Adaptation of the Chinese edition of the CSBS-DP: a cross-cultural comparison of prelinguistic development between Taiwanese and American toddlers.

Huang et al. (2014) translated the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales-Developmental Profile into Chinese. They gave the three-part screener to Taiwanese toddlers with typical development.

The team compared scores to the original U.S. norms. They looked at symbolic play, understanding words, and how kids used toys.

Taiwanese toddlers scored differently from U.S. kids in every area. The gap changed depending on how the data were collected: checklist, parent interview, or watching the child play.

Because the patterns were not the same across methods, the authors built new Taiwan-based norms.

Faughn et al. (2015) also adapted a social-communication scale, but for chimpanzees. Both papers show that a tool built for one group needs fresh norms when used in a new culture or species.

Hsu (2013) found that people with Williams syndrome understood language yet missed implied meaning. Together these studies warn us: good scores do not always mean the same thing across groups.

Chou et al. (2007) worked with Taiwanese adults with ID and again showed that local context shapes assessment results. All four papers push the same point—use local norms, not foreign ones.

If you screen a Mandarin-speaking toddler with the English CSBS-DP norms, you may flag typical kids as delayed or miss real delays. Ask for the Chinese edition and plot scores against the Taiwan tables. When no local norms exist, treat any commercial cutoff as a rough guide only, not a diagnosis.