Interpretive Report

Self-Report Form
by Robert M. Roth, PhD, Peter K. Isquith, PhD, Gerard A. Gioia, PhD, and PAR Staff
Generated by

Client name: Sample Client

Client ID: 12345
Sex: Male
Gender identity: Boy/Man
Age: 51
Date of birth: 05/17/1973
Education (years): Not Specified
Education level: Not Specified
Test date: 10/17/2024
Language administered: English
This report is intended for use by qualified professionals only and is not to be shared with the examinee
or any other unqualified persons.

Copyright © 1996, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2024 by PAR. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in
whole or in part in any form or by any means without written permission of PAR.
Contents
Introduction to the BRIEF2A
Overview of Results
BRIEF2A Self-Report Form Score Summary
Profile of BRIEF2A T Scores
Validity
Clinical Scales
Indexes and Global Executive Composite
General Approach to Enhancing Executive Functioning
Executive Function Interventions for Sample

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 2
Introduction to the BRIEF2A
The BRIEF2A is a standardized rating scale designed to provide a window into everyday behaviors
associated with specific domains of executive functioning in adults ages 18 years and older. Ratings of
everyday executive functions, or self-regulation, are good predictors of an individual’s functioning in
many areas, including academic, vocational, social, behavioral, and emotional. As for all measures, the
BRIEF2A should not be used in isolation as a diagnostic tool. Instead, it should be used in conjunction
with other sources of information, including detailed history, other BRIEF2A and behavior ratings,
clinical interviews, performance test results, and, when possible, direct observation in the natural
setting. By examining converging evidence, the clinician can confidently arrive at a valid diagnosis and,
most importantly, an effective treatment plan. A thorough understanding of the BRIEF2A, including its
development and psychometric properties, is a prerequisite to interpretation. As with any clinical
method or procedure, appropriate training and supervision are necessary to ensure competent use of
the BRIEF2A.
This report is confidential and intended for use by qualified professionals only. This report should not be
released to the individual being rated or to informants or others such as family members or caregivers. If
the clinician wants to provide a summary of the results specifically written for the rated individual and
their informants, the BRIEF2A Feedback Report can be generated and given to the interested parties,
preferably in the context of verbal feedback and a review of the Feedback Report by the clinician.
T scores are used to interpret the individual’s level of executive functioning as reported on the BRIEF2A
rating forms. These scores are transformations of the raw scale scores (M = 50, SD = 10). T scores
provide information about an individual’s scores relative to the scores of respondents in the
standardization sample. Percentiles represent the percentage of individuals in the standardization
sample with scores at or below the same value.
For all BRIEF2A clinical scales and indexes:
• T scores below 60 are considered within normal limits.
• T scores from 60 to 64 are also within normal limits, but there may be subtle, subclinical
difficulties.
• T scores from 65 to 69 are considered mildly elevated.
• T scores from 70 to 74 are considered moderately elevated.
• T scores at or above 75 are considered highly elevated.

In the process of interpreting the BRIEF2A, review of individual items within each scale can yield useful
information for understanding the specific nature of the individual’s elevated score on any given clinical
scale. In addition, certain items may be particularly relevant to specific clinical groups. Placing too much
interpretive significance on individual items, however, is not recommended because individual items
have lower reliability relative to the scales and indexes.

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 3
Overview of Results
Sample completed the Self-Report Form of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, Second
Edition–Adult Version (BRIEF2A) on 10/17/2024. There are no missing item responses in the protocol.
Responses are reasonably consistent. Sample’s ratings of himself do not appear overly negative. There
was 1 atypical response to infrequently endorsed items. In the context of these validity considerations,
ratings of Sample’s executive function exhibited in everyday behavior indicate some areas of concern.
The overall index score, the GEC, was mildly elevated (GEC T = 67, %ile = 96). The Cognitive Regulation
Index (CRI) score was within normal limits (CRI T = 63, %ile = 89), but the Behavior Regulation Index
(BRI) score was mildly elevated (BRI T = 69, %ile = 98) and the Emotion Regulation Index (ERI) score was
mildly elevated (ERI T = 66, %ile = 91).
Within these summary indicators, all of the individual scales can be calculated. One or more of the
individual BRIEF2A scale T scores were elevated, suggesting that Sample exhibits difficulty with some
aspects of executive function. Concerns are noted with his ability to resist impulses, be aware of his
functioning in social settings, react to events appropriately, plan and organize his approach to problem
solving appropriately, and keep materials and belongings reasonably well-organized. Sample’s ability to
adjust well to changes, get going on tasks and activities and independently generate ideas, sustain
working memory, and be appropriately cautious in his approach to tasks and check for mistakes is not
described as problematic.
Sample’s scores on the Emotional Control and Inhibit scales are elevated. In the absence of other
substantial BRIEF2A scale elevations, clinical information, or test data, this pattern suggests the
presence of a primary behavioral or emotional disorder rather than executive dysfunction. Other
sources of data regarding Sample’s social–emotional functioning should be examined.

