Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38528944›Full record

ArticleCollabra. Psychology2023

Measuring CHAOS? Evaluating the short-form Confusion, Hubbub And Order Scale.

Sally A Larsen, Kathryn Asbury, William L Coventry, Sara A Hart, Callie W Little, Stephen A Petrill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Collabra. Psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Adaptation and validation for use in Brazil of the Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale (CHAOS).Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sally A LarsenSchool of Education, University of New England, Australia.
Kathryn AsburyDepartment of Education, University of York, UK.
William L CoventrySchool of Psychology, University of New England, Australia.
Sara A HartDepartment of Psychology, Florida State University, USA.
Callie W LittleFlorida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, USA.
Stephen A PetrillDepartment of Psychology, Ohio State University, USA.

Funding

THE FLORIDA LONGITUDINAL STUDYP50HD052120 · NICHD · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI TIFFANY P HOGAN, Nicole Sandi Patton-Terry · 2006 to 2026
$31.7M
Colorado Adoption/Twin Study of Lifespan behavioral development & cognitive aging (CATSLife2)R01AG046938 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI REYNOLDS, CHANDRA A, WADSWORTH, SALLY J · 2015 to 2024
$18.5M
ENVIRONMENTAL INFLUENCES ON EARLY READING:A TWIN STUDYR01HD038075 · NICHD · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI PETRILL, STEPHEN A. · 2002 to 2010
$4.9M
Assessing the links between risk factors, COVID-19 impacts, and reading skillsR01HD109292 · NICHD · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Sara Ann Hart, Callie Little · 2022 to 2026
$2.9M
An Open Learning Disabilities Behavioral Data RepositoryR01HD095193 · NICHD · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI HART, SARA ANN, SCHATSCHNEIDER, CHRIS W · 2019 to 2023
$2.9M
GENETICS OF GENERAL AND SPECIFIC MATH DISABILITIESR01HD046167 · NICHD · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI PETRILL, STEPHEN A · 2003 to 2005
$1.6M
Exploring Individual Differences in Response to InterventionR21HD072286 · NICHD · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI HART, SARA ANN · 2013 to 2014
$393k
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG046938NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD052120NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD038075NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD046167NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD095193NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD109292NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD072286
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Confusion, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS) - short form - is a survey tool intended to capture information about home environments. It is widely used in studies of child and adolescent development and psychopathology, particularly twin studies. The original long form of the scale comprised 15 items and was validated in a sample of infants in the 1980s. The short form of the scale was developed in the late 1990s and contains six items, including four from the original scale, and two new items. This short form has not been validated and is the focus of this study. We use five samples drawn from twin studies in Australia, the UK, and the USA, and examine measurement invariance of the CHAOS short-form. We first compare alternate confirmatory factor models for each group; we next test between-group configural, metric and scalar invariance; finally, we examine predictive validity of the scale under different conditions. We find evidence that a two-factor configuration of the six items is more appropriate than the commonly used one-factor model. Second, we find measurement non-invariance across groups at the metric invariance step, with items performing differently depending on the sample. We also find inconsistent results in tests of predictive validity using family-level socioeconomic status and academic achievement as criterion variables. The results caution the continued use of the short-form CHAOS in its current form and recommend future revisions and development of the scale for use in developmental research.

Indexed as

Confusion Hubbub and Order Scalefactor analysishome environmentmeasurement invariancetwin studies

Identifiers

PMID38528944
PMCPMC10961925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.