skip navigation
Logic Model builder for Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention/Family Support Programs
Home     Outcomes      Indicators     Tools
 
 
 

All Tools for Postadoption LMB

#70 Beck Depression Inventory for Youth
Introduction
Title:
Beck Depression Inventory for Youth
Author:
Beck, J. S., Beck, A. T., & Jolly, J. B.
Date:
2001
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adopted Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Self–report questionnaire.
Uses of Information:
Identify syptoms of depression in children ages 7 to 14.
Environment:
Must be quiet so the respondent can focus on the self-report.
Description:
This inventory is designed for early identification of depression symptoms. It includes items related to a child's or adolescent's negative thoughts about self, life and the future; feelings of sadness and guilt; and sleep disturbance.
References:

Beck, J. S., Beck, A. T., & Jolly, J. B. (2001). Beck Youth Inventories. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

Cost:
Depression Inventory Pad is $46; the manual for a combined Beck Youth Inventories is $85.
Availability of Test Manual:
Available for purchase at www.pearsonassess.com.
Contact Information:
Pearson Assessment, Inc.
19500 Bulverde Road
San Antonio, Texas 78259-3701
800.211.8378 Customer Service
800.228.0752 Administration
http://pearsonassess.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productdetail.htm?pid=015-8018-370

Beck Institute for Cognitive Therapy and Research
One Belmont Avenue, Suite 700
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-1610
Phone: 610.664.3020
Fax: 610.664.4437
Utility
Instructions:
Inventories should be completed in a quiet, comfortable place free from distractions. Inventories may be administered to individuals or to groups of youth.
Administrator:
The BDI for Youth is self-administered but can be administered in a group setting as well.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
No specific training is required.
Administration Time:
5 - 10 minutes.
Respondents:
Children age 7 to 14.
Scales/Item Options:
Scale uses Likert options from never = 0 to always = 3.
Scoring:
Raw score is calculated and then transformed into standardized T scores using computed means and standard deviations for the normative groups. The T scores are used for profiling and assessment.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
One important finding is that the reliability and validity estimates did not differ across the races or ethnic groups of Caucasian, Latino American, African American, and Asian American. Researchers also found that reliability and, subsequently, validity may differ by age.


#71 Beck Depression Inventory
Introduction
Title:
Beck Depression Inventory
Author:
Beck, J. S., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K.
Date:
1961, 1978, 1996
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adopted Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Self–report questionnaire.
Uses of Information:
To assess depression symptoms and mood.
Environment:
Respondents need a quiet environment to complete the inventory with no distractions or disturbances.
Description:
The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) is a 21 item self- report inventory that evaluates the level of depression in adolescents (aged 13 and older) and adults. The respondent is asked to rate each item on a 4-point scale of severity. The items included in the updated version of the BDI bring the BDI into alignment with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria.
References:

Beck, J. S., Beck, A. T., & Jolly, J. B. (2001). Beck Youth Inventories. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

Beck, A., & Steer, R. (1984, November). Internal consistencies of the original and revised Beck Depression Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40(6), 1365-1367. Retrieved October 8, 2008, doi:10.1002/1097-4679(198411)40:6<1365::AID-JCLP2270400615>3.0.CO;2-D

Beck Depression Inventory. Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. Retrieved October 8, 2008. http://www.minddisorders.com/A-Br/Beck-Depression-Inventory.html

Cost:
Manual and 25 record forms is $99.00 with www.pearsonassess.com
Availability of Test Manual:
Available for purchase.
Contact Information:
Pearson Assessment, Inc.
19500 Bulverde Road
San Antonio, Texas 78259-3701
800.211.8378 Customer Service
800.228.0752 Administration
http://pearsonassess.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productdetail.htm?pid=015-8018-370

Beck Institute for Cognitive Therapy and Research
One Belmont Avenue, Suite 700
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-1610
Phone: 610.664.3020
Fax: 610.664.4437
Utility
Instructions:

If the test is taken individually, the respondent answers each item as it relates to how they feel today and within the last two weeks.

Administrator:
The BDI is self-administered, but can be administered in a group setting as well.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
None specified.
Administration Time:
5 - 10 minutes.
Respondents:
Respondents are ages 13+.
Scales/Item Options:
The symptoms and attitudes are (1) Mood; (2) Pessimism; (3) Sense of Failure; (4) Lack of Satisfaction; (5) Guilt Feelings; (6) Sense of Punishment; (7) Self-dislike; (8) Self accusations; (9) Suicidal Wishes; (10) Crying; (11) Irritability; (12) Social Withdrawal; (13) Indecisiveness; (14) Distortion of Body Image; (15) Work Inhibition; (16) Sleep Disturbance; (17) Fatigability; (18) Loss of Appetite; (19) Weight Loss; (20) Somatic Preoccupation; and (21) Loss of Libido.

Each of the 21 items have 4 possible responses that are scored between 0 and 3.

Scoring:
The items′ scores are added to reach a sum between 0 and 63. For the general population, a score of 21 or over represents depression. For people who have been clinically diagnosed, scores from 0 to 9 represent minimal depressive symptoms, scores of 10 to 16 indicate mild depression, scores of 17 to 29 indicate moderate depression, and scores of 30 to 63 indicate severe depression.
Languages:
English and Spanish.
Psychometric Properties:
The BDI has been extensively tested for content validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity. At least 35 studies have shown concurrent validity between the BDI and other measures of depression. Following a range of biological factors, attitudes, and behaviors, tests for construct validity (the degree to which a test measures an internal construct or variable) have shown the BDI to be related to medical symptoms, anxiety, stress, loneliness, sleep patterns, alcoholism, suicidal behaviors, and adjustment among youth.

The BDI has been extensively tested for reliability. Internal consistency has been estimated by over 25 studies among a number of populations. The BDI has been shown to be valid and reliable, with results corresponding to clinician ratings of depression in more than 90% of all cases.



#72 Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale
Introduction
Title:
Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale, Second Edition (BERS-2)
Author:
Epstein, H. M.
Date:
1998, 2004
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adults, Relationships Among Triad Members.
Standardized:
Yes.
Instrument Type(s):
Parent-child and observer report.
Uses of Information:
The BERS-2 is useful in evaluating children for pre-referral services, in placing children for specialized services, and in measuring the outcomes of services.
Environment:
Mental health clinics, juvenile justice settings, child welfare agencies, and State and Federal agencies.
Description:
The Behavior and Emotional Rating Scale is a 52-item scale that assesses children's emotional and behavioral strengths in five subscales. The fist subscale, Interpersonal Strengths, assesses a child's ability to control emotions or behavior in a social situation. The second subscale, Family Involvement, focuses on a child's participation and relationship with his or her family. The third subscale, Intrapersonal Strengths, assess a child's outlook on his or her competence and accomplishments. Subscale four, School Functioning, focuses on a child's competence in school and classroom tasks. The fifth subscale, Affective Strengths, addresses a child's ability to express feelings toward others and to accept affection from others.
References:
Walker & McConnell (1998)
Cost:
BERS-2 Introductory Kit listed price: $143.00-$168.00. The kit includes the BERS-2 Examiner's Manual, 25 Teacher Rating Scales, 25 Parent Rating Scales, 25 Youth Rating Scales and 50 Summary Forms.
Availability of Test Manual:
Yes. Demographics are reported in the manual. This includes age, gender, geographic location, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.
Contact Information:

Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. (PAR)
16204 N. Florida Avenue
Lutz, FL 33549
Phone: 800.331.8379, Fax: 800.727.9.29
http://www3.parinc.com/products/product.aspx?Productid=BERS-2#

Utility
Instructions:
Paper and pencil instrument.
Administrator:
Parents, teachers, counselors, and clinicians.
Qualification:
A degree from a 4-year accredited college or university in psychology, counseling, or a closely related field.
Training Required:
Yes. Completion of coursework in Test Interpretation, Psychometrics and Measurement Theory, Education Statistics, or a closely related area. License or certification from an agency that requires appropriate training and experience in the ethical and competent use of psychological tests.
Administration Time:
10 minutes.
Respondents:
Children ages 5 - 18 years.
Scales/Item Options:

There are three additional scales: The Youth Rating Scale, the Parenting Rating Scale, and the Teacher Rating Scale.

Respondents are asked to rate the child on each other the 52 items on a scale of 0 to 3 (0 = not at all like the child, 1 = not much like the child, 2 = like the child, 3 = very much like the child). Respondents are also asked to complete eight open-ended questions about the child (e.g., "What are the child's favorite hobbies or activities?", "Who is this child's favorite teacher?"). The open-ended questions address resiliency and protective factors and may be useful for planning purposes.

Scoring:
Hand scoring.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:

Test-retest reliability was excellent for all three forms:

  • Teacher Rating Scale Composite Strength Index (r = .99) with subscale rs ranging from .85-.99.
  • Parent Rating Scale Composite Strength Index (r = .87) with subscale rs ranging from .82-.92.
  • Youth Rating Scale Composite Strength Index (r = .91) with subscale rs ranging from .84-.91.

Content validity, criterion validity, and construct validity were all examined and provide evidence that the BERS-2 is a valid measure of behavioral and emotional strength in children.



#73 Child Behavior Checklist
Introduction
Title:
Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL)
Author:
Achenbach, T.A.
Date:
1991, 2001
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family.
Standardized:
Yes.
Instrument Type(s):
Parent survey.
Uses of Information:
The CBCL is a viable tool for assessing a child's behaviors.
Environment:
Parenting Skills, Child Development.
Description:
The Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) was designed to assess behavioral problems and social competencies of children as reported by parents. The CBCL can also be used to measure a child's change in behavior over time or post-treatment. Additional report forms (e.g., Teacher Report Forms, Youth Self-Reports, and Direct Observation Forms) are also available for the CBCL. Two versions of this instrument exist: one for children ages 1½ - 5 and another for ages 6-18. Information below pertains to the CBCL for 6-18 year olds.
References:
Achenbach (1991), Achenbach & Rescorla (2001), Achenbach (1991)
Cost:
Costs are subject to change. As of 2007, 50 sets of forms cost $25.00.See the catalog for more cost related information:

http://www.aseba.org/2008%20Catalog.pdf
Availability of Test Manual:
Yes.
Contact Information:

Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment
1 South Prospect Street,
Room 6436
Burlington, VT 05401-3456

Tel: 802.656.8313, Fax: 802.656.2608
Email: mail@ASEBA.org
Website: www.ASEBA.org
Utility
Instructions:
Paper and pencil instrument.
Administrator:
Self-administered by parents or administered by an interviewer.
Qualification:
Master's degree.
Training Required:
Not specified.
Requires familiarity with the instrument.
Administration Time:
15 minutes.
Respondents:
6 - 18 years old.
Scales/Item Options:
Three-point scale, ranging from "not true" to "often true".
Scoring:
Computer and manual scoring.
Languages:
English, Spanish, French.
Psychometric Properties:
The range of test-retest value: 0.95 to 1.00
The range of interrater reliability: 0.93 to 0.96
The range of internal consistency: 0.78 to 0.97

Criterion validity was assessed and found to be acceptable.



