The Aberrant Behavior Checklist with children and adolescents with dual diagnosis.
The ABC is acceptable for dual-diagnosis youth, yet its modest inter-rater reliability means you should interpret scores with caution.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team tested the Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) on kids who have both intellectual disability and another psychiatric diagnosis.
They looked at how well the checklist hangs together, whether different raters agree, and if scores line up with other measures.
What they found
The ABC showed good internal consistency and decent validity for these dual-diagnosis youth.
Inter-rater reliability was only modest, so two people scoring the same child may not match closely.
How this fits with other research
Katz et al. (2003) later found stronger inter-rater reliability for the PDDBI in preschoolers with PDD.
The PDDBI’s better agreement may come from its newer design and clearer item wording.
Together, the studies tell us older tools like the ABC still work, but newer ones can give tighter agreement between raters.
Why it matters
Keep using the ABC in inpatient settings, but note its modest rater agreement when you share scores with the team. If you need tighter reliability, consider adding a second rater or switching to a newer scale such as the PDDBI for preschool cases.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Have a second staff member complete an ABC on the same child this week and compare totals before the treatment meeting.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC; Aman, Singh, Stewart, & Field, 1985a, 1985b) is a 58-item third-party informant rating scale originally developed for institutionalized, low-functioning adolescents and adults. The present study investigated the appropriateness of the scale for youngsters with dual diagnosis of mental retardation and psychiatric disturbance. Over a period of 2 1/2 years, 204 patients (199 after data reduction) from a child psychiatry unit were rated twice daily by direct care staff. Data analysis addressed internal consistency, interrater reliability, criterion validity, and robustness of the factor structure. Internal consistency was satisfactory with alpha coefficients ranging from .82 to .94. Interrater reliability varied between subscales but was relatively low (Pearson correlations between .39 to .61). In terms of its criterion validity, the ABC was sensitive to psychiatric diagnoses and age and the original 5-factor structure was robust (congruence coefficients ranged between .80 to .89). Yet, only a relatively small proportion of the variance (31.5%) was explained by factor analysis indicating possible limitations of the ABC for this population. Given the paucity of assessment instruments for this particular population and the difficulty involved in developing new population-specific instruments, the ABC can be recommended for children and adolescents with dual diagnosis.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 1991 · doi:10.1007/BF02206994