Turkish Validity and Reliability Study of the Executive Functioning Scale and the Daily Living Skills Scale in Children and Adolescents
International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience, vol.86, no.5, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Publication Type: Article / Article
- Volume: 86 Issue: 5
- Publication Date: 2026
- Doi Number: 10.1002/jdn.70152
- Journal Name: International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience
- Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO)
- Keywords: daily living skills, executive functioning, neurodevelopmental disorders, psychometric properties, validity and reliability
- Dokuz Eylül University Affiliated: Yes
Abstract
Objective: This study examined the psychometric properties of the Turkish versions of the Executive Functioning Scale (EFS) and the Daily Living Skills Scale (DLSS) in children and adolescents. Methods: The sample included 197 participants (11–18 years), comprising 107 with neurodevelopmental disorders and 90 healthy controls. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, and test–retest reliability was evaluated over 2 weeks in a subsample of 37 parents. Construct validity was examined with confirmatory factor analysis. Convergent validity of the EFS was assessed using correlations with the Teenage Executive Functioning Inventory (TEXI) and Trail Making Test (TMT); DLSS convergent validity was examined via correlations with the TEXI and EFS. Discriminant validity was determined by comparing clinical and control groups. Results: The EFS showed high internal consistency (α = 0.969; subscales: 0.704–0.922) and strong test–retest reliability (r = 0.869). EFS total scores correlated strongly and negatively with TEXI (r = −0.78, p < 0.001), and TMT-B scores were significantly related to several EFS subscales. The DLSS had high internal consistency (α = 0.959) and good test–retest reliability (r = 0.823). DLSS total scores correlated negatively with TEXI (r = −0.495) and positively with EFS (r = 0.572). Both scales distinguished between clinical and control groups (p < 0.001). However, CFA findings indicated inadequate model fit for both scales (EFS: CFI = 0.636, RMSEA = 0.117; DLSS: CFI = 0.411, RMSEA = 0.191), suggesting that the original factor structures were not adequately replicated in the current sample. Conclusion: The Turkish versions of the EFS and DLSS demonstrated strong internal consistency, acceptable test–retest reliability and supportive evidence of convergent and known-groups validity. However, confirmatory factor analyses did not adequately support the original factor structures of either scale. Therefore, further studies are needed to clarify the structural validity and latent dimensional structure of these instruments in Turkish populations.