Social Behavioral Assessment and Intervention: Observations and Impressions

Gresham, Frank M., School Psychology Review

I was favorably impressed with the breadth, scope, and quality of the articles in this miniseries that dealt with the various aspects and correlates of social behavioral functioning as well as assessment and intervention considerations. Each of these articles dealt with a unique aspect of social behavioral functioning in children and youth and each emphasized a different focus of this important topic for school psychologists. My commentary will be broadly divided into two main categories: assessment considerations and intervention considerations. I will comment on each article within each of these categories.

Assessment Considerations

Three articles in this miniseries dealt with various aspects of social behavioral assessment (Christ, Riley-Tilman, Chafouleas, & Jaffery, 2011; McConaughy, Volpe, Antshel, Gordon, & Eiraldi, 2011; Merrell, Cohn, & Tom, 2011). The Christ et al. article investigated the psychometric properties of Direct Behavior Ratings (DBRs) of social behavior, the McConaughy et al. article reported on cognitive and social behavioral characteristics of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and the Merrell et al. article reported on the factor structure of a newly developed teacher rating scale of students' social-emotional assets. I will comment on each of these articles in the order just presented.

Christ et al.

This article investigated the inter-rater reliability of DBRs and two types of accuracy using systematic direct observations (SDOs) as the criterion measure. Inter-rater reliability and criterion-related validity were high using global behaviors of academic engagement and disruptive behavior. The correlation between SDO and DBR measures of academic engagement was .75 for positively and negatively worded items, respectively. The correlations between SDO and DBR measures of disruptive behavior were .81 and .79 for positively and negatively worded items, respectively. Magnitudes of rater bias were substantial across positive and negative wording conditions in that raters underestimated well-behaved behaviors and overestimated disruptive behaviors as measured by the criterion of SDOs. In fact, this rater bias effect was very large, accounting for about 45% of the variance in DBRs. Appropriately, the authors note that this finding has important implications for school psychologists in that over

reliance on behavior ratings of positive and negative behaviors may be compromised by teacher rater bias that could affect anything from referral rates to measurement of response to intervention.

A useful body of literature to draw upon for interpreting the effects of teacher rater bias is the informant discrepancy or optimal informant literature (Achenbach, 2011; De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005; Kraemer, Measelle, Ablow, Essex, Boyce, & Kupfer, 2003; Youngstrom, Loeber, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 2000). This literature suggests that measurement of social behavioral functioning in children and youth is complicated by the absence of an incontrovertible criterion that can be used in combining and interpreting assessment data from multiple sources. In assessment practice, the recommended strategy is to collect data from multiple sources (teacher, students, parent, direct observation). However, there is no scientifically defensible way of combining this information in a meaningful manner to make decisions based on a meaningful integration of this information. In educational practice and research, discrepancies influence how one draws conclusions in that: (a) multiple sources of information are often used to assess students' social behavior without guidance as to which source of information to trust or weight most heavily; (b) use of a single source of information will necessarily restrict the conclusions and recommendations to be drawn; and (c) the use of single or multiple sources of information in research studies often significantly changes the conclusions that might be drawn from about an individual (De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005; Weisz, Jensen-Doss, & Hawley, 2005). Kraemer et al. (2003) suggested that an individual's behavior is influenced by the behavior being measured, the context in which it is measured, the perspective or characteristics of the informant, and the effects of random error (measurement error).

De Los Reyes and Kazdin (2005) conducted a comprehensive review of informant discrepancies and found a number of moderators and correlates of these discrepancies based on various child characteristics (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity/race, social desirability) and problem type (externalizing vs. internalizing). These authors proposed a theoretical framework they termed the ABC Model to guide research and practice on multisource discrepancies based on the notion of the actor-observer phenomenon deriving from attribution theory and the influence of perspective taking on memory recall from cognitive psychology.

Explained briefly, the actor-observer phenomenon (Jones & Nisbett, 1972) argues that observers of another person's behavior attribute the causes of that person's behavior to his or her dispositional qualities (stable/ inflexible) and disregard or downplay the role of context or environmental factors in which behavior occurs. In contrast, individuals attribute the causes of their own behavior to the context in which the behavior occurs and disregard or downplay the role of dispositional (trait) factors. In the context of the current study, it may be that teachers overestimated rates of disruptive behavior and underestimated rates of positive behavior based on this notion of the actor-observer phenomenon.

…

Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Article title: Social Behavioral Assessment and Intervention: Observations and Impressions. Contributors: Gresham, Frank M. - Author. Journal title: School Psychology Review. Volume: 40. Issue: 2 Publication date: June 2011. Page number: 275+. © 2002 School Psychology Review. COPYRIGHT 2011 Gale Group.

This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.