Epidemiologic research suggests a gap between prevalence estimates of students with emotional or behavioral problems and the actual number of students identified under the federal category of emotional disturbance (ED). To better understand issues related to the identification gap, we investigated the academic and behavioral functioning, school-based services, frequency of discipline incidents, and predictors of labels among 626 secondary age students referred for participation in a larger study due to emotional and behavioral difficulties. Students with special education labels (i.e., ED, specific learning disability [SLD], other health impairment [OHI]) were compared to those who did not have a school label. Analyses indicated that there were no significant differences between groups on standardized measures of emotional and behavioral functioning. Academic performance was the only distinction, with students with learning disabilities scoring significantly lower in reading and math than students with other and without disabilities. Students without an ED label received significantly fewer services whereas students with an ED label received significantly higher rates of disciplinary actions. Finally, demographic data examined did not differentially predict receipt of a label.

流行病学研究表明，有情绪或行为问题的学生的患病率估计值与联邦情绪障碍 (ED) 类别下确定的学生实际人数之间存在差距。为了更好地了解与认同差距相关的问题，我们调查了 626 名因情绪和行为困难而被转介参加更大研究的中学生的学业和行为功能、校本服务、纪律事件频率以及标签预测因素. 将具有特殊教育标签（即 ED、特定学习障碍 [SLD]、其他健康障碍 [OHI]）的学生与没有学校标签的学生进行比较。分析表明，两组之间在情绪和行为功能的标准化测量方面没有显着差异。学业成绩是唯一的区别，有学习障碍的学生在阅读和数学方面的得分明显低于有其他障碍和没有障碍的学生。没有 ED 标签的学生接受的服务要少得多，而带有 ED 标签的学生受到的纪律处分率要高得多。最后，检查的人口统计数据并没有差异地预测标签的接收。没有 ED 标签的学生接受的服务要少得多，而带有 ED 标签的学生受到的纪律处分率要高得多。最后，检查的人口统计数据并没有差异地预测标签的接收。没有 ED 标签的学生接受的服务要少得多，而带有 ED 标签的学生受到的纪律处分率要高得多。最后，检查的人口统计数据并没有差异地预测标签的接收。