Classifying COAs with three variations of the CAST: classification rates, stability, and gender differences.

The Children of Alcoholics Screening Test (CAST) was administered to a sample of young adolescents as sixth graders and again one year later. Psychometric properties of the full CAST and a shortened version (CAST-6) were examined, and three different rules for classifying COAs were analyzed. The CAST was found to demonstrate adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability. When examined as an entire group, the vast majority of respondents maintained the same classification (COA or NCOA) from the first to the second administration. For boys, however, CAST scores and the proportion who were self-identified as COAs declined significantly. Classification rates based on the full CAST and on the shortened version were similar. The use of two confirmatory items, "Ever think your father (mother) was an alcoholic?" however, substantially reduced the percentage of self-identified COAs. Finally, girls were dramatically more likely than boys to endorse items suggesting parental alcoholism, and they were also more likely to self-identify as COAs.

The relationship of self-perception and stress in adult children of alcoholics and their peers.

Woititz identified thirteen generalizations which she asserts characterize adult children of alcoholics (ACOAs) [1]. Her work, however, was based upon clinical populations and may not be generalizable to a non-clinical population. Using 442 undergraduate students, 2 x 3 multivariate analysis of variance (parental alcoholism by level of childhood stress) on students' perceptions of the applicability of Woititz's variables to them was conducted. No significant effects were found even though ACOAs experienced more childhood stress than their peers. Results do not support the generalization of Woitiz's model to a non-clinical sample.

Variables associated with alcohol abuse among self-identified collegiate COAs and their peers.

In order to investigate the interrelationship among children of alcoholics (COA) status, problem drinking, gender, and several psychosocial variables, a sample of college students completed a questionnaire that measured consequences of drinking, parental drinking habits, family environment, and personality. No relationship was found between COA status and either the likelihood or severity of problem drinking. Furthermore, COAs and non-COAs differed on only 4 of 15 psychosocial variables, suggesting a smaller impact of parental alcohol abuse than is commonly assumed. The variable most consistently related to problem drinking was social nonconformity, a measure of antisocial behavior. Findings suggest the importance of investigating the development and maintenance of antisocial behaviors as etiological factors in problem drinking among college students, rather than COA status per se.

Environmental and personality differences between children of alcoholics and their peers.

Nonclinical, adolescent children of alcoholics (COAs) and their peers from nonalcoholic homes (CONAs) responded to questionnaires of environmental variables, depression, and anxiety. Multivariate (discriminant) analyses revealed several meaningful differences between the two groups. Although the two groups differed on the measures of anxiety and depression, environmental stressors contributed most to the discriminant function that differentiated between the two groups. Also, gender differences were discovered, suggesting that males and females perceive problem drinking differently and that home environments may be different for the two genders. Implications for research and intervention are discussed.

Aphasic and tactile--perceptual deficits of disabled readers.

As part of a psychoeducational battery, 36 children, referred for reading and/or other learning difficulties, were administered the Aphasia Screening Test. the Tactile Finger Recognition Test, and the Finger-tip Number Writing Perception Test from the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery for Older Children. The children were divided into two groups: 18 determined on the basis of a severe discrepancy to be eligible for learning disabilities services in the area of reading (RD) and 18 determined to be ineligible for such services (NRD). Statistical comparisons of the two groups revealed the RD group to display significantly more impairment on the Aphasia Screening Test and the Finger-tip Number Writing Perception Test.