Assessing the Severity of Challenging Behaviour: Psychometric Properties of the Challenging Behaviour Interview

Chris Oliver · Scott S. Hall · Melanie Smith · Dave Dagnan · Biza Stenfert Kroese

93 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Behavioral and Psychological Studies Autism Spectrum Disorder Research Psychometric Methodologies and Testing

Abstract

Background The Challenging Behaviour Interview (CBI) was developed as an assessment of the severity of challenging behaviour. The CBI is divided into two parts. Part I of the interview identifies the occurrence of five clearly operationalized forms of challenging behaviour that have occurred in the last month. Part II of the interview assesses the severity of the behaviours identified on 14 scales measuring the frequency and duration of episodes, effects on the individual and others and the management strategies used by carers. In this paper we report upon its psychometric properties and discuss potential clinical and research uses of the new scale. Methods The CBI was administered to 40 adults and 47 children. Test–retest and inter‐rater agreement was assessed for 22 participants in the adult sample. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating total scores for the child sample with the subscale and total scores of the Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC). Content validity was assessed by comparing scores for each behaviour on specific items relating to relevant aspects of severity of impact that would be expected to differ based upon the topographies of the behaviour. Results Mean inter‐rater and test–retest reliability kappa indices for the behaviours in Part I of the interview were 0.67 (range: 0.50–0.80) and 0.86 (range: 0.70–0.91), respectively. Mean inter‐rater and test–retest reliability Pearson‘s correlation indices for the behaviours in Part II of the interview were 0.48 (range: 0.02–0.77) and 0.76 (range: 0.66–0.85), respectively. Correlations with the ABC varied between 0.19 and 0.68. The majority of content validity comparisons were in line with prediction. Conclusions The potential of the interview for clinical assessment, as an outcome measure for services and individual interventions and research purposes, is discussed.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 93 citations exist upstream.

References

1985The aberrant behavior checklist: a behavior rating scale for the assessment of treatment effects.1990Toward a Technology of “Nonaversive” Behavioral Support 1987Self‐injurious behaviour in people with mental handicap: a total population study 2005Toward a Technology of “Nonaversive” Behavioral Support 1985Alternatives to Punishment: Solving Behavior Problems With Non-Aversive Strategies 1995Challenging Behaviour: Analysis and Intervention in People with Learning Disabilities 1994CHALLENGING BEHAVIOUR IN SCHOOLS FOR PUPILS WITH SEVERE LEARNING DIFFICULTIES

Cited by

2011Psychological well-being in parents of children with Angelman, Cornelia de Lange and Cri du Chat syndromes 2009The Behavior Problems Inventory: Reliability and Factor Validity in Institutionalized Adults with Intellectual Disabilities 2011Prevalence, phenomenology, aetiology and predictors of challenging behaviour in Smith‐Magenis syndrome 2009Teachers' beliefs about inappropriate behaviour: challenging attitudes?2005The association between environmental events and self‐injurious behaviour in Cornelia de Lange syndrome

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.