Is the mental wellbeing of young Australians best represented by a single, multidimensional or bifactor model?. (30th July 2016) - Hides, Leanne
Abstract: Internationally there is a growing interest in the mental wellbeing of young people. However, it is unclear whether mental wellbeing is best conceptualized as a general wellbeing factor or a multidimensional construct. This paper investigated whether mental wellbeing, measured by the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF), is best represented by: (1) a single-factor general model; (2) a three-factor multidimensional model or (3) a combination of both (bifactor model). 2220 young Australians aged between 16 and 25 years completed an online survey including the MHC-SF and a range of other wellbeing and mental ill-health measures. Exploratory factor analysis supported a bifactor solution, comprised of a general wellbeing factor, and specific group factors of psychological, social and emotional wellbeing. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the bifactor model had a better fit than competing single and three-factor models. The MHC-SF total score was more strongly associated with other wellbeing and mental ill-health measures than the social, emotional or psychological subscale scores. Findings indicate that the mental wellbeing of young people is best conceptualized as an overarching latent construct (general wellbeing) to which emotional, social and psychological domains contribute. The MHC-SF total score is a valid and reliable measure of this general wellbeing factor. Highlights: There has been considerable debate about the structure of wellbeing. The factor structure of the MHC-SF in young people was examined. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated a bifactor model had the best fit. The MHC-SF is best conceptualized as a measure of general wellbeing. The MHC-SF total score is a valid and reliable measure of general wellbeing.