2,010
Views
6
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Structural Validity of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency – Second Edition (BOT-2) Subscales and Composite Scales

Pages 323-353 | Received 01 Oct 2018, Accepted 02 Mar 2019, Published online: 14 Mar 2019
 

ABSTRACT

The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency – Second Edition (BOT-2) is a commonly used assessment of children’s skills. It is important that assessments have validity evidence reported about them. The objective of the study was to investigate the structural validity of the BOT-2’s eight subscales and four composite scales. A sample of 117 healthy children (65 males and 52 females; M = 10 years, 2 months, SD = 1 year, 4 months) completed the BOT-2. The Rasch Measurement Model was used to assess the dimensionality, hierarchical ordering, differential item functioning (DIF), and reliability of the eight BOT-2 subscales and four composite scales. The Fine Motor Precision (FMP), Manual Dexterity (MD), Running Speed & Agility (RSA), Upper Limb Coordination (ULC), and Strength (S) subscales exhibited reasonable dimensionality while the Fine Motor Integration (FMI), Bilateral Coordination (BC), and Balance (B) subscales did not. The Motor Coordination Composite (MCC) and Strength & Agility Composite (SAC) composite scales demonstrated good dimensionality while the Fine Motor Manual Control Composite (FMMCC) and Body Coordination (BCC) scales did not. The FMP, MD, BC, and RSA subscales and SAC composite scales did not exhibit adequate hierarchical ordering. The FMI, B, RSA, and ULC subscales and the MCC and BCC composite scales exhibited DIF based on gender. The eight subscales and four composite scales all had excellent item reliability with all coefficients being >.95. A number of the BOT-2 subscales and composite scales appear problematic with two or more issues in relation to dimensionality, hierarchical ordering, DIF and/or reliability: FMI, BC, B, RSA, and BCC. Therefore, only some of the BOT-2 subscales and composite scales can be used with confidence.

Authors’ contributions

Dr. Ted Brown designed the study, collected the data, performed the statistical analyses, completed the interpretation of the data findings, and drafted the manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Additional information

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 168.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.