Manual for the

ASEBA School-Age
Forms & Profiles
 Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 6-18
 Teacher’s Report Form
 Youth Self-Report

An Integrated System of
Multi-informant Assessment

Thomas M. Achenbach, University of Vermont

& Leslie A. Rescorla, Bryn Mawr College
Ordering Information: This Manual and other ASEBA materials can be ordered from:
ASEBA Fax: 802-656-5131
1 South Prospect Street E-mail: mail@ASEBA.org
Burlington, VT 05401-3456 Web: www.ASEBA.org
Proper bibliographic citation for this Manual:
Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles. Burlington,
VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
Related Publications
Documentation for Multicultural Options and 2007 Scales scored by ADM 7.0 and subsequent versions of ADM:
Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2007). Multicultural Supplement to the Manual for the ASEBA School-Age
Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
Achenbach, T.M. (2009). The Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA): Development, Find-
ings, Theory, and Applications. Burlington VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Fami-
lies.
Achenbach, T.M., & McConaughy, S.H. (2009). School-Based Practitioners’ Guide for the Achenbach System of
th
Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) (6 ed.). Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for
Children, Youth, & Families.
Achenbach, T.M., Newhouse, P.A., & Rescorla, L.A. (2007). Guide for ASEBA Instruments for Adults/18-59 and
Older Adults/60-90+ (2nd ed.). Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Fami-
lies.
Achenbach, T.M., Pecora, P.J., & Wetherbee, K.M. (2009). Child and Family Service Workers’ Guide for the Achenbach
System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) (6th ed.). Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center
for Children, Youth, & Families.
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2000). Manual for the ASEBA Preschool Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT:
University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2003). Manual for the ASEBA Adult Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT: Univer-
sity of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2009). Mental Health Practitioners’ Guide for the Achenbach System of Empiri-
cally Based Assessment (ASEBA) (6th ed.). Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children,
Youth, & Families.
Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2007). Multicultural Guide for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles.
Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2007). Multicultural Understanding of Child and Adolescent Psychopathology:
Implications for Mental Health Assessment. New York: Guilford Press.
Achenbach, T.M., & Ruffle, T.M. (2007). Medical Practitioners’ Guide for the Achenbach System of Empirically
Based Assessment (ASEBA) (5th ed.). Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, &
Families.
McConaughy, S.H. (2005). Clinical Interviews for Children and Adolescents: Assessment to Intervention. New York:
Guilford Press.
McConaughy, S.H., & Achenbach, T.M. (2001). Manual for the Semistructured Clinical Interview for Children and
Adolescents (2nd ed.). Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
McConaughy, S.H., & Achenbach, T.M. (2004). Manual for the Test Observation Form for Ages 2-18. Burlington,
VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
McConaughy, S.H., & Achenbach, T.M. (2009). Manual for the Direct Observation Form. Burlington, VT: University
of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
Copyright 2001 T.M. Achenbach & L.A. Rescorla. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited by law.
ISBN 0-938565-73-7 Library of Congress 2001-126102
Printed in the United States of America 14 13 12 11 10
505
ii
 User Qualifications
The ASEBA school-age forms are designed to by different informants. ASEBA computer software
be self-administered by respondents who have at provides systematic comparisons between reports
least fifth grade reading skills. The Child Behavior from different informants.
Checklist for Ages 6-18 (CBCL/6-18) is completed
If a child has a disability or is in a special setting
by parents and others who see children in home-
for children with disabilities, respondents should be
like settings. The Youth Self-Report (YSR) is com-
told to base their ratings on expectations for typical
pleted by 11- to 18-year-olds to describe their own
peers of the child’s age, i.e., children who do not
functioning. The Teacher’s Report Form (TRF) is
have disabilities. This is necessary to provide ap-
completed by teachers and other school staff who
propriate comparisons with the norms for the ASEBA
have known a child in school settings for at least 2
scales.
months. If a respondent has difficulty completing a
form, it can be read aloud by an interviewer who For proper use of the ASEBA forms, the data
writes the respondent’s answers on the form. The should be scored on the appropriate profiles. Comple-
respondent should also have a copy of the form to tion of hand-scored profiles requires that the instruc-
look at while the interviewer reads each item. tions in Appendix A be carefully followed. The
ASEBA computer software provides instructions that
When a form is given to a respondent, the user
can be followed by users familiar with basic com-
should explain that its aim is to obtain a picture of the
puter procedures. The profiles from all respondents
child’s behavior as the respondent sees it. It is impor-
should be compared with each other and with other
tant to tell respondents that the forms are designed to
relevant data. Users should therefore have access to
describe many different children. If some items do
multiple sources of data about the child and must be
not seem applicable to a particular child, respondents
trained in the theory and methodology of standard-
should still score the items, but they should also write
ized assessment, as well as in work with children and
explanations for their responses. For example, a re-
families. The training required will differ according
spondent who lacks opportunities to observe the be-
to the specific applications of the ASEBA forms, but
havior described by a particular item should circle 0
graduate training of at least the Master’s degree level
to indicate Not true (as far as you know), but may
or two years of residency in pediatrics, psychiatry, or
wish to write “No chance to observe.”
family practice is usually necessary. No amount of
A person familiar with the form should be avail- prior training, however, can substitute for professional
able to answer questions about it. Answers to ques- maturity, a thorough knowledge of the procedures
tions should be objective and factual, rather than and cautions presented in this Manual, and adher-
probing or interpretive. ence to professional ethical codes, such as the Code
of Fair Testing Practices in Education (Joint Com-
Whenever possible, it is desirable to have mul-
mittee on Testing Practices, 2002).
tiple informants independently complete separate
forms describing the child’s behavior. For compre- All users should understand that ASEBA instru-
hensive assessment, it is especially desirable to have ments are designed to provide standardized descrip-
forms completed by both parents or parent surro- tions of functioning. No scores on ASEBA scales
gates and as many teachers as possible, as well as should be automatically equated with a particular
having the YSR completed by adolescents. As de- diagnosis or disorder. Instead, the responsible pro-
tailed in this Manual, the profiles scored from the fessional will integrate ASEBA data with other types
forms should then be compared to identify consis- of data to provide comprehensive evaluations of
tencies and inconsistencies in how the child is seen functioning.

iii
 Preface
The Achenbach System of Empirically Based As- 1. Both the CBCL and TRF now span ages 6-
sessment (ASEBA) enables professionals from many 18.
backgrounds to quickly and effectively assess di-
2. The scoring scales are based on new national
verse aspects of adaptive and maladaptive function-
samples.
ing. Because children’s functioning may vary from
one context and interaction partner to another, com- 3. Syndrome scales have been revised on the
prehensive assessment requires data from multiple basis of new samples that were analyzed via
sources. In 1991, we introduced cross-informant more advanced factor analytic methodology
syndromes that provide central foci for systematic designed to coordinate CBCL, YSR, and
comparisons of data from parent, teacher, and self- TRF scales.
reports (Achenbach, 1991a, b, c, d). The current
4. DSM-oriented scales have been constructed
Manual reflects important new advances in the in-
from ASEBA items rated as very consistent
tegration of parent, self, and teacher reports, includ-
with DSM-IV diagnostic categories.
ing more items that have counterparts across the
CBCL/6-18, YSR, and TRF; use of advanced fac- 5. ASEBA software now compares scores for
tor-analytic methodology to coordinate the deriva- empirically based and DSM-oriented scales
tion of syndromes from parent, self, and teacher on any combination of up to eight CBCL,
reports; the addition of cross-informant DSM-ori- YSR, and TRF forms per child.
ented scales; and integrated documentation for the
6. The narrative reports now include critical
CBCL/6-18, YSR, and TRF in a single Manual.
items that were reported for each child.
This Manual provides essential information about
The innovations in the ASEBA school-age instru-
using and scoring the ASEBA school-age instruments
ments are fruits of long-term programmatic research
and about the new database on which they rest. It
and practical experience. Many colleagues through-
also provides extensive guidelines and illustrations
out the world have contributed ideas, data, findings,
of practical and research applications for helping us-
and other ingredients to this effort. For their help
ers achieve their objectives most effectively.
with this particular phase of the work, we especially
To enable users to quickly learn about the ASEBA thank the following people: Janet Arnold, Rachel
school-age forms, Chapters 1 through 5 provide ba- Bérubé, Ken Britting, Christine Chase, Sarah
sic information in a practical format without techni- Cochran, Levent Dumenci, Michelle Hayes, Bernd
cal details. Chapters 6 though 11 document the re- Heubeck, James Hudziak, David Jacobowitz, Rob-
search basis for the ASEBA preschool instruments. ert Krueger, Stephanie McConaughy, Catherine
Chapter 12 presents relations to previous versions of Stanger, Colin Tinline, Frank Verhulst, Denise
ASEBA scales, while Chapter 13 describes related Vignoe, and Dan Walter.
ASEBA assessment instruments. Chapter 14 presents
We also thank the psychiatrists and psycholo-
ways to use the ASEBA instruments in research, while
gists from 16 cultures who rated the consistency of
Chapter 15 provides answers to commonly asked
ASEBA school-age items with DSM-IV diagnostic
questions. The Reader’s Guide following this pref-
categories to provide the basis for our new DSM-
ace offers an overview of the Manual’s contents to
oriented scales. Their names and affiliations are
aid users in quickly locating the material they seek.
listed in our report of that effort (Achenbach,
The versions of the ASEBA school-age instru- Dumenci, & Rescorla, 2001), which is available at
ments presented here offer the following innova- our web site: www.ASEBA.org
tive features:

