Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 96, Issue 2, pp 267–274 | Cite as

Psychometric Evaluation of the Hebrew Language Version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale

  • Dana AnabyEmail author
  • Tal Jarus
  • Bruno D. Zumbo
Article

Abstract

The satisfaction with life scale (SWLS) is a widely accepted and widely used tool for measuring well-being. Although its potential as a cross-cultural index is recognized, an introduction and systematic validation of the Hebrew version is needed. Thus, the purpose of this study is: (1) to describe the process of developing the Hebrew version of the SWLS, and (2) to examine its construct validity as well as its internal consistency. Four hundred and eighty seven working adults completed the following self reported Hebrew language versions of the: (1) SWLS, (2) positive affect and negative affect scales (PANAS), and (3) the self-rated health (SRH) scale. In addition, as way of gathering additional evidence of validity, the SWLS was completed by proxy (i.e., each participant’s life partner or significant other). Confirmatory factor analysis supported a single-factor structure with significant correlations between the SWLS and the rest of the measures—PANAS scores, the SRH scores as well as the SWLS scores as measured by proxy. In addition, item-analysis supports the internal consistency of the scale. The Hebrew version of the SWLS is a valid and reliable scale and can be utilized in the Israeli context.

Keywords

Subjective well-being Life satisfaction Validity Reliability Israel 

References

  1. Arrindell, W. A., Meeuwesen, L., & Huyse, F. J. (1991). The satisfaction with life scale (SWLS)—psychometric properties in a non-psychiatric medical outpatients sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 117–123. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(91)90094-R.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atienza, F. L., Pons, D., Balaguer, I. U., & Garcia-Merita, M. (2000). Psychometric properties of the satisfaction with life scale in adolescents. Psicothema, 12, 314–319.Google Scholar
  3. Ayyash-Abdo, H., & Alamuddin, R. (2007). Predictors of subjective well-being among college youth in Lebanon. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 265–284. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.147.3.265-284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentler, P. M. (1985). Theory and implication of EQS: A structural equations program. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software.Google Scholar
  5. Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations programs manual. Enrico, CA: Multivariate Software Inc.Google Scholar
  6. Carmel, S., Baron-Epel, O., & Shemy, G. (2007). The will-to-live and survival at old age: Gender differences. Social Science and Medicine, 65, 518–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31, 103–157. doi: 10.1007/BF01207052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 403–425. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., da Fonseca, P. N., & Coelho, J. A. P. M. (2009). Life satisfaction in Brazil: Testing the psychometric properties of the satisfaction with life scale (SWLS) in five Brazilian samples. Social Indicators Research, 90, 267–277. doi: 10.1007/s11205-008-9257-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hultell, D., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2008). A psychometric evaluation of the satisfaction with life scale in a Swedish nationwide sample of university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1070–1079. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Larsen, R. J., Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). An evaluation of subjective well-being measures. Social Indicators Research, 17, 1–17. doi: 10.1007/BF00354108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lawrence, R. J. (2006). Housing and health: Beyond disciplinary confinement. Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 83, 540–549.Google Scholar
  17. Lewis, C. A., Shevlin, M. E., Smékal, V., & Dorahy, M. J. (1999). Factor structure and reliability of a Czech translation of the satisfaction with life scale among Czech university students. Studia Psychologica, 41, 239–244.Google Scholar
  18. Miilunpalo, S., Vuori, I., Oja, P., Pasanen, M., & Urponen, H. (1997). Self-rated health status as a health measure: The predictive value of self-reported health status on the use of physician services and on mortality in the working-age population. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50, 517–528. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00045-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Neto, F. (1993). The satisfaction with life scale—psychometrics properties in an adolescent sample. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 22(2), 125–134. doi: 10.1007/BF01536648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Oishi, S., Diener, E. F., Lucas, R. E., & Suh, E. M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: Perspectives from needs and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 980–990. doi: 10.1177/01461672992511006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Paul-Dauphin, A., Guillemin, F., Virion, J. M., & Briancon, S. (1999). Bias and precision in visual analogue scales: A randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Epidemiology, 150, 1117–1127.Google Scholar
  22. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.5.2.164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sachs, J. (2003). Validation of the satisfaction with life scale in a sample of Hong Kong university students. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 46, 225–234. doi: 10.2117/psysoc.2003.225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology—an introduction. The American Psychologist, 55, 5–14. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Slocum-Gori, S. L., Zumbo, B. D., Michalos, A. C., & Diener, E. (in press). A note on the dimensionality of quality of life scales: An illustration with the satisfaction with life scale (SWLS). Social Indicators Research: An International Interdisciplinary Journal of Quality of Life Measurement.Google Scholar
  26. Smead, V. S. (1991). Measuring well-being is not eazy. Paper Presented at the Annual Convention of the American Association of Applied and Preventive Psychology.Google Scholar
  27. Swami, V., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Psychometric evaluation of the Malay satisfaction with life scale. Social Indicators Research, 92, 25–33.Google Scholar
  28. Vassar, M. (2008). A note on the score reliability for the satisfaction with life scale: An RG study. Social Indicators Research, 86, 47–57. doi: 10.1007/s11205-007-9113-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vitterso, J., Biswas-Diener, R., & Diener, E. (2005). The divergent meanings of life satisfaction: Item response modeling of the satisfaction with life scale in Greenland and Norway. Social Indicators Research, 74, 327–348. doi: 10.1007/s11205-004-4644-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Watson, D., Clark, L. 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, 1063–1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. World Health Organization. (1993). WHOQOL study protocol. Geneva Switzerland: WHO (MNH/PSF/93.9).Google Scholar
  32. Wu, C. H., & Wu, C. Y. (2008). Life satisfaction in persons with schizophrenia living in the community—validation of the satisfaction with life scale. Social Indicators Research, 85, 447–460. doi: 10.1007/s11205-007-9136-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006). Analysis of factorial invariance across gender in the Taiwan version of the satisfaction with life scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1259–1268. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rehabilitation SciencesUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of Occupational Science and Occupational TherapyCanDo Research Unit, University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Department of ECPSUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations