Psychometric Evaluation of theBehavior Problems Inventory-01and theNisonger Child Behavior Rating Formwith Children and Adolescents

Abstract

This study was conducted to assess the psychometric properties of 2 assessment instruments, the Behavior Problems Inventory-01 (BPI-01; Rojahn, Matson, Lott, Esbensen, & Smalls, 2001 Rojahn, J., Matson, J. L., Lott, D., Esbensen, A. J. and Smalls, Y. 2001. The Behavior Problems Inventory: An instrument for the assessment of self-injury, stereotyped behavior, and aggressive/destructive behavior in individuals with developmental disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31: 577–588. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) and the Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form (NCBRF; Aman, Tassé, Rojahn, & Hammer, 1996 Aman, M. G., Tassé, M. J., Rojahn, J. and Hammer, D. 1996. The Nisonger CBRF: A child behavior rating form for children with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 17: 41–57. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). The sample consisted of 237 ethnically diverse children and adolescents with intellectual disabilities who ranged in age from 4 to 22 years. Reliability parameters included internal consistency, interteacher agreement, teacher-parent agreement, and test-retest reliability. Factorial validity was assessed first by bivariate Spearman rank (ρ) correlations and then by examining the factor structure fit via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Convergent and discriminant validity was assessed by multiple regression analyses across the 2 instruments. Reliability coefficients (internal consistency, interteacher agreement, and test-retest reliability) of the BPI-01 and of the NCBRF subscales ranged from fair to excellent and from poor to excellent, respectively. The CFA suggested a poor fit between the present and the original BPI-01 and NCBRF factor structures, although item-total correlations were reasonable. Convergent and discriminant validity between the BPI-01 and the NCBRF, however, was strong. Limitations of the study are discussed and recommendations for future studies are presented.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.