CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 521Down syndrome and intellectual disability researchPsychometric Methodologies and TestingPsychological Testing and Assessment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 134 of the 135 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Methodological issues in interviewing and using self-report questionnaires with people with mental retardation.

Finlay, W. M. L., Lyons, E.·2001·Psychological Assessment
DOI 10.1037/1040-3590.13.3.319
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this article the authors review methodological issues that arise when interviews and self-report questionnaires are used with people with mental retardation and offer suggestions for overcoming some of the difficulties described. Examples are drawn from studies that use qualitative methodology, quantitative studies assessing different question types, and studies reporting on the development of instruments measuring psychiatric symptoms, self-concept, and quality of life. Specific problems that arise with respect to item content (e.g., quantitative judgments, generalizations), question phrasing (e.g., modifiers), response format (e.g., acquiescence, multiple-choice questions), and psychometric properties (factor structure and validity) are discussed. It is argued that because many self-report questionnaires include questions that have been found to be problematic in this population, more attention needs to be paid to establishing the validity of such measures and to clearly defining the population for which the instrument is designed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1040-3590.13.3.319

Cites

134 of 134 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. 1994, Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
  2. Conroy, 1985, The Pennhurst Longitudinal Study: A report of five years of research and analysis.
  3. Eysenck, 1965, Manual of the Eysenck-Withers Personality Inventory for Subnormal Subjects (50-80 I.Q.).
  4. Fraser, 1986, Psychiatric and behavior disturbance in mental handicap., Journal of Mental Deficiency Research, 30, 49
  5. 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Prosser, 1998, Interviewing people with intellectual disabilities.
  7. Prout, 1994, Assessment in counseling and psychotherapy.
  8. Sabsay, 1983, Communicative design in the speech of mildly retarded adults.
  9. Scott, 1994, Mental retardation.
  10. Sigelman, 1981, Issues in interviewing mentally retarded persons: An empirical study.
  11. Simons, 1992, Sticking up for yourself.
  12. Tully, 1984, Police interviewing of the mentally handicapped: An experimental study.
  13. Voelker, 1990, Validity of self-reports of adaptive-behavior skills by adults with mental retardation., Mental Retardation, 28, 305

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 521

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Finlay, W. M. L., & Lyons, E.
Affiliations
University of Surrey (GB)
ORCID
Finlay, W. M. L.
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2001
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
319-335
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
DOI
10.1037/1040-3590.13.3.319
OpenAlex
W4229864968
Cited by
521
References
135
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 20
FWCI
9.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
intellectual disability, interviewing, self-report questionnaire, assessment methods, questionnaire use
MeSH terms
Adult, Child, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Disclosure, Reproducibility of Results, Persons with Intellectual Disabilities, Persons with Mental Disabilities

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