Measuring problem behaviors in children with mental retardation: dimensions and predictors.
Two parent checklists overlap only partly for kids with ID, so age, IQ, and dual forms sharpen assessment.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team compared two parent checklists for kids with intellectual disability.
They used the CBCL and the lesser-known CDER.
Factor analysis showed which problem-behavior clusters each tool picks up.
Child age and level of disability were also tested as predictors.
What they found
CBCL and CDER share some behavior factors but also capture unique ones.
Older kids and those with lower IQ scored higher on internalizing items.
No single checklist told the whole story.
How this fits with other research
Tyler et al. (2021) later added teacher reports and still saw only low-to-moderate agreement with parents.
That extends this work: you need both sides to catch internalizing problems.
Vassos et al. (2023) reviewed adult tools and found most lack solid psychometrics.
Their warning reinforces why child tools like CBCL must be re-checked before use with adults.
Dawson et al. (2000) used the same factor-analytic lens on the adult PIMRA scale.
Together the studies form a chain: factor structure matters across age and tool.
Why it matters
You now have evidence that CBCL and CDER overlap but do not duplicate each other.
If you screen a child with ID and results feel incomplete, add the other checklist.
Also weigh age and IQ when internalizing scores spike; they may explain the bump rather than a new disorder.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Run both CBCL and CDER on your next intake with ID, then compare factors side-by-side.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Scores from the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991a) and the Client Development Evaluation Report (CDER; California Department of Developmental Services, 1980) for 67 children and adolescents with mental retardation were examined to evaluate the factorial validity of the instruments. Four factor analyses were conducted. The initial factor analysis of CBCL data failed to confirm the presence of the five first-order factors previously reported for the CBCL standardization sample (Achenbach, 1991b). Second, the higher-order factors of Externalizing and Internalizing behaviors, similar to the structure reported for the CBCL standardization sample (Achenbach, 1991b), were confirmed on the present sample. Third, the two CDER factors of Personal Maladaption and Social Maladaption, previously identified by Widaman, Gibbs, and Geary (1987), were also confirmed. Finally, a higher-order factor analysis of the two factor scores from the CBCL and two factor scores from the CDER was conducted to study the congruence between the CBCL Externalizing and CDER Social Maladaption dimensions, and between the CBCL Internalizing and CDER Personal Maladaption factors. Moderate levels of congruence were found. Next, child characteristics, including level of mental retardation, age, and four dimensions of adaptive behavior, were used as predictors of problem behavior. No child characteristics were significantly related to the CBCL Externalizing dimension, but child age and level of mental retardation were significant predictors of the CBCL Internalizing dimension. CDER Cognitive Competence predicted CDER Social Maladaption, and child age predicted CDER Personal Maladaption. The findings are discussed in relation to previous studies of problem behaviors of children and adolescents with mental retardation.
Research in developmental disabilities, 1997 · doi:10.1016/s0891-4222(97)00020-6