iv
 Reader’s Guide
I. Introductory Material Needed by Most Readers
A. Features of ASEBA School-Age Forms ....................................................... Chapter 1
B. Hand-Scored Profiles .................................................................................... Chapter 2
C. Computerized Scoring and Cross-Informant Comparisons ........................... Chapter 3
D. DSM-Oriented Scales ................................................................................... Chapter 4
E. Practical Applications ................................................................................... Chapter 5

II. Construction and Norming of Scales for ASEBA School-Age Forms

A. CBCL and YSR Competence Scales ........................................................... Chapter 6
B. TRF Adaptive Functioning Scales ................................................................ Chapter 6
C. Syndrome Scales .......................................................................................... Chapter 7
D. Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems Scales ............................... Chapter 8

III. Statistical Data on Reliability and Validity

A. Reliability, Internal Consistency, Cross-Informant Agreement,
and Stability .................................................................................................. Chapter 9
B. Validity ....................................................................................................... Chapter 10
C. Item Scores ................................................................................................. Chapter 11

IV. Relations to Other Scales

A. Relations of New Scales to Previous Versions ........................................... Chapter 12
B. Relations to Other ASEBA Instruments ..................................................... Chapter 13

V. Research Use of ASEBA School-Age Forms ................................................. Chapter 14

VI. Answers to Frequently Asked Questions ....................................................... Chapter 15

VII. Instructions for Hand Scoring the Profiles .................................................. Appendix A

VIII. Factor Loadings of Items on Syndrome Scales ............................................. Appendix B

IX. Mean Scale Scores for National Normative Samples .................................. Appendix C

X. Mean Scale Scores for Matched Referred and Nonreferred Samples ....... Appendix D

XI. Correlations Among Scales ............................................................................ Appendix E

Beginning with the 2007 version, the Assessment Data Manager (ADM7.0) Ages 6-18 Module
provides options for displaying CBCL/6-18, TRF, and YSR problem scale scores in relation to norms
for different societies. It also scores the following 2007 scales: Obsessive-Compulsive Problems,
Posttraumatic Stress Problems, Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (CBCL/6-18 & TRF), and Positive
Qualities (YSR). For details see: Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2007). Multicultural
Supplement to the Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT: University
of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.

v
 Contents
User Qualifications ................................................................................................................. iii
Preface ...................................................................................................................................... iv
Reader’s Guide .......................................................................................................................... v

1. Features of ASEBA™ School-Age Forms .............................................................. 1

THE CBCL/6-18 ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Innovations in the CBCL/6-18 ........................................................................................................ 6
Respondents Who Cannot Complete Forms Independently ........................................................ 6
THE YSR ..................................................................................................................................................... 6
THE TRF ................................................................................................................................................... 11
Innovations in the TRF .................................................................................................................. 16
ACHENBACH SYSTEM OF EMPIRICALLY BASED ASSESSMENT ............................................... 16
STRUCTURE OF THIS MANUAL ......................................................................................................... 16
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 17

2. Hand-Scored Profiles for ASEBA School-Age Forms ....................................... 18

THE CBCL COMPETENCE PROFILE .................................................................................................. 18
CBCL Competence Scales ............................................................................................................ 18
CBCL Total Competence Score .................................................................................................... 20
THE YSR COMPETENCE PROFILE ..................................................................................................... 20
THE TRF ADAPTIVE FUNCTIONING PROFILE ................................................................................ 20
SYNDROME PROFILES ......................................................................................................................... 22
The CBCL Syndrome Profile ........................................................................................................ 22
Profiles Scored from Different Informants .................................................................................. 24
INTERNALIZING AND EXTERNALIZING GROUPINGS OF SYNDROMES ................................ 24
TOTAL PROBLEMS SCORE .................................................................................................................. 25
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 25

3. Computerized Scoring and Cross-Informant Comparisons ............................. 27

COMPUTERIZED SCORING OF ASEBA FORMS .............................................................................. 27
ASEBA WEB-LINK ................................................................................................................................. 27
CASE EXAMPLE: WAYNE WEBSTER, AGE 15 ................................................................................. 27
COMPUTER-SCORED CBCL AND YSR PROFILES .......................................................................... 29
CBCL Competence Profile ............................................................................................................ 29
CBCL Syndrome Profile ................................................................................................................ 29
YSR Syndrome Profile .................................................................................................................. 34
YSR Narrative Report and Critical Items ..................................................................................... 34
COMPUTERIZED CROSS-INFORMANT COMPARISONS ............................................................... 34
Cross-Informant Comparisons of Item Scores ............................................................................ 34
Correlations Among Informants’ Scores ...................................................................................... 34
Cross-Informant Comparisons of Scale Scores ........................................................................... 38
INTERVIEW WITH WAYNE .................................................................................................................. 38
CLINICAL PLAN .................................................................................................................................... 40
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 40

vii
viii Contents

4. DSM-Oriented Scales for Scoring ASEBA School-Age Forms ......................... 42

CONSTRUCTING DSM-ORIENTED SCALES .................................................................................... 42
PROFILES OF DSM-ORIENTED SCALES ........................................................................................... 43
PROFILES AND CROSS-INFORMANT COMPARISONS OF
DSM-ORIENTED SCALES ........................................................................................................... 45
GUIDELINES FOR USING DSM-ORIENTED SCALES ..................................................................... 46
High Scores on Multiple Scales .................................................................................................... 46
Cross-Informant Differences in Scale Scores .............................................................................. 46
Severity of Problems on DSM-Oriented Scales ........................................................................... 48
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 48

