Journal of Child and Family Studies

, Volume 22, Issue 2, pp 177–191 | Cite as

An Experimental Test of Whether Informants can Report About Child and Family Behavior Based on Settings of Behavioral Expression

  • Andres De Los Reyes
  • Katherine B. Ehrlich
  • Anna J. Swan
  • Tana J. Luo
  • Michael Van Wie
  • Shairy C. Pabón
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

Researchers and practitioners conduct multi-informant assessments of child and family behavior under the assumption that informants have unique perspectives on these behaviors. These unique perspectives stem, in part, from differences among informants in the settings in which they observe behaviors (e.g., home, school, peer interactions). These differences are assumed to contribute to the discrepancies commonly observed in the outcomes of multi-informant assessments. Although assessments often prompt informants to think about setting-specific behaviors when providing reports about child and family behavior, the notion that differences in setting-based behavioral observations contribute to discrepant reports has yet to be experimentally tested. We trained informants to use setting information as the basis for providing behavioral reports, with a focus on parental knowledge of children’s whereabouts and activities. Using a within-subjects controlled design, we randomly assigned 16 mothers and adolescents to the order in which they received a program that trains informants to use setting information when providing parental knowledge reports (Setting-Sensitive Assessment), and a control program involving no training on how to provide reports. Relative to the control program, the Setting-Sensitive Assessment training increased the differences between mother and adolescent reports of parental knowledge, suggesting that mothers and adolescents observe parental knowledge behaviors in different settings. This study provides the first experimental evidence to support the assumption that discrepancies arise because informants incorporate unique setting information into their reports.

Keywords

Attribution Bias Context Model Correspondence Disagreement Informant discrepancies Multiple informants Setting-Sensitive Assessment 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported, in part, by an internal grant from the University of Maryland (General Research Board Summer Award Program) awarded to Andres De Los Reyes and an NRSA Predoctoral Award (F31 DA027365) awarded to Katherine B. Ehrlich. Portions of this paper’s findings were presented at the Council on Undergraduate Research’s Posters on the Hill Event (April 2011; Washington, DC) and the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence (March 2012; Vancouver, BC). We are grateful to Ho-Man Yeung for his assistance with data collection and administration of training protocols for this study.

