Advertisement

Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

, Volume 38, Issue 8, pp 1179–1191 | Cite as

When to Use Broader Internalising and Externalising Subscales Instead of the Hypothesised Five Subscales on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): Data from British Parents, Teachers and Children

  • Anna Goodman
  • Donna L. Lamping
  • George B. Ploubidis
Article

Abstract

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a widely used child mental health questionnaire with five hypothesised subscales. There is theoretical and preliminary empirical support for combining the SDQ’s hypothesised emotional and peer subscales into an ‘internalizing’ subscale and the hypothesised behavioral and hyperactivity subscales into an ‘externalizing’ subscale (alongside the fifth prosocial subscale). We examine this using parent, teacher and youth SDQ data from a representative sample of 5–16 year olds in Britain (N = 18,222). Factor analyses generally supported second-order internalizing and externalizing factors, and the internalizing and externalizing subscales showed good convergent and discriminant validity across informants and with respect to clinical disorder. By contrast, discriminant validity was poorer between the emotional and peer subscales and between the behavioral, hyperactivity and prosocial subscales. This applied particularly to children with low scores on those subscales. We conclude that there are advantages to using the broader internalizing and externalizing SDQ subscales for analyses in low-risk samples, while retaining all five subscales when screening for disorder.

Keywords

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Factor structure Construct validity Britain Internalizing problems Externalizing problems 

Notes

Conflict of Interest

AG is a director of Youthinmind, which provides no-cost and low-cost software and web sites related to the SDQ and the DAWBA.

References

  1. Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, C. T. (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. Psychological Bulletin, 101(2), 213–232.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Achenbach, T. M., Becker, A., Dopfner, M., Heiervang, E., Roessner, V., Steinhausen, H. C., et al. (2008). Multicultural assessment of child and adolescent psychopathology with ASEBA and SDQ instruments: research findings, applications, and future directions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(3), 251–275.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV). Washington: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
  4. Becker, A., Steinhausen, H. C., Baldursson, G., Dalsgaard, S., Lorenzo, M. J., Ralston, S. J., et al. (2006). Psychopathological screening of children with ADHD: strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a pan-European study. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 15(Suppl. 1), 56–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  7. Campbell, D., & Fiske, D. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Dadds, M. R., Fraser, J., Frost, A., & Hawes, D. J. (2005). Disentangling the underlying dimensions of psychopathy and conduct problems in childhood: a community study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(3), 400–410.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Dickey, W., & Blumberg, S. (2004). Revisiting the factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: United States, 2001. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 43(9), 1159–1167.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Ford, T., Goodman, R., & Meltzer, H. (2003). The British Child and Adolescent Mental Health Survey 1999: the prevalence of DSM-IV disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(10), 1203–1211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Goldberg, D., & Huxley, P. (1992). Common mental disorders: A bio-social model. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  12. Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(5), 581–586.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Goodman, R. (1999). The extended version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire as a guide to child psychiatric caseness and consequent burden. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40(5), 791–799.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337–1345.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodman, A., & Goodman, R. (2009). Strengths and difficulties questionnaire as a dimensional measure of child mental health. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(4), 400–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Goodman, R., & Scott, S. (1999). Comparing the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and the Child Behavior Checklist: is small beautiful? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27(1), 17–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodman, R., Ford, T., Richards, H., Gatward, R., & Meltzer, H. (2000a). The development and well-being assessment: description and initial validation of an integrated assessment of child and adolescent psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(5), 645–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goodman, R., Renfrew, D., & Mullick, M. (2000b). Predicting type of psychiatric disorder from Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) scores in child mental health clinics in London and Dhaka. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 9(2), 129–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Green, H., McGinnity, A., Meltzer, H., Ford, T., & Goodman, R. (2005). Mental health of children and young people in Great Britain, 2004: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  20. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Klasen, H., Woerner, W., Wolke, D., Meyer, R., Overmeyer, S., Kaschnitz, W., et al. (2000). Comparing the German versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ-Deu) and the Child Behavior Checklist. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 9(4), 271–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koskelainen, M., Sourander, A., & Vauras, M. (2001). Self-reported strengths and difficulties in a community sample of Finnish adolescents. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 10(3), 180–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mellor, D., & Stokes, M. (2007). The factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23(2), 105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Meltzer, H., Gatward, R., Goodman, R., & Ford, T. (2000). Mental health of children and adolescents in Great Britain. London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  25. Meltzer, H., Gatward, R., Corbin, T., Goodman, R., & Ford, T. (2003). Persistence, onset, risk factors and outcomes of childhood mental disorders. London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  26. Moran, P., Flach, C., Rowe, R., Briskman, J., Ford, T., Maughan, B., et al. (2009). Predictive value of callous-unemotional traits in a large community sample. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(11), 1079–1084.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Mullick, M. S., & Goodman, R. (2001). Questionnaire screening for mental health problems in Bangladeshi children: a preliminary study. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 36(2), 94–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Muthen, B. (1983). Latent variable structural equation modeling with categorical-data. Journal of Econometrics, 22(1–2), 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Muthen, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49(1), 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  31. Parry-Langdon, N., et al. (2008). Three years on: Survey of the development and emotional well-being of children and young people. Cardiff: Office for National Statistics.Google Scholar
  32. Ronning, J. A., Handegaard, B. H., Sourander, A., & Morch, W. T. (2004). The Strengths and Difficulties Self-Report Questionnaire as a screening instrument in Norwegian community samples. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13(2), 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ruchkin, V., Koposov, R., & Schwab-Stone, M. (2007). The Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire: scale validation with Russian adolescents. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 861–869.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Smedje, H., Broman, J. E., Hetta, J., & von Knorring, A. L. (1999). Psychometric properties of a Swedish version of the “Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire”. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 8(2), 63–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Leeuwen, K., Meerschaert, T., Bosmans, G., De Medts, L., & Braet, C. (2006). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a community sample of young children in Flanders. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22(3), 189–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Woerner, W., Becker, A., & Rothenberger, A. (2004a). Normative data and scale properties of the German parent SDQ. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13(Suppl 2), II/3–10.Google Scholar
  37. Woerner, W., Fleitlich-Bilyk, B., Martinussen, R., Fletcher, J., Cucchiaro, G., Dalgalarrondo, P., et al. (2004b). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire overseas: evaluations and applications of the SDQ beyond Europe. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13(Suppl 2), II/47–54.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna Goodman
    • 1
  • Donna L. Lamping
    • 2
  • George B. Ploubidis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Epidemiology and Population HealthLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineLondonUK
  2. 2.Health Services Research UnitLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineLondonUK

Personalised recommendations