Abstract
The existing literature includes distinct psychometric measures designed to assess the psychological future. Examples include the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory and the Future Time Perspective Scale. Nevertheless, these measures have been found to have certain statistical and theoretical limitations, or they predominantly concentrate on a singular aspect of the future. This article aims to address these limitations by introducing the Future Time Orientation Scale (FTOS), a novel instrument designed to assess the psychological future. The article comprises three studies involving five distinct samples that encompassed 3,316 participants from Brazil and Portugal. The FTOS consists of two factors, each containing five and three items, respectively. The factors assess impact (i.e., influence of the psychological future in current decisions and behavior) and distance (i.e., perceptions of time distance into the future). Across the three studies, validity and reliability evidence is established through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, measurement invariance models, ceiling and floor effect assessment, four types of reliability coefficients, and relations to other measures. Therefore, the FTOS is ready for further use, development, and testing in other research and practice contexts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
All data and analysis code have been made publicly available at the Open Science Framework and can be assessed at https://osf.io/q7j8g/?view_only=db260a40ba1f450c8a468523ab5655bc
References
Audibert, A., & Teixeira, M. A. P. (2015). Escala de adaptabilidade de carreira: Evidências de validade em universitários brasileiros. Revista Brasileira De Orientação Profissional, 16(1), 83–93.
Bjørnebekk, G., & Gjesme, T. (2009). Future time orientation and temperament: Exploration of their relationship to primary and secondary psychopathy. Psychological Reports, 105(1), 275–292. https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.105.1.275-292
Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. The Guilford Press.
Carelli, M. G., Wiberg, B., & Åström, E. (2014). Broadening the TP profile: Future negative time perspective. In M. Stolarski, N. Fieulaine, & W. Beek (Eds.), Time perspective theory; review, research and application (pp. 87–97). Springer International Publishin. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4615.4403
Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165
Ceccon, C., & Moscardino, U. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 and lockdown on mental health and future orientation among young adult asylum seekers in Italy: A mixed-methods study. Transcultural Psychiatry, 59(6), 782–796. https://doi.org/10.1177/13634615221098306
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
Coscioni, V., Teixeira, M. A. P., Damásio, B. F., Dell’Aglio, D. D., & Paixão, M. P. (2020). Perspectiva temporal futura: Teorias, construtos e instrumentos [Future time perspective: Theories, constructs, and isntruments]. Revista Brasileira de Orientação Profissional, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.26707/1984-7270/2020v21n208
Coscioni, V., Teixeira, M. A. P., & Paixão, M. P. (2021). The construction of two transcultural psychological measures for the assessment of Future Time Orientation and Life Project [Conference presentation]. IV Seminário Internacional Desenvolvimento de Carreira e Aconselhamento, online.
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(1), 7.
Dagani, J., Buizza, C., Ferrari, C., & Ghilardi, A. (2020). Psychometric validation and cultural adaptation of the Italian medical student stressor questionnaire. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00922-x
Daltrey, M. H., & Langer, P. (1984). Development and evaluation of a measure of future time perspective. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 58(3), 719–725. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1984.58.3.719
Dancey, C. P., & Reidy, J. (2007). Statistics without maths for psychology. Pearson Education.
De Volder, M. L., & Lens, W. (1982). Academic achievement and future time perspective as a cognitive–motivational concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(3), 566–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.3.566
Duarte, M. E., Soares, M. C., Fraga, S., Rafael, M., Lima, M. R., Paredes, I., ..., & Djaló, A. (2012). Career adapt-abilities scale–Portugal form: psychometric properties and relationships to employment status. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(3), 725–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.01.019
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2018). Assessing the quality and appropriateness of factor solutions and factor score estimates in exploratory item factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 78, 762–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164417719308
Figueira, G. L., Lemos, V. D. C. O. D., & Damásio, B. F. (2020). Inventário de Adiamento de Gratificação (DGI-35): Propriedades psicométricas da versão brasileira. Psico-USF, 25, 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712020250107
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Gjesme, T. (1979). Future time orientation as a function of achievement motives, ability, delay of gratification, and sex. Journal of Psychology, 101, 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1979.9915069
Gjesme, T. (1983). On the concept of future time orientation: Considerations of some functions’ and measurements’ implications. International Journal of Psychology, 18(1–4), 443–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207598308247493
Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Proceedings of the Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, USA.
Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Pearson Education Inc.
Heimberg, L. K. (1963). The measurement of future time perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States.
Hoerger, M., Quirk, S. W., & Weed, N. C. (2011). Development and validation of the Delaying Gratification Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 725. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023286
Holman, E. A., & Silver, R. C. (1998). Getting" stuck" in the past: Temporal orientation and coping with trauma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1146. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1146
Husman, J., & Shell, D. F. (2008). Beliefs and perceptions about the future: A measurement of future time perspective. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(2), 166–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.08.001
Janeiro, I. N. (2012). O Inventário de Perspectiva Temporal: Estudo de validação [Time perspective inventory: A validation study]. Revista Iberoamericana De Diagnóstico e Avaliação Psicológica, 34(1), 117–133.
Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2021). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semTools
Lenzo, V., Sardella, A., Grazia, V., Corsano, P., Quattropani, M. C., Franceschini, C., & Musetti, A. (2022). Fear of COVID-19 and future orientation: Different profiles in dealing with the pandemic and associations with loneliness and posttraumatic growth. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001319
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in the social sciences: Selected theoretical papers. Harper.
Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernandez-Baeza, A., & Tomas-Marco, I. (2014). Exploratory item factor analysis: A practical guide revised and updated. Anales De Psicología, 30(3), 1151–1169. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2006). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavior Research Methods, 38(1), 88–91. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192753
Lorenzo-Seva, U., Timmerman, M. E., & Kiers, H. A. L. (2011). The Hull method for selecting the number of common factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 340–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.564527
Nurmi, J. E. (1991). How do adolescents see their future? A review of the development of future orientation and planning. Developmental Review, 11(1), 1–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(91)90002-6
Nuttin, J. R., & Lens, W. (1985). Future time perspective and motivation: Theory and research method. Psychology Press.
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (version 4.1.1) [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
Raphiphatthana, B., Jose, P., & Salmon, K. (2018). Does dispositional mindfulness predict the development of grit? Journal of Individual Differences, 39(2), 76–87. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000252
Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. É., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
Savickas, M. L., & Porfeli, E. J. (2012). Career Adapt-Abilities Scale: Construction, reliability, and measurement equivalence across 13 countries. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(3), 661–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.01.011
Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338
Seginer, R. (2009). Future orientation: Developmental and ecological perspectives. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/b106810
Shell, D. F., & Husman, J. (2001). The multivariate dimensionality of personal control and future time perspective beliefs in achievement and self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(4), 481–506. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2000.1073
Soper, D. S. (2021). A-priori sample size calculator for structural equation models [software]. Available from https://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc
Stouthard, M. E., & Peetsma, T. T. (1999). Future-time perspective: Analysis of a facet-designed questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 15(2), 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1027//1015-5759.15.2.99
Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 742. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., ..., & de Vet, H. C. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
Timmerman, M. E., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods, 16, 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023353
Trommsdorff, G. (1983). Future orientation and socialization. International Journal of Psychology, 18(1–4), 381–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207598308247489
Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the international teams’ members and experts involved in the creation of the test content, namely: Mark Savickas, Katariina Salmela-Aro, Jenefer Husman, Lea Ferrari, Sara Santilli, Thea Peetsma, Lucija Andre, Sami Mahajna, Dora Herrera, José Tomás da Silva, Marucia Bardagi, Madeleine Smith, Filomena Parada, Lauri Hietajärvi, Kim Kuok, Kay Chang, Holly H. Y. Sit, Adriana Sacramento, Maria Dosil Santamaria, Itsaso Biota, Maitane Pikaza, Naiara Ozamiz, Amaia Eiguren, Bruno Capão de Oliveira, and Sérgio Castillo, Artur Martins, and Ricardo Palmela de Oliveira.
Funding
This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brazil (Capes) [grant numbers 88882.346414/2010–01, 88887.363292/2019–00].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Vinicius Coscioni: conceptualization, data collection and analyses, writing – original draft, funding acquisition.
Isabela Menezes Oliveira: data collection, writing – review & editing.
Marco Antônio Pereira Teixeira: conceptualization, supervision, writing – review & editing, resources, funding acquisition.
Maria Paula Paixão: conceptualization, supervision, writing – review & editing, resources.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
The study was evaluated and approved by the Comissão de Ética e Deontologia da Investigação da Faculdade de Psicologia e Ciências da Educação da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal, as well as by the Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa do Instituto de Psicologia da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (03411918.8.0000.5334).
Informed consent
All participants provided their consent form before filling in the survey.
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicting interests to declare.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
FTOS’s items (Study 1)
-
1)
Two years ahead seems to me like a short period of time
-
2)
I often give a lot of importance to goals I wish to achieve in the future
-
3)
When making decisions, I spend time thinking about how my choices may influence the future
-
4)
For me, something that will happen two years from now seems relatively near
-
5)
I tend to value activities that may only benefit me in the long run
-
6)
I hardly ever make plans for the future
-
7)
When I think of an event that will happen two years from now, I feel like there is a great deal of time ahead
-
8)
In my opinion, long-range goals are more important than short-range goals
-
9)
When I want something, I spend time thinking about what I have to do to achieve it in the future
-
10)
If I need to wait for something for two years, I feel like this is an eternity
-
11)
When making decisions, I would rather choose something I want now than something I want for the future
-
12)
I make connections between the things I do now and what may happen with me in the future
-
13)
I think two years is a relatively short time to wait for something
-
14)
What happens now is more important to me than what might happen in the future
-
15)
I find it difficult to foresee the impact of my actions in the future
Appendix 2
FTOS’s items (Study 2)*
-
1)
Two years ahead seems to me like a short period of time.
-
2)
In my opinion, feeling well in the future is more important than feeling well right now.
-
3)
When making decisions, I think carefully about how my choices may influence the future.
-
4)
I value activities that may benefit me in the long run.
-
5)
For me, something that will happen two years from now seems relatively near.
-
6)
I often give more importance to long-range goals than short-range goals.
-
7)
I hardly ever make plans for the future.
-
8)
When making decisions, I would rather choose something I want now than something I want for the future.
-
9)
When I think of something that will happen two years from now, I feel like there is a great deal of time ahead.
-
10)
What happens now is more important to me than what might happen in the future.
-
11)
When I want something, I think carefully about what I have to do to achieve it in the future.
-
12)
I only value activities that may immediately benefit me.
-
13)
If I need to wait for something for two years, I feel like this is an eternity.
-
14)
Given the choice, I would rather plan for the future than intensely live in the present.
-
15)
I make connections between the things I do now and what may happen with me in the future.
-
16)
I make sacrifices in the present if I think they may benefit me in the future.
-
17)
I think two years is a relatively short time to wait for something.
-
18)
I find it difficult to foresee the impact of my actions in the future.
*The Brazilian and Portuguese forms is available upon request to the corresponding author.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Coscioni, V., Oliveira, I.M., Teixeira, M.A.P. et al. Future Time Orientation Scale: a new measure to assess the psychological future. Curr Psychol 43, 10703–10720 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05193-w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05193-w