Search

Parent–teacher cross-informant agreement, although usually modest, may provide important clinical information. Using data for 27,962 children from 21 societies, we asked the following: (a) Do parents report more problems than teachers, and does this vary by society, age, gender, or type of problem? (b) Does parent–teacher agreement vary across different problem scales or across societies? (c) How well do parents and teachers in different societies agree on problem item ratings? (d) How much do parent–teacher dyads in different societies vary in within-dyad agreement on problem items? (e) How well do parents and teachers in 21 societies agree on whether the child's problem level exceeds a deviance threshold? We used five methods to test agreement for Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Teacher's Report Form (TRF) ratings. CBCL scores were higher than TRF scores on most scales, but the informant differences varied in magnitude across the societies studied. Cross-informant correlations for problem scale scores varied moderately across societies studied and were significantly higher for Externalizing than Internalizing problems. Parents and teachers tended to rate the same items as low, medium, or high, but within-dyad item agreement varied widely in every society studied. In all societies studied, both parental noncorroboration of teacher-reported deviance and teacher noncorroboration of parent-reported deviance were common. Our findings underscore the importance of obtaining information from parents and teachers when evaluating and treating children, highlight the need to use multiple methods of quantifying cross-informant agreement, and provide comprehensive baselines for patterns of parent–teacher agreement across 21 societies. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

We used population sample data from 25 societies to answer the following questions: (a) How consistently across societies do adolescents report more problems than their parents report about them? (b) Do levels of parent-adolescent agreement vary among societies for different kinds of problems? (c) How well do parents and adolescents in different societies agree on problem item ratings? (d) How much do parent-adolescent dyads within each society vary in agreement on item ratings? (e) How well do parent-adolescent dyads within each society agree on the adolescent's deviance status? We used five methods to test cross-informant agreement for ratings obtained from 27,861 adolescents ages 11 to 18 and their parents. Youth Self-Report (YSR) mean scores were significantly higher than Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) mean scores for all problem scales in almost all societies, but the magnitude of the YSR-CBCL discrepancy varied across societies. Cross-informant correlations for problem scale scores varied more across societies than across types of problems. Across societies, parents and adolescents tended to rate the same items as low, medium, or high, but within-dyad parent-adolescent item agreement varied widely in every society. In all societies, both parental noncorroboration of self-reported deviance and adolescent noncorroboration of parent-reported deviance were common. Results indicated many multicultural consistencies but also some important differences in parent-adolescent cross-informant agreement. Our findings provide valuable normative baselines against which to compare multicultural findings for clinical samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveMethodsResultsConclusionsAlthough the significance of the general factor of psychopathology (p) is being increasingly recognized, it remains unclear how to best operationalize and measure p. To test variations in the operationalizations of p and make practical recommendations for its assessment, we compared p-factor scores derived from four models.We compared p scores derived from principal axis (Model 1), hierarchical factor (Model 2), and bifactor (Model 3) analyses, plus a Total Problem score (sum of unit-weighted ratings of all problem items; Model 4) for parent- and self-rated youth psychopathology from 24 societies. Separately for each sample, we fitted the models to parent-ratings on the Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 6–18 (CBCL/6–18) and self-ratings on the Youth Self-Report (YSR) for 25,643 11–18-year-olds. Separately for each sample, we computed correlations between p-scores obtained for each pair of models, cross-informant correlations between p-scores for each model, and Q-correlations between mean item x p-score correlations for each pair of models.Results were similar for all models, as indicated by correlations of .973–.994 between p-scores for Models 1–4, plus similar cross-informant correlations between CBCL/6–18 and YSR Model 1–4 p-scores. Item x p correlations had similar rank orders between Models 1–4, as indicated by Q correlations of .957–.993.The similar results obtained for Models 1–4 argue for using the simplest model – the unit-weighted Total Problem score – to measure p for clinical and research assessment of youth psychopathology. Practical methods for measuring p may advance the field toward transdiagnostic patterns of problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Standardized assessment instruments developed in one society are often used in other societies. However, it is important to determine empirically how assessment instruments developed in one society function in others. The present study tested the fit of the Teacher's Report Form syndrome structures in 20 diverse societies using data for 30,030 6- to 15-year-old students from Asia, Australia, the Caribbean, eastern, western, southern, and northern Europe, and the Middle East. A correlated seven-syndrome model and a hierarchical Attention Problems model were tested separately in each of the 20 societies via confirmatory factor analyses. The results supported the fit of the models in the tested societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study compared teachers' ratings of behavioral and emotional problems on the Teacher's Report Form for general population samples in 21 countries (N = 30,957). Correlations between internal consistency coefficients in different countries averaged .90. Effects of country on scale scores ranged from 3% to 13%. Gender effects ranged from <1% to 5%, and age effects were all <1%. With great consistency across countries, scores were higher for boys than for girls on eight scales: Total Problems; Externalizing; the Attention Problems, Rule-Breaking Behavior, and Aggressive Behavior syndromes; and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-oriented Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Problems, Oppositional Defiant Problems, and Conduct Problems. Correlations between mean item ratings in different countries averaged .74. Teacher's Report Form results were thus similar across 21 very diverse countries, despite differences across these countries in school systems, models of pedagogy, and curricula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]