5. Practical Applications of ASEBA Forms ............................................................. 49

GUIDELINES FOR PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS ............................................................................. 49
Using ASEBA Forms Routinely .................................................................................................... 49
Obtaining Reports from Multiple Informants .............................................................................. 50
Using ASEBA Data to Guide Interviews ...................................................................................... 50
Using ASEBA Data in the Diagnostic Process ............................................................................. 50
Using ASEBA Forms for Assessing Service Delivery and Outcomes ....................................... 50
Reassessing Children at Uniform Intervals .................................................................................. 51
Using ASEBA Forms to Train Practitioners ................................................................................. 51
MENTAL HEALTH SETTINGS ............................................................................................................. 51
Intake and Evaluation .................................................................................................................... 53
Having Both Parents Fill Out CBCLs ........................................................................................... 53
Interviewing Parents ....................................................................................................................... 55
Diagnostic Issues ............................................................................................................................ 55
EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS .................................................................................................................. 56
Using ASEBA Data to Guide and Monitor Prereferral Interventions ........................................ 56
Using ASEBA Data in an Evaluation ............................................................................................ 56
Using ASEBA Information to Support Section 504 Accommodations ..................................... 57
Using ASEBA Data in Designing Individualized Educational Programs (IEP) ........................ 57
CASE EXAMPLE IN A SCHOOL SETTING: Alicia Martinez, Age 8 ................................................ 59
Cross-Informant Comparisons ...................................................................................................... 59
Intervention ..................................................................................................................................... 61
Follow-up Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 62
MEDICAL SETTINGS ............................................................................................................................. 62
Using ASEBA Forms to Identify Problems In Medical Settings ................................................ 63
Using ASEBA Information in Treating Medical Conditions ...................................................... 63
Using ASEBA Information in Assessing
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ........................................................................... 63
CASE EXAMPLE IN A MEDICAL SETTING: Wesley Russell, Age 11 .......................................... 63
Obtaining ASEBA Data .................................................................................................................. 64
Cross-informant Comparisons ...................................................................................................... 64
Intervention ..................................................................................................................................... 66
Follow-up Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 66
CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICE SETTINGS ....................................................................................... 66
FORENSIC CONTEXTS ......................................................................................................................... 67
Using ASEBA Forms When Child Abuse Is Suspected .............................................................. 67
Using ASEBA Information in Juvenile Courts ............................................................................ 67
CASE EXAMPLE IN A FORENSIC SETTING: Lorraine Nelson, Age 13 ......................................... 68
 Contents ix

Cross-informant Comparisons ...................................................................................................... 68

Direct Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 70
Intervention ..................................................................................................................................... 71
Follow-up Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 71
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 71

6. Constructing and Norming Competence and Adaptive Scales ........................ 73

CBCL AND YSR COMPETENCE ITEMS ............................................................................................. 73
CBCL AND YSR COMPETENCE SCALES .......................................................................................... 73
Construction of Competence Scales ............................................................................................. 73
NATIONAL NORMATIVE SAMPLES ................................................................................................... 74
Obtaining a National Probability Sample ..................................................................................... 75
Selection of Nonreferred Children for Norms ............................................................................. 76
ASSIGNING NORMALIZED T SCORES TO COMPETENCE SCALES ........................................... 76
Total Competence Score ................................................................................................................ 79
NORMING THE TRF ACADEMIC AND ADAPTIVE FUNCTIONING SCALES ............................ 80
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 80

7. Constructing and Norming Syndrome Scales .................................................... 81

STATISTICAL DERIVATION OF THE SYNDROMES ........................................................................ 81
Factor Analysis of Item Scores ...................................................................................................... 81
CBCL Samples ................................................................................................................................ 82
YSR Samples .................................................................................................................................. 82
TRF Samples ................................................................................................................................... 82
Items Analyzed ............................................................................................................................... 84
Factor-Analytic Methods ............................................................................................................... 84
Results of the Factor Analyses ...................................................................................................... 85
Additional TRF Analyses of Attention Problems ........................................................................ 85
Additional TRF Analyses of Affective Problems ........................................................................ 86
CONSTRUCTING SYNDROME SCALES ............................................................................................ 87
ASSIGNING NORMALIZED T SCORES TO RAW SCORES ............................................................ 89
Truncation of Lower T Scores at 50 ............................................................................................. 89
Assigning T Scores Above 70 (98th Percentile) .......................................................................... 89
Mean T Scores ................................................................................................................................ 90
BORDERLINE AND CLINICAL RANGES .......................................................................................... 90
NORMS FOR DSM-ORIENTED SCALES ............................................................................................ 90
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 92

8. Constructing and Norming Internalizing, Externalizing,

and Total Problems Scales ..................................................................... 93
CONSTRUCTING INTERNALIZING AND EXTERNALIZING
GROUPINGS OF SYNDROMES ............................................................................................ 93
Arrangement of Syndromes on Profiles ....................................................................................... 94
ASSIGNING T SCORES TO INTERNALIZING, EXTERNALIZING,
AND TOTAL PROBLEMS ...................................................................................................... 94
NORMAL, BORDERLINE, AND CLINICAL RANGES ..................................................................... 95
RELATIONS BETWEEN INTERNALIZING AND EXTERNALIZING SCORES ............................. 96
Distinguishing Between Internalizing and Externalizing Patterns ............................................. 97
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 97
x Contents

9. Reliability, Internal Consistency, Cross-Informant Agreement,

and Stability ............................................................................................ 99
RELIABILITY OF ITEM SCORES ........................................................................................................ 99
Inter-Interviewer Reliability of Item Scores ............................................................................... 100
Test-Retest Reliability of Item Scores ......................................................................................... 100
INTERNAL CONSISTENCY OF SCALE SCORES ........................................................................... 100
TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY OF SCALE SCORES ......................................................................... 102
Test-Retest Attenuation ................................................................................................................ 102
CROSS-INFORMANT AGREEMENT ................................................................................................. 103
STABILITIES OF SCALE SCORES ..................................................................................................... 106
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 106

10.Validity ................................................................................................................. 108

CONTENT VALIDITY .......................................................................................................................... 108
Selection of Items ......................................................................................................................... 108
Problem Items ............................................................................................................................... 108
Competence and Adaptive Functioning Items ........................................................................... 108
CRITERION-RELATED VALIDITY OF SCALE SCORES ................................................................ 109
Demographically Similar Referred and Nonreferred Samples ................................................. 109
Multiple Regression Analyses of Competence and Adaptive Functioning Scales ................. 109
Multiple Regression Analyses of Problem Scales ..................................................................... 113
CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN ACCORDING TO CLINICAL CUTPOINTS ......................... 113
Odd Ratios (ORs) ......................................................................................................................... 120
CUTPOINTS DERIVED FROM CROSS-TABULATION OF TOTAL PROBLEMS,
TOTAL COMPETENCE, AND ADAPTIVE SCALES ........................................................ 123
Cases That Are Not Easily Classified as Normal vs. Deviant .................................................. 123
Effects of Cutpoint Algorithms ................................................................................................... 123
DISCRIMINANT ANALYSES .............................................................................................................. 124
Cross-Validated Correction for Shrinkage ................................................................................. 125
Cross-Validated Percent of Children Correctly Classified ........................................................ 125
PROBABILITY OF PARTICULAR TOTAL SCORES BEING FROM THE REFERRED
VS. NONREFERRED SAMPLES ......................................................................................... 126
Competence and Adaptive Scores .............................................................................................. 127
Total Problems Scores .................................................................................................................. 127
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF ASEBA SCALES ................................................................................. 127
Correlations of ASEBA Problem Scales with DSM Diagnoses ................................................ 129
Correlations of ASEBA Scales with Scores from Other Instruments ....................................... 131
Cross-Cultural Replications of ASEBA Syndromes .................................................................. 132
Genetic Evidence ......................................................................................................................... 134
Biochemical Evidence ................................................................................................................. 134
Developmentat Course and Outcomes ....................................................................................... 134
Implications of the Evidence for Construct Validity ................................................................. 135
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 135

11. Item Scores ........................................................................................................... 136

CBCL COMPETENCE SCORES .......................................................................................................... 136
Referral Status Differences in CBCL Competence Scores ....................................................... 136
Demographic Differences in CBCL Competence Scores ......................................................... 138
YSR COMPETENCE SCORES ............................................................................................................. 138
Referral Status Differences in YSR Competence Scores .......................................................... 138
 Contents xi

Demographic Differences in YSR Competence Scores ................................................................. 138

TRF ACADEMIC AND ADAPTIVE SCORES ..................................................................................... 143
Referral Status Differences in TRF Academic and Adaptive Scores ............................................ 143
Demographic Differences in TRF Academic and Adaptive Scores ............................................... 143
CBCL, YSR, AND TRF PROBLEM SCORES ...................................................................................... 144
Referral Status Differences in Problem Scores .............................................................................. 144
Demographic Differences in Problem Scores ................................................................................ 144
GRAPHS OF PREVALENCE RATES ................................................................................................... 149
YSR SOCIALLY DESIRABLE ITEMS ................................................................................................. 163
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 163

