Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Self- and Parent- Report Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits in 8- to 10-Year-Olds
- 351 Downloads
The factorial structure of the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits (ICU; Frick 2004) has been inconsistent across various studies using different rater versions and samples. In this study the factorial structure of the self- and parent-report versions of the ICU was examined in a community sample of 340 boys and girls aged 8- to 10- years. A series of confirmatory factor analyses revealed that (1) for self-report ICU, a two-factor model comprising one Uncaring and one Callousness factor fit the data best; the factorial structure was invariant across sex, although boys showed higher scores than girls on the Uncaring factor; (2) for the parent-report ICU, a three-factor structure was supported, and boys and girls did not differ on factor structure or levels of the factors. For both versions, CU traits were positively associated with the count of Oppositional Defiant Disorder/Conduct Disorder and internalizing behavior symptoms, demonstrating ICU’s good convergent albeit unsatisfactory discriminant validity. Findings suggest further refinement of this instrument for the self-report and parent versions separately.
KeywordsCallousness Uncaring Unemotional Child Parent Factor structure Validity
Research reported in this publication was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health to the first author under Award Number SC2HD076044. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. We would like to thank the Psychophysiology Lab staff for their assistance in collecting data and the families for participation.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflicts of Interest
Yu Gao and Wei Zhang declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was approved by the university Internal Review Board (IRB) and all study procedures, including informed consent, followed the protocol approved by the IRB.
- Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Integrative guide for the 1991 CBCL/4–18, YSR, and TRF profiles. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.Google Scholar
- Barker, C., Pistrang, N., & Elliott, R. (1994). Research methods in clinical and counseling psychology. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- Carmines, E. G., & McIver, J. P. (1981). Analyzing models with unobserved variables: analysis of covariance structures. In G. Bohrnstedt & E. Borgatta (Eds.), Social measurement: Current issues, (pp. 65–115). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Ciucci, E., Baroncelli, A., Franchi, M., Golmaryami, F. N., & Frick, P. J. (2014). The association between callous-unemotional traits and behavioral and academic adjustment in children: further validation of the inventory of callous-unemotional traits. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 36(2), 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Frick, P. J. (2004). The inventory of callous-unemotional traits. Unpublished rating scale. New Orleans: University of New Orleans.Google Scholar
- Houghton, S., Hunter, S. C., Khan, U., & Tan, C. (2013b). Interpersonal and affective dimensions of psychopathic traits in adolescents: development and validation of a self-report instrument. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 44(1), 51–69.Google Scholar
- Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling. Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76–99). London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7 user’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
- Kimonis, E. R., Frick, P. J., Skeem, J. L., Marsee, M. A., Cruise, K., Munoz, L. C., et al. (2008). Assessing callous–unemotional traits in adolescent offenders: validation of the inventory of callous–unemotional traits. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 31(3), 241–252.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed., ). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.Google Scholar
- Shaffer, D., Fisher, P., & Lucas, C. (2004). The diagnostic interview schedule for children (DISC). In M. Hersen (Ed.), Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment (pp. 256–270). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Shaffer, D., Fisher, P., Lucas, C. P., Dulcan, M. K., & Schwab-Stone, M. E. (2000). NIMH diagnostic interview schedule for children version IV (NIMH DISC-IV): description, differences from previous versions, and reliability of some common diagnoses. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 39(1), 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Waller, R., Hyde, L. W., Grabell, A. S., Alves, M. L., & Olson, S. L. (2015). Differential associations of early callous-unemotional, oppositional, and ADHD behaviors: multiple domains within early-starting conduct problems? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(6), 657–666.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar