Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See attached Word document

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for all the comments. Please see each response in the attached revise-and-resubmit-responses form. Thank you!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Editorial Review: Recommendation for Publication in MDPI Youth

Title: The Adolescent Flourishing Index (AFI): Convergent, Discriminant, and Incremental Validity Beyond Factor Structure

1. Introduction and Theoretical Framework

The manuscript begins with a robust theoretical justification for the study, aligning perfectly with the scope of Youth. The author effectively argues for a paradigm shift in mental health—moving from a deficit-based model (focused on pathology) to a holistic model focused on flourishing.

The Importance of Positive Dimensions

A major strength of this paper is its emphasis on the need for instruments that evaluate the positive dimensions of health. As the author notes, mental health is not merely the absence of illness but the presence of "social engagement, accomplishment, meaning, and purpose".

The paper highlights that research on flourishing has historically focused on advantaged populations. By focusing on youth aging out of foster care, the study addresses a critical gap.

Instead of cataloging risks (homelessness, unemployment), the study seeks to identify modifiable protective factors that enable these young people to thrive despite adversity.

2. Empirical Rigor and Methodological Quality

The empirical study is well-designed, utilizing a national cross-sectional survey of 379 U.S. youth. The choice of the 18-24 age range is developmentally appropriate, as this transition to emerging adulthood is a period where prior systemic challenges become most salient.

Psychometric Validation

The manuscript provides a sophisticated analysis of the Adolescent Flourishing Index (AFI) by comparing it with established measures:

3. Conclusion

This article is a important contribution to the journal Youth. It moves beyond the "deficit lens" that characterizes much of the research on system-involved youth and provides a validated, scientifically sound tool for measuring the positive aspects of their lives. The focus on character, virtue, and social relationships as measurable components of health is essential for developing future interventions.

The paper meets the academic standards of MDPI Youth and provides significant value to researchers and practitioners in the field of positive youth development.

 

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful and encouraging evaluation of our manuscript. We are especially grateful for the reviewer’s recognition of the study’s effort to move beyond deficit-focused perspectives and to advance strengths-based approaches to understanding flourishing among youth aging out of foster care.

We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s acknowledgment of the importance of developing measures that capture positive dimensions of mental health, including meaning, relationships, accomplishment, and overall well-being. We are also thankful for the reviewer’s positive assessment of the study design, psychometric analyses, and developmental framing of emerging adulthood. The reviewer’s thoughtful feedback and support are deeply appreciated and have been very encouraging to our team as we continue this line of research.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I commend the authors for their revisions to the now titled “The Adolescent Flourishing Index (AFI): Validity Evidence with Youth Aging Out of Foster Care.” My remaining suggestions are minor.

Page 4 – Change the section heading to “Previous Validity Evidence for the AFI”. The beginning of the sentence in line 152 could be more clearly written as “Internal consistency was also high…”

Page 5 – The Study Context and Sample sections can be combined given that the first sentence of the Sample section is largely redundant.

Page 6 – Line 231 mentions 6 domains when, as noted earlier, only 5 domains were examined.

Page 10 – The legend in Figure 1 should be removed given that the axis titles and figure title adequately describe the and it is not clear what HFMtotal refers to.

Pages 11 and 12 – There is no need for both the heatmap (Figure 2) and the table of correlations. I suggest keeping only the heatmap as it is more comprehensive.

The formatting is inconsistent throughout the manuscript. Headers, alignment, fonts, and text size need to be consistent.

Author Response

Thank you for all the helpful comments. We attached the response letter.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf