View source for Why Generic Assessment Fails with Uneven Cognitive Profiles

== Why Generic Assessment Fails with Uneven Cognitive Profiles ==
This page explains why standard or “generic” assessment methods often produce invalid conclusions when cognitive abilities are unevenly distributed across domains.

Generic assessment typically assumes that cognitive abilities are broadly uniform. Where this assumption does not hold, performance may be dominated by the most constrained domain rather than by the reasoning capacity being evaluated.

=== Structural assumptions in generic assessment ===
Most assessment formats combine multiple cognitive demands simultaneously, including reasoning, working memory, processing speed, and output fluency.

When these demands are aggregated into a single overall judgement, internal variation between domains is obscured.

Where WAIS domain separation reveals significant discrepancy between reasoning-dominant and efficiency-dominant indices, reliance on aggregated performance risks misrepresentation.

=== Suppression of capacity under load ===
In uneven cognitive profiles, constraints in working memory or processing speed can suppress access to intact reasoning capacity under load.

Where assessment formats impose high memory demand, speed pressure, or sequencing complexity, observable performance may reflect access limitations rather than absence of ability.

This is a structural effect, not a motivational one.

=== Averaging and misclassification ===
Use of composite or averaged scores can conceal meaningful internal differences.

In the presence of significant internal discrepancy, overall averages may:

underestimate reasoning capacity

over-weight constrained domains

misinterpret inconsistency as unreliability

lead to invalid conclusions about competence

The error arises from the structure of the assessment method, not from the individual.

=== Why this matters ===
Where assessment outcomes are used in high-stakes contexts — education, employment, or judicial settings — structural misinterpretation can lead to exclusion, inappropriate capability judgements, or refusal of adjustment.

Recognising uneven cognitive architecture, as demonstrated in structured domain-based assessment, is necessary to ensure validity of decision-making.

=== Related pages ===
[[WAIS Domain Structure and Internal Discrepancy]]

[[Uneven cognitive profiles explained|Uneven Cognitive Profiles explained]]

[[Cognitive Capacity, Expression, and Compensability|Cognitive Capacity, Expression, and Adjustability]]

[[Limits of cognitive adjustability|Limits of Cognitive Adjustability]]

[[Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Validity]]