Page 48 - Ana Kozina and Nora Wiium, eds. ▪︎ Positive Youth Development in Contexts. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2021. Digital Library, Dissertationes (Scientific Monographs), 42.
P. 48
positive youth development in contexts
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6
7. External Assets [.23, .35] [.35, .46] [.53, .62] [.38, .49] [.49, .58]
.76**
.34** .39** .46** .32** .59** [.73, .78]
[.28, .39] [.33, .44] [.41, .51] [.26, .38] [.54, .63]
Note. **p = <.01, *p < .05
Figure 1. Prediction of satisfaction with life and well-being by the 5Cs of the PYD and internal and external
assets. Note: Age, sex, grade and settlement were controlled for. Estimates provided are standardised
coefficients. Solid lines indicate significant paths (p < .05). Dashed lines indicate non-significant paths (p
> .05). Model fit: CFI = 1.000, RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.000. Residual terms, factor loadings, correlations
between the independent variables, and variances are omitted for the sake of clarity.
To identify the influence of 5Cs and developmental assets on satisfac-
tion with life and well-being we estimated a path analysis model. All the fit
indices showed ideal scores. This model, as visualized in Figure 1, showed
that three out of 5Cs together with both internal and external assets posi-
tively predicted satisfaction with life and well-being while controlling for
one another. Confidence was the strongest predictor of the satisfaction with
life (β = .221, p < .001) and well-being (β = .252, p < .001). This was followed
by competence, which also showed significant effects on the satisfaction
with life (β = .106, p = .002) and on well-being (β = .100, p = .004). The last
one of the 5Cs that showed consistent significant effects was connection (β
= .117, p = .002; respectively β = .131, p = .001). On the other side, character
48
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6
7. External Assets [.23, .35] [.35, .46] [.53, .62] [.38, .49] [.49, .58]
.76**
.34** .39** .46** .32** .59** [.73, .78]
[.28, .39] [.33, .44] [.41, .51] [.26, .38] [.54, .63]
Note. **p = <.01, *p < .05
Figure 1. Prediction of satisfaction with life and well-being by the 5Cs of the PYD and internal and external
assets. Note: Age, sex, grade and settlement were controlled for. Estimates provided are standardised
coefficients. Solid lines indicate significant paths (p < .05). Dashed lines indicate non-significant paths (p
> .05). Model fit: CFI = 1.000, RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.000. Residual terms, factor loadings, correlations
between the independent variables, and variances are omitted for the sake of clarity.
To identify the influence of 5Cs and developmental assets on satisfac-
tion with life and well-being we estimated a path analysis model. All the fit
indices showed ideal scores. This model, as visualized in Figure 1, showed
that three out of 5Cs together with both internal and external assets posi-
tively predicted satisfaction with life and well-being while controlling for
one another. Confidence was the strongest predictor of the satisfaction with
life (β = .221, p < .001) and well-being (β = .252, p < .001). This was followed
by competence, which also showed significant effects on the satisfaction
with life (β = .106, p = .002) and on well-being (β = .100, p = .004). The last
one of the 5Cs that showed consistent significant effects was connection (β
= .117, p = .002; respectively β = .131, p = .001). On the other side, character
48
