Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Early Evidence of the Italian Parent-Report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ-P)

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Child Psychiatry & Human Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The parent-report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ-P) is a widely used scale that assesses children’s and adolescents’ strengths and difficulties. The present study applied this scale to Italian adolescents and compared the current results with previous Chinese findings and the United Kingdom norm. Participants were 422 Italian parents and their adolescent children. Parents and adolescents answered the parent-report and the self-report SDQ, respectively. Results showed that the five-factor first-order model was better than other competing models. Cronbach’s alpha of emotional problems, conduct problems, hyperactivity, peer problems, prosocial behavior, and total difficulties was .63, .52, .69, .51, .59, and .77 respectively for mother-report measure, and .67, .48, .67, .46, .55, and .79 respectively for father-report measure. Parent–adolescent agreements ranged from low to medium, whereas mother–father agreements were large. Parents did not rate boys and girls as well as early-adolescence and mid-adolescence differently. Italian parents rated their adolescent children to have lower levels of hyperactivity, peer problems, total difficulties, and higher levels of prosocial behavior than Chinese parents; and Italian mothers rated their adolescent children to have lower levels of hyperactivity than United Kingdom parents. In conclusion, the current findings suggest both strengths and inadequacies of the SDQ-P for Italian adolescents.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Italian version of the SDQ and the SDQ-P had been translated and back-translated; and it can be obtained on http://www.sdqinfo.org/.

References

  1. Goodman R (2001) Psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 40:1337–1345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hawes DJ, Dadds MR (2004) Australian data and psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 38:644–651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Du Y, Kou J, Coghill D (2008) The validity, reliability and normative scores of the parent, teacher and self report versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in China. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 2:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Niclasen J, Teasdale TW, Andersen A-MN, Skovgaard AM, Elberling H, Obel C (2012) Psychometric properties of the Danish Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire: the SDQ assessed for more than 70,000 raters in four different cohorts. PLoS One 7:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Woerner W, Becker A, Rothenberger A (2004) Normative data and scale properties of the German parent SDQ. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 13:110–113

    Google Scholar 

  6. McCrory C, Layte R (2012) Testing competing models of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire’s (SDQ’s) factor structure for the parent informant instrument. Personal Individ Differ 52:882–887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Muris P, Meesters C, van den Berg F (2003) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)—further evidence for its reliability and validity in a community sample of Dutch children and adolescents. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 12:1–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rodríguez-Hernández PJ, Betancort M, Ramírez-Santana GM, García R, Sanz-Álvarez EJ, 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. Int J Clin Health Psychol 12:265–279

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bourdon KH, Goodman R, Rae DS, Simpson G, Koretz DS (2005) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: US normative data and psychometric properties. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 44:557–564

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Moreno J, Silverman WK, Saavedra LM, Phares V (2008) Fathers’ ratings in the assessment of their child’s anxiety symptoms: a comparison to mothers’ ratings and their associations with paternal symptomatology. J Fam Psychol 22:915–919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sanne B, Torsheim T, Heiervang E, Stormark KM (2009) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in the Bergen child study: a conceptually and methodically motivated structural analysis. Psychol Assess 21:352–364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. van Roy B, Veenstra M, Clench-Aas J (2008) Construct validity of the five-factor Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in pre-, early, and late adolescence. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 49:1304–1312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Palmieri PA, Smith GC (2007) Examining the structural validity of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in a US sample of custodial grandmothers. Psychol Assess 19:189–198

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Goodman A, Lamping DL, Ploubidis GB (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. J Abnorm Child Psychol 38:1179–1191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stone LL, Otten R, Engels RCME, Vermulst AA, Janssens JMAM (2010) Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire for 4- to 12-year-olds: a review. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev 13:254–274

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Davé S, Nazareth I, Senior R, Sherr L (2008) A comparison of father and mother report of child behaviour on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 39:399–413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Li JB, Delvecchio E, Di Riso D, Nie YG, Lis A (2015) The parent-report version of the Spence Children’s Anxiety Scale (SCAS-P) in Chinese and Italian community adolescents: validation and cross-cultural comparison. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev (accepted)

  18. Li JB, Delvecchio E, Miconi D, Salcuni S, Di Riso D (2014) Parental attachment among Chinese, Italian, and Costa Rican adolescents: a cross-cultural study. Personal Individ Differ 71:118–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sheikh S, Furnham A (2000) A cross-cultural study of mental health beliefs and attitudes towards seeking professional help. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 35:326–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hollingshead AA (1975) Four-factor index of social status. Unpublished manuscript

  21. Goodman R, Meltzer H, Bailey V (1998) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a pilot study on the validity of the self-report version. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 7:125–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. American Psychological Association (2010) Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. http://apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

  23. Steiger JH (2007) Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modelling. Personal Individ Differ 42:893–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychol Bull 107:238–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cohen J (1992) A power primer. Psychol Bull 112:155–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Steiger JH (1980) Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychol Bull 87:245–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  28. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a pratical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B 57:289–300

    Google Scholar 

  29. Glickman ME, Rao SR, Schultz MR (2014) False discovery rate control is a recommended alternative to Bonferroni-type adjustment in health studies. J Clin Epidemiol 67:850–857

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Achenbach TM, Krukowski RA, Dumenci L, Ivanova MY (2005) Assessment of adult psychopathology: meta-analyses and implications of cross-informant correlations. Psychol Bull 131:361–382

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Achenbach TM, McConaughy SH, Howell CT (1987) Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. Psychol Bull 101:213–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rescorla LA, Achenbach TM, Ivanova MY, Harder VS, Otten L, Bilenberg N et al (2011) International comparisons of behavioral and emotional problems in preschool children: parents’ report from 24 societies. J Clin Adolesc Psychol 40:456–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Delvecchio E, Mabilia D, Di Riso D, Miconi D, Li JB (2014) A comparison of anxiety symptoms in community-based Chinese and Italian adolescents. J Child Fam Stud 24:2418–2431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Goodman A, Heiervang E, Fleitlich-Bilyk B, Alyahri A, Patel V, Mullick MSI et al (2012) Cross-national differences in questionnaires do not necessarily reflect comparable differences in disorder prevalence. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 47:1321–1331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization, University of Padua, Via Venezia, 15, Padua, Italy

    Jian-Bin Li, Daniela Di Riso, Adriana Lis & Silvia Salcuni

  2. Department of Philosophy, Social and Human Sciences and Education, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

    Elisa Delvecchio

Authors
  1. Jian-Bin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elisa Delvecchio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniela Di Riso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adriana Lis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Silvia Salcuni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jian-Bin Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, JB., Delvecchio, E., Di Riso, D. et al. Early Evidence of the Italian Parent-Report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ-P). Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 48, 335–345 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-016-0646-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-016-0646-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation