Integrating Assessment Data from Multiple Informants

Offord, David R.; Boyle, Michael H.; Racine, Yvonne; Szatmári, Péter; Fleming, Jan E.; Sanford, Mark; Lipman, Ellen L.

doi:10.1097/00004583-199608000-00019

Cited by 292 publications

(275 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

239

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To facilitate interpretation of possible interaction effects, ratings were dichotomised and the product of AD/HD and ODD/CD ratings was used as a predictor in the analyses. A distinction was made between parent and teacher reported symptoms because a substantial body of evidence suggests that both informants report on different aspects of behavior (Achenbach, McConaughy, & Howell, 1987;Hart, Lahey, Loeber, & Hanson, 1994;Loeber, Green, Lahey, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1991;Offord et al, 1996) and that symptom reports of both informants may show different associations with neuropsychological deficits (Riccio et al, 1994).…”

Section: Continuous Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Which Executive Functioning Deficits Are Associated With AD/HD, ODD/CD and Comorbid AD/HD+ODD/CD?

Oosterlaan

Scheres

Sergeant

2005

J Abnorm Child Psychol

169

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Continuous Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Which Executive Functioning Deficits Are Associated With AD/HD, ODD/CD and Comorbid AD/HD+ODD/CD?

Oosterlaan

Scheres

Sergeant

2005

J Abnorm Child Psychol

169

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The methodological nuisance refers to the fact that clinicians and researchers can obtain quite different results in either a clinical evaluation or research, based on whose views (mother's, child's, teacher's) are assessed, or whether one or all are used to characterize the child. For example, in a given sample, different children will be identified as meeting criteria for a disorder, depending on whose ratings are used or whether informants' ratings are combined (e.g., Kazdin, 1989;Offord et al, 1996; Youngstrom, Findling, & Calabrese, 3 Correspondence regarding this manuscript should be addressed to Alan E. Kazdin, Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, 230 S. Frontage Road, New Haven, CT 06520-7900, alan.kazdin@yale.edu. Note: This paper was forwarded on August 29, 2005, and is not the final version of this article.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The methodological nuisance refers to the fact that clinicians and researchers can obtain quite different results in either a clinical evaluation or research, based on whose views (mother's, child's, teacher's) are assessed, or whether one or all are used to characterize the child. For example, in a given sample, different children will be identified as meeting criteria for a disorder, depending on whose ratings are used or whether informants' ratings are combined (e.g., Kazdin, 1989;Offord et al, 1996;Youngstrom, Findling, & Calabrese, 2003). Similarly, the extent to which individuals improve with treatment and whether one treatment is more effective than another can vary as a function of parent, child, or teacher evaluations of treatment outcomes (e.g., Kazdin, Siegel, & Bass, 1992;Kendall et al, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Informant Discrepancies in Assessing Child Dysfunction Relate to Dysfunction Within Mother-Child Interactions

Reyes

Kazdin

2006

J Child Fam Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Examined whether mother-child discrepancies in perceived child behavior problems relate to dysfunctional interactions between mother and child and stress in the mother. Participants included 239 children (6-16 years old; 58 girls, 181 boys) referred for oppositional, aggressive, and antisocial behavior, and their mothers. Mother-child discrepancies in perceived child behavior problems were related to mother-child conflict. Moreover, maternal stress mediated this relationship. The findings suggest that discrepancies among mother and child evaluations of child functioning are not merely reflections of different perspectives or artifacts of the assessment process, but can form components of conceptual models that can be developed and tested to examine the interrelations among critical domains of child, parent, and family functioning. Keywordsattribution bias context; disagreement; discrepancies; stress; conflict Parents, teachers, children, and clinicians are often discrepant in how they perceive and rate the child's social, emotional, and behavioral problems (e.g., Achenbach, McConaughy, & Howell, 1987;De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005;Grills & Ollendick, 2002). Discrepancies among informants' ratings, especially those between mothers and children, have been studied extensively to examine correlates of the discrepancies, whether discrepancies are more likely with some disorders rather than others, and whether data from some informants (e.g., mother vs. child) are more useful for some disorders or purposes than others (see De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005, for a review).Discrepancies among informants' ratings are often considered as both a clinical reality and methodological nuisance. The clinical reality refers to the fact that informants' perceptions of children's functioning are more often than not disparate from one another, and their ratings simply will differ, even when the same measure (e.g., identical rating scale) is used. The methodological nuisance refers to the fact that clinicians and researchers can obtain quite different results in either a clinical evaluation or research, based on whose views (mother's, child's, teacher's) are assessed, or whether one or all are used to characterize the child. For example, in a given sample, different children will be identified as meeting criteria for a disorder, depending on whose ratings are used or whether informants' ratings are combined (e.g., Kazdin, 1989;Offord et al., 1996; Youngstrom, Findling, & Calabrese, 3 Correspondence regarding this manuscript should be addressed to Alan E. Kazdin, Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, 230 S. Frontage Road, New Haven, CT 06520-7900, alan.kazdin@yale.edu. Note: This paper was forwarded on August 29, 2005, and is not the final version of this article. NIH Public AccessAuthor Manuscript J Child Fam Stud. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 January 13. . Similarly, the extent to which individuals improve with treatment and whether one treatment is more effective than another can vary as a function ...