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 4
BRIEF2A Self-Report Form Score Summary
Scale/Index/Composite Raw score T score Percentile 90% CI
Inhibit 14 65 98 55–75
Self-Monitor 12 70 99 62–78
Behavior Regulation Index (BRI) 26 69 98 62–76
Shift 11 63 92 56–70
Emotional Control 15 65 92 60–70
Emotion Regulation Index (ERI) 26 66 91 61–71
Initiate 12 55 74 48–62
Working Memory 13 60 86 53–67
Plan/Organize 16 68 97 62–74
Task-Monitor 10 58 86 50–66
Organization of Materials 16 65 94 59–71
Cognitive Regulation Index (CRI) 67 63 89 59–67
Global Executive Composite (GEC) 119 67 96 64–70

Number of
Scale T score Base rate in normative Base rate in mixed
clinical scales
elevation sample clinical sample
elevated
≥65 5 6 47
≥70 1 18 68
≥75 0 >99 >99

Validity scale Raw score Percentile Protocol classification

Inconsistency 6 98 Acceptable
Negativity 1 98 Acceptable
Infrequency 1 98 Acceptable
Note. Age-specific norms have been used to generate these scores. For additional interpretive information,
refer to the BRIEF2A Professional Manual.

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 5
Profile of BRIEF2A T Scores

Note. Age-specific norms have been used to generate this profile.

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 6
Validity
Sample Client completed the Self-Report Form of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function,
Second Edition–Adult Version (BRIEF2A) on 10/17/2024.
Before examining the BRIEF2A Self-Report Form profile, it is essential to carefully consider the validity of
the data provided. The first step is to examine the protocol for missing data. The BRIEF2A Inconsistency,
Negativity, and Infrequency scales provide additional information about the validity of the protocol.

Missing Items
Sample completed 70 of a possible 70 BRIEF2A items. For reference purposes, the summary table for
each scale provides Sample's actual rating for each item. This protocol has no missing item responses,
providing a complete data set for interpretation.

Inconsistency
Scores on the Inconsistency scale indicate the extent to which the respondent answered similar BRIEF2A
items in an inconsistent manner compared to individuals in the combined normative and clinical
samples. For example, a high Inconsistency score might be associated with the combination of
responding Never to the item “I overreact to small problems” and Often to the item “I get upset quickly
or easily over little things.” Item pairs composing the Inconsistency scale are shown in the following
summary table. T scores are not generated for the Inconsistency scale. Instead, the absolute value of the
raw difference scores for the ten paired items are summed, and the total difference score (i.e., the
Inconsistency score) is compared with the cumulative percentile of similar scores in the combined
normative and clinical samples and used to classify the protocol as either Acceptable or Inconsistent.
The Inconsistency score of 6 is within the acceptable range, suggesting that Sample was reasonably
consistent in rating BRIEF2A items.

Item # Inconsistency item Response Difference

1 I make careless errors when completing tasks Never
1
38 I make careless mistakes Sometimes

23 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never

1
46 Sometimes

26 Never
1
39 Sometimes

31 Sometimes
1
67 Often

32 Sometimes
0
58 Sometimes

41 Sometimes
0
56 Sometimes

43 Sometimes 0

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 7
 Item # Inconsistency item Response Difference
52 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Sometimes

48 Sometimes
1
70 Often

55 Sometimes
1
69 Often

59 Often
0
65 Often

Negativity
The Negativity scale measures the extent to which the respondent answered certain BRIEF2A items in an
unusually negative manner (i.e., marking Often) relative to individuals in the clinical sample. Items
composing the Negativity scale are shown in the following summary table. The Negativity raw score is
the count of Negativity items endorsed as Often. A higher raw score on this scale indicates a greater
degree of negativity, with less than 3% of respondents ages 50 years and older scoring 4 or above in the
clinical sample.
As with the Inconsistency scale, T scores are not generated for this scale. The Negativity score of 1 is
within the acceptable range for Sample’s age, suggesting that Sample’s view of himself is not overly
negative.
Item # Negativity item Response
18 I have emotional outbursts for little reason Never
21 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
27 Never
34 Sometimes
35 Sometimes
37 Sometimes
38 Sometimes
40 Sometimes
53 Sometimes
59 Often

