In Defense of the Lowly Questionnaire

By October 7, 2019NESCA Notes 2019

By Jason McCormick, Psy.D.
Pediatric Neuropsychologist

When gleaning information about a child’s areas of strength and challenge, neuropsychologists gather information from multiple sources, including parent and child interviews, conversations with teachers and mental health professionals working with the child, clinical observations, structured testing and questionnaires.

In my work with families, I sometimes hear complaints from parents about the myriad questionnaires that I saddle with them as part of the evaluation process – that some questionnaires might appear to be geared toward more challenged children than their own or that they are unsure how to respond to some of the questions (e.g., Is this behavior exhibited “sometimes” or “often?”).  While those are valid complaints, I find data from questionnaires to be particularly valuable in my work.

For instance, simply relying on clinical observations to glean information about a child’s attention span and degree of distractibility would be often misleading.  While the distraction-reduced, one-to-one, highly-structured testing setting is an ideal context in which to administer standardized assessments, within such a setting, even students with moderate attention disorders can often remain on task to an extent they are not able to demonstrate in less-structured, real-world contexts.

Similarly, children with mild social communication or autism spectrum disorders might be able to demonstrate reasonably-intact social skills within the context of a structured, one-to-one setting with an adult, while they struggle in their interactions with peers in less structured settings.

Conversely, children who might present with moderately high levels of test anxiety might appear so wound-up in a testing setting that, without additional information about their emotional state outside of the testing context, they could mistakenly be diagnosed with a generalized anxiety disorder.

In addition, relying exclusively on results of standardized testing to glean information about a child’s learning profile can be equally misleading.  For instance, children who might well present with executive function challenges can often fare well on specific tests of executive function, as those tests provide a level of structure not present in daily contexts.  Further, the nature of those standardized tests is such that specific executive function skills are measured in isolation (e.g., how well is a child able to brainstorm or switch gears or see the big picture), as opposed to in real life, when a child needs to make use of multiple different executive function skills in concert to complete given tasks.

Of further importance, I often find that a comparison between a child’s responses on a self-report questionnaire and those of parents or teachers yields critical information.  More specifically, it is often the case that from the parent perspective a child is running into pronounced executive function challenges, while from the child’s perspective they have minimal challenges in that domain of functioning.  That discrepancy can provide useful information about a child’s level of self-awareness or self-acceptance, information that can, in turn, illuminate an important area to address moving forward.

Again, a thorough, comprehensive, integrated neuropsychological evaluation draws on multiple sources of information.  As part of a thorough assessment, questionnaire data is a critical data source, not only in confirming observations made during the testing and results of structured assessments, but also in providing an additional perspective as to how a child might present outside of the structured testing setting.

 

About the Author:

McCormick

Dr. Jason McCormick is a senior clinician at NESCA, sees children, adolescents and young adults with a variety of presenting issues, including Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD), dyslexia and non-verbal learning disability. He has expertise in Asperger’s Disorder and has volunteered at the Asperger’s Association of New England (AANE). Dr. McCormick mainly sees individuals ranging from age 10 through the college years, and he has a particular interest in the often difficult transition between high school and college. As part of his work with older students, Dr. McCormick is very familiar with the documentation requirements of standardized testing boards. He also holds an advisory and consultative role with a prestigious local university, assisting in the provision of appropriate academic accommodations to their students with learning disabilities and other issues complicating their education.

 

To book a consultation with Dr. McCormick or one of our many other expert neuropsychologists, complete NESCA’s online intake form.

 

Neuropsychology & Education Services for Children & Adolescents (NESCA) is a pediatric neuropsychology practice and integrative treatment center with offices in Newton, Massachusetts, Plainville, Massachusetts, and Londonderry, New Hampshire, serving clients from preschool through young adulthood and their families. For more information, please email info@nesca-newton.com or call 617-658-9800.