A bibliometric and content analysis of Best Practices in School Psychology.

Best Practices in School Psychology is one of the most influential books in school psychology history. Originally published in 1985 by Thomas and Grimes, it was the first book offered by the National Association of School Psychologists. Its six editions have been revised every 5-8 years. Utilizing Publish or Perish as well as cross-referenced tables of contents from Best Practices, a bibliometric analysis of its 589 chapters and 37 appendices was completed. Results yielded 15,812 citations in Google Scholar-most citations (6,448) stem from its fourth edition, published in 2002. One chapter by Good et al. (2002) was cited more than 400 times, and five other chapters were cited more than 300 times. In all, 42 chapters were cited more than 100 times. Content analysis revealed that most chapters primarily addressed domains reflecting data-based decision making and interventions. The 79 most cited chapters generated almost two-thirds of all citations, and at least one-third of the citations to each of the 10 most cited chapters emerged from student projects, such as theses and dissertations. The editors, authors, and reviewers of Best Practices have produced a massive number of chapters across six editions, and although these publications were initially intended to guide practicing school psychologists, they have had a substantial impact on scholarship, including student projects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Determining journal article citation classics in school psychology: An updated bibliometric analysis using Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science.

Bibliometric analyses have been the primary form of examining and evaluating literature within a field of study. By focusing on citation count and source, researchers have been able to identify journal articles considered to be high impact in reach and relevance, branding them "citation classics" in a field. As time progresses, technology, methods, and metrics for conducting these analyses have improved, and although there have been several studies designed to identify citation classics and patterns of citations supporting them in school psychology literature, none have done so in an updated, comprehensive manner. To address these limitations, the current study aims to replicate and extend these works in three major ways: (a) including 11 primary school psychology journals in the search, (b) using three of the largest reference databases, and (c) collapsing results across these databases to accurately identify the most highly cited articles. The search yielded evidence of more than 12,000 articles accruing more than 500,000 citations. The 100 most highly cited articles were identified, and the majority were classified as explicative (n = 63) and quantitative (n = 70). Themes of bullying, burnout, and teacher-child relationships were the prominent focus. School psychology's citation classics tended to feature quantitative research and examine the relations between constructs, and several revealed a new category of citations classics: the methodological and statistical article.

Is the Vineland-3 Comprehensive Interview Form a Multidimensional or Unidimensional Scale? Structural Analysis of Subdomain Scores Across Early Childhood to Adulthood.

As the Vineland Scales are among the most relevant, well-developed, and popular measures of adaptive behavior available for use, this study evaluated the factor structure and dimensionality of the Vineland-3 Comprehensive Interview Form. Drawing data from 2,560 participants in the norming sample, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were completed across two independent samples from four age-groups ranging from preschool-age children to adults. Results from exploratory factor analysis revealed evidence for a unidimensional model across age-groups, but results from confirmatory factor analysis indicated that multidimensional models were better fitting than unidimensional models for each age-group. Discussion focuses on whether the Vineland-3 Comprehensive Interview Form is truly a unidimensional or multidimensional measure.

State special education criteria for identifying intellectual disability: A review following revised diagnostic criteria and Rosa's Law.

Across the last century, the condition known as intellectual disability (ID) has been labeled by assorted terms, its key features have varied, and recommendations for its identification have been divided. In light of recent changes to the diagnostic criteria for ID and to federal legislation, this study was designed to compile and summarize information about the state special education criteria for this condition and its associated assessment process, as they guide school-based and associated practices. Authors independently double-coded components of all ID regulations and guidelines from the 50 United States and the District of Columbia in pairs, which was then checked and corrected for inconsistencies. A total of 10% of states provided only the federal definition of ID. Intellectual disability was the most common term used across states, but it was used by only 63% of them. To meet the intellectual deficit criterion, 37% of states referenced a fixed IQ cutoff, and 49% referred to a flexible IQ cutoff. In contrast, most states did not refer to what score types or criteria should be referenced when identifying adaptive behavior deficits. The influence of the recently updated diagnostic criteria for ID and federal legislation was evident, as several patterns of changes were apparent since the last studies of this type. The assessment in intellectual functioning was more well defined than the assessment of adaptive behavior. Health-related features associated with ID were not commonly referenced. These results can inform school psychology practice, training, and related research. (PsycINFO Database Record