Factor validity and norms for the aberrant behavior checklist in a community sample of children with mental retardation.
The ABC’s four-factor structure is solid for kids with ID, so keep using the original scoring.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team ran a confirmatory factor analysis on the Aberrant Behavior Checklist. They used a large community sample of children with intellectual disability.
The goal was to see if the original four-factor structure still fit outside the lab.
What they found
The four ABC factors held up. Irritability, lethargy, stereotypy, and hyperactivity subscales all stayed separate.
You can keep using the standard scoring sheet for kids in special-ed classes.
How this fits with other research
Kildahl et al. (2025) later repeated the test with autistic children who also have ID. They got the same four-factor shape and added proof that scores stay stable over time.
Embregts (2000) looked at the rival Child Behavior Checklist in youth with mild ID. That tool showed poor reliability, so the ABC is the safer pick.
Bachman et al. (1988) had earlier checked the PIMRA in adults with ID. Their work set the stage for child-focused tools like the ABC.
Why it matters
You now have 30-year evidence that ABC subscale scores mean the same thing in everyday classrooms as they do in research clinics. Keep using the four-factor norms when you write present-level statements or track IEP behavior goals. No need to hunt for a newer checklist unless you work with autistic clients—then peek at Kildahl et al. (2025) to see which subscale needs extra caution.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open your last ABC report and confirm you totaled irritability, lethargy, stereotypy, and hyperactivity exactly as the manual says—no tweaks needed.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) is a 58-item rating scale that was developed primarily to measure the effects of pharmacological intervention in individuals living in residential facilities. This study investigated the use of the ABC in a sample of community children with mental retardation. Teacher ratings on the ABC were collected on 666 students attending special classes. The data were factor analyzed and compared with other studies using the ABC. In addition, subscales were analyzed as a function of age, sex, and classroom placement, and preliminary norms were derived. A four-factor solution of the ABC was obtained. Congruence between the four derived factors and corresponding factors from the original ABC was high (congruence coefficients ranged between .87 and .96). Classroom placement and age had significant effects on subscale scores, whereas sex failed to affect ratings. The current results are sufficiently close to the original factor solution that the original scoring method can be used with community samples, although further studies are needed to look at this in more detail.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 1992 · doi:10.1007/BF01048240