23803
Parental and Teacher Reports of Social Skills and Problem Behaviours in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Thursday, May 11, 2017: 12:00 PM-1:40 PM
Golden Gate Ballroom (Marriott Marquis Hotel)
M. Clark1, J. Barbaro2 and C. Dissanayake3, (1)Kingsbury Drive Bundoora, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, (2)Olga Tennison Autism Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, (3)Olga Tennison Autism Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
Background: Cross-informant literature suggests that parents and teachers provide unique information on children’s social competencies across settings. However, there is also considerable evidence to indicates that these informants often differ in their reports of child behaviours. Parents consistently report more problem behaviours at home in comparisons with teachers, both informants report similar social skills (Achenbach & McConaughy, 1987)

Objectives: This study compared parent (n=46) and teacher (n=44) ratings of social skills, problem behaviours and peer interaction in a sample of school-aged children with an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). A second objective was to identify which social areas children are reportedly strongest and weakest according to parents and teachers.

Methods: Parents and teachers completed the Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) to obtain a cross-informant perspective of positive and negative social behaviours. The Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale (PIPPS) was also completed to assess three dimensions of play across settings ‘play interaction’, ‘play disconnection’ and ‘play disruption’.

Results: As expected, parents reported a higher occurrence of maladaptive behaviours in the home environment. Parent and teacher ratings of social skills were simiar across settings as expected. Parents and teachers also converged on two dimensions of the PIPPS: ‘play interaction’ and ‘play disruption’. A significant difference in reports of ‘play disconnection’ was evident with parents reporting higher disconnection. Communication was identified as a social strength by both informants. Despite differences in the frequency of problem behaviours, informants agreed that hyperactivity/inattention and externalizing were the most common and challenging behaviours.

Conclusions: Understanding social weaknesses provides a benchmark for tailoring social skills interventions to support these areas of difficulty. Addressing challenging behaviours at school age may minimise subsequent disruption on later development and social engagement during adolescents and adulthood.