MALADJUSTMENT AND SOCIOCOGNITIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING - THE VALIDITY OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT

General socio-cognitive problem-solving deficits have become accepted as the basis for applied interventions with maladjusted children despite conflicting findings and problematic assessment procedures. This study used Kendall's deficit/distortion distinction to compare the performance of conduct disorder and non-problem boys on means-ends and optional thinking measures, using both quantitative and qualitative indices. Although quantitative problem/non-problem deficits were found, the pattern of results did not support the notion of a consistent maladjustment deficit. The nature of the qualitative differences, however, suggested a more specific role for the assessment of socio-cognitive problem solving with increased emphasis on context and problem differentiation.