and general intellectual functioning
Identifying individuals believed to have intellectual impairment
Ruling out intellectual impairment whose test performance may be
confounded by concurrent language or motor impairments
Verifying validity of referrals for treatment, therapy or special services
Formulating hypotheses for intervention or further evaluation
Conducting research

Standardization &
Normative Data
Sample Selection

2,272 individuals
from 31 states in
United States
graphic Characteristics and Sample Stratification
Based on percentages, the TONI-IV is considered
representative of the US as a whole, with salient
demographic categories (region, gender, race, etc.) being
comparable to US Census Data.
Stratification of select categories (listed below) was
computed for each age interval and is likewise
representative
of national expectations at each age group
Region

Gender
Race

Psychometric Data
SUBJECTIVE NALYSIS

OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS

Administration
Instructions

Scoring

NDEPENDANT VARIABLES

Between SubjectWithin Subject

Listener:
Stimulus Type:
Nave vs ExperiencedMPA/non-MPA, JA/JP

EPENDANT VARIABLES

erformance Ratings

ubjective
echnical Accuracy/Artistic Expression)

Objective
(Timing/Pitch Errors)

HYPOTHESES
perfomers will be perceived as more anxious than nMPA performers

ormers will be perceived as more anxious in the JP condition vs JA

ve listeners will rate performance quality as higher

Interpretation

Practical Considerations
Cost
Availability

Other Considerations

Inclusiveness
Mental Age Equivalent
Special Cases, Appropriate Action

Questions/Discus
sion?