12. Relations Between the New ASEBA Scales and the 1991 Versions ............. 165
CHANGES IN COMPETENCE SCALES ............................................................................................. 165
CHANGES IN SYNDROME SCALES .................................................................................................. 166
DSM-ORIENTED SCALES .................................................................................................................... 166
INTERNALIZING AND EXTERNALIZING ........................................................................................ 166
TOTAL PROBLEMS SCALES ............................................................................................................... 168
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 168

13. Other ASEBA Materials .................................................................................... 169

IMPORTANCE OF INTERVIEW AND OBSERVATION DATA ........................................................ 169
THE SEMISTRUCTURED CLINICAL INTERVIEW FOR CHILDREN
AND ADOLESCENTS (SCICA) ........................................................................................... 169
SCICA Procedures ......................................................................................................................... 169
SCICA Scales ................................................................................................................................. 170
SCICA Training Video .................................................................................................................... 170
THE DIRECT OBSERVATION FORM (DOF) ..................................................................................... 170
DOF Procedure ............................................................................................................................... 171
Comparisons With Other Children ........................................................................................ 171
DOF Scales ..................................................................................................................................... 171
Reliability and Validity of the DOF .................................................................................................. 171
ASEBA FORMS FOR AGES 1½ TO 5 ................................................................................................... 172
Language Development Survey (LDS) ........................................................................................... 172
Preschool Syndromes ...................................................................................................................... 172
Prediction of School-Age Problems ................................................................................................ 172
ASEBA FORMS FOR AGES 18 TO 59 .................................................................................................. 173
Syndromes for Ages 18 to 59 .......................................................................................................... 173
ASEBA FORMS FOR AGES 60 TO 90+ ................................................................................................ 173
Syndromes for Ages 60 to 90+ ........................................................................................................ 174
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 174

14. Research Use of ASEBA School-Age Forms ................................................... 175

GUIDELINES FOR USE OF ASEBA FORMS IN RESEARCH .......................................................... 175
Use of Raw Scores vs. T Scores .................................................................................................... 175
Inspection of ASEBA Data Prior to Analysis ................................................................................. 176
Standardization of Scale Scores within Research Samples ............................................................. 176
Developmental Perspectives on Longitudinal Research ................................................................. 177
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL RESEARCH ....................................................................................................... 178
Population Studies ........................................................................................................................... 178
DIAGNOSTIC AND TAXONOMIC RESEARCH ................................................................................ 179
Diagnosis of Behavioral/Emotional Problems ................................................................................. 180
xii Contents

Assessment and Taxonomy ............................................................................................................. 180

The DSM-Oriented ASEBA Scales ................................................................................................ 180
ETIOLOGICAL RESEARCH ................................................................................................................. 181
OUTCOME RESEARCH ........................................................................................................................ 182
Identifying Children with Poor Outcomes ....................................................................................... 182
The Clinical Significance of Improvements ..................................................................................... 183
Groups at Risk ................................................................................................................................. 183
Evaluating Outcomes of Services ................................................................................................... 183
Experimental Intervention Studies ................................................................................................... 184
CROSS-CULTURAL RESEARCH ........................................................................................................ 184
RESEARCH ON CHILD ABUSE .......................................................................................................... 184
RESEARCH ON PARENTAL CHARACTERISTICS .......................................................................... 186
RESEARCH ON MEDICAL CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 186
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 188

15. Answers to Frequently Asked Questions ......................................................... 189

QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SCHOOL-AGE FORMS ......................................................................... 189
QUESTIONS ABOUT SCORING THE SCHOOL-AGE FORMS ...................................................... 191
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SCHOOL-AGE PROFILES .................................................................... 192
RELATIONS OF THE SCHOOL-AGE FORMS TO ASEBA
FORMS FOR OTHER AGES ................................................................................................. 195

References ................................................................................................................... 197

Appendix A ................................................................................................................ 205

Appendix B ................................................................................................................ 211
Appendix C ................................................................................................................ 216
Appendix D ................................................................................................................ 221
Appendix E ................................................................................................................ 230
Index ........................................................................................................................... 233
28 3. Computerized Cross-Informant Comparisons

Table 3-1
Features of ASEBA Web-Link

Owners can electronically transmit CBCL/6-18, YSR, and TRF forms to any web-enabled PC.

1. The electronically transmitted forms can be printed as paper copies to be

filled out in pencil or ink.
2. The electronically transmitted forms can also be displayed on the monitor of any
web-enabled PC to allow respondents to key enter their answers.
3. Web-Link allows data clerks to key enter data from paper forms via any web-
enabled PC for transmission to the PC on which the owner’s Ages 6-18 Mod-
ule resides.
4. The Ages 6-18 Module can score profiles and make cross-informant com-
parisons from data transmitted from any web-enabled PC via Web-Link.
5. The owner of the Ages 6-18 Module can transmit scored profiles and cross-
informant comparisons to any web-enabled PC via Web-Link.
6. All data transmitted via Web-Link are encrypted.
7. Data are stored, scored, and analyzed on the owner’s PC.
8. The owner of a Web-Link account can purchase additional E-units that in-
clude options for transmitting ASEBA forms to be printed by web-enabled
PCs; for data clerks to key enter ASEBA data at web-enabled PCs; for par-
ents, youths, and teachers to directly enter their own responses at web-en-
abled PCs; and for transmitting ASEBA data back to the owner’s PC.
9. For further information about ASEBA Web-Link, visit our website at
www.ASEBA.org.

In view of the potential seriousness of Wayne’s increasing conflicts in the home but hadn’t known
temper outbursts, his threats, and the school’s what to do about them. They agreed to contact Dr.
policy of zero tolerance for violence, Ms. Ames Barrett for an evaluation. As part of the evalua-
contacted a violence prevention team at the local tion, Dr. Barrett requested each parent to complete
community mental health center (CMHC) that a CBCL. He also requested permission to have
worked closely with the school. The team leader, Wayne’s teachers complete TRFs. Because Mr.
Dr. Barrett, advised Ms. Ames to speak with Webster was away on a computer consulting job,
Wayne’s parents about having Wayne evaluated at Dr. Barrett used Web-Link to transmit the CBCL
the CMHC. electronically to Mr. Webster’s laptop computer.
Mr. Webster then completed the CBCL on his com-
When Ms. Ames contacted Wayne’s parents, she
puter and transmitted it via Web-Link to Dr.
learned that they had become concerned about his
142 11. Item Scores

Table 11-2
Percent of Variance Accounted for by Significant
(p<.01) Effects of Referral Status and Demographic Variables
in ANCOVAs of YSR Competence
Ref Covariates
Item Statusa Genderb Agec SESd Whitee Afr.f Latinog
I. A. Number of sports 8 2M 4Y — 1h — —
B. Sports part/skill 13 1M 2Y — 2 1 —
II. A. Number of activities 6 — — — — — 1
B. Activities part/skill 13 — — 1h 1 — 1
III. A. Number of organiz. 5 — — 2 — — 1h
B. Participation in organiz. 10 — — 2 1h — —
IV. A. Number of jobs 11 <1Fh 1Yh 1 — — —
B. Job performance 17 1F 1Oh — 1 1Ah —
V. 1. Number of friends 3h — 2Y — — — —
2. Contacts w. friends 4 1M — — — — —
VI. A. Gets along 9 — — — — <1Ah —
B. Work/play alone 1h — — — — — —
VII. 1. Mean academic perf. 10 <1Fh — 1 — — —
Activities scale 24 — 2Y 1h 1 — 1
Social scale 14 — — 1 — — —
Total Competence 28 — — 1 1 — 1h
Note. N = 1,938 demographically matched referred and nonreferred 11- to 18-year-olds. Items are designated
with summary labels for their content. Numbers in table indicate percent of variance (eta2) accounted for by
each effect that was significant at p <.01. Interactions did not exceed chance.
aAll scores were higher for nonreferred.
bF = females scored higher; M = males scored higher.
cO = older youths scored higher; Y = younger youths scored higher.
dAll significant SES effects reflect higher scores for upper SES.
eAll significant white effects reflect higher scores for whites.
fA= African American scored higher.
gAll significant Latino effects reflect lower scores for Latinos.
hNot significant when corrected for number of analyses.
170 13. Other ASEBA Materials

vations of the child’s behavior and what the child ASEBA Assessment Data Manager software. The
says. Immediately after the interview, the inter- Manual for the Semistructured Clinical Interview
viewer rates the observational and self-report items for Children and Adolescents (2 nd edition;
on the SCICA scoring form. Space is also provided McConaughy & Achenbach, 2001) provides de-
for reporting additional problems not specifically tails of the background, development, scoring, re-
listed. Each item is rated on a 0-1-2-3 scale. The liability, and validity of the SCICA. It also pro-
inclusion of one more point than on the CBCL, vides instructions for interviewing children and for
YSR, and TRF rating scales allows a rating for a integrating SCICA data with other assessment data.
very slight or ambiguous occurrence of a behavior
(scored 1), as well as a definite occurrence with
SCICA Training Video
mild to moderate intensity and less than 3 minutes A training video is available that depicts segments
duration (scored 2), and a definite occurrence with of interviews with a variety of children. The trainee
severe intensity or greater than 3 minutes dura- watches an interview segment and then scores the seg-
tion (scored 3). ment on the SCICA Observational and Self-Report
rating forms. Thereafter, the trainee enters the item
SCICA Scales
scores into the program for scoring the SCICA. The
The 2001 version of the SCICA profile displays program will print a profile that compares the trainee’s
seven empirically based syndromes for ages 6-11 scores on each item and scale with scores obtained
and 12-18, plus a Somatic Complaints syndrome from experienced clinicians who rated the same inter-
that was derived from self-report items only for view segment. The program also prints correlations
ages 12-18 (McConaughy & Achenbach, 2001). indicating the degree of agreement between ratings by
The syndromes derived from observational items the trainee and by the experienced clinicians. If agree-
for both age ranges are designated as Anxious, With- ment is low, the trainee can identify the specific items
drawn/Depressed, Language/Motor Problems, At- and scales where agreement is low and can then view
tention Problems, and Self-Control Problems. The and rate the segment as many times as necessary to
syndromes derived from self-report scores for both obtain good agreement.
age groups are designated Anxious/Depressed and
Aggressive/Rule-Breaking. Scores for Internalizing THE DIRECT OBSERVATION FORM
and Externalizing groupings of syndromes are (DOF)
computed using both the observational and self-
report syndromes. However, separate Total Prob- To apply the ASEBA approach to direct observa-
lems scores are computed for the observational and tions, the DOF (McConaughy & Achenbach, 2009) is
self-report items. designed to assess problems and on-task behavior of
6- to 11-year-old children observed in settings such as
The 2001 version of the SCICA also yields the classrooms, group activities, and recess. Students and
same six DSM-oriented scales as are scored from paraprofessionals, such as teacher aides and research
the CBCL, YSR, and TRF. These scales are Affec- assistants, can be trained to use the DOF by first read-
tive Problems, Anxiety Problems, Somatic Prob- ing the instructions and then practicing observations of
lems, Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems, several children who are simultaneously observed by
Oppositional Defiant Problems, and Conduct Prob- an experienced DOF observer. The trainee and experi-
lems. Self-report and observational items on the enced observer should then compare their observations
SCICA were assigned to the same DSM-oriented and scores to identify reasons for discrepancies. There-
scale as the corresponding items on the CBCL, after, the trainee should observe additional children and
YSR, or TRF. make comparisons with an experienced observer’s ob-
The 2001 SCICA Profile can be scored on hand- servations and scores until good agreement is reached.
scored forms or via the SCICA module of the The DOF has 88 specific problem items, 51 of which
 13. Other ASEBA Materials 171

have counterparts on the CBCL and 63 of which have scores and percentiles for each scale score. The DOF
counterparts on the TRF. There is also one open-ended scales are normed for ages 6 to 11, with separate pro-
item for other problems not listed on the DOF. files of scales for classroom observations and recess
observations. The normative sample for classroom
DOF Procedure
observations includes 403 boys and 258 girls who were
To use the DOF, an observer writes a narrative observed anonymously in general education classrooms
description of the child’s behavior and interactions in public and private schools in Arizona, New York,
while observing the child for 10 minutes. The nar- Pennsylvania, and Vermont. The normative sample for
rative is written in space provided on the DOF pro- recess observations includes 170 boys and 74 girls
tocol. At the end of each 1-minute observation in- who were observed anonymously as controls for re-
terval, the child is also scored as being on task or off ferred children in Vermont.
task. At the end of the 10-minute period, the observer
DOF Scales
scores the child on the 89 problem items. Each item is
rated on a 0-1-2-3 scale like that of the SCICA. The The DOF Profile for classroom observations dis-
observer also sums the 10 on-task scores, thereby plays scores for five empirically derived syndrome
providing an on-task score ranging from 0 to 10. To scales (Sluggish Cognitive Tempo, Immature/With-
obtain a stable index of problems and on-task behav- drawn, Attention Problems, Intrusive, and Opposi-
ior, we recommend that 10-minute samples of behav- tional), a DSM-oriented Attention Deficit/Hyperac-
ior be obtained on three to six occasions and that the tivity Problems scale with Inattention and Hyperactiv-
scores be averaged over these occasions. ity-Impulsivity subscales, Total Problems, and On-
task. The syndrome scales were derived from explor-
Comparisons With Other Children
atory and confirmatory factor analyses of classroom
Because the significance of a child’s behavior de- observations of 1,261 6-12-year-old children
pends partly on its deviation from the behavior of other (McConaughy & Achenbach, 2009). Items with fac-
children assessed under the same conditions, we rec- tor loadings >.20 and p <.01 were retained on the
ommend that the DOF be completed for one “control” syndrome scales. The Root Mean Square Error of
child observed just before the identified child and a sec- Approximation (RMSEA) for the final 5-factor solu-
ond “control” child observed just after the identified tion was .024, which was well below the upper limit
child. The control children should be of the same gen- of .05 to .07 considered to indicate good fit (Browne
der as the identified child, but should be as far as pos- & Cudeck, 1993; Yu & Muthén, 2002). The DSM-
sible from the identified child in the group setting. Mean oriented Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems
scores for the control children can be compared with scale includes 23 items consistent with DSM-IV-TR
mean scores for the identified child across all observa- criteria for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
tion sessions to identify ways in which the identified child’s (ADHD), of which 10 items comprise the Inattention
behavior differs from that of peers observed under similar subscale and 13 items comprise the Hyperactivity-
conditions. Impulsivity subscale. The DOF Profile for recess ob-
servations displays scores for an Aggressive Behavior
The ASEBA Assessment Data Manager software
syndrome and Total Problems.
automatically averages ratings for the identified child
over as many as six occasions and separately aver- Reliability and Validity of the DOF
ages ratings for one or two control children over as
McConaughy and Achenbach (2009) reported in-
many as six occasions. The DOF can only be scored
ternal consistency alphas from .49 to .87 for the nine
by computer because of the complexity of averaging
DOF problem scales, with mean alpha = .74. Inter-
ratings across multiple observation sessions. The com-
rater reliabilities were .71 to .88 for the nine DOF
puter-scored DOF Profile displays mean scale scores
problem scales and .97 for On-task, averaged across
for the identified child and the control children, with T
12 pairs of observers for a total sample of 212 6-11-
172 13. Other ASEBA Materials

