Abstract
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.
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.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Journal | Journal of Neural Transmission |
Early online date | 27 Apr 2016 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 27 Apr 2016 |