Adversity in Adolescence: Modeling risk for different purposes

Area of Science:

• Child and Adolescent Psychology
• Public Health Research Methods

Background:

• Research on childhood adversity and wellbeing is increasingly used by policymakers.
• Disciplinary variations in conceptualizations and analytical approaches impact findings and their application.

Purpose of the Study:

• To demonstrate the importance of aligning research aims with analytical methods when modeling adversity and negative outcomes.
• To compare variable-centered and person-centered approaches in analyzing adolescent risk behaviors.

Main Methods:

• Utilized three analytical approaches: cumulative risk score, individual main-effects modeling (variable-centered), and latent class analysis (person-centered).
• Modeled data from the Philadelphia 2019 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (N = 1,217) on adolescent adversity, problems, and demographics.

Main Results:

• Findings differed across the three analytical approaches in terms of specificity, causal inference strength, and interpretation.
• Variable-centered approaches provided different insights compared to the person-centered approach.

Conclusions:

• Congruity between analytical approaches, research questions, and study conceptualization is essential.
• Accurate interpretation and translation of empirical findings into policy and practice depend on appropriate methodological choices.