Abstract:
With the development of the Adaptive Behavior Scale, the AAMD claimed to have provided a means of accurately and objectively measuring adaptive behavior. However, because the type or seriousness of behaviors described within the behavior domains are not taken into account in Part II of the Scale, it is possible for two individuals achieving identical domain scores to still differ significantly in terms of the seriousness of their maladaptive behavior. Thus, an inaccurate representation of the individuals would result. To investigate this, the behaviors described in each behavior domain on Part II of the AAMD Adaptive Behavior Scale were rated on a seven-step scale ranging from "serious" to "mild," by a group of fourteen mental health professionals. The data generated from these rating scales were evaluated using an analysis of variance and a test for specific comparisons. The findings revealed significant differences in the degree of seriousness of the behaviors described in twelve of the thirteen behavior domains included in this study. Only Domain VIII (and XIV, which was not studied) failed to achieve statistically significant results. The results obtained from this investigation brought into question the Scale's evaluative ability and illustrated the need for altering the present Adaptive Behavior Scale's scoring system. Modifications involving weighted scores were recommended to alleviate existing inadequacies in the Scale's scoring method.
