Publication Cover
Child Neuropsychology
A Journal on Normal and Abnormal Development in Childhood and Adolescence
Volume 13, 2007 - Issue 4
794
Views
100
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Construct Validity of Parent Ratings of Inhibitory Control

, , , &
Pages 345-362 | Received 18 Mar 2006, Accepted 18 Mar 2006, Published online: 12 Jun 2007
 

Abstract

Recent literature has emphasized the need to examine executive functions (EF) in children using multiple sources, including both parent rating and performance-based measures. Computerized Go/No-Go tests, including commercially available continuous performance tests (CPTs), represent one of the most commonly used methods of assessing inhibitory control—a variable central to the executive function construct. We examined the relationship between parent ratings of inhibitory control and CPT performance in two mixed clinical samples. Experiment 1 examined 109 children ages 6–18 using the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF; Gioia, Isquith, Guy, & Kenworthy, 2000) and the Conners' CPT-II (Conners, 2000). In this sample, ratings on the BRIEF Inhibit scale (mean T-score = 62.3) were significantly higher than the CPT-II commissions score (mean T-score = 50.7; p < .0001); and the BRIEF and CPT-II scores were not highly correlated (r = − .12). Experiment 2 examined a sample of 131 children ages 7–18 using the BRIEF and the Tests of Variables of Attention (TOVA; Greenberg, 1996). In this sample, parent ratings on the BRIEF Inhibit scale (mean T-score = 56.8) were similar to TOVA commissions scores (mean T-score = 58.6; p = .33), although still poorly correlated (r = −.02). Factor analyses exploring covariance between BRIEF scales CPT-II variables (Experiment 1) and between BRIEF and TOVA (Experiment 2) yielded similar findings. In both experiments, all eight BRIEF scales loaded on a single factor, with no overlap with either the CPT-II or the TOVA. In mixed outpatient clinical samples, the BRIEF appears to measure different elements of inhibitory control than those assessed by computerized continuous performance tests.

A portion of this paper was presented at the 32nd annual meeting of the International Neuropsychological Society in Baltimore, Maryland, February 2005. This research was supported HD-24061 (Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Center), P01 NS 35359 (MBD), M01 RR00052 (Johns Hopkins General Clinical Research Center), and the TOVA Research Foundation.

Notes

National Institutes of Health Consensus Statement (November 15–18,1998). Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Author

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.