#74 Coping Scale for Children and Youth
Introduction
Title:
Coping Scale for Children and Youth
Author:
Brodzinsky, D. M.
Date:
1992
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adopted Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Administered self-assessment.
Uses of Information:
The Coping Scale for Children and Youth can be used with adopted children and youth to identify the coping behaviors used during a self-identified stressor or stressor described by the administrator. This information gives caregivers and professionals an understanding of the child's natural coping strategies and can be used to help guide the child to improved coping behavior.
Environment:
The child or youth should be in an atmosphere with little to no distractions so the child can fully relate the self-indicated stressor or described stressor to the questionnaire, and answer the questions to the best of his or her ability.
Description:
Based on previous research, 44 coping behaviors were identified and placed into the following coping strategies: assistance seeking, cognitive-behavioral problem-solving, cognitive avoidance, and behavioral avoidance.
Assistance seeking involves interpersonal problem-solving, such as getting advice or sharing feelings with another person. Cognitive-behavioral problem-solving includes both cognitive/affective and direct behavioral components, such as planning to solve the problem and then following the plan, and then thinking about the problem in a new way so as to minimize distress. Cognitive avoidance involves emotion management, cognitive redefinition, selective attention, and minimization of the problem. Examples include putting the problem out of one's mind and trying to pretend that the problem did not happen. Behavioral avoidance involves taking oneself out of the vicinity of the stressor or reducing tension indirectly, such as displacement of anger onto another person. Examples include staying away from people who remind you of the problem or being mean to someone even though they did not deserve it. The scale is administered to the child by a teacher or other qualified investigator. Based on a self-identified stressor or a stressor described by the administrator, the child rates the use of the 44 coping behaviors on a 4-point Likert scale.
References:
Brodzinsky, D. M., Elias M., Steiger, C., Simon, J., Gill, M., & Clarke Hitt, J. (1992). Coping scale for children and youth: Scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 13(2), 195-214.
Cost:
Free
Availability of Test Manual:
None available.
Contact Information:
David Brodzinsky, Ph.D
dbrodzinsky@adoptioninstitute.org
800.331.8378
Utility
Instructions:

An administrator reads the following (or similar) directions:

"All children and teenagers have some problems they find hard to deal with and that upset them or worry them. We are interested in finding out what you do when you try to deal with a hard problem. Think about some problem that has upset you or worried you in the past few months. It could be a problem with someone in your family, a problem with a friend, a school problem, or anything else."

Children think about a specific problem they can relate to. Then the directions continue:

"Briefly describe what the problem is in the space below. Listed below are some ways that children and teenagers try to deal with their problems. Please tell us how often each of these statements has been true for you when you tried to deal with the problem you described above."

There is also flexibility with this scale in that the administrator can identify a specific stressor for all of the respondents to relate to.

The administer reads each of the 44 items, and the children rate the frequency with which they use the particular coping behaviors to deal with the problem, or stressor, they identified. A 4-point Likert scale was used for the ratings: (0) never, (1) sometimes, (2) often, and (3) very often.

Administrator:
Either a teacher that had been trained by an investigator or an investigator would read the instructions to the children.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
Yes, training by a qualified instructor or investigator.
Administration Time:
Not specified.
Respondents:
Adopted children and youth.
Scales/Item Options:
A 4-point Likert scale is used for the children to evaluate the 44 coping behaviors, based on either a self-identified stressor or a stressor identified by the administrator.
Scoring:
Not specified.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
According to Brodzinsky, during the development of the instrument, "The scale was found to be reliable, both in terms of its internal structure and short-term test-retest reliability. Furthermore, the factor pattern was comparable across grade and sex." During the initial studies, the scale had only been used on middle-class children in the middle school age group; there had been no use of the scale on special or minority groups.


#75 ENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale
Introduction
Title:
ENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale
Author:
Olson, D. H.
Date:
1993
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
This is a 15–item scale with 10 items on marital satisfaction and 5 items on idealism.
Uses of Information:
The ENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale is a measure of marital satisfaction that covers 10 domains of couple relationships and includes a couple conventionalization subscale, which corrects for socially desirable responses.
Environment:
Not specified.
Description:
The ENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale is composed of two of the subscales of the full-length ENRICH Inventory. The Marital Satisfaction scale provides a universal measure of satisfaction by surveying 10 areas of a couple's marriage. These areas include the major categories in ENRICH: communication, conflict resolution, roles, financial concerns, leisure time, sexual relationship, parenting, family and friends, and religion (Fowers & Olson, 1993).
References:
Fowers, B. J. & Olson, D. H. (1993). ENRICH Marital Satisfaction Scale.
Journal of Family Psychology, 7(2), 176-185.
Cost:
$30
Availability of Test Manual:
Not specified.
Contact Information:
Life Innovations, Inc.
c/o FACES IV
P.O. Box 190
Minneapolis, MN 55440–0190
800.331.1661
Twin Cities Metro Area: 651.635.0511
Fax: 651.636.1668
cs@facesiv.com
www.facesiv.com

Utility
Instructions:

Not specified.

Administrator:
Not specified.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
Not specified.
Administration Time:
Not specified.
Respondents:
Married couples.
Scales/Item Options:
This is a 15-item scale with 10 items on satisfaction and 5 items on idealism.

The Marital Satisfaction scale provides a global measure of satisfaction by surveying 10 areas of a couple's marriage. These areas include: communication, conflict resolution, roles, financial concerns, leisure time, sexual relationship, parenting, family and friends, and religion.

The Idealistic Distortion scale measures the extent to which the respondent is being optimistic, realistic, or pessimistic. This scale can be a useful reference point in understanding the respondent's perceptual biases. When describing their relationships, premarital couples tend to be overly optimistic, unhappy couples tend to be overly pessimistic, and married couples tend to be more realistic.

The Marital Satisfaction Scale provides a scale for each partner. This score is derived by first scoring the Marital Satisfaction and Idealistic Distortion scales, then correcting the Marital Satisfaction score downward on the basis of the person's Idealistic Distortion score. The positive couple agreement score (PCA score) is the percentage of items on which both partners evaluate the marriage positively. Thus individual Enrich Marital Satisfaction scores include both the Marital Satisfaction and Idealistic Distortion items, and the couple score is a combination of both partners' Marital Satisfaction responses (Fowers and Olson, 1993). Complete scoring instructions are available in appendix B of the article included in the References section on p. 2.

Scoring:
Not specified
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
The Marital Satisfaction Scale appears to provide a psychometrically sound means of measuring marital satisfaction. The assessment of marital conventionalization available in the EMS Scale can aid in the recognition of overly positive evaluations of marriage or denial of problems. The scale also has a readily available couple consensus score.

Cronbach's alpha revealed an internal reliability of .86. Test-retest reliability was assessed with 115 individuals over a period of 4 weeks. The reliability coefficient over time was .86.

Item-total correlations were conducted to further assess the degree to which the items form a cohesive scale. The item-total correlations for the Marital Satisfaction Scale items are strong, ranging from .52 to .82 with a mean of .65 for men and .68 for women.

Because the Marital Satisfaction Scale is closely related to the complete ENRICH Inventory, it may provide additional clinical relevance and offer a useful alternative for researchers interested in studying marital satisfaction (Fowers & Olson, 1993).



#76 Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES)
Introduction
Title:
Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES)
Author:
Olson, D. H., Gorall, D. M., & Tiesel, J.W.
Date:
2004
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Self-report survey.
Uses of Information:
Evaluate communication styles, family interactions, and flexibility.
Environment:
Home, office, school, church.
Description:
FACES IV is a 42-item self-report questionnaire. It is intended to measure cohesion and flexibility.
References:
(Olson & Gorall, 2006)
http://www.facesiv.com/pdf/3.innovations.pdf
Cost:
$95.00 All inventories include scoring instructions and psychometrics.
Availability of Test Manual:
Not specified.
Contact Information:
Contact by mail or fax:
Life Innovations, Inc.
P.O. Box 190
Minneapolis, MN 55440
Tel: 651.635.0511 or 800.331.1661
www.facesiv.com
Utility
Instructions:
Paper and pencil, online.
Administrator:
Therapist, clergy, counselor.
Qualification:
Professional training degree (master's degree minimum) in psychology or similar area
Training Required:
No.
Administration Time:
15 minutes.
Respondents:
Adolescents and adults.
Scales/Item Options:

Six scales assess the dimensions of family cohesion and family flexibility from the Circumplex Model (http://www.facesiv.com/pdf/cplxfaces.pdf). These six scales include two balanced and four unbalanced scales. These scales have very good levels of reliability and validity. There are seven items in each scale, making a total of 42 items in FACES IV.

The scales include two balanced and four unbalanced scales: Balanced Cohesion and Balanced Flexibility; Disengaged and Enmeshed; Rigid and Chaotic, Family Communication Scale, Family Satisfaction Scale.
Some sample items include:

1. Family members are involved in each others lives.
5. There are strict consequences for breaking the rules in our family.
15. Family members feel closer to people outside the family than to other family members.
20. In solving problems, the children's suggestions are followed.
25. Family members like to spend some of their free time with each other.
30. There is no leadership in this family.
35. It is important to follow the rules in our family.

Scoring:
Hand-scored or online.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
These scales have very good levels of reliability and validity. Alpha reliability analysis of validation scales is included for comparison purposes. Reliabilities of the six FACES IV scales are as follows:

Disengaged=.87, Enmeshed=.77, Rigid=.83, Chaotic=.85, Balanced Cohesion=.89, Balanced Flexibility=.80. Alpha reliability analysis was also run for the validation scales and ranged from .91 to .93.



