Rasch Analysis of the Emotional and Behavioral Screener

  • Allen G. Garcia
  • Matthew C. Lambert
  • Michael H. Epstein
  • Douglas Cullinan
Original Paper


The present study examined the measurement properties of the Emotional and Behavioral Screener (EBS), a universal screening instrument which identifies students presenting with emotional and behavioral problems. The primary research questions sought to examine the degree to which the EBS item responses fit the Rasch model through evaluating fit of item responses to the Rasch model and item-measure correlations. The sample consisted of K-12 students with emotional disturbance (n = 1138) and with no identified disabilities (n = 1096). Students were rated by their teachers on the 10-item EBS. The findings suggested the EBS possesses favorable measurement properties such that most items had (1) overall good fit to the Rasch model, (2) a few items across age/gender that assess internalizing problems were found to be somewhat problematic, (3) the item hierarchy was found to align with logical and theoretical expectations, and (4) teachers endorsed the response options in a reliable and predictive manner with response categories mostly being distinguishable from one another. Overall, the results justify the interpretations and decisions made with the EBS scores.


Behavior assessment Universal screening Emotional and Behavioral Screener (EBS) Rasch model Emotional disturbance 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Allen G. Garcia declares that he has no conflict of interest; Matthew C. Lambert declares that he has no conflict of interest; Michael H. Epstein is a developer of the Emotional and Behavioral Screener and receives royalties from the sales of the assessment; Douglas Cullinan is a developer of the Emotional and Behavioral Screener and receives royalties from the sales of the assessment; the data were analyzed and interpreted independently by Allen G. Garcia and Matthew C. Lambert.


  1. Andrich, D. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Bradley, R., Doolittle, J., & Bartolotta, R. (2008). Building on the data and adding to the discussion: The experiences and outcomes of students with emotional disturbance. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 4–23. Scholar
  4. Bruhn, A. L., Woods-Groves, S., & Huddle, S. (2014). A preliminary investigation of emotional and behavioral screening practices in K-12 schools. Education and Treatment of Children, 37, 611–634. Scholar
  5. Cronbach, L. J. (1954). Report on a psychometric mission to Clinicia. Psychometrika, 19, 263–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cullinan, D., & Epstein, M. H. (2013a). Development, reliability, and construct validity of the Emotional and Behavioral Screener. Preventing School Failure, 57, 223–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cullinan, D., & Epstein, M. H. (2013b). Emotional and Behavioral Screener. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  8. Dever, B. V., Raines, T. C., Dowdy, E., & Hostutler, C. (2016). Addressing disproportionality in special education using a universal screening approach. The Journal of Negro Education, 85, 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunlap, G., Strain, P. S., Fox, L., Carta, J., Conroy, M., Smith, B., et al. (2006). Prevention and intervention with young children’s challenging behavior: A summary of current knowledge. Behavioral Disorders, 32, 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eklund, K., & Dowdy, E. (2014). Screening for behavioral and emotional risk versus traditional school identification methods. School Mental Health, 6, 40–49. Scholar
  11. Epstein, M. H., & Cullinan, D. (2010). Scales for assessing emotional disturbance (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  12. Federal Register. (2006). Assistance to states for the education of children with disabilities and preschool grants for children with disabilities; Final Rule 34. CFR Parts 300 and 301, 71 Fed. Reg. 46540 (August 14, 2006).Google Scholar
  13. Fontaine, R. G., Fida, R., Paciello, M., Tisak, M. S., & Caprara, G. V. (2014). The mediating role of moral disengagement in the developmental course from peer rejection in adolescence to crime in early adulthood. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 20, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gage, N. A. (2013). Characteristics of students with emotional disturbance manifesting internalizing behaviors: A latent class analysis. Education and Treatment of Children, 36, 127–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glover, T. A., & Albers, C. A. (2007). Considerations for evaluating universal screening assessments. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 117–135. Scholar
  16. Goodman, R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harrison, J. R., Vannest, K., David, J., & Reynolds, C. (2012). Common problem behaviors of children and adolescents in general education classrooms in the United States. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 20, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hersh, R., & Walker, H. (1983). Great expectations: Making schools effective for all students. Policy Studies Review, 2, 147–188.Google Scholar
  19. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).Google Scholar
  20. Kamphaus, R. W., & Reynolds, C. R. (2015). BASC-3 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
  21. Kamphaus, K. W., Reynolds, C. R., & Dever, B. V. (2014). Behavioral and mental health screening. In R. J. Kettler, T. A. Glover, C. A. Albers, & K. A. Feeney-Kettler (Eds.), Universal screening in educational settings: Evidence-based decision making for schools (pp. 249–273). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50, 1–73. Scholar
  23. Kilgus, S. P., & von der Embse, N. P. (2014). Social, academic, and emotional behavior risk screener (SAEBRS). Minneapolis, MN: Theodore J. Christ & Colleagues.Google Scholar
  24. Lambert, M. C., Epstein, M. H., Ingram, S., Simpson, A., & Bernstein, S. (2014). Psychometrics and measurement invariance of the Emotional and Behavioral Screener. Behavioral Disorders, 39, 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lambert, M. C., January, S.-A. A., & Pierce, C. D. (2016). Latent structure of scores from the Emotional and Behavioral Screener. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36, 249–260. Scholar
  26. Linacre, J. M. (1994). PROX with missing data. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, 378.Google Scholar
  27. Linacre, J. M. (1997). The normal cumulative distribution and the logistic ogive. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 11, 569.Google Scholar
  28. Linacre, J. M. (2002). Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3, 85–106.Google Scholar
  29. Merikangas, K. R., He, J. P., Burstein, M., Swendsen, J., Avenevoli, S., Case, B., et al. (2011). Service utilization for lifetime mental disorders in US adolescents: Results of the National Comorbidity Survey-Adolescent Suppl. (NCS-A). Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 50, 32–45. Scholar
  30. Miller, F. G., Cohen, D., Chafouleas, S. M., Riley-Tillman, T. C., Welsh, M. E., & Fabiano, G. A. (2015). A comparison of measures to screen for social, emotional, and behavioral risk. School Psychology Quarterly, 30, 184–196. Scholar
  31. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Reddy, L. A., & Newman, E. (2009). School-based programs for children with emotional disturbance: Obstacles to program design and implementation and guidelines for school practitioners. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 25, 169–186. Scholar
  33. Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., & Haviland, M. G. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544–559. Scholar
  34. Smith, E. (2001). Evidence for the reliability of measures and validity of measure interpretation: A rasch measurement perspective. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2, 281–311.Google Scholar
  35. Snyder, T. D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2016). Digest of education statistics 2014 (NCES 2016-006). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  36. Stoiber, K. C., & Gettinger, M. (2016). Multi-tiered systems of support and evidence-based practices. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of multi-tiered systems of support (2nd ed., pp. 121–141). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ullman, J. B. (2001). Structural equation modeling. In B. G. Tabachnick & S. Fidell (Eds.), Using multivariate statistics (Vol. 4, pp. 653–771). San Francisco, CA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  38. Urben, S., Stephan, P., Habersaat, S., Francescotti, E., Fegert, J. M., Schmeck, K., et al. (2017). Examination of the importance of age of onset, callous-unemotional traits and anger dysregulation in youths with antisocial behaviors. European Child Adolescent Psychiatry, 26, 87–97. Scholar
  39. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2009). Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington DC: Author.Google Scholar
  40. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999). Mental health: A report of the surgeon general. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental Health Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health.Google Scholar
  41. von der Embse, N. P., Pendergast, L. L., Kilgus, S. P., & Eklund, K. R. (2016). Evaluating the applied use of a mental health screener: Structural validity of the social, academic, and emotional behavior risk screener. Psychological Assessment, 28, 1265–1275. Scholar
  42. Wagner, M., Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., Epstein, M. H., & Sumi, W. C. (2005). The children and youth we serve: A national picture of the characteristics of students with emotional disturbances receiving special education. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 13, 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Walker, H., Severson, H. H., & Feil, E. G. (2014). Systematic screening for behavior disorders (2nd ed.). Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing.Google Scholar
  44. Wei, X., Yu, J. W., & Shaver, D. (2014). Longitudinal effects of ADHD in children with learning disabilities or emotional disturbance. Exceptional Children, 80, 205–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wiley, A. L., Siperstein, G. N., Forness, S. R., & Brigham, F. J. (2010). School context and the problem behavior and social skills of students with emotional disturbance. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 19, 451–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wilson, M. (2004). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  47. Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1999). Measurement essentials (2nd ed.). Wilmington, DE: Wide.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allen G. Garcia
    • 1
  • Matthew C. Lambert
    • 2
  • Michael H. Epstein
    • 2
  • Douglas Cullinan
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Educational PsychologyUniversity of Nebraska–LincolnLincolnUSA
  2. 2.Department of Special Education and Communication DisordersUniversity of Nebraska–LincolnLincolnUSA
  3. 3.Department of Special EducationNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations