Scholarlink

<p>This paper crafts a validity argument for the core measures we have created and reported over the past decade to assess young people’s experience of developmentally significant relationships, or <i>developmental relationships</i> (DRs). In a sample of ≈ 11,000 middle and high school-aged youth in schools and out-of-school time programs in the United States, we conducted a series of rigorous analyses to build a systematic validity argument for a 5-item form measuring key elements of DR and a 20-item form measuring specific actions that operationalize those elements. Results showed that each DR measure performed as expected in Rasch analysis across items and people, with minimal differential item functioning, and supported previous findings that higher levels of DR predict positive outcomes. We conclude that the data have demonstrated a strong case for the theoretical and empirical validity of the DR measures as group-level research tools for informing PYD research, theory, and practice.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Developmental Relationships: An Interpretative and Validity Argument for Research and Practice in Child Well-Being

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月6日

查看全文
  • Amy K. Syvertsen,
  • Peter C. Scales,
  • Carlos Chavez,
  • Eugene Roehlkepartain,
  • Justin Roskopf

摘要

This paper crafts a validity argument for the core measures we have created and reported over the past decade to assess young people’s experience of developmentally significant relationships, or developmental relationships (DRs). In a sample of ≈ 11,000 middle and high school-aged youth in schools and out-of-school time programs in the United States, we conducted a series of rigorous analyses to build a systematic validity argument for a 5-item form measuring key elements of DR and a 20-item form measuring specific actions that operationalize those elements. Results showed that each DR measure performed as expected in Rasch analysis across items and people, with minimal differential item functioning, and supported previous findings that higher levels of DR predict positive outcomes. We conclude that the data have demonstrated a strong case for the theoretical and empirical validity of the DR measures as group-level research tools for informing PYD research, theory, and practice.