Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Valued Action and Satisfaction Questionnaire: Preliminary Validation and Psychometric Evaluation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is an evidence-based cognitive-behavioral therapy based on the psychological flexibility model in which developing values clarity and conviction is viewed as an essential treatment activity. The purpose of the current studies is to explore the basic psychometric properties of the Valued Action and Satisfaction Questionnaire, a new measure of values that accounts for importance, valued action, and satisfaction. Study 1 (n = 354; 52.80% white; 50.56% women) and Study 2 (n = 103; 68.93% white; 52.43% women) recruited undergraduate students from a large Midwestern university. Study 1 consisted of a cross-sectional design, and the results suggest that the VASQ demonstrates acceptable internal consistency and construct validity with clinical measures. Study 2 consists of a longitudinal design, and the results confirmed the factor structure, test-retest reliability, temporal measurement invariance, predictive validity, and internal consistency of the VASQ. Our findings support the idea that values-consistent action is related to positive as well as negative life outcomes. Future studies should explore the degree to which people can accurately assess their level of valued action and how sensitive the VASQ is to change in treatment-seeking populations.

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
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Databases for Study 1 and Study 2 are available at https://osf.io/9f543/?view_only=f4fe237ab853413e964bef4c07f732ae

References

  • Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Kreitemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191105283504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, F. W., Hayes, S. C., Baer, R. A., Carpenter, K. M., Guenole, N., Orcutt, H. K., Waltz, D., & Zettle, R. D. (2011). Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire–II: A revised measure of psychological inflexibility and experiential avoidance. Behavior Therapy, 42(4), 676–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2011.03.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A., Eckersley, R., Pallant, J., Van Vugt, J., & Misajon, R. (2003). Developing a national index of subjective wellbeing: The Australian Unity Wellbeing Index. Social Indicators Research, 64(2), 159–190. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024704320683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgaard-Park, S. M. (2012). Core values–the entrance to human satisfaction and commitment. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(2), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2012.655067

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Biswas-Diener, R., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D., & Oishi, S. (2009). New measures of well-being. In Diener, E., (ed.), Assessing well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener, pp. 247–266). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2354-4_12

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, C. E., Masuda, A., Dalsky, D., Stevens, K. T., Kramer, S., Primeaux, S. J., Muto, T., & Mitamura, T. (2019). Examining U.S. and Japanese college students’ differences in psychological distress: The mediating roles of valued action and experiential avoidance. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 41, 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-018-9342-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gámez, W., Chmielewski, M., Kotov, R., Ruggero, C., Suzuki, N., & Watson, D. (2014). The Brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire: Development and initial validation. Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gámez, W., Chmielewski, M., Kotov, R., Ruggero, C., & Watson, D. (2011). Development of a measure of experiential avoidance: The Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 692–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gillanders, D. T., Bolderston, H., Bond, F. W., Dempster, M., Flaxman, P. E., Campbell, L., Kerr, S., Tansey, L., Noel, P., Ferenbach, C., Masley, S., Roach, L., Lloyd, J., May, L., Clarke, S., & Remington, B. (2014). The development and initial validation of the cognitive fusion questionnaire. Behavior Therapy, 45(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2013.09.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48(1), 26–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2012). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: An experiential approach to behavior change. Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., Bunting, K., Twohig, M., & Wilson, K. G. (2004a). What is acceptance and commitment therapy? In S. C. Hayes & K. D. Strosahl (Eds.), A practical guide to Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (pp. 3–29). Springer-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., Wilson, K., Bissett, R. T., Pistorello, J., Toarmino, D., ... , McCurry, S. M. (2004b). Measuring experiential avoidance: A preliminary test of a working model. The Psychological Record, 54, 553–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395492

  • IBM Corp. (2021). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28.0. Armonk: IBM Corp

  • Jensen, M. P., Vowles, K. E., Johnson, L. E., & Gertz, K. J. (2015). Living well with pain: Development and preliminary evaluation of the Valued Living Scale. Pain Medicine, 16(11), 2109–2120. https://doi.org/10.1111/pme.12802

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102–138). Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2022). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-6. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=semTools

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.2307/3090197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobau, R., Sniezek, J., Zack, M. M., Lucas, R. E., & Burns, A. (2010). Well-being assessment: An evaluation of well-being scales for public health and population estimates of well-being among US adults. Applied Psychology. Health and Well-Being, 2(3), 272–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-0854.2010.01035.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korkmaz, S., Goksuluk, D., & Zararsiz, G. (2014). MVN: An R package for assessing multivariate normality. The R Journal, 6(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2014-031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (2001). The PHQ-9, validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16(9), 606–613. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, M. E., MacLane, C., Daflos, S., Pistorello, J., Hayes, S. C., Seeley, J., & Biglan, A. (2014). Examining psychological inflexibility as a transdiagnostic process across psychological disorders. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3, 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.06.003

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lishinski, A. (2021). lavaanPlot: Path Diagrams for 'Lavaan' Models via 'DiagrammeR'. Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN).https://d.docs.live.net/Users/bryantstone/Downloads

  • Lovibond, S., & Lovibond, P. (1995a). Manual for the Depression Anxiety Scales (DASS). Psychology Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995b). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Löwe, B., Decker, O., Müller, S., Brähler, E., Schellberg, D., Herzog, W., & Herzberg, P. Y. (2008). Validation and standardization of the generalized anxiety disorder screener (GAD-7) in the general population. Medical Care, 46(3), 266–274. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318160d093

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren, T., Luoma, J. B., Dahl, J., Strosahl, K., & Melin, L. (2012). The Bull's-Eye Values Survey: A psychometric evaluation. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 19(4), 518–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2012.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michelson, S. E., Lee, J. K., Orsillo, S. M., & Roemer, L. (2011). The role of values-consistent behavior in generalized anxiety disorder. Depression and Anxiety, 28(5), 358–366. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20793

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, M. B., Meier, E., Lombardi, N., Leavens, E. L., Grant, D. M., & Leffingwell, T. R. (2016). The Valued Living Questionnaire for alcohol use: Measuring value-behavior discrepancy in college student drinking. Psychological Assessment, 28(9), 1051–1060. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moshagen, M., & Erdfelder, E. (2016). A new strategy for testing structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Interdisciplinary Journal, 23(1), 54–60.https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.950896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr, J. M., Sackett, P. R., & Dubois, C. L. (1991). Outlier detection and treatment in I/O psychology: A survey of researcher beliefs and an empirical illustration. Personnel Psychology, 44(3), 473–486.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb02401.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polk, K., Schoendorf, B., Webster, B., & Olaz, F. (2016). The essential guide to the ACT matrix: A step-by-step approach to using the ACT matrix model in clinical practice. Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prebensen, N. K., Kim, H., & Uysal, M. (2016). Cocreation as moderator between the experience value and satisfaction relationship. Journal of Travel Research, 55(7), 934–945. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287515583359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primeaux, S. (2019). A preliminary examination of the ACT Matrix as a brief therapeutic intervention [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Southern Illinois University.

    Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolffs, J. L., Rogge, R. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2018). Disentangling components of flexibility via the hexaflex model: Development and validation of the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI). Assessment, 25(4), 458–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191116645905

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Moreno, R., Gallego-Alberto, L., Márquez-González, M., & Losada, A. (2016). Psychometric properties of the valued living questionnaire adapted to dementia caregiving. Aging & Mental Health, 21(9), 983–990. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2016.1191055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smout, M., Davies, M., Burns, N., & Christie, A. (2014). Development of the valuing questionnaire (VQ). Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3(3), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sortheix, F. M., & Schwartz, S. H. (2017). Values that underlie and undermine well–being: Variability across countries. European Journal of Personality, 31(2), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092–1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Trompetter, H. R., Ten Klooster, P. M., Schreurs, K. M., Fledderus, M., Westerhof, G. J., & Bohlmeijer, E. T. (2013). Measuring values and committed action with the Engaged Living Scale (ELS): Psychometric evaluation in a nonclinical sample and a chronic pain sample. Psychological Assessment, 25(4), 1235–1246. https://doi.org/10.3990/1.9789036537087

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Buskirk, K., West, L., Malcarne, V., Afari, N., Liu, L., Petkus, A., & Wetherell, J. L. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Valued Living Questionnaire in a Black American sample: Implications for cognitive research and practice. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 36(6), 796–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-011-9405-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K. G., & DuFrene, T. (2008). Mindfulness for two. New Harbinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K. G., & Groom, J. (2002). The valued living questionnaire. In Department of Psychology. University of Mississippi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K. G., & Murrell, A. R. (2004). Values work in acceptance and commitment therapy: Setting a course for behavioral treatment. In S. C. Hayes, V. M. Follette, & M. M. Linehan (Eds.), Mindfulness and acceptance: Expanding the cognitive-behavioral tradition (pp. 120–151). Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K. G., Sandoz, E. K., Kitchens, J., & Roberts, M. (2010). The Valued Living Questionnaire: Defining and measuring valued action within a behavioral framework. The Psychological Record, 60(2), 249. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization Quality of Life Group. (1998). Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychological Medicine, 28(3), 551–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychological and Behavioral Sciences, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL, 62918, USA

    Grace A. Lyons, Bryant M. Stone, Sunni Primeaux, Vanessa Wang & Chad E. Drake

Authors
  1. Grace A. Lyons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bryant M. Stone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sunni Primeaux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vanessa Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chad E. Drake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chad E. Drake.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

Authors are required to disclose financial or nonfinancial interests that are directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication. The authors of this manuscript declare no financial or nonfinancial interests that directly or indirectly relate to this work.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study with human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Below is a list of ten 3-part questions.

Part A asks about the importance of a certain activity in your life. This is not a question about your abilities. Instead, please note how much importance you place on the activity whether you are able to perform the activity or not.

Part B asks how active you have been in this area of your life in the past week. This is not a question about your success with your activity. Instead, please note how much time and effort you spent on this area of life.

Part C asks about your satisfaction with your activities in this area of life in the past week. This is not a question about the opinions of other people. Instead, please note the degree to which you lived up to your own standards for success in this area of life.

Please circle the number as it best applies to you for each part of each question.

------------------------------

  1. 1.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to do things for or with family (parents, siblings, relatives)?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      b.In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

------------------------------

  1. 2.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to work toward or to be in an intimate relationship?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

------------------------------

  1. 3.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to provide care or support for children (your own or others)?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

------------------------------

  1. 4.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to be a friend to others?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

  1. 5.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to manage daily tasks or work at a job?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

  1. 6.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to acquire more education or pursue personal growth?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

------------------------------

  1. 7.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to engage in recreational activities?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

------------------------------

  1. 8.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to have a religious or spiritual life?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

  1. 9.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to be involved in your community or promote citizenship?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

------------------------------

  1. 10.
    1. a

      How important is it to you to improve or maintain your physical health?

      not at all important > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely important

    2. b

      In the last week, how active were you in this area of life?

      not at all active > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely active

    3. c

      In the last week, how satisfied were you with your engagement in this area of your life?

      not at all satisfied > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 < extremely satisfied

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.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lyons, G.A., Stone, B.M., Primeaux, S. et al. The Valued Action and Satisfaction Questionnaire: Preliminary Validation and Psychometric Evaluation. Psychol Rec 73, 183–201 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-023-00548-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-023-00548-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation