Is the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory Short Form valid for ecological momentary assessment? A preliminary psychometric investigation
Jennifer Krafft, Ashley C. Middleton, Natalie Tadros
{"title":"Is the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory Short Form valid for ecological momentary assessment? A preliminary psychometric investigation","authors":"Jennifer Krafft, Ashley C. Middleton, Natalie Tadros","doi":"10.1016/j.jcbs.2025.100903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI), and its short form, the MPFI-24, have demonstrated strong psychometric properties in assessing all components of psychological flexibility and inflexibility (Gregoire et al., 2020; Rolffs et al., 2018). However, these measures have not been validated for their use in ecological momentary assessment (EMA), a methodology that is important for understanding within-person change processes and furthering the progress of contextual behavioral science. Therefore, we conducted a preliminary psychometric investigation of the MPFI-EMA, a version of the MPFI-24 adapted for EMA, in a U.S. college student sample (n = 126). Our results provide support for the validity and reliability of the MPFI-EMA. However, validity for assessing within-person variability remained unclear, psychometric limitations were observed for some subscales, and reactivity over time occurred for the MPFI-EMA Psychological Inflexibility scale and specific subscales. Limitations include the use of novel cutoffs, as criteria for psychometric validation within EMA are not well-established, and the need for replication in diverse samples, including clinical populations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","volume":"36 ","pages":"Article 100903"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144725000341","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI), and its short form, the MPFI-24, have demonstrated strong psychometric properties in assessing all components of psychological flexibility and inflexibility (Gregoire et al., 2020; Rolffs et al., 2018). However, these measures have not been validated for their use in ecological momentary assessment (EMA), a methodology that is important for understanding within-person change processes and furthering the progress of contextual behavioral science. Therefore, we conducted a preliminary psychometric investigation of the MPFI-EMA, a version of the MPFI-24 adapted for EMA, in a U.S. college student sample (n = 126). Our results provide support for the validity and reliability of the MPFI-EMA. However, validity for assessing within-person variability remained unclear, psychometric limitations were observed for some subscales, and reactivity over time occurred for the MPFI-EMA Psychological Inflexibility scale and specific subscales. Limitations include the use of novel cutoffs, as criteria for psychometric validation within EMA are not well-established, and the need for replication in diverse samples, including clinical populations.
多维心理灵活性量表(MPFI)及其简短形式MPFI-24在评估心理灵活性和不灵活性的所有组成部分方面显示出强大的心理测量特性(Gregoire et al., 2020;Rolffs et al., 2018)。然而,这些措施还没有在生态瞬间评估(EMA)中得到验证,这是一种对理解人体内变化过程和促进环境行为科学进步很重要的方法。因此,我们在美国大学生样本(n = 126)中对MPFI-EMA进行了初步的心理测量调查,这是一种适用于EMA的MPFI-24版本。本研究结果为MPFI-EMA的效度和信度提供了支持。然而,评估个人内部变异性的有效性仍然不清楚,在一些子量表中观察到心理测量的局限性,并且随着时间的推移,MPFI-EMA心理不灵活性量表和特定子量表会出现反应性。局限性包括使用新的截止点,因为EMA内的心理测量验证标准尚未建立,并且需要在包括临床人群在内的不同样本中进行复制。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science is the official journal of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS).
Contextual Behavioral Science is a systematic and pragmatic approach to the understanding of behavior, the solution of human problems, and the promotion of human growth and development. Contextual Behavioral Science uses functional principles and theories to analyze and modify action embedded in its historical and situational context. The goal is to predict and influence behavior, with precision, scope, and depth, across all behavioral domains and all levels of analysis, so as to help create a behavioral science that is more adequate to the challenge of the human condition.