Construct validity of parent ratings of inhibitory control.

TitleConstruct validity of parent ratings of inhibitory control.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2007
AuthorsBodnar EL, Prahme CM, Cutting LE, Denckla MB, Mahone ME
JournalChild neuropsychology : a journal on normal and abnormal development in childhood and adolescence
Date Published2007 Jul

Recent literature has emphasized the need to examine executive functions (EF) in children using multiple sources, including both parent rating and performance-based measures. Computerized Go/No-Go tests, including commercially available continuous performance tests (CPTs), represent one of the most commonly used methods of assessing inhibitory control - a variable central to the executive function construct. We examined the relationship between parent ratings of inhibitory control and CPT performance in two mixed clinical samples. Experiment 1 examined 109 children ages 6-18 using the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF; Gioia, Isquith, Guy, & Kenworthy, 2000) and the Conners' CPT-II (Conners, 2000). In this sample, ratings on the BRIEF Inhibit scale (mean T-score = 62.3) were significantly higher than the CPT-II commissions score (mean T-score = 50.7; p < .0001); and the BRIEF and CPT-II scores were not highly correlated (r = - .12). Experiment 2 examined a sample of 131 children ages 7-18 using the BRIEF and the Tests of Variables of Attention (TOVA; Greenberg, 1996). In this sample, parent ratings on the BRIEF Inhibit scale (mean T-score = 56.8) were similar to TOVA commissions scores (mean T-score = 58.6; p = .33), although still poorly correlated (r = -.02). Factor analyses exploring covariance between BRIEF scales CPT-II variables (Experiment 1) and between BRIEF and TOVA (Experiment 2) yielded similar findings. In both experiments, all eight BRIEF scales loaded on a single factor, with no overlap with either the CPT-II or the TOVA. In mixed outpatient clinical samples, the BRIEF appears to measure different elements of inhibitory control than those assessed by computerized continuous performance tests.

Alternate JournalChild Neuropsychol