2006
DOI: 10.1177/030802260606900507
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Review and Critique of the Touch Inventory for Elementary School-Aged Children (TIE)

Abstract: The paper presents a review of the published literature about and a critique of the Touch Inventory for Elementary School-Aged Children (TIE), a screening tool for children to self-report on their emotional and behavioural responses to tactile stimuli, developed by Royeen (1985, 1986) and Royeen and Fortune (1990). The TIE is used as a screening tool for children aged 6–12 years who have an IQ of at least 80 and no history of physical disabilities. Psychometric properties based on previously published studies … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(84 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More extensive research studies addressing construct validity, clinical utility, and responsiveness must be completed (89). Furthermore, the author developed a preschool version that could be applicable to children who are developmentally delayed and non-verbal children (61).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More extensive research studies addressing construct validity, clinical utility, and responsiveness must be completed (89). Furthermore, the author developed a preschool version that could be applicable to children who are developmentally delayed and non-verbal children (61).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Forty-one studies were identified in the literature search and screening, reflecting 20 different assessments. Nine of the included articles, [56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63] including one assessment, the Sense and Self-Regulation Checklist, 64 were excluded during data extraction, as during this process it became apparent that they met the exclusion criteria. Therefore 19 assessments were considered for further analysis.…”
Section: R E Su Ltsmentioning
confidence: 99%