Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 9DA, UK.
Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Prev Sci. 2019 Nov;20(8):1265-1273. doi: 10.1007/s11121-019-00999-2.
School-based psychosocial interventions are a widely used approach to prevent or reduce externalising behaviour. However, evaluating the effects of such interventions is complicated by the fact that the interventions may not only change the target behaviour, but also the way that informants report on that behaviour. For example, teachers may become more aware of bullying behaviour after delivering lessons on the topic, resulting in increased teacher reports of the behaviour. In this study, we used multi-group confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate whether teachers exposed to the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) intervention changed the way they reported on child externalising behaviour. Using data from the z-proso study (802 participants; 51% male; 69 teachers), teacher reports of aggressive behaviour, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and non-aggressive conduct disorder symptoms were compared pre- and post- intervention and across the intervention and control conditions. There was no evidence that teacher reporting was affected by exposure to the intervention. This helps bolster the interpretation of intervention effects as reflecting changes in child behaviour, rather than in the manner of informant reporting.
学校为基础的心理社会干预是一种广泛使用的方法,用于预防或减少外化行为。然而,评估这种干预的效果很复杂,因为干预不仅可能改变目标行为,还可能改变报告者报告该行为的方式。例如,教师在教授有关欺凌行为的课程后,可能会更加意识到欺凌行为,从而导致教师报告的行为增加。在这项研究中,我们使用多组验证性因素分析来评估接受促进替代思维策略(PATHS)干预的教师是否改变了他们报告儿童外化行为的方式。利用 z-proso 研究的数据(802 名参与者;51%为男性;69 名教师),比较了干预前和干预后的攻击性行为、注意力缺陷多动障碍和非攻击性品行障碍症状的教师报告,并比较了干预组和对照组的教师报告。没有证据表明教师的报告受到干预的影响。这有助于支持干预效果的解释,即反映儿童行为的变化,而不是报告者报告方式的变化。