(EDDT) Emotional Disturbance Decision Tree

The EDDT is the first instrument to provide a standardized approach to the assessment of Emotional Disturbance (ED). It is useful for school psychologists, counseling/clinical psychologists, guidance counselors, evaluation specialists, teachers, educational diagnosticians, and speech/language pathologists within the school setting, as well as within juvenile correctional facilities.

Children who are socially maladjusted do not meet the criteria for special education services for an ED, unless deemed both socially maladjusted and emotionally disturbed. The EDDT treats social maladjustment (SM) as a supplemental trait, and assesses it after ED characteristics have been assessed.

The EDDT encompasses all of the federal criteria, and addresses the broad emotional and behavioral nuances in those requiring special education services for an ED. Designed by a working school psychologist, the EDDT includes five sections that correlate with the specific components of the federal criteria, enabling evaluators to work through each criterion—one by one.

The Emotional Disturbance Characteristic Scales consist of:

• Inability to Build or Maintain Relationships
• Behaviors or Feelings
• Pervasive Mood/Depression
• Physical Symptoms or Fears
• EDDT Total Score

Screening items are included within two clusters:

• Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity
• Possible Psychosis/Schizophrenia

The EDDT addresses the severity and educational impact that emotional and behavioral problems have on students, via two clusters:

• Level of Severity   
• Educational Impact

These clusters also aid in the development of recommendations and interventions.

EDDT Parent Form (EDDT-PF)

The EDDT-PF adds the parental perspective when evaluating for possible ED. It offers a standardized approach to gathering parent information about the child’s functioning in areas that meet federal ED criteria.

Standardization, Reliability and Validity

The EDDT standardization sample was composed of 601 children, ages 5-18 years, who were matched to the U. S. Population for gender, race/ethnicity and geographic region. In addition, data were collected on a sample of 404 children eligible for special education due to an ED diagnosis.

Internal consistency was high (r=.94) for the EDDT Total Score, and ranged from .75 to .88 for the other EDDT scales. Test-retest stability was high (r=.92) for the EDDT Total Score, and ranged from .81 to .94 (interval of 1-44 days, mean=18 days). Interrater reliability was good (r=.84) for the EDDT Total Score (mean T-score change=1.04).

Convergent validity was examined for the normative sample, using the Clinical Assessment of Behavior (CAB–Stoelting Cat. No. 32590) and the BASC-2. These same forms were used to examine convergent validity for a subgroup of the ED sample, along with the CAB Parent Form, and the Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist.

Validity was also examined using six specific samples of children who were representative of various special education exceptionalities: specific learning disability; speech/language impairment; mental retardation; attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder; autism spectrum disorder, and social maladjustment. The following measures were used:

• CAB Teacher Form (Stoelting Cat. No. 32590T
• Gilliam Autism Rating Scale (Stoelting Cat. No. 32607)
• Gilliam Asperger’s Disorder Scale (Stoelting Cat. No. 32827)
• Conduct Disorder Scale *BASC-2 Teacher Form
• Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Child
• Differential Test of Conduct and Emotional Problems
• Jessness Inventory-Revised