#77 FAMILY ENVIRONMENT SCALE (FOURTH EDITION)
Introduction
Title:
Family Environment Scale (Fourth Edition)
Author:
Moos, B. S., & Moos, R. H.
Date:
2002
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family
Standardized:
Yes
Instrument Type(s):

The pre-, post-, and repeated measure survey includes 90 items to measure 10 subscales.
The Family Environment Scale (FES) examines, through self-report on three separate forms, the social climate of a family in three ways:

  • Family members' perceptions of their family as it is (real)
  • Family members' perceptions of their family as it would be in a perfect situation (ideal)
  • Family members' perceptions of their family in new situations (expected)
Uses of Information:
The FES is appropriately used to facilitate family counseling and psychotherapy in clinical settings, to plan and monitor family change, as a teaching tool to train clinicians and program evaluators about family systems, and to evaluate intervention progress and outcomes.
Environment:
The FES may be used in clinical counseling settings, for home and family-based services, and for family support programs.
Description:

The FES is composed of 10 subscales measuring three underlying dimensions of the family environment:

  • Relationship:
    Cohesion – the degree of commitment, help, and support family members provide for one another
    Expressiveness – the extent to which family members are encouraged to express their feelings directly
    Conflict – the amount of openly expressed anger and conflict among family members
  • Personal Growth:
    Independence – the extent to which family members are assertive and self-sufficient and make their own decisions
    Achievement orientation – how much activities (such as school and work) are cast into an achievement-oriented or competitive framework
    Intellectual-cultural orientation – the level of interest in political, intellectual, and cultural activities Active-recreational orientation – the amount of participation in social and recreational activities
    Moral-religious emphasis – the emphasis on ethical and religious issues and values
  • System Maintenance:
    Organization – the degree of importance of clear organization and structure in planning family activities and responsibilities
    Control – how much set rules and procedures are used to run family life
References:

Moos, R., & Moos. B. (1983). Clinical applications of the Family Environment Scale. In E. Filsinger (Ed.), A sourcebook of marriage and family assessment (pp. 253-273). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Cost:

The copyrighted scale and forms may be purchased online or in paper copy by mail. The manual is $40.00, and a set that may be duplicated is $120.00. The cost of forms depends upon the number purchased.

Availability of Test Manual:

Yes. Contact Mindgarden (see below).

Contact Information:

Mindgarden
855 Oak Grove Avenue, Suite 215
Menlo Park, CA 94025
650.322.6300 (phone) 650.322.6398 (fax)
http://www.mindgarden.com/products/fescs.htm

Utility
Instructions:
The FES may be used upon intake diagnostically and for assessment of risk; periodically to monitor intervention progress; and before and after intervention for research and program evaluation.
Administrator:
The FES is composed of 10 subscales measuring three underlying dimensions of the family environment: Relationship, Personal Growth, and System Maintenance. To introduce the FES, the administrator reads the instructions aloud while the client follows along in the test booklet.  Respondents complete the FES by reading the reusable test booklet and scoring corresponding items on the test form. Administrators may clarify the meanings of words in test items, being careful not to influence the test-taker's response.
Qualification:

The FES should be administered and interpreted by trained psychologists, social workers, or education and medical personnel knowledgeable in family systems theory.

Before administering and interpreting the FES, one should be familiar with the FES Manual and with general assessment guidelines (such as providing a quiet, private, well-lit space) and how to provide support without influencing responses.

Training Required:
Before administering and interpreting the FES, one should be familiar with the FES Manual and with general assessment guidelines (such as providing a quiet, private, well-lit space) and how to provide support without influencing responses.
Administration Time:
No time estimate for administration is provided.
Respondents:
The FES is a self-report assessment for use by parents and adolescent children. A Children's Version of the FES, a 30-item pictorial adaptation for use with children between the ages of 5 and 11, is also available.
Scales/Item Options:

The three dimensions and 10 subscales are represented by 90 items in each of the Form Item test booklets (Real, Ideal, and Expected). Items are scored true/false.
Item examples:

  • "Family members often keep their feelings to themselves."
  • "We feel it is important to be the best at whatever you do."
  • "Family members have strict ideas about what is right and wrong."
Scoring:

Individual subscale scores and family mean scores may be converted to standard scores. Some investigators have used a multi-point rather than a two-point (true/false) format, but as much information is gained by using the two-point format, and it avoids problems stemming from personal response styles.  A Family Incongruence Score may also be calculated and used to describe the level of disagreement within a family.

Languages:
The FES is available in English and has also been adapted and translated into Arabic, Chinese, Danish, Dutch, French, Greek, Hebrew, Hindi, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Portuguese (Portugal) Spanish, and Swedish. Published manuals provide psychometric and normative information on the Dutch and Spanish translations.
Psychometric Properties:

A total of over 1,000 people in 285 families completed Form A in the normative sample. Some racial minority families were represented in the sample, but relative proportions were not reported. The FES Forms I (Ideal) and R (Real) were completed by 591 individuals from a varied group of families including both normal and distressed individuals. No separate norms are available for Form E (Expected). Internal consistency for Forms I and R range from .61 to .78 for the 10 subscales and are within acceptable ranges. Intercorrelations among subscales indicate that the subscales measure distinct though somewhat related aspects of family environments. Test-retest reliability was acceptable at 1-week, 2-month, and 4-month intervals.

The authors include in the FES manual an extensive literature review tied to careful interpretation of the FES subscales.


#78 The Family Inventory of Life Events and Changes (FILE)
Introduction
Title:
The Family Inventory of Life Events and Changes (FILE)
Author:
McCubbin, H. I., Patterson, J. M., & Wilson, L. R.
Date:
1983, 1991
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
71–item self-report measure.
Uses of Information:
The Family Inventory of Life Events and Changes (FILE) assesses changes in family structure-changes that family members consider stressful events. The focus of the FILE is on change, with items intended to reflect a change of sufficient magnitude to require some adjustment in the family's patterns of interactions (Fischer & Corcoran, 2007).
Environment:
This inventory is a self-report; respondents need an environment with little to no distractions and interruptions.
Description:
This scale assess the accumulation of normative and nonnormative life events and changes experienced by the family, such as parenting strains, marital strains, and illness. The respondent indicates whether or not his or her family has experienced each event.
References:
Berg-Cross, L. (2000). Basic concepts in family therapy: an introductory text. New York: The Haworth Press.

Fischer, J., & Corcoran, K. (2007). Measures for clinical practice and research: A sourcebook, vol. 1: Couples, families, and children. Oxford University Press.

McCubbin, H. I., & Thompson, A. I. (Eds.). (1991). Family assessment inventories for research and practice. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Cost:
Not specified.
Availability of Test Manual:
Not specified.
Contact Information:
University of Wisconsin
Family Stress Coping
Coping and Health Project
608.262.5070
Utility
Instructions:

Respondent is given a list of family life changes and decides if any of those changes have occurred with anyone within his/her family. Some conditions require the respondent to indicate if the changes occurred within or before the past 12 months. In the next set of questions (8 statements) the respondent is asked to measure his/her feelings on a 9-point scale.

Administrator:
This is a self-report instrument.
Qualification:
None specified.
Training Required:
None specified.
Administration Time:
Not specified.
Respondents:
This version is usually completed by the two partners, but there are both adolescent and adult versions.
Scales/Item Options:
There are 71-items grouped into 9 subscales. The 9 areas include: intrafamily strains, marital strains, pregnancy/childbearing strains, finance and business strains, work-family transitions, illness and family care strains, losses, transitions in and out of the family, and family legal violations. Respondents check a Y/N response for each item and also indicate the degree of stress on a 4-point scale from "no stress" to "high stress."
Scoring:
The FILE can be completed by one or both partners. Any item answered "yes" by one or both partners has a score of "1." The sum of the scores yields the subscale and total scores.

The scale can also be scored based on a weighted item method, in which the intensity of each change is noted and the sum of the weighted items is compared to a table of normative scores based on life stages in development of the family (Berg-Cross, 2000). This allows a clinician to see how each family member is coping or experiencing the same situation or problem.

Languages:
English and Spanish.
Psychometric Properties:
The FILE instrument has good internal consistency with total scale alphas that range from 0.79 to 0.82. The subscales have lower alphas. The FILE also has very good stability with a 4- to 5-week test-retest correlation of 0.80. The FILE has fairly good concurrent validity, with several significant correlations with scale of the Family Environment Scales. The FILE also has good known-groups validity, and can distinguish between families with chronically ill children who were high and low in family conflicts (Fischer and Corcoran, 2007).


#79 FAMILY NEEDS SCALE
Introduction
Title:
Family Needs Scale
Author:
Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Jenkins, V.
Date:
1986
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family
Standardized:
Yes
Instrument Type(s):
Parent self-report
Uses of Information:
The Family Needs Scale (FNS) measures a family's need for different kinds of resources and support. The scale includes 41 items organized into categories of needs. Discussions that center around the responses on the scale can help clarify concerns and help define the precise nature of the family's needs.
Environment:
Unspecified
Description:
Paper and pencil instrument, using a 41-item 5-point Likert scale
References:

Dunst (1985); Dunst (1986); Dunst, Trivette, & Deal (1988); Dunst, Trivette, & Deal (1994); Holroyd (1985)

Cost:

$15.00 for a 25-set license download

Availability of Test Manual:

Unspecified

Contact Information:

To order copies of the scale, visit: http://www.wbpress.com/index.php?main_page=product_book_info&products_id=235

Utility
Instructions:
The parent completes the tool in a center or home setting with staff available to answer questions. The parent rates each item according to how often they need assistance in that area.
Administrator:
Family members, caregivers of young children
Qualification:
Unspecified, self-administered by family members
Training Required:
No training requirement is specified by the developers. Some training support may be found in Supporting and Strengthening Families: Methods, Strategies, and Practices, published by Brookline Publishing.
Administration Time:
Parent can complete the scale in 10 minutes. The administrator can review the answers and interpret the scale, identifying places for concern, in under 10 minutes.
Respondents:
Family members or caregivers of young children
Scales/Item Options:

The scale consists of 41 items that the parent evaluates for sources of support (such as the immediate family, relatives, friends, and others in the family's social network, social organizations, and specialized and generic professional services). In addition, the scale provides two open items for parents to assess other sources of support. The parent rates each item on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from Almost never [1] to Almost always [5]
Items include the following:
To what extent do you feel the need for any of the following types of help or assistance:

  • Having money to buy necessities and pay bills
  • Budgeting money
  • Paying for special needs of my child
  • Saving money for the future
Scoring:

After the parent has completed the scale, the administrator manually calculates overall scores for five domains: Basic Resources, Specialized Care, Growth & Support, Financial, Future Concerns.

Languages:
English
Psychometric Properties:

Reliability and Validity: Coefficient alpha computed from the average correlation among the 41 items was .95. The total scale score, reflecting overall adequacy of resources, was significantly related to well-being, decision-making, and internal locus of control. Details of the psychometric properties are available with purchase of the scale.



