Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Child Behavior Checklist, Wave 1, 1994-1997

Author(s): Earls, Felton; Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne; Raudenbush, Stephen W.; Sampson, Robert;
Date Issued: 2005
Description: A large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development specifically focusing on the understanding of the developmental pathways of both positive and negative human social behaviors such as the causes and pathways of juvenile delinquency, adult crime, substance abuse, and violence and the environments in which these social behaviors took place.
show entire record ↓
Funder(s): United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau ; United States. Child Care Bureau
Alernative Title: PHDCN CBCL, 1994-1997
Source: Earls, Felton J., Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Robert J. Sampson. PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): CHILD BEHAVIOR CHECKLIST, WAVE 1, 1994-1997 [Computer file]. Boston, MA: Harvard Medical School [producer], 2002. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2005.
Note: The Murray Research Center conducted the initial data and documentation processing for this collection.
Topics: Children & Child Development > Child Development & School Readiness

Parent, School, & Community School Readiness/Child School Success & Performance
Research Design:

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods

The city of Chicago was selected as the research site for the PHDCN because of its extensive racial, ethnic, and social-class diversity. The project collapsed 847 census tracts in the city of Chicago into 343 neighborhood clusters (NCs) based upon seven groupings of racial/ethnic composition and three levels of socioeconomic status. The NCs were designed to be ecologically meaningful. They were composed of geographically contiguous census tracts, and geographic boundaries and knowledge of Chicago's neighborhoods were considered in the definition of the NCs. Each NC was comprised of approximately 8,000 people.

Longitudinal Cohort Study

For the Longitudinal Cohort Study, a stratified probability sample of 80 neighborhoods was selected. The 80 NCs were sampled from the 21 strata (seven racial/ethnic groups by three socioeconomic levels) with the goal of representing the 21 cells as equally as possible to eliminate the confounding between racial/ethnic mix and socioeconomic status. Once the 80 NCs were chosen, then block groups were selected at random within each of the sample neighborhoods. A complete listing of dwelling units was collected for all sampled block groups. Pregnant women, children, and young adults in seven age cohorts (birth, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 years) were identified through in-person screening of approximately 40,000 dwelling units within the 80 NCs. The screening response rate was 80 percent. Children within six months of the birthday that qualified them for the sample were selected for inclusion in the Longitudinal Cohort Study. A total of 8,347 participants were identified through the screening. Of the eligible study participants, 6,228 were interviewed.

For all cohorts except 0 and 18, primary caregivers as well as the child were interviewed. The primary caregiver was the person found to spend the most time taking care of the child. Separate research assistants administered the primary caregiver interviews and the child interviews. The primary method of data collection was face-to-face interviewing, although participants who refused to complete the personal interview were administered a phone interview. Interviews were conducted in Spanish, English, and Polish. In Wave 1 the complete protocol was translated into Spanish and Polish. An interpreter was hired for participants who spoke a language other than English, Spanish, or Polish. Depending on the age and wave of data collection, participants were paid between $5 and $20 per interview. Other incentives, such as free passes to museums, the aquarium, and monthly drawing prizes were also included.

Interview protocols included a wide range of questions. For example, some questions assessed impulse control and sensation-seeking traits, cognitive and language development, leisure activities, delinquency and substance abuse, friends' activities, and self-perception, attitudes, and values. Caregivers were also interviewed about family structure, parent characteristics, parent-child relationships, parent discipline styles, family mental health, and family history of criminal behavior and drug use.

Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL)

Completed between 1994 and 1997, the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) was administered to the primary caregiver (defined as the person(s) found to spend the most time taking care of the subject) of subjects belonging to Cohorts 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 of the PHDCN Longitudinal Cohort Study. The PHDCN CBCL was administered in two versions--a preschool version geared toward subjects aged 2 to 3, which contained approximately 100 questionnaire items, and a slightly longer version (approximately 120 questionnaire items) for subjects between the ages of 4 and 18. Each instrument also contained 2 to 3 open-ended items for reporting additional behavioral problems. The questionnaire items were presented in alphabetical order to reduce any respondent bias that might have occurred as a result of the respondent's preconceived notion regarding the presence or absence of a particular disorder. Respondents were asked to rate a list of items that applied to his or her child's behavior, occurring within the past six months, on a three-point Likert-type response scale: 0 = not true, 1 = somewhat true, and 2 = very true. Questionnaire items included "argues a lot," "complains of loneliness," "cruel to animals," "bites fingernails," "doesn't eat well," "nightmares," "physically attacks people," "refuses to talk," "talks or walks in sleep," "underactive or lacks energy," and "wets the bed." The preschool version of the CBCL was comprised of six narrow-band subscales and two broad-band scales (listed in the variable description section). The CBCL for the 4 to 18 age group contained eight narrow-band subscales, two broad-band scales, and a total problems scale. The scales were not mutually exclusive (i.e., one questionnaire item may contribute to more than one scale).

Date of Collection: 1994--1997
Period Coverage: 1994--1997
hide record ↑

Related Resources

what is this? Related Resources include summaries, versions, or components of the currently selected resource, documents encompassing or employing it, or datasets/measures used in its creation.

PHDCN Child Care Research Partnership Administration for Children and Families/OPRE Projects


More Like This

what is this? These resources were found by comparing the title, description, and topics of the currently selected resource to the rest of the Research Connections holdings.

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised, Wave 1, 1994-1997 Data Sets
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Deviance of Peers, Wave 1, 1994-1997 Data Sets
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Exposure to Violence (Subject), Wave 1, 1994-1997 Data Sets
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Master File, Wave 1, 1994-1997 Data Sets
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Health Screen, Wave 1, 1994-1997 Data Sets

Disclaimer: Use of the above resource is governed by Research Connections' Terms of Use.

Research Connections is supported by grant #90YE0104 from the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The contents are solely the responsibility of the National Center for Children in Poverty and the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, the Administration for Children and Families, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Google Translate