test validity parental attitude and behavior inventory maim form … · the parental attitude and...
TRANSCRIPT
HOR Krug, Ronald S.LE Evaluation of Parental Attitudes and Behavior
Inventory. Terminal Progress Report.TITUTION Oklahoma Univ., Oklahoma City. Medical Center.DATE Aug 71
44p.
S PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$3.29CRIPTORS Behavior; Behavior Rating Scales; *Comparative
Statistics; Correlation; Interaction; Item Analysis;Measurement Techniques; Norms; *Parent Attitudes;*Parent Child Relationship; Predictive Validity;*Questionnaires; Response Style (Tests); *Scoring;Social Behavior; Test Construction; Test Reliability;Test Validity
NTIFIERS *Parental Attitude and Behavior Inventory Form III
TRACTAn investigation was conducted to determine whether
Parental Attitude and Behavior Inventory maim Form III, agthy self-report instrument (577 items each for both parents) foressing parents' attitudes and behavior toward their children andh other, could be shortened to a more feasible length. Thisminal report summarizes the results of the statistical evaluationthe final scoring system for the PABI. The reliability andidity of the revised system has been demonstrated to be comparablethe original system. In addition, the cross-validity of theised system is noted to be within acceptable limits of shrinkage.uiescence contributions are-available for various subgroups, and,mative tables have been established- (AG)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.EDUCATION & WELFAREOFFICE OF EDUCATION
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO-DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIG-INATING IT. POINTS OF VIEW OR OPIN-IONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILYREPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDU-CATION POSITION OR POLICY.
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
TERMINAL PROGRESS REPORT
RESEARCH GRANT 1 103 MH 19369-01
EVALUATION OF PARENTAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR INVENTORY
(September 1, 1970 - August 31, 1971)
RONALD S. KRUG, Ph.D.
August, 1971
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRYTAND::1EHAVIORAL:$CIENCES
:UNIVERSITY-OFOKLAHOMA'SGHOOLOF mEpIciNE
-.OKLAHOMA CITY, om4gom.
EVALUATION OF PARENTAL ATTITUDE AND BEHAVIOR INVENTORY
Ronald S. Krug, Ph.D.
INTRODUCTION
This terminal report summarizes the results of the statistical
evaluation of the final scoring system for the Parental Attitude and
Behavior Inventory (PABI) Form III.
Background - The history of attempts to develop adequate questionnaires
to assess parent attttudes and behaviors has been rather discouraging
(Schaefer and Bell, 1958; Becker and Krug, 1965). In the latter review
of the most popular and effective parent-child inventory, the Parental
Attitude Research Instrument (PARI), it was concluded that education
of parents and uncontrolled response sets had strong enough influence
on the PARI scores to consider a new approach to questionnaire-type
assessment of parent attitudes and behaviors. The repeated failures
of construct validity studies with the PARI reinforced this conclusion.
Becker and Krug felt it was time to turn to specific first-person
behavioral statements concerning a particular child, rather than third-
person generalized attitude statements. It was felt a questionnaire
should be derived with established relations to more direct assess-
ment of parent behavior, and the effects of possible response sets
and background variables (parents' age, education, socio-economic
status, etc.) known, controlled or correctable. Also, it wag-believed
the relations to assessments of parent behavior derived by more intensive
methods should be demonstrable.
2
2)
The Parental Attitude and Behavior Inventory (PABI), Form II, is
the result of approximately ten years of effort to develop a self-
report procedure to facilitate parents reporting how they interact with
their children and each other. While many of the areas of inquiry
covered by the PABI obviously overlap those which are included in an
intensive interview evaluation, the PABI offers the advantage of an
efficient, economical, standardized evaluation which can be compared
against "norms" of behavior and eliminates the bias of an interviewer's
theoretical or educational predisposition.
The developmental studies with the PABI have demonstrated its
usefulness in assessing dimensions of parent-childreering attitudes and
behaviors in "normal" samples, clinic camples, various specific clinical
disorders, selected socio-economic groups and in comparison to other
more intensive interpersonal assessment techniques.1
In summary of the developmental steps, an initial 1000-item pool
of questions was collected and ft armchair" scoring procedues hypothesized.
All items were administered to a group of "normal" parents from Champaign,
- Illinois, and responses scored according to the hypothesized scales. These
sca/es were then intercorrelated and factor analyzed. Related scales were
combined and all 1000 items correlated with these scales to detect good
items not Included before and delete items of no value. After this item
analysis was completed, item characteristics considered and ineffective
questions discarded, a second new sample from throughout Illinois was
administered the PABI, Form II. Item characteristics were again examined,
scales correlated with one another amd factor analyzed. Construct validity
studies were carried_out to determine the PAMI's usefulness in various
3)
samples of subjects and in comparison to other more intensive assessment
techniques.
It was obvious at this point that the PABI was too lengthy for
general use as a broad band evaluation instrument. The decision at this
point was to eliminate items which were of limited value, and to discard
scales which demonstrated little validity when correlated with independent
criteria of child behavior. As a result of these latter multiple analyses,
non-effective scales and extraneous items were deleted, resulting in the
final PABI, Form III. This reduction in the number of score scales and
extraneous items has reduced the size of the questionnaire from 577 items
for mothers to 319 items; and, from 557 items for fathers to 322 items.
In actuality, only three scales of mother's questionnaire and two scales
of father's questionnaire were changed. Other scales which were retained
remained identical. Table 1 lists the final scales retained in both
mother's and father's questionnaires.
Insert Table I About Here
Specific Aims - The present investigation was designed to evaluate four
distinct statistical problems.
1. The reliability of the final scoring system as compared
with the previous scoring system.
2. The validity of the final scoring system as compared with
the previous scoring system.
The acquiescence contribution to each scale.
The normative data for various child age levels, and sex of
parent and child.
4)
METHOD
Data for this study had been collected previously. The data
consisted of parents' responses to the PABI, Form II, (separate responses
for mothers and fathers) and rated social behavior of the children of these
parents. The latter data were obtained from the mother, father, and
teacher of each child. The total number of cases consisted of 628 children
from different families. All scale scores from both the previous and present
scoring system were intercorrelated. This analysis gave information
regarding the relation between homologous scales in the two scoring systems.
It also yielded comparative information regarding interscale correlations
within the two scoring systems.
Reliability - All scale scores, from both the previous and present scoring
system, were intercorrelated. This analysis gave information regarding
the relation between homologous scales in the two scoring systems. It
also yielded comparative information regarding interscale correlations
within the two scoring systems.
Validity - To examine the relative predictive validity of the two scoring
systems, the following data analysis vas performed.
A. The total N of 628 cases wejl separated on a random basis
into two groups (N=3I4 each). For Group 1, correlations
between both the old and new scoring system and their
criterion data were calculated. Correlations with the
criterion data for homologous scales from the two systems
were examined for significance. This provided information
'about relative predictive efficiency of the two scoring systems.
5)
B. For Group II, only correlations between the new scoring
system and the criterion scores were determined. These
data compared to the similar data obtained from Group I
were examined for significance. This provided information
about the shrinkage of prediction co-efficients from one
sample to another.
Acquiescence Contribution - After the above steps were completed to
provide information regarding reliabil-Ity and validity, the two groups
were recombined and reformed into 12 subsets of data according to the
following diagram.
BOYS GIRLS
GRADE OF CHILDMOTHERSFATHERS
0-2
IV V
5-8 0-2III VIIVI
3-4,VIII
XI
5-8IX
XII
Intercorrelations among the revised scales (including an acquiescence
scale) for each subset were determined in order to establish the relation-
ship of acquiescence to each set of data.
Normative Data - T-score tables (X=50; SD=10) were constructed for
conversion of raw Emores to a standardized presentation format, for each
of the 12 eubgroups given in the above section. The following formula
was applied.T = 50 + 10 Craw score -ii:1
standard deviation
RESULTS
Reliability - Table 2 lists the correlations between the two scales of
the fathers' data which were revised (Permissive and Acquiescence) and the
6)
other fathers' scales retained.
Insert Table 2 About Here
It also gives the correlations between the revised scales and the
scales from which they were derived. Since few scales changed their
number of items, and the correlations between old and new scales were
so high, homogeniety coefficients were not calculated.
Table 3 lists similar data for the three scales of the mothers' data
which were revised (Warmth, Permissive, and Acquiescence).
Insert Table 3 About Here
Validity - Table 4 lists the differences in correlations between original
scales and revised scales with the rated social behavior of the children
Insert Table 4 About Here'
for both the mothers' and fathers' data. Differences between these two
sets of correlations reflect differences in predictive validity between
the old and revised scales.
Table 5 lists the differences between correlations of the revised
scales with rated child behavior and similar data derived from the 314
Ss not included in the validity study above. These data reflect the
Insert Table S'About Here
7)
amount of shrinkage of the validity coefficients from one sample to
another.
Acquiencence Contribution - Table 6 lists the correlations between
Acquiescence and other scales retained. This table is separated by
Parent, sex of child, and grade group of child.
Insert Table 6 About Here
Columns 1 and 8 of this table contain the correlations between the
revised Acquiescence scale and all other scales, with the data combined
over age and sex of child.
Normative Date - Due to the magnitude of data generated by the T-score
conversion of the scales under each of the conditions set forth in the
methodology section above; tables for conversion from raw scores to
T-score format (mean = 50; standard deviation = 10) are given in
Appendix A-
DISCUSSION
Reliability - Examination of Tables 2 and 3 shows a very high correlation
between original and revised scales for both Fathers and Mothers data.
Further, the comparison of the correlations between other scored scales
and the original versus the revised scales demonstrate virtually no
changes in the interrelationships. That is, the revised scales have
retained the sane relationship to other scored scales as did the original
scales from which they'were derived.
8)
It is apparent from these analyses that the revised scoring system
is essentially unchanged by the deletion of select itews from their scoring
ystem.
Validity - The object of this analysis was first to determine if the revisec
scales predicted criterion behavior in children similarly; and, second, to
establish the amount of shrinkage from one sample of data to another.
Table 4 lists the differences in correlations between original and
revises scales with assessments of children's social behavior as rated
by Fathers, Mothers, and Teachers. Due to the size of the sample (N-314)
relatively small differences are statistically significant. However, in
terns of practical usage, a difference of .34 (accounting for 10% of the
common variance) was considered significant. Obviously from Table 4, no
practical differences were noted. Apparently the revised scoring systems ar
equally as good as the original systems in predicting criterion behaviors.
The question of shrinkage in predictive power from one sample to
another is addressed by data in Table 5. The second sample (N-314) to
which the revised scaring system was applied is comparable to the first
sample in demographic variables. As noted in the method section, bath
saples were derived from the original 628 cases, but randomly separated
into two groups of N=314 each. While validity coefficients did change
from one sanple to another, again looking at differences between the two
sets of coefficients the previously stated criterion of 107 common
variance is not attained by any of these differences.
From these two different sets of data, it is suggested that the
predictive validity between the original and revised scoring systens is
not significantly different; and, the shrinkage from one sample to another
with revised scoring systems is not appreciable in a practical sense.
9)
Acquiescence - Table 6 is divided into subgroups by parent--sex of child,
and school grade of the child. Also, there are data for acquiescence
contribution to the scales separated only by parent, collapsed over school
grade and sex of child. Examination of Table 6 demonstrates that for some
scales, the correlation with acquiescence is significant. Looking at these
data, in almost all instances, if a correlation between acquiescence and a
scale reached practical significance (.34) in one of the subgroupings by
sex and school grade of child, the correlation was also significant and of
similar magnitude in the combined parent group (collapsed over sex and
school grade of child).
While the original plans were to establish some manner of removing the
acquiescence contribution from various scales, two difficulties have been
encountered. First, theoretically there is controversy as to the desira-
bility of doing this since by virtue of the existance of the correlation,
there is implication that acquiescence is an indigenous part of the trait
being assessed and should not be statistically removed. On the other hand,
some authors state it should be controlled; however, it is suggested rather
pointedly that no acdeptable;niethadfor effeCting thiajtas been developed.,
With these points in mind the data on the acquiescence contribution
are presented so that the users of this inventory are aware of the existence-
of the relationships between acquiescence and the various scored
Also, if in the future acceptable methods for control are established, the
data are available for appropriate control.
Normative Data - Appendix A lists T-score conversion tables for various
subgroupings of Parent, sex of child, and school group of child, as well as
data collapsed aver sex and school group of child, but separated by Parent.
10)
These data show that differences in scores do occur as a function
of various subgroupings of the data. The user should be aware of these
differences and be cautioned to take advantage of the appropriate group
to which his particular subject belongs.
SUMMARY
The reliability and validity of the revised scoring system has been
demonstrated to be comparable to the original system. In addition, the
cross-validity of the revised system is noted to be within acceptable
limits of shrinkage. Acquiescence contribution are available for various
subgroups, and, normative tables have been established.
11)
FOOTNMES
1. These studies are being combined into appendices for the manual
of the PABI.
ABBREVIATION
TABLE I
SCALES'RETAINED IN MOTHER'S AND FATHER'S QUESTIONNAIRES
MOTHER'S SCALES FATHER'S SCALES
WARM
IPAR
POWA
RATL
PERM
ACQU
AGEN
ISOL
DEPR
REWD
VISF
DMAF
FAPT
Warmth*
Interparental Attitudes
Power Assertion
Rational Approach to Discipline
Permissive (Behavior) *
Acquiescence*
Aggression Encouraging
Use of Isolation
Deprivation of Privileges
Use of Rewards
Visible Suffering
Demonstrative Affection
(Not Scored for Mothers)
Warmth
Interparental Attitudes
Power Assertion
Rational Approach to Discipl:
Permissive (Behavior) *
Acquiescence*
Aggression Encouraging
Use of Isolation
Deprivation of Privileges
Use of Rewards
Visible Suffering
Demonstrative Affection
Father Participation in ChilcCare
Indicates scales whose item content was altered. Other scales were not altered.
TABLE 2
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND REVISED FATHERS)SCALES
WITH OTHER RETAINED SCALES*
PERMISS rvE ACQUIESCENCE
Original Revised Original Revised
WARM 12 12 - 05 - 03
IPAR - 10 - 11 - 06 - 06
POWA - 53 - 54 26 24
RATL --08 - 08 47 49
AGEN 18 17 02 - 02
ISOL - 17 - 17 11 08
DEPR - 45 - 45 18 16
REWD - 08 - 08 12 10
VISE - 41 - 41 42 42
DNAF - 01. 02 - 04 - 06
FAPT - 02 - 02 - 02 - 01
ACQU (Original) - 26 - 25 1.00 97
ACQU (Revised) - 26 25 97 1.00
PERM (Original 1:00 99 26 --26
PERM (Revised) 99, 1.00 25 - 26
* Decimals remove .
TABLE 3
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND REVISED MOTHERS' SCALES
WITH OTHER RETAINED SCALES*
WARMTH PERMISSIVEI
ACQUIESCENCE
IPAR
POWA
RATL
AGEN
ISOL
DEPR
REWD
VISF
DMAF
WARM (Original)
WARM (Revised)
PERM (Original)
PERM (Revised)
ACQU (Original)
ACQU (Revised)
Original Revised Original Revised Original
30 29 -08 -08 06
-49 -49 -49 -50
21 21 -12 -12 47
-15 -15 16 15 02
-31 -32 -06 -06 -03
-15 -16 -34 -34 11
-14 -13 -06 -06 16
-31 -31 -41 -42 40
28 27 03 02 07
1.00 99 06 07 -13
99 1.00 07 07 -12
06 07 1.00 99 -26
07 07 99 1.00 -26
-13 -1.00
I -10
34
Revised
08
32
49
02
-03
12
16
40
08
TABLE 4
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND REVISED SCALE CORRELATIONS
WITH RATED SOCIAL BEHAVIOR OF CHILD*
(Original Subtracted From Revised)
FATHER M O-T H E R
Permissive Acquiescence
Mothers' Rating Child
3n-croversion 01
Emotional Stability 00
Calm-Compliant 00
Submissive 00-
Withdrawn 00
Distrusting 01
Defiant-Hostile 00
Fathers' Rating Child
Introversion 00
Emotional Stability -01
Calm-Compliant 00
Submissive -01
Withdrawn 01
Distrusting -01
Defiant-Hostile 01
Teachers Rating Child
Introversion
Emotional Stability
-01
00
-Ca16-Compliant 00_
SubmissiVe- 01
Withdrawn -01
Distrusting -01
Defiant-Hostile 00
-03
01
01
02
--02
00
-01
Go
03
-03
00
00
oil-
01
00
04
04
Warmth I Permissive Acquiescence
-01 00 00
01 -01 01
01 -01 01
00 00 -01
00 -01 -01
00 -01 01
01 01 02
-701 oo 00
-01 01
02 00 01
oo 00
00 oo 00
oo oo. 01
P0 01
00 -01 00
-01 02 -01
00, 00
00_ 01 00:
-01 -01 00
.00 -037 00
-01 00 00
TABLE 5
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REVISED SCALE VALIDATION CORRELATIONS
AND CROSS VALIDATION CORRELATIONS WITH RATED SOCIAL BEHAVIOR
OF CHILD (Validation Subtracted From Cross Validation)*
Mothers' Rating Child
Tntroversion
Emotional Stability
Calm-CompliantSubmissivs
,Withdrawn
Distrustingagiant-Hostile
Fathers' Rating Child
IntroversionEmotional Stability
Calm-CompliantSubmissive
Withdrawn
DistrustingDefiant-Hosdle
Teachers' Rating Child_
04
Emotional Stability 06
Calm -Compliant 02
Submissive 03
Withdrawn 04
Distrusting 00
Defiant-Hostile -10
FATHER MOTHER
Permissive Acquiescence Warmth Permissive Acquiescence
00 -01 -02 -07 09
16 08 -11 10 -14
13 -08 -17 07 -10
06 -03 00 -06 -02
-03 04 -03 -06 12
-07 03 -04 -06 15
-16 07 05 -09 15
02 -05 -24 -06 08
07 . 01 10 04 -10
04 -01 00 -03 -16
12 -11 -16 -02 05
-07 01 -25 -09 09
06 00 -16 -05 -01
-08 02 -14 -06 -04
- 17 -06 00 04
08 13 03 -04
08 02 -01 -08
- 16 00 -01 00
-18 -08 -01 06
- 16 -16 -03 00
-02 -16 -08 01
*Decimals removed. Negative score indicates shrinkage.
IARM
IPAR
GEN
;DP
' I SF
1MAF
'APT
9AMPLE
TABLE 6
CORRELATIONS OF ACQUIESCIENCEWITH OTHER RETAINED SCALES*
MUT1LR
BOYS
GIRLS
w o. .t
0 -0
Z...
.. Z
o co
X -
Xw
.U.-
0GO, 0 0
Boys
'GIRLS..
w o
0 o < N
_m
.i-W
I0 0
0 0 < ..
-t
0 01
w o l'.00
4:-1
0 n
0 W o-
< N
,m
i00
0.
W o ..1.4
*m
i0 01
0 w o 4 00 ml
0 n
..
0 0
z - Z
< X
.-'
0 co
XX
WIA
.°M
1C
O 0
0
0 w 0 < 0
.1,
00.
0 w 0-
<Lt
.m
iOrel
0 W 0 < C
Om
l-m
i0 n
0 W ea < C
ti
00
0 w o -
< ..
.m
iC, 01
0 w o < C
Om
i0 n
0 1
11'.
op
04
,
- 12
- 18
,
- 14
- 17
- 19
-_ 04:
....
01
01-
- 11
-
10
- 02
10
- 07
02
26.
--20
09
-28.
_44
29
29
31
39
23
28
30
30
33
.52-
:50
57
65,
47
50
4o
50
52.
45
60
48
47
51
-..30.
'
--.26
22
- 30 -
- 44
- 39
- 19
- 24
- 18
- 23
. 31
- 26
- 25
- 25
07
- 01
09
.01
- 16
01
- 28
02
- 04
15
11
- 17
- oi
oo
,09
-11
-..
14.
07
31
11
02
- 02
04
- 18
- lo
- 01
.
07
02
19
.21-.
'
07
09
54
21
.05
17
21
16
11
10
15
20
13
12
25
15
1 3
09
25
27
18
' 44
-
49 -
49
31
56-
38
45
110
44
44
27
59
27
41
03,
02.
10
.
01
09
- 01
03
- 01
33
ol
o8
- 14
-1)2
- 10'
19
- 11
- 17
_..
.
.424
113
110.
'
93
.
95
109
104
624
113
110
93
95
109
104
..,
Appendix A
T-Score conversion tables for each scale scored.
RaW Score
1
- 2 3 4 5
'
6 7
-:41 9 10
11
12
13
.14
15
16
1.7
In
WARMTH
T - Scores
FATHER
MOTHER
CcmtdxJ
over
BY
GIRL
Omfted
over
BY
GIRL
Grade
!Se Sex
Grade
0-2
3-4
5-8
Level
IGrade
K-2
3-4
5-8
I&Sex
Grade
0-2
3-4
5-8
Level
K-2
3-4
5-8
64
811
-0
95
14
16
12
14
18
13
9
7 .
59
12
010
715
17
13
15
19
14
10
8,6
10
'13
1.11
'8
18
14
16
20
15
11
10
811
14
212
917
19
15
17
20
16
12
,11
912
15
413
10
18
20
16
18
21
17
13
12
10
13
16
514
11
19
21
17
19
22
18
14
13
11
14 ,
17
615
12
20
22
18
20
23
19
15
14.
12
15-
18
816
13
21
23
19
21
24
20
16
15
13
16
19,
917
14
22
24
20
22
25
21
17
16
14
18
20
10
18
15
23
25
21
23
26
22
19
17
16
19
21
11
19
17
24
26
22
24
27
23
20
.18
17,
20
22
13
20,
18
25
27
23
25
28
24
21
19
18
5,
21
23
14
21
19
26
28
24
26
29
'
25
22
21:
.19
22
24
15
22
20
27
29
,25
27
30
26
23
22
20.
23
'25
16
23
21
28
30
26
28
31
27
24
23
21
24
26
18
24
22
29
31
27
29
32
28
25
24
23
25
'
27
19
25
23
30
32
28
30
33
29
26
nr
nh
nr
nn
.W
arm
th -
Pag
e 2
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
26 27 28 29 30 33 34 35 36 37 38 3 40 141
43 45 46 48 49
2527
2922
2726
3234
3032
3431
28
2628
3023
2827
3335
3133
3532
29
2729
3124
2928
3436
3231
436
3330
2830
3225
3029
3537
3335
3734
31
3032
3327
3130
3638
3336
3835
32
33.
33S
1428
3231
3739
3437
3936
33
3234
3529
3332
3840
3538
4037
34
3335
3630
3433
3914
136
3941
3835
3436
3732
3535
4042
3740
4239
36
3537
3833
3636
4043
3841
143
4037
3638
3931
437
3741
4439
4244
4138
3839
140
3638
3814
245
140
143
4542
39
3940
4137
3939
4346
141
4414
643
41
4014
142
3840
4014
447
4245
4643
42
4243
3941
4145
148
4346
4744
143
'42
1-B
4441
4342
4649
141-
147
148
4514
14
' 43
4445
42V
Itit
i47
5014
558
4946
45
4545
4643
4545
5851
4649
5114
714
6
4747
1414
146
4649
5247
5051
4814
7
4748
4846
4747
5053
4851
5249
48
4814
914
947
4814
851
5449
5253
5014
9
550
4849
4952
55;r
1cq
;itcn
War
mth
- P
age
3
141
5050
5150
142
5152
5251
4352
5353
52
144
5351
451
453
4555
5555
54
146
. 56
56'5
655
4757
5757
56
148
5858
5857
149
5960
'59
58
5060
6161
59
5161
6260
60
5262
6363
61
5863
614
614
62
514
6465
6563
55'
6667
6661
4
,56
6768
6765
57'
6869
6866
5869
7069
67
5970
7170
68
6071
7271
69
6172
7472
70
6273
7573
71
50 51 52 53 55 56 57 58 60 61 62 6E1
65 66 67 69 70 71 72 75 76
5050
5356
-51
5455
5251
5151
5457
5255
5653
52
5252
5558
5356
6754
53
5354
5659
514
5758
5554
5455
5760
5558
5956
55
5556
5861
5659
5957
56
56 57
57 58
59 60
62 63
57 58
60 61
60 61
'58 59
57 58
5859
'61
6459
6262
6059
5960
6265
6063
6361
60
6061
6366
6161
464
6262
6163
6467
6265
6563
63
6264
.65
6863
6666
6461
4
6365
6669
64.
6667
6565
6466
6769
6567
6666
65'
6768
7066
6869
6767
6668
6971
6769
7068
68
6769
7072
6870
7169
69
6870
7173
6971
7270
70
6972
7274
7072
7271
71
7073
7375
7173
7372
72
7171
474
7672
7474
7373
75 76
7477
,73
7575
7474
INTERPARENTAL ATTITUDE
T - ScOres
FATHER
(Whined
Raw Score
over
B O Y
G I R L
Grade
&Sex
Grade
0-2
314
5-8
Level
K-2
3-14
5-8
16
72
10
29
69
1411
1010
118
116
13
11
12
12
912
714
513
13
14
11
14
916
611
415
15
13
15
11
17
71-
616
17
14
17
12
19
18
18
1816
19
14
20
19
20
20
18
20
16
22
10
21
21
21
19
22
17
23
11
22
23
23'
21
23
19
25
12
24
214
25
23
25
21
26
13
26
26
26'
24
26
22
27
14
27
27
28
26
28
24
29
15
29
29
29
'
28
30
26
30
16
30
31
31
29
31
27
32
17
32
32
32
31
33
29
33
18
33
314
314
33
314
31
35
M 0 T.11 E R
Combined
over
B O Y
GIRL
Grade
Gra
s- Level
0-2
5-8
10
12
11
12
10
511
12
13
12
114
11
712
13
15
14
15
13
814
14
16
15
16
14
10
15
16
17
16
18
16
11
16
17
19
18
19
17
13
18
19
20
19
20
19
14
19
20
21
20
22
20
16
20
21
23
22
23
21
17
22
23
24
23
24
23
19
23
24
25
24
26
24
20
25
26
27
26
27
26
22
26
27
28
27
28
27
23
27
28
29
29
30
29
25
29
30
31
30
31
30
26
30
31
32
31
32
31
28
31
32
33
33
314
33
29
33
34
35
314
35
,
314
31
34
Z9
09
09
65
65
LS
85
95
tiS
TS
ZS
OS
'TS
81i
611
Lii
911
Eh
Ofi
Th
BE
Oil
LE
9£
ZE
99
59
t9
119
119
89
89
69
OL
89
119
E9
Z9
£9
£9
99
99'
-L9
29
99
£9
Z9
19
Z9
Z9
59
59
99
L9'
59,
19
19
09
.
09
09
119
-£9
119
59
.:419:.
09
65
85
65 -
65
Z9
19.
.E9.'
,E9
6S.,
85
LS
.8S.
LS
19
65
19
Z9
:09
LS.
95
9S
9S
9S
6S,
8S
09.
09
:.8S.
9S
SS
fiS
SS.
-SS
LS
AS'
8S
2S
.1.5
fiS
fiS
.ES
fiS
ES
9S
fiS
9S
9S
5S
ES
ZS
ZS
ZS
ZS
tIS
ES
SS'.
SS
:ES
TS
IS
OS
TS
OS
ES
TS
ES
ES
ZS
OS
.0S
611
OS
611
TS
611
,ZS'
IS
TS
611
811
81i
811
811
OS
RI
OS
OS
611-
a'1.11
94
L4
911
81i
911
61i
81i
911
911
Sli
St!
Sli
aWI
a911
91i .
titl
tit'
Eh
tfi
liii
Sli
li
Sfi
St
.
511
Eh
Efi
Zfi
'Eh
Zfi
liii
Th
trh.
Efi.
Eh
Th
li
Ili
Iii
Ifi,
li
6E
li
Tti
Ili
Oil
011
6E
Otl
6DI
BE
Tfi
.011
:Oil
'6E.
6£
8£
6£
8£
6£
9E
6£
8E
BE.
LE
8£
LE
LE
LE'
8£
tE
8E-
9£
LE
9£
9£
SE
9£
'SE
9£
EE
9£
.
SE
.
SE
.89
89
.011
.
-L9.
:19
,59'
8£
.E9-.
119.
Z9'::
.9E
09
H09.
-6S,
6S.
.tE
45
1.5
iE.
-.9S'.
-9S.
-ZE
ES
uS
.1E
ZS
OE.,
TS,
TS
pz.
VI::
.6h,
8Z
Bli
84.
12
911
91i
.9Z
St
,SZ;
Eli
Eti.
.4?'.
2E
8E
TZ
LE
LE'
OZ
-
SE
SE
61 .
7 ARPJ
annlrilw Tnina.7nA7milltr
6966 67
:
66 67
65 66
66 67
67 69
:65 66
66 67
,POWER ASSERTION
T - Scores
F A T
E R'
MOTHER
lip Score
antered
over
B O Y
GIRL
Corhired
over
B O Y
GIRL
Grade
&Sex
Grade
0-2
3-4
5-8
Level
K-2
3-4
5-8
Grade
&Sex
Grade
0-2
3-4
5-8
Level
K-2
3-4
5-8
127
23
26
214
27
30
38
26
26
25
27
26
26
28
29
2.J
28
26
29
32
30
28
28
27
29
28
28
30
331
27
30
28
31
314
32
30
30
29
30
30
30
32
33
29
32
31
33
35
314
32
31
31
32
32
32
314
535
31
35
33'
314
37
36
314
33
33
34
33
34
36
36
33
37
35
36
39
38
36
35
35
36
35
36
38
.7
38
35
39
37
38
140
38
37
37
38
37
38
39
40
37
41
39
140
143
142
39
38
38
40
39
40
41
142
39
43
qi
142
145
53
141
140
142.
41
42
43
10
41
LI414
14 3
142
43
43
IN
14 5
1.1
46
43
147
145
46,
,11.8
147
45
14 3
45.
145
46
47
3.2
149
48
50
149
147
146'
14 7
146
48
49
13
50
51
149
50
52
51
149
147
14 9
148
50
51
iLl
52
50
53
52
52
514
53
51
14 8
50
51
50
51
52
15
52
55
514
56
55
52
50
52
53
52
53
54
56
54
57
56
56
.57
57
514
52
514
55
54
55
56
17
58
56
59
58
58
59
59
56
514
56
56
56
57
58
0616
t888
06
8868
S8
9888
98t8
£8118
98
ti8S
8Z
8Z
8118
Z8
£808
18Z
8
0818
816L
08
8L61
94.8L
ItIL
St
9t
St
SL
ZL
EL
hi,
Et
EL
OL
ItZ
L
ILIL
6969
Ot
6969
L989
89
1.949
S9
9999
S9
S9
E9
ti9
119£9
19Z
929
Z9
19:6S
0909
Z8
186/a9/.
114
ZL
It69t9S9
119
Z9
096SIS
8898
118
Z8
tiELEZE
TE
08118
£8£8
S8
98Z
8118
Oe
8/E
818
18£8
11808
ZS
6Z
9t08
6L6t
18Z
88/
088Z
SL
8/8L
bL08
81tZ
Et
9L9L
SL
LI84
9L9E
.
Ittit
litE
tS
I9L
Et
SZ
69Z
tE
tIL
EL
OL
Zt
11Z
49O
L04
6901
EL
89'O
LE
Z
S9
8989
t989
Ot
9989
ZZ
£999
L9S
999
t9119
99T
Z
Z9
119S
9£9
119*S
9Z
9119
OZ
09£9
£919
Z9
E9
09Z
961
7 AR
PJ
1triT1.7afteW
.7 nMtl...7
RATIONAL APPROACH TO DISCIPLINE
T - Scores
FATHER'
MOTHER-
Raw Seore
Cittlibined
over
Grade'
& Sex
1 2 3 6 10 11 18
Carbine
B O Y
G I R L
over
B O Y
GIRL
5
-
7
10
13
15.
18
21.
23
26 29
34
37
40
42
45
48
SO;
Grade Level
Grade
Grade Level
0-2
3-4
5-8
-2
3-4
5-8
-2
5-8
010
-2
56
41
-7
-3
13
08
87
-1
-4
23
-4
-0
.15
-3
11
11
10
1-1
46
-1
2
17
614
14
12
40
17
81
5
11
.20
917
16
15
63
410
11
47
14
'22
12
19
19
18
96
712
13
710
.17
25
15
22
21
20
12
910
15
16
913
, 20
21
18
25
24
23
15
12
13
17
19
12
16
'.-2.3
30
21.
28
27
26
18
15
16
20
21
15
18
.26
32
24
31
29
28
20
18
19
23
24
18
21
29
35
.27
33
32
31
23
21
21
25
26
21
24
31.
37
.30
36
35
34
26
24
24
28
29
24
27
34
40
33
39
37
37
29
27
27
31
31
27
29
37-
42
36
42
40
39
31
30
30
33
34
30
32
_40
45
40
45
42
42
34
33
33
36
'36
33
35
43
47
'
43
47
45
45
37
36
36
39
39
36
38
46
;50
46
50
48
47
40
39
39
41
42
38
40
49
52
49
53
I50
50
43
42
42
UU
uu
Ill
lig
Rat
iona
l App
roac
h to
Dis
cipl
ine
- Pa
ge 2
1953
5254
5256
5353
4545
4547
147
I-11
-146
2056
5557
5558
5656
4848
4849
4947
49
2159
5759
5861
5858
5151
5152
5250
.51
2261
6062
6164
6161
5454
5454
5453
54
2364
6364
6467
6364
5757
5657
5756
57
2467
6667
6770
6666
5960
5960
6059
60
2569
6969
7072
6969
62.
6362
6262
6262
2665
6665
6565
6465
2768
6968
6867
6768
PERMISSIVE
T - Scores
FATHER
MOTHER
Raw Score
rotit
hfre
over
B O Y
GIRL
Curare
over
B 0 Y
GIRL
Grade
&Sex
Grade
0-2
3 4
5-8
Level
K-2
3-4
5-8
Grade
&Sex
Grade
0-2
3-4
Level
3-4
5-8
25
25
25
25
27
24
25
22
22
21
24
19
22
214
27
27
27
26
29
25
26
23
23
23
25
21
23
25
28
28
28
28
30
27
28
25
25
24
26
22
25
27
29
29
29
29
31
28
29
26
26
25
27
24
26
28
531
31
31
31
32
29
30
27
27
27
29
25
27
29
632
32
32
32
314
31
32
29
29
28
30
27
29
31
733
314
33
33
35
32
33
30
30
30
31
28
30
32
835
35
35
.35
36
33
32
32
31
32
30
31
33
936
36
36
36
37
35
36
33
33
32
33
3;
33
35
10
37
38
37
38
38
36
37
34
35
33
36
11
39
39
39
39
38
38
36
36
35
36
34
36
37
12
LW
39
Ito37
37
37
37
36
37
39
13
41
42
Ito41
38
38
38
38
37
38
140
43
43
143
142
142
140
39
140
38
Ito15
tttt
44
45
45
143
143
41
Ito4.1
16
-46
146
46
45
145
142
142
42
142
44
17
:47
147
46
44
144
44
143'
143
44
145
Permissive - Page 2
19
49
20
51
21
52
22
53
23
55
24
56
25
57
26
59
27
,
60
28
61
: 29
63
3.0
:6 4
,
31
65
32
'
33
68
69
71.
36
72
37
'13:
38
75
39
.
76
, 40:
77
34 35
50
49
50
49
49
49
47
47
47
51
51
52
,51
50
50
48
48
48
53
52
53
52
-
51
51
49
,49
49
54
53
54
53
53
53
51
51
'
51
'
55
55
56
54
54
54
52
52
52
57
56
57
56
56
55
53
53
54
58
57
59
57
57
57
55
55
55
60
59
60
58
58
58
56
56
56
61
61
59
60
59
57
57
58
62
61
63
60
61
60
59
59
59
'
64
63
64
62
6''2'
62
60
60
61
664
66
63
64
63
62
61
62
:66
65
67
64
65
64
63
636
63
-
68
67
68
65
67
66
64
64
65
'
69
68
70
67
,68
67
66
66
66
71
69
71
68
69
68
67
67
68
72
71
73
69
71
70
68
68
69
73
72
74
70
72
71
70
70
71
75
73
75
72
73
72
71
71
72,
76
75
77 -
73
75
74
72
72
73
77
76
78
74
76
75
74
74
75
:7.9
77
80 -
75
78
76
75
75
76
1
46
46
47
48
47
47
48
49
48
49
49
50
50
50
'51
52
51
52
52
53
52
53
53
54
53
55
55
56
55
56
56
57
56
57
58
58
57
59
59
61
58
60
60
61
60
62
62
62
61
63
63
64
62
65
64
65
63
66
66
66
65
68
67
68
66
69
69
69
67
71
70
70
68
72
71
72
70
74
73
73
71
75
74
74
72
76
75
75
797
777
7678
7378
7777
8079
7878
7975
7978
78
8280
7979
8076
8180
79
8381
8181
8277
8281
81
8483
8282
8378
8482
82
8684
83,8
385
8085
8483
8785
8585
8681
8785
85
8987
8686
8782
8886
86
9088
8787
,89
8390
8887
9189
8989
9085
9189
89
9391
.90
9092
8693
9190
,
9191
9387
9492
91
t:.
AGGRESS I ON ENCOURAG I NG
T-S
CO
RE
S
FATHER
MOTHER
RAW
SCORE.
COMB I NED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
13 0 Y
AR
AD
ELE
VE
LGIRL
25
8K
-25-
8
38 2 66
2 36 44
2
5 9 33 2 46 54 58 62 66 70
29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69
28 32 36 4 44 48 51 55 59 63 67 7
26 3132
3028
3536
3533
3940
3938
4444
4442
4847
49
5251
5452
5755
5957
6159
6362
6563
6866
6967
7371
7471
CO
MB
I N
ED
OVER
GRADE &.
SEX
B '0 Y
GR
AO
E L
EV
gLGIRL
0-2
29 39 43 48 52 57 6 66 71
5-8
K-2
311.
'5-
8
2427
27
2831
3230
3336
3735
3841
4240
4345
4645
4859
5151
5254
5656
5759
6161
6264
6666
6768
7172
7173
7677
ACQU
I EC
IENCE
TSCORES
FATHER
,
CO
MB
!NED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
GIRL
GRADE LEVEL
0-2
K-2
4i
8
52
9
64
10
78
512
99
97
13
1010
108
14
1212
1015
1313
1117
1414
1318
1616
1519
1717
1716
21
1819
1818
22
2020
2019
23
,21
2121
211
MO
TH
ER
CO
MB
I N
ED
OVER
B O
Y
GRADE LEVEL
5-8
GRADE
&SEX
0-2
3-4
5-8
K-2
62
3
73
IL6
95
67
106
31
79
118
48
10
139
64
1012
1411
811
13
1512
98
1315
1714
119
1416
1815
1211
1618
1917
1413
1719
2018
1614
1921
2220
1716
2023
2322
1918
212
4
GIRL
3-4
5-8 5
37
48
610
8ii
912
1114
1215
1417
1518
1720
1821
2023
2224
MA
U I
ES
C I
EN
CE
2423
23
1625
2424
2525
2727
2828 30 31 32 34 35 37 38 39 41
4242
4344
4445
4646 49
2222
2624
2321
2023
2623
26
2424
2726
2522
2124
2725
27
2525
2827
2624
2326
2926
28
2627
3028
2825
2527
3028
30
2829
3130
2927
2629
3229
31
2930
3231
3129
2830
3331
33
3032
3332
3230
3032
3533
34
3233
3534
3432
3233
3634
36
3335
3635
3534
3334
3836
37
3436
3736
3735
3536
3937
39
3638
3938
3937
3737
4139
3739
ito39
Ito38
3839
4340
42
3841
414o
4240
4o4o
4442
43
4o43
4242
4342
4242
4643
44
4144
4443
4543
4443
4745
46
IQ46
4544
4645
4544
4947
47
4447
4646
4847
4746
5048
49h E
5h 79
h ,h
4948
4947
5250
50
4650
4948
5150
5049
5351
52
4852
5050
5251
5250
5553
53
AC
QU
I E
SC
I E
NC
E
3551
3652
3751
1
3855 56 58 59
5051
49
5152
50
5353
52
5455
53
5556
54
5758
56
5859
57
5960
59
6162
6o
6263
61
6365
63
6566
64
6667
4
6869
4 769
7068
7072
69
7273
71
7374
72
7476
73
7677
75
7779
76
3
5351
5154
5354
5256
5455
5553
5256
5556
5358
5656
5751
151
157
5657
5559
5858
5855
5559
5859
5661
5959
6057
566o
6061
5763
6161
6158
5862
6162
5964
6262
6359
5963
6364
6o66
6463
6460
6065
6566
6?67
6565
6662
6266
6668
6369
6766
6763
6368
6869
6570
6868
6964
6469
6971
6672
7069
7166
6671
7173
6773
7271
7267
6772
7374
6975
7372
7468
6874
7476
7076
7574
7569
7076
7678
7278
7675
7771
7177
7879
7379
7877
7872
7279
7981
7581
7978
8073
748o
8183
7683
8179
8175
7582
8285
7884
8281
8376
7683
8486
7986
8482
8577
7885
8688
8087
8684
AM
U I
ES
C I
EN
CE
77
5781
.8o
8179
5882
8183
8o
8483
811
81
8486
A ,., 3
8587
84
8788
85 87 88
8678
7986
8790
8289
8785
888o
8o88
8991
8390
8987
8981
8189
9193
8592
go88
9182
8391
9295
8693
92go
9284
8493
9497
8895
9391
9485
8594
9598
8996
9593
9586
8796
9710
091
9897
94
9787
8897
9910
292
9998
95
9989
89
"
I SOL AT I ON
T -SCORES
FATHER
RAW
SCORE
COMB I NED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B O Y
GRADE
0-2
3
32 39 46 53 6o 67
31 38 45 52 59 67
3-4
5-8
33 4o 46 53 59 66
29 36 51 58 66
LEVEL
K-2
32 39 45 52 59 65
GIRL
3-4
5-8
COMB I NED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B O Y
MOTHER
GIRL
GRADE LEVEL
0-2
3-4
5-8
K-2
3-4
5-8
4o 47 54 61 68
32 4o 47 54 61 68
29 36 50 57 64
27 3)1
56
30 37 43 50 57 64
29 36 50 56 63
31 38 44 51 57 64
29 36 43 50 57 64
31 38 51 58 65
DEPRIVATION OF PR IV ILEGES
T-SCORES
FATHER
MOTHER
RAW
SCORE
COMBINED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B O Y
G l'R L
GRADE LEVEL
0-2
5 8
K-2
3-4
COMBINED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B O Y
GRAD
7LEVEL
GIRL
0-2
5-8
K-2
-4
3 6
29 35 46 52 58 63
2829
24
29
30
31
27
3435
3135
3636
33
3941
3741
4142
39
4547
4347
4747
45
5152
5053
5352
51
5758
5655
5858
57
62'
6462
6564
6363
2526
2428
2829
3132
3134
3434
3738
374o
4o4o
4344
4346
4646
5050
4952
5251
5656
5558
5857
6262
6164
6463
USE OF REWARDS
T-SCORES
FATHER
MOTHER
COMBINED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B O Y
GRADE
LEVELGIRL
0-2
3-4
5-8
K-2
COMBINED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B O Y
GRADE
LEVEL
GIRL
0-2
3-4
5-8
K-2
3-4
5-8
113"
50 57 64
71
35
112
56 63 70
35
42
50 58
66 74
34
4o
47
54
60
67
36 44 51 59
66
74
36
43
50
57
64
71
37
43
50 56
63
69
36
43
50
57
64
71
35
49
55
62
69
36
43
51 58 65 72
36
43
50
56
63
70
37
43
50
56
63
70
36 43
50
57
72
37 44 52 59 66
74
USE OF VISIBLE SUFFERING
T -SCORES
FATHER
MOTHER
RAW, -.-
SCORE:
.1 3
04.
6 7 8 9
10
.COMB1NED
OVER
GRADE, &
SEX:
B O Y
0-2
35
42
49
56
63
70
76
83
90
34
42
49
57
65 72
8o
88
95
3-4
36
44
51 59
67 74
82 90
97
GRADE
5-8
GIRL
LEVEL
K-2
31 39
46
54
62
69 77
85
92
37
43
50
56
63 76
83
89
3-4
36
42
49
55
61 67 73
79
85
5-8
34
4o
47
54
61 67
74
81 87
COMB I NED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
BY
GRADE
LEVEL
0-2
3-4
31 37
44
51 57
64
71 77
84
91
30
37
43 50 57
64
71 77
84
91
31 38
44
51 58
65
71 78
85 92
5-8
28
36
43
51 58
66
73
81--
89
96
K-2
31 37
44
50
57 63
70
76
83
89
IR L
3-4
5-8
32
31
38
38
45
44
51
50
58
57
64
63
71
69
77
76
83
82
90
88
DEMONSTRATIVE AFFECTION
T-SCORES
RAW
SCORE
compliip
J:IVER
GRADE &
SEX:
FATHER
B O Y
GRADE
GIRL
LEVEL
0-2
5-8
K-2
3-4
COMBINED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B O Y
MOTHER
GR
AD
ELEVEL
GIRL
0-2
3r4
5-8
K-2
1`
1
it 8 9
30
39
44
48
53 58 62 7
27
32
37
42
47
53 58 63 68
31 36
41 45
50
54
59 63 68
33
37
42
46
51
55
6o
64
68
28
32
37
41 46
50
55
59
63
28
33
38
43
48
52
57
62 67
3°
35
39
44
49
54
59 63 68
20 25 35
4o
44
49 54 59 64
19
24
29 38 43 48 53 58 62
21 26
31 36
4o
45
50
511-
59 64
22
27
31 36
41 46
50
55
6o
17
22
28
33
38
43 48 53 58 63
3-4
5-8
21
20
26
25
31
30
35
35
4o
4o
44
45
49
50
53
55
58
60
63
64
FATHER PARTICIPATION IN CHILD CARE
T -SCORES
FATHER
MOTHER
RAW
SCORE
COMBINED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
0-2
B O Y
GRADE
LEVEL'GIRL
3-4
5-8
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
lo
-11
22
25
29
33
37
41 48
52
56
20
24
28
32
36
40
43
47
51
55 59
20
24
28
32
36
39
43
47
51
-55
59
20
211
28
32
36
53
57
K-2
3-4
5-8
24
21
24
27
25
28
31
29
31
35
32
35
38
36
38
42
4o
42
45
44
46
49
48
49
53
52
53
56
56
56
6o
6o
6o
COMBINED
OVER
GRADE &
SEX
B 0 Y
0-2
3-4
GRADE LEVEL
5-8
K-2
GIRL