Search

We examined differences among 158 children, 44 with selective mutism (SM; M = 8.2 years, SD = 3.4 years), 65 with mixed anxiety (MA; M = 8.9 years, SD = 3.2 years), and 49 community controls ( M = 7.7 years, SD = 2.6 years) on primary caregiver, teacher, and child reports of behavioral and socio-emotional functioning. Children with SM were rated lower than controls on a range of social skills, but the SM and MA groups did not significantly differ on many of the social skills and anxiety measures. However, children with SM were rated higher than children with MA and controls on social anxiety. Findings suggest that SM may be conceptualized as an anxiety disorder, with primary deficits in social functioning and social anxiety. This interpretation supports a more specific classification of SM as an anxiety disorder for future diagnostic manuals than is currently described in the literature. The present findings also have implications for clinical practice, whereby social skills training merits inclusion in intervention for children with anxiety disorders as well as children with SM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although structured interviews are assumed to be scientifically superior to checklists for measuring youth psychopathology, few studies have tested this hypothesis. Interviews place a much greater burden on respondents, making it critical to determine their added value when quantifying psychiatric symptoms. Methods: Confirmatory factor analysis was used to compare interviews and checklists in community ( N = 251) and clinically referred ( N = 406) samples of youth aged 5 to 17 years. We examined the associations between mother-reported externalizing symptoms assessed by interview versus checklist against (a) teacher-reported externalizing symptoms, and (b) child’s gender, academic performance, single- versus two-parent family, and family income. Models in which associations were estimated freely were contrasted to models in which the interview and the checklist were constrained to have equal associations with the variables. Finding these models fit comparably would suggest no difference between interviews and checklists. Results: In the community sample, both the constrained and unconstrained models provided comparable fit to the data, suggesting no marked differences between interviews and checklists. In the clinical sample, associations with the interview were generally stronger. Reducing the number of items on the interview to match those on the 6-item checklist eliminated these differences, suggesting that the increased reliability of the interview scales, afforded by additional items, enhanced their quantification of psychopathology. Conclusions: Consistent with previous studies, interviews were not notably superior to checklists for the measurement of externalizing symptoms. When only a few items are used, small performance differences between checklists and interviews may be due to scale length. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]