Adaptation of the Chinese edition of the CSBS-DP: A cross-cultural comparison of prelinguistic development between Taiwanese and American toddlers

The preliminary analysis of the reliability and validity of the Chinese Edition of the CSBS DP

“…Upon closer examination, we noticed that activities such as playing with clay or Legos as referenced in the CQ questionnaire were not common among children aged 1-2 years in Taiwan (possibly as a result of parents' concern over youngsters swallowing small objects by accident). This could also explain the disparity in the norms between Taiwanese toddlers and infants and their American counterparts (Lin & Chiu, 2014). Thus, the strong predictive power of the symbolic composite (across all three assessments-the checklist, CQ, and BS) from the current study proves particularly inspiring and informative for the field of early intervention in Taiwan.…”

“…The current study is our second in this series. In the first study, we compared the mean scores between the Taiwanese samples (using the Chinese Edition of the CSBS DP) and the original US norming samples (Lin & Chiu, 2014). A significant difference in the scores for the symbolic subscale was observed between the test subjects in Taiwan and the norm established in the original CSBS-DP in the United States.…”

Performance of South African children on the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales—Developmental Profile (CSBS DP)

“…() used the CSBS DP to assess 728 twelve‐month‐old Australian children on the Behaviour Sample of the CSBS DP and concluded that both the Behaviour Sample, along with the Infant Toddler Checklist, were valid clinical tools for clinicians to use with English‐speaking Australian toddlers without any adaptations, at 12 months of age. In contrast, using an adapted Chinese translation of the CSBS DP, Lin and Chui () found that 171 Taiwanese toddlers demonstrated significant differences on all cluster, composite and total scores compared with the US norms. They felt that cultural differences, including unfamiliarity with the testing situation and test administrators, could explain these differences.…”

The Griffiths Development Scales‐Chinese (GDS‐C): A cross‐cultural comparison of developmental trajectories between Chinese and British children

“…Previous studies have shown that cross‐cultural differences exist in the language and social development of children from different backgrounds (Iverson, Capirci, Volterra, & Goldin‐Meadow, ; Lin & Chiu, ). Here, we demonstrated that cross‐cultural differences may be seen across all domains of childhood development (gross motor, fine motor, language, social, performance, and practical reasoning abilities), reflecting cognitive development.…”