Accelerat ing t he world's research.

Reliability and validity of age band 1

of the Movement Assessment Battery
for Children – Second Edition
Zoe Konstantinidou

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

T he efficacy of t wo t ask-orient at ed int ervent ions for children wit h Development al Coordinat i…
Jennifer Jelsma

Cavalcant e Net o, J.L., St eenbergen, B., Wilson, P.H., Zamunér, A.R. & Tudella, E. (2020). Is Wii-based mot …
Pet er H . Wilson

Mot or Skill Performance and Sport s Part icipat ion in Deaf Element ary School Children
Yam Sharma
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Research in Developmental Disabilities 32 (2011) 1046–1051

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Reliability and validity of age band 1 of the Movement Assessment

Battery for Children – Second Edition
Theodoros Ellinoudis a,*, Christina Evaggelinou a, Thomas Kourtessis b, Zoe Konstantinidou a,
Fotini Venetsanou b, Antonis Kambas b
a
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Adapted Physical Activity Laboratory, Department of Physical Education & Sport Science,
Ag. Ioannis 62100, Serres, Greece
b
Democritus University of Thrace, Department of Physical Education & Sport Science, 69100 Komotini, Greece

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: The purpose of this study was to examine specific aspects of the reliability and validity of
Received 21 September 2010 age band 1 of the Movement Assessment Battery for Children – Second Edition (MABC-2)
Received in revised form 5 December 2010 (Henderson, Sugden, & Barnett, 2007) in Greek preschool children. One hundred and
Accepted 19 January 2011 eighty-three children participated in the study; the children ranged in age from 36 to 64
Available online 17 February 2011 months old (M = 50 months, SD = 9 months). Test-retest reliability of the MABC-2 was
evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Cronbach’s alpha for the items of
Keywords: each motor domain was estimated to determine internal consistency. Confirmatory factor
Motor assessment
analysis was used to examine the factorial validity of the MABC-2 test. Correlation
Psychometric properties
coefficients among individual item scores and the total score were also calculated to
DCD
further examine validity. The ICC for all test items was good, except for the drawing trail
task, which was moderate. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values were .51, .70 and .66 for
manual dexterity, aiming and catching, and balance, respectively. In the confirmatory
factor analysis, goodness-of-fit indices suggested a satisfactory fit of the data to the model.
The correlation coefficients between each test item and the total score were moderate. The
results suggest that the MABC-2 can be a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of
movement difficulties among 3–5-year-old children.
ß 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Valid and reliable motor tests are essential tools for professionals in adapted physical activity, psychologists, and
educators to use to identify children with motor impairment, evaluate motor development, and assess the efficacy of
interventions. The Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC) (Henderson & Sugden, 1992) is one of the most
widely used standardized assessment tests used to detect mild to moderate movement difficulties in children (Barnett &
Henderson, 1998).
The second edition of Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC-2) (Henderson et al., 2007) is a revision of the
MABC test. Changes undertaken to produce the second edition involved revising existing items and introducing new ones.
These changes were made in the test content section and concern materials, tasks, and instructions. Structural changes
included adding a 3–6-year-old age band, and combining the 7–8-year-old and 9–10-year-old age bands. Further changes

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +30 2321024886, fax: +30 2310991063.

E-mail address: tellinou@phed-sr.auth.gr (T. Ellinoudis).

0891-4222/$ – see front matter ß 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2011.01.035
 Author's personal copy

T. Ellinoudis et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 32 (2011) 1046–1051 1047

included adding a traffic light coding system to assist score interpretation, and the inclusion of a representative
standardization sample of 1172 children from the United Kingdom.
Studies conducted in different countries, such as the Netherlands (Smits-Engelsman, Henderson, & Michels, 1998),
Sweden (Rösblad & Gard, 1998), Greece (Ellinoudis, Kourtessis, & Kiparissis, 2008), Hong Kong (Chow, Henderson, & Barnett,
2001), Singapore (Wright & Sugden, 1996) and Japan (Miyahara et al., 1998), have assessed the usefulness of the test.
However, according to the technical information included in the MABC-2 manual, it appears that data regarding the
psychometric properties of the test are rather limited. Only three studies have tested the reliability of the MABC-2. In the first
study, test-retest reliability of the whole motor test was estimated using all three age bands containing 20 children in each.
Using the standard scores for the three motor domains (manual dexterity, aiming and catching, and balance) and the total
test score, Pearson’s correlation coefficient values were .77, .84, .73, and .80, respectively (Henderson et al., 2007). In the
second study, measures of test-retest reliability concerned 55 Dutch children who were 3 years old. Participants were each
tested twice by the same tester. The average time between testing sessions was 11 days. Item-by-item Pearson’s correlation
coefficient results ranged from .49 to .70. In the third study, Chow, Chan, Chan, and Lau (2002) evaluated test-retest
reliability of an experimental version of age band 3 items with instructions and scoring criteria translated into Chinese.
Participants were 31 adolescents. The test-retest reliability was .62. These findings indicated reasonable test-retest
reliability for the MABC-2. However, Brown and Lalor (2009) argued that there are issues with cultural context, translation of
the MABC-2 performance test items, and the evaluation of one age band at a time.
Although the studies reported in the MABC-2 test manual contribute to the overall body of knowledge about the MABC-2,
there is clearly a need for more research regarding the psychometric properties of the test (Brown & Lalor, 2009). It may be
reasonable to assume that the reliability information reported for the MABC also applies to the MABC-2 (Henderson et al.,
2007). However, despite the fact that the two test versions may assess the same motor skill domains in similar formats, four
new items have been added to the latter version and some items have been revised. Furthermore, some of the age bands have
been altered to include younger and older children compared to the earlier version. Therefore, the MABC-2 should be treated
as a different test that needs to have its own specific measurement properties evaluated and reported (Brown & Lalor, 2009).
The three distinct approaches often used to assess validity are content-related, criterion-related and construct-related
(Yun & Ulrich, 2002). While the criterion-related validity has been investigated by direct comparisons among valid motor
assessment instruments and the MABC-2, we believe that research data are needed to confirm the construct validity of the
MABC-2. A study presented in the MABC-2 manual provides evidence of this kind of validity. In this study, subtest standard
scores were correlated with each other and with the total score to produce results that indicate acceptable coefficients
(Henderson et al., 2007). In a study that used the first edition of the MABC and was conducted using 9–12-year-old Greek
children, factorial analysis seemed to validate the suggested concept of the test (Ellinoudis, Kourtessis, Kiparissis, Kampas, &
Mavromatis, 2008). The results of this study revealed that the structure of the test was quite similar to the three-domain
model suggested by Henderson and Sugden (1992).
Taking into consideration the aforementioned issues regarding the need for more research data regarding the
psychometric characteristics of MABC-2, the purpose of this study was to assess specific aspects of reliability and validity of
the battery. This study was limited to Greek preschool children in the age band 1.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Participants

The participants were 183 children (98 boys and 85 girls), aged 36–64 months old (M = 50 months, SD = 9 months),
without an identified neurological, sensory, or anatomical problems and attended preschool in northern Greece at the time
of the study. Stratified sampling, using sex and nationality as stratification variables, was used to select study participants
from randomly selected public nursery schools. Written informed consent was obtained from the parents and legal
guardians of the participants prior to initial assessment. All experimental procedures were approved by the Institutional
Review Board for research involving human subjects.

2.2. Instruments

The Movement Assessment Battery for Children – Second Edition (MABC-2) (Henderson et al., 2007) is composed of a
performance test, a checklist, and a manual describing the ecological approach to intervention for children with movement
difficulties. The performance test requires a child to perform a series of fine and gross motor tasks. These tasks are grouped in
the following three categories: (1) manual dexterity, which includes activities such as posting coins, threading beads and
drawing trails; (2) aiming and catching, which consists of catching a beanbag and throwing a beanbag onto a mat; and (3)
balance, where activities include a one-leg balance, walking with heels raised, and jumping on mats. Norms are provided for
3–6-year-old, 7–10-year-old, and 11–16-year-old age bands. In this study, the age band 1 of the performance test of the
MABC-2 was administered and scored.
A child’s performance was assessed in several ways depending on the item being assessed. Raw scores, such as seconds
or the number of successful catches, were always recorded and then converted into standard scores. Standard scores for
every item were provided for each age between 3 and 16 years. Age-adjusted standard scores and percentiles were
 Author's personal copy

1048 T. Ellinoudis et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 32 (2011) 1046–1051

provided for the three motor components of the battery and for the total score. The best scores were used for data analysis
when there were items with more than one test trial. Because two of the items within age band 1 (e.g. ‘‘Posting coins’’ and
‘‘One-leg balance’’) involved testing both preferred and non-preferred limbs, ten raw scores were obtained from a total of
eight MABC-2 tasks.

2.3. Procedure

Children were individually assessed on the MABC-2 according to the test manual instructions (Henderson et al., 2007). The
examiner was experienced in MABC-2 administration. To facilitate testing, the datasheets and the guidelines purchased from
the publisher were translated from English into Greek. Three examiners tested the precision and reliability of the translated
instructions prior to test administration. To assess test-retest reliability, the MABC-2 was administered twice under the same
physical conditions but one week apart. Thirty boys and 30 girls were included in the second measurement. The children ranged
in age from 3 to 5 years old, with a mean age of 50 months and a standard deviation of 7.8 months. Intra-rater reliability was
examined before the study. Intraclass correlation coefficients were excellent, having a mean of .96 across items.

2.4. Data analysis

The following two aspects of reliability of the MABC-2 were checked: (1) test-retest reliability was determined for the
total score, the three components, and each individual item; (2) internal consistency reliability was determined using
Cronbach’s alpha for all tasks within the three motor domains. Although widely used in the reliability analysis, Pearson’s
correlation coefficient tends to ignore the significance of potential differentiations among the raters. This weakness results in
high values between the two rates because of the similarities in the rating of the individuals, although the assessments differ
significantly (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to examine test-retest
reliability in this study. The (2.1) type of ICC was chosen because it provides a powerful and flexible method to examine the
reliability (Ottenbacfhef & Tomcheck, 1993). Coefficients below .50 indicate poor reliability, those between .50 and .75
indicate moderate reliability, and those above .75 indicate good reliability (Portney & Watkins, 1993). These values were
used as a guide for interpreting the results. Raw scores were used for the test items and standard scores were used for the
total test score and the three components.
Confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS 7.0 (Arbuckle, 2006) was employed to examine the factorial validity of the
[()TD$FIG]MABC-2. The postulated model hypothesized that the eight motor tasks are manifestations of three intercorrelated latent

Fig. 1. The factor structure of the MABC-2 test is shown in this diagram. Uni-dimensional arrows represent direct causal influence, bi-directional arrows
represent non-causal influence and e1 to e8 represent errors in the observed variables.
 Author's personal copy

T. Ellinoudis et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 32 (2011) 1046–1051 1049

factors, namely dexterity, aiming and catching, and balance (Fig. 1). Based on the recommendations of Hu and Bentler (1999)
in evaluating goodness-of-fit, it was decided, apart from chi-square values, to report an absolute fit index and an incremental
fit. The absolute fixed index used the standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) and the incremental fit index used is
the comparative fit index (CFI). Values close to .80 for SRMR and .95 for CFI would indicate a relatively good fit between the
observed data and the hypothesized model (Hu & Bentler, 1999).
Structural equation procedures require large sample sizes. Bootstrapping procedures were also employed because of the
relatively small number of participants in this study. Bootstrapping techniques can be implemented when adequate sample
size or data of a continuous scale and with multivariate normal distribution are not satisfied (Bollen & Stine, 1992). Thus, the
Bollen–Stine bootstrapping test (Bollen & Stine, 1992), provided by AMOS, was also applied to supplement the conventional
chi-square test of fit. This test examines the null hypothesis that the model is correct. Non-significant values indicate that the
proposed model is correct.
Correlation coefficients were calculated to examine the relationship between each item score and the total test score. The
correlation between each one of the three motor domains of the MABC-2 and the total test score was estimated.

3. Results

3.1. Reliability of the MABC-2

The results of the test-retest reliability are shown in Table 1. The ICC for the trail drawing test activity was moderate. For
all the others, the reliability was good.
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values were .51, .70 and .66 for manual dexterity, aiming and catching, and balance task
groups, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha is commonly used to establish internal consistency. A value of .60 is considered
acceptable for exploratory purposes, .70 is considered adequate for confirmatory purposes, and .80 is considered good for
confirmatory purposes (Miller, 1995).

3.2. Validity of the MABC-2

Data were examined for possible outliers prior to conducting the main analysis. Cases with Mahalanobis distance values
higher than x2(8) = 20.09, p < .01 (where 8 is the number of the MABC-2), were considered as outliers (Tabachnick & Fidell,
1996). One case was excluded from subsequent analysis thus restricting the sample size to 182. Confirmatory factor analysis
results showed a marginally non-significant chi-square (x2(17) = 22.17, p = .048). Goodness-of-fit indices suggested a
satisfactory fit of the data to the model. In particular, SRMR yielded a value of .049 and the CFI yielded a value of .957.
Additionally, Bollen–Stine’s test, based on 500 bootstrapped samples, was not statistically significant (p = .092). This finding
increased our confidence on tenability of the proposed model. These findings clearly suggest that the three-factor model was
the most viable for describing the underlying structure of the MABC-2.
The MABC-2 factor structure is depicted in Fig. 1. All factor loadings were statistically significant, ranging from .41 to .76.
Moreover, significant correlations were observed among the three latent factors. Raykov’s rho reliability coefficient was used
to determine the reliability of the latent factors. Results showed low internal consistencies; Raykov’s rho was .60, .54 and .67
for dexterity, aiming and catching, and balance categories respectively.
Correlation coefficients between each test item and the total score of the test are shown in Table 2. The analysis revealed that
all items were significantly but moderately correlated with the total motor score. Correlation coefficients between .00 and .30
are considered weak, those between .30 and .70 are moderate, and coefficients higher of .70 are considered high (Lipsey, 1990).

Table 1
Test-retest reliability of test items and domains of MABC-2.

Test item N Rating 1 Rating 2 ICC 95% CI

Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Lower Upper

Posting coins (preferred hand) 60 15.98 (5.37) 15.80 (5.08) .93a .89 .96
Posting coins (non-preferred hand) 60 18.39 (5.57) 17.59 (5.77) .94a .91 .96
Threading beads 60 52.61 (15.62) 53 (15.25) .92a .87 .95
Drowing trail 60 3.59 (2.81) 3.34 (2.45) .66a .49 .78
Catching beanbag 60 7.14 (2.10) 7.31 (1.79) .81a .70 .88
Throwing beanbag onto mat 60 6.61 (1.93) 6.90 (1.68) .84a .74 .90
One-leg balance (preferred leg) 60 10.49 (6.24) 10.42 (6.27) .73a .59 .83
One-leg balance (non-preferred leg) 60 8.32 (5.06) 8.44 (4.69) .85a .77 .91
Walking heels raised 60 13.24 (3.06) 13.32 (2.95) .96a .94 .97
Jumping on mats 60 4.56 (.67) 4.59 (.61) .87a .80 .92

Domain
Manual dexterity 60 25.61 (6.15) 26.21 (6.10) .82a .72 .89
Aiming and catching 60 23.86 (5.09) 25.29 (5.36) .61a .43 .75
Balance 60 32.73 (6.59) 32.54 (6.82) .90a .84 .91
Total score 60 81.85 (14.70) 84.05 (16.23) .85a .77 .91
a
Correlation is significant at the .01 level; SD, standard deviation; ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient; CI, confidence interval.
 Author's personal copy

1050 T. Ellinoudis et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 32 (2011) 1046–1051

Table 2
Correlations among the item scores and the total score.

Test item N Kendall’s tau

Posting coins 183 .45a

Threading beads 183 .45a
Drowing trail 183 .37a
Catching beanbag 183 .50a
Throwing beanbag onto mat 183 .41a
One-leg balance 183 .46a
Walking heels raised 183 .45a
Jumping on mats 183 .48a
a
Correlation is significant at the .01 level.

Table 3
Correlations between scores on the three test components and the total score.

Manual dexterity Aiming and catching Balance Total score

a a
Manual dexterity .26 .48 .74a
Aiming and catching .26a .28a .70a
Balance .48a .28a .71a
a
Correlation is significant at the .001 level.

In addition, the MABC-2 component standard scores were correlated with each other and with the total test score. The
resulting coefficients are presented in Table 3. The three components were moderately correlated to each other, but each
component was highly correlated with the total test score.

4. Discussion

The aim of this study was to examine selected aspects of the reliability and validity of the MABC-2 (Henderson et al., 2007)
for age band 1. Most of the reliability data included in the technical section of the test manual refers to studies on the original
version of the instrument (Chow & Henderson, 2003; Croce, Horvat, & McCarthy, 2001). Reliability data for age band 1 in the
MABC-2 are limited to the unpublished work of Visser, Jongmans, and Volman (as cited by Henderson et al., 2007). The
authors stated that the overall moderate correlations, the poor performance in the aiming and catching category, and the low
values of the non-preferred limb activities prompted them to improve the test equipment and instructions. Children
between 3 and 4 years old often lack well-developed verbal skills, do not sit attentively for long periods of time, get easily
bored with repetitive activities, and are not very concerned with compliance to please the examiners (Payne & Isaacs, 1998).
Henderson et al. (2007) re-tested the reliability of age band 1 on a small number of children and found improved reliability
coefficients. Although the items of age band 1 were more fun and game-like, were more easily comprehensible through
simple instructions, and did not require the child to sit attentively for a long time, the authors identified the need for more
relative data for ages between 3 and 4.
The aspects of reliability that were examined in this study were test-retest reliability and internal consistency. As shown,
test-retest reliability values were high for all the test items except for a moderate finding for the drawing trail activity. This
finding indicates that the MABC-2 provides state values over a weeklong period. Moreover, ICC values were high for the
motor domains of manual dexterity and balance. However, the moderate yet significant value for aiming and catching may
denote an inherited problem of the test to deal with the specific domain. Overall, the findings support the improvements and
they reinforce the idea that age band 1 of the test can provide consistent measures on separate weekly assessments. This
result supports the use of the test to examine the effectiveness of motor intervention programs and allows practitioners to be
confident in the initial assessment of the child.
The internal consistency of the battery was tested using Cronbach’s alpha. The values for manual dexterity, aiming and
catching, and balance categories were .51, .66 and .70, respectively, indicating rather moderate to poor internal consistency.
Nonetheless, the relatively small number of items for which Cronbach’s alpha was calculated may justify the values found
from the analysis. This finding is because the larger the number of skills tested, the higher the value may be (Nunnally &
Bernstein, 1994). Unfortunately, comparisons could not be made due to the lack of similar research data regarding the
specific ages.
A confirmatory factor analysis was performed to test the goodness-of-fit of the items. The analysis revealed values for the
three-domain model (manual dexterity, aiming and catching and balance) that are similar to the structure proposed by
Henderson et al. (2007). In the present study, goodness-of-fit indices suggested the data have a satisfactory fit to the above
model because the CFI approached the desirable level .90. The findings clearly suggest that the three-domain model appears
to fit sufficiently. As mentioned before, the lack of relative research data makes the present results appear preliminary.
Additional support for the validity of the battery was provided by the moderate correlations between the test items and the
total score. The current findings agree with a relative study that assessed 220 children between 9 and 12 years old using the
earlier version of the battery (Ellinoudis, Kourtessis, & Kiparissis, 2008; Ellinoudis, Kourtessis, Kiparissis, Kampas, et al.,
2008). Correlations between each of the test items and the total score were moderately significant, ranging from r = .35
 Author's personal copy

T. Ellinoudis et al. / Research in Developmental Disabilities 32 (2011) 1046–1051 1051

(p < .05) to r = .62 (p < .05). The results of both studies were similar for each one of the motor domains and the total score. In
the current study, the three motor components were significantly correlated with one another but only to a moderate degree.
This result was expected because the three subscales are supposed to measure different aspects of movement. If correlations
were too high, subscales would be measuring the same characteristics. Conversely, if the correlations were low, subsets
would be measuring irrelevant abilities (Simons et al., 2008). The results of the present study agree with the findings of
Henderson et al., who reported that moderate coefficients are acceptable because MABC-2 was designed to cover a wide
range of competencies. The fact that the components correlated well with the total score provides more evidence for the
validity of the test.
In conclusion and within the limitations of the present study (i.e., the sample consisted only of children 3–5 years old and
did not include children from the whole range of the preschool age), the MABC-2 is a reliable and valid tool for the
assessment of movement difficulties for preschool children. Although Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values were moderate,
the high values for the test-retest reliability for almost all test items and the good construct results indicated that the MABC-
2 can be used with confidence. However, a validation process should be confirmed by more than one approach and using
multiple techniques (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Future research efforts are required to provide evidence of reliability and
validity in different groups of children with or without movement difficulties in all age bands.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the children who participated in this project as well as Dr. Nikos Tsiggilis for his statistical
advice.

References

Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). AMOS user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.

Barnett, A., & Henderson, S. E. (1998). An Annotated Bibliography of Published Studies Employing the TOMI/Movement ABC 1984–1996. London, United Kingdom: The
Psychological Corporation.
Bollen, K. A., & Stine, R. A. (1992). Bootstrapping goodness-of-fit measures in structural equation model. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 205–
229doi:10.1177/0049124192021002004.
Brown, T., & Lalor, A. (2009). The Movement Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (MABC-2): A review and critique. Physical and Occupational Therapy in
Pediatrics, 29(1), 86–103doi:10.1080/01942630802574908.
Chow, S. M. K., Chan, L. L., Chan, C. P. S., & Lau, C. H. Y. (2002). Reliability of the experimental version of the movement ABC. British Journal of Therapy and
Rehabilitation, 9, 404–407.
Chow, S. M. K., & Henderson, S. E. (2003). Interrater and test-retest reliability of the movement assessment battery for Chinese preschool children. American Journal
of Occupational Therapy, 57(5), 574–577.
Chow, S. M. K., Henderson, S. E., & Barnett, A. L. (2001). The Movement Assessment Battery for Children: A comparison of 4-year-old to 6-year-old children from
Hong Kong and the United States. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55, 55–61.
Croce, R. V., Horvat, M., & McCarthy, E. (2001). Reliability and concurrent validity of the Movement Assessment Battery for Children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 93,
275–280.
Ellinoudis, T., Kourtessis, T., & Kiparissis, M. (2008). Suitability of the Movement Assessment Battery for Children in Greece: Comparison between a Greek sample
and the North-American normative sample of 9 and 11 year old children. International Journal of Health Science, 1(4), 132–137.
Ellinoudis, T., Kourtessis, T., Kiparissis, M., Kampas, A., & Mavromatis, G. (2008). Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC): Measuring the Construct
Validity for Greece in a sample of elementary school aged children. International Journal of Health Science, 1(2), 56–60.
Henderson, S. E., & Sugden, D. A. (1992). Movement assessment battery for children. Kent, UK: The Psychological Corporation.
Henderson, S. E., Sugden, D. A., & Barnett, A. L. (2007). Movement assessment battery for children-2 second edition [Movement ABC-2]. London, UK: The Psychological
Corporation.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Modelling, 6, 1–55doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.
Lipsey, M. (1990). Design sensitivity: Statistical power for experimental research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Miller, M. B. (1995). Coefficient alpha: A basic introduction from the perspectives of classical test theory and structural equation modelling. Structural Equation
Modelling, 2(3), 255–273doi:10.1080/10705519509540013.
Miyahara, M., Tsuji, M., Hanai, T., Jongmans, M., Barnett, A. L., Henderson, S. E., et al. (1998). The movement assessment battery for children: A preliminary
investigation of its usefulness in Japan. Human Movement Science, 17, 679–697doi:10.1016/S0167-9457(98)00018-9.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Ottenbacfhef, J. K., & Tomcheck, S. D. (1993). Reliability analysis in therapeutic research: Practice and procedure. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47(1),
10–16.
Payne, G., & Isaacs, L. (1998). Human movement development: A lifespan approach. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Portney, L. G., & Watkins, M. P. (1993). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Norwalk, Connecticut: Appleton and Lange.
Rösblad, B., & Gard, L. (1998). The assessment of children with developmental coordination disorders in Sweden: A preliminary investigation of the suitability of
the movement ABC. Human Movement Science, 17, 711–719.
Simons, J., Daly, D., Theodorou, F., Caron, C., Simons, J., & Antoniadou, E. (2008). Validity and reliability of the TGMD-2 in 7-10 year old Flemish children with
intellectual disability. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 25(1), 71–82.
Smits-Engelsman, B. C. M., Henderson, S. E., & Michels, C. G. J. (1998). The assessment of children with developmental coordination disorders in the Netherlands:
The relationship between the movement assessment battery for children and the Korperkoordinations Test fur Kinder. Human Movement Science, 17, 699–
709.
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
Wright, H. C., & Sugden, D. A. (1996). Two-step procedure for the identification of children with developmental co-ordination disorder in Singapore. Developmental
Medicine and Child Neurology, 38(12), 1099–1105doi:10.1111/j.1469-8749.1996.tb15073.x.
Yun, J., & Ulrich, D. A. (2002). Estimating measurement validity: A tutorial. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 19, 32–47.