Exploring the Validity of Adolescent Responses to a Measure of Psychological Flexibility and Inflexibility

Validating measures of psychological flexibility (PF) and psychological inflexibility (PI) has occurred in multiple adult samples, but little research has validated PF and PI measures with adolescents. This manuscript describes two studies exploring the validity of responses to the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI) with two samples of adolescents. The first study used exploratory factor analyses on responses to the MPFI with a sample of 16-17-year-olds (<i>N</i> = 249). The results yielded a reduced and simplified measurement model that consisted of two general factors: one for PF and the other for PI. These exploratory findings were further investigated with confirmatory factor analyses in the second study, with a larger sample of 14-17-year-olds (<i>N</i> = 503). The results from the second study generally confirmed the factor model from the first study. Findings from both studies showed that scores derived from the reduced MPFI measurement model evidenced convergent and divergent validity with a variety of mental health criterion measures. Moreover, findings from the second study showed that PF and PI scores had differential predictive power on different concurrent mental health outcomes. This discussion highlights the implications of measuring PF and PI in adolescents, considers limitations of the present studies, and recommends next steps for research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavioral Sciences
Published
2025-02-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15020197
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Resilience and Mental Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.31

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Exploring the Validity of Adolescent Responses to a Measure of Psychological Flexibility and Inflexibility

Caleb D. Farley, Tyler L. Renshaw
1 citations
Behavioral Sciences
Resilience and Mental Health
2.31
article

Exploring the Validity of Adolescent Responses to a Measure of Psychological Flexibility and Inflexibility

Caleb D. Farley, Tyler L. Renshaw
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Validating measures of psychological flexibility (PF) and psychological inflexibility (PI) has occurred in multiple adult samples, but little research has validated PF and PI measures with adolescents. This manuscript describes two studies exploring the validity of responses to the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI) with two samples of adolescents. The first study used exploratory factor analyses on responses to the MPFI with a sample of 16-17-year-olds (<i>N</i> = 249). The results yielded a reduced and simplified measurement model that consisted of two general factors: one for PF and the other for PI. These exploratory findings were further investigated with confirmatory factor analyses in the second study, with a larger sample of 14-17-year-olds (<i>N</i> = 503). The results from the second study generally confirmed the factor model from the first study. Findings from both studies showed that scores derived from the reduced MPFI measurement model evidenced convergent and divergent validity with a variety of mental health criterion measures. Moreover, findings from the second study showed that PF and PI scores had differential predictive power on different concurrent mental health outcomes. This discussion highlights the implications of measuring PF and PI in adolescents, considers limitations of the present studies, and recommends next steps for research.

Behavioral SciencesVol. 15(2)
Utah State University (US)
Utah State University
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Resilience and Mental Health
2.31
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.