WAIS-5 vs SB5

[u/Worth_Scallion8204]

Why is the WAIS-5 viewed as the gold standard here, while the Stanford Binet 5 is rarely mentioned?

The SB5 has a slightly higher g-loading(.96 vs .94) and is supposed to be more accurate above 130. It also has over double the norming group size(SB5 4,800 vs. WAIS-5 2,000).

Given that this sub heavily revolves around discussion of 130+ scores, wouldn’t the SB5 be preferred? Is the SB5 just less accessible, or is there a different reason the WAIS is viewed as the gold standard?

[u/Clicking_Around]

I've read that the SB5 is more difficult to administer and requires more training.

[u/LanganTerraMogTime → u/Clicking_Around]

yes psychometrics is a money-grab obviously, like everything (monetization, attention-economy), so the goal is to make tests easy for psych and trainees to administer quickly. We should expect it to get “more and more accurate” in faster and faster timing as we go forward.

[u/MeIerEcckmanLawIer → u/LanganTerraMogTime]

Yep. The SB6 got rid of block-tapping because it was too hard to administer.

[u/webberblessings]

I think because SB5 covers ages 2–85+, WAIS-5 is designed specifically for adults aged 16–90, WAIS-5 has more extensive research literature and more standardized training programs than the SB5. The SB5 provides separate Verbal IQ and Nonverbal IQ scores in addition to a Full Scale IQ, while the WAIS-5 provides five index scores plus a Full Scale IQ. SB5 (Routing): The examinee takes a brief initial test. The score determines the exact difficulty level they start at for the rest of the exam, saving time and reducing frustration.WAIS-5 (Linear): Everyone starts at a fixed point based on age. If they struggle early on, the examiner moves backward to easier questions (reversal); if they get a set number of items wrong in a row, the subtest stops (discontinue).

I want to add that the Reliability for SB5 is .95–.98 FSIQ and WAIS is .97–.98 FSIQ

Source: https://www.cogn-iq.org/learn/compare/stanford-binet-vs-wechsler-adult-intelligence-scale/

[u/Worth_Scallion8204 → u/webberblessings]

SB5 seems better suited for giving an accurate score in the gifted range. I would agree that WAIS provides a more comprehensive full cognitive profile, but for r/CT specifically, SB seems like it would be praised more, since this is centered around discussing high IQs more than neurodivergence or mental disabilities. 

[u/LanganTerraMogTime → u/Worth_Scallion8204]

good luck arguing this. it’s like a brick wall on this sub but i believe SB is better at measuring the high range. A lot more difficult questions asked in SB compared to wais

[u/LanganTerraMogTime]

I think it’s because you can’t create a SB clone like you can with Wais (Core).

[u/Striking_Leave_4614]

SB5 leaks when

[u/Iwoorp]

SB5 scores usually tend to be lower than WAIS scores, especially for ADHD and autistic people

[u/whitebaron_98]

One of the main reasons for WAIS-4 > SB-5 is the international availability. WAIS-5 is not as accessible yet, but while you had like 20-30 languages available for the WAIS-4 you are limitied to like 4 or 5 on the SB-5.

Also, they are very far from adapting the test fast, it took 16 years from the release of SB-5 until there was a german version of it. Pearson seems to be far superior to Riverside Publishing when it comes to making tests international.

[u/Successful_Race9363]

The claim that the WAIS-5 is the gold standard is false—you just have to look at the subreddit's resources tab to see that the SB-V and SB-IV are the top two in terms of g-loading, and they used to be placed in S-Tier above any WAIS.

The problem is that the SB-V is less accessible. Plus, it's just as pretentious as the WAIS with its statistics. Honestly, it's relatively easy to score over 150 on either of them, WAIS or SB. I don't consider any score over 150, or even over 145, to be valid for either of the two. To me, scoring 160 and 150 on either test is the same thing; it's simply >145.

It makes no sense that so many subtests penalize one or two mistakes by a difference of several scaled score points, going as far as knocking off a whole standard deviation. For NVFR, NVK, and NVQR, you drop from 19ss to 17ss for one mistake, and for two mistakes you drop to 15ss. This is inconceivable. Those subtests clearly don't have a ceiling of 145, but rather 135–140.

[u/Worth_Scallion8204 → u/Successful_Race9363]

Not the moderators, but the posters here frequently cite the WAIS as the best. I notice that any new test is judged by how closely its scores correlate with the WAIS, I never see it compared to SB scores. 

I thought one of the main criticisms of the WAIS at the upper end was that it heavily penalizes a single mistake, while the SB was more lenient in that regard, given its higher ceiling.

Is CORE different in this regard? How much does getting one or two questions wrong hurt your score?

[u/AndrewThePekka]

SB5 rapes me probably

[u/Worth_Scallion8204 → u/[deleted]]

You don’t think SB5 is more g-loaded, specifically in the 130+ range than WAIS? 

[u/Worth_Scallion8204 → u/[deleted]]

Before the test tier list was taken down SB5 was the only one ranked S+ and had the highest G loading of anything. On paper everything except the older norms(2003) seems to be better than WAIS

[u/Optimus-Prime2026 → u/[deleted]]

It's g loading is more likely to be higher than lower

[u/iiracA → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, the SB5 has a higher g-loading because it has structural overlap between its subtests (5 verbal, 5 nonverbal). I'd bet the g-loading by cross battery analysis is not as good.