This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Kamphaus, R. W. Articles by Lahey, B. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kamphaus, R. W. Articles by Lahey, B. B. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Methodological Issues and Learning Disabilities Diagnosis in Clinical Populations

Randy W. Kamphaus is an associate professor of educational psychology and coordinator of the school psychology program at the University of Georgia. He received his doctorate at the University of Georgia. His research interests include intelligence theory and assessment, measurement issues in learning disability diagnosis, and test construction.

Paul J. Frick

Paul J. Frick, PhD, received his doctorate from the University of Georgia in 1990. He is currently assistant professor of psychology at the University of Alabama. Research interests include the assessment and classification of childhood behavior disorders and familial influences on the development of childhood behavior problems.

Benjamin B. Lahey

Benjamin B. Lahey, PhD, is professor of psychiatry, psychology, and pediatrics at the University of Miami School of Medicine. He received his doctorate from the University of Tennessee. His research focuses on the classification, etiology, and correlates of the disruptive behavior disorders. Address: Randy W. Kamphaus, 329 Alderhold Hall, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602.

Previous research suggests that the diagnosis of a comorbid learning disability is dependent on the method used for making the LD diagnosis. This study investigated that proposition by studying the effects of using three approaches to the assessment of learning disabilities in a sample of 177 six- to thirteen-year-old boys referred to outpatient mental health clinics for behavior problems. The use of these three procedures to diagnose comorbid learning problems produced significantly different results. All methods identified significant numbers of children in the clinical population as learning disabled; however, each method identified children with differing characteristics. Consistent with predictions from measurement theory, the commonly used simple standard score discrepancy method was more likely to identify children with above-average IQs as learning disabled, whereas a regression approach identified learning disabilities more consistently across the ability range. These results were interpreted as supporting the use of regression approaches to diagnose co-occurring learning disabilities, as that method is less likely to be biased by the child's intelligence test score. The implications of the use of each method in research investigations is also discussed.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 24, No. 10, 613-618 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/002221949102401004


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. J. Obringer and K. M. Coffey Eligibility Criteria for Learning Disabilities: an Administrative Case Study Assessment for Effective Intervention, January 1, 1998; 23(2): 77 - 86. [PDF]

				E. E. Rock, M. A. Fessler, and R. P. Church The Concomitance of Learning Disabilities and Emotional/Behavioral Disorders: A Conceptual Model J Learn Disabil, May 1, 1997; 30(3): 245 - 263. [Abstract] [PDF]