#80 FAMILY RESOURCE SCALE
Introduction
Title:
Family Resource Scale
Author:
Dunst, C. J., & Leet, H. E.
Date:
1986
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family
Standardized:
Yes
Instrument Type(s):
Paper and pencil instrument, using a 30-item 5-point Likert scale
Uses of Information:
The Family Resource Scale helps identify appropriate resources needed by individual families. An overall index of family resources can be derived, and the scale identifies areas that may be targeted for services. The lack of resources may pose barriers to the family's involvement in their child's program, as families with unmet basic needs may not have time or energy to participate actively in the child's program. The Family Resource Scale may be used as an initial preservice assessment for identifying unmet needs and as a pre- to posttest tool for measuring program outcomes.
Environment:
Family resource center, home
Description:
This scale determines the extent to which different types of resources are adequate in the households of young children.
References:

Dunst (1986a); Dunst (1986b); Dunst, Trivette, & Deal (1988); Dunst, Trivette, & Deal (1994)

Cost:

$15.00 for a 25-set license download

Availability of Test Manual:

Unspecified

Contact Information:

To order copies of the scale, visit: http://tinyurl.com/familyresource

Utility
Instructions:
The parent completes the tool in a center or home setting with staff available to answer questions. The parent (or family member) marks the extent to which each of the resources is adequate for his/her family by selecting one of the following responses: Does Not Apply, Not at All Adequate, Seldom Adequate, Sometimes Adequate, Usually Adequate, and Almost Always Adequate. Those items rated Not at All Adequate or Seldom Adequate may be evidence that these needs are not being met.
Administrator:
Family Resource Center staff
Qualification:
Unspecified
Training Required:
No training requirement is specified by the developers. Some training support may be found in Supporting and Strengthening Families: Methods, Strategies, and Practices, published by Brookline Publishing.
Administration Time:
Parent (or other family member) can complete the scale in 10 minutes. A program administrator can review the answers and interpret the scale, in under 10 minutes
Respondents:
Parent self-report or report by other family member
Scales/Item Options:

The 30-item self-report Family Resource Scale measures the adequacy of a family's tangible and intangible resources using a 5-point scale, ranging from (1) Not at All Adequate to (5) Almost always adequate. The scale covers such resources as food, shelter, financial resources, transportation, health care, time to be with family, child care, and time for self. The resources are generally organized from the most to the least essential. A modified version of the scale for teenage mothers is available.
Items include the following:
To what extent are the following resources adequate for your family?

  • Food for 2 meals a day
  • House or apartment
Scoring:

After the parent or other family member has completed the scale, the administrator manually calculates overall scores for six domains: Growth and Support, Necessities and Health, Physical Necessities and Shelter, Intra Family Support, Child Care, and Personal Resources.

Languages:
English and Spanish
Psychometric Properties:

Reliability: The research sample consisted of 45 mothers of preschool-age retarded, handicapped, and developmentally at-risk children participating in an early intervention program. (1) Internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha) was .92; split-half reliability (using the Spearman-Brown formula) was .95; (2) Test-retest reliability (2 to 3 month interval) was .52.

Validity: (1) Concurrent validity: Both the personal well-being (Dunst 1986a) and maternal commitment (Dunst 1986b) measures were significantly related to the total scale score (.57 and .63, respectively). Details of the psychometric properties are available with purchase of the scale.


#81 Family Crisis Oriented Personal Scales (FCOPES)
Introduction
Title:
Family Crisis Oriented Personal Scales (FCOPES)
Author:
McCubbin H.I., Olson D.H., & Larsen, A.S.
Date:
1991
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family; Adoptive Youth and Adults, Relationships Among Triad Members.
Standardized:
Yes.
Instrument Type(s):
Self-administered survey.
Uses of Information:
To identify problem solving and behavioral strategies used by families when faced with problems or crises. Can be used to as a pre-post test to measure change over time.
Environment:
Any setting that is free of distractions.
Description:
This scale has 30 items that describe a variety of coping behaviors that individuals may use in times of stress or crisis. The respondent rates the items on a 1–5 scale with 1, "Strongly disagree", and 5, "Strongly Agree".
References:
Family crisis orientated personal evaluation scales [F COPES] (1987, 1991). McCubbin HI; Olson DH; Larsen AS. Corcoran K & Fischer J (2000). Measures for clinical practice: A sourcebook. 3rd Ed. (2 vols.) NY, Free Pr. V. 1, Pg. 294-297
Cost:
$5.00 This is a one-time copyright fee.
Availability of Test Manual:
Not specified.
Contact Information:
To obtain permission to use the scales, contact:

Family Stress Coping and Health Project
1300 Linden Drive
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Madison, WI 53706
608.262.5070

Utility
Instructions:
Respondents rate to what degree they agree or disagree with each of 30 coping behaviors.
Administrator:
Self-administered.
Qualification:
N/A.
Training Required:
N/A.
Administration Time:
10-15 minutes.
Respondents:
Family members.
Scales/Item Options:
5-point scale that measure 5 factors.

Items include:

  1. Sharing our difficulties with relatives.
  2. Seeking encouragement and support from friends.
  3. Knowing we have the power to solve major problems.

Scoring:
Scores are added up for a total Score in each of the following factor-areas:
  1. Acquiring social support.
  2. Reframing.
  3. Seeking Spiritual Support.
  4. Mobilizing to acquire and accept help.
  5. Passive appraisal.
Some items are reverse scored.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
Overall reliability of the F-COPES using Cronbach's Alpha has been estimated as ranging from .77-.86. Individual subscales had alpha's ranging from .63- .83. Overall test-retest reliability is .81 with individual scales ranging from .61-.95


#82 Index of Family Relations
Introduction
Title:
Index of Family Relations
Author:
Hudson, W.W.
Date:
1994
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adult, Relationships Among Triad Members.
Standardized:
Yes.
Instrument Type(s):
The Index of Family Relations (IFR) assesses the severity or magnitude of client problems of personal and social functioning in the area of family adjustment. The IFR characterizes the severity of family relationship problems in a global manner and can be regarded as a measure of intra-familial stress.

The IFR is a short-form, 25-item self-report questionnaire that is administered to individual adults and young adults, 12 years-of-age and older who are literate and have no severe cognitive impairment.

Uses of Information:
The IFR is used at intake for screening, initial problem assessment and service or treatment planning, and at intervals during intervention to monitor progress and for program evaluation.
Environment:
The IFR may be used in individual and family-focused clinical settings and intervention programs.
Description:
The IFR was designed to measure the degree, severity or magnitude of a problem that family members have in their relationships with one another as felt or perceived by the person completing the scale. The IFR is appropriately used as a measure of the client's family environment, and it may be used to help the client deal with problems in relating to the family as a whole. The reading level for the IFR is grade 5 or higher.
References:

Bentley, K.J., & Harrison, D.F. (1990). Behavioral, psychoeducational, and skills training approaches to family management of schizophrenia. In B.A. Thyer (Ed.), Behavioral Family Therapy. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 147-168.

Grief, G.L., & DeMarris, A. (Summers, 1989). Single custodial fathers in contested custody suits. Psychiatry and Law, 223-238.

Hamilton, M.A., & Orme, J.G. (1990). Examining the construct validity of three parenting knowledge measures using LISREL. Social Service Review, 64(1), 121-143.

Hudson, W.W., Acklin, J.D. (1980). Assessing discord in family relationships. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 16(3). 21-29.

Cost:
  • IFR Scale (1 pad of 50 copies) $22.50
  • Walmyr Assessment Scoring Manual $20.00
Availability of Test Manual:
Yes. Contact WALMYR. .
Contact Information:
WALMYR Publishing Company
PO Box 12217
Tallahassee, FL 32317-2217
850.383.0045 (phone)
850.383.0970 (fax)
http://www.walmyr.com/index.html
Utility
Instructions:
It is suggested that clinicians explain to the client why they are asking the client to complete the IFR and how they are going to use the information.
Administrator:
The client responds to all items on the test form by selecting one response from a 7-point scale ranging from None of the time to All of the time.
Qualification:
The clinician using the scale should have professional training and clinical experience related to adult and child psychology and social and emotional development and functioning, and should be knowledgeable about family systems.
Training Required:
No specific training is required for administrators other than familiarity with the content of the IFR, the scoring form and the scoring procedures. The author recommends that test administrators take the IFR themselves before administering it to others.
Administration Time:
There is no specific time limit for administration. The author reports that administration is rapid.
Respondents:
The IFR is a self-report, paper-and-pencil instrument.
Scales/Item Options:
The IFR scale has 25 items. Four item examples from the IFR are presented below:
  • "I can really depend on my family."
  • "Members of my family argue too much."
  • "Other families seem to get along better than ours."
  • "I feel left out of my family."
Scoring:
The IFR produces a score ranging from 0 to 100 where a low score indicates the relative absence of the problem being measured, and a higher score indicates the presence of a more severe problem. The cutting score of 30 is the score at which clients may have a clinically significant problem. Scores above 70 may indicate severe stress or the possibility of violence. IFR scores should always be considered in relation to all other client data and information.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
The reliability alpha is .95 indicating that the scale is internally consistent and that alternative forms should yield consistent results. The Standard Error of Measurement is 3.65 indicating that the IFR is a relatively accurate measure.


#83 Interactional Competence Scale
Introduction
Title:
Interactional Competence Scale
Author:
Beavers, W. R. & Hampson, R. B.
Date:
1990
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Beavers Interactional Competence Scale is a 12-item structured rating scale designed to assess a family's overall level of health/competence (Beavers & Hampson, 1990).
Uses of Information:
A structured observational scale designed to assess centripetal (CP) and centrifugal (CF) family style on the basis of observed behavior (Hampson, Prince, & Beavers, 1999).
Environment:
Not specified.
Description:
The Beavers Interactional Competence Scale is designed to assess a family's overall level of health and competence. Trained raters observe an episode of family interaction in which family members discuss for ten minutes the following question: What would you like to see changed in your family? The Interactional Competence Scale is made up of subscales, with concrete descriptions of what types of families should be given particular ratings (Beavers and Hampson, 1990).
References:
Baucom, D. H., & Hoffman, J. A. (1986). The effectiveness of marital therapy: Current status and application to the clinical setting. In N. S. Jacobson & A. S. Gurman (Eds.), Clinical handbook of marital therapy(pp. 597-620). New York, NY: Guilford.

Beavers, W. R. (1985). Successful marriage: A family systems approach to marital therapy. New York, NY: Norton.

Beavers, R., & Hampson R. (2000, May). The Beavers systems model of family functioning. Journal of Family Therapy [serial online].22(2):128. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from SocINDEX with full text, Ipswich, MA.

Beavers W., & Hampson R. (1990). Successful families: Assessment and intervention[e-book]. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Co. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from PsycINFO, Ipswich, MA.

Epstein, N., Bishop D., Ryan C., Miller I., & Keitner G. (1993). The McMaster model: View of healthy family functioning. Normal family processes (2nd ed.) [e-book], pp. 138?160. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Retrieved December 1, 2008, from PsycINFO, Ipswich, MA.