year-old children. Significant test-retest reliabilities binations. In addition, parents are asked to provide
were .43 to .77 for seven problem scales and .42 for information about possible risk factors for language
On-task, over an average interval of 12.4 days. delays, such as prematurity, ear infections, and familial
history of slow language development. The number of
As evidence for criterion-related validity,
LDS vocabulary words scored and the average length
McConaughy and Achenbach (2009) reported sig-
of the phrases reported by the parent are compared
nificantly higher scores for clinically referred vs.
to norms for the child’s age and gender. The LDS
nonreferred 6-11-year-old children on all DOF scales.
can quickly identify children whose speech is far
McConaughy, Ivanova, Antshel, Eiraldi, and Dumenci
enough below norms for their age to warrant a com-
(2009) also found that the DOF Intrusive and Oppo-
prehensive assessment for language development.
sitional syndromes, Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity
Problems, Hyperactivity/Impulsivity subscale, Total Preschool Syndromes
Problems, and On-task scores significantly discrimi-
nated between children diagnosed with ADHD-Com- Many of the CBCL/1½-5 and C-TRF problem
items have counterparts on the ASEBA school-age
bined type vs. children without ADHD diagnoses. The
DOF Sluggish Cognitive Tempo and Attention Prob- instruments. The ASEBA preschool syndrome scales
lems syndromes, Inattention subscale, Total Problems, were derived by factor analyzing preschoolers’ item
and On-task significantly discriminated between chil- scores on the CBCL/1½-5 and C-TRF. These analy-
dren with ADHD-Inattentive type vs. nonreferred con- ses yielded several preschool syndromes that are
trol children. similar to ASEBA school-age syndromes. The fol-
lowing preschool syndromes have the clearest coun-
terparts among the school-age syndromes: Aggres-
ASEBA FORMS FOR AGES 1½ TO 5
sive Behavior, Anxious/Depressed, Attention Prob-
For many clinical and research purposes, it is im- lems, Somatic Complaints, and Withdrawn. A new
portant to assess individuals repeatedly over periods syndrome identified on the 2000 version of the CBCL/
of years. To assess children as preschoolers and then 1½-5 and C-TRF, which has no clear counterpart on
again during their school years, the ASEBA preschool the school-age forms, was designated as Emotionally
forms and profiles can be used for the initial assess- Reactive. The CBCL/1½-5 also has a syndrome des-
ments (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000). Similarities in ignated as Sleep Problems.
format, content, and structure across ASEBA instru-
Five DSM-oriented scales were also constructed for
ments for different ages facilitate meaningful develop-
theASEBApreschool forms, using the methods that were
mental comparisons. The CBCL/1½-5 obtains data
described in Chapter 4. The preschool Affective Prob-
from parents and parent surrogates on children’s prob-
lems, Anxiety Problems, Attention Deficit/Hyperac-
lems, plus information about illnesses, disabilities, con-
tivity Problems, and Oppositional Defiant Problems
cerns about the child, and the best things about the
scales have close counterparts on the school-age forms.
child. The Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (C-TRF)
However, the preschool Pervasive Developmental
obtains similar data from daycare providers and pre-
Problems scale does not, because too few of its items
school teachers.
are on the school-age forms.
Language Development Survey (LDS)
Prediction of School-Age Problems
Because delayed language is a common cause for
Longitudinal research has shown significant pre-
concern about young children, the CBCL/1½-5 in-
dictive correlations from scores on many CBCL/
cludes the Language Development Survey (LDS). The
1½-5 syndromes to scores on corresponding
LDS requests parents of children younger than 3 years
school-age versions of the syndromes (Achenbach &
to circle on a vocabulary list of early words the words
Rescorla, 2000). The following findings indicate that
that are used by their child. Parents are also asked to
CBCL/1½-5 Total Problems scores are also good pre-
report five of their child’s longest and best word com-
dictors of CBCL Total Problems scores up to at least
 13. Other ASEBA Materials 173

age 9: (a) from CBCL/1½-5 Total Problems scores Syndromes for Ages 18 to 59
at age 2 to CBCL Total Problems scores at ages 6 to
EFAs and CFAs of the ASR and ABCL problem
9, the predictive correlations ranged from .55 to .59;
items yielded the following syndromes that have clear
(b) from CBCL/1½-5 Total Problems scores at age 3
counterparts among the CBCL, TRF, and YSR syn-
to CBCL Total Problems scores at ages 6 to 9, the
dromes: Anxious/Depressed, Withdrawn, Somatic
predictive correlations ranged from .64 to .68
Complaints, Thought Problems, Attention Prob-
(Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000).
lems, Aggressive Behavior, and Rule-Breaking Be-
ASEBA FORMS FOR AGES 18 TO 59 havior. In addition, we found a syndrome designated
as Intrusive, which comprises socially obnoxious be-
In the course of research on the development of havior such as bragging, seeking a lot of attention,
psychopathology, longitudinal studies have been done showing off, talking too much, teasing, and being loud.
that started with empirically based assessment of chil- Some of these items are included on the Aggressive
dren who were subsequently reassessed in adulthood Behavior syndrome derived from the CBCL, TRF,
(e.g., Achenbach, Howell, McConaughy, & Stanger, and YSR. Longitudinal research has shown that ado-
1995c; Hofstra et al., 2000). Because there was a lescents’ scores on the Aggressive Behavior syndrome
lack of empirically based procedures for assessing strongly predict young adult scores on both the Ag-
young adults, we developed the Young Adult Self- gressive Behavior and Intrusive syndromes
Report (YASR) and the Young Adult Behavior Check- (Achenbach et al., 1995c). This indicates that some
list (YABCL; Achenbach, 1997). The YASR and individuals who scored high on the Aggressive Behav-
YABCL were subsequently revised as the Adult Self- ior syndrome during adolescence remain high on ag-
Report (ASR) and Adult Behavior Checklist (ABCL), gressive behavior during adulthood, whereas others
which both span ages 18 through 59 (Achenbach & remain high on the less overtly aggressive but socially
Rescorla, 2003). The ABCL is completed by people obnoxious behavior of the Intrusive syndrome. These
who know the adult well, such as spouses, partners, findings suggest that personal characteristics and/or
family members, friends, and therapists. intervening experiences may cause some aggressive
The ASR and ABCL include counterparts of nu- adolescents to become less overtly aggressive while
merous YSR and CBCL items that are developmen- still remaining socially obnoxious as adults.
tally appropriate for adults as well as children, in addi-
tion to numerous items that are not developmentally ASEBA FORMS FOR AGES 60 TO 90+
appropriate for children. In addition, the ASR and To meet the need for empirically based assessment
ABCL have scales for tobacco, alcohol, and nonmedi- of the strengths and problems of elders, we have de-
cal drug use. The ASR and ABCL also have adaptive veloped the Older Adult Self-Report (OASR) and the
functioning scales for friendships, relationships with Older Adult Behavior Checklist (OABCL; details are
spouse or partner (if any), family relationships, job available at www.ASEBA.org). Like the ABCL, the
functioning, functioning in educational programs, and OABCL can be completed by spouses, partners, fam-
a mean adaptive score computed from those of the ily members (including grown children), friends, and
preceding scales that are relevant to the individual be- therapists. The OABCL can also be completed by
ing assessed. DSM-oriented scales were constructed staff of retirement and nursing homes, home health aides,
for the ASR and ABCL on the basis of judgments by and other caregivers. Although our research with the
experts from 10 cultural groups. The DSM-oriented OASR and OABCL has included participants as old
scales are designated as Depressive Problems, Anxi- as 102 years, we specify the age range as 60 to 90+,
ety Problems, Somatic Problems, Avoidant Per- because our national normative sample included pro-
sonality Problems, Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity gressively smaller numbers at each year of age over
Problems with Inattention and Hyperactivity-Impul- 90.
sivity subscales, and Antisocial Personality Problems.
174 13. Other ASEBA Materials

