What does the term “emotional-behavioral disorders” entail?
The guest contributors of this article are Dr Noel Chia Kok Hwee and Mdm Betty Kuan Fui Ha. Dr Chia is a board-certified educational therapist registered with the Association of Educational Therapists, USA, and he also holds a board-certification in special education as well as a diplomate of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals. He is also a professional counsellor registered with the Australian Institute of Professional Counsellors. Mdm Kuan is a board-certified dialogic-diagnostic art therapist registered with the International Association of Counselors & Therapists, USA, and a qualified counsellor.
According to Webber and Plotts (2008), the use of classification systems in the behavioral sciences has always been controversial because of the imperfections inherent in the current systems and the lack of empirical precision in developing such a system (see also Forness, 2005; Kaufman, 2005; Taylor, 1997). However, it can help facilitate the understanding, treatment, and possibility the prevention of some emotional-behavioral disorders (EBDs). Hence, in the fields of special education, educational counselling and educational therapy, defining EBDs as a group of disorders is most useful for the purposes of determining its prevalence, providing appropriate services, conducting and communicating research on it, and for determining probable intervention outcomes (Webber & Plotts, 2008). In addition, the classification of EBDs can form the key to understanding large groups of events, objects, or phenomena related to feelings, emotions and behaviors, and provides a means of communication among professionals by defining the rules by which psychological constructs such as emotional disturbance are defined (Quay, 1986).
We would use either of the terms - emotional and behavioral disturbances or emotional-behavioral disorders interchangeably - and define EBDs as a syndrome of composite maladaptive behaviors (Ullman & Krasner, cited in Russ, 1974) of internalising and/or externalising nature and can be best expressed in terms of bio-physical, bio-ecological, psycho-dynamic and cognitive-behavioral disturbances (Webber & Plotts, 2008), resulting in the inability to perform the following activities: (i) “to learn at a rate commensurate with intellectual, sensory-motor and physical development” (Haring, 1963, p.291); (ii) to “adapt to reasonable requirements of social regulation and convention” (Blackham, 1967, p.73) so as “to establish and maintain adequate social relationships” (Haring, 1963, p.291); (iii) to respond appropriately to activities of daily living (Blackham, 1967) in how events are construed, i.e., how an individual thinks, believes, expects, attends to - in short, his/her mental life - that influences how he/she behaves (Haaga & Davison, 1991; Rosenhan & Seligman, 1989) or to perceive reality clearly or meet the ordinary demands of the various ecosystems (Blackham, 1967; Graubard, 1973); and lastly, in addition, (iv) display a variety of excessive, chronic, deviant behaviors ranging from hyperactive, impulsive and aggressive to depressive and withdrawal acts (Haring, 1963) that “violate the perceiver’s expectations of appropriateness and that the perceiver wishes to see stopped” (Graubard, 1973, p.246).
In summary, the EBDs can be categorized into four behavioral profiles (Webber & Plotts, 2008) as follow: (1) conduct disorder that is characterized by aggressive, hostile and contentious behavioral traits (Quay et al., 1966, p.297); (2) personality problem as characterized by anxiety, withdrawal and introvertive behavioral traits (Quay et al., 1966, p.297); (3) a less distinctive profile of inadequacy-immaturity that involves pre-occupation, lacking interest in or awareness of the environment, sluggishness, laziness, day-dreaming, passivity and other autistic-like traits (Quay et al., 1966, p.298); and (4) deviant behavioral traits that closely approximate social maladjustment (Quay, 1972, 1975) and are known as socialized delinquency. This fourth behavioral profile relates to participation in cultural sub-groups (or gangs) that break rules or laws, play truancy, shop-lifting or stealing, vandalism against public property, violate curfew.
These four behavioral profiles can easily be classified into the internalizing behaviors (i.e., personality problem and inadequacy-immaturity) and externalizing behaviors (i.e., conduct disorder amd socialized delinquency) as identified in many research studies on EBDs (e.g., Kaufman et al., 1979; Quay et al., 1966; Webber & Plotts, 2008).
Copyright © 2009 LSES. All rights reserved. see Disclaimer