Psychometric Evaluation of the Psychological Flexibility Scale for Adolescents
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective : To examine psychometric properties of Psychological Flexibility Scale for
Adolescents (PFSA).
Method : The samples were 312 high school students. For validity, confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA) was utilized for factorial validation. Concurrent validity was assessed as
correlation with Acceptance and action questionnaire (AAQ-II). Moreover, nomological
network with depression and mindfulness was investigated. For reliability, Cronbach’s
alpha coefficients and ω coefficients were estimated.
Result : The findings suggested that the 6-factor model of the PFSA demonstrated good
factor structures (χ2= 510.818, df = 309, p < .001, χ2/df = 1.653, CFI = .952, RMSEA =
.046). Moreover, it was found that psychological flexibility score was associated with
depression and mindfulness in accordance with theoretical expectation. In addition,
the PFSA demonstrated good internal reliabilities (Cronbach’s α ranged from .603 to
.790 and full-scale reliability at .897; ω reliability coefficients ranged from .634 to .847,
and full-scale reliability at .937)
Conclusion : The findings supported that the Psychological Flexibility Scale for
Adolescents is psychometrically sound questionnaire, which can be used for assessing
psychological flexibility in adolescents.
Downloads
Article Details
บทความที่ส่งมาลงตีพิมพ์ในวารสารสมาคมจิตแพทย์ ต้องไม่เคยตีพิมพ์หรือได้รับการตอบรับให้ตีพิมพ์ในวารสารฉบับอื่น และต้องไม่อยู่ระหว่างการส่งไปตีพิมพ์ในวารสารอื่น
References
Hayes SC, Strosahl KD, Wilson KG. Acceptance and commitment therapy: The process and practice of mindful change. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2012.
Halliburton AE, Cooper LD. Applications and adaptations of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for adolescents. J Contextual Behav Sci [internet]. 2015[cited 2018 Jan 3]; 4:1-11. doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2015.01.002.
Livheim F, Hayes L, Ghaderi A, Magnusdottir T, Hogfeldt A, Rowse, A, et al. The effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy for adolescent mental health: Swedish and Australian pilot outcomes. J Child Fam Stud 2015; 24: 1016-30. doi:10.1007/s10826-014- 9912-9.
Bond FW, Hayes SC, Baer RA, Carpenter KM, Guenole N, Orcutt HK, et al. Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II: revised measure of psychological inflexibility and experiential avoidance. Behav Ther [internet]. 2011[cited 2018 Sep 7]; 42:676-88. Available from: http:// contextualscience.org/acbs.
Noiphon W, Phromuthai N. Reliability and validity of Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (Thai version) among depression patients. [internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Feb 28]. Available from: http://aimhc.net/new/_admin/download/ -290-1501753396.pdf.
Rolffs JL, Rogge RD, Wilson KG. Disentangling components of flexibility via the Hexaflex Model: development and validation of the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI). Assessment. 2016; 1-25. doi:10.1177/1073191116645905.
Greco LA, Lambert W, Baer RA. Psychological inflexibility in childhood and adolescence: development and evaluation of the Avoidance and Fusion Questionnaire for Youth. Psychol Assess 2008; 20: 93-102. doi: 10.1037/1040- 3590.20.2.93.
Rochefort C, Baldwin AS, Chmielewski M. Experiential avoidance: an examination of the construct validity of the AAQ-II and MEAQ. Behav Ther 2018; 49:435-49. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2017.08.008.
Wolgast M. What does the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ-II) really measure?. Behav Ther 2014; 45:831-9. doi: 0005-7894/ 45/831-839/$1.00/0.
Sannarin T. Development and psychometric evaluation of the Psychological Flexibility Scale for Adolescents: A pilot study. Thai Journal of Clinical Psychology 2019; 1-10.
Hair J, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Edinburg: Pearson; 2014.
Trangkasombat U, Lapboonsap W, Hawanon P. Using CES-D (Thai version) for screening depression in adolescents. Journal of the Psychiatric Association of Thailand [internet]. 1997 [cited 2018 Mar 28]; 42:2-13. Available from: https://www.tci-thaijo.org.
Silpakit C, Silpakit O, Wisajun P. The validity of Philadephia Mindfulness Scale Thai version. Journal of Mental Health of Thailand 2011; 19:140-47.
Nunnally CJ, Bernstein HI. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw Hill; 1994.
Christodoulou A, Michaelides M, Karekla M. Network analysis: a new psychometric approach to examine the underlying ACT model components. J Contextual Behav Sci 2019; 12: 285-9. Available from: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.10.002.
Levin ME, MacLane C, Daflos S, Seeley JR, Hayes SC, Biglan A, et al. Examining psychological inflexibility as a transdiagnostic process across psychological disorders. J Contextual Behav Sci 2014; 3: 155-63. doi:10.1016/j.jcbs. 2014.06.003.
Stabbe OK, Rolffs JL, Rogge RD. Flexibly and/or inflexibly embracing life: identifying fundamental approaches to life with latent profile analyses on the dimensions of the Hexaflex model. J Con¬textual Behav Sci 2019; 12: 106-18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs. 2019.03.003.
Zettle RD, Gird SR, Webster BK, Carrasquillo- Richardson N, Swails JA, Burdsal CA. The self-as-context scale: development and preliminary psychometric properties. J Contextual Behav Sci 2018; 10:64-74. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jcbs.2018.08.010.
Eisenbeck N, Szabó-Bartha A. Validation of the Hungarian version of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II). J Contextual Behav Sci 2018; 9:80-7. Available from: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.07.007.
Levin ME, Krafft J, Pistorello J, Seeley JR. Assessing psychological inflexibility in univer¬sity students: Development and validation of the acceptance and action questionnaire for university students (AAQ-US). J Contextual Behav Sci 2019; 12:199-206. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.03.004.
Renshaw TL. Probing the relative psychometric validity of three measures of psychological inflexibility. J Contextual Behav Sci 2018; 7:47- 54. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jcbs.2017.12.001.
Gámez W, Chmielewski M, Kotov R, Ruggero C, Watson D. Development of a measure of experiential avoidance: the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire. Psychol Assess 2011; 23; 692-713. doi: 10.1037/ a0023242.
MacAndrew Z, Richardson J, Stopa L. Psychometric properties of acceptance measures: a systematic review. J Contextual Behav Sci2019; 12:261-77. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.08.006.
Ong CW, Pierce BG, Wood DW, Twohig MP, Levin ME. The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire - II: an Item Response Theory Analysis. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2019; 41:123-34. Available from https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10862-018-9694-2.
Tyndall I, Waldeck D, Pancani L, Whelan R, Roach B, Dawson DL. The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II) as a measure of experiential avoidance: concerns over discriminant validity. J Contextual Behav Sci 2019; 12:278-84. Available from: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.09.005.
Ong CW, Lee EB, Levin ME, Twohig MP. A review of AAQ variants and other context-specific measures of psychological flexibilityJ Contextual Behav Sci 2019; 12:329-46. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs. 2019.02.007.
Swan J, Hancock K, Dixon A, Bowman J. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for children: a systematic review of intervention studies. J Contextual Behav Sci 2015; 4:73-85. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jcbs.2015.02.001.
Harris R. The happiness trap: how to stop struggling and start living: a guide to ACT. Boston, MA: Trumpeter; 2008.
Puolakanaho A, Tolvanen A, Kinnunen SM, Lappalainen R. Burnout-related ill-being at work: associations between mindfulness and acceptance skills, worksite factors, and experienced well-being in life. J Contextual Behav Sci2018; 10:92-102. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.09.003.