Convergent Validity between Three Self-Report Measures of Children’s Play and Activity Interests

ABSTRACT

It is important for assessments used by occupational therapists to have documented evidence of their validity. This adds to the knowledge about what specific factors assessments measure and inform their utility for use in clinical practice by occupational therapists. The convergent validity between the Children’s Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment & Preferences for Activities of Children (CAPE/PAC), Kid Play Profile (KiPP), and Pediatric Activity Card Sort (PACS) was investigated. This will address gaps in the current body of psychometric evidence related to these three participation-focused, child self-reported measures of children’s play and activity interests. Fifty Australian children without disabilities (x̅ age 8.54 ± 2.04 years; 64% female) completed the CAPE/PAC, KiPP, and PACS. Data were analyzed using Spearman Rho correlations with bootstrapping. Several significant low to moderate level correlations (r_s = 0.280, p < .05 to r_s = 0.552, p < .01) were found between the scale domains of the CAPE, PAC, KiPP, and PACS. Evidence of the convergent validity between the CAPE/PAC, KiPP, and PACS was established. This indicates that the three measures appear to measure several similar play and activity interest factors. Given the differences between the CAPE/PAC, KiPP, and PACS in the mode of administration, time needed to complete, purchase costs and profile of score results obtained, the convergent evidence provides additional information for occupational therapists toward making informed decisions about the most appropriate assessment(s) to potentially use. Further validity research is recommended.

KEYWORDS:

• Play
• leisure activities
• assessment
• child-centered
• validity

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to the participants and their families for generously donating their time to this research study. Acknowledgments are also extended to Michelle Thompson, Kerry Doslov, Diane Hobbs, and Catherine Lugton.

Authors’ Contributions

The three authors all made the following contributions in the execution, drafting, and completion of this manuscript:

• design of the work

• acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data

• drafted the article

• approved the version to be published

• participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for its contents.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) confirm that there is no conflict of interest.

Research Ethics

Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Ethics Advisory Group, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (HEAG-H 34_2018) on 24/04/2018. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants who took part in the study.

Additional information

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.