Skip to main content
Skip to main content

Level 3 Triple P Discussion Groups

What Works logo
View child outcomes and impact Email Tweet
Evidence rating: 3+
Cost rating: 1

Level 3 Triple P Discussion Groups is for parents with specific concerns about the behaviour of a child between the ages of 0 and 12.

Parents can attend one to four small group sessions lasting approximately two hours, facilitated by a trained and accredited Triple P practitioner. The discussion groups are designed to provide an overview of the positive-parenting principles, covering topics involving common child-rearing issues, including dealing with disobedience, managing fighting and aggression, developing good bedtime routines, and shopping with children.

EIF Programme Assessment

Evidence rating: 3+
Level 3 indicates evidence of efficacy. This means the programme can be described as evidence-based: it has evidence from at least one rigorously conducted RCT or QED demonstrating a statistically significant positive impact on at least one child outcome. This programme does not receive a rating of 4 as it has not yet replicated its results in another rigorously conducted study, where at least one study indicates long-term impacts, and at least one uses measures independent of study participants.
Cost rating: 1
A rating of 1 indicates that a programme has a low cost to set up and deliver, compared with other interventions reviewed by EIF. This is equivalent to an estimated unit cost of less than €125. This figure is based on an analysis of UK costs and a conversion rate of 1.19.

What does the plus mean?

The plus rating indicates that this programme has evidence from at least one level 3 study, along with evidence from other studies rated 2 or better.

Child outcomes

This programme can affect outcomes for children in Active and healthy, physical and mental wellbeing.

According to the best available evidence for this programme's impact, it can achieve the following positive outcomes for children:

Preventing crime, violence and antisocial behaviour

Improved behaviour

based on study 1

  • Statement: 13.73-point reduction on the Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory (Intensity Scale)
  • Score: 31
  • Timeframe: Immediately after the intervention

based on study 2

This programme also has evidence of supporting positive outcomes for couples, parents or families that may be relevant to a commissioning decision. Please see About the evidence for more detail.

Who is it for?

The best available evidence for this programme relates to the following age-groups:

Toddlers Preschool Primary school

How is it delivered?

The best available evidence for this programme relates to implementation through these delivery models:

  • Group

Where is it delivered?

The best available evidence for this programme relates to its implementation in these settings:

  • Children's centre or early-years setting
  • Primary school
  • Community centre
  • Out-patient health setting

How is it targeted?

The best available evidence for this programme relates to its implementation as:

  • Universal

Where has it been implemented?

  • Australia
  • Belgium
  • Canada
  • China
  • England
  • Ireland
  • Netherlands
  • New Zealand
  • Scotland
  • United States

Ireland provision

This programme has been implemented in Ireland.

Ireland evaluation

This programme’s best evidence does not include evaluation conducted in Ireland.

About the programme

What happens during the delivery?

How is it delivered?

A Triple P Discussion Group is delivered by one practitioner in one session of two hours’ duration.


What happens during the intervention?

  • Triple P Discussion Group sessions are delivered in a two-hour small group format on a specific parenting topic. The discussion groups are designed to provide an overview of the positive parenting principles.
  • The sessions may cover the following topics:
    • Dealing with disobedience
    • Managing fighting and aggression
    • Developing good bedtime routines
    • Hassle-free shopping with children

What are the implementation requirements?

Who can deliver it?

  • The practitioner who delivers this programme can come from a range of professions (eg family support worker) and has recommended minimum NFQ-6 level qualifications.


What are the training requirements?

The practitioner has two days of programme training, one day of pre-accreditation and attends a half-day accreditation workshop (accreditation workshops are held over two days; practitioners attend in groups of five). Booster training of practitioners is not required.


How are the practitioners supervised?

  • It is recommended that practitioners are supervised by one host-agency supervisor with NFQ-9/10 level qualifications, with no required programme training.


What are the systems for maintaining fidelity?

  • Accreditation process
  • Training manual
  • Supervision
  • Fidelity monitoring

Is there a licensing requirement?

There is no licence required to run this programme.


How does it work? (Theory of Change)

How does it work?

