The Structure and Developmental Course of Positive Youth Development (PYD) in Early Adolescence: Implications for Theory and Practice.

By E. Phelps, Stacy M. Zimmerman, Amy Warren, H. Jeličić, Alexander Von Eye, R. Lerner. 2009

218 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Safety Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/39990feee69793364fefd4a288a0096670cb65aa

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Safety Research

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Positive Youth Development: A Measurement Framework for Sport (2012, methodology): “Furthermore, the measures employed by Jones et al. were a modified version of an instrument used by Phelps et al. [5] that focused on general PYD constructs that were not specifically related to sport.”
Creation of short and very short measures of the five Cs of positive youth development (2014, methodology): “Therefore, analyses utilizing the bifactor model with individual items have provided both novel and more nuanced results than prior work (Bowers et al., 2010; Phelps et al., 2009).”
The role of adolescents’ hopeful futures in predicting positive and negative developmental trajectories: Findings from the 4-H Study of Positive Youth Development (2011, methodology): “In this study, these scores range from 0 to 10 (in past research, a range of 0 to 100 was used; Phelps et al., 2009).”
Positive Youth Development Processes , Philosophies , and Programs (2012, methodology): “H Study dataset from the beginning of the adolescent period through, to date, 11th grade (e.g., Lerner et al., 2005; Phelps et al., 2009; Bowers et al. 2010).”
Social and Emotional Learning in Adolescence: Testing the CASEL Model in a Normative Sample (2018, methodology): “…an empirical formulation of measurement and dimensional relations among key constructs, in the United States (Bowers et al., 2010; Lerner et al., 2005; Phelps et al., 2009) and internationally (e.g., Conway, Heary, & Hogan, 2015; Shek & Ma, 2010; Shek, Siu, & Lee, 2007), the SEL framework has not.”
Empowerment-Based Positive Youth Development: A New Understanding of Healthy Development for African American Youth (2014, background): “Optimal fit between a person and his or her environment, where individual strengths are matched with sufficient levels of support and opportunities, has shown potential benefits for individuals and their communities (Delgado & Staples, 2008; Eccles & Gootman, 2002; Jelicic et al., 2007; Lewin-Bizan ”
Toward an integrated approach to positive development: Implications for intervention (2016, methodology): “…while PPsy and PYD each consider explicitly a distinction of adequacy of functioning or the absence of dysfunction from thriving or exceptional health, this differentiation has not had much attention from SC and SEL theoreticians and researchers (Gestsdóttir & Lerner, 2007; Phelps et al., 2009).”