CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 343Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentPsychology and Mental HealthPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

More than the Terrible Twos: The Nature and Severity of Behavior Problems in Clinic-Referred Preschool Children

Keenan, Kate, Wakschlag, Lauren S.·2000·Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
DOI 10.1023/a:1005118000977
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The primary goals of this study are to describe the nature and severity of disruptive behavior problems in clinic-referred preschoolers from low-income environments and to explore the validity of DSM-IV disruptive disorders for young children. We examine the relation between DSM-IV symptoms, standardized behavior checklists, and observational ratings as a means of exploring measurement validity in this age group. Seventy-nine clinic-referred preschoolers (ages 2 through 5 years) from low-income environments were assessed. To examine whether clinic-referred preschool children have symptoms that are consistent with DSM-IV disruptive behavior disorders, parents were administered a semistructured diagnostic interview, modified for developmentally appropriate usage. In addition, parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and children's behavior problems were assessed with observational ratings during parent-child interaction. Nearly half of the sample met criteria for conduct disorder, and three quarters met criteria for oppositional defiant disorder. Preliminary evidence for the validity of DSM-IV disruptive disorders in preschool children was demonstrated through association with CBCL scores, behavior ratings, and significant levels of impairment. Future efforts aimed at validating these diagnoses in preschoolers and implications for prevention are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1005118000977

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 40 references

3 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Achenbach, T. M. (1992). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/2-3 and 1992 Profile. Burlington: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry.
  2. Achenbach, T. M. (1997). What is normal? What is abnormal? Developmental perspectives on emotional and behavioral problems. In S. Luthar, J. Burack, D. Cichetti., & J. Weisz (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Perspectives on adjustment, risk and disorder (pp. 93-114). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Crowell, J., & Fleischmann, M. (1993). Use of structured research assessments in clinical assessments of infants. In C. Zeanah (Ed.), Handbook of infant mental health (pp. 210-222). New York: Guilford Press.
  4. Elliot, C. (1983). Differential Abilities Scales: Introductory and technical handbook. New York: Psychological Corporation.
  5. Eyberg, S., & Boggs, S. R. (1989). Parent training for oppositional-defiant preschoolers. In C. E. Schaefer & J. M. Briesmeister (Eds.), Handbook of parent training: Parents as Co-therapists for children's behavior problems (pp. 105-132). New York: Wiley.
  6. Orvaschel, H., & Puig-Antich, J. (1995). Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Epidemiologic 5th Version. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: Nova University.
  7. Setterberg, S., Bird, H., Gould, M., Shaffer, D., & Fisher, P. (1992). Parent and interviewer versions of the Children's Global Assessment Scale. New York: Columbia University.
  8. Webster-Stratton, C. (1997). Early intervention for families of preschool children with conduct problems. In M. Guralnick (Ed.), The effectiveness of early intervention (pp. 429-454). Baltimore: Brookes.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 343

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Keenan, K., & Wakschlag, L. S.
Affiliations
University of Chicago (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2000-02
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
33-46
ISSN
  • 0091-0627 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2835
DOI
10.1023/a:1005118000977
OpenAlex
W1607154925
Cited by
341
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 22
FWCI
14.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K01MH001484)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (K08-DA-0030-02)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Keywords
disruptive behavior disorders, preschool children, conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, low-income children, clinic-referred children, Child Behavior Checklist, parent-child interaction, early childhood psychopathology
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Child, Preschool, Family, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Parent-Child Relations, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Referral and Consultation, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Sex Factors, Socioeconomic Factors

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