Clinical utility of diagnosing limited prosocial emotions in young children using the Clinical Assessment of Prosocial Emotions (CAPE).

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-28 DOI:10.1037/pas0001279
Bryan Neo, Georgette E Fleming, Silvana Kaouar, Mei E Chan, Nikki N Huang, David J Hawes, Valsamma Eapen, Nancy Briggs, Eva R Kimonis
{"title":"Clinical utility of diagnosing limited prosocial emotions in young children using the Clinical Assessment of Prosocial Emotions (CAPE).","authors":"Bryan Neo, Georgette E Fleming, Silvana Kaouar, Mei E Chan, Nikki N Huang, David J Hawes, Valsamma Eapen, Nancy Briggs, Eva R Kimonis","doi":"10.1037/pas0001279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated the interrater reliability, convergent and divergent validity, incremental validity, and clinical prognostic utility of the Clinical Assessment of Prosocial Emotions (CAPE; Frick, 2013) for assessing limited prosocial emotions (LPE). Participants were 232 young children (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 3.94 years, <i>SD</i> = 1.46, range = 2-8; 74.6% boys) clinic-referred for conduct problems. We scored the CAPE using binary and dimensional scoring approaches and measured outcomes using parent-report and child laboratory measures. CAPE LPE symptom ratings had good interrater reliability. Children diagnosed with pretreatment LPE had more severe externalizing problems and lower empathy than children without LPE but did not differ in emotion recognition accuracy or anxiety. Dimensional CAPE symptom sum scores were associated with criterion variable scores in expected ways and offered incremental validity beyond scores on the parent-report Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits for predicting conduct problem severity, aggression, empathy deficits, and global emotion recognition accuracy. Among children who completed parent management training (<i>n</i> = 44), those diagnosed with LPE ended treatment with more severe aggressive behavior than those without LPE. Overall, children diagnosed with CAPE LPE have severe externalizing problems and achieve reduced benefits from standard parent management training, supporting the need for tailored and intensive interventions to maximize treatment outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001279","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study evaluated the interrater reliability, convergent and divergent validity, incremental validity, and clinical prognostic utility of the Clinical Assessment of Prosocial Emotions (CAPE; Frick, 2013) for assessing limited prosocial emotions (LPE). Participants were 232 young children (Mage = 3.94 years, SD = 1.46, range = 2-8; 74.6% boys) clinic-referred for conduct problems. We scored the CAPE using binary and dimensional scoring approaches and measured outcomes using parent-report and child laboratory measures. CAPE LPE symptom ratings had good interrater reliability. Children diagnosed with pretreatment LPE had more severe externalizing problems and lower empathy than children without LPE but did not differ in emotion recognition accuracy or anxiety. Dimensional CAPE symptom sum scores were associated with criterion variable scores in expected ways and offered incremental validity beyond scores on the parent-report Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits for predicting conduct problem severity, aggression, empathy deficits, and global emotion recognition accuracy. Among children who completed parent management training (n = 44), those diagnosed with LPE ended treatment with more severe aggressive behavior than those without LPE. Overall, children diagnosed with CAPE LPE have severe externalizing problems and achieve reduced benefits from standard parent management training, supporting the need for tailored and intensive interventions to maximize treatment outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

使用亲社会情绪临床评估(CAPE)诊断幼儿有限亲社会情绪的临床实用性。
本研究评估了亲社会情绪临床评估(CAPE;Frick,2013)评估有限亲社会情绪(LPE)的评估者间可靠性、收敛和发散有效性、增量有效性和临床预后效用。参与者是232名因行为问题被诊所转诊的幼儿(Mage=3.94岁,SD=1.46,范围=2-8;74.6%为男孩)。我们使用二元和维度评分方法对CAPE进行评分,并使用家长报告和儿童实验室测量结果。CAPE LPE症状评分具有良好的患者间可靠性。与未接受LPE治疗的儿童相比,接受LPE预处理的儿童有更严重的外化问题和更低的同理心,但在情绪识别准确性或焦虑方面没有差异。维度CAPE症状总分以预期的方式与标准变量得分相关,并在预测行为问题严重程度、攻击性、移情缺陷和全球情绪识别准确性方面提供了超过家长报告《Callous Unmotional Characters Inventory》得分的增加有效性。在完成父母管理培训的儿童中(n=44),被诊断为LPE的儿童在结束治疗时表现出比没有LPE的更严重的攻击性行为。总的来说,被诊断为CAPE LPE的儿童有严重的外化问题,并且从标准的父母管理培训中获得的益处减少,这支持了对量身定制的强化干预措施的需求,以最大限度地提高治疗效果。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信