目的：本研究主要在比較篩檢學齡前兒童的注意力與衝動過動問題時，由不同訊息提供者所得之評量結果，並探討兩種干擾行為評量表的信效度。 方法：以臺灣南部某大都會為研究地區，從17所幼稚園隨機取樣1,091名學齡前兒童為研究對象，請父母填寫『家庭情境問卷』與『兒童注意力量表』作為篩檢工具，並請教師對班級中行為問題最嚴重的3名兒童填寫『學校情境問卷』與『兒童注意力量表』。篩出在『兒童注意力量表』或『家庭情境問卷』上得分為全體之前5％的高危險群兒童58名，再進行『兒童行為檢核表-直接觀察評量』，並與對照組116名兒童做比較。 結果：研究顯示來自相同訊息提供者的各評量值之間達顯著相關，而不同訊息提供者間之評量，除了在『兒童注意力量表』的過動分數上達顯著相關外，其餘均無相關。此外，在觀察者所評量的『兒童行為檢核表-直接觀察評量』分數上，高危險群組均顯著高於控制組，顯示『兒童注意力量表』與『家庭情境問卷』有合宜的區辨效度。 結論：除針對本研究之限制與未來之研究方向加以討論外，並建議臨床工作者於評估兒童行為時，應考慮學校與家庭的情境變異性，儘量自不同訊息提供者收集跨情境之資料。

Objective: To examine the correspondence among assessments by different informants as well as to evaluate the reliability and validity of two rating scales for disruptive behaviors (inattention and hyperactivity) as used in a screening process for preschoolers with attention problems and hyperactive behaviors. Method: Four instruments were used: the Child Attention Profile (CAP), the Home Situations Questionnaire (HSQ), the School Situations Questionnaire (SSQ), and the Child Beharior Checklist-Direct Observation Form (DOF). Subjects were 1,091 preschoolers ecruited from 17 kindergartens in southern Taiwan. Their Parents completed both the HSQ and CAP. Their teachers were asked to nominate the three most disruptive children in their classes and completed the SSQ and CAP for the nominated children. Fifty-eight high-risk children and 116 matched peers were observed by trained observers using the DOF. Results: The results showed adequate internal consistency for the instruments. There is satisfactory consistency between various behavior rating within but not across informants. The findings support adequate validity for the HSQ and CAP in discriminating high-risk and control children. Conclusion: Given situational variations, it is important to assess children's behaviors across situations and informants. Limitations of this study and directions for future research are discussed.