Infrequency
The Infrequency scale measures the extent to which the respondent endorsed items in an atypical
fashion. The scale includes four items that are likely to be endorsed in one direction by most
respondents. Marking Often to the items “I forget my name” or “I have trouble counting to three” is
highly unusual, even in cases of severe impairment. Marking Never to the items “I get tired” or “I make
mistakes” is also unusual, except in some individuals who deny any problems with executive functioning.
Items composing the Infrequency scale are shown in the following summary table. The raw score is the
count of Infrequency items endorsed with the most uncommon response. A higher raw score on this
scale indicates a greater degree of infrequency. As with the Inconsistency and Negativity scales, T scores
are not generated. The cutoff for Infrequency varies by overall rating level (i.e., Global Executive
Composite [GEC] T-score level), with 1% of respondents with GEC T < 57 scoring 3 or above, and 1% of

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 8
respondents with GEC T ≥ 57 scoring 2 or above. The Infrequency scale score of 1 is within the
acceptable range, indicating low likelihood of an atypical response pattern.

Item # Infrequency item Response

9 I forget my name Never
25 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
36 Sometimes
45 Sometimes

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 9
Clinical Scales
The BRIEF2A clinical scales measure the extent to which Sample reports problems with different types of
behavior related to the nine domains of executive functioning. The following sections describe the
scores obtained on the clinical scales and the suggested interpretation for each clinical scale.

Inhibit
The Inhibit scale assesses inhibitory control and impulsivity. This can be described as the ability to resist
impulses and the ability to stop one’s own behavior at the appropriate time. Sample’s score on the
Inhibit scale is mildly elevated (T = 65, %ile = 98). He typically has difficulty resisting impulses and
considering consequences before acting. He is often perceived as being less in control of himself than his
peers, interrupting others frequently, saying inappropriate things, and/or being restless or unable to sit
still for appropriate lengths of time. Others may be concerned about his verbal and social intrusiveness
or lack of personal safety.
Examining responses to the individual items that compose the Inhibit scale may help guide
interpretation and intervention.

Item # Inhibit item Response

4 I tap my fingers or bounce my legs Never
15 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
27 Never
34 Sometimes
40 Sometimes
51 Sometimes
54 Sometimes
68 Often

Self-Monitor
The Self-Monitor scale assesses awareness of the impact of one’s own behavior on other people and
outcomes. It captures the degree to which an individual is aware of the effect that their behavior has on
others and how it compares with standards or expectations for behavior. Sample’s score on the
Self-Monitor scale is moderately elevated (T = 70, %ile = 99), suggesting substantial difficulty
monitoring his behavior in social settings. He tends to show limited awareness of his behavior and the
impact it has on his social interactions with others.

Item # Self-Monitor item Response

I don’t notice when I cause others to feel bad or get mad until it
12 Never
is too late
21 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
35 Sometimes
47 Sometimes
59 Often
65 Often

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 10
Shift
The Shift scale assesses the ability to move freely from one situation, activity, or aspect of a problem to
another as the circumstances demand. Key aspects of shifting include the ability to make transitions,
tolerate change, problem solve flexibly, switch or alternate attention between tasks, and change focus
from one task or topic to another. Mild deficits may compromise efficiency of problem solving and result
in a tendency to get stuck or focused on a topic or problem, whereas more severe difficulties can be
reflected in perseverative behaviors and substantial resistance to change. Sample’s score on the Shift
scale is within normal limits (T = 63, %ile = 92). He may have subtle difficulties flexibly adjusting to
changes such as those in environment, plans, place, or demands.

Item # Shift item Response

7 I have trouble changing from one activity or task to another Never
20 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
30 Sometimes
41 Sometimes
56 Sometimes
62 Often

Emotional Control
The Emotional Control scale measures the impact of executive function problems on emotional
expression and assesses an individual’s ability to modulate or regulate their emotional responses.
Sample’s score on the Emotional Control scale is mildly elevated (T = 65, %ile = 92). He has problems
with regulation or modulation of emotions. Sample likely overreacts to events and demonstrates sudden
outbursts, sudden and/or frequent mood changes, and excessive periods of emotional upset.
Poor emotional control is often expressed as emotional lability, sudden outbursts, or emotional
explosiveness. Individuals with difficulties in this domain often have overblown emotional reactions to
seemingly minor events.

Item # Emotional Control item Response

11 I overreact emotionally Never
18 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
26 Never
31 Sometimes
39 Sometimes
53 Sometimes
64 Often
67 Often

Initiate
The Initiate scale reflects an individual’s ability to begin a task or activity and to independently generate
ideas, responses, or problem-solving strategies. Sample’s score on the Initiate scale is within normal
limits (T = 55, %ile = 74). He is generally able to get going on tasks, activities, and problem-solving
approaches appropriately.

