Factor structure of the VABS-3 Comprehensive Parent/Caregiver form in autistic individuals: Poor fit of three-factor and unidimensional models

Abstract

The commonly used Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS-3) divides adaptive behavior into three domains comprising three subdomains. The validity of this three-factor structure has not been explored in autistic samples, which are often heterogeneous with respect to language and IQ. Furthermore, although there are two comparable forms, Comprehensive Interview Form and Comprehensive Parent/Caregiver Form (a questionnaire), the original validation was based on interview data. Considering the widespread use of the VABS-3 in autism research, and the increased feasibility of online-administered questionnaires, it is necessary to establish the validity of the Parent/Caregiver form in autistic individuals across a range of abilities. This study aimed to investigate the measurement invariance of the VABS-3 Parent/Caregiver form between a minimally verbal group and verbal group of autistic people; however, poor overall fit of the three-factor structure precluded invariance analyses. Subsequent analyses suggested poor fit in both language and age groups, as well as a unidimensional model. The results of the current study suggest that neither the three-factor or unidimensional model fit the VABS-3 Parent/Caregiver Form, thereby cautioning against interpretation of domain or overall adaptive behavior composite scores in autistic individuals and further encouraging careful consideration of administration format.

Lay Abstract

Adaptive behavior is a broad set of skills needed to function in everyday life. The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS-3) is commonly used to measure adaptive behavior. It divides adaptive behavior into three domains, Communication, Daily Living Skills, and Socialization, each of which are split into subdomains. Analyses of this three-part structure of the first version of VABS used the instrument as an interview, but now it is done as a questionnaire as well. The structure has not been well supported in samples of autistic people, who often have different strengths and challenges in adaptive behavior compared with non-autistic people. Because adaptive behavior is an important concept in autism research and online-administered questionnaires are increasingly common, it is important to ensure the structure of the VABS-3 Comprehensive Parent/Caregiver Form (VABS-3:CPCF; a questionnaire) works well for autistic individuals across a range of abilities. This study aimed to investigate whether VABS-3:CPCF measures adaptive behavior similarly in verbal and minimally verbal autistic people. However, the data didn’t fit the structure in the first step of the analysis, so this could not be investigated. The next analyses also found the three-domain structure didn’t fit in different age and language groups. In addition, the data didn’t fit a structure combining all the domains into 1 (unidimensional). These results suggest that neither the three-factor or unidimensional structure fit the VABS-3:CPCF, cautioning against interpretation of domain or overall adaptive behavior composite scores in autistic individuals and further encouraging careful consideration of administration format.

Keywords

adaptive behavior autism spectrum disorders behavioral measurement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

D. K.

Liang

J. W.

Lord

(2014). Predicting young adult outcome among more and less cognitively able individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(5), 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12178

Bal

V. H.

Katz

Bishop

S. L.

Krasileva

(2016). Understanding definitions of minimally verbal across instruments: Evidence for subgroups within minimally verbal children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57(12), 1424–1433. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12609

Balboni

Tasso

Muratori

Cubelli

(2016). The Vineland-II in preschool children with autism spectrum disorders: An item content category analysis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(1), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2533-3

Barriball

K. L.

While

(1994). Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: A discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19(2), 328–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01088.x

Benson

N. F.

Floyd

R. G.

Kranzler

J. H.

Eckert

T. L.

Fefer

S. A.

Morgan

G. B.

(2019). Test use and assessment practices of school psychologists in the United States: Findings from the 2017 National Survey. Journal of School Psychology, 72, 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.12.004

Bentler

P. M.

(1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238

Bentler

P. M.

Bonett

D. G.

(1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588

Bölte

Poustka

(2002). The relation between general cognitive level and adaptive behavior domains in individuals with autism with and without co-morbid mental retardation. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 33(2), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020734325815

Camara

W. J.

Nathan

J. S.

Puente

A. E.

(2000). Psychological test usage: Implications in professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31(2), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.31.2.141

10.

Carter

A. S.

Volkmar

F. R.

Sparrow

S. S.

Wang

J.-J.

Lord

Dawson

Fombonne

Loveland

Mesibov

Schopler

(1998). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales: Supplementary norms for individuals with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 28(4), 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026056518470

11.

Chatham

C. H.

Taylor

K. I.

Charman

(2018). Adaptive behavior in autism: Minimal clinically important differences on the Vineland-II. Autism Research, 11(2), 270–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1874

12.

de Bildt

Kraijer

Sytema

Minderaa

. (2005). The psychometric properties of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales in children and adolescents with mental retardation. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-004-1033-7

13.

Donoso

O. A.

Hernandez

Horin

E. V.

(2010). Use of psychological tests within vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 32(3), 191–200. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2010-0509

14.

Dovgan

Mazurek

M. O.

Hansen

(2019). Measurement invariance of the child behavior checklist in children with autism spectrum disorder with and without intellectual disability: Follow-up study. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 58, 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2018.11.009

15.

Farley

M. A.

McMahon

W. M.

Fombonne

Jenson

W. R.

Miller

Gardner

Block

Pingree

C. B.

Ritvo

E. R.

Ritvo

R. A.

Coon

(2009). Twenty-year outcome for individuals with autism and average or near-average cognitive abilities. Autism Research, 2(2), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.69

16.

Farmer

R. L.

Floyd

R. G.

McNicholas

P. J.

(2021). Is the Vineland-3 comprehensive interview form a multidimensional or unidimensional scale?: Structural analysis of subdomain scores across early childhood to adulthood. Assessment, 28(7), 1848–1864. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191120947804

17.

Fombonne

Achard

(1993). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale in a sample of normal French children: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34(6), 1051–1058. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1993.tb01108.x

18.

Fountain

Winter

A. S.

Bearman

P. S.

(2012). Six developmental trajectories characterize children with autism. Pediatrics, 129(5), e1112–e1120. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-1601

19.

Goldberg

M. R.

Dill

C. A.

Shin

J. Y.

Nhan

N. V.

(2009). Reliability and validity of the Vietnamese Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales with preschool-age children. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(3), 592–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2008.09.001

20.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

21.

Jorgensen

T. D.

Pornprasertmanit

Schoemann

A. M.

Rosseel

(2022). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-6. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semTools

22.

Kanne

S. M.

Gerber

A. J.

Quirmbach

L. M.

Sparrow

S. S.

Cicchetti

D. V.

Saulnier

C. A.

(2011). The role of adaptive behavior in autism spectrum disorders: Implications for functional outcome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41(8), 1007–1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-010-1126-4

23.

Klin

Saulnier

C. A.

Sparrow

S. S.

Cicchetti

D. V.

Volkmar

F. R.

Lord

(2007). Social and communication abilities and disabilities in higher functioning individuals with autism spectrum disorders: The Vineland and the ADOS. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(4), 748–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0229-4

24.

Limperopoulos

Majnemer

Steinbach

C. L.

Shevell

M. I.

(2006). Equivalence reliability of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale between in-person and telephone administration. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 26(1–2), 115–127.

25.

Lopata

Smith

R. A.

Volker

M. A.

Thomeer

M. L.

Lee

G. K.

McDonald

C. A.

(2013). Comparison of adaptive behavior measures for children with HFASDs. Autism Research and Treatment, 2013, Article 415989 https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/415989

26.

Lord

Schopler

(1989). The role of age at assessment, developmental level, and test in the stability of intelligence scores in young autistic children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 19(4), 483–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212853

27.

MacCallum

R. C.

Browne

M. W.

Sugawara

H. M.

(1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149.

28.

Mervis

C. B.

Klein-Tasman

B. P.

Mastin

M. E.

(2001). Adaptive behavior of 4- through 8-year-old children with Williams syndrome. American Journal of Mental Retardation: AJMR, 106(1), 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1352/0895-8017(2001)106<0082:ABOTYO>2.0.CO;2

29.

Neuhaus

Beauchaine

T. P.

Bernier

R. A.

Webb

S. J.

(2018). Child and family characteristics moderate agreement between caregiver and clinician report of autism symptoms: Moderators of ASD symptom agreement. Autism Research, 11(3), 476–487. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1907

30.

Pandolfi

Magyar

C. I.

(2021). Vineland-3 structural validity and interpretability of domain scores: Implications for practitioners assessing adolescents with developmental conditions. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 126(3), 216–229. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-126.3.216

31.

Perry

Factor

D. C.

(1989). Psychometric validity and clinical usefulness of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales and the AAMD Adaptive Behavior Scale for an autistic sample. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 19(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212717

32.

Pickles

Anderson

D. K.

Lord

(2014). Heterogeneity and plasticity in the development of language: A 17-year follow-up of children referred early for possible autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(12), 1354–1362. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12269

33.

Rosseel

(2012). Lavaan: An R Package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

34.

Sattler

J. M.

Hoge

R. D.

(2006). Assessment of children: Behavioral, social, and clinical foundations (5th ed.). J.M. Sattler.

35.

Smith

H. W.

(1981). Strategies of social research: The methodological imagination (2d ed.). Prentice-Hall.

36.

Smith

L. E.

Maenner

M. J.

Seltzer

M. M.

(2012). Developmental trajectories in adolescents and adults with autism: The case of daily living skills. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 51(6), 622–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2012.03.001

37.

The SPARK Consortium. (2018). SPARK: A US Cohort of 50,000 families to accelerate autism research. Neuron, 97(3), 488–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2018.01.015

38.

Sparrow

S. S.

Balla

D. A.

Cicchetti

D. V.

(1984). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. American Guidance Service, Inc.

39.

Sparrow

S. S.

Cicchetti

D. V.

Balla

D. A.

(2005). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition: Survey Interview Form. American Guidance Service.

40.

Sparrow

S. S.

Cicchetti

D. V.

Saulnier

C. A.

(2016). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Third Edition (Vineland-3). Psychological Corporation.

41.

Tager-Flusberg

Kasari

(2013). Minimally verbal school-aged children with autism spectrum disorder: The neglected end of the spectrum: Minimally verbal children with ASD. Autism Research, 6(6), 468–478. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1329

42.

Tassé

M. J.

Schalock

R. L.

Balboni

Bersani

Jr. Borthwick-Duffy

S. A.

Spreat

. . . Zhang

(2012). The construct of adaptive behavior: Its conceptualization, measurement, and use in the field of intellectual disability. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 117(4), 291–303.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB