CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 127Child Welfare and AdoptionChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentChild Abuse and Trauma

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

CBCL Behavior Problems of Post-Institutionalized International Adoptees

Open access
Hawk, Brandi, McCall, Robert B.·2010·Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
DOI 10.1007/s10567-010-0068-xPMC PMC3021319
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

With the increase in international adoptions during the last decade, many researchers have investigated the developmental outcomes of these adoptees, including their extreme behaviors. Collectively, these results have not always appeared consistent across studies, perhaps because studies have used children reared in institutions or not, the institutional environments vary in severity, children spend different lengths of time in the institution and are assessed at different ages, and studies use different outcome measures. In an attempt to discern more order in the literature, this review focuses on 18 studies, each of which used the Child Behavior Checklist, and their outcomes are viewed with respect to these parameters. Results suggest that the major factor contributing to extreme behaviors is age at adoption, with those adopted after 6/18 months having more behavior problems, especially Internalizing, Externalizing, and Attention problems. Generally, samples of post-institutional children have more problems than samples of mixed or non-institutional internationally adopted children, and some problems are more likely to be manifest in adolescence, suggesting the effects of deficient early experiences are not simply the persistence of learned behavior but more general dispositions that become more noticeable or severe during adolescence. Findings are discussed in terms of early deficient social-emotional caregiver-child interactions that characterize most institutional environments as a possible major cause of later difficulties in post-institutionalized children.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10567-010-0068-x

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 46 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Child behavior checklist/4–18 and 1991 profile. Burlington, VT: Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont.
  2. Ames, E. W. (1997). The development of Romanian orphanage children adopted into Canada. Ottowa: National Welfare Grants.
  3. Audet, K., Kurytnik, K., & Le Mare, L. (2006). Behaviour difficulties of post-institutionalized children. New Orleans USA: Poster presented at the American Psychological Association Convention (APA).
  4. Groza, V., Chenot, D., & Holtedahl, K. (2004). Adoption of Indian children by Norwegian parents. International Journal of Child and Family Welfare, 8, 98–113.
  5. Rosas, J., & McCall, R. B. (2010). Characteristics of institutions, interventions, and resident children’s development. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Office of Child Development. Unpublished manuscript, authors.
  6. The St. Petersburg-USA Orphanage Research Team. (2005). Characteristics of children, caregivers, and orphanages for young children in St. Petersburg, Russian Federation. Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 477–506.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Hawk, B., & McCall, R. B.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
McCall, Robert B.
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-06
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
199-211
ISSN
  • 1096-4037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2827
DOI
10.1007/s10567-010-0068-x
PMC
PMC3021319
OpenAlex
W2059541797
Cited by
127
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R-25 MH54318-13)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD039017, R01HD050212, R01HD50212, R01HD39017)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Child Welfare and Adoption
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
international adoption, institutional upbringing, Child Behavior Checklist, behavioral problems, age at adoption, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, attention deficits, adolescence, caregiver-child interaction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adoption, Age Factors, Attention, Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Child, Institutionalized, Deinstitutionalization, Humans, Internal-External Control, Risk Factors, Social Adjustment, Internationality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review