Heather E Ormiston, Brittany N Zakszeski, Daniel Osgood, Tyler L Renshaw, Jack Komer, Elizabeth C McPherson
{"title":"高中生普遍行为筛查中的信息提供者差异。","authors":"Heather E Ormiston, Brittany N Zakszeski, Daniel Osgood, Tyler L Renshaw, Jack Komer, Elizabeth C McPherson","doi":"10.1037/spq0000679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of self-report measures evaluating social, emotional, and behavioral risk can be an important element of universal screening with older children and adolescents. Research has demonstrated discrepancies between teacher ratings and student self-report ratings of social, emotional, and behavioral risk, which commonly result in incongruent risk classifications. The present study explored classification incongruence and informant discrepancies on the teacher- and student self-report versions of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener. Screening data from over 600 high school students and their homeroom teachers were examined. Results showed classification congruence was highest for the Social Behavior subscale and lowest for the Emotional Behavior subscale of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener, with teachers endorsing lower levels of risk compared to students. Analysis of potential sociodemographic predictors of informant discrepancies indicated that grade, sex, free and reduced-price lunch eligibility, 504 plan status, and special education status were significant predictors of classification incongruence on at least one Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener subscale. Implications for practice and limitations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74763,"journal":{"name":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Informant discrepancies in universal behavioral screening at the high school level.\",\"authors\":\"Heather E Ormiston, Brittany N Zakszeski, Daniel Osgood, Tyler L Renshaw, Jack Komer, Elizabeth C McPherson\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/spq0000679\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The use of self-report measures evaluating social, emotional, and behavioral risk can be an important element of universal screening with older children and adolescents. Research has demonstrated discrepancies between teacher ratings and student self-report ratings of social, emotional, and behavioral risk, which commonly result in incongruent risk classifications. The present study explored classification incongruence and informant discrepancies on the teacher- and student self-report versions of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener. Screening data from over 600 high school students and their homeroom teachers were examined. Results showed classification congruence was highest for the Social Behavior subscale and lowest for the Emotional Behavior subscale of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener, with teachers endorsing lower levels of risk compared to students. Analysis of potential sociodemographic predictors of informant discrepancies indicated that grade, sex, free and reduced-price lunch eligibility, 504 plan status, and special education status were significant predictors of classification incongruence on at least one Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener subscale. Implications for practice and limitations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000679\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000679","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
使用自我报告的方法来评估社会、情感和行为风险,是对年龄较大的儿童和青少年进行普遍筛查的一个重要因素。研究表明,教师评分和学生自我报告的社会、情感和行为风险评分之间存在差异,这通常导致风险分类不一致。本研究探讨了社会、学术和情感行为风险筛选中教师和学生自我报告版本的分类不一致和信息差异。对600多名高中生及其班主任的筛选数据进行了检查。结果显示,社会行为子量表的分类一致性最高,情感行为子量表的分类一致性最低,教师认可的风险水平低于学生。对被调查者差异的潜在社会人口学预测因素的分析表明,年级、性别、免费和减价午餐资格、504计划状态和特殊教育状态是至少一个社会、学术和情感行为风险筛查量表分类不一致的显著预测因素。讨论了实践的意义和局限性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
Informant discrepancies in universal behavioral screening at the high school level.
The use of self-report measures evaluating social, emotional, and behavioral risk can be an important element of universal screening with older children and adolescents. Research has demonstrated discrepancies between teacher ratings and student self-report ratings of social, emotional, and behavioral risk, which commonly result in incongruent risk classifications. The present study explored classification incongruence and informant discrepancies on the teacher- and student self-report versions of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener. Screening data from over 600 high school students and their homeroom teachers were examined. Results showed classification congruence was highest for the Social Behavior subscale and lowest for the Emotional Behavior subscale of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener, with teachers endorsing lower levels of risk compared to students. Analysis of potential sociodemographic predictors of informant discrepancies indicated that grade, sex, free and reduced-price lunch eligibility, 504 plan status, and special education status were significant predictors of classification incongruence on at least one Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener subscale. Implications for practice and limitations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).