Lisa A Jacobson1,2, Luther G Kalb1,3, E Mark Mahone1,2. 1. Department of Neuropsychology, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
Objective: The BRIEF2 is the recent revision of a frequently employed measure of executive behaviors; however, no research has yet addressed the validity of the new measure's theoretical design.Method: The present study examined the factor structure of the BRIEF2 in 5212 clinically referred youth (66% male, 5-18 years) via exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factor analyses of item-level responses. Results: Results from the EFA suggested the BRIEF2 has fewer factors than would be suggested by the nine theoretically derived scales. While the theoretical CFA model, that omitted item-level information, demonstrated the best fit, when the item-level information was employed there was a decrement in model fit statistics and several extremely high loadings suggested scale-level redundancy in measurement. When the scales were omitted, and the items were loaded directly onto the indices, there was very little change in item-level factor loadings.Conclusions: Findings suggest fewer than nine scales are needed and that clinical interpretation of the BRIEF2 may be more appropriate at the index, rather than scale, level.
Objective: The BRIEF2 is the recent revision of a frequently employed measure of executive behaviors; however, no research has yet addressed the validity of the new measure's theoretical design.Method: The present study examined the factor structure of the BRIEF2 in 5212 clinically referred youth (66% male, 5-18 years) via exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factor analyses of item-level responses. Results: Results from the EFA suggested the BRIEF2 has fewer factors than would be suggested by the nine theoretically derived scales. While the theoretical CFA model, that omitted item-level information, demonstrated the best fit, when the item-level information was employed there was a decrement in model fit statistics and several extremely high loadings suggested scale-level redundancy in measurement. When the scales were omitted, and the items were loaded directly onto the indices, there was very little change in item-level factor loadings.Conclusions: Findings suggest fewer than nine scales are needed and that clinical interpretation of the BRIEF2 may be more appropriate at the index, rather than scale, level.
Authors: Amy M Lyons Usher; Scott C Leon; Lisa D Stanford; Grayson N Holmbeck; Fred B Bryant Journal: Child Neuropsychol Date: 2015-07-08 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Lisa A Jacobson; Alison E Pritchard; Taylor A Koriakin; Kelly E Jones; E Mark Mahone Journal: J Atten Disord Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 3.196