4.2 Article

Exploratory Graph Analysis of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children

Journal

ASSESSMENT
Volume 29, Issue 8, Pages 1622-1640

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/10731911211024338

Keywords

exploratory graph analysis; network psychometrics; Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire; dimensionality

Funding

  1. Commonwealth Department of Families, Community Services, and Indigenous Affairs

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study used exploratory graph analysis to investigate the dimensionality of the caregiver-completed SDQ version 4 to 10 years in Australian children. Findings showed low structural consistency and four-dimensional structures, providing implications for future use of the SDQ in Australia.
In Australia, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) has been implemented in several national studies, including the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). However, three previous state-level validations indicated problems with instrument dimensionality, warranting further research. To address this gap, the current study employed exploratory graph analysis to investigate dimensionality of the caregiver-completed SDQ version 4 to 10 years in a nationally representative sample of Australian children. Data were from a dual cohort cross-sequential study (LSAC) that included more than 20,000 responses. Gaussian graphical models were estimated in each study wave and exploratory graph analysis applied. Structural consistency, item stability and network loadings were evaluated. The findings provided mixed support for the original SDQ five-factor structure. The Peer Problem scale displayed low structural consistency since items clustered with the Emotional Symptoms and Prosocial behavior, generating four-dimensional structures. Implications for future use of the SDQ version 4 to 10 years in Australia are provided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available