(PS5-33) The Impact of parental treatment motivation in youth mental health: A National Psychometric Evaluation of the Parent Motivation Inventory(PMI)

Abstract Text: Parental motivation is crucial for a family’s engagement in youth mental health services, as caregivers typically determine whether their children initiate or continue treatment. Despite its recognized importance, there is a relative lack of validated measures specifically assessing parents’ motivation to engage in child therapy. Accordingly, the Parent Motivation Inventory (PMI; Nock & Photos, 2006) was originally developed with three proposed factors: Desire for Change (DFC), Readiness to Change (RTC), and Perceived Ability to Change (PAC). However, results from Nock & Photos (2006) supported a unidimensional structure (i.e., one factor) with excellent internal consistency (α = .96). Using a diverse North American parent sample (N = 407; 225 (55%) female, 181 (44%) male), the present study had two primary aims: (a) to compare and contrast two competing factor-structure models of the PMI (i.e., one-factor vs. three-factor) via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and (b) to assess the PMI’s internal consistency using McDonald’s Omega. In contrast to Nock & Kazdin’s (2006) conclusion of a single-factor solution, results supported the three-factor structure over a one-factor model. The three-factor model showed better fit (χ²(272)=166.784, p < .001; CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.000; RMSEA = .000; SRMR = .054) compared to the one-factor model (χ²(275)=1655.63, p < .001; CFI = .985; TLI = .984; RMSEA = .111; SRMR = .080). One possible explanation for our divergence from the original unidimensional findings may stem from our larger and more heterogeneous sample (i.e., 407 participants from across the continental U.S. compared to 76 parents referred regionally for treatment in the original study). For the second aim, regarding internal consistency, McDonald’s Omega results all fell into the excellent range (ωt_DFC = .90, ωt_PAC = .83, and ωt_RTC = .96), and for the total PMI scale as well (ωt_PMI = .97) In conclusion, our results suggest reconsidering the original three-factor conceptualization of the PMI when assessing parents’ motivation to engage in child therapy. This conclusion departs from the uni-dimensional conceptualization concluded by Nock & Photos in 2006, suggesting that parents’ motivation in treatment may indeed be multidimensional. These and other and results(e.g., Omega Hierarchical) for further comparing the PMI’s one- versus three-factor structure will be presented alongside recommendations for future studies and clinical practice.