Initial development of the expectations test for children: A tool to investigate social information processing

Gully, Kevin J.

doi:10.1002/1097-4679(200012)56:12<1551::aid-6>3.0.co;2-3

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Answers are summed to reflect the child’s expectations for certain emotions and experiences in social situations. Psychometric evaluation reveals good reliability and internal consistency, sensitivity and specificity data for common trauma histories, and some evidence for sensitivity to therapeutic change (Gully, 2000, 2003). We report expectation scores for a subset of experiences relevant to child physical abuse that were not redundant with the TSCC scales (i.e., scared, physical harm, personal efficacy in interpersonal situations).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Evaluation of the sustainability and clinical outcome of Alternatives for Families: A Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (AF-CBT) in a child protection center

Kolko

Iselin

Gully

2011

Child Abuse & Neglect

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the sustainability and outcome of Alternatives for Families: A CognitiveBehavioral Therapy (AF-CBT) as delivered by practitioners in a community-based child protection program who had received training in the model several years earlier. Formerly described as Abuse-Focused CBT, AF-CBT is an evidence-based treatment (EBT) for child physical abuse and family aggression/conflict that was included in the National Child Traumatic Stress Network's initial EBT dissemination efforts in 2002. Seven practitioners participated in a year-long Learning Collaborative in AF-CBT and in similar training programs for 4 other EBTs. The agency's routine data collection system was used to document the clinical and adjustment outcomes of 52 families presenting with a physically abused child who received their services between 2 and 5 years after the AF-CBT training had ended. Measures of the use of all 5 EBTs documented their frequency, internal consistency, and intercorrelations. Controlling for the unique content of the other four EBTs, the amount of AF-CBT Abuse-specific content delivered was related to improvements on standardized parent rating scales (i.e., child externalizing behavior, anger, anxiety, social competence) and both parent and clinician ratings of the child's adjustment at discharge (i.e., child more safe, less scared/sad, more appropriate with peers). The amount of AF-CBT General content was related to a few discharge ratings (better child prognosis, helpfulness to parents). These novel data provide suggestive evidence for the sustainability and clinical benefits of AF-CBT in an existing community clinic serving physically abused children and their families, and are discussed in the context of key developments in the treatment model and dissemination literature.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Evaluation of the sustainability and clinical outcome of Alternatives for Families: A Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (AF-CBT) in a child protection center

Kolko

Iselin

Gully

2011

Child Abuse & Neglect

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prior research with the Expectations Test (Gully, 2000) demonstrated excellent interrater reliability for the set of 16 photographs depicting social situations for the five derived expected emotions (M = .94) and nine expected experiences (M = .86). The test administrators followed the standard training protocol to administer and score the Expectations Test, which, as noted in Gully (2000), is to watch the Expectations Test being administered to two different children during a 19-minute training videotape. The test administrators ranged from undergraduate research assistants to licensed, master-level, clinical social workers and licensed, doctoral-level psychologists.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…One scale might help identify children who are experiencing PTS. Prior research (Gully, 2000) delineated excellent interrater reliability for the variables obtained from the Expectations Test. Cronbach's alpha for all four scales was greater than .74.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As presented by Gully (2000), research on trauma and social information processing has shown that social experience can affect how information is processed and how it can influence cognitions that later mediate behavior. The Expectations Test (Gully, 2000) is a self-report measure of expectations for children ages 4 through 17. It is intended to measure expectations for emotions and experiences for social situations in general and especially when there is a concern about sexual or physical abuse.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Initial research with the Expectations Test (Gully, 2000) suggested it has the potential to help identify children who have been sexually and physically abused. Expectations for the experiences of sexual abuse and physical harm each significantly increased the amount of variance explained, respectively, for histories of sexual abuse and physical abuse beyond the variance explained by the total problem behavior T score from the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach, 1991).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Expectations Test: Trauma Scales for Sexual Abuse, Physical Abuse, Exposure to Family Violence, and Posttraumatic Stress

Gully

2003

Child Maltreat

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gully's 2000 Expectations Test was developed as a tool to use with children ages 4 through 17 to measure social information processing. Prior research suggested it could help identify abused and emotionally traumatized children. Results from regression analyses were used to develop four scales that could be calculated simply. Prior research demonstrated excellent interrater reliability for the variables from the Expectations Test used in the regression analyses. The minimum Cronbach's alpha for any scale is .75. The minimum test-retest reliability is .88. Classification results indicated each scale can provide data to help evaluate children: Sexual Abuse Scale (sensitivity = 81% and specificity = 78%), Physical Abuse Scale (84% and 78%), Exposure to Family Violence Scale (65% and 63%), and Posttraumatic Stress Scale (86% and 54%). However, careful attention needs to be given to the potential limitations of these scales to prevent their misuse.

show abstract

Cognitive attribution bias

Poore

Waldman

2018

Developmental Pathways to Disruptive, Impulse-Control and Conduct Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Initial development of the expectations test for children: A tool to investigate social information processing

Cited by 6 publications

References 26 publications

Evaluation of the sustainability and clinical outcome of Alternatives for Families: A Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (AF-CBT) in a child protection center

Evaluation of the sustainability and clinical outcome of Alternatives for Families: A Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (AF-CBT) in a child protection center

Expectations Test: Trauma Scales for Sexual Abuse, Physical Abuse, Exposure to Family Violence, and Posttraumatic Stress

Cognitive attribution bias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About