Are caregivers' reports of motivation valid? Reliability and validity of the Reiss Profile MR/DD.
Expect only moderate agreement among caregivers when using the Reiss Profile MR/DD to assess motives.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The researchers asked two or more caregivers to fill out the Reiss Profile MR/DD for the same adult with intellectual disability.
They then checked how often the caregivers picked the same answers and whether the profile still pointed to the right person.
What they found
Caregivers only agreed moderately with each other on the ratings.
Yet, when the scores were treated as a pattern, the tool still picked out the correct individual 95 percent of the time.
How this fits with other research
Gutierrez et al. (1998) tested a different caregiver scale, the MAS, and found poor reliability. The Reiss Profile MR/DD fares better, so it can be used with more confidence.
Cary et al. (2024) extended the question to autistic youth. They showed that adding the child’s own voice improves prediction of social skills. Together, the two studies tell us: caregiver reports are useful, but not the whole story.
Schroeder et al. (2014) compared caregiver ratings, self-ratings, and real-life behavior in Williams syndrome. Parents predicted actual social approach better than self-report did. This supports Matson et al. (2004): caregiver patterns hold value even when single-item agreement is modest.
Why it matters
You can keep using the Reiss Profile MR/DD to sketch motivation profiles for adults with ID, but expect some disagreement among staff or family. Treat the full pattern, not any single item, as the signal. When possible, add self-report or direct observation to round out the picture.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Plot the full 15-scale profile, not isolated items, and discuss any large mismatches with the team before writing goals.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Sensitivity theory proposes that there are wide individual differences in what motivates people with intellectual disability. The Reiss Profile MR/DD is a rating scale that measures 15 fundamental motives. This study examined the internal consistency and interrater reliability of the 15 subscales as well as the validity of motivational profiles. METHOD: The study consisted of two distinct but related steps. First, the interrater reliability of the rating scale was established by having pairs of raters evaluate 48 individuals. Second, raters were presented with three different motivational profiles and asked to identify which one corresponded to the individual they had rated 4 weeks earlier. RESULTS: Results indicated good internal consistency (average alpha=0.84), significant variability in the interrater reliability (average intraclass correlation coefficient=0.52), and excellent validity (95% of the correct profiles were chosen). Average discrepancies between pairs of raters are presented. CONCLUSIONS: Interrater reliability is an important topic for professionals working in the field of intellectual disability and results are discussed in terms of the factors that affect it. This is the first published study to report on the interrater reliability of the Reiss Profile MR/DD.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2004 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2003.00480.x