New interview and observation measures of the broader autism phenotype: impressions of interviewee measure.
A fresh 20-item interview scale captures broader autism traits with okay reliability, but it is not ready to stand alone.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team built a 20-item checklist for spotting the broader autism phenotype.
They watched adults during a short interview and scored each item live.
Then they checked if two raters gave the same scores and if the items hung together.
What they found
The scale showed decent reliability. Alpha was 0.78 and raters agreed.
Still, the authors say it needs more work before you trust it for big decisions.
How this fits with other research
Koegel et al. (1992) did the same thing twenty years earlier. Their 19-item IBSE scale also used live ratings for young kids with autism.
Kim et al. (2014) later built the OSEL, another live scale, but for language. All three studies show short observational tools can work.
Stevens et al. (2018) went the opposite route. They trimmed their screen to just five items and hit 93 % sensitivity. The new 20-item scale trades brevity for richer detail.
Why it matters
You now have a quick way to flag broader autism traits in adults. Use it for research or to spot family members who might need support. Just remember it is still a draft tool—pair it with sturdier measures until more labs replicate the numbers.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Try the 20 items during your next adult intake, then compare notes with a second rater to see if you both score the same way.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
A 20 item observational measure of social functioning, the Impression of Interviewee rating scale, is one of three measures devised to assess the broader autism phenotype. The sample studied included families containing at least two individuals with autism spectrum disorder; observations were undertaken by the researcher who interviewed the subject. An exploratory factor analysis suggested a single factor was most appropriate (Cronbach's α of 0.78). There was a modest but significant retest correlation of 0.42. Correlations between live ratings and blind consensus ratings of vignettes were high (0.93). Correlations with the interview measures were moderate but statistically significant. In conclusion, the observational scale provides a promising start but further work is required before general use can be recommended.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2013 · doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1810-2