Program Outcomes for Youth
Social Competencies

Adolescent Relationships
Measures

The measures listed in this section are by no means exhaustive and are merely a sampling of the more popular measures used by researchers for assessing the various components believed to be important in successful adolescent relationships. It is possible also that the often overlooked qualitative measures such as portfolios, diaries or journals, and personal interviews can be valuable and useful alternative sources of data gathering when investigating the dynamics of adolescent interpersonal relationships.

Name: Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents (ASA).
Author: Dong Yul Lee, Ernest T. Hallberg, Alan G. Slemon, & Richard F. Haase
Date: 1985
Instrument Description: This instrument measures respondents on 33 items describing interpersonal situations and providing 3 options for the respondent choose from as to what he/she would usually do in that particular situation. The 3 options are classified as assertive, unassertive, and aggressive or passive-aggressive. The scale has three purposes: to obtain children's reports of typical behavior for use in identifying interpersonal problem areas, as a screening device for intervention programs, and as a research tool for the study of assertiveness.
Where Available: Dr. Dong Yul Lee, Dept. of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6G 1G7
Literature Reference: Lee, D. Y., Hallbert, E. T., Slemon, A. G., & Haase, R. F. (1985). An assertiveness scale for Adolescents, Journal of Clinical Psychology, 41, 51-57.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Children in grades 6-12
Subtests: None indicated.
Psychometrics: Fairly good internal consistency based on the Kuder-Richardson 20. Test-retest reliability good, with 4 week interval of .84.
Advantages/Disadvantages May be used as a screening device for intervention programs.


Name: Adolescent Coping Orientation for Problem Experiences (A-Cope)
Author: Joan M. Patterson and Hamilton I. McCubbin
Date: 1991
Instrument Description: The instrument is a 54-item instrument designed to measure behaviors that adolescents find helpful in managing problems and difficult situations. This measure can be helpful in designing intervention programs. The instrument compromises 12 factors, each of which are described in the primary reference. The total score can be calculated and used as an overall measure of coping.
Where Available: Dr. Hamilton McCubbin, Dean, School of Family Resources and Consumer Services, Madison, WI 53706-1575
Literature Reference: McCubbin, H. I. & Thompson, A. I. (eds.) (1991). Family Assessment Inventories for Research and Practice. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin
Cost: Not Available
Intended Audience: Adolescents
Subtests: Not indicated
Psychometrics: Alphas for internal consistency on the subscales range from .50 to .75. Reliability shows an overall alpha of .82. Test-retest correlation was .83 indicating good stability.
Advantages/Disadvantages May be helpful in designing intervention programs.


Name: Assessment of Interpersonal Relations (AIR)
Author: Bruce A. Bracken
Date: 1993
Instrument Description: This instrument is designed to assess 15 important characteristics of children's and adolescent's relationships in the five most important relationships to children and adolescents: their mothers, their fathers, female peers, male peers, and teachers. Each of the five domains contain 35 items to which the adolescents indicate the extent to which they agree/disagree with the item stem as it pertains to their mother, father, male peers, female peers, and teachers. The response format is a hierarchical four option forced choice Likert type scale containing no neutral option. The instrument can be administered in either group or individual format and takes approximately 15-20 minutes to complete.
Where Available: Bruce A. Bracken, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN
Literature Reference: Bracken, B. A. & Newman, V. L. (1994). Child and adolescent interpersonal relations with parents, peers, and teachers: A factor analytic investigation. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 10(2), 108-122.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Children and adolescents
Subtests: Subscales consist of mothers, fathers, female peers, male peers, and teachers protions. Each subscale has available T scores, percentile ranks, and relationship classifications to describe the student's relationship status for each subscale and a Total Relationship Index (TRI).
Psychometrics: The examiner's manual reports internal consistency coefficients ranging from .93 to .96 for all five subscales, and .96 for the TRI. For the subscales two-week stability ranges were .94 to .97, and .98 for the TRI.
Advantages/Disadvantages Sample consisted of 2,501 children and adolescents between ages 9 and 19 inclusive, and selected from 17 sites, both rural and urban, in all geographical regions of the U.S. The sample was predominately white (n=2,010)


