Key Features

Theoretical/Conceptual Basis
Conners 3 is a multi-informant behaviour rating
scale used to:

1) Evaluate symptoms of ADHD and related disorders (CD,
ODD), as well as provide screener items for Anxiety and
Depression.

2) Features multiple scales which assess problems related to
Executive Functioning, Learning, Aggression, and
Peer/Family Relationships.

3) Make decisions pertaining to clinical diagnosis, education
eligibility, intervention planning/monitoring, or for screening
purposes.
Conners Forms:

1) Full Length Forms (Conners 3)
2) Short Forms (Conners 3-S):
3) Index Forms: ADHD Index (Conners 3-AI)

Global Index (Conners 3-GI)

-With the exception of the Global Index (which does not
contain a self-report) all other forms are available in parent,
teacher and self-reports.
Parent Teacher Self-Reports








Created from 50 years of clinical assessments and
theoretical research on ADHD (1960s). Supported by
solid psychometric properties and statistical analyses.


Current version of the Conners - Built on three theoretical
frameworks: DSM-IV-TR criteria, IDEA 2004 eligibility, and
domain based perspective.

DSM-IV Connections-Comorbid disorders often seen with
ADHD are ODD and CD; scales in the Conners 3 relate directly
to DSM criteria. Also assessed with Conners 3 scales, are
problems of Executive Functioning, Learning, Aggression, and
Peer/Family Relations, all shown to be associated with ADHD.

IDEA, 2004- Conners 3 contains a scoring feature linking
assessment result to areas of disability eligibility (IDEA, 2004).

Domains Based Perspective-Domains and subcategories
created from ADHD research and referrals. Pertinent domains
include: behavioural, emotional, social, academic/cognitive, and
other. Subcategories fall under those domains which are then
related to DSM-IV-TR criteria.
Conners is
used
between
ages 6-18
Parents and teachers rate youth ages
6-16.
Youth who are 8 to 18 can do self
reports.
CRS (1989)
First compyrighted version (Conners Rating Scales).
Comprehensive normative sample.
Gold standard for ADHD tool with parent/teacher
rater forms.
CRS-R
(1997)
Further data collected, added adolescent rater forms
(Conners Rating Scales-Revised).
Statistically analyzed, good psychometric properties.
Items reviewed; DSM criteria; diverse norm sample.
Included problems with conduct , emotion,
congition, family, anxiety, depression, perfectionism.
Index forms were added for pathology in general as
well as ADHD (long/short forms).
Conners 3
(2008)

Comprehensive rating scale was needed, however,
was too long; therefore, Conners 3 was created to
serve mainly as an ADHD tool, and Conners CBRS
was created as the comprehensive pathology survey.
Key contructs for inclusion were derived from the
DSM-IV and research and age ranges for comparison
were developed along with validity scores.

Conners 3
rd
Edition
C. Keith Conners, Ph.D. (2008)
Conners
3-P
Conners
3-T
Conners-
SR

Constructs Measured

Administration/Scoring

Content structure of the Conners 3, represents constructs that
are directly relevant to DSM-IV-TR criteria of ADHD (as
well as CD and ODD) and associated concerns. Items were
created to capture key components of the below clinical
constructs on each form.


Inattention- Pertains to problems with attending to detail,
misplacing things. Links to criteria specified in the DSM-IV-
TR for ADHD.

Hyper Activity/ Impulsivity Pertains to motor (fidgets) and
verbal manifestations (blurts out) that occur often. When
combined, youth is more likely to act before thinking (gets
into trouble more often). Links to criteria specified in the
DSM-IV-TR for ADHD.

Learning Problems- Pertains to memory deficits. Reflects
characteristics of children who may have Learning
Disabilities. High scores on this scale may suggest further
ability/cognitive testing.

Executive Functioning- Pertains to planning, strategy
formation, organizational skills, self-inhibition, and
emotional regulation.

Aggression-Provides information about the features of ODD
and CD. Conduct critical items are included to highlight
behaviours of immediate concern.

Peer/Family Relations- Problems with social functioning
deficits (social intrusiveness). High scores on this scale may
indicate risk for anxiety/depression.

- Can be administered in group or individual setting, in
person or not (via email).
-Should occur in one setting, ideally to be completed at one
time.
- Should be completed individually.
-All raters should complete the same type of Conners form.
-Rater should consider behaviour that has occurred
within the past month when completing form.

Therefore
-Appropriate raters must know child/adolescent for at
least 1 month before completing the Conners 3;
however, 2 months are recommended.

Completion Time and Number of Items to Complete
per form

Full length
forms
20 minutes 99-115
items
Short forms 10 minutes 41-45
items
Index forms 5 minutes 10 items

Item Scores

0=Not True At All (Never, Seldom)
1=Just a Little True (Occasionally)
2= Pretty Much True (Often, Quite a bit)
3= Very Much True (Very Often, Very Frequently)


-May be scored by hand, software, or online.
-Scores must be interpreted and confirmed by qualified
assessor (Qualification=B level)
-When scoring with online programs/software, turn on double
entry or data verification to enhance reliability.
-If number of omitted responses exceeds what is allowable,
you are recommended to not score that scale.

Conners
3
Construct
Learning
Problems
Hyperactive
/Impulsivity
Inattention
Executive
Functioning
Peer/Family
Relations
Aggression
Explanation/Interpretation of Results Description and Technical Characteristics
*Solid psychometric properties*

-Raw scores are converted to standardized scores (T-
scores and percentiles). T-scores may be used to:

1) Compare a youths functioning to same age/gender
peers.
2) Determine areas of strengths (lower T-scores) and
weaknesses (higher T-scores).
3) Result integration (across raters/settings).

High T-scores = greater number of reported concerns.
T-score of 60 or more is considered clinically
significant.
T-score Percentile Guideline
70+ 98+ Very Elevated
60-69 84-97 Elevated
40-59 16-83 Average
<40 <16 Low
Very Elevated Score = Many more concerns than are typical.
Elevated Score = More concerns than are typically reported.
Average Score = Average number of concerns.
Low Score = Less concerns than are typically reported.

Relative Perspective DSM-IV-TR T-scores-Is
developmentally sensitive. Elevated T-scores indicates
individual demonstrates more symptoms of that disorder
than other same age peers.

Absolute Perspective and DSM-IV T-scores- To meet
a section of DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, a particular
number of symptoms must be recognized. Symptoms rated
as may be indicated or indicated are counted towards a
DSM-IV Total Symptom Count (ADHD-HI, ADHD-I,
ODD, or CD).

Anxiety/Depression Screener Items:
Both contain 4 items each. If one is endorsed with a rating
of 2 or 3, further exploration is recommended.

Critical Items:
Contains 6 items of severe misconduct. Endorsement of 1,
2, or 3, further exploration recommended.

Index Forms 3AI, 3GI: Same as above table, however, a
Very Elevated score would mean many more similar
responses to youth with ADHD (or psychopathology)
than are typical for this age/gender.
Large Standardization Size: 6,825 (general pop. and clinical
sample). N=3,400, 50 boys and 50 girls from each age range.
U.S. Census 2000 was used so ethnicity/location reflected the
general population.

Internal Consistency Reliability: High, Except for Validity
Scales: Satisfactory

Cronbachs
Alpha
Content
Scales
DSM-IV
Symptom
Scales
Validity
Scales
Conners 3-
P 3-T
3-SR
.91
.94
.88
.9
.9
.85
.67
.72
.85

Interpretation? Validity scales have small variance; a
minimal number of items on the validity scales (6 items each)
will decrease value.

Reliability? Acceptable? Interpretation?
Test-Retest
Content Scales
r=.79 - .85
Symptoms Scales
r=.76-.89

Acceptable

Effective in measuring
change over time.
Inter-Rater
Content Scales/
Symptoms Scales
Moderate to
Very Strong
Correlations
Multiple rating of same
youth yield good
consistency.

Validity? Acceptable? Interpretation?
Factorial Validity Adequate fit
of model to
data
Theoretical
concepts/empirical
structure balances.
Across Informant
correlations
Moderate Supports collection of
data from multiple
informants.
Convergent/Divergent
Validity
Strong
evidence of
both
Conners 3 correlates
with other related
variables; does not
correlate with
measures measuring
different constructs.
Discriminative
Validity
Good to Very
Good
Conners 3
differentiates clinical
sample from general
population.

Clinical Applications of Conner 3 and Strengths/Limitations of Use
Strengths Weaknesses
Clinical Application
- DSM-IV-TR symptoms and symptom counts in
Conners 3, coordinates with DSM-IV as a diagnostic
tool in clinical practice (ADHD). Helps with process of
ruling in/out; identifying comorbid issues.
-Various forms available to account for time restraints
in clinical practice/school setting.
-May be administered in group or individual settings or
remotely (online).
-Reading Levels required are low and range from grade
6 (parent report) to grade 3 ability (self-report).
-DSM-IV-TR ADHD symptoms from Conners 3,
translates into medical setting for professionals who
use ICD based system.
-Comprehensive, understandable manual for reference.
-May be re-administered, easily scored with software;
feedback reports available.


- Diagnosis cannot be given solely on fact that symptom
count has been met. Scales require multi-raters,
multimodal evaluation, across multiple settings.
- Group administrations results must be interpreted with
caution; time consuming for teachers to provide data.
- Conners 3 relates to DSM-IV specifically, DSM-V
contains changes to ADHD which have yet to be
addressed in relation to the Conners 3.

Identification
-Validity scales useful in identifying response bias.
-Appropriate for current RTI structure. Quickly
administered to assess childrens areas of needs for
targeting intervention.
-Provides scoring criteria that relates to IDEA (2004)
and areas of eligibility for funding.
-Relates directly to identification/evaluation of
childrens needs (social/emotional, educational) within
school context.
-Not racially/culturally biased; Spanish/English forms.

Intervention
-Results may be interpreted using DSM-IV-TR criteria,
IDEA (2004) eligibility requirements, or domain based
to guide intervention.
-Assessment results assist in tailoring student IEPs
with identified strengths and weaknesses (high or low
T-scores).
-May be used to assess intervention, document
progress, and review IEP goals as needed.
-Assessments include Index of Reliable Change, to
monitor if progress over time is statistically significant
(RCI values).

-Monitoring change: T-scores may change as child
moves from one age to another (due to a change in
comparison group). Raw scores must then be assessed
to record change in symptoms.


The relative perspective aloows the child to be compared to other children of the
same age. The T score will determine if the individuals level of symtpoms is
typical for his or her age. Tscore of 40-59 is average.
Absolute perspective- The existence of a certain number of symptoms from a finite
list must be documented. For example to demonstrate diagnosis for an ADHD
predominantly I type, the child must meet 6 of 9 of the symtpomsl isted in the Part
A of thecriteria.
The number of symptoms that are rated as indicated or maybe indicated are
counted towards a DSM-IV-TR Total Symptom Count for ADHD
Hyperactive/Impulsive Type, ADHD Inattentive Type, CD or ODD. Depending on
the assessors purpose,, symptoms that are rated as maybe indicated, can be
excluded in the symptom count.

Elevated scores indicate a high level of concern in that area, and average or low scores indicate average or
low levels of concern (or none) in that area.

1960- Dr. Conners devised an early rating scale, while studying stimulant effects on adolescents. He
noted parents and teachers observed changes in behaviour effectively. He grouped by content, a list of
problems in order to quantify the behavioural changes observed. Colleagues did the same, and
information was gradually collected, pertaining to how teacher/parents saw childrens behaviour at
various ages. Eventually, enough information had been collected to decide if childrens behaviour was
typical or not based on age. The list for monitoring childrens behaviour was too long, therefore, Dr.
Conners created a short form to differentiate children with or without hyperactivity (Hyperactivity Index)
which references DSM-II criteria.
What followed was the Conners Rating Scale (CRS) in 1989, the Conners Rating Scale Revised (CRS-R)
in 1997, and the Conners 3
rd
Edition in 2008. Conners 3 has been streamlined as an ADHD tool.