Parent Ratings of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: What Is the Optimum Factor Model?

Abstract

To date, at least 12 different models have been suggested for the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). The current study used confirmatory factor analysis to examine the relative support for these models. In all, 1,407 Malaysian parents completed SDQ ratings of their children (age range = 5-13 years). Although the findings showed some degree of support for all 12 models, there was most support for an oblique six-factor model that included the five SDQ domains (emotional problems, conduct problems, hyperactivity, peer problems, and low prosocial behavior) and a positive construal factor comprising all the 10 SDQ positive worded items. The original proposed five-factor oblique model also showed good fit. The implications of the findings for understanding the results of past studies of the structural models of the parent version of the SDQ, and for clinical and research practice involving the SDQ are discussed.

Malaysian Parent Ratings of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: Factor Structure and Measurement Invariance Across Language Versions, Gender, Informants, and Race

“…The support for the 2-factor model in the study differs from the originally theorized 5factor model, with the ES, CP, HY, PP and PS items loading on their own respective factors (R. Goodman, 1997Goodman, , 2001. Although this does not reflect any of the other 11 SDQ models reviewed by Gomez and Stavropoulos (2017), the present model has some semblance with one of the model they reviewed. In that model, initially proposed by Palmieri and Smith (2007), there is (like our study) a positive construal factor comprising all the 10 positive worded items.…”

“…For more detailed description of the participants and procedure, the reader is encouraged to refer to Gomez and Stavropoulos (2017).…”

Assessing the factor structure of the Spanish language parent Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in Honduras

“…The results indicated that boys scored higher than girls on the Total Difficulties score [45]. Also, Gomez and Stavropoulos found that a six-factor model with a positive construal factor encompassing the reverse-coded items and Prosocial Behavior factor was the best fit for Malaysian parents [46]. They also noted that the standard five-factor model showed a good fit, and that all 12 models tested had adequate fits with the sample of Malaysian parents [46].…”

“…Also, Gomez and Stavropoulos found that a six-factor model with a positive construal factor encompassing the reverse-coded items and Prosocial Behavior factor was the best fit for Malaysian parents [46]. They also noted that the standard five-factor model showed a good fit, and that all 12 models tested had adequate fits with the sample of Malaysian parents [46]. However, Stokes and colleagues failed to validate previously identified SDQ factor structures with a sample of Malaysian children, parent, and teacher triads; rather, the authors conducted a split sample exploratory factor analysis (EFA), producing a three-factor structure, which was partially supported in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) [47].…”

Measurement invariance of maternal ratings of ADHD symptoms across clinic referred children’s with and without ADHD

“…Concurrent to this, most recently used ADHD rating scales have the 18 ADHD symptoms, word-to-word, as presented in DSM-IV, but with the word often omitted in the description of the symp-toms. [4] ADHD rating scales are often used in research and clinical settings. In that line, Burns, Walsh, Servera, Lorenzo-Seva, Cardo and Rodrguez-Fornells (2013) have noted that ADHD rating scales have made extensive contributions to our knowledge and understanding of ADHD.…”