Get Adobe Flash player

Data

Bikers Against Child Abuse International

Evaluation Report – January 2014

Prepared by Dee C. Ray, Ph.D., LPC-S, NCC, RPT-S

DESCRIPTIVE DATA

Participants: N=35; Females: n=23, Males: n=12

Age: Range = 3-17 years old; Mean = 9.06 years

Participants per State:

State # of Participants

Missouri 10
Oklahoma 7
Texas 4
 Massachusetts 4
Ohio 3
Wyoming 2
Maryland 1
New York 1
 New Hampshire 1
Utah 1
Washington 1

Participants per Researcher:

Researcher # of Participants

Doc 12
Nancy 17
Stoop 6

Type of Abuse:

Type # of Participants

Physical 3
Sexual 19
Other 1
Not Indicated 12

STATISTICAL RESULTS

The following analyses were conducted on data collected from the Strengths and Difficulties

Questionnaire, an assessment completed by parents/caregivers and used to identify behavioral

problems and interpersonal strengths of children ages four to seventeen years old.

Overall Stress

A one way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare scores on the Overall Stress

Score of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire at Time 1 (prior to intervention), Time

2 (following …), Time 3 (following…), and Time 4 (following…). The means and standard

deviations are presented in Table 1. There was a significant effect for time, Wilks’ Lambda=.32,

F(3, 32) = 22.77, p<.001, multivariate partial eta squared = .68.

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for Overall Stress Score for Time 1, 2, 3, & 4

 

Time Period N Mean Standard Deviation
1 35 21.23 6.64
2 35 17.06 8.42
3 35 13.80 9.42
4 35 11.86  8.50

 

Interpretation:

There was a statistically significant difference, with a large effect size, across time periods.

All time periods were statistically significantly different from each other except Time 3 when

compared to Time 4. Reports indicated that children’s total difficult behaviors decreased over the

time of intervention, with the greatest decreases occurring from Time 1 to Time 3.

Emotional Distress

A one way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare scores on the Emotional

Distress score of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire at Time 1 (prior to intervention),

Time 2 (following …), Time 3 (following…), and Time 4 (following…). The means and

standard deviations are presented in Table 2. There was a significant effect for time, Wilks’

Lambda=.38, F(3, 32) = 17.39, p<.001, multivariate partial eta squared = .62.

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics for Emotional Stress Score for Time 1, 2, 3, & 4

 

Time Period N Mean Standard Deviation
1 35 7.23 2.38
2 35 5.20 2.80
3 35 4.40 2.82
4 35 3.34  2.87

 

Interpretation:

There was a statistically significant difference, with a large effect size, across time periods.

All time periods were statistically significantly different from each other except Time 2 when

compared to Time 3, and Time 3 when compared to Time 4. Reports indicated that children’s

emotional distress decreased over the time of intervention, with the greatest decreases occurring

from Time 1 to Time 2.

Behavioral Difficulties

A one way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare scores on the Behavioral

Difficulties score of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire at Time 1 (prior to

intervention), Time 2 (following …), Time 3 (following…), and Time 4 (following…). The

means and standard deviations are presented in Table 3. There was a significant effect for time,

Wilks’ Lambda=.61, F(3, 32) = 6.94, p=.001, multivariate partial eta squared = .39.

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics for Behavioral Difficulties for Time 1, 2, 3, & 4

 

Time Period N Mean Standard Deviation
1 35 4.00 2.90
2 35 3.46 3.00
3 35 2.80 3.19
4 35 2.31  2.61

 

Interpretation:

There was a statistically significant difference, with a large effect size, across time periods. Time

1 to Time 2 and Time 2 to Time 3 were not statistically significantly different. Reports indicated

that children’s total difficult behaviors decreased over the time of intervention, with steady

decrease from Time 1 to Time 4.

Hyperactivity and Attentional Difficulties

A one way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare scores on the Hyperactivity

and Attentional Difficulties score of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire at Time 1 (prior

to intervention), Time 2 (following …), Time 3 (following…), and Time 4 (following…). The

means and standard deviations are presented in Table 4. There was a significant effect for time,

Wilks’ Lambda=.40, F(3, 32) = 16.34, p<.001, multivariate partial eta squared = .61.

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics for Hyperactivity and Attentional Difficulties for Time 1, 2, 3, & 4

 

Time Period N Mean Standard Deviation
1 35 6.37 2.50
2 35 5.26 2.94
3 35 4.17 3.42
4 35 3.74  3.04

 

Interpretation:

There was a statistically significant difference, with a large effect size, across time periods.

All time periods were statistically significantly different from each other except Time 3 when

compared to Time 4. Reports indicated that children’s hyperactive and attentional difficulties

decreased over the time of intervention, with the greatest decreases occurring from Time 1 to Time 3

Difficulties Getting Along With Other Children

A one way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare scores on the Difficulties

Getting Along with Other Children score of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire

at Time 1 (prior to intervention), Time 2 (following …), Time 3 (following…), and Time

4 (following…). The means and standard deviations are presented in Table 5. There was a

significant effect for time, Wilks’ Lambda=.62, F(3, 32) = 6.52, p=.001, multivariate partial eta

squared = .38.

Table 5. Descriptive Statistics for Difficulties Getting Along With Peers for Time 1, 2, 3, & 4

 

Time Period N Mean Standard Deviation
1 35 3.63 2.34
2 35 3.14 2.37
3 35 2.43 2.12
4 35 2.46  2.12

 

Interpretation:

There was a statistically significant difference, with a large effect size, across time periods.

Time 1 to Time 2 and Time 3 to Time 4 were not statistically significantly different. Reports

indicated that children’s difficulties in getting along with other children decreased over the time

of intervention, with the greatest decreases occurring from Time 1 to Time 3.

Kind and Helpful Behavior

A one way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare scores on the Kind and

Helpful Behavior score of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire at Time 1 (prior to

intervention), Time 2 (following …), Time 3 (following…), and Time 4 (following…). The

means and standard deviations are presented in Table 6. There was no significant effect for time,

Wilks’ Lambda=.91, F(3, 32) = 1.07, p=.38, multivariate partial eta squared = .09.

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics for Kind and Helpful Behavior Scores for Time 1, 2, 3, & 4

 

Time Period N Mean Standard Deviation
1 35 7.80 2.27
2 35 7.80 2.34
3 35 8.23 2.26
4 35 8.37  2.33

 

Interpretation:

There was no statistically significant difference across time periods. However, there was a

medium effect size indicating that some improvement occurred from Time 1 to Time 4 but not

at a statistically significant level. Reports indicated that children’s kind and helpful behaviors

remained relatively stable over the time of intervention. It should be noted that the pretest mean

score (7.8) was close to average (8.0), meaning that the children started intervention close to

average in this domain.