Social
Competencies
Communication
Measures
| Name: |
Parent-Adolescent
Communication Scale |
| Author: |
H. L. Barnes & D. H. Olson |
| Date: |
1982 |
| Instrument
Description: |
This 20 item, 5-point
Likert-type scale is composed of two subscales which measure degree
of openness and extent of problems in family communication. This
scale is often used in conjunction with the Family Adaptability and
Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES) according to the Circumplex Model
of Marital and Family Systems (Olson, Sprenkle, & Russell,
1979). |
| Where Available: |
Literature reference:
Barnes, H. L., & Olson, D. H. (1982). Parent adolescent
communication scale. Olson, D. H., et al. (eds.). Family
inventories, (pp. 33-48). St Paul: Family Social Science, University
of Minnesota. |
| Literature Reference: |
Barnes, H. L., &
Olson, D. H. (1985). Parent-adolescent communication and the
Circumplex model. Child Development, 56, 438-447. |
| Cost: |
Not available |
| Intended
Audience: |
Adolescents and their
primary caregivers |
| Subtests: |
1) Open Family
Communication Scale
2) Problems in Family Communication Scale |
| Psychometrics: |
Alpha reliabilities for
each subscale are .87 and .78; test-retest reliabilities are .78 and
77. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
A highly utilized scale
in the family communication literature. |
| Name: |
Interpersonal
Communication Inventory |
| Author: |
M. J. Bienvenu, Sr. |
| Date: |
1970 |
| Instrument Description:
|
This 50 item, 3-point Likert type
self-inventory was developed to measure the process of communication
as an element of social interaction. It is intended to identify not
content, but patterns, characteristics, and styles of communication.
Such areas as the ability to listen, to empathize, to understand, to
deal with angry feelings, and to express oneself are explored. |
| Where Available: |
Literature reference |
| Literature Reference: |
Bienvenu, M. J. (1971).
An interpersonal communication inventory. The Journal of
Communication, 21, 381-388. |
| Cost: |
Not Available |
| Intended Audience: |
Individuals of high school age or
older |
| Subtests: |
Not Available |
| Psychometrics: |
Face validity by a panel of
sociologists, psychologists and specialists in the field of human
relations. Evidence of discriminant validity. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
May be best suited as a counseling
tool, as a supplement to an interview, or as a teaching tool. |
| Name: |
Defensive and Supportive
Communication Interaction Coding System |
| Author: |
C. Barton; J. F. Alexander; & C. W. Turner |
| Date: |
1988 |
| Instrument Description:
|
This coding system is designed to be
used while observing family verbal and non-verbal behaviors. The
system consists of eight subcategories, four defensive and four
supportive. |
| Where Available: |
literature reference |
| Literature Reference: |
Waldron, H. B., Turner,
C. W., Alexander, J. F., & Barton, C. (1993). Coding defensive
and supportive communications: discriminant validity and subcategory
convergence. Journal of Family Psychology, 7, 197-203 |
| Cost: |
Not available |
| Intended Audience: |
Often used in families with juvenile
delinquents. |
| Subtests: |
Four defensive subcategories:
judgmental-dogmatism; control; indifference; superiority. Four
supportive subcategories: genuine information giving and seeking;
spontaneous problem solving; empathy; equality. |
| Psychometrics: |
Convergent and discriminant validity
for subcategories. Interrater reliabilities kappa coefficients in
analog setting from .76 to .96 (determined elsewhere). Current
study, interrater agreement of 90%. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
Has been used frequently in the study
of interactions in families with a juvenile delinquent. Lack of
research examining the psychometric properties. |
| Name: |
Behavior Inventory |
| Author: |
D. Kirby & J. Alters |
| Date: |
1984 |
| Instrument Description:
|
This inventory was designed for
Mathtech to evaluate a sex education program. It was intended to
measure frequency with which respondents actually use important
skills in everyday life and the comfort respondents experience when
using some of the skills. It is a 6-point Likert-type format. |
| Where Available: |
ETR Associates, P.O. Box 1830, Santa
Cruz, CA 95062-1830 |
| Literature Reference: |
Lock, S. E., &
Vincent, M. L. (1995). Sexual decision making among rural adolescent
females. Health Values, 19, 47-58. |
| Cost: |
$10.00 |
| Intended Audience: |
Adolescents |
| Subtests: |
This measure contains an eight
question communication skills subscale. |
| Psychometrics: |
Test-retest is .57; Cronbach=s alpha
is .75 for communication subscale. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
Contains general communication skills
items and items specific to communication about sexuality. |
| Name: |
Parent-Youth
Communication Questionnaire |
| Author: |
L. Serna, J. B. Schumaker, J. A. Sherman, & J. B. Sheldon |
| Date: |
1991 |
| Instrument Description:
|
This scale was designed to measure
parent and youth perceptions of family communication and overall
social interactions. 7-point Likert-type format. |
| Where Available: |
Loretta Serna, 1776 University Ave.,
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96822 |
| Literature Reference: |
Serna, L. A., Schumaker,
J. B., Sherman, J. A., & Sheldon, J. B. (1991). In home
generalization of social interactions in families of adolescents
with behavior problems. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24,
733-746. |
| Cost: |
Not Available |
| Intended Audience: |
Adolescents and their families |
| Subtests: |
Not Available |
| Psychometrics: |
None noted. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
No psychometrics found. |
| Name: |
Life Skills Development
Scale - Adolescent form |
| Author: |
C. A. Darden, E. J. Ginter, & G. M. Gazda |
| Date: |
1996 |
| Instrument Description:
|
The 65-item revision of this scale is
an assessment instrument that produces a general score of global
efficacy, but also provides some specific information regarding the
four identified component parts: interpersonal communication/human
relations skills; problem-solving/decision-making skills; physical
fitness/health maintenance skills; and identity development/purpose
in life skills. |
| Where Available: |
C. A. Darden, Learning Disabilities
Center, 343 Milledge Hall, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
30602-5554. |
| Literature Reference: |
Darden, C. A., Ginter, E.
J., & Gazda, G. M. (1996). Life-skills development scale -
adolescent form: the theoretical and therapeutic relevance of
life-skills. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 18, 142-163. |
| Cost: |
Not Available |
| Intended Audience: |
Adolescents, ages 13-18. |
| Subtests: |
This instrument contains a
communication/human relations skills subscale - 15 items. |
| Psychometrics: |
Internal consistency is .94 for the
total scale; ranged from .72 to .87 for the subscales. Interscale
correlations were significant but in the low-to-moderate range. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
The intended purposes of this
instrument are for research and to assist in intervention design,
implementation, and evaluation in clinical and educational settings.
|
| Name: |
Family Assessment Device
(FAD) |
| Author: |
Epstein, Baldwin, & Bishop |
| Date: |
1983 |
| Instrument Description:
|
This instrument is based on the
McMaster Model. It is a 60-item self-report instrument utilizing a
4-point Likert-type format. The FAD operationalizes six dimensions
of family functioning: problem solving; communication; roles;
affective responsiveness; affective involvement; and behavior
control. It also contains a general functioning scale which can be
used independently. |
| Where Available: |
Ivan W. Miller, Ph.D., Director of
Research, Butler Hospital, 345 Blackstone Boulevard, Providence, RI
02906 |
| Literature Reference: |
Sawin, K., &
Harrigan, M. P. (1995) Woog, P. (ed.). Measures of Family
Functioning for Research and Practice. New York: Springer Publishing
Company. |
| Cost: |
Not available |
| Intended Audience: |
Used with families. |
| Subtests: |
This instrument contains a
communication subscale. |
| Psychometrics: |
Internal consistency: Alpha=s ranged
from .57 to .86, .70 to .76 for communication scale. Test-retest at
one-week interval: .72 for communication. Evidence of content,
construct, concurrent, discriminant, and predictive validity. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
This is a well-established and highly
utilized self-report instrument. The FAD has been used in clinical
studies of families responding to adolescent suicide and other
mental health issues. The FAD is based on a sound, theoretical
model. |
| Name: |
Family Environment Scale
(FES) |
| Author: |
R. Moos & B. Moos |
| Date: |
1974 |
| Instrument Description:
|
This 90-item self-report instrument
with a true/false format measures ten dimensions of family
functioning. The FES assesses the social environment or climate of
families from an interactionist framework. Three domains of family
climate measured are: social relationship; personal growth; and
family system maintenance. |
| Where Available: |
Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.,
3803 E. Bayshore Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303 |
| Literature Reference: |
Sawin, K., &
Harrigan, M. P. (1995) Woog, P. (ed.). Measures of Family
Functioning for Research and Practice. New York: Springer Publishing
Company. |
| Cost: |
Not available |
| Intended Audience: |
Used with families. |
| Subtests: |
Contains an expressiveness subscale.
Other subscales include: cohesion; conflict; independence;
achievement orientation; intellectual-cultural orientation; active
recreational orientation; moral-religious emphasis; organization;
and control. |
| Psychometrics: |
Internal consistency reliabilities
range from .60 to .78. Test-retest reliabilities at eight weeks
range from .73 to .86. Content and construct validity. Concurrent,
discriminant, and predictive validity for some scales. |
| Advantages/Disadvantages |
This is a well-established and highly
utilized self-report instrument. It requires 20-40 minute
administration time, although a shortened version is available.
Questions have been raised by recent scholars about the psychometric
properties. |
|
