Charamut Natalie R, Racz Sarah J, Wang Mo, De Los Reyes Andres
Comprehensive Assessment and Intervention Program, Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, United States.
Department of Management, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.
Front Psychol. 2022 Jul 28;13:911629. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.911629. eCollection 2022.
Accurately assessing youth mental health involves obtaining reports from multiple informants who typically display low levels of correspondence. This low correspondence may reflect . That is, youth vary as to where they display mental health concerns and informants vary as to where and from what perspective they observe youth. Despite the frequent need to understand and interpret these , no consensus guidelines exist for integrating informants' reports. The path to building these guidelines starts with identifying factors that reliably predict the level and form of these informant discrepancies, and do so for theoretically and empirically relevant reasons. Yet, despite the knowledge of situational specificity, few approaches to integrating multi-informant data are well-equipped to account for these factors in measurement, and those that claim to be well-positioned to do so have undergone little empirical scrutiny. One promising approach was developed roughly 20 years ago by Kraemer and colleagues (2003). Their Satellite Model leverages principal components analysis (PCA) and strategic selection of informants to instantiate situational specificity in measurement, namely components reflecting variance attributable to the in which informants observe behavior (e.g., home/non-home), the from which they observe behavior (e.g., self/other), and behavior that manifests across contexts and perspectives (i.e., ). The current study represents the first test of the Satellite Model. A mixed-clinical/community sample of 134 adolescents and their parents completed six parallel surveys of adolescent mental health. Adolescents also participated in a series of simulated social interactions with research personnel trained to act as same-age, unfamiliar peers. A third informant () viewed these interactions and completed the same surveys as parents and adolescents. We applied the Satellite Model to each set of surveys and observed high internal consistency estimates for each of the six-item (α = 0.90), (α = 0.84), and (α = 0.83) components. Scores reflecting the , , and components displayed distinct patterns of relations to a battery of criterion variables that varied in the context, perspective, and source of measurement. The Satellite Model instantiates situational specificity in measurement and facilitates unifying conceptual and measurement models of youth mental health.
准确评估青少年心理健康需要从多个信息提供者那里获取报告，而这些信息提供者之间的一致性通常较低。这种低一致性可能反映了……也就是说，青少年在何处表现出心理健康问题存在差异，信息提供者在何处以及从何种角度观察青少年也存在差异。尽管经常需要理解和解释这些……但目前尚无整合信息提供者报告的共识性指南。制定这些指南的途径始于识别能够可靠预测这些信息提供者差异程度和形式的因素，并基于理论和实证相关的原因来进行识别。然而，尽管了解情境特异性，但很少有整合多信息提供者数据的方法能够在测量中充分考虑这些因素，而那些声称能够做到这一点的方法几乎没有经过实证检验。大约20年前，克雷默及其同事（2003年）开发了一种很有前景的方法。他们的卫星模型利用主成分分析（PCA）和对信息提供者的策略性选择，在测量中体现情境特异性，即反映因信息提供者观察行为的……（例如，家庭/非家庭）、观察行为的……（例如，自我/他人）以及跨情境和视角表现出的行为（即……）而产生的方差的成分。本研究是对卫星模型的首次……检验。一个由134名青少年及其父母组成的临床/社区混合样本完成了六项关于青少年心理健康的平行调查。青少年还参与了一系列与经过培训扮演同龄、不熟悉同伴的研究人员进行的模拟社交互动。第三位信息提供者（……）观看了这些互动，并完成了与父母和青少年相同的调查。我们将卫星模型应用于每组调查，并观察到六个项目的……（α = 0.90）、……（α = 0.84）和……（α = 0.83）成分各自都有较高的内部一致性估计值。反映……、……和……成分的分数与一系列在测量情境、视角和来源方面各不相同的标准变量呈现出不同的关系模式。卫星模型在测量中体现了情境特异性，并有助于统一青少年心理健康的概念模型和测量模型。
