Sensory Profile

Full Name of Assessment:		Sensory Profile
Author, Publisher, Date:		Winnie Dunn, Aspen Publishers/ Pearson Publishing, 1999
Source: Pearson via www.pearsonassessments.com			Pricing: $192.00
Brief description (purpose, domains, subscales, time to administer, space/equipment needs):   Caregivers complete the 125-question profile, reporting the frequency with which their child responds to various sensory experiences. Once the questionnaire is completed, use the Summary Score Sheet to obtain a profile of the child's sensory responses. The Summary Score Sheet contains an area to record the child's demographic information, a Factor Grid to help summarize the child's scores into the nine factor groupings (i.e., Factor Summary), and a Section Summary to plot section raw score totals. The Short Sensory Profile is a 38-item caregiver questionnaire and score sheet designed for use in screening and research protocols. The items on the Sensory Profile are grouped into three major sections: sensory processing, modulation, and behavioral and emotional responses. The age range varies anywhere from 3-10 or 5-10 years old. Purpose: The profile contributes to a comprehensive picture of a child's performance. Combine it with other evaluation data to create a complete picture of the child's status for diagnostic and intervention planning. This is a tool to connect performance strengths and barriers with the child’s sensory processing patterns. It also evaluates the possible contributions of sensory processing to the child’s daily performance patterns. Time:  30 minutes for the long caregiver form/questionnaire, 10 minutes for the short sensory profile and 20-30 minutes to complete the sensory score sheet. Subscales: Under sensory processing domain: auditory processing, visual processing, vestibular processing, touch processing, and multi-sensory processing, oral processing. Modulation domain: sensory processing related to endurance and tone, modulation related to body position and movement, modulation of movement affecting activity level, modulation of sensory input affecting emotional responses, modulation of visual input affecting emotional responses and activity level. Behavior and emotional responses: emotional/social responses, behavioral outcomes of sensory processing, items indicating threshold for response. Domains: Sensory processing, modulation, behavioral and emotional responses Space/Equipment needs: The sensory profile manual, scoring forms, summary score sheet, caregiver questionnaire, short sensory profile, and pencil.
Scoring: The scoring system is a likert scale: always = 1 point, frequently = 2 points, occasionally = 3 points, seldom = 4 points, and never = 5 points. The caregiver can place a mark between two categories, record the more frequent score. For example, if you score between never and seldom, record seldom ( 4 points). In these cases, always score for the lower score. The scores are added up per subscale. This determines a raw score for each subscale. The raw score are then normalized by being converted to a scale that compares the child to the typical age range for that scale. The administer of the child’s score for the cluster and factors to the Raw score total column. Then plot these totals by marking X in the appropriate classficiation column. These raw scores place the child into categories for each sensory item: typical performance, probable difference, and definite difference. Factor grid: Factor 1 = sensory seeking, factor 2= emotionally reactive, factor 3= low endurance/tone, factor 4 = oral sensory sensitivity, factor 5 = inattention/distractibility, factor 6 = poor registration, factor 7 = sensory sensitivity, factor 8 = sedentary and factor 9= fine motor/perception
Psychometric properties (describe briefly; e.g. reliability, validity, sensitivity, specificity, etc): Test reliability is an indication of the degree to which a test provides a precise and stable score. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was calculated to examine the internal consistency for each section of the Sensory Profile. Internal consistency indicates the extent to which the items in each section measure a single construct. The values of alpha for the various sections ranged from .47 to .91. Content validity was established during development of the Sensory Profile by determining that the test sampled the full range of children’s sensory processing behaviors and that the items were placed appropriately within sections. Methods used included a literature review, expert review by eight therapists experienced in applying sensory integration theory to practice, and category analysis based on a national study. The study included 155 occupational therapists who categorized the items in the Sensory Profile without cues about where the items would be placed. Results indicated that 80% of the therapists agreed on the category placement on 63% of the items. For the remaining items, new categories were developed. To examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the Sensory Profile, various scores obtained on the Sensory Profile were compared with different functional tasks as measured by the School Function Assessment. Researchers hypothesized that some school functions would be related to aspects of sensory processing while others would be independent of sensory processing. The School Function Assessment was selected because professionals and caregivers are interested in children’s performance at school. Researchers expected to see the following relationships, which would establish convergent validity: • High correlations between the School Function Assessment performance items and the items in Factor 9 (Fine Motor/Perceptual) on the Sensory Profile because both measures evaluate product behaviors such as hand use. • High correlations between the School Function Assessment socialization and behavior interaction sections and the modulation sections and factors on the Sensory Profile because children who have difficulty regulating sensory input have difficulty constructing appropriate responses. Researchers expected to see the following relationships to establish discriminant validity: • Low correlations between the School Function Assessment sections that capture daily routines and the sensory sections of the Sensory Profile because children can learn these routines as patterns of performance that do not require planning each time. As expected, there were large and meaningful correlations between the Sensory Profile’s Factor 9 (Fine Motor/Perceptual) and the performance items of the School Function Assessment. The moderate correlations between the Behavioral Regulation and Positive Interaction sections of the School Function Assessment and the modulation sections from the Sensory Profile also suggest convergent validity. The study findings also provide evidence of discriminant validity. Researchers found low correlations between the more detailed performance items on the School Function Assessment and the items on the Sensory Profile.
Citations/References (source at least 2 articles that use the tool or reports on psychometrics): Ermer, J., & Dunn, W. (1998). The sensory profile: A discriminant analysis of children with and without disabilities. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52(4), 283-290. Kientz, M. A., & Dunn, W. (1997). A comparison of the performance of children with and without autism on the Sensory Profile. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 51(7), 530-537. Watling, R. L., Deitz, J., & White, O. (2001). Comparison of sensory profile scores of young children with and without autism spectrum disorders. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55(4), 416-423.
Comments/critique (include application to practice – settings, needs, populations): The most difficult part will be having to explain most of these items to the parents. We must explain the scoring system and have a way to remember the percentages of the scoring scale is and accurate reporting from the parents could be issues. Could split up smell and taste, they are together on this assessment and they are completely different in nature, even if they are related. The typical age range suggests the setting is for toddlers to young school aged children. This assessment will be used in pre-schools and elementary schools. The assessment is used for children that have sensory deficits.
Training or certification requirements:	No additional training is required to administer this assessment. Examiners with backgrounds in OT, PT, and developmental adaptive education or related fields who have completed testing and measurement training may administer, score, and interpret the sensory profile in a more effective nature.