Questionnaire data from a cross-sectional study on social resilience in adolescence, with a sample of N = 1,974 Swiss seventh grade high school students ages 12–14 was used to identify and compare violence resilience profiles. Person-centered latent profile analysis was applied and allowed for the grouping of adolescents into profiles of internalizing and externalizing symptoms and differentiation of adolescents with and without physical parental violence experiences. Subsequently, a multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to further investigate the sociodemographic predictors of (...) violence resilience profiles. With LPA, we identified four distinct profiles for both adolescent groups. The results showed three particularly burdened profiles of adolescents, one with higher externalizing and one with higher internalizing symptoms, which did not occur simultaneously to the same extent. Furthermore, the third profile contained adolescents with both elevated internalizing and externalizing symptoms, the comorbid profile. The fourth profile consisted of the majority of adolescents, who exhibited little or no internalizing and externalizing symptoms, the so-called no/low symptomatic profile. A differentiated view of the symptoms can create added value regarding the understanding of violence resilience. Moreover, in the multinomial logistic regression, significant associations were found between the profiles and adolescents’ gender in the group of adolescents with parental physical violence experiences, but none were found in relation to sociocultural status and migration background. (shrink)

Many studies have been conducted on the effect of item order in self-report questionnaires on mean scores. This research aims to study the effect of item order on measurement invariance in addition to mean scores. To this end, two groups randomly obtained from the same sample were presented a fixed order form in which all items belonging to the same dimension were adjacent to each other, and a random order form in which the items were randomly sequenced respectively. The results (...) obtained revealed a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the two forms. In the next stage of the study, the fit indices obtained from the confirmatory factor analysis applied to the two separate forms and the modification indices suggested by the software were compared. Both forms returned high modification suggestions for adjacent items or items presented near each other. Additionally, it was found that high χ2 reductions suggested by the MIs in one form resulted in low χ2 reductions in the other. Lastly, multiple group CFA was conducted to determine whether or not measurement invariance was achieved through different item order presentations of the scale. The findings indicate that measurement invariance could not be achieved even at the first stage of analysis. It may specifically be stated that presenting respondents items under the same dimension together ensures empirical findings congruent with theoretical structure. (shrink)