Solidarität mit der ukrainischen Bevölkerung. Klinische Fragebögen in ukrainischer und russischer Sprache erhältlich. Erfahren Sie mehr.

WISC-IV: User Survey on Q-interactive Examinee Behavior


In this survey of 95 practitioners who have administered WISC–IV using Q-interactive, there was a high incidence of reports that Q-interactive either increased examinees’ engagement and attention, or had no effect.

Pearson recently conducted the first of a series of surveys of Q-interactive users to gather their observations about how the assessment system is working. User feedback can have several important benefits. Reports such as this can provide the Q-interactive users with timely information about patterns in the behaviors and responses of examinees of different ages, demographic characteristics, or reasons for referral. Learning about the experiences of a large number of users can help individual practitioners interpret their own clinical observations and be confident in making decisions about using Q-interactive with particular clients. Regular feedback gives the Q-interactive developers insights about areas for possible enhancement of the system. This initial survey focused on practitioners’ perceptions of whether the Q-interactive format affects the test-taking behavior of children and adolescents, with a special emphasis on examinees being evaluated for particular clinical conditions. WISC–IV was the first child/adolescent assessment to become available on Q-interactive, in August 2012, 14 months before this survey was conducted. Other instruments for children and adolescents have since been added (D-KEFS, NEPSY,CMS, and WIAT-III). Although this survey was directed to WISC-IV users, the questions were not limited to that instrument. Equivalence of scores obtained from Q-interactive and paper versions of the same tests has been largely demonstrated in a series of empirical studies (see Q-interactive Technical Reports 1 through 6, available at The feedback from users presented here should be considered in light of the general finding of score equivalence between modes of administration.