Selecting Assessment Instruments for Problem Behavior Outcome Research With Youth

Abstract

Using effect sizes from Erford, Paul, Oncken, Kress, & Erford ( 2014 Erford, B. T. , Paul, L. E. , Oncken, C. , Kress, V. E. , & Erford, M. R. (2014). Counseling outcomes for youth with oppositional behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling & Development, 92, 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2014.00125.x [Google Scholar] ) meta-analysis for treatments of oppositional defiant disorder and Erford, Bardhoshi, Ross, Gunther, & Duncan ( 2017 Erford, B. T. , Bardhoshi, G. , Ross, M. , Gunther, C. , & Duncan, K. (2017). Meta-analysis of counseling outcomes for youth with conduct disorders. Journal of Counseling & Development, 95, 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12115 [Google Scholar] ) meta-analysis of conduct problems in school-aged youth, the 6 most commonly used disruptive behavior instruments were analyzed for practical and technical strengths and weaknesses, and best use recommendations for screening and counseling outcome research were provided. The instruments included the Achenbach System of Empirically-Based Assessment (ASEBA), Revised Behavior Problem Checklist, Self-Report Delinquency Checklist, Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory/Sutter-Eyberg School Behavior Inventory, Conners–3 Rating Scale, and Parent Daily Report.