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, 213–232.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Darling, N., Cumsille, P., Caldwell, L. L., & Dowdy, B. (2006). Predictors of adolescents’ disclosure to parents and perceived parental knowledge: Between- and within-person differences. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 667–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Los Reyes, A. (2011). Introduction to the special section. More than measurement error: Discovering meaning behind informant discrepancies in clinical assessments of children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 40, 1–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Los Reyes, A., Goodman, K. L., Kliewer, W., & Reid-Quiñones, K. R. (2008). Whose depression relates to discrepancies? Testing relations between informant characteristics and informant discrepancies from both informants’ perspectives. Psychological Assessment, 20, 139–149.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Los Reyes, A., Goodman, K. L., Kliewer, W., & Reid-Quiñones, K. R. (2010). The longitudinal consistency of mother-child reporting discrepancies of parental monitoring and their ability to predict child delinquent behaviors two years later. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1417–1430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Los Reyes, A., Henry, D. B., Tolan, P. H., & Wakschlag, L. S. (2009). Linking informant discrepancies to observed variations in young children’s disruptive behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37, 637–652.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2005). Informant discrepancies in the assessment of childhood psychopathology: A critical review, theoretical framework, and recommendations for further study. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 483–509.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2006). Conceptualizing changes in behavior in intervention research: The range of possible changes model. Psychological Review, 113, 554–583.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2008). When the evidence says, “yes, no, and maybe so”: Attending to and interpreting inconsistent findings among evidence-based interventions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 47–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2009). Identifying evidence-based interventions for children and adolescents using the range of possible changes model: A meta-analytic illustration. Behavior Modification, 33, 583–617.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Los Reyes, A., & Marsh, J. K. (2011). Patients’ contexts and their effects on clinicians’ impressions of conduct disorder symptoms. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 40, 479–485.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Los Reyes, A., & Weersing, V. R. (2009). A brief manual of an Attribution Bias Context Model assessment paradigm for parent-youth discrepancies on questionnaire ratings of parental monitoring. Unpublished manual. University of Maryland at College Park.Google Scholar
  13. De Los Reyes, A., Alfano, C. A., & Beidel, D. C. (2011a). Are clinicians’ assessments of improvements in children’s functioning “global”? Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 40, 281–294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Los Reyes, A., Youngstrom, E. A., Pabón, S. C., Youngstrom, J. K., Feeny, N. C., & Findling, R. L. (2011b). Internal consistency and associated characteristics of informant discrepancies in clinic referred youths age 11 to 17 years. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 40, 36–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Los Reyes, A., Youngstrom, E. A., Swan, A. J., Youngstrom, J. K., Feeny, N. C., & Findling, R. L. (2011c). Informant discrepancies in clinical reports of youths and interviewers’ impressions of the reliability of informants. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 21, 417–424.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dishion, T. J., & McMahon, R. J. (1998). Parental monitoring and the prevention of child and adolescent problem behavior: A conceptual and empirical formulation. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 1, 61–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dodge, K. A., McClaskey, C. L., & Feldman, E. (1985). Situational approach to the assessment of social competence in children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53, 344–353.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Essau, C. A., Sasagawa, S., & Frick, P. J. (2006). Psychometric properties of the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 15, 597–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Frick, P. J., Christian, R. E., & Wootton, J. M. (1999). Age trends in the association between parenting practices and conduct problems. Behavior Modification, 23, 106–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanley, J. A., Negassa, A., Edwardes, D. B., & Forrester, J. E. (2003). Statistical analysis of correlated data using generalized estimating equations: An orientation. American Journal of Epidemiology, 157, 364–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hartley, A. G., Zakriski, A. L., & Wright, J. C. (2011). Probing the depths of informant discrepancies: Contextual influences on divergence and convergence. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 40, 54–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hunsley, J., & Mash, E. J. (2007). Evidence-based assessment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 3, 29–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. IBM Corporation. (2009). IBM SPSS Data Collection (version 5.6) [computer software]. Somers, NY: IBM Corporation.Google Scholar
  24. Jansen, R. G., Wiertz, L. F., Meyer, E. S., & Noldus, L. P. J. J. (2003). Reliability analysis of observational data: Problems, solutions, and software implementation. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 391–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Koenig, K., De Los Reyes, A., Cicchetti, D., Scahill, L., & Klin, A. (2009). Group intervention to promote social skills in school-age children with pervasive developmental disorders: Reconsidering efficacy. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39, 1163–1172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kraemer, H. C., Measelle, J. R., Ablow, J. C., Essex, M. J., Boyce, W. T., & Kupfer, D. J. (2003). A new approach to integrating data from multiple informants in psychiatric assessment and research: Mixing and matching contexts and perspectives. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 1566–1577.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Luthar, S. S., & Goldstein, A. S. (2008). Substance use and related behaviors among suburban late adolescents: The importance of perceived parent containment. Development and Psychopathology, 20, 591–614.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lutz, M. N., Fantuzzo, J. F., & McDermott, P. A. (2002). Contextually relevant assessment of the emotional and behavioral adjustment of low-income preschool children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 338–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McDermott, P. A. (1993). National standardization of uniform multisituational measures of child and adolescent behavior pathology. Psychological Assessment, 5, 413–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pantin, H., Prado, G., Lopez, B., Huang, S., Tapia, M. I., Schwartz, S. J., et al. (2009). A randomized controlled trial of Familias Unidas for Hispanic adolescents with behavior problems. Psychosomatic Medicine, 71, 987–995.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pelham, W. E., Fabiano, G. A., & Massetti, G. M. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34, 449–476.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shelton, K. K., Frick, P. J., & Wootton, J. M. (1996). Assessment of parenting practices in families of elementary school-age children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 25, 317–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Silverman, W. K., & Ollendick, T. H. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of anxiety and its disorders in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34, 380–411.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smetana, J. G. (2008). ‘‘It’s 10 o’clock: Do you know where your children are?’’ Recent advances in understanding parental monitoring and adolescents’ information management. Child Development Perspectives, 2, 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stanton, B., Cole, M., Galbraith, J., Li, X., Pendleton, S., Cottrel, L., et al. (2004). Randomized trial of a parent intervention: Parents can make a difference in long-term adolescent risk behaviors, perceptions, and knowledge. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 158, 947–955.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stanton, B. F., Li, X., Galbraith, J., Cornick, G., Feigelman, S., Kaljee, L., et al. (2000). Parental underestimates of adolescent risk behavior: A randomized, controlled trial of a parental monitoring intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health, 26, 18–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stattin, H., & Kerr, M. (2000). Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child Development, 71, 1072–1085.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  41. Weisz, J. R., Jensen Doss, A., & Hawley, K. M. (2005). Youth psychotherapy outcome research: A review and critique of the evidence base. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 337–363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wu, Y., Stanton, B. F., Galbraith, J., Kaljee, L., Cottrell, L., Li, X., et al. (2003). Sustaining and broadening intervention impact: A longitudinal randomized trial of 3 adolescent risk reduction approaches. Pediatrics, 111, e32–e38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andres De Los Reyes
    • 1
  • Katherine B. Ehrlich
    • 2
  • Anna J. Swan
    • 1
  • Tana J. Luo
    • 1
  • Michael Van Wie
    • 1
  • Shairy C. Pabón
    • 1
  1. 1.Comprehensive Assessment and Intervention Program, Department of PsychologyUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.Maryland Child and Family Development Laboratory, Department of PsychologyUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations