Psychometric Properties and Measurement Invariance of the Positive Youth Development Scale - Turkish Version

被引:3
作者
Yildirim, Sinan [1 ,2 ]
Arslan, Yunus [1 ]
机构
[1] Pamukkale Univ, Fac Sport Sci, Denizli, Turkiye
[2] Pamukkale Univ, Fac Sport Sci, Kinikli Kampusu Oda 0011, TR-20160 Pamukkale, Denizli, Turkiye
关键词
psychometric properties; reliability; validity; development; youth; Turkish; positive development scale; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELS; 5; CS; LONGITUDINAL ANALYSIS; SPORT; RECOMMENDATIONS; PROGRAMS; LISREL;
D O I
10.1177/00315125231206311
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
In this study, we translated to Turkish and evaluated the validity, reliability, and measurement invariance for respondent sex, grade level and analysis programs the Short Form and Very Short Form of the Positive Youth Development Scale (Turkish version). We had 435 youth, aged 11-17 years, complete the Short (34 items) and Very Short (17 items) Forms of the instrument. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that both forms had a 5-factor structure, and validity testing showed good criterion-related correlation validity between this tool and the Satisfaction with Life Scale. The Short Form had adequate reliability coefficients, but the Very Short Form lacked sufficient reliability for some dimensions. Test-retest correlations were satisfactory for both forms. While the Short and Very Short Forms showed measurement invariance across gender and grade level, CFI, NNFI (TLI), and IFI values diverged between LISREL and AMOS analysis programs. In summary, our data suggest that the Short Form is a reliable measure of positive youth development, while the Very Short Form may not be as reliable due to insufficient confidence values.
引用
收藏
页码:2362 / 2387
页数:26
相关论文
共 80 条
[41]  
Hair J. F., 2009, Multivariate data analysis
[42]  
Harter S., 1983, SUPPLEMENTARY UNPUB
[43]  
Harter S., 1986, Manual for the self-perception profile for adults
[44]   The five Cs of positive youth development in Norway: Assessment and associations with positive and negative outcomes [J].
Holsen, Ingrid ;
Geldhof, John ;
Larsen, Torill ;
Aardal, Elisabeth .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT, 2017, 41 (05) :559-569
[45]  
Holt NL, 2011, REV IBEROAM PSICOL E, V6, P299
[46]   AMOS, EQS, and LISREL for Windows: A Comparative Review [J].
Hox, Joop J. .
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL, 1995, 2 (01) :79-91
[47]  
Ilhan M, 2014, J MEAS EVAL EDUC PSY, V5, P26
[48]   The role of youth engagement in positive youth development and social justice youth development for high-risk, marginalised youth [J].
Iwasaki, Yoshitaka .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENCE AND YOUTH, 2016, 21 (03) :267-278
[49]   Connection in Youth Development Key to the Mental Health Continuum in Ghana: A Structural Equation Model of Thriving and Flourishing Indicators [J].
Kabir, Russell Sarwar ;
Doku, David Teye ;
Wiium, Nora .
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 12
[50]  
Kline R. B., 2016, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, V6th