General socio‐cognitive problem‐solving deficits have become accepted as the basis for applied interventions with maladjusted children despite conflicting findings and problematic assessment procedures. This study used Kendall's deficit/distortion distinction to compare the performance of conduct disorder and non‐problem boys on means‐ends and optional thinking measures, using both quantitative and qualitative indices. Although quantitative problem/non‐problem deficits were found, the pattern of results did not support the notion of a consistent maladjustment deficit. The nature of the qualitative differences, however, suggested a more specific role for the assessment of socio‐cognitive problem solving with increased emphasis on context and problem diff