Hampson, R., Prince, C., & Beavers, R. (1999, October). Marital therapy: Qualities of couples who fare better or worse in treatment. Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3658/is_199910/ai_n8871372/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1

Lewis, J., Beavers, W., Gossett, J., & Phillips, V. (1976). No single thread: Psychological health in family systems. Brunner/Mazel, Oxford, England. Retrieved December 1, 2008, from PsycINFO database.
Cost:
Not specified.
Availability of Test Manual:
Not specified.
Contact Information:
Robert Beavers, Executive Director
Robert Beavers Family Studies Center
Dedman College
Southern Methodist University
P.O. Box 750442
Dallas, TX 75275-0442
Utility
Instructions:
Trained observers rate the family after their discussion task. During the task, the therapist presents the assignment: "Discuss together what you would like to see changed in your family," and then leaves them alone for 10 minutes.
Administrator:
The family is rated by their therapist and trained observers of the family's interaction.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
Not specified.
Administration Time:
10 minutes.
Respondents:
Family members.
Scales/Item Options:
The competence scale is composed of the following 13 subscales:

Structure of the family:

  1. Overt power (from chaotic to egalitarian)
  2. Parental coalitions (from parent-child coalition to strong parental coalition)
  3. Closeness (from indistinct boundaries to distinct boundaries)
  4. Mythology (from congruent to incongruent)
  5. Goal-directed negotiation (from extremely efficient to extremely inefficient)

Autonomy:

  1. Clarity of expression (from very clear to unclear)
  2. Responsibility (from regular to rare acceptance of responsibility for actions)
  3. Permeability (from very open to unreceptive)

Family affect:

  1. Range of feelings (from a wide range of direct expression to little expression)
  2. Mood and tone (from warm and optimistic to cynical and pessimistic)
  3. Unresolvable conflict (from severe unresolved conflict to none)
  4. Empathy (from consistent empathy to none)
  5. Global health pathology (from pathological to healthy)
Scoring:
Not specified.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
The validity of the competence scale has been verified by a number of clinical and empirical demonstrations. The original Timberlawn study found that the Competence Scale successfully discriminated families with hospitalized adolescents from nonclinical families, with significant differences on the Global Competence and subscales. The Competence Scale also showed a high degree of construct validity with self-report versions of the Beavers Model (the SFI: R = .62) and with those from the McMaster Model (Beavers & Hampson, 2000).


#84 Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment
Introduction
Title:
Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA)
Author:
Armsden, G. C. & Greenberg, M. T.
Date:
1987
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adults.
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Questionnaire.
Uses of Information:
The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA) is designed to assess adolescents' perceptions of the positive and negative affective/cognitive dimension of relationships with their parents and close friends and how well these figures serve as sources of psychological security.
Environment:
The respondent should be in an environment where he/she can focus with little to no distractions to provide the most accurate assessment of their relationships.
Description:
The IPPA was developed in order to assess adolescents’ perceptions of the positive and negative affective/cognitive dimension of relationships with their parents and close friends–particularly how well these figures serve as sources of psychological security. The theoretical framework is attachment theory, originally formulated by Bowlby and recently expanded by others. Three broad dimensions are assessed: degree of mutual trust, quality of communication, and extent of anger and alienation.
References:

Armsden, G. (1986). Attachment to parents and peers in late adolescence: Relationships to affective status, self-esteem, and coping with loss, threat and challenges. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Washington, 1986). Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(4), October, 1986. Available on microfilm.

Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment: Relationships to well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16(5), 427-454.

Armsden, G. C., McCauley, E., Greenberg, M. T., Burke, P., & Mitchell, J. (1991). Parent and peer attachment in early adolescence depression. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 18, 683-692.

Greenberg, M. T., Siegal, J., & Leitch, C. (1984). The nature and importance of attachment relationships to parents and peers during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 12(5), 373-386.

Lewis, F. M., Woods, N. F., & Ellison, E. (1987). Family impact study. Unpublished report. University of Washington, R01-NUO1000, Division of Nursing, Public Health Service.

Redondo, L. M., Martin, A. L., Fernandez, J. S., & Lopez, J. M. (1986). An examination of the relationship between family environment and juvenile delinquency. Unpublished manuscript. University of Santiago, Chile.

Cost:
Not specified.
Availability of Test Manual:
Email library@ets.org or call call 609.734.5689
Order online at http://store.digitalriver.com/store/ets/DisplayProductDetailsPage/productID.39401700
Contact Information:
Dr. Mark Greenbery, PhD
Professor
Human Development
Penn State University
State College, PA 16802

Gay Armsden, PhD
Research Consultant
230 Ilihau St
Kailua, HI 96734
814.863.0112
Email armsden@seanet.com

Utility
Instructions:
Respondents are given the questionnaire that inquires about relationships with important people in their life; their mother, their father, and their close friends. The questionnaire is self-administered, so instructions are provided for the questionnaire. The instructions for Part I, II, and III are very similar, adjusting for what relationship the questions focus on.

"Part I. Some of the following statements ask about your feelings about your mother or the person who has acted as your mother. If you have more than one person acting as your mother (e.g., a natural mother and a stepmother), answer the questions for the one you feel has most influence you. Please read each statement and circle ONE number that tells how true the statement is for you now."

Administrator:
Not specified.
Qualification:
None.
Training Required:
None.
Administration Time:
30-60 minutes.
Respondents:
Adolescents from 12 to 20 years old.
Scales/Item Options:
Responses are given on a 5-point Likert scale, with responses including Almost Never or Never True, Not Very Often True, Sometimes True, Often True, and Almost Always or Always True. The original version has 28 parent items and 25 peer items. A revised version, available through NAPS-3, contains 25 items in each of the mother, father, and peer sections.
Scoring:
The original IPPA has three Parent and Peer subscales. Subscale scores are computed by summing the item responses. Responses to negatively worded items must be reverse-scored before calculations.

The subscales for parent and peer include trust, communication, and alienation.

Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
It was concluded that the IPPA-R constitutes a useful tool for the assessment of both parent and peer attachment in youth aged between 9 and 15 years.

Armsden and Greenberg (1987) found significant intercorrelations between all subscales. Specifically, Trust and Communication were found to be positively correlated (r = 0.76 for each of the parent and peer scales). In contrast, the Alienation subscale was inversely correlated with each of the Communication (r = -0.70 for parents and r = -0.40 for peers) and Trust (r = -0.76 for parents and r = -0.46 for peers) subscales.



#85 Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors
Introduction
Title:
Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors (ISSB)
Author:
Barerra, M.J., Sandler, I.N., & Ramsay, T.B.
Date:
1981
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adult.
Standardized:
Yes.
Instrument Type(s):
Self-administered questionnaire.
Uses of Information:
The scale is used for measuring the extent of social support systems the resondent has experienced in the last 4 weeks.
Environment:
As the tool is self-administered, it can be done in a variety of environments provided the respondent is relatively free of distractions.
Description:
This scale has 40 items that examine both emotional support and tangible support. Emotional support is the extent to which the respondent perceives that others give him/her care and love. Tangible support is the extent that others assist an individual in providing or helping obtain concrete materials/supplies needed for daily living.
References:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t48258520k2hw337/

Barrera, M., Sandler, I., & Ramsay, T. (1981). Preliminary development of a scale of social support: Studies on college students. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 435-441.

Barrera, M.J. & Ainlay, S. L. (1983). The structure of social support: A conceptual and empirical analysis. Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 133-143

Cost:
This scale is in the public domain. No cost.
Availability of Test Manual:
Information unavailable.
Contact Information:
A copy of the scale and scoring instructions can be examined and copied on the following web-page:
http://chipts.ucla.edu/assessment/Assessment_Instruments/Assessment_files_new/assess_issb.htm

Utility
Instructions:
To score, add up the ratings (some items are reverse rated). Divide the total number of points by the number of items answered. The higher the score, the greater the social support.
Administrator:
Clinician, home visitor, parent educator.
Qualification:
None specified.
Training Required:
None specified.
Administration Time:
Approximately 10-15 minutes.
Respondents:
Adults and adolescents. The questionnaire is self-administered.
Scales/Item Options:
1 – 5 scale
Examples of items:
  1. Looked after a family member when you were away.
  2. Was right there with you (physically) in a stressful situation.
  3. Provided you with a place where you could get away for awhile.
  4. Watched after your possessions when you were away (pets, plants, home, apartment, etc.).
  5. Told you what she/he did in a situation that was similar to yours.
  6. Did some activity together to help you get your mind off of things
  7. Talked with you about some interests of yours.
  8. Let you know that you did something well.
Scoring:
The respondent rates the frequency of events by rating them as occurring:
  1. Not at all
  2. Once or twice
  3. About once a week
  4. Several times a week
  5. About every day
Languages:
Spanish, French, English.
Psychometric Properties:
Several Studies in the reliability of the ISSB have found total reliabilities over .9. Internal consistency: Cronbach alpha = 0.926 to 0.94 on Test-retest reliabilities have varied from .63 to .88 depending on the length of the time between tests.


#86 KidCope for Younger Children
Introduction
Title:
KidCope for Younger Children
Author:
Spirito, A., Stark, L., & Williams, C.
Date:
1987
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adopted Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Checklist.
Uses of Information:
Measures children's coping mechanisms.
Environment:
Not specified.
Description:
The KidCope checklist is suitable for use by clinicians and researchers as part of an individual or group assessment. "KidCope for younger children" has been used with children as young as 5 years of age (U. Pretzlik and P. Hindley, European Conference on Developmental Psychology, Germany, 1993). It has been shown to be a reliable and valid instrument. KidCope's uniqueness is that it was designed for pediatric patients and is based on a theoretical framework. KidCope invites children to report a personal problem (the stressor) within a specific situation (the setting), and then to describe their efforts at coping with that problem (coping strategies). (Pretzlik & Sylva, 1999)
References:
Spirito, A., Stark, L., & Williams, C. (1988). Development of a brief coping checklist for use with pediatric populations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 13(4):555-574 [Abstract/Free Full Text].

Band, E. B. (1990). Children's coping with diabetes: understanding the role of cognitive development. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 15:27-41 [Abstract/Free Full Text].

Lazarus, R. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.

Sylva, K., & Stevenson, J. (1998). KidCope. Social behaviour and competence in childhood. In: Sclare, I., Ed. Child psychology portfolio. Health and social care. Windsor, Berkshire: NFER Nelson Publishing Company.

Spirito, A., Stark, L., Grace, N., & Stamoulis, D. (1991). Common problems and coping strategies reported in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20:531-544.

Pretzlik, U. (1997). Children coping with a serious illness: a study exploring distress and coping in children with leukaemia or aplastic anaemia. Amsterdam: SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut University of Amsterdam.