In addition to numerous items that have counter- rate segments of SCICA interviews, enter their ratings
parts on the ASR and ABCL, the OASR and OABCL into the SCICA software module and have their rat-
have numerous items to assess personal strengths and ings compared with ratings by experienced clinicians.
problems that are of particular relevance to older adults. Trainees can then watch and rate the interview seg-
Based on judgments by experts from seven cultural ments again until their ratings agree well with the ex-
groups, the OASR and OABCL are also scored on perienced clinicians’ ratings.
the following DSM-oriented scales: Depressive Prob-
The DOF is used by observers to make narrative
lems, Anxiety Problems, Somatic Problems, Demen-
descriptions and to rate problems and on-task behav-
tia Problems, Psychotic Problems, and Antisocial
ior observed over 10-minute intervals in classrooms,
Personality Problems.
recess, and other group situations. Students, research
Syndromes for Ages 60 to 90+ assistants, teacher aides, and other paraprofessionals
can learn to make reliable DOF ratings. Observations
EFAs and CFAs identified seven syndromes of
of target children are averaged over multiple intervals
problems in OASR and OABCL ratings of older adults.
to obtain stable samples of behavior for comparison
Syndromes designated as Anxious/Depressed, So-
with normative samples, as well as with control chil-
matic Complaints, and Thought Problems have
dren observed in the same settings as the target chil-
counterparts on the ASR and ABCL, as well as on the
dren.
CBCL, TRF, and YSR, although the constituent items
differ somewhat. The following four OASR and For children younger than 6, problems are assessed
OABCL syndromes comprise mainly problems that via the CBCL/1½-5 completed by parent figures and
are of particular importance among older adults: Wor- via the C-TRF completed by daycare providers and
ries, Functional Impairment, Memory/Cognition preschool teachers. The LDS component of the
Problems, and Irritable/Disinhibited. CBCL/1½-5 is completed by parents to assess the
language development of children below age 3. Sub-
SUMMARY stantial proportions of the preschool items and syn-
dromes have counterparts on the school-age instru-
This chapter presented ASEBA instruments for ments. Significant predictive correlations have been
assessing school-age children via interviews and ob- found from ASEBA preschool scores to school-age
servations and for assessing preschoolers and adults. scores.
The SCICA obtains observational and self-report To apply empirically based assessment to adults,
data, achievement subtest scores, fine and gross mo- the ASR and ABCL are available for ages 18 to 59.
tor screens, and detailed descriptive information in Substantial proportions of ASEBA school-age items
clinical interviews with 6- to 18-year-old children. and syndromes have counterparts on the adult instru-
Immediately after the interview, the interviewer rates ments. Scores on the school-age scales have been found
observational and self-report items that are scored on to significantly predict scores on the adult scales. The
syndrome scales, Internalizing, Externalizing, and sepa- OASR and OABCL are designed for assessment of
rate Total Problems scales for observed and self-re- older adults, with norms for ages 60 to 90+ years.
ported problems. A training video enables trainees to
198 References

Achenbach, T. M., Howell, C. T., McConaughy, S. care workers: A study regarding the factor structure. Jour-
H., & Stanger, C. (1995a). Six-year predictors of prob- nal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 29, 83-89.
lems in a national sample of children and youth: I.
Cross-informant syndromes. Journal of the Ameri- American Psychiatric Association. (1952; 1968; 1980;
can Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 1987; 1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of men-
336-347. tal disorders. (1st ed., 2nd ed., 3rd ed., 3rd ed. rev., 4th ed.).
Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association.
Achenbach, T. M., Howell, C. T., McConaughy, S. H.,
& Stanger, C. (1995b). Six-year predictors of problems Arend, R., Lavigne, J. V., Rosenbaum, D., Binns, H.
in a national sample of children and youth: II. Signs of J., & Christoffel, K. K. (1996). Relation between taxo-
disturbance. Journal of the American Academy of nomic and quantitative diagnostic systems in pre-
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 488-498. school children: Emphasis on disruptive disorders.
Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 25, 388-397.
Achenbach, T. M., Howell, C. T., McConaughy, S. H.,
& Stanger, C. (1995c). Six-year predictors of problems Auerbach, J. G., & Lerner, Y. (1991). Syndromes de-
in a national sample: III. Transitions to young adult syn- rived from the Child Behavior Checklist for clinically
dromes. Journal of the American Academy of Child referred Israeli boys aged 6-11. Journal of Child Psy-
and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 658-669. chology and Psychiatry, 32, 1017-1024.

Achenbach, T. M., Howell, C. T., McConaughy, S. H., Bartko, J. J. (1976). On various intraclass correlation
& Stanger, C. (1998). Six-year predictors of problems reliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83,
in a national sample: IV. Young adult signs of disturbance. 762-765.
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Ado-
Bérubé, R. L., & Achenbach, T. M. (2001). Bibliog-
lescent Psychiatry, 37, 718-727.
raphy of published studies using ASEBA instruments:
Achenbach, T. M., & Lewis, M. (1971). A proposed 2001 edition. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont,
model for clinical research and its application to en- Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
copresis and enuresis. Journal of the American Acad-
Biederman, J., Mick, E., Faraone, S.V., & Burback,
emy of Child Psychiatry, 10, 535-554.
M. (2001). Patterns of remission and symptom de-
Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, cline in conduct disorder: A four-year prospective
C. T. (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and emo- study of an ADHD sample. Journal of the American
tional problems: Implications of cross-informant cor- Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 290-
relations for situational specificity. Psychological 298.
Bulletin, 101, 213-232.
Birmaher, B., Stanley, M., Greenhill, L., Twomey, J.,
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2000). Manual Gavrilescu, A., & Rabinovich, H. (1990). Platelet
for the ASEBA Preschool Forms & Profiles. imipramine binding in children and adolescents with
Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research impulsive behavior. Journal of the American Acad-
Center for Children, Youth, & Families. emy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 29, 914-918.

Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2003). Manual Boomsma, D., van Beijsterveldt, T., van Baal, C.,
for the ASEBA Adult Forms & Profiles. Burlington, Stroet, T., Polderman, T., Groot, A., van derValk, J.,
VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Chil- Verhulst, F., Achenbach, T., & Hudziak, J. (2001,
dren, Youth, & Families. July). Genetic analysis of DSM-IV oriented scales in
3-year-old Dutch twins. Paper presented at Behavior
Albrecht, G., Veerman, J.W., Damen, H., & Kroes, Genetics Association, Oxford, England.
G. (2001). The Child Behavior Checklist for group
 References 201

psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Manual for the Semistructured Clinical Interview for
Psychiatry, 38, 625-632. Children and Adolescents (2nd ed.). Burlington, VT:
University of Vermont, Research Center for Children,
Kazdin, A. E., & Heidish, I. E. (1984). Convergence Youth, & Families.
of clinically derived diagnoses and parent checklists
among inpatient children. Journal of Abnormal Child McConaughy, S. H., & Achenbach, T. M. (2009)
Psychology, 12, 421-435. Manual for the Direct Observation Form. Burlington,
VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Chil-
Keenan, K., Shaw, D., Delliquadri, E., Giovannelli, dren, Youth, & Families.
J., & Walsh, B. (1998). Evidence for the continuity
of early problem behaviors: Application of a devel- McConaughy, S. H., Achenbach, T. M., & Gent, C. L.
opmental model. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychol- (1988). Multiaxial empirically based assessment:
ogy, 26, 441-454. Parent, teacher, observational, cognitive, and person-
ality correlates of Child Behavior Profiles for 6-11-
Kendall, P. C., Marrs-Garcia, A., Nath, S. R., Shel- year-old boys. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychol-
drick, R. C. (1999). Normative comparisons for the ogy, 16, 485-509.
evaluation of clinical significance. Journal of Con-
sulting Clinical Psychology, 67, 285-299. McConaughy, S.H., Ivanova, M.Y., Antshel, K., Eiraldi,
R.B., & Dumenci, L. (2009). Standardized observational
Kendler, K. S., Neale, M. C., Kessler, R. C., Heath, assessment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder com-
A. C., & Eaves, L. J. (1992). Major depression and bined and predominantly inattentive subtypes: II. Class-
generalized anxiety disorder: same genes, (partly) room observations. School Psychology Review, in press.
different environments? Archives of General Psychia-
try, 49, 716-722. McConaughy, S. H., Kay, P. J., & Fitzgerald, M. (1998).
Preventing SED through parent-teacher action. Research
Krueger R. F. (2002). Psychometric perspectives on and social skills instruction: First-year outcomes. Jour-
comorbidity. In J. E. Helzer & J. J. Hudziak (Eds). nal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 6, 81-
Defining psychopathology in the 21st century. Wash- 93.
ington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press.
McConaughy, S. H., Kay, P. J., & Fitzgerald, M. (1999).
Liu, X., Kurita, H., Guo, C., Tachimori, H., Ze, J., & The Achieving Behaving Caring Project for preventing
Okawa, M. (2000). Behavioral and emotional prob- ED: Two-year outcomes. Journal of Emotional and
lems in Chinese children: Teacher reports for ages 6 Behavioral Disorders, 7, 224-239.
to 11. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
41, 253-260. Mesman, J., Bongers, I. L., & Koot, H. M. (2001).
Preschool developmental pathways to preadolescent
Liu, X., Sun, Z., Uchiyama, M., Li, Y., & Okawa, M. internalizing and externalzing problems. Journal of
(2000). Attaining nocturnal urinary control, noctur- Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 679-689.
nal enuresis, and behavioral problems in Chinese
children aged 6 through 16 years. Journal of the Mesman, J., & Koot, H. M. (2000). Common and
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychia- specific correlates of preadolescent internalizing and
try, 39, 1557-1564 externalizing psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 109, 428-437.
Loehlin, J. C. (1998). Latent variable models: An in-
troduction to factor, path, and structural analysis (3rd Milich, R., Roberts, M., Loney, J., & Caputo, J.
ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (1980). Differentiating practice effects and statistical re-
gression on the Conners Hyperkinesis Index. Journal of
McConaughy, S. H., & Achenbach, T. M. (2001) Abnormal Child Psychology, 8, 549-552.
202 References

Miller, L. C. (1967). Louisville Behavior Checklist for evidence for distortion. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 485-
males, 6-12 years of age. Psychological Reports, 21, 499.
885-896.
Richters, J. E., & Pellegrini, D. (1989). Depressed moth-
Miller, L. C., Hampe, E., Barrett, C. L., & Noble, H. ers’ judgments about their children: An examination of
(1972). Test-retest reliability of parent ratings of children’s the depression-distortion hypothesis. Child Develop-
deviant behavior. Psychological Reports, 31, 249-250. ment, 60, 1068-1075.

Mish, F. C. (Ed.). (1988). Webster’s ninth new colle- Robins, L. N. (1985). Epidemiology: Reflections on testing
giate dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster. the validity of psychiatric interviews. Archives of Gen-
eral Psychiatry, 42, 918-924.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2001). Mplus User’s
Guide (Version 2). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Sakoda, J. M., Cohen, B. H., & Beall, G. (1954). Test
Muthén. of significance for a series of statistical tests. Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 51, 172-175.
Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measure-
ment, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. SAS (1999). SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 8, Vol-
Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. umes 1, 2, and 3. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

Petersen, N. S., Kolen, M. J., & Hoover, H. D. Scerbo, A. S., & Kolko, D. (1994). Salivary testoster-
(1993). Scaling, norming, and equating. In R. L. Linn one and cortisol in disruptive children: Relationship
( Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed.), (pp. 221- to aggressive, hyperactive, and internalizing behav-
262). Washington, D.C.: American Council on Edu- iors. Journal of the American Academy of Child and
cation. Adolescent Psychiatry, 33, 1174-1184.

Peterson, D. R. (1961). Behavior problems of middle Schmitz, S., Fulker, D. W., & Mrazek, D. A. (1995).
childhood. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 25, Problem behavior in early and middle childhood: An
205-209. initial behavior genetic analysis. Journal of Child Psy-
chology and Psychiatry, 36, 1443-1458.
Reed, M. L., & Edelbrock, C. (1983). Reliability and
validity of the Direct Observation Form of the Child Semrud-Clikeman, M., Steingard, R. J., Filipek, P.,
Behavior Checklist. Journal of Abnormal Child Psy- Biederman, J., Bekken, K., & Renshaw, P. F. (2000).
chology, 11, 521-530. Using MRI to examine brain-behavior relationships
in males with attention deficit disorder with hyperac-
Rehabilitation Act (1973). (29 U.S.C. Sec. 794 et seq), tivity. Journal of the American Academy of Child and
Section 504. Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 477-484.
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (1992a). Behav- Shaw, D. S., Owens, E. B., Giovannelli, J., & Winslow,
ior Assessment System for Children. Parent Rating E. B. (2001). Infant and toddler pathways leading to
Scales. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. early externalizing disorders. Journal of the Ameri-
can Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40,
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (1992b). Be-
36-43.
havior Assessment System for Children. Teacher Rat-
ing Scales. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance SPSS. (2000). SPSS Base 10.0 User’s Guide. Chi-
Service. cago, IL: SPSS.
Richters, J. E. (1992). Depressed mothers as infor- Stanger, C., Achenbach, T. M., & Verhulst, F. C.
mants about their children: A critical review of the (1997). Accelerated longitudinal comparison of ag-
 References 203

gressive versus delinquent syndromes. Development and epidemiological sample. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychopathology, 9, 43-58. Psychology, 20, 595-610.

Steinhausen, H-C., Dorr, H. G., Kannenberg, R., & Verhulst, F. C., Van der Ende, J., & Rietbergen, A. (1997).
Malin, Z. (2001). The behavior profile of children Ten-year time trends of psychopathology in Dutch chil-
and adolescents with short stature. Journal of Devel- dren and adolescents: No evidence for strong trends. Acta
opmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 21, 423-428. Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 96, 7-13.

Stoff, D. M., Pollock, L., Vitiello, B., Behar, D., & Bridger, Watson, D. C., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative af-
W. H. (1987). Reduction of 3-H-imipramine binding sites fectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emo-
on platelets of conduct disordered children. tional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 465-490.
Neuropsychopharmacology, 1, 55-62.
Wechsler, D. C. (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale
Swets, J. E., & Pickett, R. M. (1982). Evaluation of for Children Third Edition. San Antonio, TX: Psy-
diagnostic systems: Methods from signal detection chological Corporation.
theory. New York: Academic Press.
Yang, H.-J., Soong, W.-T., Chiang, C.-N., Chen, W. J.
Van den Oord, E. J. C. G., Verhulst, F. C., & (2000). Competence and behavioral/emotional prob-
Boomsma, D. I. (1996). A genetic study of mater- lems among Taiwanese adolescents as reported by
nal and paternal ratings of problem behaviors in parents and teachers. Journal of the American Acad-
three-year-old twins. Journal of Abnormal Psychol- emy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 232-239.
ogy, 105, 349-357.
Yu, C.Y., & Muthén, B.O. (2002). Evaluation of
Van der Valk, J. C., Van den Oord, E. J. C. G., Verhulst, model fit indices for latent variable models with
F. C., & Boomsma, D. I. (2001). Using parental rat- categorical and continuous outcomes (Technical
ings to study the etiology of 3-year-old twins’ prob- Report). Los Angeles: University of California at Los
lem behaviors: Different views or rater bias? Journal Angeles, Graduate School of Education and Informa-
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 921-931. tion Studies.

Verhulst, F. C., Akkerhuis, G. W., & Althaus, M. (1985). Zahn-Waxler, C., Schmitz, S., Fulker, D., Robinson, J.,
Mental health in Dutch children: (I)A cross-cultural com- & Emde, R. (1996). Behavior problems in 5-year-old
parison. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 72, (Suppl. monozygotic and dizygotic twins: Genetic and environ-
323). mental influences, patterns of regulation, and internaliza-
tion of control. Development and Psychopathology, 8,
Verhulst, F. C., & Van der Ende, J. (1992). Six-year 103-122.
stability of parent-reported problem behavior in an