Social Indicators Research

, Volume 110, Issue 2, pp 681–693 | Cite as

Issues in Evaluating Importance Weighting in Quality of Life Measures

  • Chang-ming HsiehEmail author


For most empirical research investigating the topic of importance weighting in quality of life (QoL) measures, the prevailing approach has been to use (1) a limited choice of global QoL measures as criterion variables (often a single one) to determine the performance of importance weighting, (2) a limited option of weighting methods to develop importance weighting, and (3) a limited number of domains to construct the (formative-indicator) measures. Although limitations resulted from a limited choice of global QoL measures as criterion variables to determine the performance of importance weighting and a limited option of weighting methods to develop importance weighting have been recognized previously, little attention has been paid to the impact of non-comprehensive domains in QoL measures constructed based on the formative-indicator approach. Using empirical data, this article revealed the potential impacts of non-comprehensive domains on the evaluation of importance weighting in QoL measures. Results presented in this article showed that both of the two most popular methods of evaluating the performance of importance weighting in QoL measures, correlation and moderated regression analysis, could produce misleading results in the situation when QoL measures constructed using the formative-indicator approach did not include comprehensive domains. Issues discussed in this article are of great importance to research in the field of QoL, especially on the topic of importance weighting in QoL measures.


Domain importance Subjective well-being Life satisfaction Formative-indicator model Measurement 


  1. Beatty, P., & Tuch, S. A. (1997). Race and life satisfaction in the middle class. Sociological Spectrum, 17, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rogers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New York: Russel Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Cummins, R. A. (1995). On the tale of gold standard for life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 35, 179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cummins, R. A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 38, 303–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cummins, R. A., McCabe, M. P., Romeo, Y., & Gullone, E. (1994). The comprehensive quality of life scale: Instrument development and psychometric evaluation on tertiary staff and students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 372–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diamantopoulos, A. (2006). The error term in formative measurement models: Interpretation and modeling implications. Journal of Modeling in Management, 1, 7–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diamantopoulos, A., Riefler, P., & Roth, K. P. (2008). Advancing formative measurement models. Journal of Business Research, 61, 1201–1302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans, M. G. (1991). The problem of analyzing multiplicative composites: Interactions revisited. American Psychologist, 46, 6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans, D. R. (1994). Enhancing quality of life in the population at large. Social Indicators Research, 33, 47–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feist, G. J., Bodner, T. E., Jacobs, J. F., Miles, M., & Tan, V. (1995). Integrating top-down and bottom-up structural models of subjective well-being: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 138–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferrans, C., & Powers, M. (1985). Quality of life index: Development and psychometric properties. Advances in Nursing Science, 8, 15–24.Google Scholar
  15. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. George, L. K., & Bearon, L. B. (1980). Quality of life in older persons: Meaning and measurements. New York: Human Sciences Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hagerty, M. R., Cummins, R. A., Ferris, A. L., Land, K. C., Michalos, A. C., Peterson, M., et al. (2001). Quality of life indexes for national policy: Review and agenda for research. Social Indicators Research, 55, 1–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hagerty, M. R., & Land, K. C. (2007). Constructing summary indices of quality of life: A model for the effect of heterogeneous importance weights. Sociological Methods and Research, 35, 455–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hardin, A. M., Chang, J. C., Fuller, M. A., & Torkzadeh, G. (2011). Formative measurement and academic research: In search of measurement theory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 281–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hsieh, C. M. (2003). Counting importance: The case of life satisfaction and relative domain importance. Social Indicators Research, 61, 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hsieh, C. M. (2004). To weight or not to weight: The role of domain importance in quality of life measurement. Social Indicators Research, 68, 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hsieh, C. M. (2006). Using client satisfaction to improve case management services for the elderly. Research on Social Work Practice, 16, 605–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hsieh, C. M. (2011a). Importance is not unimportant: The role of importance weighting in QoL measures. Social Indicators Research. doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9900-z.
  24. Hsieh, C. M. (2011b). Should we give up domain importance weighting on QoL measures? Social Indicators Research. doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9868-8.
  25. Inglehart, R. (1978). Value priorities life satisfaction, and political dissatisfaction among western publics. Comparative Studies in Sociology, 1, 173–202.Google Scholar
  26. Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Land, K. (2000). Social indicators. In E. F. Borgatta & R. V. Montgomery (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sociology (revised ed.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Jarvis, C. B. (2005). The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 710–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Martin, F. (2011). Perceptions of links between quality of life areas: Implications for measurement and practice. Social Indicators Research. doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9795-8.
  30. Mastekaasa, A. (1984). Multiplicative and additive models of job and life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 14, 141–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mookherjee, H. N. (1992). Perceptions of well-being by metropolitan and nonmetropolitan populations in the United States. Journal of Social Psychology, 132, 513–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Neugarten, B., Havighurst, R., & Tobin, S. (1961). The measurement of life satisfaction. Journal of Gerontology, 16, 134–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Philip, E. J., Merluzzi, T. V., Peterman, A., & Cronk, L. B. (2009). Measurement accuracy in assessing patient’s quality of life: To weight or not to weight domains of quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 18, 775–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rojas, M. (2006). Life satisfaction and satisfaction in domains of life: Is it a simple relationship? Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 467–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Russell, L. B., & Hubley, A. M. (2005). Importance ratings and weighting: Old concerns and new perspectives. International Journal of Testing, 5, 105–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Russell, L. B., Hubley, A. M., Palepu, A., & Zumbo, B. D. (2006). Does weighting capture what’s important? Revisiting subjective importance weighting with a quality of life measure. Social Indicators Research, 75, 146–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ryff, C. D., & Essex, M. J. (1992). The interpretation of life experience and well-being: The sample case of relocation. Psychology and Aging, 7, 507–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Serrano, J. P., Latorre, J. M., Gatz, M., & Montanes, J. (2004). Life review therapy using autobiographical retrieval practice for older adults with depressive symptomatology. Psychology and Aging, 19, 272–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wagnild, G. (2003). Resilience and successful aging: Comparison among low and high income older adults. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 29(12), 42–49.Google Scholar
  41. Wood, V., Wylie, M., & Sheafor, B. (1969). An analysis of a short self-report measure of life satisfaction: Correlation with rater judgments. Journal of Gerontology, 24, 456–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wu, C. H. (2008a). Examining the appropriateness of importance weighting on satisfaction score from range-of-affect hypothesis: Hierarchical linear modeling for within-subject data. Social Indicators Research, 86, 101–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wu, C. H. (2008b). Can we weight satisfaction score with importance ranks across life domains? Social Indicators Research, 86, 468–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wu, C. H., Chen, L. H., & Tsai, Y. M. (2009). Investigating importance weighting of satisfaction scores from a formative model with partial least squares analysis. Social Indicators Research, 90, 351–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006a). Do we need to weight satisfaction scores with importance ratings in measuring quality of life? Social Indicators Research, 78, 305–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006b). Do we need to weight item satisfaction by item importance? A perspective from Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Social Indicators Research, 79, 485–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2007). Examining the relationship between global and domain measures of quality of life by three factor structure models. Social Indicators Research, 84, 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Jane Addams College of Social WorkUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations