New methodological directions for the study of adolescent competence and adaptation.

Although adolescence is by many scholars viewed as a problematic developmental period, recent research efforts focus increasingly on the antecedents and consequences of what makes adolescents thrive (Smetana, Campione-Barr, & Metzger, 2006). Clearly, adolescence is a time of exploration and opportunity for many youth and adolescent researchers have recognized the importance of studying the mechanisms underlying individual differences in adolescent competence. From the early work on motivation (White, 1959) and self-esteem (Harter, 1982), through the theoretical advancements on adaptation (e.g. Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Sroufe, Egeland, & Carlson, 1999), adolescent competence and adaptation has established itself as an essential scientific area for developmental scholars. Examples of advancements in statistical methodology to the study of competence are, however, rare. The introduction of innovations in statistical methodology generally finds its place in the study of substance abuse (e.g. Muthen & Muthen, 2000) or aggression (e.g. Nagin & Tremblay, 1999). There are two potential reasons for this problem-focused application of quantitative methods to the study of adolescent development. First, as compared to measures of behaviour problems, such as the Youth Self Report (YSR) and Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL), there are few, if any, standardized measures of competence that have good measurement properties. For example, despite the fact that the YSR/CBCL has a section on competence with associated norms, few researchers use the competence domain of the YSR/CBCL due to concerns about its concurrent and predictive validity. Second, studying change in competence poses particular challenges for adolescent researchers as indicators of competence are uniquely related to different developmental periods. For example, indicators of adolescent competence may include information on ego-resiliency, self-efficacy, peer relationships, and academic functioning, whereas indicators of young adulthood competence may also include information on ego-resiliency and self-efficacy, but less on peer relationships and academic functioning, and more on romantic relationships and work functioning (e.g. Arnett, 2000; Roisman, Masten, Coatsworth, & Tellegen, 2004). The study of adolescent competence, thus, is uniquely related to salient developmental tasks that may complicate both measurement and analysis.