Construction and validation of a measure of integrative well-being in seven languages: The Pemberton Happiness Index

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Carmelo Vázquez¹  Gonzalo Hervás¹ 

[1] School of Psychology, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain

关键词: Cross-cultural;    Happiness;    Measurement;    Quality of life;    Life satisfaction;    Psychological well-being;   

Others  :  823773
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-11-66

 received in 2012-10-19, accepted in 2013-04-08,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Purpose

We introduce the Pemberton Happiness Index (PHI), a new integrative measure of well-being in seven languages, detailing the validation process and presenting psychometric data. The scale includes eleven items related to different domains of remembered well-being (general, hedonic, eudaimonic, and social well-being) and ten items related to experienced well-being (i.e., positive and negative emotional events that possibly happened the day before); the sum of these items produces a combined well-being index.

Methods

A distinctive characteristic of this study is that to construct the scale, an initial pool of items, covering the remembered and experienced well-being domains, were subjected to a complete selection and validation process. These items were based on widely used scales (e.g., PANAS, Satisfaction With Life Scale, Subjective Happiness Scale, and Psychological Well-Being Scales). Both the initial items and reference scales were translated into seven languages and completed via Internet by participants (N = 4,052) aged 16 to 60 years from nine countries (Germany, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and USA).

Results

Results from this initial validation study provided very good support for the psychometric properties of the PHI (i.e., internal consistency, a single-factor structure, and convergent and incremental validity).

Conclusions

Given the PHI’s good psychometric properties, this simple and integrative index could be used as an instrument to monitor changes in well-being. We discuss the utility of this integrative index to explore well-being in individuals and communities.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Hervás and Vázquez; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Diener E: Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. Am Psychol 2000, 55:34-43.
• [2]Lopez SJ, Snyder CR: Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2003.
• [3]Fava GA: Well-being therapy: Conceptual and technical issues. Psychother Psychosom 1999, 68:171-178.
• [4]Seligman MEP, Steen TA, Park N, Peterson C: Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. Am Psychol 2005, 60:410-421.
• [5]Eid M: Measuring the immeasurable: Psychometric modeling of subjective well-being data. In The science of subjective well-being. Edited by Eid M, Larsen R. New York: Guilford; 2008:141-169.
• [6]Schimmack U: Affect measurement in experience sampling research. J Happiness Stud 2003, 4:79-106.
• [7]Diener E: Guidelines for national indicators of subjective well-being and ill-being. Social Indicators Network News 2005, 84:4-6.
• [8]Diener E, Suh EM, Lucas RE, Smith HL: Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychol Bull 1999, 125:276-302.
• [9]Ryan RM, Deci EL: On happiness and human potential: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu Rev Psychol 2001, 52:141-166.
• [10]Ryff CD, Keyes C: The structure of psychological well-being revisited. J Pers Soc Psychol 1995, 69:719-727.
• [11]Seligman MEP: Authentic happiness. New York: Free Press; 2002.
• [12]Keyes CL: The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. J Health Soc Behav 2002, 43:207-222.
• [13]Ryff CD: Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol 1989, 57:1069-1081.
• [14]Waterman AS: Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. J Pers Soc Psychol 1993, 64:678-691.
• [15]Delle Fave A, Bassi M: The contribution of diversity to happiness research. J Posit Psychol 2009, 4:205-207.
• [16]Kashdan TB, Biswas-Diener R, King LA: Reconsidering happiness: The costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia. J Posit Psychol 2008, 3:219-233.
• [17]Keyes CL, Annas J: Feeling good and functioning well: Distinctive concepts in ancient philosophy and contemporary science. J Posit Psychol 2009, 4:197-201.
• [18]Ryan RM, Huta V: Wellness as healthy functioning or wellness as happiness: The importance of eudaimonic thinking. J Posit Psychol 2009, 4:202-204.
• [19]Waterman AS: Reconsidering happiness: A eudaimonist’s perspective. J Posit Psychol 2008, 3:234-252.
• [20]Lyubomirsky S, King L, Diener E: The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychol Bull 2005, 131:803-855.
• [21]Tamir M, Gross JJ: Beyond pleasure and pain? Emotion regulation and positive psychology. In Designing the future of positive psychology: Taking stock and moving forward. Edited by Sheldon K, Kashdan T, Steger M. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011:89.
• [22]Baumeister RF, Leary MR: The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull 1995, 117:497-529.
• [23]Keyes CL: Social well-being. Soc Psychol Q 1998, 61:121-140.
• [24]Kahneman D, Riis J: Living and thinking about it: Two perspectives on life. In The science of well-being. Edited by Huppert F, Baylis N, Kaverne B. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005:285-306.
• [25]Kahneman D: Objective happiness. In Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. Edited by Diener E, Schwarz N, Kahneman D. New York: Russell Sage; 1999:3-25.
• [26]Schneider L, Schimmack U: Examining sources of self-informant agreement in life-satisfaction judgments. J Res Pers 2010, 44:207-212.
• [27]Schwarz N, Strack F: Reports of subjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications. In Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. Edited by Kahneman D, Diener E, Schwarz N. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 1999:61-84.
• [28]Csikszentmihalyi M, Hunter J: Happiness in everyday life: The uses of experience sampling. J Happiness Stud 2003, 4:185-199.
• [29]Kahneman D, Krueger AB, Schkade DA, Schwarz N, Stone AA: A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The Day Reconstruction Method. Science 2004, 306:1776-1780.
• [30]Krueger AB, Schkade DA: The reliability of subjective well-being measures. J Public Econ 2008, 92:1833-1845.
• [31]Oishi S: Culture and well-being: Conceptual and methodological issues. In International differences in well-being. Edited by Diener E, Helliwell J, Kahneman D. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010:34-69.
• [32]Oishi S: The experiencing and remembering of well-being: A cross cultural analysis. Pers Soc Psychol B 2002, 28:1398-1406.
• [33]Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S: The Satisfaction with Life Scale. J Pers Assess 1985, 49:71-75.
• [34]Lyubomirsky S, Lepper HS: A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Soc Indic Res 1999, 46:137-155.
• [35]Diener E, Wirtz D, Tov W, Kim-Prieto C, Choi D, Oishi S, Biswas-Diener R: New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Soc Indic Res 2009, 97:143-156.
• [36]Keyes CL: The subjective well-being of America’s youth: Toward a comprehensive assessment. Adolesc Fam Health 2005, 4:3-11.
• [37]Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R, Platt S, Joseph S, Weich S, Parkinson J, Secker S, Stewart-Brown S: The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): Development and UK validation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 5(63) [serial on the Internet] 2007 November 27 [cited 2012 September 28]; Available from: http://www.hqlo.com/content/5/1/63 webcite
• [38]Ryan RM, Frederick CM: On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. J Pers 1997, 65:529-565.
• [39]Keyes CL, Ryff C, Shmotkin D: Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. J Pers Soc Psychol 2002, 82:1007-1022.
• [40]Harter JK, Gurley V: Measuring well-being in the United States. Association for Psychological Science Observer 21(8) [Serial on the Internet] 2008 September [cited 2012 September 28]; Available from: [http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2008/september-08/measuring-well-being-in-the-united-states.html webcite]
• [41]Pavot W, Diener E: The Satisfaction with Life Scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. J Posit Psychol 2008, 3:137-152.
• [42]Cummins RA: Personal Wellbeing Index – Adult. 4th Edition. The International Wellbeing Group. Melbourne: Australian Centre on Quality of Life, Deakin University; 2006.
• [43]Huebner ES, Gilman R, Laughlin J: The multidimensionality of children's well-being reports: Discriminant validity of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Soc Indic Res 1999, 46:1-22.
• [44]Diaz D, Rodriguez-Carvajal R, Blanco A, Moreno-Jimenez B, Gallardo I, Dirk CVY, Van Dierendonck D: Spanish adaptation of the Psychological Well-Being Scales (PWBS). Psicothema 2006, 18(3):572-577.
• [45]Van Dierendonck D: The construct validity of Ryff’s Scales of Psychological Well-Being and its extension with spiritual well-being. Pers Individ Dif 2004, 36:629-644.
• [46]Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A: Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 1988, 54:1063-1070.
• [47]Watson D, Clark LA: THE PANAS-X. Manual for the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule – Expanded Form. : The University of Iowa; 2004. [cited 2012 September 28]. Available from: [http://www.psychology.uiowa.edu/faculty/clark/panas-x.pdf webcite]
• [48]Deaton A: Income, health, and well-being around the world: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. J Econ Perspect 2008, 22:53-72.
• [49]Vazquez C, Hervas G, Rahona JJ, Gomez D: Psychological well-being and health: Contributions of positive psychology. Annuary of Clinical and Health Psychology 2009, 5:15-28.
• [50]Blanchflower DG: International evidence on well-being. In Measuring the subjective well-being of nations: National accounts of time use and subjective well-being. Edited by Krueger AB. Chicago, IL: NBER and University of Chicago Press; 2009:155-225.
• [51]O'Connor BP: SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 2000, 32:396-402.
• [52]Velicer WF: Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika 1976, 41:321-327.
• [53]Diener E, Kahneman D, Tov W, Arora R: Income’s association with judgments of life versus feelings. In International differences in well-being. Edited by Diener E, Helliwell J, Kahneman D. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010:3-15.
• [54]Briggs SR, Cheek JM: The role of factor analysis in the evaluation of personality scales. J Pers 1986, 54:106-148.
• [55]Nunnally J, Bernstein I: Psychometric Theory. 3rd edition. New York: McGraw Hill; 1994.
• [56]Gallagher MW, Lopez SJ, Preacher KJ: The hierarchical structure of well-being. J Pers 2009, 77:1025-1049.
• [57]Bardwell WA, Berry CC, Ancoli-Israel S, Dimsdale JE: Psychological correlates of sleep apnea. J Psychosom Res 1999, 47:583-596.
• [58]Gosling SD, Rentfrow PJ, Swann WB Jr: A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. J Res Pers 2003, 37:504-528.
• [59]Cox EP: The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: A review. J Marketing Res 1980, 17:407-422.
• [60]Alwin DF: Feeling thermometers versus 7-point scales: Which are better? Sociol Method Res 1997, 25:318-51.
• [61]Saris W, Gallhofer I: Design, evaluation and analysis of questionnaires or survey research. New York: Wiley; 2007.
• [62]Cummins RA, Gullone E: Why we should not use 5-point Likert scales: The case for subjective quality of life measurement. In Proceedings, Second International Conference on Quality of Life in Cities. Singapore: National University of Singapore; 2000:74-93.
• [63]Boyle GJ: Does item homogeneity indicate internal consistency or item redundancy in psychometric scales? Pers Individ Dif 1991, 12:291-294.
• [64]Reise S, Widaman KF, Pugh RH: Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychol Bull 1993, 114:552-566.
• [65]Gosling SD, Vazire S, Srivastava S, John OP: Should we trust Web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. Am Psychol 2004, 59:93-104.
• [66]Harter JK, Arora R: The impact of time spent working and job fit on well-being around the world. In International differences in well-being. Edited by Diener E, Helliwell J, Kahneman D. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010:389-426.
• [67]Shiffman S, Stone AA, Hufford MR: Ecological momentary assessment. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2008, 4:1-32.
• [68]Diener E, Ng W, Harter J, Arora R: Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling. J Per Soc Psychol 2010, 99:52-61.
• [69]Ones DS, Viswesvaran C: Bandwidth–fidelity dilemma in personality measurement for personnel selection. J Organ Behav 1999, 17:609-626.
• [70]Salgado JF, Viswesvaran C, Ones DS: Predictors used for personnel selection. In Handbook of Industrial, Work, & Organizational Psychology. Vol 1. Edited by Anderson N, Ones DS, Sinangil HK, Viswesvaran C. London, UK: Sage; 2001:165-199.
• [71]Ashton MC: Personality and job performance: The importance of narrow traits. J Organ Behav 1998, 19:289-303.
• [72]Helliwell JF, Barrington-Leigh CP: Measuring and understanding subjective well-being. Can J Econ 2010, 43:729-753.
• [73]Fricker S, Galesic M, Tourangeau R, Yan T: An experimental comparison of Web and telephone surveys. Public Opin Q 2005, 69:370-392.
• [74]Hambleton RK, Patsula L: Adapting tests for use in multiple languages and cultures. Soc Indic Res 1998, 45:153-171.