View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Content Validation of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale--3rd Edition: Strength-Based Interview

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Content Validation of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale--3rd Edition: Strength-Based Interview
Language: English
Authors: Pierce, Corey D. (ORCID 0000-0002-9283-5421), Epstein, Michael H., Wood, Matthew D. (ORCID 0000-0003-0039-9376)
Source: Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Sep 2023 31(3):184-190.
Availability: SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 7
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Behavior Rating Scales, Content Validity, Psychometrics, Mental Health, Ability, Test Items, Norm Referenced Tests
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale
DOI: 10.1177/10634266221099246
ISSN: 1063-4266
1538-4799
Abstract: Strength-based assessment has achieved acceptance from educational, mental health, and social service professionals as a means to measuring emotional and behavioral strengths of children. Several standardized, norm-referenced tests have been developed to assess these strengths; however, the primary mode of assessment is via informal interviews of parents and caregivers. In many cases, these interviews lack psychometric support, including basic validity and reliability. The purpose of this study was to document the multistep process used to establish the content validity of a newly developed instrument: Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: Strength-Based Interview. Specifically, the results of a survey of 40 U.S. professional mental health staff and educators are described where respondents rated the importance of interview questions to the construct of strength-based assessment. The findings of the survey as well as the 18 items deemed most important are reported. Research limitations, future research, and implications for mental health and educational professionals are discussed.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2023
Accession Number: EJ1387036
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFM4MZvXwGqF3a12Ii1wrYKAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDIbYOK5LPMnGJAIWTQIBEICBm0nbqHRPes92Y_vDNrTQeUsqVFc-Lh0gZLWPXlpu-rX-n635idnMhc9nkaSA9xlrQpNE3VORikkqL0Tk95FrB9OUt7TGU8uz0ul_IntDNB-G1utudX4AXBUqL3C24wta4sqMrtBvQ6MC6f9gKgfzL4ez7XlHcoM4cMBwL1tPIjFwbRgH_9kSCilvZCg2-dlkJrut_X9rvUBB_77_
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0168592534;ebd01sep.23;2023Aug01.06:51;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0168592534-1">Content Validation of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale–3rd Edition: Strength-Based Interview </title> <p>Strength-based assessment has achieved acceptance from educational, mental health, and social service professionals as a means to measuring emotional and behavioral strengths of children. Several standardized, norm-referenced tests have been developed to assess these strengths; however, the primary mode of assessment is via informal interviews of parents and caregivers. In many cases, these interviews lack psychometric support, including basic validity and reliability. The purpose of this study was to document the multistep process used to establish the content validity of a newly developed instrument: Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: Strength-Based Interview. Specifically, the results of a survey of 40 U.S. professional mental health staff and educators are described where respondents rated the importance of interview questions to the construct of strength-based assessment. The findings of the survey as well as the 18 items deemed most important are reported. Research limitations, future research, and implications for mental health and educational professionals are discussed.</p> <p>Keywords: assessment; behavioral; rating scales; behavior(s); methodology</p> <p>Critical educational, social, and mental health decisions are made every day about children and youth with the assistance of test instruments. These decisions include screening, diagnosing, and placing school-age children into programs, then monitoring the effects of these treatment programs, and evaluating the outcomes of these programs. Overall, these tests possess acceptable psychometric characteristics and are appropriate for screening purposes into special programs and services. However, these tests, for the most part, focus on measuring the deficits, problems, and pathologies in children and adolescents. While helpful in identifying children who can benefit from specialized programs and services, these tests are less useful in providing a comprehensive picture of the child or preparing an individualized treatment plan or Individualized education Program (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref1">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref2">7</reflink>]). To this end, over the past few decades, there have been efforts toward assessing the emotional and behavioral strengths of children, which has become known as strength-based assessment ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref3">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>Strength-based assessment has been defined</p> <p>as the measurement of emotional and behavioral skills, competencies, and characteristics that create a sense of personal accomplishment; contribute to satisfying relationships with family members, peers, and adults; enhance one's ability to deal with adversity and stress; and promote one's personal, social, and academic development. In a sense, strength-based assessment measures the positive emotions, behaviors, and aspects of an individual's life. ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref4">9</reflink>], p. 4)</p> <p>Strength-based assessment allows professionals to focus on a child's strengths when preparing educational, social services, and mental health treatment plans that may afford greater acceptability by the child, parents, and other key participants ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref5">9</reflink>]). Strength-based assessment has achieved wide acceptance and use from professionals in the helping professions. including social work, family services, child psychology, education, and mental health ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref6">8</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref7">14</reflink>]).</p> <p>Strength-based assessment is congruent with the concept of child well-being, which has been articulated by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref8">28</reflink>]). The UN Convention defined children's rights so that all children can achieve a reasonable level of development, protection, education, and overall quality of life. The UN Rights of the Child principles have been supported by many professional groups (e.g., American Psychological Association, Division 16; International School Psychology Association) and international groups (e.g., the European Commission, Office for Economic Cooperation and Development). The UN Convention conceived child well-being as not merely the absence of deficits, problems, or pathologies but as the presence of positive personal benchmarks such as personal strengths, competencies, and assets ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref9">3</reflink>]). To this end, several researchers have made significant efforts to conceptualize, define, and measure indicators of child well-being ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref10">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref11">14</reflink>]), including the assessment of emotional and behavioral strengths.</p> <p>Several tests have been designed to assess the strengths and well-being of children (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref12">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref13">16</reflink>]). One of the most widely used strength-based instruments is the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref14">9</reflink>]), which is a standardized, norm-referenced test that assesses the emotional and behavioral strengths of school-age children. The BERS is a multi-informant assessment system that collects data from youth (11–18 years of age), parents, and teachers. The youth, parent, and teacher forms include the same 52 items, with some slight wording changes to indicate the perspective of the respondent. The BERS provides scores on five dimensions of emotional and behavioral strengths (i.e., interpersonal strength, family strength, intrapersonal strength, school functioning strength, and affective strength) and a Total Strength Index. The psychometric functioning of the BERS has been well established ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref15">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref16">11</reflink>]).</p> <p>The Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale–3rd Edition (BERS-3; [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref17">10</reflink>]) was recently renormed and the psychometric status of the three rating scales (Teacher Rating Scale, Parent Rating Scale, and Youth Rating Scale) in the new edition was reestablished. Based on feedback from consumers of earlier editions of the BERS-2 (Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale–2nd Edition), a decision was made to develop and include an informal interview for consumers to use alongside the standard, norm-referenced rating forms. However, before the interview could be included in the BERS-3 ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref18">10</reflink>]), the content validity of the Strength-Based Interview had to be established.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-2">Content Validity: Preliminary Development Steps</hd> <p>Validity means the usefulness, suitability, and importance of what can be said based on a set of scores derived from a test ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref19">19</reflink>]). One type of validity to address early in the design of a new test is content validity, which involves "the systematic examination of the test content to determine whether it covers a representative sample of the behavior domain to be measured" ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref20">2</reflink>], p. 114). For qualitative instruments, content validity is the aspect of measurement that assesses whether items are complete and comprehensive and adequately reflect the respondents' perspective ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref21">5</reflink>]). In addition, content validity affords information that the format, instructions, and response features are appropriate, and the measure is understandable, feasible, and acceptable to the population of interest.</p> <p>Content validity has to be designed into tests at the time that the format, response properties, and items are conceptualized, developed, and written ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref22">24</reflink>]). The content validity of the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref23">10</reflink>]) was demonstrated through several phases.</p> <p>Before developing the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview, it was decided that the instrument (a) include content that address the major variables in strength-based assessment and child well-being, (b) cover strength-based questions that are important to the professionals who will use the interview form, and (c) be completed easily by the professionals who will use the form. With these guidelines, the content for the Strength-Based Interview proceeded in several phases. First, a comprehensive search of the research and practice literature on strength-based assessment and child well-being across professional disciplines was conducted. This literature search resulted in the identification of dozens of professional articles on the topic (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref24">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref25">20</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref26">21</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref27">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref28">23</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref29">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref30">26</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref31">29</reflink>]). Second, another literature search was conducted to identify current strength-based and child well-being instruments, interview guides, and informal inventories that measure strengths and well-being. This search led to the identification of 10 informal and formal measures (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref32">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref33">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref34">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref35">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref36">27</reflink>]). Third, the identified published literature and tests were reviewed and resulted in the identification of four domains that are considered central to strength-based assessment and child-well being: child, family, school, and community. The four domains formed the core areas of the interview form that was being developed. Fourth, within each domain interview, questions were written, which resulted in 38 strength-based questions. These questions were reviewed and edited by a panel of five professionals familiar with a strength-based approach to assessment. The last step of the process to develop the content validity of the Strength-Based Interview was to finalize the actual items included in the interview. The purpose of the present study was to continue to develop and refine the content of the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview. This was achieved by surveying a group of professionals on the importance of each of the items on the prototype form to assess children's strengths and well-being.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-3">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0168592534-4">Participants</hd> <p>Respondents were 40 individuals who completed a survey on strength-based assessment and were involved either in educating children or providing mental health or related services to children in schools. The participants included 33 (82.5%) females and seven (17.5%) males, with an average of 12.5 years of working with children and families. Further demographic data related to race/ethnicity were collected on the study participants, unfortunately, were not collected. Also, seven (17.5%) respondents had a bachelor's degree, 22 (55%) a master's degree, three (7.5%) an education specialist degree, and eight (20%) a doctoral degree. The positions they held included the following: 11 (27.5%) were school or clinical psychologist, nine (22.5%) were general education teachers, nine (22.5%) were social workers or counselors, six (15%) were special education teachers, and five (12.5%) were involved in other aspects or working with children. They came from 11 states representing each of the major geographical regions (i.e., West, 65%; East, 2.5%; North, 5%; and South, 27.5%) in the United States, although over half of the respondents were from the Western geographical region.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-5">Instrument</hd> <p>The instrument consisted of 38 questions that were organized into four domains that are central to strength-based assessment: child, family, school, and community. The child domain had nine questions (e.g., What are three of your child's greatest strengths or assets?), the family domain had 12 questions (e.g., What are your family's most important traditions?), the school domain had 10 questions (e.g., Who is your child's favorite teacher?), and the community domain had seven questions (e.g., Describe the best thing about your community.). The survey instrument asked the respondents to provide basic demographic information (e.g., gender, profession, years employed).</p> <p>The respondents were given information on strength-based assessment, the purpose of the task that they were to perform (i.e., judge importance of the items), the product that would be developed based on their responses (i.e., a Strength-Based Interview guide), and instructions on how to complete each item. The instructions were as follows:</p> <p>Based on your experience with children and families we would like you to rate the importance of these statements in understanding a child's strengths. By importance we mean information that you would like in this area to assist you in working with this child and family. If the statement is very important to understanding a child's strengths, choose Very Important. If a statement is somewhat important to understanding a child's strengths, choose Somewhat Important. If a statement is less important to understanding a child's strengths, choose Less Important. It is critical that you rate ALL statements.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-6">Procedure</hd> <p>Sixty-five individuals with experience educating or providing mental health or related services were recruited to participate in this study. Participants were emailed a link to a Qualtrics™ (Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA) survey to evaluate the quality of the interview items. Participant data were collected over an 8-week time period. Once an education professional consented to participate, they were given 3 weeks to review and rank each of the 38 potential BERS-3 interview questions in terms of level of importance for inclusion as an interview item. For each item, participants were instructed to provide a ranking of "very important" (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref37">3</reflink>), "somewhat important" (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref38">2</reflink>), or "less important" (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>). Participants received automated reminders at the end of Weeks 1, 2, and 3, if they had not yet completed the survey. The four items with the highest average rating from the focus domains Child Strengths, Family Strengths, School Strengths, and Community Strengths would be selected for inclusion in the interview.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-7">Results</hd> <p>A summary of responses from 40 participants is presented in Table 1. The table is organized into the four domains central to strength-based assessment and lists the items in each of the domains. For each item listed in Table 1, the number of responses marked very important, somewhat important, and less important as well as the mean score for each item are provided. The mean scores ranged from a high of 2.90 to a low of 1.67. Eight of the items were identified, by at least 30 of the respondents (75%), as Very Important and two items were identified by 36 respondents (90%) as Very Important (i.e., What are three of your child's greatest strengths or assets? What's working well for your child at the moment?). Based on the data provided by the respondents, the four highest rated items in each domain were selected. Two additional items, one in the Family Strengths domain and one in the School Strengths domain, scored very high and we included in the interview. As a result, an 18-item Strength-Based Interview was finalized.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p>Table 1. Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale–3rd Edition Interview Items by Domain.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th /><th align="center" colspan="3">Number of responses for item</th><th /></tr><tr><th align="center">Domain and Items</th><th align="center">Very important 3</th><th align="center">Somewhat important 2</th><th align="center">Less important 1</th><th align="center">Mean score</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="5">Child Strengths</td></tr><tr><td> What are three of your child's greatest strengths or assets?