Hannah E Morton, Summer B Bottini, Alana J McVey, Jennifer M Gillis, Raymond G Romanczyk
{"title":"Different Tools, Different Results: Comparing Methods for Bullying Assessment in Autistic and ADHD Youth.","authors":"Hannah E Morton, Summer B Bottini, Alana J McVey, Jennifer M Gillis, Raymond G Romanczyk","doi":"10.1007/s10803-025-06938-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Autistic and ADHD youth face heightened risk of peer victimization and subsequent poor educational and mental health outcomes. Yet, bullying interventions have had limited success in these groups, potentially due to variability in bullying assessment methods across studies. Additionally, general tools validated for community samples may fail to capture the unique victimization experiences of these youth. This study evaluated the agreement and sensitivity of three bullying assessment methods-a single-item assessment, the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire (OBQ), and the disability-specific Assessment of Bullying Experiences (ABE)-and examined group differences in victimization risk. Caregivers of 516 autistic, ADHD, and community youth completed all three bullying assessments. Agreement across measures was examined overall and within groups using percent agreement, Cohen's kappa and McNemar's tests. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate group differences in bullying classification within each measure. Agreement between the OBQ and ABE was moderate overall, but weaker in each of the autism and ADHD groups. The single-item assessment underestimated bullying prevalence compared to multi-item questionnaires and also failed to detect any between-group differences. Youth with ADHD were nearly three times more likely to be bulled compared to community youth when measured by both the ABE (OR = 2.81; 95% CI [1.34, 5.92]) and the OBQ (OR = 2.76; 95% CI [1.37, 5.57]) whereas increased vulnerability for autistic youth with co-occurring ADHD was only identified by the ABE (OR = 2.34; 95% CI [1.42, 3.85]). Findings highlight the limitations of single-item assessments and general measures in capturing disability-specific bullying. By including disability-specific behaviors, the ABE provides greater sensitivity for assessing bullying in autistic and ADHD youth. Integrating theory-driven frameworks may further improve assessment and intervention approaches for understanding and addressing bullying risk in autistic and ADHD youth.</p>","PeriodicalId":15148,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-025-06938-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Autistic and ADHD youth face heightened risk of peer victimization and subsequent poor educational and mental health outcomes. Yet, bullying interventions have had limited success in these groups, potentially due to variability in bullying assessment methods across studies. Additionally, general tools validated for community samples may fail to capture the unique victimization experiences of these youth. This study evaluated the agreement and sensitivity of three bullying assessment methods-a single-item assessment, the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire (OBQ), and the disability-specific Assessment of Bullying Experiences (ABE)-and examined group differences in victimization risk. Caregivers of 516 autistic, ADHD, and community youth completed all three bullying assessments. Agreement across measures was examined overall and within groups using percent agreement, Cohen's kappa and McNemar's tests. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate group differences in bullying classification within each measure. Agreement between the OBQ and ABE was moderate overall, but weaker in each of the autism and ADHD groups. The single-item assessment underestimated bullying prevalence compared to multi-item questionnaires and also failed to detect any between-group differences. Youth with ADHD were nearly three times more likely to be bulled compared to community youth when measured by both the ABE (OR = 2.81; 95% CI [1.34, 5.92]) and the OBQ (OR = 2.76; 95% CI [1.37, 5.57]) whereas increased vulnerability for autistic youth with co-occurring ADHD was only identified by the ABE (OR = 2.34; 95% CI [1.42, 3.85]). Findings highlight the limitations of single-item assessments and general measures in capturing disability-specific bullying. By including disability-specific behaviors, the ABE provides greater sensitivity for assessing bullying in autistic and ADHD youth. Integrating theory-driven frameworks may further improve assessment and intervention approaches for understanding and addressing bullying risk in autistic and ADHD youth.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders seeks to advance theoretical and applied research as well as examine and evaluate clinical diagnoses and treatments for autism and related disabilities. JADD encourages research submissions on the causes of ASDs and related disorders, including genetic, immunological, and environmental factors; diagnosis and assessment tools (e.g., for early detection as well as behavioral and communications characteristics); and prevention and treatment options. Sample topics include: Social responsiveness in young children with autism Advances in diagnosing and reporting autism Omega-3 fatty acids to treat autism symptoms Parental and child adherence to behavioral and medical treatments for autism Increasing independent task completion by students with autism spectrum disorder Does laughter differ in children with autism? Predicting ASD diagnosis and social impairment in younger siblings of children with autism The effects of psychotropic and nonpsychotropic medication with adolescents and adults with ASD Increasing independence for individuals with ASDs Group interventions to promote social skills in school-aged children with ASDs Standard diagnostic measures for ASDs Substance abuse in adults with autism Differentiating between ADHD and autism symptoms Social competence and social skills training and interventions for children with ASDs Therapeutic horseback riding and social functioning in children with autism Authors and readers of the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders include sch olars, researchers, professionals, policy makers, and graduate students from a broad range of cross-disciplines, including developmental, clinical child, and school psychology; pediatrics; psychiatry; education; social work and counseling; speech, communication, and physical therapy; medicine and neuroscience; and public health.