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 11
 Item # Initiate item Response
5 I need to be reminded to begin a task even when I am willing Never
13 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
19 Never
23 Never
42 Sometimes
46 Sometimes
49 Sometimes
57 Sometimes

Working Memory
The Working Memory scale measures online representational memory—that is, the capacity to hold
information in mind for the purpose of completing a task; encode information; or generate goals, plans,
and sequential steps to achieve goals. Working memory is essential to carrying out multistep activities,
completing mental manipulations such as mental arithmetic, and following complex instructions. It also
supports the ability to sustain attention and concentration. Sample’s score on the Working Memory
scale is within normal limits (T = 60, %ile = 86). He may have subtle difficulty holding an appropriate
amount of information in mind or in active memory for further processing, encoding, and/or mental
manipulation.

Item # Working Memory item Response

I have trouble concentrating on tasks (such as chores, reading,
3 Never
or work)
10 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
16 Never
24 Never
33 Sometimes
43 Sometimes
52 Sometimes
63 Often

Plan/Organize
The Plan/Organize scale measures an individual’s ability to manage current and future-oriented task
demands. The scale has two components: Plan and Organize. The Plan component captures the ability to
anticipate future events, to set goals, and to develop appropriate sequential steps ahead of time to
carry out a task or activity. The Organize component refers to the ability to bring order to information
and to appreciate main ideas or key concepts when learning or communicating information.
Organization also plays an important role in memory and recall. Individuals with difficulties in this area
may report that they are poor test takers or have poor memory. How they organize new information
when learning or memorizing impacts their ability to retrieve the materials, especially during testing.
Sample’s score on the Plan/Organize scale is mildly elevated (T = 68, %ile = 97). He has difficulty with
planning and organizing information, which has a negative impact on his approach to problem solving.
Planning involves developing a goal or end state and then strategically determining the most effective
method or steps to attain that goal. Sample may underestimate the time required to complete tasks or
the level of difficulty inherent in a task. He may often wait until the last minute to begin a long-term

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 12
project or assignment for school or work and may have trouble carrying out the actions needed to reach
his goals.
Organization involves the ability to bring order to oral and written expression and to understand the
main points expressed in presentations or written material. Organization also has a clerical component
that is demonstrated, for example, in the ability to efficiently scan a visual array or to keep track of a
homework or work assignment. Sample may approach tasks in a haphazard fashion, getting caught up in
the details and missing the big picture. He may have good ideas that he has difficulty expressing on
written assignments. He may often feel overwhelmed by large amounts of information and may have
difficulty retrieving material spontaneously or in response to open-ended questions. He may, however,
exhibit better performance with recognition (e.g., multiple-choice) questions.

Item # Plan/Organize item Response

8 I get overwhelmed by large tasks Never
14 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
32 Sometimes
44 Sometimes
50 Sometimes
58 Sometimes
61 Often
66 Often

Task-Monitor
The Task-Monitor scale assesses the ability to keep track of one’s own problem-solving successes and
failures and to identify and correct mistakes. The scale captures whether an individual assesses their
own performance during or shortly after finishing a task to ensure accuracy or appropriate attainment
of a goal. Sample’s score on the Task-Monitor scale is within normal limits (T = 58, %ile = 86), suggesting
an appropriate overall level of task monitoring. He tends to be appropriately cautious in his approach to
tasks or assignments and usually checks for mistakes. He is usually able to keep track of projects and his
progress in completing tasks.

Item # Task-Monitor item Response

1 I make careless errors when completing tasks Never
17 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
22 Never
38 Sometimes
48 Sometimes
70 Often

Organization of Materials
The Organization of Materials scale measures orderliness of work, living, and storage spaces (e.g., desks,
rooms). Sample’s score on the Organization of Materials scale is mildly elevated (T = 65, %ile = 94). He
has difficulty keeping materials and belongings reasonably well-organized, having materials readily
available for projects or assignments, and finding belongings when needed. Individuals who have
significant difficulties in this area often do not function efficiently in school, at work, or at home because
they do not have ready access to what they need and must spend time getting organized rather than

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 13
producing work. Pragmatically, teaching Sample to organize his belongings can be a useful, concrete tool
for enhancing task organization.

