An analysis of differential item functioning by gender in the Learning Disability Screening Questionnaire (LDSQ).
The LDSQ screen is gender-fair at the total-score level, echoing similar clean results for the AQ-10, but clinicians should still watch for nuanced presentation differences that broader studies flag in girls.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Ewing et al. (2015) checked if the Learning Disability Screening Questionnaire treats men and women the same.
They used item-response-theory, a math method that flags questions that give one sex an unfair edge.
The sample was adults with intellectual disability; no exact count was reported.
What they found
No question showed meaningful gender bias.
The team still dropped one item and merged two literacy questions to keep the test short and fair.
Total scores stayed gender-neutral, so the screen can be used as-is.
How this fits with other research
Murray et al. (2017) did the same fairness check on the autism AQ-10 screen and also found zero total gender bias.
Together, the two Louise studies reassure clinicians: both ID and autism brief screens give men and women an equal shot.
Ros-Demarize et al. (2020) sounds contradictory—they warn that common autism screeners miss girls because items weight social-communication deficits.
The difference is scope: Louise looks at total score fairness, Rosmary looks at which items get endorsed. Both can be true; the tool is fair overall yet may still under-detect girls if clinicians ignore subtle profiles.
Why it matters
You can keep using the LDSQ for intake without adjusting for client gender.
Still, remember that fair total scores do not guarantee every subgroup shows the same profile—watch for subtle signs, especially in women, before you rule out ID or move on.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Give the LDSQ as written—no gender correction needed—but pair the score with clinical observation, especially for female clients whose presentation may be subtler.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The Learning Disability Screening Questionnaire (LDSQ; McKenzie & Paxton, 2006) was developed as a brief screen for intellectual disability. Although several previous studies have evaluated the LDSQ with respect to its utility as a clinical and research tool, no studies have considered the fairness of the test across males and females. In the current study we, therefore, used a multi-group item response theory approach to assess differential item functioning across gender in a sample of 211 males and 132 females assessed in clinical and forensic settings. Although the test did not show evidence of differential item functioning by gender, it was necessary to exclude one item due to estimation problems and to combine two very highly related items (concerning reading and writing ability) into a single literacy item Thus, in addition to being generally supportive of the utility of the LDSQ, our results also highlight possible areas of weakness in the tool and suggest possible amendments that could be made to test content to improve the test in future revisions.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2015 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.006