The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales Are Applicable Whenever an Assessment of an Individual's

The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales are applicable whenever an assessment of an individual's daily functioning is required. The scales serve uses in a variety of clinical, educational, or research settings.

Diagnostic Evaluations

Perhaps the major clinical use to which the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales will be applied is as a major or ancillary diagnostic tool.

The Vineland Social Maturity Scale was developed by Edgar A. Doll (1935, 1965) for use in the evaluation of mentally retarded individuals. As early as 1935, Doll noted that assessments of the abilities of mentally retarded individuals are incomplete without valid estimates of adaptive behavior. According to Doll, the primary focus of assessment of mentally retarded individuals should be on their capacity for maintaining themselves and their affairs. Since Doll's pioneering work in the field of adaptive behavior, legislation (e.g., Public Law 94-142) and the official manuals of the American Association on Mental Deficiency (Heber, 1959, 1961; Grossman, 1973, 1977, 1983) have stated that deficits in adaptive behavior, as well as in intelligence, must be substantiated before an individual is classified as mentally retarded.

The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales are well suited for evaluation and diagnosis of the mentally retarded because of comprehensive content and careful development and standardization. The norm-referenced data provide reliable and valid estimates of an individual’s adaptive behavior and ranking in comparison with a national normative group. Statistically significant 5trengths and weaknesses in specific areas of adaptive behavior may be determined.

The Vineland is not limited to use with the mentally retarded, however. The Vineland is also recommended for use with individuals who have other handicaps, to determine levels of adaptive behavior and the extent to which the handicaps affect daily functioning. An assessment of adaptive behavior is necessary to obtain a comprehensive picture of a nonhandicapped person's abilities, as well.

In many instances, information about adaptive behavior and intelligence is compared, particularly when an individual is evaluated to determine whether or not the individual should be classified as mentally retarded. This comparison is facilitated by using the Vineland Survey Form, Expanded Form, or Classroom Edition with the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC; Kaufman & Kaufman, 1983), an intelligence and achievement battery for children aged 2.5 to 12.5 Because of a substantial overlap of the standardization samples for the Vineland and the K-ABC, valid comparisons can be made between scores obtained from the two assessment instruments.

By administration of the Survey Form or Expanded Form to a parent or caregiver concurrently with completion of the Classroom Edition by a teacher, an individual's adaptive behavior in different settings and from different points of view can be assessed. Furthermore, the overlap between the standardization sample for the Survey and Expanded Forms and the standardization sample for the Classroom Edition allows direct comparison between scores. Hypotheses about any differences that are found in the individual's adaptive behavior can be explored, and the user gains information necessary for a comprehensive diagnostic evaluation.

Program Planning

In recent years, increased emphasis has been placed on the development and implementation of individual educational, habilitative, and treatment programs. All require the development of goals and objectives that are relevant to an individual's needs. Many stress skills necessary for personal and social sufficiency-skills that are assessed by the Vineland.

The Vineland can be used in several ways to develop individual programs. The Survey Form, Expanded Form, and Classroom Edition indicate strengths and weaknesses in specific areas of adaptive behavior; this information can be used to select the most suitable type of program for the individual and to pinpoint activities that should receive emphasis in the program. The Expanded Form was specifically developed to provide detailed information about the prerequisite skills of

1 adaptive behaviors and offers step-by-step guidelines for preparing an individual program. All three versions can be used to monitor progress during such a program and to evaluate its success at completion.

Research

The Vineland may be used in many types of research projects in which the development and functioning of handicapped and nonhandicapped individuals are investigated. Because the Vineland does not require the presence of the individual being assessed, it is useful for research about mental and physical handicaps, infant development, and parent-child relationships. Examples of specific research applications of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales are

1. To assess the effects of various treatments or clinical interventions upon levels of adaptive functioning;

2. To determine the relationship of adaptive behavior levels to levels of clinical, cognitive, or educational functioning; and

3. To gather information in longitudinal studies in which adaptive functioning is a variable of interest. Because the Vineland can be used with individuals from birth to adulthood, information gathered from the Vineland can be used throughout the duration of longitudinal studies.

The Vineland Social Maturity Scale (Doll, 1935, 1965) is a venerable instrument widely used in a variety of settings (Reschly, 1982; Salvia & Ysseldyke, 1981), and many of its characteristics have been retained in the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. Since the development of the original Vineland in the 1930s, however, there have been advances in test construction and test evaluation procedures, significant research findings concerning the development of handicapped and nonhandicapped individuals, and powerful legislation and litigation pertaining to assessment practices. Many new features have been incorporated into the revised Vineland because of these advances.

