King's College London

Research portal

Only complementary voices tell the truth: a reevaluation of validity in multi-informant approaches of child and adolescent clinical assessments

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Aleksandra Kaurin, Boris Egloff, Argyris Stringaris, Michèle Wessa

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Neural Transmission
Early online date27 Apr 2016
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 27 Apr 2016


King's Authors


Multi-informant approaches are thought to be key to clinical assessment. Classical theories of psychological measurements assume that only convergence among different informants’ reports allows for an estimate of the true nature and causes of clinical presentations. However, the integration of multiple accounts is fraught with problems because findings in child and adolescent psychiatry do not conform to the fundamental expectation of convergence. Indeed, reports provided by different sources (self, parents, teachers, peers) share little variance. Moreover, in some cases informant divergence may be meaningful
and not error variance. In this review we give an overview of conceptual and theoretical foundations of valid multiinformant
assessment and discuss why our common concepts of validity need revaluation.

Download statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454