Pretzlik, U., & Sylva, K. (1999). Paediatric patients' distress and coping during medical treatment: a self report measure. Diseases in Childhood, 81: 525-527.
Cost:
Not specified
Availability of Test Manual:
Copies of the KidCope can be obtained from Anthony Spirito.
Contact Information:
Anthony Spirito, Child & Family Psychiatry
Rhode Island Hospital/Brown University Program in Medicine
593 Eddy Street
Providence, RI 02903
Utility
Instructions:

There are two ways to complete the KidCope checklist. The clinician can present the child with a stressor—for example: "Can you remember when you had a blood test?"—or the child will be asked to choose a personal stressor recently encountered. In the second instance, the process of completing KidCope will require a child to identify and describe his or her "personal" stressor. The child's choice will be constrained by the interviewer who might ask him or her to recall a problem "during inpatient treatment" or "a visit to the outpatient department." Thus, in the first method the choice of the stressor is made by the interviewer, and in the second method the choice is made by the patient. The child describes the stressor and, while focusing on it, completes the set of questions during a one-on-one interview.

The checklist has four parts: the stressor within a setting, the distress felt by the child in relation to that stressor, the child's way of coping with the stressor, and the helpfulness of that coping strategy. It can be repeated across settings and/or over time. (Pretzlik & Sylva, 1999)

THE COPING MEASUREMENT

The child rates each of the statements according to whether or not he or she used this particular coping strategy. The 10 coping strategies are measured via a simple "yes" or "no" to 15 statements. After replying that he or she did/did not use a coping strategy, the child is asked how helpful he or she perceived it to be. On a graded green strip the child points to: not at all (1), a little (2), or a lot (3).

A child may cope in one way with a specific medical procedure, for example, getting a parent to hold a hand during the blood test, but might have an alternative way of coping when told that his or her medical condition is deteriorating—for example, by withdrawing from the parent. (Pretzlik & Sylva, 1999)

Administrator:
Not specified.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
Not specified.
Administration Time:
Not specified.
Respondents:
Young children ages 5–13 .
Scales/Item Options:
The ten coping categories were conceptualized as problem-solving, distraction, social support, social withdrawal, cognitive restructuring, self-criticism, blaming others, emotional regulation, wishful thinking, and resignation. For the stressor selected, two questions were posed tapping the frequency with which the respondent used each of the 10 coping strategies and the efficacy of each. A four-point (not at all, sometimes, a lot, and almost all the time) and a five-point (not at all, a little, somewhat, pretty much, very much) Likert–type format were employed to examine frequency and efficacy, respectively.
Scoring:
Not specified.
Languages:
Not specified.
Psychometric Properties:
Preliminary psychometric investigations conducted with healthy adolescents demonstrated adequate reliability at 3-day, 7-day, 14-day, and 10-week intervals and concurrent validity with previously established measures of coping. (Spirito, Stark, & Williams, 1988)

This checklist, the KidCope2, was shown to have advantages over the previous scale: It was briefer than the 13-item scale, was more clinically relevant, covered a broader range of coping strategies, and its concepts were clearer. Although these qualities are commendable, the psychometric properties of such a checklist are more problematic. In particular, with only one item tapping each coping strategy, demonstrating reliability of each strategy is difficult. One reason for developing longer coping scales with a number of items for each coping category is to establish adequate test-retest reliability. Because coping is a process that changes over time and according to situational demands, high correlation coefficients on a test-retest format may not be the most appropriate indicator of the soundness of a coping checklist. (Moos & Billings, 1982; Stone & Neale, 1984)



#87 KidCope for Older Children
Introduction
Title:
KidCope for Older Children
Author:
Spirito, A., Stark, L., & Williams, C.
Date:
1987
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family, Adopted Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Checklist.
Uses of Information:
Measures children's coping mechanisms.
Environment:
Not specified.
Description:
The KidCope checklist is suitable for use by clinicians and researchers as part of an individual or group assessment. "KidCope for older children" has been used with age groups from 13 to 16 years. It has been shown to be a reliable and valid instrument. KidCope's uniqueness is that it was designed for pediatric patients and is based on a theoretical framework. KidCope invites children to report a personal problem (the stressor) within a specific situation (the setting), and then to describe their efforts at coping with that problem (coping strategies). (Pretzlik & Sylva, 1999)
References:
Spirito, A., Stark, L., & Williams, C. (1988). Development of a brief coping checklist for use with pediatric populations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 13(4):555-574 [Abstract/Free Full Text].

Band, E. B. (1990). Children's coping with diabetes: understanding the role of cognitive development. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 15:27-41 [Abstract/Free Full Text].

Lazarus, R. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.

Sylva, K., & Stevenson, J. (1998). KidCope. Social behaviour and competence in childhood. In: Sclare, I., Ed. Child psychology portfolio. Health and social care. Windsor, Berkshire: NFER Nelson Publishing Company.

Spirito, A., Stark, L., Grace, N., & Stamoulis, D. (1991). Common problems and coping strategies reported in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20:531-544.

Pretzlik, U. (1997). Children coping with a serious illness: a study exploring distress and coping in children with leukaemia or aplastic anaemia. Amsterdam: SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut University of Amsterdam.

Pretzlik, U., & Sylva, K. (1999). Paediatric patients' distress and coping during medical treatment: a self report measure. Diseases in Childhood, 81: 525-527.
Cost:
Not specified
Availability of Test Manual:
Copies of the KidCope can be obtained from Anthony Spirito.
Contact Information:
Anthony Spirito, Child & Family Psychiatry
Rhode Island Hospital/Brown University Program in Medicine
593 Eddy Street
Providence, RI 02903
Utility
Instructions:

There are two ways to complete the KidCope checklist. The clinician can present the child with a stressor—for example: "Can you remember when you had a blood test?"—or the child will be asked to choose a personal stressor recently encountered. In the second instance, the process of completing KidCope will require a child to identify and describe his or her "personal" stressor. The child's choice will be constrained by the interviewer who might ask him or her to recall a problem "during inpatient treatment" or "a visit to the outpatient department." Thus, in the first method the choice of the stressor is made by the interviewer, and in the second method the choice is made by the patient. The child describes the stressor and, while focusing on it, completes the set of questions during a one-on-one interview.

The checklist has four parts: the stressor within a setting, the distress felt by the child in relation to that stressor, the child's way of coping with the stressor, and the helpfulness of that coping strategy. It can be repeated across settings and/or over time. (Pretzlik & Sylva, 1999)

THE COPING MEASUREMENT

The child rates each of the statements according to whether or not he or she used this particular coping strategy. The 10 coping strategies are measured via a simple "yes" or "no" to 15 statements. After replying that he or she did/did not use a coping strategy, the child is asked how helpful he or she perceived it to be. On a graded green strip the child points to: not at all (1), a little (2), or a lot (3).

A child may cope in one way with a specific medical procedure, for example, getting a parent to hold a hand during the blood test, but might have an alternative way of coping when told that his or her medical condition is deteriorating—for example, by withdrawing from the parent. (Pretzlik & Sylva, 1999)

Administrator:
Not specified.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
Not specified.
Administration Time:
Not specified.
Respondents:
Ages 13–16.
Scales/Item Options:
The ten coping categories were conceptualized as problem-solving, distraction, social support, social withdrawal, cognitive restructuring, self-criticism, blaming others, emotional regulation, wishful thinking, and resignation. For the stressor selected, two questions were posed tapping the frequency with which the respondent used each of the 10 coping strategies and the efficacy of each. A four-point (not at all, sometimes, a lot, and almost all the time) and a five-point (not at all, a little, somewhat, pretty much, very much) Likert–type format were employed to examine frequency and efficacy, respectively.
Scoring:
Not specified.
Languages:
Not specified.
Psychometric Properties:
Preliminary psychometric investigations conducted with healthy adolescents demonstrated adequate reliability at 3-day, 7-day, 14-day, and 10-week intervals and concurrent validity with previously established measures of coping. (Spirito, Stark, & Williams, 1988)

This checklist, the KidCope2, was shown to have advantages over the previous scale: It was briefer than the 13-item scale, was more clinically relevant, covered a broader range of coping strategies, and its concepts were clearer. Although these qualities are commendable, the psychometric properties of such a checklist are more problematic. In particular, with only one item tapping each coping strategy, demonstrating reliability of each strategy is difficult. One reason for developing longer coping scales with a number of items for each coping category is to establish adequate test-retest reliability. Because coping is a process that changes over time and according to situational demands, high correlation coefficients on a test-retest format may not be the most appropriate indicator of the soundness of a coping checklist. (Moos & Billings, 1982; Stone & Neale, 1984)



#88 Parent Child Relationship Inventory
Introduction
Title:
Parent Child Relationship Inventory (PCRI)
Author:
Gerard, A.B.
Date:
April, 2005
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family, Relationships Among Triad Members
Standardized:
Yes.
Instrument Type(s):
The Parent-Child Relationship Inventory (PCRI) is a 78-item, self-report questionnaire that can be administered to either an individual or a group.
Uses of Information:
The PCRI is designed to be used in clinical evaluations of children and families in combination with qualitative evaluation and clinical judgment by making normative comparisons possible. The PCRI should never be used in isolation as the sole basis for clinical diagnoses, treatment decisions, or custody recommendations.
Environment:
The PCRI may be used in clinical and research settings.
Description:
The PCRI is comprised of seven content scales that explore a specific aspect of the parent-child relationship:
  1. The Parental Support scale consists of 9 items that assess the level of emotional and social support a parent receives.
  2. The Satisfaction with Parenting scale consists of 10 items measuring the amount of pleasure and fulfillment an individual derives from being a parent.
  3. The Involvement scale contains 14 items measuring the level of a parent's interaction with and knowledge of his or her child.
  4. The Communication scale consists of 9 items that assess a parent's perception of how effectively he or she communicates with a child.
  5. The Limit Settings scale contains 12 items that focus on a parent's experience disciplining a child.
  6. The Autonomy scale assesses the ability of a parent to promote a child's independence.
  7. The Role Orientation scale is comprised of 9 items and examines parents' attitudes about gender roles in parenting.
References:
Impara, J. C., & Plake, B. S. (Eds.). (1998). The thirteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
Cost:
  • KIT: 25 AutoScore Answer Sheets and Manual $99.00
  • AUTOSCORE ANSWER SHEET (Pkgs. of 25) $47.00
  • SPANISH TEST FORM (Pkgs. of 5) $17.00
  • MANUAL $58.00
  • CONTINUING EDUCATION (CE) QUESTION-NAIRE AND EVALUATION FORM $20.00
  • PCRI MAIL-IN ANSWER SHEET. $17.50
  • PCRI CD. PC with Windows 98, ME, XP, or 2000. $356.50
PCRI PC ANSWER SHEET. For use with the PCRI CD. Pads of 100.
$16.50
Availability of Test Manual:
Yes. Contact developer to order manual.
Contact Information:
Western Psychological Services
12031 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90025-1251
Phone: 800.648.8857
FAX: 310.478.7838
http://portal.wpspublish.com/

Utility
Instructions:
It is suggested that clinicians explain to parents how they intend to use the information from the PCRI in their evaluation. Parents may be asked to respond to the PCRI based on their relationship with only one of their children when appropriate.
Administrator:
The client responds to all 78 items on a 4-point scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree.
Qualification:
The clinician using the scale should have clinical experience and sensitivity and a thorough knowledge of the research on parent-child interactions. The PCRI is designed for use by individuals with a background in psychological assessment.
Training Required:
No specific training is required for administrators other than familiarity with the content presented in the test manual, the scoring forms and the scoring procedures.
Administration Time:
There is no time limit for taking the PCRI, but most clients complete the form in about 15 minutes.
Respondents:
The PCRI is a self-report instrument.
Scales/Item Options:
The PCRI consists of seven scales: Parental Support; Satisfaction with Parenting; Involvement; Communication; Limit Setting; Autonomy; and Role Orientation.
Item examples:
  • "My feelings about being a parent change from day to day."
  • "My child is out of control much of the time."
  • "My life is very stressful right now."
Scoring:
Once the client has completed the PCRI, the clinician transfers scores to the PCRI Profile Form that yields raw scores, normalized T-scores, and standardized scores.