The Survey Form of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales replaces the original Vineland Social Maturity Scale. Two additional versions, the Expanded Form and Classroom Edition, are included in the revised Vineland to extend its application.

The original Vineland assesses individuals between birth and maturity; the Survey Form and Expanded Form assess individuals from birth through 18 years 11 months and low-functioning adults. The Classroom Edition was designed for students aged 3 years through 12 years 11 months.

The revised Vineland, like the original Vineland, measures adaptive behavior through administration of the scales to a respondent (parent or caregiver, or teacher) familiar with the daily activities of the individual being assessed. The Survey Form and

Expanded Form use the semi-structured interview technique developed in the original Vineland, for administration by a trained interviewer to a parent or caregiver. The Classroom Edition uses a questionnaire independently completed by a teacher and does not require a trained examiner.

• The 117 items of the original Vineland were either refined or deleted to reflect societal changes that have occurred since the Vineland was first used in the 1930s. Many new items were developed for the Survey Form, Expanded Form, and Classroom Edition. The Survey Form and Classroom Edition each have about twice as many items as the original Vineland, and the Expanded Form has about four times that number.

• For ease of administration, the items in the Survey Form Record Booklet are grouped according to domain. Items are presented in developmental order within each domain, and the subdomain of each item is noted. The Expanded Form Item Booklet groups items by subdomain. Within each subdomain, items are arranged in clusters related to specific areas of adaptive behavior. The items of the Classroom Edition Questionnaire Booklet are grouped by subdomain and listed within them according to specific adaptive behavior topics such as reading, writing, eating, and dressing.

2 • For the Survey Form, Expanded Form, and Classroom Edition, item scores reflect whether or not the individual performs the activity described. A score of 2 indicates "yes, usually," 1 "sometimes or partially," and 0 "no, never." On the Survey Form and Expanded Form, scores indicating that the individual has no opportunity to perform the activity (N) or that the parent or caregiver does not know whether the individual performs the activity (DK) may be applied. Detailed item scoring criteria that must be used during administration are contained in the Survey Form and Expanded Form manuals and appear with the items in the Classroom Edition Questionnaire Booklet.

• Standardization of the revised Vineland was conducted with national samples of handicapped and nonhandicapped individuals who were carefully selected according to demographic information derived from the 1980 United States Census.

• A variety of derived scores replace the Social Age and Social Quotient of the original Vineland. Each version of the revised Vineland yields standard scores, percentile ranks, stanines, adaptive levels, and age equivalents for the domains and the Adaptive Behavior Composite. Adaptive levels and age equivalents are given for the subdomains.

• The standard scores for the domains and Adaptive Behavior Composite (mean = 100, standard deviation = 15) are familiar to most test users because such scores are provided for many assessment instruments.

• The interpretive systems outlined in the manuals for the Survey Form, Expanded Form, and Classroom Edition include step-by-step guidelines for determining statistically significant domain patterns.

• The manuals for the Survey Form, Expanded Form, and Classroom Edition, and the Technical and Interpretive Manual summarize internal consistency, test-retest, and interrater reliability data and a number of validity studies.

The development of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales relied heavily upon the following definition, as well as historical trends in the conceptualization and measurement of adaptive behavior. The greatest influence in the development of the revised Vineland was the tradition of assessment established by Edgar A. Doll.

Definition

We define adaptive behavior as the performance of the daily activities required for personal and social sufficiency. Three important principles are inherent in this definition of adaptive behavior. First, adaptive behavior is age-related. In most individuals, adaptive behavior increases and becomes more complex as an individual grows older. For younger children, activities such as dressing and getting along with playmates are important; for adults, holding a job and managing money are necessary. Second, adaptive behavior is defined by the expectations or standards of other people. The adequacy of an individual's adaptive behavior is judged by those who live, work, and interact with the individual. Finally, adaptive behavior is defined by typical performance, not ability. While ability is necessary for the performance of daily activities, an individual's adaptive behavior is inadequate if the ability is not demonstrated when it is required. For example, if a person has the ability to perform according to basic rules of safety and verbalizes the rules when asked, but seldom follows them, adaptive behavior is considered to be inadequate in that area.

History

The construct of adaptive behavior has its roots in the history of defining mental retardation. Present concepts of adaptive behavior can be traced to early attempts to describe the mentally retarded; for example, during the Renaissance and Reformation, language and law defined mental retardation in terms of adaptive behavior (Kagin, 1968). According to Robinson and Robinson (1976), the adaptive behavior of mentally retarded individuals received continued attention throughout the 1800s with legal reforms for handicapped individuals and a greater effort to understand the relationship between mentally retarded individuals and others in the community.

The introduction of intelligence scales in the early 1900s (e.g., Binet & Simon, 1905; Terman, 1916; Wechsler, 1939) led to the pervasive practice of defining mental retardation solely in terms of intelligence test scores. The reliance on IQ as the 3 means of classifying mentally retarded individuals continued for many years, despite increasing concern over the use of a single criterion and increasing criticism of intelligence tests (Meyers, Nihira, & Zetlin, 1979).

Although it was several years before the role of adaptive behavior in assessing and classifying mentally retarded individuals was widely recognized, in 1959 the American Association on Mental Deficiency (AAMD) published its first official manual and formally included deficits in adaptive behavior, in addition to sub-average intelligence, as an integral part of the definition of mental retardation (Heber, 1959, 1961). The AAMD manual listed two major facets of adaptive behavior:

1. The degree to which the individual is able to function and maintain himself independently and

2. The degree to which he meets satisfactorily the culturally imposed demands of personal and social responsibility. (Heber, 1961, p. 61)

In 1973, 1977, and 1983 the AAMD published revised editions of its manual that further emphasized the importance of adaptive behavior in the classification of mental retardation (Grossman, 1973, 1977, 1983). Although modified somewhat, the major premises of Heber's definition were still evident in later editions of the AAMD manual.

The development of the adaptive behavior construct and its wider application were strongly influenced by passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Public Law 94-142), which followed a similar act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a law to promote the education, employment, and training of the handicapped. Public Law 94-142 requires that states seeking financial assistance from the federal government provide free and appropriate public education to all children regardless of handicap (physical, mental, emotional, learning, or linguistic). Stringent guidelines for the assessment of handicapped children are stated in the law; assessment in all areas related to the handicap, including adaptive behavior, is required. The definition of mental retardation in Public Law 94-142 is similar to the AAMD definition (Grossman, 1973, 1977, 1983), and the law requires that deficits in adaptive behavior be substantiated before a child is classified as mentally retarded. Further, Public Law 94-142 recognizes the importance of an adaptive behavior assessment for children with handicaps other than mental retardation. Since the passage of the law, states have developed guidelines which stress adaptive behavior assessment, particularly for the mentally retarded and individuals with other handicaps (Patrick & Reschly, 19821.

The Contributions of Edgar A. Doll

Edgar A. Doll, author of the Vineland Social Maturz: _ Scale (1935, 1965) was the major pioneer in the objective assessment of adaptive behavior. Doll's concern was to identify the relationship between mental deficiency and social competence, which he defined as "the functional ability of the human organism for exercising personal independence and social responsibility" 'Doll, 1953, p. 10). In his six criteria of mental deficiency, Doll (1940) listed social incompetence as first and most important. Because the immediate occasion for suspicion of mental deficiency is a social circumstance, Doll wrote, no mental diagnosis is complete if it does not begin with a sound estimate of social competence and end with a prediction of social competence following prognosis or treatment.

Doll (1953) contributed many ideas to the construct of adaptive behavior, paramount among them the concept that adaptive behavior is developmental in nature. In other words, what is considered to be socially sufficient behavior is dependent upon the age of the person under evaluation? This principle continues to be crucial to the measurement of adaptive behavior.

A second enduring contribution of Edgar Doll is his understanding that social competence, or adaptive behavior, encompasses a wide range of areas or domains. Doll classified eight categories of items on the Vineland Social Maturity Scale (Doll, 1935, 1965): self-help general; self-help dressing: self-help eating; communication; self-direction: socialization: locomotion; and occupation. Although there is some difference of opinion as to whether Doll's categorization is the best, the perception of adaptive behavior as multidimensional has survived from one generation to the next.

4 Another characteristic of adaptive behavior assessment embodied in the original Vineland has withstood the test of time and appears in most later scales of adaptive behavior: the administration of such scales does not require the participation of the individual whose adaptive behavior is being assessed, but only requires a respondent who is familiar with the individual's behavior. This "third party" method of administration produces a valid measurement of the day-today activities that cannot be adequately measured through direct administration of tasks. This method also allows assessment of individuals who will not or cannot perform on command in a direct administration situation, such as infants, the severely or profoundly retarded, the severely emotionally disturbed, and the physically handicapped.

Doll's concepts undoubtedly formed the basis of present definitions of mental retardation and practices in the assessment of adaptive behavior. For many years after Doll's development of the Vineland in the 1930s, however, IQ scores continued to receive the major emphasis in the classification of the mentally retarded. Not until the 1960s and 1970s were Doll's ideas reflected in terms of new definitions of mental retardation' legislation and litigation concerning the mentally retarded, and the further development and proliferation of adaptive behavior scales.