Bell Relationship Inventory for Adolescents ( BRIA )
Morris D. Bell VA Connecticut Healthcare System Psychology Service, 116-B, Campbell Ave. West Haven, CT, 06516
Bell, M.D. (2005) Bell Relationship Inventory for Adolescents (BRIA) Manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
The BRIA is an adapted version of the Bell Object Relations and Reality Testing Inventory (BORRTI) that was developed for adolescents aged 11 to 17 and assesses for psychological disturbances and relationship problems. The BORRTI has been widely used with adults and is reviewed in this database. The BRIA contains only the Object Relations subscales (and not the Reality Testing subscales) from the BORRTI. It yields scores on 4 scales comparable to the BORRTI scores: 1) Alienation, 2) Insecure attachment, 3) Egocentricity, and 4) Social incompetence. It also yields a score on one additional scale Positive Attachment, which reflects healthy object relations. While both measures have validity scales, the BRIA has a response bias scale in place of the three scales found on the BORRTI. The measure can be administered to individuals or groups. Content from the BRIA copyright (c) 2005 by Western Psychological Services. Reprinted for reference within the NCTSN Measure Review Database by permission of the publisher, WPS, 12031 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90025, www.wpspublish.com. All rights reserved.
Personal/interpersonal functioning (child)
Trauma-related alterations of expectancies/attitud
Measure Type:General Assessment
Response bias=2 SD above or below the average score T<30 or T>70; Positive attachment T<40, all other scales T>59.
Pros & Cons
1. The measure is relatively new and is not widely used. 2. While a factor analysis has been conducted, the variance accounted for by this factor solution is low (16%). 3. Internal consistencies are acceptable, but this would be expected, given that they were calculated using the same sample with which the factor structure was determined. In addition, while acceptable, the internal consistencies are in the lower range of acceptable. Additional work is needed to examine whether the internal consistencies are similar when examined in other populations. 4. While the development and normative samples did include a reasonable percentage of African-Americans (19%), it did not involve large samplings of other ethnic groups. More research may be needed before applying the measure to other groups, especially given the author's caution regarding using the BORRTI with respondents who are not fluent in English because it contains idiomatic expressions that are not well understood by foreign-born English speakers.
The author received the reviews and provided comments on the BORRTI but not the BRIA.
Editor of Review:
Chandra Ghosh Ippen, Ph.D.