Social Indicators Research

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 1–19 | Cite as

The validity of measures of self-reported well-being

  • Frank M. Andrews
  • Rick Crandall


Using a new analytic approach, construct validity estimates are developed for proposed social indicators of self-reported well-being. Two separate investigations are reported: the first involves data on six aspects of well-being each assessed by six methods from 222 adults in one geographic area; the second, a partial replication and extension, involves a more limited set of indicators measured on a sample of 1297 respondents representative of all American adults.

The results provide evidence that perceptions of well-being can be measured by single questionnaire or interview items using any of four formats with validities in the range of 0.7 to 0.8 and with correlated method effects contributing less than 10% of the total variance. Two other formats, however, were markedly less valid. These findings are important in view of past criticisms of ‘subjective’ social indicators as lacking in validity, and the findings can guide current efforts to develop new ways to assess the quality of life.

Methodologically, the article illustrates the feasibility and utility of deriving parameter estimates of structural equation models of multimethod-multitrait data using Joreskog's LISREL algorithm. The possibility of deriving validity estimates in this way, even when the data include correlated errors, opens new and important opportunities to precisely assess the amount of error variance in much social science data.


Construct Validity Structural Equation Model Error Variance Science Data Current Effort 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alwin, D. F.: ·1974, ‘Approaches to the Interpretation of Relationships in the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix’, In Sociological Methodology 1973–74 (edited by H. L. Costner), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, F. M.: 1974, ‘Social Indicators of Perceived Life Quality’, Social Indicators Research 1, 279–299.Google Scholar
  3. Andrews, F. M. and Withey, S. B.: 1974, ‘Developing Measures of Perceived Life Quality: Results from Several National Surveys, Social Indicators Research 1, 1–26.Google Scholar
  4. Andrews, F. M. and Withey, S. B.: 1976, Social Indicators of Well-being: Americans' Perceptions of Life Quality, Plenum, New York, in press.Google Scholar
  5. Blalock, H. M.Jr.: 1964, Causal Inferences in Nonexperimental Research, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
  6. Blalock, H. M.Jr.: 1970, ‘Estimating Measurement Error Using Multiple Indicators and Several Points in Time’, American Sociological Review 35, 101–111.Google Scholar
  7. Bohrnstedt, G. W., and Carter, T. M.: 1971, ‘Robustness in regression Analysis’, in Sociological Methodology 1971 (ed. by H., Costner), Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco.Google Scholar
  8. Boruch, R. F. and Wolins, L.: 1970, ‘A Procedure for estimation of Trait, Method, and Error Variance Attributable to a Measure’, Educational and Psychological Measurement 30, 547–574.Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., and Rodgers, W. L.: 1976, The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations and Satisfactions, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Campbell, D. T. and Fiske, D. W.: 1959, ‘Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix’, Psychological Bulletin 56, 81–105.Google Scholar
  11. Cantril, H.: 1965, The Pattern of Human Concerns, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  12. Conger, A. J.: 1971, ‘Evaluation of Multimethod Factor Analysis’, Psychological Bulletin 75, 416–420.Google Scholar
  13. Costner, H. L.: 1969, ‘Theory, Deduction, and Rules of Correspondence’, AmericanJournal of Sociology 75, 245–263.Google Scholar
  14. Crandall, R.: 1976, ‘Validation of Self-Report Measures Using Ratings by Others’, Sociological Methods and Research, 4, 380–400.Google Scholar
  15. Cronbach, L. J. and Meehl, P. E.: 1955, ‘Construct Validity in Psychological Tests’, Psychological Bulletin 52, 281–302.Google Scholar
  16. Duncan, O. D.: 1966, ‘Path Analysis: Sociological Examples’, American Journal of Sociology 72, 1–16.Google Scholar
  17. Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget, 1973. Social Indicators, 1973. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  18. Goldberger, A.S.: 1972, ‘Structural Equation Methods in the Social Sciences’, Econometrica 40, 979–1001.Google Scholar
  19. Goldberger, A. S. and Duncan, O. D. (eds.): 1973, Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences, Seminar Press, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Guilford, J. P.: 1954, Psychometric Methods (2nd ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Heise, D. R. and Bohrnstedt, G. W.: 1970, ‘Validity, Invalidity, Reliability’, in American Sociological Review 34, 93–101.Google Scholar
  22. Heise, D. R. and Bohrnstedt, G. W.: 1970, ‘Validity, Invalidity, Reliability’, in Sociological Methodology 1970 (ed. by E. F., Borgatta and G. W., Bohrnstedt), Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco.Google Scholar
  23. Holmes, D.: 1971, ‘Conscious Self-Appraisal of Achievement Motivation: The Self-Peer Rank Method Revisited’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 36, 23–26.Google Scholar
  24. Holmes, D. and Tyler, J.: 1968, ‘Direct Versus Projective Measurement of Achievement Motivation’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 32, 712–717.Google Scholar
  25. Jackson, D. N.: 1969, ‘Multimethod Factor Analysis in the Evaluation of Convergent and Discriminant Validity’, Psychological Bulletin 72, 30–49.Google Scholar
  26. Jackson, D. N.: 1971, “Comments on ‘Evaluation of Multimethod Factor Analysis’, Psychological Bulletin 75, 421–423.Google Scholar
  27. Joreskog, K. G.: 1969, ‘A General Approach to Confirmatory Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis’, Psychometrika 34, 183–202.Google Scholar
  28. Joreskog, K. G.: 1970, ‘A General Method for Analysis of Covariance Structures’, Biometrika 57, 239–251.Google Scholar
  29. Joreskog, K. G.: 1973, ‘A General Method for Estimating a Linear Structural Equation System’, In Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences, (ed, by A. S., Goldberger and O. D., Duncan), Seminar Press, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Joreskog, K. G. and van, Thillo, M.: 1972, LISREL: A general computer program for estimating a linear structural equation system involving multiple indicators of unmeasured variables. Unpublished research bulletin, RB-72–56, Princeton, New Jersey, Educational Testing Service, December.Google Scholar
  31. Land, K. C.: 1970, ‘On the Estimation of Path Coefficients for Unmeasured Variables from Correlations among Observed Variables’, Social Forces 48, 506–511.Google Scholar
  32. Wilcox, L. D., Brooks, R. M., Beal, G. M., and Klonglan, G. E.: 1972, Social Indicators and Societal Monitoring: (An Annotated Bibliography) Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank M. Andrews
    • 1
  • Rick Crandall
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Social ResearchUniversity of MichiganUSA

Personalised recommendations