Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 110, Issue 2, pp 469–478 | Cite as

Validation of the Flourishing Scale and Scale of Positive and Negative Experience in Portugal

  • Ana Junça Silva
  • António Caetano
Article

Abstract

The Flourishing Scale (FS) and the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience (SPANE) created by Diener et al. (Soc Indic Res 97:143–156, 2010) are instruments that assess psychological flourishing and feelings (positive and negative, and the difference between the two). In this study, the psychometric properties of both scales were explored by using two Portuguese samples (I: n = 734; II: n = 194). Reliability analysis and a multi-group confirmatory factorial analysis (MCFA) of both scales were performed. To examine the validity of FS and SPANE we analyzed their correlations with other well-being and happiness measures. Results showed that the Portuguese versions of both scales have good psychometric properties, and they also showed convergent validity. Results also demonstrated the unidimensional structure of the FS and a two-factor solution for the SPANE. The multi-group CFA of both scales evidenced an invariant structure. Both Portuguese versions of the scales behave consistently with the original and may be used in future studies of well-being.

Keywords

Subjective well-being Flourishing Positive emotions Negative emotions 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was partially supported by FCT grant SFRH/BD/72455/2010 and by FCT grant PTDC/PSI/73347/2006.

References

  1. Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS.Google Scholar
  2. Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  3. Cantril, H. (1965). The pattern of human concerns. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cummins, R. A. (2003). Normative life satisfaction: Measurement issues and a homeostatic model. Social Indicators Research, 64, 225–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diener, E., & Lucas, R. (1999). Personality, and subjective well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–229). New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (1991). Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 119–139). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (2009). Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. Social Indicators Research Series, 39, 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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, 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fordyce, M. W. (1988). A review of research on happiness measures: A sixty second index of happiness and mental health. Social Indicators Research, 20, 355–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Henson, R. K. (2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177–189.Google Scholar
  14. International Wellbeing Group. (2006). Personal Wellbeing Index (4th Edn.). Melbourne, Australian Centre on Quality of Life, School of Psychology, Deakin University, ISBN 1 74156 048 9. Retrieved June 9, 2011, from http://www.deakin.edu.au/research/acqol/instruments/wellbeing-index/pwi-a-english.pdf.
  15. Keyes, C., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. (2002). Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. King, L. A., & Napa, C. K. (1998). What makes a life good? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 156–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: A preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McGregor, I., & Little, B. R. (1998). Personal projects, happiness, and meaning: On doing well and being yourself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 494–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  20. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). To be happy or to be self-fulfilled: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. In S. Fiske (Ed.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 52, pp. 141–166). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews/Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Ryff, C. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1.069–1.081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ryff, C., & Keyes, C. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the MI literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 678–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL)LisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Business Research Unit—BRU (UNIDE-IUL)LisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations