Factor-analytically derived scales for the Louisville Behavior Checklist.

The Louisville Behavior Checklist, an inventory for parents to rate children's behavior, was developed in 1965 from a factor analysis of an outpatient male population. This article reports on a factor analysis and scale revision that occurred 20 years later with a much larger clinical sample of boys and girls from a more diverse population using improved factor-analytic techniques. The results cross-validated five of the original factors, and two new factors emerged. No major differences were found between male and female factors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Replication of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Third edition four-factor model in the Canadian normative sample.

Confirmatory factor analyses of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Third Edition (WISC—III; D. Wechsler, 1991) subtests, using the Canadian normative sample, were conducted to verify the 4-factor model identified for WISC—III in the U.S. normative sample. Because the items and test materials for WISC—III were identical in both samples, this study focused on replication of the factor model across national samples. The Canadian normative sample (N?=?1,100) was a stratified random sample of Canadian children, ages 6 to 16. Results for the Canadian sample paralleled those found in the U.S. sample (N?=?2,200) and confirmed the presence of the 4 factors previously identified (Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Organization, Processing Speed, and Freedom From Distractibility). This article also provides justification for the scoring and clinical use of WISC—III factor indexes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cost-effectiveness analysis in mental health policy research.

Comments on C. A. Kiesler's (see record 1981-30977-001) argument for cost benefit (CB) and cost-effectiveness (CE) studies in mental health program evaluations. The present author maintains that Kiesler failed to mention the work of several psychologists who investigated the application of CB and CE analyses to mental health. Several misconceptions of CB and CE analyses that were not mentioned by Kiesler are reviewed. These include: (1) the confusion that CB and CE are somewhat interchangeable, (2) the misconception that direct or budgetary costs are the only relevant costs in these analyses, (3) the oversimplification that CB and CE involve only quantitative ratios, and (4) the tendency for these techniques to be seen as objective and nonjudgmental. (2 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)