show abstract

“…One of these studies examined informant agreement with regard to individual symptoms and found moderate-to-high levels of parent-teacher agreement on individual symptoms regarding schoolwork (Loeber et al, 1989). Occasionally, the findings have been moderated by child and family characteristics (e.g., child age, child gender, children's social desirability, family conflict; Edelbrock et al, 1986;Grills & Ollendick, 2003), although informant agreement generally remains in the low-to-moderate range despite the influence of these informant characteristics on levels of agreement.With regard to informants' ratings of childhood oppositional behavior, prior work has generally revealed low-to-moderate levels of informant agreement (Edelbrock et al, 1986;Jensen et al, 1999;Kashani et al, 1985;Loeber et al, 1989;Offord et al, 1996;Williams et al, 1989). One of these studies examined informant agreement with regard to individual symptoms and found moderate-to-high levels of parent-teacher agreement on individual symptoms regarding school problems and arguments with teachers (Loeber et al, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Informant Discrepancies in the Assessment of Childhood Psychopathology: A Critical Review, Theoretical Framework, and Recommendations for Further Study.

Reyes¹,

Kazdin²

2005

Psychological Bulletin

2,046

142

1,749

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discrepancies often exist among different informants' (e.g., parents, children, teachers) ratings of child psychopathology. Informant discrepancies have an impact on the assessment, classification, and treatment of childhood psychopathology. Empirical work has identified informant characteristics that may influence informant discrepancies. Limitations of previous work include inconsistent measurement of informant discrepancies and, perhaps most importantly, the absence of a theoretical framework to guide research. In this article, the authors present a theoretical framework (the Attribution Bias Context Model) to guide research and theory examining informant discrepancies in the clinic setting. Needed directions for future research and theory include theoretically driven attention to conceptualizing informant discrepancies across informant pairs (e.g., parent-teacher, mother-father, parent-child, teacher-child) as well as developing experimental approaches to decrease informant discrepancies in the clinic setting.Keywords: agreement, attribution bias context, correspondence, discrepancies, distortionIn a meta-analysis of 119 studies, Achenbach, McConaughy, and Howell (1987) identified what has come to be one of the most robust findings in clinical child research: Different informants' (e.g., parents, children, teachers) ratings of social, emotional, or behavior problems in children are discrepant (e.g., rs often in .20s). This finding has been replicated by further studies that have examined differences and similarities among informants' ratings under varying monikers (e.g., level of agreement among informants' ratings, disagreement among informants' ratings, correspondence among informants' ratings, discordance among informants' ratings). 1 Informant discrepancies have been found in virtually every method of clinical assessment that researchers and practitioners use to assess abnormal behavior in youths (e.g., rating scales, structured interviews; Achenbach et al., 1987;Grills & Ollendick, 2002). Moreover, discrepancies have been found in samples of informants encompassing diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds (Hay et al., 1999;Jensen et al., 1999;Kaufman, Swan, & Wood, 1980;Krenke & Kollmar, 1998;Rohde et al., 1999;Rousseau & Drapeau, 1998;Verhulst, Althaus, & Berden, 1987) and in virtually any clinic sample in which discrepancies have been examined (Edelbrock, Costello, Dulcan, Conover, & Kala, 1986;Frank, Van Egeren, Fortier, & Chase, 2000;Frick, Silverthorn, & Evans, 1994;Hart, Lahey, Loeber, & Hanson, 1994;Kazdin, French, & Unis, 1983;Rapee, Barrett, Dadds, & Evans, 1994).The importance in studying informant discrepancies is highlighted by three key factors. First, there is no single measure or method of assessing psychopathology in children that provides a definitive or "gold standard" to gauge which children are experiencing a given set of problems or disorders (e.g., Richters, 1992). The lack of such a standard stems, in part, from the need to incorporate information from multiple informants to asses...

show abstract

Integrating Assessment Data from Multiple Informants

Cited by 292 publications

References 23 publications

Which Executive Functioning Deficits Are Associated With AD/HD, ODD/CD and Comorbid AD/HD+ODD/CD?

Which Executive Functioning Deficits Are Associated With AD/HD, ODD/CD and Comorbid AD/HD+ODD/CD?

Informant Discrepancies in Assessing Child Dysfunction Relate to Dysfunction Within Mother-Child Interactions

Informant Discrepancies in the Assessment of Childhood Psychopathology: A Critical Review, Theoretical Framework, and Recommendations for Further Study.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About