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>36</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>2.90</td></tr><tr><td> What is your child's favorite hobby, favorite sport?</td><td>18</td><td>18</td><td>4</td><td>2.35</td></tr><tr><td> Who is your child's best friend in the neighborhood?</td><td>8</td><td>11</td><td>21</td><td>1.68</td></tr><tr><td> How well does your child evaluate their own strengths and weaknesses?</td><td>18</td><td>20</td><td>2</td><td>2.40</td></tr><tr><td> Does your child accept discipline and supervision from adults?</td><td>32</td><td>7</td><td>1</td><td>2.78</td></tr><tr><td> What's working well for your child at the moment?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>36</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>2.90</td></tr><tr><td> What are the things in your child's life that help your child succeed?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>35</td><td>5</td><td>0</td><td>2.88</td></tr><tr><td> At a time of need, whom does your child turn to for help?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>31</td><td>7</td><td>2</td><td>2.72</td></tr><tr><td> How do you picture your child's life in 5 years?</td><td>21</td><td>16</td><td>3</td><td>2.45</td></tr><tr><td colspan="5">Family Strengths</td></tr><tr><td> What are three of your family's greatest strengths or assets?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>23</td><td>11</td><td>5</td><td>2.46</td></tr><tr><td> What does your family do for fun?</td><td>18</td><td>16</td><td>5</td><td>2.33</td></tr><tr><td> Describe afterschool or weekend activities that your family engages in together.</td><td>20</td><td>14</td><td>5</td><td>2.38</td></tr><tr><td> What are your family's most important traditions?</td><td>16</td><td>17</td><td>6</td><td>2.26</td></tr><tr><td> In your home are there clearly stated expectations and consequences for child behavior?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>31</td><td>6</td><td>2</td><td>2.79</td></tr><tr><td> What's working well for your family at the moment?</td><td>24</td><td>14</td><td>1</td><td>2.59</td></tr><tr><td> What are the things in your family's life that help your family succeed?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>29</td><td>9</td><td>1</td><td>2.72</td></tr><tr><td> When your family needs help, to whom do they turn to for assistance?</td><td>18</td><td>16</td><td>5</td><td>2.33</td></tr><tr><td> What person(s) have helped you and your family in the past?</td><td>11</td><td>21</td><td>7</td><td>2.10</td></tr><tr><td> How are your relationships with personnel from school, child care, and other child organizations?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>27</td><td>11</td><td>1</td><td>2.67</td></tr><tr><td> If you could have one family goal met within the next 12 months, what would it be?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>33</td><td>5</td><td>1</td><td>2.82</td></tr><tr><td colspan="5">School Strengths</td></tr><tr><td> What is your child's favorite subject in school?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>18</td><td>17</td><td>4</td><td>2.36</td></tr><tr><td> Who is your child's favorite teacher?</td><td>16</td><td>15</td><td>8</td><td>2.21</td></tr><tr><td> Who is your child's best friend in school?</td><td>13</td><td>16</td><td>10</td><td>2.08</td></tr><tr><td> Does your child have a mentor in school?</td><td>17</td><td>17</td><td>5</td><td>2.31</td></tr><tr><td> In your child's school are there clearly stated rules and consequences for behavior?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>29</td><td>7</td><td>3</td><td>2.67</td></tr><tr><td> Is your child involved in extracurricular activities in school?</td><td>18</td><td>16</td><td>5</td><td>2.33</td></tr><tr><td> Describe the best thing about your child's school.</td><td>10</td><td>23</td><td>6</td><td>2.10</td></tr><tr><td> How have school personnel fostered a school–family partnership?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>21</td><td>11</td><td>7</td><td>2.36</td></tr><tr><td> What school services have been or may be helpful to you and your child?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>33</td><td>4</td><td>2</td><td>2.80</td></tr><tr><td> How does the school provide a healthy environment for your child?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>18</td><td>17</td><td>4</td><td>2.36</td></tr><tr><td colspan="5">Community Strengths</td></tr><tr><td> What neighbors are the most helpful, caring to your child and family?</td><td>5</td><td>16</td><td>18</td><td>1.67</td></tr><tr><td> What positive connections do you have in your community (e.g., family, friends, groups)?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>27</td><td>9</td><td>3</td><td>2.62</td></tr><tr><td> Describe the best thing about your community.</td><td>9</td><td>21</td><td>9</td><td>2.23</td></tr><tr><td> In what community activities does your child and family participate?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>19</td><td>18</td><td>2</td><td>2.44</td></tr><tr><td> Which neighbors are the most helpful, caring to your child and family?</td><td>8</td><td>17</td><td>14</td><td>1.84</td></tr><tr><td> What makes a community service accessible or usable to your child and family?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>17</td><td>14</td><td>8</td><td>2.23</td></tr><tr><td> What kind of community supports have been or may be helpful to you and your family?<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref></td><td>25</td><td>10</td><td>4</td><td>2.54</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 Indicates items that were included in the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-8">Discussion</hd> <p>The purpose of the present study was to establish content validity for the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview. Establishing content validity of an instrument affords evidence that the conceptual model, content of the items and format, and overall measurement approach are applicable to the constructs being measured. The multistep approach applied in the present study, including a comprehensive examination of the literature, a review of other strength-based instruments, identification of critical domains of strength-based assessment, the writing of preliminary interview questions, and a survey of 40 professionals who rated the importance of each item. This multistep approach to content validity can afford the consumer confidence that the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview instrument is measuring the construct of interest.