Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses of the Motivation Assessment Scale and Resident Choice Assessment Scale

  • Christopher A. Kearney
  • L. Caitlin Cook
  • Gillian Chapman
  • Arva Bensaheb

The Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS) and Resident Choice Assessment Scale (RCAS) are commonly used to evaluate people with severe developmental disabilities. However, the factor structure of these scales has not been subjected to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). We analyzed 335 MAS administrations via CFA and 122 RCAS administrations via exploratory factor analysis and CFA. The original factor structure of the MAS was not supported, though an alternative model that included omission of the sensory reinforcement function was supported. Exploratory factor analysis of the RCAS revealed one- and two-factor structures, but the two-factor model was not supported via CFA. Instead, a limited single factor that included several core items was supported. Implications for the revision and use of these scales are discussed.


Motivation Assessment Scale Resident Choice Assessment Scale 



The authors thank Kim Barchard for her assistance.


  1. Akande, A. (1998). Some South African evidence of the inter-rater reliability of the motivation assessment scale. Educat. Psychol. 18: 111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barton-Arwood, S. M., Wehby, J. H., Gunter, P. L., and Lane, K. L. (2003). Functional behavior assessment rating scales: Intrarater reliability with students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behav. Disord. 28: 386–400.Google Scholar
  3. Bentler, P. M., and Wu, E. J. C. (2005). EQS 6.1 for Windows, Multivariate Software, Encino, CA.Google Scholar
  4. Bihm, E. M., Kienlen, T. L., Ness, M. E., and Poindexter, A. R. (1991). Factor structure of the Motivation Assessment Scale for persons with mental retardation. Psychol. Rep. 68: 1235–1238.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Conroy, M. A., Fox, J. J., Bucklin, A., and Good, W. (1996). An analysis of the reliability and stability of the motivation assessment scale in assessing the challenging behaviors of persons with developmental disabilities. Educ. Train. Mental Retard. Develop. Disab. 31: 243–250.Google Scholar
  6. Crawford, J., Brockel, B., and Schauss, S. (1992). A comparison of methods for the functional assessment of stereotypic behavior. J. Assoc. Persons Severe Handicaps 17: 77–86.Google Scholar
  7. Duker, P. C., and Sigafoos, J. (1998). The motivation assessment scale: Reliability and construct validity across three topographies of behavior. Res. Develop. Disab. 19: 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Durand, V. M. (1990). Severe Behavior Problems: A Functional Communication Training Approach, Guilford, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Durand, V. M. (1999). Functional communication training using assistive devices: Recruiting natural communities of reinforcement. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 32: 247–267.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Durand, V. M., and Crimmins, D. B. (1988). Identifying the variables maintaining self-injurious behavior. J. Autism Develop. Disord. 18: 99–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Durand, V. M., Crimmins, D. B., Caulfield, M., and Taylor, J. (1989). Reinforcer assessment I: Using problem behavior to select reinforcers. J. Assoc. Persons Severe Handicaps 14: 113–126.Google Scholar
  12. Hartwig, L., Heathfield, L. T., and Jenson, W. R. (2004). Standardization of the functional assessment and intervention program (FAIP) with children who have externalizing behaviors. School Psychol. Quart. 19: 272–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 30: 179–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kearney, C. A. (1994). Interrater reliability of the Motivation Assessment Scale: Another, closer look. J. Assoc. Persons Severe Handicaps 19: 139–142.Google Scholar
  15. Kearney, C. A., Bergan, K. P., and McKnight, T. J. (1998). Choice availability and persons with mental retardation: A longitudinal and regression analysis. J. Develop. Phys. Disab. 10: 291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kearney, C. A., Durand, V. M., and Mindell, J. A. (1995a). Choice assessment in residential settings. J. Develop. Phys. Disab. 7: 203–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kearney, C. A., Durand, V. M., and Mindell, J. A. (1995b). It's not where but how you live: Choice and adaptive/maladaptive behavior in persons with severe handicaps. J. Develop. Phys. Disab. 7: 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kearney, C. A., and McKnight, T. J. (1997). Preference, choice, and persons with disabilities: A synopsis of assessments, interventions, and future directions. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 17: 217–238.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.). Guilford, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Newton, J. T., and Sturmey, P. (1991). The motivation assessment scale: Inter-rater reliability and internal consistency in a British sample. J. Mental Deficiency Res. 35: 472–474.Google Scholar
  21. O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behav. Res. Methods, Instruments, Comput. 32: 396–402.Google Scholar
  22. Paclawskyj, T. R., Matson, J. L., Rush, K. S., Smalls, Y., and Vollmer, T. R. (2001). Assessment of the convergent validity of the questions about behavioral function scale with analogue functional analysis and the motivation assessment scale. J. Intell. Disab. Res. 45: 484–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shogren, K. A., and Rojahn, J. (2003). Convergent reliability and validity of the Questions about behavioral function and the motivation assessment scale: A replication study. J. Develop. Phys. Disab. 15: 367–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sigafoos, J., Kerr, M., and Roberts, D. (1994). Interrater reliability of the motivation assessment scale: Failure to replicate with aggressive behavior. Res. Develop. Disab. 15: 333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Singh, N. N., Donatelli, L. S., Best, A., Williams, D. E., Barrera, F. J., Lenz, M. W., Landrum, T. J., Ellis, C. R., and Moe, T. L. (1993). Factor structure of the motivation assessment scale. J. Intell. Disab. Res. 37: 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Spreat, S., and Connelly, L. (1996). Reliability analysis of the motivation assessment scale. Am. J. Mental Retard. 100: 528–532.Google Scholar
  27. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  28. Thompson, S., and Emerson, E. (1995). Inter-informant agreement on the motivation assessment scale: Another failure to replicate. Mental Handicap Res. 8: 203–208.Google Scholar
  29. Young, L., Ashman, A., Sigafoos, J., and Grevell, P. (2001). Closure of the Challinor Centre II: An extended report on 95 individuals after 12 months of community living. J. Intell. Develop. Disab. 26: 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zarcone, J. R., Rodgers, T. A., Iwata, B. A., Rourke, D. A., and Dorsey, M. F. (1991). Reliability analysis of the Motivation Assessment Scale: A failure to replicate. Res. Develop. Disab. 12: 349–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zwick, W. R., and Velicer, W. F. (1986). Factors influencing five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychol. Bull. 99: 432–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher A. Kearney
    • 1
    • 2
  • L. Caitlin Cook
    • 1
  • Gillian Chapman
    • 1
  • Arva Bensaheb
    • 1
  1. 1.University of NevadaLas VegasUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychology, University of NevadaLas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations