Skip to main content
Original Article

Investigating the Structural Model of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000344

Abstract. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) aims to assess problems in the psychological adjustment of children and youths. In this paper, we present results from an analysis of the structure of the SDQ. Data were collected from a community sample of 582 children and adolescents aged 10–19 years in Poland. The results showed that the bi-factor model yielded a good fit to the data. Out of five original SDQ factors, only emotional symptoms and prosocial behavior scales were distinguished from the general factor of difficulties. Additionally, two independent facets that concerned the characteristics of unsettlement and cautiousness have been extracted from the hyperactivity and conduct scales. The achieved structure differs from the theoretically assumed structure, but the findings are consistent with the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits (CPM), which was adapted to interpret the results. Moreover, with the help of the CPM, an additional difficulty that can be introduced to the model was identified.

References

  • Borg, A. M., Kaukonen, P., Salmelin, R., Joukamaa, M. & Tamminen, T. (2012). Reliability of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire among Finnish 4–9-Year-Old children. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 66, 403–413. doi: 10.3109/08039488.2012.660706 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bourdon, K. H., Goodman, R., Rae, D. S., Simpson, G. & Koretz, D. S. (2005). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: U.S. normative data and psychometric properties. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 44, 557–564. doi: 10.1097/01.chi.0000159157.57075.c8 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. J. LonneriJ. W. BerryEds., Cross-cultural research methodology series: Field methods in cross cultural research (Vol. 8, pp. 137–164). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Browne, M. W. (2001). An overview of analytic rotation in exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 111–150. Retrieved from http://www.rc.usf.edu/~jdorio/FA/Brown%20%282001%29%20An%20Overview%20of%20Analytic%20Rotation%20in%20Exploratory%20Factor%20Analysis.pdf First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Caci, H., Morin, A. J. S. & Tran, A. (2015). Investigation of a bifactor model of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1007/s00787-015-0679-3 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Capron, C., Thérond, C. & Duyme, M. (2007). Psychometric properties of the French version of the self-report and teacher Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 79–88. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.23.2.79 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Chen, F. F., West, S. & Sousa, K. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 189–225. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr4102_5 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multiinformant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138–1151. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1138 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dickey, W. C. & Blumberg, S. J. (2004). Revisiting the factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: United States, 2001. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 43, 1159–1167. doi: 10.1097/01.chi.0000132808.36708.a9 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1246 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Di Riso, D., Chessa, D., Bobbio, A. & Lis, A. (2013). Factorial structure of the SCAS and its relationship with the SDQ. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29, 28–35. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000117 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Essau, C. A., Olaya, B., Anastassiou-Hadjicharalambous, X., Pauli, G., Gilvarry, C., Bray, D., … Ollendick, T. H. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire from five European countries. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 21, 232–245. doi: 10.1002/mpr.1364 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Giannakopoulos, G., Tzavara, C., Dimitrakaki, C., Kolaitis, G., Rotsika, V. & Tountas, Y. (2009). The factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in Greek adolescents. Annals of General Psychiatry, 8, 20–27. doi: 10.1186/1744-859X-8-20 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 1337–1345. doi: 10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Goodman, R., Meltzer, H. & Bailey, V. (1998). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A pilot study on the validity of the self-report version. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 7, 125–130. doi: 10.1007/s007870050057 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gómez-Beneyto, M., Nolasco, A., Moncho, J., Pereyra-Zamora, P., Tamayo-Fonseca, N., Munarriz, M., … Girón, M. (2013). Psychometric behaviour of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in the Spanish national health survey 2006. BMC Psychiatry, 13, 95–106. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-13-95 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. In R. K. HambletonP. F. MerendaC. D. SpielbergerEds., Adapting Psychological and Educational Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment (pp. 3–38). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hawes, D. J. & Dadds, M. R. (2004). Australian data and psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 38, 644–651. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1614.2004.01427.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jennrich, R. I. & Bentler, P. M. (2012). Exploratory bi-factor analysis: The oblique case. Psychometrika, 77, 442–454. doi: 10.1007/s11336-012-9269-1 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Klein, A. M., Otto, Y., Fuchs, S., Zenger, M. & von Klitzing, K. (2013). Psychometric properties of the parent-rated SDQ in preschoolers. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29, 96–104. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000129 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Kóbor, A., Takács, Á. & Urbán, R. (2013). The bifactor model of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29, 299–307. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000160 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Loeber, R., Lahey, B. B. & Thomas, C. (1991). Diagnostic conundrum of oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 379–390. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • McCrory, C. & Layte, R. (2012). Testing competing models of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire’s (SDQ’s) factor structure for the parent-informant instrument. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 882–887. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.02.011 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus User’s Guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Retrieved from http://www3.udg.edu/fcee/professors/gcoenders/Mplus_User_s_Guide_Version_7.pdf First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Niclasen, J., Teasdale, T. W., Andersen, A.-M. N., Skovgaard, A. M., Elberling, H. & Obel, C. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Danish Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire: The SDQ assessed for more than 70,000 raters in four different cohorts. PloS One, 7, e32025. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032025 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Palmieri, P. A. & Smith, G. C. (2007). Examining the structural validity of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in a U.S. sample of custodial grandmothers.. Psychological Assessment, 19, 189–198. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.19.2.189 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Petermann, U., Petermann, F. & Schreyer, I. (2010). The German Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): Validity of the teacher version for preschoolers. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26, 256–262. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000034 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • R Development Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M. & Haviland, M. G. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544–559. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2010.496477 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. É. & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17, 354–373. doi: 10.1037/a0029315 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ruchkin, V., Koposov, R., Vermeiren, R. & Schwab-Stone, M. (2012). The Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire: Russian validation of the teacher version and comparison of teacher and student reports. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 87–96. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.06.003 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ruscio, J. & Roche, B. (2012). Determining the number of factors to retain in an exploratory factor analysis using comparison data of known factorial structure. Psychological Assessment, 24, 282–292. doi: 10.1037/a0025697 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74, 107–120. doi: 10.1007/s11336-008-9101-0 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Strus, W., Cieciuch, J. & Rowiński, T. (2014). The Circumplex of Personality Metatraits: A synthesizing model of personality based on the Big Five. Review of General Psychology, 18, 273–286. doi: 10.1037/gpr0000017 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tanabe, T., Kashiwagi, M., Shimakawa, S., Fukui, M., Kadobayashi, K., Azumakawa, K., … Wakamiya, E. (2013). Behavioral assessment of Japanese children with epilepsy using SDQ (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire). Brain & Development, 35, 81–86. doi: 10.1016/j.braindev.2012.03.008 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Van Roy, B., Veenstra, M. & Clench-Aas, J. (2008). Construct validity of the five-factor Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in pre-, early, and late adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49, 1304–1312. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01942.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vostanis, P. (2006). Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: Research and clinical applications. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 19, 367–372. doi: 10.1097/01.yco.0000228755.72366.05 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Woerner, W., Becker, A. & Rothenberger, A. (2004). Normative data and scale properties of the German parent SDQ. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13, 3–10. doi: 10.1007/s00787-004-2002-6 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar