Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Psychometric Properties of the Flourishing Scale in a New Zealand Sample

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Flourishing Scale (FS; Diener et al. in Soc Indic Res 97(2):143–156, 2010) was developed to assess psychological flourishing, which can be conceived of as a social-psychological prosperity incorporating important aspects of human functioning. This study takes the FS, which has previously been validated on convenience samples of students, and analyses the underlying structure, psychometric properties, and demographic norms using nationally-representative data from New Zealand’s Sovereign Wellbeing Index (n = 10,009; Human Potential Centre in Sovereign Wellbeing Index: New Zealand’s first measure of wellbeing. Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, 2013). Evidence for the reliability and validity of the FS is presented (Cronbach alpha) and its performance compared to other related scales and behaviors. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the one factor structure of the 8-item FS. Contemporary population norms for the FS are reported, providing a much-needed benchmark for estimation of population health and permitting cross-study and international comparisons. The study provides further evidence that the FS is a valid and reliable brief summary measure of psychological functioning, suited for use with a wide range of age groups and applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. N’s for the FS and the Basic Needs Satisfaction scale varied from 527 to 530.

  2. As of July 10th 2013.

  3. The second round of the SWI is due October 2014, and the third in October 2016.

  4. Removing missing FS data reduced the sample from n = 10,009 to n = 9,646.

  5. A duplicate copy of the survey can be viewed at: http://www.mywellbeing.co.nz.

References

  • Aked, J., Marks, N., Cordon, C., & Thompson, S. (2009). Five ways to well-being: A report presented to the foresight project on communicating the evidence base for improving people’s well-being. London: Nef.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, J., & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS 4 user’s reference guide. Chicago: Smallwaters Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on multiplying factors for various Chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16(Series B), 296–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. L., Nesse, R. M., Vinokur, A. D., & Smith, D. M. (2003). Providing social support may be more beneficial than receiving it: Results from a prospective study of mortality. Psychological Science, 14(4), 320–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245–276. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., Lee, Y.-T., Pethtel, O. L., Gutowitz, M. S., & Kirk, R. M. (2012). Age differences in goal concordance, time use, and well-being. Educational Gerontology, 38(11), 742–752. doi:10.1080/03601277.2011.645424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Child, D. (1970). The essentials of factor analysis. London: Cassel Education Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (2009). Assessing well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener (Vol. 3). Oxford: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2008). Happiness: Unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. (2009). Well-being for public policy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Beyond Money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., Oishi, S., et al. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143–156. doi:10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ensel, W. (1986). Measuring depression: The CES-D scale. In N. Lin, A. Dean, & W. Ensel (Eds.), Social support, life events, and depression (pp. 51–70). New York: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fordyce, M. W. (1988). A review of research on the happiness measures: A sixty second index of happiness and mental health. Social Indicators Research, 20(4), 355–381. doi:10.2307/27520745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Human Potential Centre. (2013). Sovereign Wellbeing Index: New Zealand’s first measure of wellbeing. Auckland, NZ: Auckland University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huppert, F. A. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence regardings its causes and consequences. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1(2), 137–164. doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01008.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huppert, F. A., Marks, N., Clark, A., Siegrist, J., Stutzer, A., Vitters, J., et al. (2009). Measuring well-being across Europe: Description of the ESS well-being module and preliminary findings. Social Indicators Research, 91, 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huppert, F. A., & So, T. C. (2009). What percentage of people in Europe are flourishing and what characterises them? Presented at the meeting of the OECD/ISQOLS meeting, Florence.

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151. doi:10.1177/001316446002000116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36. doi:10.1007/bf02291575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M. (2005). Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health [Research Support, Non-US Gov’t]. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(3), 539–548. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.73.3.539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NZGSS. (2010). New Zealand Social Survey. Wellington, NZ: Statistics New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2009). Life satisfaction. In Society at a glance: OECD Social indicators: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/soc_glance-2008-30-en.

  • Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of democracy, 6(1), 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385–401. doi:10.1177/014662167700100306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. E. (1980). Reliability of the CES-D scale in different ethnic contexts. Psychiatry research, 2(2), 125–134. doi:10.1016/0165-1781(80)90069-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being [Research Support, US Gov’t, P.H.S.]. The American psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141–166. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginners’ guide to structural equation modelling (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, M. E. (2006). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life (1st Vintage Books ed.). New York: Vintage Books. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/login?url=http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0703/2006277713-d.html, http://ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/login?url=http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0703/2006277713-s.html.

  • Silva, A. J., & Caetano, A. (2011). Validation of the Flourishing Scale and scale of positive and negative experience in Portugal. Social Indicators Research, 110(2), 469–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spielberger, C. D., Ritterband, L. M., Reheiser, E. C., & Brunner, T. M. (2003). The nature and measurement of depression. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 3(2), 209–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2006). 2006 New Zealand census data. Retrieved from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/about-2006-census/2006-census-reports.aspx.

  • Watson, D., Clark, I. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Potential Centre, AUT University, Millennium Campus, 17 Antares Place, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, 0632, New Zealand

    Lucy Hone, Aaron Jarden & Grant Schofield

Authors
  1. Lucy Hone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aaron Jarden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Grant Schofield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucy Hone.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 The Flourishing Scale

Below are eight statements with which you may agree or disagree. Using the 1–7 scale below, indicate your agreement with each item by indicating that response for each statement.

  • 7. Strongly agree

  • 6. Agree

  • 5. Slightly agree

  • 4. Mixed or neither agree nor disagree

  • 3. Slightly disagree

  • 2. Disagree

  • 1. Strongly disagree

  • I lead a purposeful and meaningful life

  • My social relationships are supportive and rewarding

  • I am engaged and interested in my daily activities

  • I actively contribute to the happiness and well-being of others

  • I am competent and capable in the activities that are important to me

  • I am a good person and live a good life

  • I am optimistic about my future

  • People respect me

Scoring: Add the responses, varying from 1 to 7, for all eight items. The possible range of scores is from 8 (lowest possible) to 56 (highest possible). A high score represents a person with many psychological resources and strengths.

Permission for Using the Scales: Although copyrighted, the SPANE and Flourishing Scale may be used as long as proper credit is given. Permission is not needed to employ the scales and requests to use the scales will not be answered on an individual basis because permission is granted here. This article should be used as the citation for the scales, and this note provides evidence that permission to use the scales is granted. Copyright by Ed Diener and Robert Biswas-Diener, January 2009.

1.2 Life Satisfaction

  • All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole nowadays?

    • 0—Extremely dissatisfied

    • 1

    • 2

    • 3

    • 4

    • 5

    • 6

    • 7

    • 8

    • 9

    • 10—Extremely satisfied

1.3 Happiness

  • Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are?

    • 0—Extremely unhappy

    • 1

    • 2

    • 3

    • 4

    • 5

    • 6

    • 7

    • 8

    • 9

    • 10—Extremely happy

1.4 Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, ESS 8 Item Version

Please indicate, how much of the time during the past week…

  • 3. All or almost all of the time

  • 2. Most of the time

  • 1. Some of the time

  • 0. None or almost none of the time

  • …you felt depressed?

  • …you felt that everything you did was an effort?

  • …your sleep was restless?

  • …you were happy?

  • …you felt lonely?

  • …you enjoyed life?

  • …you felt sad?

  • …you could not get going?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hone, L., Jarden, A. & Schofield, G. Psychometric Properties of the Flourishing Scale in a New Zealand Sample. Soc Indic Res 119, 1031–1045 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0501-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0501-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation