140 likes | 183 Views
Examination of the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory Discrepancy Hypothesis. Ashley M. Butler, MS Sheila M. Eyberg, PhD Elizabeth V. Brestan, PhD The 6 th Annual Parent-Child Interaction Therapy Conference January 28, 2006. The ECBI. Measures child disruptive behavior parent-report
E N D
Examination of the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory Discrepancy Hypothesis Ashley M. Butler, MS Sheila M. Eyberg, PhD Elizabeth V. Brestan, PhD The 6th Annual Parent-Child Interaction Therapy Conference January 28, 2006
The ECBI • Measures child disruptive behavior • parent-report • 36-items • Has two scales • Intensity Scale • severity of disruptive behavior • Problem Scale • parent perception of child’s behavior
The ECBI • Clinical utility in PCIT • Measure of initial behavior severity • Measure of behavior change • Measure of behavior severity outcome • Measure of treatment maintenance
Additional Clinical Utility • ECBI scales positively correlated • ECBI Discrepancy Hypothesis • ECBI is an indirect measure of problematic parenting styles when scale scores are discrepant in either direction
Discrepancy Hypothesis T Score
Purpose and Specific Aims • Examine Discrepancy Hypothesis • Aim One • Examine whether ECBI discrepancy scores predict parental tolerance for child misbehavior • Aim Two • Examine whether an ECBI discrepancy marker could be used to identify parents with deviant tolerance levels for child’s misbehavior
Measures • Demographic Questionnaire • ECBI • Child Rearing Inventory (CRI)(Brestan et al., 2003) • Parent tolerancefor child misbehavior • Cronbach’s alpha = .72 • 2-wk test-retest stability = .69 • Convergent validity • Standardization included 37% African Americans
Participants • Recruited from pediatric clinics and preschools in Gainesville, FL • Female primary caregiver self-identified African American • Child 3-5 years • (Total N = 139) Boys = 51%; Girls = 49% • Low Middle SES Hollingshead Index of Social Status = 31
Aim 1 Discrepancy Theory • Do ECBI discrepancy scores predict parental tolerance for child misbehavior? • Raw scores converted into T scores • Calculated discrepancy scores • Subtract Intensity T score from Problem T score • T-score difference > 10 is significant • Negative discrepancy score = Problem score higher • Positive discrepancy score = Intensity score higher • Scores ranged from – 40 to 33
Aim 1 Discrepancy Theory • Simple linear regression • DV = Parent tolerance (CRI) • higher scores = lower tolerance for misbehavior • IV = Discrepancy scores • F(1, 137) = 4.82 • r = -.18* • ECBI discrepancy scores significantly predicted parent tolerance for childmisbehavior
Aim 2 Discrepancy Theory • Can a discrepancy marker identify parents with deviant tolerance levels for child’s misbehavior?
Aim 2 n % sample Higher Problem Score “Intolerant” group 15 11% Higher Intensity Score “Permissive”group 10 7% Non-discrepant Scores “Non-discrepant” group 114 82% Discrepancy Theory
Aim 2 Discrepancy Theory • Three level one-way ANOVA • F (2, 21.57) = 6.22*; p <.01 Planned Contrasts Parent Tolerance (CRI) t = 3.40* t = -2.98*
Conclusions • First empirical support for ECBI discrepancy hypothesis • Practical way to quantify ECBI discrepancy • Inform treatment planning