The Paediatric Evaluation of Emotions, Relationships, and Socialisation Questionnaire (PEERS-Q): development and validation of a parent-report questionnaire of social skills for children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background To assess social skills, professionals require a tool that is grounded in science, age-appropriate and sensitive to deviations from normal expectations. The Paediatric Evaluation of Emotions, Relationships and Socialisation Questionnaire (PEERS-Q) was developed to address this gap. This study aimed to detail the psychometric properties of PEERS-Q.Method 571 parents of children aged 5-15 years completed questionnaires about their child’s social competence (PEERS-Q, Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS), Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)). Children completed a measure of estimated IQ. Confirmatory factor analysis explored reliability and validity of PEERS-Q. Age- and sex-adjusted T-scores were derived and relationships between these and validation instruments were explored.Results Six subscales were derived; Relationships, Participation, Social Rules, Social Communication, Social Cognition and Behaviour. PEERS-Q has good to very good internal consistency (α = 0.89, subscales 0.78-0.95); good convergent validity with the SSIS and the SDQ (r = 0.76, subscales 0.47 to 0.59), and good discriminant validity using Matrix Reasoning (r = – 0.11, subscales – 0.08 to – 0.11).Conclusions PEERS-Q is a useful tool for measuring domains of social competence in children/adolescents. PEERS-Q may improve a clinician’s ability to identify a young person’s social difficulties and hence guide intervention. Further research in clinical populations is required to determine these benefits.KEY POINTSWhat is already known about this topic: (1) There is currently a lack of robust and developmentally appropriate social skills assessment tools for children and adolescents.(2) Exisiting measures either fail to assess the complexity of social function, or are included as smaller sub-scales of broader outcome measures.(3) Without valid and reliable measures that target the specific subdomains of social skills, interventions cannot be targeted to specific social skills strengths and weaknesses.What this topic adds: (1) The PEERS-Q is a new tool for measuring social skills in children, grounded in developmental neuroscience.(2) PEERS-Q is a valid and reliable measure.(3) PEERS-Q may improve a clinician’s ability to identify a young person’s social difficulties and tailor the type of intervention required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".