Cross-national invariance of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder factors in Japanese and U.S. university students.
ADHD self-ratings break into the same two factors for Japanese and U.S. students, so one scoring rule works for both.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Davis et al. (2011) asked Japanese and U.S. college students to fill out the same ADHD self-report form.
They used math tests to see if a two-factor or three-factor model fit both groups better.
What they found
The two-factor model won. It fit both countries equally well.
In plain words, inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity show up the same way in both cultures.
How this fits with other research
Ohnishi et al. (2010) and Tani et al. (2010) already found the same two-factor shape in Japanese children rated by teachers and parents.
Mark’s team simply proves the pattern still holds when the students rate themselves.
Wakabayashi et al. (2006) did a similar cross-country check with the autism-spectrum quotient and also got matching factor shapes, showing this kind of invariance is doable across diagnoses.
Why it matters
If you test ADHD in bilingual or immigrant university clients, you can trust the same two-factor scoring rules. No need to build separate norms for Japanese students. Just run the usual inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity subtotals and compare them to the same cut-offs you use for U.S. students.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Use the standard two-factor scoring on your next ADHD self-report form, even if the student is Japanese.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Prior research with children generally supports the two-dimensional structure of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD; inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive factors) of the DSM-IV-TR as well as invariance of the two-factor structure across nations and cultures. Research with adults supports either a two-factor or three-factor structure depending on reporting source and breadth of symptoms assessed. However, research with adults is limited and there are few studies addressing cross-national invariance in adults. The purposes of this study were to (1) assess relative fit of two- versus three-factor solutions for self-report of childhood and recent ADHD symptoms in adults; and (2) further establish cross-national invariance of factors. Participants included 271 U.S. and 712 Japanese university students who completed a rating scale assessing the 18 DSM-IV-TR ADHD symptoms. Confirmatory factor analysis using Mplus (Version 6) and the mean and variance-adjusted weighted least squares (WLSMV) procedure showed invariance of two- and three-factor models across U.S. and Japanese samples. The two- and three-factor models showed similar fit indices. Neither a two-factor or three-factor model was clearly superior. The two-factor model was favored, however, because it is more parsimonious and consistent with current theory, and because of high correlations between hyperactive and impulsive factors in the three-factor models. Invariance across nations is consistent with previous studies and supports ADHD as a universally valid syndrome rather than a cultural construct. These results add to the limited knowledge of assessment of ADHD symptoms in Japan.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2011 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2011.05.004