In addition, the PCRI includes two validity indicators: the Social Desirability scale which indicates whether the client was operating with a defensive or ?fake good? response set; and an Inconsistency indicator which indicates if the client may have been responding randomly or inattentively.

Languages:
English and Spanish.
Psychometric Properties:
Normative data on the PCRI were collected on a sample of more than 1,100 (predominately white) mothers and fathers across the United States in four major geographical areas (Northeast, South, Midwest, and West). The internal consistency (the extent to which the items in a scale reflect a common trait or dimension) is good with a median value of .82. Test-retest reliability (the tests ability to elicit similar responses from clients across administrations) is good with a mean scale autocorrelation of .81. The construct validity (the extent to which the PCRI measures the trait it is intended to measure), based on internal consistency and the correlation of each individual item with its scale, is good.


#89 Perceived Competence Scale
Introduction
Title:
Perceived Competence Scale.
Author:
Harter, S. A.
Date:
1982
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Self-report. A "structure alternative format" was designed to offset the tendency to give socially desirable responses.
Uses of Information:
The purpose of this scale is to identify the child's perception of his or her competence. Children as young as 8 make meaningful differentiations among the four areas tapped by the scale: cognitive competence in school, social competence with peers, physical competence in sports, and general self-worth (Harter, 1982).
Environment:
Not specified.
Description:
Emphasis is placed on the assessment of a child's sense of competence across different domains instead of viewing perceived competence as a unitary construct. Three domains of competence, each constituting a separate subscale, were identified: (a) cognitive, (b) social, and (c) physical. A fourth subscale, general self-worth, independent of any particular skill domain, was also included. Items on this subscale refer to being sure of oneself, being happy with the way one is, feeling good about the way one acts, and thinking that one is a good person.
References:
Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered toward a developmental model. Human Development, (1)34-64.

Harter, S. (1981). A model of intrinsic mastery motivation in children: individual differences and developmental change. Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, 14. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Harter, S. (1981). A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom: motivational and informational components. Developmental Psychology, (17)300-312 (b).

Harter, S. Developmental perspectives on the self system. In Hetherington, E. M. (Ed.), Social development. Carmichael's manual of child psychology. New York: Wiley, in press

Harter, S. (1982). The Perceived Confidence Scale for Children. Child Development, 53, 87-97.
Cost:
$9.95
Availability of Test Manual:
Available.
Contact Information:
Department of Psychology
University of Denver
University Park
Denver, CO 80208
Utility
Instructions:
The child is first asked to decide which kind of kid he or she is most like—the kids described on the right or the left (an example of such statements are given below). Once having made this decision, the child decides whether the description on that side is sort of true or really true for him or her. The scores are then based on these decisions (Harter, 1982).

"Some kids often forget what they learn, but other kids can remember things easily" (Harter, 1982).

Administrator:
Not specified.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
Minimal. Administrator should be familiar with the manual.
Administration Time:
10–15 minutes
Respondents:
Children in third to ninth grades.
Scales/Item Options:
Three competence subscales emerged (a) cognitive competence, with an emphasis on academic performance (doing well at schoolwork, being smart, feeling good about one's classroom performance); (b) social competence, vis-à-vis one's peers (having a lot of friends, being easy to like, being an important member of one's class); and (c) physical competence, with a focus on sports and outdoor games (doing well at sports, learning new outdoor games readily, preferring to play sports rather than merely watch others play).

From the outset, four domains — cognitive, social, physical, and general — were designated. Face validity and meaningfulness to children, as determined from individual interviews, served as initial guidelines. Some items were adapted from existing scales. The cognitive-competence domain included school as well as non-school, social domain referred primarily to peers but also included items referring to "people," and the physical domain included, with sports, skills at making and building things.

A 28-item teacher-rating form parallels the child scale. Items were reworded to obtain the teacher's best judgment of the child's actual competence. Thus a teacher item would read: "This kid often forgets what he or she learns, but this kid remembers things easily." The same four-choice question format and scoring procedure was employed (Harter, 1982).

Scoring:
Each item is scored from 1 to 4, where a score of 1 indicates low perceived competence, and a score of 4 reflects high perceived competence. Scores are added and then averaged for each subscale, resulting in four separate subscale means (Harter, 1982).
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
The Perceived Competence Scale is based on psychometric properties and considered to be sound. Its psychometric properties are presented for children in third through ninth grades. Emphasis is placed on its factorial validity. Each subscale defines a separate factor, indicating that children make clear differentiations among these domains. The factor structure is extremely stable across this grade range. The scale is viewed as an alternative to existing self-concept measures of questionable validity and reliability. In addition, the question format not only provides a four-point ordinal index of a child's feelings of competence and self- worth but also functions effectively to reduce the child's tendency to give socially desirable responses (Harter, 1982).


#90 Psychological Parenting Questionnaire
Introduction
Title:
Psychological Parenting Questionnaire
Author:
Henney, S.M.
Date:
1995
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family, Relationships Among Triad Members
Standardized:
No.
Instrument Type(s):
Questionnaire.
Uses of Information:
Research, screening, and service planning.
Environment:
Not specified.
Description:
The Psychological Parenting Questionnaire is a 55–item questionnaire designed to measure parental beliefs, attitudes, emotions, and behaviors that enable a non–biological parent to assume the parenting role with a particular child.
References:
Phillips (2000).
Cost:
None
Availability of Test Manual:
None available.
Contact Information:
Susan M. Henney
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Internship Coordinator
University of Houston-Downtown
Department of Social Sciences
One Main Street
Houston, TX 77002
713.221.8163 (office)
713.221.8144 (fax)
Utility
Instructions:
Not specified.
Administrator:
Not specified.
Qualification:
Not specified.
Training Required:
Not specified.
Administration Time:
15—20 minutes.
Respondents:
Prospective adoptive parents.
Scales/Item Options:
This 55–item questionnaire has been reviewed by doctoral students to preselect items tapping the factors of claiming, entitlement, and parental acceptance, in a first step towards validation. Items with low variance were not further considered for inclusion. Thirty-one items remained for further consideration. The claiming sub-scale consists of 7 items, entitlement consists of 15 items, and parental acceptance consists of 9 items.
Scoring:
Not specified.
Languages:
English.
Psychometric Properties:
Reliability analyses showed alpha reliabilities of .46 (mothers) and .62 (fathers) for claiming, .75 (mothers) and .71 (fathers) for entitlement, and .77 (mothers) and .83 (fathers) for parental acceptance (Phillips, 2000).


#91 Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
Introduction
Title:
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.
Author:
Rosenberg, M.
Date:
1965
Domain:
Birth Parent/Birth Family, Adoptive Parent/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adults, and Relationships Among Triad Members
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
The SES is a self-report 10-item Likert scale.
Uses of Information:
Rosenberg's Self-Esteem Scale is designed to measure self-esteem in both clinical and nonclinical populations.
Environment:
None specified; however, an optimal environment would be one in which the respondent can focus all his/her attention on the evaluation scale.
Description:
The scale is a 10-item Likert scale with answers based on a 4-point scale: from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." The original sample for which the scale was developed consisted of 5,024 high school juniors and seniors from 10 randomly selected schools in New York State.
References:
References with further characteristics of the scale include:

Crandal, R. (1973). The measurement of self-esteem and related constructs, pp. 80-82, in J. P. Robinson & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Measures of social psychological attitudes. Revised edition. Ann Arbor: ISR.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Wylie, R. C. (1974). The self-concept. Revised edition. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Cost:
None; the SES is in the public domain.
Availability of Test Manual:
Not specified.
Contact Information:
The Morris Rosenberg Foundation
c/o Department of Sociology
University of Maryland
2112 Art/Soc Building
College Park, MD 20742-1315
The instrument can be retrieved from:
http://eib.emcdda.europa.eu/html.cfm/index3676EN.html
Utility
Instructions:
The scale has a list of statements and the following directions:

Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself. If you strongly agree, circle SA. If you agree with the statement, circle A. If you disagree, circle D. If you strongly disagree, circle SD.

Administrator:
The SES is a self-report instrument.
Qualification:
None .
Training Required:
None.
Administration Time:
The SES can be completed in less than 5 minutes.
Respondents:
Adolescents and adults; clinical and general populations.
Scales/Item Options:
Examples of statements respondents used to express their feelings about themselves:
  • "At times, I think I am no good at all."
  • "I feel that I have a number of good qualities."
  • "I certainly feel useless at times."
  • "I take a positive attitude toward myself."
Scoring:
Scoring: Add the ratings assigned to all the items after reverse-scoring the positively worded items. Scores range from 10 to 40; higher scores indicate higher self-esteem.
Languages:
English, French, and Norwegian.
Psychometric Properties:
The SES has demonstrated good reliability and validity across a large number of different sample groups. The scale has been validated for use with both male and female adolescent, adult, and elderly populations. It has been used with Francophone populations, but studies on the use of the SES with other specific cultural groups were not found.


#92 UCLA PTSD Reaction Index
Introduction
Title:
UCLA PTSD Reaction Index.
Author:
Pynoos, R., Rodriguez, N., Steinberg, A., Stuber, M., & Frederick, C.
Date:
1998
Domain:
Birth Parents/Birth Family, Adoptive Parents/Family, Adoptive Youth and Adults
Standardized:
Not specified.
Instrument Type(s):
Self-report or semi-structured interview.
Uses of Information:
To screen for the presence of any type of traumatic event and the frequency of DSM-IV posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms.

Three versions of this brief screening instrument exist: child, adolescent, and parent. It is not intended to establish a definitive PTSD diagnosis (Rodriguez, Steinberg, and Pynoos, 1999). The UCLA PTSD Reaction Index (Pynoos, Rodriguez, Steinberg, Stuber, and Frederick, 1998) is a revised version of the widely used and researched Child Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Reaction Index (CPTSD-RI) (Nader, Pynoos, Fairbanks, and Fredrick, 1990).

