The ITSEA assesses for social or emotional problems and competencies in infants and toddlers and was designed to identify children with deficits or delays in these areas. It provides a comprehensive profile of problems and competencies with scores on 4 domains: 1) Externalizing, 2) Internalizing, 3) Dysregulation, 4) Competence. Each domain is comprised of a number of subscales (see sample items). The ITSEA also yields scores on three clusters that include atypical behaviors: Maladaptive, Social Relatedness, and Atypical. There are two versions, a Parent Form and a Childcare Provider Form; both are reviewed in this database.
Carter, A.S., & Briggs-Gowan, M. (2005). ITSEA BITSEA: The Infant-Toddler and Brief Infant Toddler Social Emotional Assessment. PsychCorp: San Antonio, TX.
3-point scale: 0 = Not true/rarely, 1 = Somewhat true/sometimes, and 2 = Very true/often. A "No Opportunity" code allows raters to indicate they have not had the opportunity to observe the behavior
Although there are norms for the ITSEA Parent Report Form, there are no norms for the Childcare Provider Form. However, means and standard deviations are provided for boys and girls by age (12-17 months and 18-36
PROBLEM SCORES: Cut scores =>90th percentile, Of Concern T-score between 63 and 69; Clinical T>=70 COMPETENCE SCORES: Cut scores =<10%; Of Concern: T between 31 and 37; Deficit/Delay T=>30
|Validity Type||Not known||Not found||Nonclincal Samples||Clinical Samples||Diverse Samples|
|Sensitive to Change|
|Sensitive to Theoretically Distinct Groups|
|Not Known||Not Found||Nonclinical Samples||Clinical Samples||Diverse Samples|
Pros & Cons/References
1. The items appear clear and easy to understand. 2. The measure was developed specifically to assess infants and toddlers and includes items that are developmentally sensitive and relevant to young children. 3. Assesses competencies as well as problem behaviors. 4. There is a comparable parent version with identical items and scales to allow for comparisons between reporters.
1. The full psychometrics of the Childcare Provider Form have not been examined. At this point (8/05) there are only data regarding internal consistency, and there are no norms. 2. The measure is long. Studies of consumer satisfaction conducted with parents seem to suggest that approximately 39% felt the measure was somewhat too long or too long. Studies of this type have not been conducted with childcare providers, but it is likely that they will find the length burdensome. The BITSEA Childcare Provider Form is more likely to be useful in childcare settings. 3. The age range of the measure 1-3 is awkward for treatment-outcome research and longitudinal studies because children need to fall in that age range at pre-, post-, and follow-up assessment periods. 4. With regard to using the measure for trauma-exposed children, there is no scale that directly measures trauma symptoms, so another measure would need to be used to capture trauma symptomatology. 5. The pricing of the ITSEA Childcare Provider Form seems high, given the limited psychometric research on this measure.