What it is
The Sensory Profile family of assessments, developed by Winnie Dunn, is the most widely used set of sensory processing instruments globally. The current edition — the Sensory Profile 2 (SP-2; Dunn, 2014) — is a set of norm-referenced caregiver- and teacher-report questionnaires designed to assess sensory processing patterns in children from birth through 14 years, 11 months. A separate instrument, the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile (A/ASP; Brown & Dunn, 2002), extends the framework to ages 11 and above using self-report.
The SP-2 unified and updated several earlier instruments (the original Sensory Profile, 1999; the Infant/Toddler Sensory Profile, 2002; the Sensory Profile School Companion, 2006) into a single manual with a consistent normative framework.
What it measures
All instruments in the Sensory Profile family are grounded in Dunn’s Sensory Processing Framework, which organises sensory processing patterns along two axes: neurological threshold (how much input the nervous system requires before responding) and behavioural response strategy (whether the person actively seeks or avoids input, or passively registers or is sensitive to it). This produces four quadrant patterns:
- Registration (high threshold, passive response): the person misses or is slow to notice sensory input.
- Seeking (high threshold, active response): the person actively pursues sensory experiences.
- Sensitivity (low threshold, passive response): the person notices sensory input readily and may be distracted or distressed by it.
- Avoiding (low threshold, active response): the person actively limits or withdraws from sensory experiences.
The SP-2 yields scores across sensory systems (auditory, visual, touch, movement, body position, oral), behaviour scores (conduct, social-emotional, attentional), and sensory pattern scores (the four quadrants). The SP-2 family includes five forms: Infant Sensory Profile 2 (birth–6 months), Toddler Sensory Profile 2 (7–35 months), Child Sensory Profile 2 (3–14 years), Short Sensory Profile 2 (3–14 years, abbreviated), and School Companion Sensory Profile 2 (3–14 years, teacher report).
Who it’s for
- SP-2: Children from birth to 14 years, 11 months. Completed by caregivers (home forms) or teachers (school companion).
- A/ASP: Adolescents and adults aged 11+. Self-report.
How it works
Caregivers or teachers rate the frequency of specific behaviours on a 5-point scale (almost never to almost always). Raw scores are compared against normative data to produce descriptive categories indicating whether the child’s scores fall within typical range, indicate a probable difference, or indicate a definite difference from same-age peers. The SP-2 can be administered on paper or via the Q-global online platform.
Strengths
- The most extensively researched sensory processing instrument, with a large evidence base in autism.
- Theory-driven: the four-quadrant model provides a clear framework for interpreting results and planning interventions.
- The SP-2 demonstrated good internal consistency (α = 0.89–0.95) and adequate test-retest reliability (0.80–0.90).
- Confirmatory factor analysis supports the four-factor structure (Dean, Dunn & Little, 2016).
- Multiple forms for different settings and age ranges allow cross-context comparison.
- Widely available in multiple languages, including validated translations in Korean, Brazilian Portuguese, Malay, and others.
Limitations
- The SP-2 is a top-down, theory-driven instrument: it organises all observations through Dunn’s four-quadrant model. If the model does not fully capture the complexity of sensory processing (and there is ongoing debate about this), the instrument will inherit those limitations.
- It relies on caregiver/teacher report, which is subject to the informant’s interpretation of behaviour. Different informants may rate the same child differently.
- Interoception is not assessed. The SP-2 was designed around the external senses, vestibular, and proprioceptive processing. Internal body awareness — hunger, pain, heart rate, bladder fullness — is absent. This is a significant gap for autistic populations.
- Cross-cultural validity has been flagged as a shortcoming by COSMIN review (Licciardi & Brown, 2021). Most normative data was collected in the United States.
- No validated Dutch version exists for the SP-2. This is a significant barrier in the Dutch-speaking practice context. Some Dutch-speaking practitioners use unofficial translations or administer the English version, but these lack formal validation. This is itself an evidence gap (see: dutch-validation-evidence-gap).
Availability and language versions
Published by Pearson. Available in English (US). Validated translations exist in several languages (Korean, Brazilian Portuguese, Malay, among others), but a formally validated Dutch-language version is not currently available. The Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile is similarly available primarily in English.
Relationship to other instruments
The SP-2 is the most widely used sensory processing measure, but it differs from the Sensory Processing Measure (SPM-2) in its theoretical basis (Dunn’s quadrant model vs. Ayres Sensory Integration theory) and from the Sensory Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ) in its target population (the SEQ was designed specifically for young children with autism, while the SP-2 was standardised on typically developing children). Dugas et al. (2018) found moderate convergent validity between the SP and SPM Home Form in children with autism, but noted that the SPM identified more children with sensory features across every domain.
Key sources
- Dunn, W. (2014). Sensory Profile 2: User’s Manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
- Brown, C. & Dunn, W. (2002). Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile: User’s Manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
- Dean, E., Dunn, W. & Little, L. (2016). Validity of the Sensory Profile 2: a confirmatory factor analysis. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70(4_Suppl_1). doi: 10.5014/ajot.2016.70S1-PO7054
- Licciardi, L. & Brown, T. (2021). An overview and critical review of the Sensory Profile – second edition. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy. doi: 10.1080/11038128.2021.1940397
- Tomchek, S.D. & Dunn, W. (2007). Sensory processing in children with and without autism: a comparative study using the Short Sensory Profile. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 61(2), 190–200.