初成期维度量表(IDEA)的心理测量证据及测量不变性。

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Matthew L Nice, Matthew Joseph
{"title":"初成期维度量表(IDEA)的心理测量证据及测量不变性。","authors":"Matthew L Nice, Matthew Joseph","doi":"10.1080/00223891.2025.2454031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Numerous versions exist of the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA), which is used to assess normative markers of development in the 18-29 age range. However, their comparative psychometric properties have not been adequately explored, and samples including non-college-going emerging adults are rare. In Study 1, confirmatory factor analyses using survey data from 429 college-going and non-college-going emerging adults (52% female, 44% non-white) showed the IDEA-Short Form (IDEA-SF) to be the most psychometrically and conceptually sound version, demonstrating good fit for the five-factor model proposed by Arnett's (2004) theory of emerging adulthood; initial evidence for concurrent validity of the IDEA-SF scores was also presented. Study 2 (<i>N</i> = 765, 40% non-college-going) tested and found evidence for internal reliability and convergent validity as well as measurement invariance across college-going and non-college-going emerging adults for the IDEA-SF, though evidence for discriminant validity was mixed. Study 3 (<i>N</i> = 817) used data from the openly-available EAMMI3 dataset to examine concurrent and discriminant validity evidence for the IDEA-SF scores with multiple measures of well-being and adult development, respectively; preliminary, albeit weak, evidence of both forms of external validity was found. Suggestions for future research employing and improving the IDEA-SF and clinical implications for mental health clinicians working with emerging adults are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":16707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric Evidence and Measurement Invariance by College-Going Status for the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA).\",\"authors\":\"Matthew L Nice, Matthew Joseph\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00223891.2025.2454031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Numerous versions exist of the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA), which is used to assess normative markers of development in the 18-29 age range. However, their comparative psychometric properties have not been adequately explored, and samples including non-college-going emerging adults are rare. In Study 1, confirmatory factor analyses using survey data from 429 college-going and non-college-going emerging adults (52% female, 44% non-white) showed the IDEA-Short Form (IDEA-SF) to be the most psychometrically and conceptually sound version, demonstrating good fit for the five-factor model proposed by Arnett's (2004) theory of emerging adulthood; initial evidence for concurrent validity of the IDEA-SF scores was also presented. Study 2 (<i>N</i> = 765, 40% non-college-going) tested and found evidence for internal reliability and convergent validity as well as measurement invariance across college-going and non-college-going emerging adults for the IDEA-SF, though evidence for discriminant validity was mixed. Study 3 (<i>N</i> = 817) used data from the openly-available EAMMI3 dataset to examine concurrent and discriminant validity evidence for the IDEA-SF scores with multiple measures of well-being and adult development, respectively; preliminary, albeit weak, evidence of both forms of external validity was found. Suggestions for future research employing and improving the IDEA-SF and clinical implications for mental health clinicians working with emerging adults are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2025.2454031\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2025.2454031","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

存在许多版本的新成年期维度清单(IDEA),用于评估18-29岁年龄段发展的规范标记。然而,他们的比较心理测量特性还没有得到充分的探索,而且包括非大学新生成年人的样本很少。在研究1中,通过对429名大学生和非大学生(52%为女性,44%为非白人)的调查数据进行验证性因素分析,结果表明,从心理测量学和概念上来说,IDEA-Short Form (IDEA-SF)是最合理的版本,与Arnett(2004)提出的新兴成年理论的五因素模型非常吻合;还提出了IDEA-SF分数并发效度的初步证据。研究2 (N = 765, 40%非大学生)测试并发现了IDEA-SF的内部信度和收敛效度以及测量不变性的证据,尽管区分效度的证据是混合的。研究3 (N = 817)使用来自公开可用的EAMMI3数据集的数据,分别用幸福感和成人发展的多重测量来检验IDEA-SF分数的并发效度和判别效度证据;初步的证据,虽然薄弱,这两种形式的外部有效性被发现。讨论了对未来研究使用和改进IDEA-SF的建议,以及对初出期成人心理健康临床医生的临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Psychometric Evidence and Measurement Invariance by College-Going Status for the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA).

Numerous versions exist of the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA), which is used to assess normative markers of development in the 18-29 age range. However, their comparative psychometric properties have not been adequately explored, and samples including non-college-going emerging adults are rare. In Study 1, confirmatory factor analyses using survey data from 429 college-going and non-college-going emerging adults (52% female, 44% non-white) showed the IDEA-Short Form (IDEA-SF) to be the most psychometrically and conceptually sound version, demonstrating good fit for the five-factor model proposed by Arnett's (2004) theory of emerging adulthood; initial evidence for concurrent validity of the IDEA-SF scores was also presented. Study 2 (N = 765, 40% non-college-going) tested and found evidence for internal reliability and convergent validity as well as measurement invariance across college-going and non-college-going emerging adults for the IDEA-SF, though evidence for discriminant validity was mixed. Study 3 (N = 817) used data from the openly-available EAMMI3 dataset to examine concurrent and discriminant validity evidence for the IDEA-SF scores with multiple measures of well-being and adult development, respectively; preliminary, albeit weak, evidence of both forms of external validity was found. Suggestions for future research employing and improving the IDEA-SF and clinical implications for mental health clinicians working with emerging adults are discussed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
8.80%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA) primarily publishes articles dealing with the development, evaluation, refinement, and application of personality assessment methods. Desirable articles address empirical, theoretical, instructional, or professional aspects of using psychological tests, interview data, or the applied clinical assessment process. They also advance the measurement, description, or understanding of personality, psychopathology, and human behavior. JPA is broadly concerned with developing and using personality assessment methods in clinical, counseling, forensic, and health psychology settings; with the assessment process in applied clinical practice; with the assessment of people of all ages and cultures; and with both normal and abnormal personality functioning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信