Name: Children's Perceived Self-Control Scale (CPSC)
Author: Laura L. Humphrey
Date: 1982
Instrument Description: This 11-item instrument measures self-control from a cognitive-behavioral perspective. Three subscales measure three aspects of self-control: interpersonal self-control (ISC), personal self-control (PSC), and self-evaluation (SE). A similar form is available that measures the teachers' assessment of the child's self-control.
Where Available: Dr. Laura Humphrey, Dept. of Psychiatry, Northwestern University Medical School, 320 E. Huron, Chicago, IL 60611.
Literature Reference: Humphrey, L. L. (1982). Childrens' and teachers' perspectives on children's self-control: The development of two rating scales. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 624-633.
Cost: Not Available
Intended Audience: Children
Subtests: Three subscales measure three aspects of self-control: interpersonal self-control (ISC), personal self-control (PSC), and self evaluation (SE).
Psychometrics: Test-retest reliability correlation over 2-3 week period was .71. Subscales were correlated with ICS and PCS each at .63, and SE = .56. Evidence for concurrent validity has been minimal.
Advantages/Disadvantages Currently has only been used on children.


Name: Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventories (CSEI)
Author: Stanley Coopersmith
Date: 1967
Instrument Description: Designed to measure in any individual those evaluative attitudes toward the self that one holds in social, academic, family, and personal areas. Contains a School Form for children with five scales: General Self, Social Self-Peers, Home-Parents, School-Academic, Total Self, and Lie Scales. An Adult Form is also available.
Where Available: Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press
Literature Reference: Coopersmith, C. (1981). Self-esteem Inventories. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press
Cost: Not Available
Intended Audience: Children and adults
Subtests: Contains a School Form for children with five scales: General Self, Social Self-Peers, Home-Parents, School-Academic, Total Self, and Lie Scales.
Psychometrics: Good internal consistency noted. The Kuder-Richardson (KR-20) reliability estimate was >.80
Advantages/Disadvantages Instrument is well researched, documented, and has been widely used. Ability to be used to estimate individual's baseline of self-esteem before initiating a self-esteem enhancement program; can be administered to individuals or to groups equally well; machine or computer scoring available at The Center for Self-esteem Development, 669 Channing Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94301. Individual or group profiles are also available through the Center.


Name: Index of Peer Relations (IPR)
Author: Walter W. Hudson
Date: 1992
Instrument Description: This instrument is designed to measure problems with peers either globally or with specific peer reference groups. The IPR has two cutting scores, one which suggests the absence of a significant clinical problem, and the other indicating severe stress with a clear possibility the adolescent may use violence to deal with problems.
Where Available: WALMYR Publishing Co., P. O. Box 24779, Tempe, AZ 85285-4779
Literature Reference: Hudson. W. W. (1992). The WALMYR Assessment Scales Scoring Manual, Tempe, AZ : WALMYR Publishing co.
Cost: Not Available
Intended Audience: Adolescents
Subtests: Not Indicated
Psychometrics: Alpha for internal consistency was .94. Test-retest alphas were not available.
Advantages/Disadvantages Measure can be used globally or for targeted groups.


Name: Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA)
Author: Gay C. Armsden and Mark T. Greenberg
Date: 1987
Instrument Description: The IPPA consists of three 25-item instruments each with three subscales (trust, communication, alienation) designed measure one's attachment to mother, father, and close friends. Scores correlate with several measures of psychological well-being: self-concept, positiveness, life satisfaction, problem-solving, and locus of control. Cost: $5.00 which includes instruments and short manual.
Where Available: Mark T. Greenberg, Ph.D., Department of Psychology, NI-25, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195
Literature Reference: Armsden, G. C. & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and the relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427-454.
Cost: $5.00 which includes instruments and short manual.
Intended Audience: Adolescents ages 10-20
Subtests: Three subscales: trust, communication, alienation
Psychometrics: Test-retest reliability over three weeks was .93 for the parent scale and .86 for the peer scale. The peer scale had internal consistency coefficients of .91 for trust, .87 for communication, and .72 for alienation. The trust, communication, and alienation subscales had internal consistency coefficients of .91, .91, and .86, respectively. The IPPA has excellent concurrent validity.
Advantages/Disadvantages Good psychometrics.


Name: Network of Relationships Inventory (NRI)
Author: Wyndol Furman & Duane Buhrmester
Date: 1985
Instrument Description: Instrument consists of 30 items designed to assess 10 relationship qualities (6 social provisions and 4 additional qualities): reliable alliance, intimacy, affection, relative power, conflict, enhancement of worth, instrumental help, satisfaction of relationship, companionship, and importance of relationship.
Where Available: Wyndol Furman, Department of Psychology, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208 Literature Reference
Literature Reference: Furman, W. & Buhrmester, D. (1985). Children's perceptions of the personal nature of their social networks. Developmental Psychology, 56, 448-461.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Adolescents, children
Subtests: none indicated
Psychometrics: Cronbach's alpha = .80.
Advantages/Disadvantages Revised by authors for implementation to college students (see 1992, Child Development, 63, 103-115)


Name: Network Orientation Scale (NOS)
Author: Alan Vaux, Philip Burda, and Doreen Stewart
Date: 1986
Instrument Description: The NOS is a 20 item instrument designed to measure negative network orientation -- measures unwillingness to maintain, nurture, or utilize the support systems available to them. Useful in research and for assessing individual's potential for involvement in therapy or other community helping resources.
Where Available: Alan C. Vaux, Dept. of Psychology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901
Literature Reference: Vaux, A., Burda, P., & Stewart, D. (1986). Orientation toward utilization of support services. Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 159-170.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: College students and adults
Subtests: Not Available
Psychometrics: Internal consistency is good with mean alpha of .74. Reported to have good concurrent validity and fair construct validity.
Advantages/Disadvantages Currently used on college students and adults. Needs to be tested on adolescents.


Name: Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale (N-SLCS)
Author: Stephen Nowicki, Jr. and Bonni R. Strickland
Date: 1973
Instrument Description: A 40-item instrument designed to measure whether or not child believe that reinforcement comes to him/her by means of chance or fate or because of his/her own behavior. Locus of control has been shown to be related to several behaviors including academic achievement.
Where Available: Dr. Stephen Nowicki, Jr., Dept. of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322.
Literature Reference: Nowicki, S. & Strickland, B. R. (1973). A locus of control scale for children, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 40, 148-154.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Children in 3rd through 12th grade
Subtests: Not Available
Psychometrics: Considered to have only fair internal consistency with split-half reliabilities increasing with age and fair concurrent validity.
Advantages/Disadvantages Useful in evaluating academic performance.


Name: Parent-Child Relationship Survey (PCRS)
Author: Mark A. Fine, J. R. Moreland, & Andrew Schwebel
Date: 1983
Instrument Description: Designed to measure the quality of parent-child relationships. Comes in two forms: one each for assessing relationship with mother or with father. The forms are identical except for the changing of the word mother to father. Factors for the father version are positive affect, father involvement, communication, and anger. The mother version factors are positive affect, resentment/role confusion, identification, and communication.
Where Available: Dr. Mark A. Fine, Dept. of Psychology, University of Dayton, Dayton, OH 45469-1430.
Literature Reference: Fine, M. A. & Schwebel, A. I. (1983). Long-term effects of divorce on parent-child relationships, Developmental Psychology, 19, 703-713.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Originally developed to assess effects of divorce on adult children. However, useful for assessing the relationship of any children to their parents.
Subtests: Components for mother and father
Psychometrics: Has excellent internal consistency. Alphas for father subscales range from .89 to .94, and for the mother subscales range from .61 to .94. Has good known-groups and predictive validity, significantly discriminating between children from intact families and children from divorced families.
Advantages/Disadvantages Primary usage has been with adults.


Name: Perceived Social Support -- Family Scale (PSS-Fa), Friend Scale (PSS-Fr)
Author: Mary E. Procidano and Kenneth Heller
Date: 1983
Instrument Description: Each of the two scales have 20 items designed to measure perceived fulfillment of his/her needs by family and friends.
Where Available: Dr. Mary Procidano, Dept. of Psychology, Fordham University, Bronx, NY 10458-5198
Literature Reference: Procidano, M. E. & Heller, K. (1983). Measures of perceived social support from friends and family: Three validation studies, American Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 1-24.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Undergraduates
Subtests: Not Available
Psychometrics: Test-retest reliability over one month yielded a coefficient alpha of .90. Concurrent validity is good with scores correlated with psychological distress and social competence. Has good known-groups validity with clinical and nonclinical samples differing on both measures.
Advantages/Disadvantages Needs to be tested on adolescents who may differ from undergraduates.


Name: Provision of Social Relations
Author: R. Jay Turner, B. Gail Frankel, and Deborah M. Levin
Date: 1983
Instrument Description: A 15 item instrument designed to measure five components of social support (attachment, social integration, reassurance of worth, reliable alliance, and guidance) on two dimensions of support-- friend and family.
Where Available: Research in Community and Mental Health, 3, (1983), 67-111.
Literature Reference: Turner, R. J., Frankel, B. G., & Levin, D. M. (1983). Social support: Conceptualization, measurement, and implications for mental health. Research in Community and Mental Health, 3, 67-111.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: University students and psychiatric patients.
Subtests: Not Available
Psychometrics: Alphas on internal consistency range from .75 to .87. Concurrent validity is good and correlates significantly with the Kaplan Scale of Social Support. The instrument were found to be negatively correlated with several measures of psychological distress, indicating that it is not confounded by item content measuring psychological distress.
Advantages/Disadvantages May be useful on adolescents but needs to be tested on adolescents who may differ from university students and psychiatric patients.


Name: Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSE)
Author: Morris Rosenberg
Date: 1962
Instrument Description: The RSE is a 10 item Guttman scale with one dimension.
Where Available: Dr. Morris Rosenberg, Dept. of Sociology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
Literature Reference: Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the Self. New York: Basic Books.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Adolescents and adults
Subtests: None
Psychometrics: The RSE has a Guttman scale coefficient of .92, indicating excellent reliability. Test-retest reliability shows correlations of .85 and .88 over two weeks, indicating excellent stability. Demonstrated concurrent, known-groups, predictive, and construct validity.
Advantages/Disadvantages The scales greatest strength is the amount of research conducted over the years using a wide range of populations.


Name: Self-efficacy Scale (SES)
Author: Mark Sherer, James E. Maddux, Blaise Mercandante, Steven Prentice-Dunn, Beth Jacobs, and Ronald W. Rogers
Date: 1982
Instrument Description: The SES is a 30 item instrument designed to measure self-efficacy not tied to specific situations or behaviors. It consists of two subscales: general self-efficacy and social self-efficacy.
Where Available: Dr. Mark Sherer, 1874 Pleasant Ave., Mobile, AL 36617.
Literature Reference: Sherer, M., Maddox, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The Self-Efficacy Scale: Construction and validation, Psychological Reports, 51, 663-671.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Undergraduate populations and inpatients at treatment facility
Subtests: Two subscales: general self-efficacy and social self-efficacy.
Psychometrics: Alphas for the general subscale are .86 and .71 for the social subscale. The SES has demonstrated construct validity by correlating with other measures i.e., Interpersonal Competency Scale and the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale. Test-retest data unavailable.
Advantages/Disadvantages Used primarily on undergraduates and inpatients who may differ from adolescents.


Name: Social Support Appraisals Scale (SSA)
Author: Alan Vaux Jeffrey Phillips, Lori Holley, Brian Thompson, Deirdre Williams, and Doreen Stewart.
Date: 1986
Instrument Description: The SSA is a 23-item instrument designed to measure the extent to which an individual believes he/she is loved by, esteemed by, and involved with friends, family, and others. There are two subscales: family and friend that can also be computed into a total score.
Where Available: Alan C. Vaux, Dept. of Psychology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901
Literature Reference: Vaux, A., Phillips, J., Holly, L., Thompson, B., Williams, D., & Stewart, D. (1986). The Social Support Appraisals (SSA) Scale: Studies of Reliability and validity. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14(2), 195-219.
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Adolescents through adult
Subtests: Two subscales: family and friend
Psychometrics: Alpha coefficients range from .81 to .90. Concurrent validity is significantly related to a variety of measures of social support and psychological wellbeing. Good concurrent, predictive, known-groups, and construct validity indicated.
Advantages/Disadvantages Authors conclude that the SSA is a useful brief measure of support appraisals.


Name: Tennessee Self Concept Scale (TSCS)
Author: William H. Fitts
Date: 1956/1965
Instrument Description: The scale is intended to summarize an individual's feelings of self-worth, the degree to which the self-image is realistic, and whether or not that self-image is a deviant one. Measures five external aspects of self-concept (moral-ethical, social, personal, physical, and family) and three internal aspects (identity, behavior, and self-satisfaction). Additionally, the mapping of 15 facets of self-concept crosses the internal and external results.
Where Available: Western Psychological Services
Literature Reference: Fitts, W. H. (1965). Manuel: Tennessee Self-Concept Scale. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services
Cost: Not available
Intended Audience: Children and adults with age indicated to be a minimum of 12 years
Subtests: Not Available
Psychometrics: Reliability is open to questions due to the types of samples on which the measure has been used.
Advantages/Disadvantages Available data do not justify the use of this instrument as an important component when an individual is faced with a major decision.



Measures

Bibliographies


| Social Competencies |
| Program Outcomes for Youth |
| NOWG Home |