Item # Organization of Materials item Response

2 I am disorganized Never
6 Remaining item content redacted for sample report Never
28 Sometimes
29 Sometimes
37 Sometimes
55 Sometimes
60 Often
69 Often

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 14
Indexes and Global Executive Composite
Behavior Regulation, Emotion Regulation, and Cognitive
Regulation Indexes
The Behavior Regulation Index (BRI) captures an individual’s ability to regulate and monitor behavior
effectively. It is composed of the Inhibit and Self-Monitor scales. Appropriate behavior regulation is
likely a precursor to appropriate cognitive regulation. It enables the cognitive regulatory processes to
successfully guide active, systematic problem solving and more generally supports appropriate
self-regulation.
The Emotion Regulation Index (ERI) represents an individual’s ability to regulate emotional responses
and to shift set or adjust to changes in environment, people, plans, or demands. It is composed of the
Shift and Emotional Control scales. Appropriate emotion regulation and flexibility are also precursors to
effective cognitive regulation.
The Cognitive Regulation Index (CRI) reflects an individual’s ability to control and manage cognitive
processes and to problem solve effectively. It is composed of the Initiate, Working Memory,
Plan/Organize, Task-Monitor, and Organization of Materials scales and relates directly to the ability to
actively problem solve in a variety of contexts and to complete tasks for school, work, and daily living.
Examination of the indexes reveals that the BRI score is mildly elevated (T = 69, %ile = 98) and the ERI
score is mildly elevated (T = 66, %ile = 91), but the CRI score is within normal limits (T = 63, %ile = 89).
This suggests appropriate cognitive regulation but fundamental difficulties with self-regulation, including
inhibitory control, self-monitoring, emotion regulation, and adjusting to changes flexibly. Despite these
difficulties, Sample was described as appropriately able to hold information in working memory and to
initiate, plan, organize, and monitor problem solving. This is a somewhat unusual pattern because
individuals with difficulty regulating behavior and emotions typically demonstrate difficulty regulating
cognitive function.

Global Executive Composite

The Global Executive Composite (GEC) is an overarching summary score that incorporates all of the
BRIEF2A clinical scales. Although review of the BRI, ERI, CRI, and individual scale scores is strongly
recommended for all BRIEF2A profiles, the GEC can sometimes be useful as a summary measure. In this
case, the three summary index scores are not substantially different from one another, with differences
between T scores for each seen in 90% of the standardization sample. Thus, the GEC adequately
captures the elevation or severity of the overall profile. With this in mind, Sample’s T score of 67 (%ile =
96) on the GEC is mildly elevated, suggesting he has significant difficulty in one or more areas of
executive function.

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 15
General Approach to Enhancing Executive Functioning
Introduction
Executive functions play a central role in guiding and regulating behavior, emotion, and thought,
including attention and problem solving. Their importance in the everyday lives of individuals across the
life span is increasingly recognized, prompting substantial interest in developing and testing new
approaches to address weaknesses and build strengths and resiliencies in everyday executive
functioning. Building on the seminal work of early pioneers in executive function intervention such as
Mark Ylvisaker and Tim Feeny’s (1998) coaching model and McKay Sohlberg and Catherine Mateer’s
(1989) cognitive remediation model, the literature since 2000 now boasts more than 1,000
treatment/intervention studies, including more than 500 clinical trials. These studies provide varying
degrees of support for medication interventions, direct cognitive training, metacognitive strategy
training, cognitive–behavioral therapies, mindfulness-based therapies, and executive function coaching.
The approach or combination of approaches likely to be most helpful for a given individual will depend
on several factors, such as the nature and severity of the executive difficulty; the extent to which other
cognitive processes, as well as motor and sensory functions, are intact and can be recruited to aid in
remediation efforts; self-awareness (i.e., whether the individual recognizes that they have cognitive
problems); and more general characteristics such as intrinsic motivation, attitude, growth mindset, and
availability of external supports, such as others to help the individual manage their executive
dysfunction, if needed.
Remaining interpretive content redacted for sample report

Executive Function Interventions for Sample

Ratings of Sample’s everyday functioning revealed some areas of concern. Recommendations for
interventions, accommodations, and functional goals are offered according to the identified concerns.
The majority of supports and accommodations described here are common and likely familiar to
clinicians and intervention teams, though they vary in the amount of empirical support.
These recommendations are general and intended as suggestions or ideas that may be tailored to suit
Sample’s needs. As with any intervention, using clinical judgment is paramount. Selecting the most
appropriate recommendations for Sample should take into account all other clinical data, including rater
characteristics and perspectives, ratings on other measures (e.g., mood and anxiety), cognitive and
educational test performance, observations, and clinical history.

Remaining interpretive content redacted for sample report

End of Report

BRIEF2A Interpretive Report: Self-Report Form | Sample Client (12345) | 10/17/2024 | Page 16