Environment:
The respondent should have a quiet environment with no distractions or interruptions.
Description:
It is a 48-item semi-structured interview that assesses a child's exposure to 26 types of traumatic events and assesses DSM-IV PTSD diagnostic criteria. It includes 19 items to assess the 17 symptoms of PTSD, as well as 2 associated symptoms (guilt and fear of the event's recurrence).
References:
Nader, K., Pynoos, R., Fairbanks, L., & Frederick, C. (1990, November). Children's PTSD reactions one year after a sniper attack at their school. American Journal of Psychiatry, 147(11):1526-1530. Available from: PsycINFO, Ipswich, MA. Accessed December 1, 2008.

Pynoos, R., Rodriguez, N., Steinberg, A., Stuber, M., & Frederick, C. (1998). UCLA PTSD Index for DSM-IV.

Rodriguez, N., Steinberg, A. M., & Pynoos, R. S. (1999). UCLA PTSD Index for DSM-IV. Los Angeles, CA: University of California at Los Angeles Trauma Psychiatry Service.

Saltzman, W., Pynoos, R., Layne, C., Steinberg, A., & Aisenberg, E. (2001, December). Trauma- and grief-focused intervention for adolescents exposed to community violence: Results of a school-based screening and group treatment protocol. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5(4):291-303. Available from: PsycARTICLES, Ipswich, MA. Accessed December 1, 2008.

Steinberg, A. M., Brymer, M. J., Decker, K. B., & Pynoos, R. S. (2004). The University of California at Los Angeles Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Reaction Index. Current Psychiatry Reports, 6, 96-100.
Cost:
Not specified
Availability of Test Manual:
Not specified.
Contact Information:
Robert S. Pynoos
National Center for Child Traumatic Stress
11150 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 770
Los Angeles, CA 90064
310.235.2633
rpynoos@mednet.ucla.edu

UCLA PTSD Index for DSM-IV: UCLA Trauma Psychiatry Service
300 Medical Plaza
Los Angeles, CA 90095-6968
310.206.8973
asteinberg@mednet.ucla.edu
Utility
Instructions:
The three versions of the UCLA PTSD Reaction Index can be administered via paper and pencil. The child and adolescent versions (20 and 22 items, respectively) have also been administered in an interview format or in school classroom settings. A 5-point Likert scale from 0 (none of the time) to 4 (almost all the time) is used to rate PTSD symptoms (Slatzman et al., 2001).
Administrator:
The instrument can be administered to the respondent or self-administered.
Qualification:
None specified.
Training Required:
None specified.
Administration Time:
The test takes around 20-30 minutes to complete depending on age, reading ability, and method of administration. It is suitable for administration by a graduate-level student under supervision.
Respondents:
Children aged 7 through 12, adolescents aged 13 or older, and parents.
Scales/Item Options:
In the children's version, respondents are asked to answer yes or no if certain scary or dangerous situations/events had happened to them, such as an earthquake, being abused or seeing someone abused at home, having an older person sexually molest them, or being in an accident that resulted in medical injuries. They were asked about their reactions to the event (scared, disgusted, confused, upset, etc.) and how much of certain activities they had or had not experienced in the past month, such as reoccurring thoughts or mental pictures, being very emotional for no apparent reason, isolating, etc.
Scoring:
Scoring takes around 5-10 minutes. The score sheet provides instructions for calculating a total PTSD severity score, and severity scores for each of the DSM-IV B, C, and D symptom clusters. When criterion A is met, children who meet criteria B, C, and D (using endorsements of "much of the time" and "most of the time" as indicating symptom presence) are scored as having a likely diagnosis of DSM-IV "full" PTSD. Where criterion A is met, children meeting criteria for only two symptom subcategories are scored as "partial" PTSD likely. A cut-off of 38 or greater for a single traumatic event has the greatest sensitivity and specificity for detecting PTSD (Rodriguez, Steinberg, Saltzman, & Pynoos 2001a, 2001b).
Languages:
English, Spanish.
Psychometric Properties:
All versions show a "dose" relationship for exposure, with higher Reaction Index scores among traumatized samples compared with control subjects. DSM-IV version correlates 0.70 with the PTSD Module of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children (epidemiologic version) and 0.82 in comparison with the Child and Adolescent Version of the Clinician-administered PTSD Scale. A cut-off of 38 has a sensitivity of 0.93 and specificity of 0.87 in detecting PTSD (Rodriguez et al. 2001a, 2001b).


#93 Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales
Introduction
Title:
Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS)
Author:
Sparrow, S.S., Balla, D.A., & Cicchetti, D.V.
Date:
1984
Domain:
Adoptive Parent/Family
Standardized:
Yes.
Instrument Type(s):
Individual parent/caregiver interviews.
Uses of Information:
The VABS are useful in assessing an individual's daily functioning. They can be used as an evaluation and diagnostic tool for individuals who are mentally retarded or individuals with other handicaps. They can also be used to develop individual educational, rehabilitative, and treatment programs and can monitor progress during such a program. Finally, the VABS can be used in research in which the development and functioning of handicapped and non-handicapped individuals are investigated.
Environment:
Unspecified.
Description:
The Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scales (VABS) are designed to assess handicapped and non-handicapped persons in their personal and social functioning. There are two versions of the revised Vineland that can be used with infants and toddlers. Each version differs in the number of items and materials and the method of administration. The Interview Edition, Survey Form, which is more similar in content to the original VABS, adaptive behavior, is administered to a parent or caregiver in a semi-structured interview format. The Interview Edition, Expanded Form, has 577 items, including 297 from the Survey Form. This form yields a more comprehensive assessment of adaptive behavior and gives a systematic basis for preparing individual educational, rehabilitative, or treatment programs. The Expanded Form can be used by itself or as a follow-up to obtain more information about deficits suggested by the Survey Form. Both versions are organized around four Behavior Domains: Communication, Daily Living Skills, Socialization, and Motor Skills. For the Survey Form, items are organized in domains in developmental order. For the Expanded Form, items are in clusters, which are organized in developmental order under sub-domains that make up the domains.
References:
Unspecified.

Annotation information obtained from http://www.pearsonassessments.com/vinelandadapt.aspx.

Cost:
Complete Vineland Starter Set (Includes Survey Form Starter Set, Expanded Form Starter Set, and Classroom Edition Starter Set): $170.

For updated pricing information, visit
http://ags.pearsonassessments.com/group.asp?nGroupInfoID=aVineland

Availability of Test Manual:
Unknown.
Contact Information:
American Guidance Service
http://www.pearsonassessments.com/vinelandadapt.aspx
Tel: 800.328-2560
Utility
Instructions:
Paper and pencil and online versions available.
Administrator:
Social worker or psychologist (or equivalent).
Qualification:
Individual administering the VABS should be a social worker, psychologist, or equivalent.
Training Required:
Yes. The website, http://www.pearsonassessments.com/vinelandadapt.aspx, contains research, information, frequently asked questions, and a discussion about the VABS. A training video is available to help train psychologists and others who administer the VABS Survey and Expanded Survey Form. In addition, there is a training tool available on CD-ROM designed to help professionals learn how to properly administer and score the Interview Editions of the VABS. An audiocassette, which accompanies the Survey Form or the Expanded Form, is also available for training purposes and contains sample interviews with parents and other caregivers.
Administration Time:
Survey Form: 20 to 60 minutes; Expanded Form: 60 to 90 minutes.
Respondents:
Parent or caregiver.
Scales/Item Options:
Unspecified.
Scoring:
Each item is rated "2" (behavior is usually or habitually performed), "1" (sometimes or partly performed), or "0" (never performed). In addition, there is a code ("N") for instances when the child has never had the opportunity to perform the activity and a code ("DK") when the caregiver does not know if the child performed the activity. The manuals provide users with instructions for scoring caregiver responses. Domain and, in the Expanded Form, sub-domain raw scores are obtained by summing the numerical values of the responses. Using tables in the manuals, the raw scores can be converted into standard scores (with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15), percentile ranks, stanines, and age equivalents. The sum of the domain standard scores is used to obtain the composite standard score. A table is then used to obtain the stanines and percentile rankings for the composite from the standard scores. The age equivalents for the composite score can be either the mean or median of the domain age equivalents. The manuals provide instructions for calculating the mean and median age equivalents. The domain standard scores are reported by age increments of 1 month up to 1 year, 11 months and 2-month increments between 2 and 3 years. Children under 6 years old share the same standard composite scores. Computer scoring software can be purchased.
Languages:
English and Spanish.
Psychometric Properties:
Reliability: 1) Split half-reliability: Internal reliability tests of both the Survey and Expanded Forms were performed on caregivers of children under age 19. The Survey Form split half coefficients for the age groups under 3 ranged from .82 to .95 for the Domains and .96 to .98 for the Adaptive Behavior Composite; the Expanded Form split half coefficients ranged from .90 to .97 for the Domains and .98 to .99 for the Composite. (2) Test-retest reliability (mean of 17 days between tests): The Survey Form reliability coefficients for caregivers of children between the ages of 6 months and 2 years, 11 months ranged from .78 to .92 for the Domains and .90 for the Adaptive Behavior Composite. There were no test-retest reliability tests for the Expanded Form. (3) Interrater reliability: The Survey Form interrater reliability coefficients, with a mean of 8 days between the interviews of caregivers of children ages 6 months to 18 years, 11 months, ranged from .62 to .78 for the Domains and was .74 for the Adaptive Behavior Composite. There were no interrater reliability tests for the Expanded Form.

Validity: (1) Content validity included a literature review and field tests with caregivers. (2) Criterion-related validity: The correlations between the Adaptive Behavior Composite and the original VABS unadjusted Social Quotient and Silverstein's Deviation Social Quotient (which corrects for inconsistencies in the Social Quotient) among caregivers of children between ages 6 months and 18 years, were both .55. Comparisons between the total of the raw scores for the four domains of the revised VABS and the original VABS yielded a correlation of .97 in a sample of mentally retarded adults and an age-adjusted partial correlation of .88 in a sample of hearing-impaired children. The correlation between the VABS and the Adaptive Behavior Inventory for Children, ages 5 to 11, was .58, and correlations between the revised VAB four domains and the AAMD Adaptive Behavior Scale, Part I, domains fell between .40 and .70. Correlations between VABS and the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised, two intelligence tests, ranged from .07 to .52 and .12 to .37, respectively. The differential magnitudes of these correlations is said to support the assumption that adaptive behavior scales and intelligence and achievement scales measure different areas of functioning.



 
 
Friends Logo The Logic Model Builder was a collaborative effort between the FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention (www.friendsnrc.org), who developed the content, and the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information (nccanch.acf.hhs.gov), who created the database.