Premium
Test–retest reliability and criterion validity of the Chinese version of CBCL, TRF, and YSR
Author(s) -
Leung Patrick W.L.,
Kwong S.L.,
Tang C.P.,
Ho T.P.,
Hung S.F.,
Lee C.C.,
Hong S.L.,
Chiu C.M.,
Liu W.S.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of child psychology and psychiatry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.652
H-Index - 211
eISSN - 1469-7610
pISSN - 0021-9630
DOI - 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01570.x
Subject(s) - cbcl , psychology , psychometrics , reliability (semiconductor) , developmental psychology , test validity , clinical psychology , test (biology) , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , paleontology , biology
Background: Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of CBCL, TRF, and YSR were understudied. This study aimed at examining their test–retest reliability and criterion validity. Methods: Three Chinese community and clinic samples were recruited in Hong Kong. The parents, teachers, and youths respectively completed the CBCL, TRF, and YSR. Results: The Chinese CBCL, TRF, and YSR were test–retest reliable and valid. However, there was score/case attenuation at retest. CBCL and TRF appeared to screen externalizing and ADHD problems better, while YSR screened internalizing problems better. Conclusions: Clinicians should be cautious about score/case attenuation at retest while using CBCL, TRF, and YSR to chart patients’ progress. They should also recognize their different strengths in screening various disorders.