Young people's future thinking and mental health: The development and validation of the Adolescent Future Thinking Rating Scale

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives
We aimed to develop and validate a new scale of future thinking and adolescent mental health—the Adolescent Future Thinking Rating Scale (AFTRS).

Methods
A provisional AFTRS was developed from interviews with 19 adolescents. It was completed by three samples: exploratory (n = 161) aged 16–21 years, who also completed established measures of future thinking, cognitive risk factors, depression and anxiety; replication (n = 209) aged 16–25 years; and test-retest (n = 102) aged 17–23 years. The reliability, convergent, predictive, and discriminant validity were examined.

Results
Exploratory factor analyses identified the AFTRS-18 and AFTRS-12. Both had three sub-scales: (i) Concerns about Maladaptive Future Thinking, (ii) Future Positivity, and (iii) Ability to Visualise the Future. Established future thinking measures were combined into two factors: Negative Future Emotions (Cognitive Triad Inventory—View of Future and Beck's Hopelessness Scale) and Immediacy Preference (Consideration of Future Consequences and Quick Delay Questionnaire). The AFTRS-18 and AFTRS-12 were similarly associated with both factors and with depression/anxiety. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were high.

Conclusions
The AFTRS-12 and AFTRS-18 are reliable and valid measures of the three key dimensions of adolescent future thinking and mental health. The first subscale remained significant in predicting depression and anxiety after controlling for general cognitive risks.
Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
Early online date3 Oct 2023
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 3 Oct 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Young people's future thinking and mental health: The development and validation of the Adolescent Future Thinking Rating Scale'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this