The Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI), a 60-item self-report measure, assesses the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Hexaflex. The factor structure of the MPFI was examined in this study. In a community sample of adults (N = 827), four models (correlated six-factor, one-factor, higher order, and bifactor) were tested for each of the constructs of interest (i.e., psychological flexibility and psychological inflexibility). All models, with the exception of the one-factor, provided adequate fit to the data. Differences between the three adequate fitting models were trivial in magnitude. Additional statistical indices from the bifactor models indicated that the general factors accounted for the large majority of reliable variance. The majority of the domain-specific factors evidenced redundancy with their respective general factors. Results from a series of structural regressions indicated that the domain-specific factors did not provide additional incremental utility above and beyond the general factors in predicting two relevant clinical constructs (i.e., health anxiety and depression). These results provide support for the use of the MPFI Flexibility and Inflexibility total scores, but not subscale scores. The MPFI may require further refinement to either greatly reduce the length of the measure, or to ensure that subscales have incremental utility.

多维心理灵活性量表 (MPFI) 是一项 60 项自我报告测量，用于评估接受和承诺疗法 Hexaflex。本研究考察了 MPFI 的因子结构。在成年人的社区样本中（N= 827)，四个模型（相关六因子、一因子、高阶和双因子）对每个感兴趣的结构（即心理灵活性和心理不灵活性）进行了测试。除单因素外，所有模型都提供了与数据的充分拟合。三个合适的拟合模型之间的差异在幅度上是微不足道的。双因子模型的其他统计指标表明，一般因素占可靠方差的大部分。大多数特定领域的因素都证明了它们各自的一般因素的冗余。一系列结构回归的结果表明，在预测两种相关临床结构（即，健康焦虑和抑郁）。这些结果为使用 MPFI 灵活性和不灵活性总分提供了支持，但不支持使用子量表分数。MPFI 可能需要进一步细化，以大大减少测量的长度，或确保子量表具有增量效用。