  • Triple P is based on the idea that parents often unintentionally perpetuate unwanted child behaviour through ineffective parenting strategies.
  • Triple P helps parents replace ineffective parenting strategies with effective methods for encouraging positive child behaviour.
  • In the short term, parents learn more effective strategies for managing their child’s behaviour and the child’s behaviour improves.
  • In the longer term, children should have greater self-regulatory skills and self confidence and do better in school.
  • It is also expected that children will be less likely to have behavioural problems and/or engage in antisocial behaviour.

Intended outcomes

  • Active and healthy, physical and mental wellbeing
  • Safe and protected from harm

Contact details

Matt Buttery
Triple P UK
matt.buttery@triplep.net

http://www.triplep.net/ 


About the evidence

Level 3 Triple P Discussion Groups' most rigorous evidence comes from two RCTs, one conducted in Australia and New Zealand the other conducted only in Australia.

This study identified statistically significant positive impact on a number of child and parent outcomes.

This programme has evidence from at least one rigorously conducted RCT along with evidence from an additional comparison group study.  Consequently, the programme receives a 3+ rating overall.

Study 1

Citation:Dittman et al. (2015)
Design:RCT
Country:Australianew Zealand
Sample:85 middle-class families in Australia and New Zealand
Timing:Post-test
Child outcomes:
  • Improved behaviour
Other outcomes:
  • Improved parenting
Study rating:3

Dittman, C.K., Farruggia, S.P., Keown, L. J. & Sanders, M.R. (2015). Dealing with disobedience:  An evaluation of a brief parenting intervention for young children showing noncompliant behaviour problems. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 47, 102-112. DOI: 10.1007/s10578-015-0548-9.

Available at
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25863790

Study design and sample

The first study is a rigorously conducted RCT.  

This study involved random assignment of parents and children to a Triple P Discussion Group treatment group and a waitlist control group. 

This study was conducted in Australia and New Zealand, with a sample of 85 middle-class parents and children between the ages of three and five. The majority of the children came from Australian or New Zealand European backgrounds (79%) and most had an annual family income of more than $70,000 (60%).

Measures

Child behaviour (intensity, problem behaviour) was measured using the Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory (parent report).

Parenting and parenting confidence (laxness, over-reactivity, verbosity) were measured using the Parenting Scale (parent report). Parents’ task-specific self-efficacy (behaviour, setting) were measured using the Parenting Task Checklist (parent report). Parental depressive symptoms were measured using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (parent report). Parental relationship functioning was measured using the Parent Problem Checklist (parent report) and the Relationship Quality Inventory (parent report).

Findings

This study identified statistically significant positive impact on one child and parent outcome, respectively.

Child outcomes include:

  • Improved behaviour

Study 2

Citation:Morawska et al. (2011)
Design:RCT
Country:Australia
Sample:67 Australian middle-class families
Timing:Post-test
Child outcomes:
  • Improved behaviour
Other outcomes:
  • Improved parenting
  • Increased self-efficacy
Study rating:2+

Morawska, A., Haslam, D., Milne, D., & Sanders, M. R. (2011). Evaluation of a brief parenting discussion group for parents of young children. Journal of Developmental and Behavioural Pediatrics, 32(2), 136-145.

Available at
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20814338

Study design and sample

The second study is an RCT.  

This study involved random assignment of families to a Triple P Discussion Group treatment group and a waitlist control group.

This study was conducted in Australia, with a sample of 67 middle-class families recruited through advertisements in playgroups and day-care centres in communities in the Brisbane metropolitan area.

Measures

Child behaviour (intensity, problem behaviour) was measured using the Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory (parent report).

Parents’ perspective on the parent-child relationship was measured using the Parenting Relationship Questionnaire (parent report). Parenting and parenting confidence (laxness, over-reactivity, verbosity) were measured using the Parenting Scale (parent report). Parents’ task-specific self-efficacy (behaviour, setting) were measured using the Parenting Task Checklist (parent report). Social support and partner support were measured using the Parenting Experience Scale (parent report).

Findings

This study identified statistically significant positive impact on a number of child and parent outcomes.

Child outcomes include:

  • Improved behaviour.

The conclusions that can be drawn from this study are limited by methodological issues pertaining to a lack of clarity in terms of attrition, hence why a higher rating is not achieved.

Sign up for What Works updates