ESI Psychometric Properties

Study Summary: Early Social Indicator (ESI) for Infants and Toddlers

Sample

  • Participants: 716 infants and toddlers aged 6–36 months served by a large, urban Early Head Start (EHS) program.
  • Demographics:
    • 49% female
    • 12% had an Individual Family Service Plan (IFSP)
    • 48% spoke English, 43% Spanish, 9% other languages
    • All families met low-income eligibility criteria
  • Setting: Assessments conducted in home (67%), center-based (32%), and other settings (1%) over a 5-year period.
  • Staff: 95 EHS practitioners were trained and certified to administer and score the ESI.

Method

  • Tool: Early Social Indicator (ESI), part of the Individual Growth and Development Indicators (IGDIs) suite.
  • Design: 6-minute, play-based observational assessment measuring frequency of verbal/nonverbal, positive/negative social behaviors directed to adults, peers, or nondirected targets.
  • Administration: Conducted quarterly (universal screening) and monthly (progress monitoring) by trained staff using standard toy sets.
  • Scoring: Frequency-based, coded live or via video. Data entered into a web-based platform for automated reporting and graphing.
  • Training: Staff achieved ≥85% agreement with master codes for certification; ongoing reliability checks conducted throughout the study.

Findings

  • Feasibility: Sustained ESI use over 5 years with consistent staff engagement and data collection; over 2,900 assessments completed.
  • Reliability:
    • High agreement for composites (e.g., Total Positive Composite [TPC] = 92%)
    • Lower reliability when identifying peer/nondirected recipients
  • Sensitivity to Growth:
    • Social engagement increased with age, with verbal skills emerging after nonverbal skills.
    • Growth followed a curvilinear pattern (fast growth early, slower after 24–30 months).
  • Key Skill Patterns:
    • Adult-directed positive social behaviors dominated early development.
    • Peer-directed behaviors emerged later (after 20 months), particularly verbal.
  • Benchmarks: Developed local benchmark trajectories for TPC (Mean, ±1.0 SD, ±1.5 SD) to guide intervention decisions.
  • Moderators:
    • IFSP Status: Children with IFSPs had lower social engagement across time.
    • Home Language: Children with non-English home languages began with higher TPC scores; rate of growth was similar.
    • Gender: No significant differences.
  • Peer Presence: Absence of a peer in the assessment did not significantly affect TPC scores.