| Literature DB >> 22271197 |
Lisa Ruble1, John H McGrew, Michael D Toland.
Abstract
Goal attainment scaling (GAS) holds promise as an idiographic approach for measuring outcomes of psychosocial interventions in community settings. GAS has been criticized for untested assumptions of scaling level (i.e., interval or ordinal), inter-individual equivalence and comparability, and reliability of coding across different behavioral observation methods. We tested assumptions of equality between GAS descriptions for outcome measurement in a randomized trial (i.e., measurability, equidistance, level of difficulty, comparability of behavior samples collected from teachers vs. researchers and live vs. videotape). Results suggest GAS descriptions can be evaluated for equivalency, that teacher collected behavior samples are representative, and that varied sources of behavior samples can be reliably coded. GAS is a promising measurement approach. Recommendations are provided to ensure methodological quality.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22271197 PMCID: PMC3358457 DOI: 10.1007/s10803-012-1446-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Autism Dev Disord ISSN: 0162-3257