CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Attachment and Relationship DynamicsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Education and Validation

The relational health indices for youth: An examination of reliability and validity aspects

Liang, Belle, Tracy, Allison J., Kenny, Maureen E., Brogan, Deirdre, Gatha, Ravi·2010·Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development
DOI 10.1177/0748175609354596
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Relational health, a termed coined by Liang et al. (2001) to reflect Relational-Cultural Theory concepts, is the presence of growth-fostering characteristics in significant relationships. Although growth-fostering relationships have been conceptualized as relevant across the lifespan, existing research has mainly explored the experiences of college students and adults. In this study, the authors seek to create a developmentally appropriate instrument called the Relational Health Indices for Youth (RHI-Y) for studying growth-fostering relationships among early and mid-adolescents. This measure adapts the original adult RHI instrument for a younger population (i.e., utilizing a simpler vocabulary and containing fewer items). Measurement development resulted in six-item scales assessing relational health in three different relationship domains: friendships, relationships with an adult mentor, and relationships with members of a community group. Results indicate that the RHI-Y scales are valid, reliable measures of growth-fostering relationships. Preliminary findings about the correlates of relational health in youth are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0748175609354596

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Liang et al. developed a six-item scale to study growth-fostering mentoring relationships; although designed to assess engagement, authenticity, and empowerment, it showed good psychometric properties for a one-factor solution.

    “Similarly, Liang et al., [132] developed a six-item scale to study growth-fostering mentoring relationships. Although the scale was designed to assess aspects of engagement, authenticity, and empowerment within the relationship (e.g., “My mentor helps me to get to know myself better”), it showed good psychometric properties for a one-factor solution.”

    From Unpacking Community-Based Youth Mentoring Relationships: An Integrative Review (2021) · cites this paper as [132]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Liang, B., Tracy, A. J., Kenny, M. E., Brogan, D., & Gatha, R.
Affiliations
  • Boston College (US)
  • Wellesley College (US)
ORCID
Venue
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2010-01
Volume
42
Issue
4
Pages
255-274
ISSN
  • 0748-1756 (ISSN-L)
  • 1947-6302
DOI
10.1177/0748175609354596
OpenAlex
W2061964929
Cited by
80
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
relational health, relational-cultural theory, adolescents, friendship, scale development, psychometric validation, reliability statistics, validity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review