A review of current rating scales notes that the majority of rating scales intended to evaluate aggression in children who are not in an inpatient or residential setting have traditionally focused on oppositional/defiant behavior, disobedience, and covert antisocial acts while giving less consideration to physical aggression. Whereas almost all aggressive children are oppositional, only some oppositional children are physically aggressive. The 33-item CAS-P assesses the frequency of aggressive acts in five separate domains: verbal aggression, aggression directed toward objects and animals, provoked physical aggression, unprovoked physical aggression, and the use of weapons independent of or in conjunction with gang membership. There is a continuum of aggressive acts within each of the five domains, so as to distinguish milder acts from more severe acts of aggression. The distinction between aggression toward adults versus peers and the distinction between aggression within the home and outside the home provide additional information on the pervasiveness and severity of aggression. In order to assess the validity and reliability of the CAS-P, it was administered to 73 (66 boys and 7 girls) clinically referred children ages 7 to 11. Validity was assessed dimensionally by examining the relationship of CAS-P scores to other parent and teacher rating scales, and it was evaluated categorically by comparing scores of children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) alone, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder. Test results showed that the scale as a whole had excellent internal consistency. Children with conduct disorder were rated significantly higher than those with oppositional defiant disorder, who were rated significantly higher than those with ADHD alone. The CAS-P did not distinguish clinical control children from those with ADHD only. Correlations with other rating scales provided further support for the validity of the CAS-P. The study concluded that the CAS-P assessed distinct components of aggressive behavior and may fill a gap, in that it distinguishes among various types and severity of aggressive behaviors, as well as the settings in which they occur. 3 tables and 32 references