Differences and similarities between children, mothers, and teachers as informants on disruptive child behavior

Abstract

Prevalence rates of disruptive child behaviors, based on structured psychiatric interviews, are presented for samples of clinic-referred prepubertal boys at two sites to investigate differences and similarities among reports of the behaviors from children, parents, and teachers. Children reported significantly less hyperactive/inattentive and oppositional behaviors than either parents or teachers. In contrast, children did not differ from parents or teachers in their report on the prevalence of more serious conduct problems. These results were well replicated across two sites, despite the fact that there were significant differences between the sites in the level of hyperactive/inattentive child behaviors and conduct problems. The ranking of parents' and teachers' reported prevalence of specific child behavior problems in each of the three domains of disruptive behavior was strikingly similar. With one exception, the concordance between the prevalence ranking based on the children's reports was lower than that based on adults' reports, Children's reports on their own behavior did not predict various child handicaps 1 year later as well as did adults' reports. The results are discussed in relation to the usefulness of certain child behaviors in symptom lists for diagnostic purposes; the reliability of children's reports on their own behavior; and the possible reasons why prevalence rankings, as perceived by adults, are so similar.

Which Executive Functioning Deficits Are Associated With AD/HD, ODD/CD and Comorbid AD/HD+ODD/CD?

“…For example, Riccio and colleagues (1994) found that teacher ratings of AD/HD and other behavioral problems predicted performance on the WCST, whereas parent ratings failed to do so. The present result also fits with the finding that teachers, as opposed to children and parents, are the optimal informants for AD/HD symptoms (Loeber, Green, & Lahey, 1990;Loeber, Green, Lahey, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1989;Loeber et al, 1991;Power et al, 1998).…”

“…To facilitate interpretation of possible interaction effects, ratings were dichotomised and the product of AD/HD and ODD/CD ratings was used as a predictor in the analyses. A distinction was made between parent and teacher reported symptoms because a substantial body of evidence suggests that both informants report on different aspects of behavior (Achenbach, McConaughy, & Howell, 1987;Hart, Lahey, Loeber, & Hanson, 1994;Loeber, Green, Lahey, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1991;Offord et al, 1996) and that symptom reports of both informants may show different associations with neuropsychological deficits (Riccio et al, 1994).…”

Speed of Inhibition Predicts Teacher‐rated Medication Response in Boys with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

“…Riccio, Hynd, Cohen, and Gonzalez (1993) found that teacher ratings of ADHD and other behavioural problems predicted performance on a measure of set-shifting, whereas parent ratings failed to do so. Together with these earlier studies, the present study fits with the finding that teachers, as opposed to children and parents, are the optimal informants for ADHD symptoms (Loeber, Green, & Lahey, 1990;Loeber, Green, Lahey, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1989, 1991Power et al, 1998).…”

Pathways of Behavior Problems From Childhood to Late Adolescence Leading to Delinquency and Academic Underachievement

“…Parents may not be well aware of the problem behaviors their children engage in, especially in adolescence when parents' ignorance of their children's experiences may increase, because children are more outside direct parental supervision (Lahey et al, 2000). However, Loeber, Green, Lahey, and Stouthamer-Loeber (1991) have shown that when parent, teacher, and self-reports were considered, only parent-reported problem behavior was associated with later police contacts. Moreover, our results showed that parent-reported status violations and property violations were linked with self-reported delinquency and an unbiased rating of academic underachievement.…”