</p> <p>The BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview is a stand-alone instrument to be administered in approximately 15 to 20 min by educators or other social service professionals when interviewing a child's parent(s) or caregiver(s). The BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview consists of eight sections. <emph>Section 1: Identifying Information</emph> asks for basic information on the child and the professional conducting the interview. <emph>Section 2: Personal and Background Information</emph> calls for specific information about the child (e.g., age, race/ethnicity) and the parents or caregivers (e.g., education level) being interviewed. <emph>Section 3: Birth and Health Information</emph> seeks background about past and current health and medical status that suggest possible physical explanations for the student's present functioning. <emph>Sections 4 to 7: Child Strengths, Family Strengths, School Strengths, and Community Strengths</emph> address the strengths, competencies, resources, and assets that are present in the child's and family's important life domains. <emph>Section 8: Interviewer Notes</emph> provides space for the interviewer's brief notes about the parent's responses to interview prompts, manner of behaving during the interview, apparent inconsistencies or other information needing follow-up, identification of strength areas, and other observations and interpretations.</p> <p>Selection of the 18 items designed to help derive more in-depth understanding of the Child Strengths, Family Strengths, School Strengths, and Community Strengths is a critical step in the content validity process. The participant sample represented many of the school and community service personnel who are charged with helping students with challenging behavior improve in many facets of their lives every day. Each of the items selected to be a part of the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview were supported as being very or somewhat important by over three-quarters of the participants. This level of support for each of the items helps establish that the items actually measure the content the interview is intending to measure, strongly supporting the overall content validity of the instrument.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-9">Limitations and Future Research Directions</hd> <p>Several limitations of this research need to be noted. First, the sample of professional respondents was not selected on a random basis. Teachers, school psychologists, clinical psychologists, and social workers were contacted and asked to participate by completing an online survey. The sample of respondents included only those individuals who volunteered to participate and completed the survey. Thus, this sample does not provide information from individuals who did not participate and whose responses might be different from those individuals who participated. Second, the respondents were obtained from a convenience sample and were not randomly selected from all possible users of the interview. Over half of the respondents came from the Rocky Mountain region in the United States who were asked to participate and the overwhelming majority were employed in school settings and not working in child welfare, mental health, juvenile justice, and other social service agencies. As a result, the participants who responded were likely not representative of all consumers for whom this measure could be potentially useful. The generalizability of future research could be enhanced by randomly selecting respondents from a larger, more diverse sampling of users or by using stratified sampling procedures to ensure that the sample is representative of the larger population.</p> <p>The current study on content validity along with the prior research on the BERS-3 ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref40">10</reflink>]) provide support for many aspects of the BERS-3 instruments; yet there exist other directions for future study with the Strength-Based Interview. First, the test–retest reliability of the interview format needs to be established. Test–retest reliability refers to the degree to which a set of responses, in this case interview responses, are stable from one administration to another. The value of an interview, such as the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview, is based on the premise that the interview responses are stable, at least in the short term when the stability of the trait is high ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref41">1</reflink>]). Future researchers need to conduct the interview with parents or caregivers and conduct a second interview within a brief period of time (e.g., a 2-week period) to determine the stability of responses. Finally, researchers need to determine the social validity of the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview. Social validity refers to the acceptability to users or consumers of interventions, including assessment instruments ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref42">15</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref43">30</reflink>]). The degree to which assessment measures are seen in a favorable light by professionals who use the tests very likely influences the use of the measures and the fidelity with which they are used. Future researchers need to sample teachers, social workers, psychologists, and other professionals who use the instrument to determine how satisfied or acceptable they are with the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview.</p> <hd id="AN0168592534-10">Implications</hd> <p>The BERS-3 ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref44">10</reflink>]) is a suite of four assessment instruments and procedures specifically developed to assess the strengths, competencies, resources, and assets of school-age children. The BERS-3 has three nationally normed 52-item rating scales (Teacher Rating Scale, Parent Rating Scale, and Youth Rating Scale) that measure specific aspects of child functioning: interpersonal strengths, family involvement, intrapersonal strengths, school functioning, and affective strengths. The BERS-3 rating scales are psychometrically sound, operationalize the construct of childhood strengths, and can aid educational and social service personnel in the measurement of emotional and behavioral strengths. The BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview can be an important supplement to the standardized rating scales and can assist professionals in gathering richer behavioral data on children and families. Specifically, the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview may assist in (a) engaging the child and family in positive ways; (b) minimizing the frustration of parents and professionals by emphasizing strengths and positive solutions; (c) identifying what is working well for the child, family, and professionals; and (d) fostering a positive parent–professional relationship based on strengths and cooperation.</p> <ref id="AN0168592534-11"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref39" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> American Educational Research Association. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Author.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref20" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anastasi A., Urbina S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref9" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Ben-Arieh A. (2008). The child indicators movement: Past, present, and future. Child Indicators Research, 1, 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-007-9003-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref10" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bradshaw J., Richardson D. (2009). An index of child well-being in Europe. Child Indicators Research, 2, 319–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-009-9037-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref21" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Brod M., Tesler L. E., Christensen T. L. (2009). Qualitative research and content validity: Developing best practices based on science and experience. Quality of Life Research, 18(9), 1263–1278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9540-9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref1" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Chatzinikolaou R. (2015). How can strength-based interventions be useful for educational psychologists working with children and young people? Educational Psychology Research and Practice, 1(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.15123/uel.8856x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref2" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Climie E., Henley L. (2016). A renewed focus on strengths-based assessment in schools. British Journal of Special Education, 43(2), 108–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12131</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref6" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Cox K. F. (2006). Investigating the impact of strength-based assessment on youth with emotional or behavioral disorders. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 15, 278–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-006-9021-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref3" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Epstein M. H. (2004). Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: A strength-based approach to assessment (2nd ed.). PRO-ED.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Epstein M. H., Pierce C. D., Lambert M. C. (2022). Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: A strength-based approach to assessment (3rd ed.). PRO-ED.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Epstein M. H., Sharma J. (1998). Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: A strength-based approach to assessment. PRO-ED.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Furlong M. J., You S., Renshaw T. L., Smith D. C., O'Malley M. D. (2014). Preliminary development and validation of the social and emotional health survey for secondary students. Social Indicators Research, 117(3), 1011–1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0373-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> 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</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hart S. N., Hart B. N. (2014). Children's rights and school psychology: Historical perspective and implications for the profession. School Psychology International, 35(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034313508875</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kazdin A. E. (1977). Assessing the clinical or applied importance of behavior change through social validation. Behavior Modification, 1(4), 427–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/014544557714001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LeBuffe P. A., Shapiro V. B., Naglieri J. A. (2009). Devereux student strengths assessment. Kaplan Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leffert N., Benson P. L., Scales P. C., Sharma A. R., Drake D. R., Blyth D. A. (1998). Developmental assets: Measurement and prediction of risk behaviors among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2(4), 209–230. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0204_4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Manthey T. J., Knowles B., Asher D., Wahab S. (2011). Strengths-based practice and motivational interviewing. Advances in Social Work, 12(2), 126–151. https://doi.org/10.18060/959</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mertens D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. SAGE.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nickerson A. B., Fishman C. E. (2013). Promoting mental health and resilience through strength-based assessment in US schools. Educational and Child Psychology, 30(4), 7–17.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pulla V. R. (2017). Strengths-based approach in social work: A distinct ethical advantage. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 3(2), 97–114.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rawana E., Brownlee K. (2009). Making the possible probable: A strength-based assessment and intervention framework for clinical work with parents, children, and adolescents. Families in Society, 90(3), 255–260. https://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.3900</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Saleebey D. (Ed.). (2009). The strengths perspective in social work practice (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salvia J., Ysseldyke J., Witmer S. (2016). Assessment in special and inclusive education (13th ed.). Cengage Learning.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tedeschi R. G., Kilmer R. P. (2005). Assessing strengths, resilience, and growth to guide clinical interventions. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 36(3), 230–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36.3.230</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tsang K. L. V., Wong P. Y. H., Lo S. K. (2011). Assessing psychosocial well-being of adolescents: A systematic review of measuring instruments. Child: Care, Health and Development, 38(5), 629–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01355.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ungar M., Liebenberg L. (2011). Assessing resilience across cultures using mixed methods: Construction of the child and youth resilience measure. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(2), 126–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689811400607</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United Nations General Assembly. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. <ulink href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/crc.pdf">http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/crc.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> VandenBerg J. E., Grealish E. M. (1996). Individualized services and supports through the wraparound process: Philosophy and procedures. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5(1), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02234675</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wolf M. M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement, or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11(2), 203–214. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1978.11-203">http://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1978.11-203</ulink></bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0168592534-12"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> Corey D. Pierce and Michael H. Epstein are authors of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale–3rd Edition, which includes the BERS-3: Strength-Based Interview.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Corey D. Pierce</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9283-5421 Matthew D. Wood</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0039-9376</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Corey D. Pierce; Michael H. Epstein and Matthew D. Wood</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref43"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1387036
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Content Validation of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale--3rd Edition: Strength-Based Interview
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pierce%2C+Corey+D%2E%22">Pierce, Corey D.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9283-5421">0000-0002-9283-5421</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Epstein%2C+Michael+H%2E%22">Epstein, Michael H.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wood%2C+Matthew+D%2E%22">Wood, Matthew D.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0039-9376">0000-0003-0039-9376</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Emotional+and+Behavioral+Disorders%22"><i>Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders</i></searchLink>. Sep 2023 31(3):184-190.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 7
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Behavior+Rating+Scales%22">Behavior Rating Scales</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Content+Validity%22">Content Validity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychometrics%22">Psychometrics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mental+Health%22">Mental Health</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ability%22">Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Items%22">Test Items</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Norm+Referenced+Tests%22">Norm Referenced Tests</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Behavioral+and+Emotional+Rating+Scale%22">Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/10634266221099246
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1063-4266<br />1538-4799
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Strength-based assessment has achieved acceptance from educational, mental health, and social service professionals as a means to measuring emotional and behavioral strengths of children. Several standardized, norm-referenced tests have been developed to assess these strengths; however, the primary mode of assessment is via informal interviews of parents and caregivers. In many cases, these interviews lack psychometric support, including basic validity and reliability. The purpose of this study was to document the multistep process used to establish the content validity of a newly developed instrument: Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: Strength-Based Interview. Specifically, the results of a survey of 40 U.S. professional mental health staff and educators are described where respondents rated the importance of interview questions to the construct of strength-based assessment. The findings of the survey as well as the 18 items deemed most important are reported. Research limitations, future research, and implications for mental health and educational professionals are discussed.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1387036
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1387036
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/10634266221099246
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 7
        StartPage: 184
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Behavior Rating Scales
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Content Validity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychometrics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mental Health
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Items
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Norm Referenced Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Content Validation of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale--3rd Edition: Strength-Based Interview
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pierce, Corey D.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Epstein, Michael H.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wood, Matthew D.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Type: published
              Y: 2023
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1063-4266
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1538-4799
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 31
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders
              Type: main
ResultId 1