Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Construct Validity of the Teacher Version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a Sample of Elementary-Aged Children in the United States

  • Published:
Contemporary School Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This exploratory study assesses the utility of the U.S. version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) teacher form as a screener for mental health and behavior concerns. The SDQ was administered to a heavily economically vulnerable, Latinx community sample of 391 students in grades K-6. Internal reliability and differences by sex and grade were analyzed, and multidimensional item response theory models were conducted. Support was found for a five-factor model allowing factor scores to be used to differentiate between student abilities. Results revealed that the U.S. version of the SDQ teacher form was adequate for identifying students from a majority Latinx population who are experiencing general difficulties; however, utilization of the SDQ as a standalone measure is not indicated. Teachers rated boys higher on total difficulties, conduct, hyperactivity–inattention, and social concern scales. Girls were rated higher on prosocial scales. Grade level differences are also noted. Findings of this exploratory study indicate that items on the SDQ teacher form don’t differentiate ability in an ideal manner. Recommendations for interpretation of the SDQ, as well as future research, are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the child behavior checklist 4–18 and 1991 profile. University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry.

  • Achenbach, T. M., Becker, A., Döpfner, M., Heiervang, E., Roessner, V., Steinhausen, H., & Rothenberger, A. (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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01867.x.

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.

  • Becker, A., Steinhausen, H., 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(Suppl1), 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-006-1008-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bøe, T., Hysing, M., Skogen, J. C., & Breivik, K. (2016). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): Factor structure and gender equivalence in Norwegian adolescents. PLoS ONE, 11(5), 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdon, K. H., Goodman, R., Rae, D. S., Simpson, G., & Koretz, D. S. (2005). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: U.S. normative data and psychometric properties. Journal of the Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 44(6), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.chi.0000159157.57075.c8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2014.0039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costello, E., He, J., Sampson, N., Kessler, R., & Merikangas, K. (2014). Services for adolescents with psychiatric disorders: 12-month data from the National Comorbidity Survey–Adolescent. Psychiatric Services, 65(3), 359–366.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.

  • Dettlaff, A. J., & Cardoso, J. B. (2010). Mental health need and service use among Latino children of immigrants in the child welfare system. Children and Youth Services Review, 32(10), 1373–1379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.06.005.

  • Di Riso, D., Salcuni, S., Chessa, D., Raudino, A., Lis, A., & Altoè, G. (2010). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Early evidence of its reliability and validity in a community sample of Italian children. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(6), 570–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickey, W. C., & Blumberg, S. J. (2004). Revisiting the factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: United States, 2001. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 43(9), 1159–1167. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.chi.0000132808.36708.a9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Distefano, C., & Morgan, G. (2014). A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A., Strand, P. S., Heinrichs, N., & Cerna, S. (2012). Use of the teacher version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire with German and American preschoolers. Early Education & Development, 23(4), 493–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2010.532082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, K., Jones, F. W., & Mallett, J. (2014). Differences in the factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in Northern Irish children. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 20(3), 330–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emam, M. M., Abu Hilal, M. M., Kazem, A. M., & Alkharousi, S. J. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Arabic self-report version of the Strengths and Difficulties questionnaire. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 59, 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2016.09.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

  • Ezpeleta, L., Granero, R., de la Osa, N., Penelo, E., & Domènech, J. M. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 3-year-old preschoolers. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 54(3), 282–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2012.07.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feil, E. G., Walker, H., Severson, H., & Ball, A. (2000). Proactive screening for emotional/behavioral concerns in head start preschools: Promising practices and challenges in applied research. Behavioral Disorders, 26(1), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290002600103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fortuna, K. & Knafo, A. (2014). Parental and genetic contributions to prosocial behavior during childhood. In L. M. Padilla-Walker, & G. Carlo (Eds.). Prosocial development: A multidimensional approach (np). doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199964772.001.0001

  • Gage, N. A., Wilson, J., & MacSuga-Gage, A. (2014). Writing performance of students with emotional and/or behavioral disabilities. Behavioral Disorders, 40, 3–14. https://doi.org/10.17988/0198-7429-40.1.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galvan, T., & Gudiño, O. G. (2019). Understanding Latinx youth mental health disparities by problem type: The role of caregiver culture. Psychological Services.

  • Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(5), 581–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, A., Lamping, D. L., & Ploubidis, G. B. (2010). 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. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38(8), 1179–1191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-010-9434-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gudiño, O. G., Lau, A. S., Yeh, M., McCabe, K. M., & Hough, R. L. (2009). Understanding racial/ethnic disparities in youth mental health services: Do disparities vary by problem type? Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 17(1), 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagquist, C. (2007). The psychometric properties of the self-reported SDQ—An analysis of Swedish data based on the Rasch model. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(5), 1289–1301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartig, J., & Höhler, J. (2009). Multidimensional IRT models for the assessment of competencies. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35(2-3), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2009.10.002.

  • Hill, C. R., & Hughes, J. N. (2007). An examination of the convergent and discriminant validity of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(3), 380–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.22.3.380.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

  • Ikeda, M. J., Neessen, E., & Witt, J. C. (2008). Best practices in universal screening. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 17–36). National Association of School Psychologists.

  • Kamphaus, R. 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. 3–16). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14316-000.

  • Keller, F., & Langmeyer, A. (2019). An item response theory analysis of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(2), 266–279. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000390.

  • Kettler, R. J., Glover, T. A., Albers, C. A., & Feeney-Kettler, K. A. (2014). An introduction to universal screening in education settings. 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. 3–16). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14316-000.

  • Kline, R. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

  • Koehler, K. J., & Larntz, K. (1980). An empirical investigation of goodness-of-fit statistics for sparse multinomials. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75(370), 336–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, N., Barrett, K., & Morgan, G. (2015). IBM SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and Interpretation (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis.

  • Levitt, J. M., Saka, N., Romanelli, L. H., & Hoagwood, K. (2007). Early identification of mental health problems in schools: The status of instrumentation. Journal of School Psychology, 45(2), 163–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.11.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merikangas, K. R., He, J., Burstein, M., Swendsen, J., Avenevoli, S., Case, B., Georgiades, K., Heaton, L., Swanson, S., & Olfson, M. (2011). Service utilization for lifetime mental disorders in U.S. adolescents: Results of the national comorbidity Survey–Adolescent supplement (NCS-A). Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 50(1), 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2010.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mieloo, C. L., Bevaart, F., Donker, M. C. H., can Oort, F. V. A., Raat, H., & Jansen, W. (2014). Validation of the SDQ in a multi-ethnic population of young children. European Journal of Public Health, 24(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckt100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49(1), 115–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus user’s guide (Version 8.4) [Computer software and manual]. Muthén & Muthén www.statmodel.com.

  • Niclasen, J., Skovgaard, A. M., Andersen, A. M. N., Sømhovd, M. J., & Obel, C. (2013). A confirmatory approach to examining the factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): A large scale cohort study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41(3), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-012-9683-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Palmieri, P. A., & Smith, G. C. (2007). Examining the structural validity of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in a U.S. sample of custodial grandmothers. Psychological Assessment, 19(2), 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.19.2.189.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Pastor, P. N., Reuben, C. A., & Duran, C. R. (2012). Identifying emotional and behavioral problems in children aged 4–17 years: United states, 2001–2007. National Health Statistics Reports, 48, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reckase, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. Springer.

  • Rodríguez-Hernández, P. J., Betancort, M., Ramírez-Santana, G. M., García, R., Sanz-Álvarez, E. J., & De las Cuevas-Castresana, C. (2012). Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in a Spanish sample. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 12(2), 265–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romer, D., & McIntosh, M. (2005). The roles and perspectives of school mental health profession- also in promoting adolescent mental health. In D. L. Evans, E. B. Foa, R. E. Gur, H. Hendin, C. P. O'Brien, M. E. P. Seligman, & B. T. Walsh (Eds.), Treating and preventing adolescent mental health disorders: What we know and what we don’t know (pp. 598–615). Oxford University Press.

  • Rønning, J. A., Handegaard, B. H., Sourander, A., & Mørch, 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-004-0356-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, A. J., & Rudolph, K. D. (2006). A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 98–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.98.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ruchkin, V., Jones, S., Vermeiren, R., & Schwab-Stone, M. (2008). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: The self-report version in American urban and suburban youth. Psychological Assessment, 20(2), 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.20.2.175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ruchkin, V., Koposov, R., Vermeiren, R., & Schwab-Stone, M. (2012). The Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire: Russian validation of the teacher version and comparison of teacher and student reports. Journal of Adolescence, 35(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.06.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, C., Newman, L., Wagner, M., Cameto, R., Knokey, A. M., & Shaver, D. (2011). The post-high school outcomes of young adults with disabilities up to 6 years after high school: Key findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2011-3004). Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/pubs/20113004/pdf/20113004.pdf

  • Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C. M. E., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssens, J. M. A. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire for 4- to 12-year-olds: A review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 13(3), 254–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Thabet, A. A., Stretch, D., & Vostanis, P. (2000). Child mental health problems in Arab children: Application of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 46(4), 266–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/002076400004600404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tobia, V., & Marzocchi, G. M. (2017). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire-Parents for Italian school-aged children: Psychometric properties and norms. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 49, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-017-0723-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Education, & Office of Civil Rights . (2016). Civil rights data collection: A first look. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/2013-14-first-look.pdf

  • United States Census Bureau. (2018). QuickFacts: United States. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/IPE120216#qf-headnote-b

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.22.3.189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, M., & Newman, L. (2012). Longitudinal transition outcomes of youth with emotional disturbances. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 35(3), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.2975/35.3.2012.199.208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whitney, D. G., & Peterson, M. D. (2019). US national and state-level prevalence of mental health disorders and disparities of mental health care use in children. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(4), 389–391.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, J., Sun, S., & Cheah, C. S. L. (2016). Multitrait–multimethod analysis of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in young Asian American children. Assessment, 23(5), 603–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115586459.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Littleton Public Schools, Littleton, CO, USA

    Sara Wynne Bosik

  2. School of Education and Human Development, University of Colorado Denver, 1380 Lawrence Street #1114, Denver, CO, 80204, USA

    Bryn Harris, Noor Alibrahim & Courtney Donovan

Authors
  1. Sara Wynne Bosik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bryn Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Noor Alibrahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Courtney Donovan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bryn Harris.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bosik, S.W., Harris, B., Alibrahim, N. et al. Construct Validity of the Teacher Version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a Sample of Elementary-Aged Children in the United States. Contemp School Psychol 26, 518–534 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-021-00371-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-021-00371-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation