ORIGINAL RESEARCH

 

Translation, adaptation and content validation of section i of the scale "assessment of peer relations" into the portuguese language

 

 

Elsa Soares^I; Ana Serrano^II; Michael J. Guralnick^III

^ISpeech and Language Pathologist - Doctoral Student at Institute of Education University of Minho - Research Center in Education. Grant Researcher for the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology - SFRH/BD/70351/2010, Project Co-funded by the European Social Fund. Rua Simões de Almeida nº 95 casa 41, 4715 - 105 Portugal - Braga
^IIPh.D., Associate Professor University of Minho - Institute of Education - Research Center in Education. Campus de Gualtar 4710 - 057 Braga
^IIIPh.D., Director, Center on Human Development and Disability. Professor of Psychology and Pediatrics University of Washington. Seattle, Washington

Correspondence to

 

 

---

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: adaptation and content validation of Section I of the scale "Assessment of Peer Relations" to the Portuguese language.
METHODS: section I was translated and back translated by experienced translators. The version of consensus was used in two pilot studies that indicated the necessity of linguistic improvements. After realizing these modifications, it was possible to gather an expert panel - composed by 8 researchers in early intervention and social interaction - who thoroughly discussed each item of section I.
RESULTS: this research process was essential to deeply explore section I allowing, consequently, to perceive which modifications should be done in order to operationalize its use in Portuguese's language and culture.
CONCLUSIONS: the objective of this research was achieved and, consequently, it was possible to do the adaptation and the content validation to the Portuguese language concerning Section I of the scale "Assessment of Peer Relations".

Key words: social adjustment; interpersonal relations; social behavior disorders; child behavior; content validation

---

 

 

INTRODUCTION

Peer interaction situations are contexts in which the child can progress and develop all the competences that, in a short and long term, will be essential for social adjustment in a less protected world and where situations are real and, therefore, distant from the several pretend worlds the child might encounter within peer culture^1-4.

It is in these interactions that the child might try social strategies to solve certain challenges, such as peer group entry, conflict resolution and maintaining play. It is also inside these interactions that the child might experience and/or observe the consequences of certain choices and, by that, realizing if those choices will be applicable in future social situations^{(1, 2)}. As these social exchanges take place, it also becomes possible to realize if the child pursues or gives up his or her objectives and the probable reasons for the made choice - Difficulties in adjusting and resorting to different social strategies? Nonresponsive peers? Context features working as possible obstacles or as possible facilitators?

All the complexity inherent to peer related social competence leads to the need to actively observe the child and interconnect several factors associated with successful interactions or difficulties - or even frustrations - in this area^3-4. Thus, it becomes vital to understand the child and the context as a whole; on one hand, there's the child with all developmental characteristics - interrelated areas that in an integrated way influence social competences' expression; on the other, there's every aspect and/or processes of the context which also influence constant and reciprocal transactions with the child. This comprehensive and interconnected perspective is vital to the effective understanding of the child's social performance and to find ways to foster it by valuing, more and more, the active role of the environment in all this process^4,6-10.

The importance of peer related social competence as a precursor of future social performance leads to the need to assess, as early as possible, children that demonstrate difficulties on this level⁵. In Portugal, however, there are a limited number of validated scales which measure social interaction⁶.

This study focus on the child's social performance in natural contexts, putting an emphasis on the relevance on peer interaction observation, as well as on information provided by the various caregivers, as described on Assessment of Peer Relations (APR) ⁽⁷⁾. This scale assesses several critical domains of social interaction regarding children between 3 and 5 years old experiencing difficulties in peer related social competence, based on the performance in natural contexts, an aspect that increases the odds of a more realistic assessment, essential to identify the domain(s) in need of improvement and, consequently, to build up individualized intervention objectives.

So, the aim of this research consists on the adaptation and content validation of Section I of Assessment of Peer Relations into the Portuguese language.

 

METHODS

Tool characterization

The items on the APR are based on the interactional development principles and aim to assess every child who demonstrates any kind of difficulty establishing and maintaining successful interactions with their peers⁽⁷⁾. The completion is made after a few days of observing the child interacting with peers in the contexts.

APR consists of three sections, each one being composed by theoretical texts which intend to substantiate and explain the base of the subsequent assessment scales. Section I - which completion allows the gathering of the necessary data to design an intervention plan - consists of four components: component A, B, C and special considerations.

Component A refers to a general perspective and assesses, through a Lickert scale (LS): level of involvement in interaction; purpose and success of initiations. Component B assesses, through the LS, the foundation processes - emotional regulation and shared understanding concerning social rules; pretend play complexity and diversity and everyday events. In component C, a summary of the linguistic, cognitive, affective and motor development is asked. Other factors conditioning the interactional performance should also be mentioned, as well as the child's strengths.

The completion of special considerations is a way of summarizing and systematizing the information collected in order to design an intervention plan.

Procedure - translation and back translation

For the translation, adaptation and content validation of Section I, and considering the Portuguese cultural reality, a qualitative methodology was used. This decision was based on the suggestions and opinions provided by the author of the tool, Professor Guralnick, who granted the permission for this study.

Cross-cultural adaptation followed the guidelines of Guillemin, Bombardier, & Beaton ⁽⁸⁾ complemented by Hill & Hill ⁽⁹⁾ , who argue that translating a tool, on its own, might turn out to be insufficient in the face of the semantic/conceptual and cultural differences between the several languages, which is why back translation and adaptation are so important.

The first phase consisted on translating the American version into the Portuguese language. This translation was made by a speech language pathologist - researcher at Institute of Education, University of Minho - in practice for six years, having a background in early childhood intervention and social interaction and, therefore, being a specialist considering the terms related to these areas. Simultaneously, this researcher masters the English language due to having attended, for nine consecutive years, a school of specialized teaching of the language.

Secondly, the back translation was made. For that we could count on the work of an experienced bilingual translator whose mother tongue is English (American English). The American original version was then compared with the back translated one in order to check if there were many discrepancies and if the meaning of the tool had been maintained and, by that, understand if the translated version would, in fact, assess what it was supposed to⁽¹⁰⁾. These two translators found a consensus version⁽⁹⁾. In a parallel way, section I was translated by two psychologists from the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Oporto - coming from the education and child development areas, one of them having large experience in Early Childhood Intervention and a deep knowledge of the English language. This translation was then subject to revision, reflection and discussion, as a focus group, by the team of the research project of the Center of Psychology - University of Oporto (RIPD/CIF/109664/2009), funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology.

The final versions made by the two work teams of the above mentioned universities were then compared, leading to a final consensual version. This version was used in two pilot-studies in order to verify if it raised any kind of questions indicating the need of linguistic improvement¹¹.

Pilot-studies

In pilot-study one - conducted within the scope of the Master's thesis of Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Oporto - "Temperamento e participação social com pares em crianças com perturbação do espectro do autismo" ("Issues on temperament and social participation with peers in children with Autism Spectrum Disorders"), defended by Daniela Maria da Costa Ferreira - section I was administrated as an oral reflection with two early childhood educators - in order to assess the perception and understanding of its' items. Their comments concerning the content, clarity and understandability of the items were noted down, as well as the improvement suggestions.

In pilot-study two, the tool (scales and related explanation texts) was sent by e-mail to a linguist and 20 early childhood intervention professionals with experience when it comes to use assessment tools. Each participant was also asked to make a general evaluation of the tool in order to realize if it had been considered relevant and if, accordingly, the maintenance of the study would be useful.

After systematizing the data gathered and the changes mentioned as necessary, and taking into account the positive feedback considering the relevance of the tool, the second phase of adaptation and content validation of section I in the APR was initiated.

Panel of experts

For the linguistic adaptation - semantically, idiomatically and conceptually - and for content validation, a panel of experts was created, composed by eight professionals coming from different areas^8,12, all having wide experience regarding early childhood intervention and social interactions. Since the tool consisted of three sections - and given the pilot-study feedback about the extension - it was considered necessary to meet with the same expert panel on three different occasions, repeating the same procedures.

Section I was sent by e-mail to each expert so that they could get a first contact with the tool and reflect on it, taking into account the explicit goals concerning the items suitability and pertinence. It was considered important that section I should be sent in its globality - texts and scales - stressing, nonetheless, that the meetings would only focus on the scales.

The panel of experts became vital to ensure if the expressions and grammar structures of the translated version - when compared to the original ones - were equivalent among themselves when it came to effectively having the same meaning framework and if they were, at the same time, culturally relevant and appropriate. This was the basis for the semantic and conceptual equivalence and for the content validation⁽⁸⁾. Considering the fact that there are typical expressions in the American English, hardly translated into Portuguese, it also became necessary to carry the idiomatic equivalence and, therefore, finding other expressions which could pass on the original idea⁸.

 

RESULTS

The differences between the original version and the back translated one allowed to find meaning discrepancies, creating the need of improvements in specific aspects of the translation. The convergence and comparison of the versions created by the two teams led to a consensus version that was considered to more clearly demonstrate the assessment intents of the original document.

From the 21 scales that were sent, in pilot-study two, ten answers were returned. The scale analysis - just like it was intended at this stage of this study - brought up Portuguese language issues - concerning spelling and morpho-syntactic errors. Still taking in consideration the pilot-studies, other data emerged, unexpected, but important to refer. In general terms, the participants suggested that it would be important to delimitate the meaning of some concepts of the scale and which are considered to be of a more theoretical nature.

When it comes to implementing the scale, the participants stressed out the importance of adding to the Lickert scale, that in the case of this tool diverges from "rarely" to "almost always", the "not observed" item.

It was also highlighted, just like what was mentioned by the author, the need that the people implementing the scale be familiar with the tool.

All the participants brought up the tool extension as being a potential barrier to its implementation - in this case, one might point out that this perception might be due to the fact that the three sections were sent simultaneously. In fact, the extension of the tool appears to be one of the main reasons explaining the participation rate observed on pilot-study two.

The first panel meeting was attended by every expert mentioned above. Some of them already knew one another because they had been involved in common projects. For others, it was the first contact day. The group established, right from the start, a dynamic discussion about section I, in general, and the items, in particular, and all the elements had a balanced intervention.

As one can see on Table 1, many of the items of the consensus version remained unaltered; in others some morpho-syntactic changes were conducted in order to ease their understanding. In many of them, some words were replaced for being considered linguistically more appropriated than others.

Next, the more important issues of discussion that influenced validation and content adaptation are stressed out.

Item one (place two - see Table 1) - "Tends to be unoccupied" - raised a few semantic and conceptual doubts, because the word "desocupado" (unoccupied) might lead to different interpretations such as: not doing anything, effectively speaking, or having a different interest in relation to the group as a whole (playing with the hand, for example).

Therefore, there was a need to fully understand what the author really intended to assess. The posterior bibliographic research allowed the definition of this and other concepts thought to be necessary. The creation of a supplementary glossary to ease and standardize implementation was then initiated - also by suggestion of the experts, complemented by the opinion of the participants of the pilot-studies.

The translation of the term "Play" raised doubts. Some experts suggested one should select the word "jogo" - (understood in Portuguese language as a rule-oriented game). However, other experts mentioned that "play" should be translated as "brincar", arguing that this is a more broad concept because it comprehends not only the rule-oriented interactions - "jogo" - as well as free interactions, without explicitly defined rules, which better suits every context in which the word "play" is used throughout the scale - therefore, this was the final option.

In an initial approach, it was thought to be more beneficial to add examples to the several items, but then it was concluded that by doing so one might condition the perspectives of the people that would, in the future, fill in the scales.

"Initiation" - appears for the first time on item six (place seven), but then is repeated throughout the scale. Initially, it was translated as "iniciativa" and, consequently, the backtranslation corresponded to "initiative". In this way, the panel of experts suggested one should choose the word "iniciação" ("initiation"), especially because there are conceptual differences between the Portuguese words: "iniciativa" and "iniciação"¹³. The first refers to the "action of someone who is the first to put an idea into practice, propose or take on something"¹⁸.

On the other hand, "iniciação" is defined as "action or the result of initiating"^{18 p2107}. One can thus infer that the level of requirement, considering social behaviors, is higher in "iniciativa" when compared to "iniciação".

Item eight (place 10) was the source of profound debate considering the conceptual meaning of the word "simples" ("simple"). Some experts viewed this term as being related to the quality of the interaction - simple interactions such as, for example, exchanging looks. Other set of experts considered this term to be more related to the quantity and, thus, reached a contradiction inside the item itself because if, on one hand, it is said "engages in simple responses or exchanges", it also adds, on the other hand, "not more than two per child". Experts argued that if it's more than one interaction per child than, according to quantity, it is no longer a simple exchange.

In order to overcome this situation, and so that this question will not appear in the future, it was considered, consensually, one should add the following explanatory footnote: "The concept "simples" refers to the quality of the interaction".

On item ten (place 12) the words "diversidade" ("diversity") and "caráter" ("character") come up. The panel of experts considered that "diversity" is - in the light of the Portuguese language and the specific context it's inserted in - an embracing word and so the word "caráter" was removed to avoid redundancies facilitating, by that, the item comprehension.

On item five (place 35), an option was made considering the use of the words "vacilando" ("vacillating") or "hesitando" ("hesitating") because it was considered that the first one referred more to the Portuguese spoken in Brazil, as the second one better adjusts to the cultural reality of Portugal.

Considering item seven (place 37), a morpho-syntactic change was necessary in order to render the item more clear and understandable. The panel also replaced the terms being used for others considered to be more conceptually appropriated.

In this way, it was mentioned that the word "muda" ("mute") should be replaced by "silenciosa" ("silent"), giving the negative connotation associated to the first and that the word "atrasada" ("delayed") didn't explicitly expressed what it meant to be assessed, which led to the election of the word "retardada" ("retarded").

Component "Pretend Play Complexity and Diversity" raised many doubts to the experts because they mentioned that item's similarity and the underlying theoretical content might difficult the understanding of the items and, consequently, condition the scale implementation. Just like what had happened, and as a way of surpassing this situation, it was pointed out, once again, the need of a theoretical research to enlighten the meaning of the items mentioned, explaining them in the glossary.

The concept "guião" ("script") raised doubts among some of the experts because it was mentioned the low employ of the word in certain preschool's contexts. The group tried to find a replacement word. Nonetheless, every word suggested wasn't broad enough - the maintenance of the word "guião" ("script") was then agreed upon, with a corresponding definition within the glossary.

Still in this component - everyday events (place 54) - a choice was made considering the establishment of some relation between the items through the use of the demonstrative pronoun "these" ("estes"), considered to be important for a better understanding.

 

DISCUSSION

The methodological steps mentioned in the bibliography concerning the qualitative processes of translation, adaptation and content validation of assessment tools turned out to be vital, because that was the only way to ensure the contextualization of the original tool considering the cultural specificities of the Portuguese children. Through this research we did the adaption of the tool in the light of these issues also regarding the need of facilitating as most as possible the operationalization and application of the tool by the caregivers⁹.

The whole process inherent to this study also led to other reflections that allowed more broad perspectives beyond those specifically connected to the tool. The perception of the experts that before the application of section I the child should be observed for several days and under different interactional situations stresses the importance of being aware that the child's social performance may vary, taking into account the type of activities in which he or she is engaged (more or less structured activities, for example); the place where the activities occur (inside or outside) and the number of children involved in the activities (larger or smaller groups), all these considerations converge with the perspective of several authors who underlie that contextual factors might affect the child's interaction profile^14,15.

The analysis of section I also allowed experts to understand that filling it out demands great observation skills, because it assesses interaction aspects that might turn out to be very subtle. In this way, they considered these scale's characteristics as an advantage because they bring out the importance of observing these details, which, by itself, might create a change in early childhood professionals' and caregiver's attitudes and perspectives in regards to the importance of the various interaction situations. This perception, on its turn, might lead, consequently, to the awareness of considering the importance of fostering, as much as possible, the interaction opportunities with peers in preschool^1,2.

Concerning again experts' considerations, the subjectivity, that might be intrinsic to the rating itself, emphasizes the importance of filling out the scales taking into account as many perspectives as possible considering the observations and knowledge of those who better know the child, like caregivers.

When discussing section I experts highlighted its benefits concerning the valorization of the context as an indispensable source of information; the incitation to actively observe the child; its capacity of inducing professionals to deep reflections regarding child's and/or context's characteristics that might work as facilitators and/or obstacles allowing, consequently, to find new ways of fostering interaction and also improving the possibility of knowing the child in a more deep way identifying, inherently, the specific competences in need of improvement ^{(1, 2)}. This results in the convergence of this section with the contemporary perspectives by focusing not only on the child, but also by valuing and allowing the establishment of a link between the child-related factors and those context related, being thus suggested that it might appear as a complementary resource when it comes to assessment and intervention^3,4,6.

The entire process intrinsic to this study allowed us to achieve the aim of the research and led to the need of a future study regarding the Portuguese preschool's dynamics concerning social interactions and its implications in the development of peer related social competence.

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology - SFRH/BD/70351/2010 and to the European Social Fund.

 

REFERENCES

1. Corsaro WA. Friendship and peer culture in the early years. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation 1993.         [ Links ]

2. Guralnick MJ. Early intervention approaches to enhance the peer-related social competence of young children with developmental delays: A historical perspective. Infants & Young Children. 2010;23(2):73-83.         [ Links ]

3. Garbarino J, Ganzel B. The human ecology of early risk In: Shonkoff JP, Meisels SJ, editors. Handbook of early childhood intervention. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000. p. 76 - 93.         [ Links ]

4. Sameroff AJ, Fiese BH. Transactional regulation: The developmental ecology of early intervention. In: Shonkoff JP, Meisels SJ, editors. Handbook of early childhood intervention. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000. p. 135 - 59.         [ Links ]

5. Meisels SJ, Burnett SA-. The elements of early childhood assessment. In: Shonkoff JP, Meisels SJ, editors. Handbook of early childhood intervention. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000. p. 231 - 57.         [ Links ]

6. Pereira APdS. Práticas centradas na família em intervenção precoce: Um estudo nacional sobre práticas profissionais [Tese de Doutoramento]. Braga: Universidade do Minho; 2009.         [ Links ]

7. Guralnick MJ. Assessment of peer relations. Washington: Child Development and Mental Retardation Center - University of Washington; 2003. Available from: http://depts.washington.edu/chdd/guralnick/Assessment_Peer_Relations2003.pdf.         [ Links ]

8. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Épidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417 - 32.         [ Links ]

9. Hill MM, Hill A. Investigação por questionário. 2ª ed. Lisboa: Sílabo; 2008.         [ Links ]

10. Zometa CS, Dedrick R, Knox MD, Westhoff W, Siri RS, Debaldo A. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of an HIV/AIDS knowledge and attitudinal instrument. AIDS Education and Prevention. 2007;19(3):231-44.         [ Links ]

11. Fachado AA, Martinez AM, Villalva CM, Pereira MG. Adaptação cultural e validação da versão portuguesa: Questionário medical outcomes study social support survey (MOS-SSS). Acta Med Port. 2007;20:525 - 33.         [ Links ]

12. Oliveira R-G, Stein LM, Pezzi JC. Tradução e validação de conteúdo da versão em português do childhood trauma questionnaire. Rev Saúde Pública. 2006;40(2):249 - 55.         [ Links ]

13. Dicionário da língua portuguesa contemporânea Lisboa: Verbo; 2001.         [ Links ]

14. Odom SL, Brown WH, Schwartz IS, Zercher C, Sandall SR. Ecologia da sala e participação da criança. In: Odom SL, editor. Alargando a roda: A inclusão de crianças com necessidades educativas especiais na educação pré-escolar. Porto: Porto Editora 2007. p. 27 - 43.         [ Links ]

15. Wood E. Developing a pedagogy of play. In: Anning A, Cullen J, Fleer M, editors. Early childhood education. London: Sage Publications; 2004. p. 27 - 38.         [ Links ]

 

 

Correspondence to:
elsamartasoares@gmail.com

Manuscript submitted Aug 01 2012,
Accepted for publication Oct 30 2012.