Social Indicators Research

, Volume 118, Issue 3, pp 953–967 | Cite as

Happiness in Italy: Translation, Factorial Structure and Norming of the Subjective Happiness Scale in a Large Community Sample

  • Luca IaniEmail author
  • Marco Lauriola
  • Kristin Layous
  • Saulo Sirigatti


The Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS) is one of the most commonly used measures of happiness. Many translations and validation studies have been carried out in different countries and languages. The aim of the current paper was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Italian translation of the SHS and to provide normative data. The SHS was administered with life satisfaction items, anxiety and depression scales to a community sample of 993 participants, aged 18–85 years, living in different parts of Italy. Age and gender distributions were stratified according to the population pyramid. Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported the unidimensionality of the SHS, with acceptable fit indexes (NNFI = .96; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .08; 95 % C.I. [.04–.12]). Multi-group analyses supported total invariance of the SHS measurement model for males and females, and partial invariance for younger (i.e., 18–44 years old) and older (i.e., 45–85 years old) participants. Significant correlations with satisfaction items, anxiety and depression provided evidence for concurrent validity. These findings showed that the Italian SHS translation is a reliable and valid tool, which adds to existing translations and validation studies in different countries and languages.


Subjective happiness Confirmatory factor analysis Reliability Validity Normative data Italy 



The authors discussed the contents of this article together. Luca Iani and Marco Lauriola equally contributed to study design, and data analysis and interpetation. Kristin Layous and Saulo Sirigatti provided a significant contribution to data interpretation and manuscript revision. The final version of the manuscript was written by Luca Iani, Marco Lauriola, and Kristin Layous. Thanks to Giulia Giordano, Lucia Lamberti, Maddalena Mealli, Giulia Pace, Sara Pompili, Teresa Roma, Valentina Sardiello, and Cinzia Valeo for helping collecting data. Thanks to Barbara Antonucci and Victoria Bailes for having taken care of translations-backtranslation procedures.


  1. Abiodun, O. A. (1994). A validity study of the hospital anxiety and depression scale in general hospital units and a community sample in Nigeria. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 165(5), 669–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bentler, P. M. (2005). EQS 6: Structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software Inc.Google Scholar
  4. Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Browne, M. W., & Cudek, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Costantini, M., Musso, M., Viterbori, P., Bonci, F., Del Mastro, L., Garrone, O., et al. (1999). Detecting psychological distress in cancer patients: Validity of the Italian version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Supportive Care Cancer, 7(3), 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Extremera, N., Fernández-Berrocal, P., & Cabello, R. (2009). Una Validación preliminar de la versión española de la Subjective Happiness Scale. In P. Fernández-Berrocal, N. Extremera, R. Palomera, D. Ruiz-Aranda, J. M. Salguero, & R. Cabello (Eds.), Avances en el estudio de la inteligencia emocional (pp. 39–43). Santander: Fundación Marcelino Botín.Google Scholar
  11. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallagher, M. W., Lopez, S. J., & Preacher, K. J. (2009). The hierarchical structure of well-being. Journal of Personality, 77(4), 1025–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Howell, R. T., Rodzon, K. S., Kurai, M., & Sanchez, A. H. (2010). A validation of well-being and happiness surveys for administration via the Internet. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 775–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ISTAT (2010). Indagine Statistica Multiscopo sulle Famiglie. Aspetti della vita quotidiana 2010. Retrieved from Accessed 13 February, 2012.
  16. Kashdan, T. B., Biswas-Diener, R., & King, L. A. (2008). Reconsidering happiness: The costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia. Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(4), 219–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2012). How small is too small? The performance of RMSEA in models with small df. (in review).Google Scholar
  18. Lucas, R. E., & Schimmack, U. (2009). Income and well-being: How big is the gap between the rich and the poor? Journal of Research in Personality, 43(1), 75–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Luhmann, M., Hofmann, W., Eid, M., & Lucas, R. E. (2012). Subjective well-being and adaptation to life events: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(3), 592–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
  23. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Moghnie, L., & Kazarian, S. S. (2012). Subjective happiness of Lebanese College Youth in Lebanon: Factorial structure and invariance of the arabic subjective happiness scale. Social Indicators Research, 109(2), 203–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pais-Ribeiro, J. L. (2012). Validação transcultural da Escala de Felicidade Subjectiva de Lyubomirsky e Lepper. Psicologia, Saúde & Doenças, 13(2), 157–168.Google Scholar
  26. Purvis, A., Howell, R. T., & Iyer, R. (2011). Exploring the role of personality in the relationship between maximization and well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(3), 370–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 41–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Salama-Younes, M. (2010). Egypt Validity structure of subjective happiness scale (SHS) and subjective vitality scale (SVS) among physical education students in Egypt, France and Saudi Arabia. Psychology and Health, 25(suppl 1), 137–376.Google Scholar
  30. Schweizer, K. (2010). Some guidelines concerning the modeling of traits and abilities in test construction. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shimai, S., Otake, K., Utsuki, N., Ikemi, A., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2004). Development of a Japanese version of the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), and examination of its validity and reliability. Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi, 51(10), 845–853.Google Scholar
  32. Sirigatti, S., Penzo, I., Iani, L., Mazzeschi, A., Hatalsaja, H., Giannetti, E., & Stefanile, C. (2013). Measurement invariance of Ryff’s psychological well-being scales across Italian and Belarusian students. Social Indicators Research, 113(1), 67–80.Google Scholar
  33. Spagnoli, P., Caetano, A., & Silva, A. (2012). Psychometric properties of a Portuguese version of the subjective happiness scale. Social Indicators Research, 105(1), 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Swami, V. (2008). Translation and validation of the Malay subjective happiness scale. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 347–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Swami, V., Stieger, S., Voracek, M., Dressler, S. G., Eisma, L., & Furnham, A. (2009). Psychometric evaluation of the Tagalog and German subjective happiness scale and a cross-cultural comparison. Social Indicators Research, 93(2), 393–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vera-Villarroel, P., Celis-Atenas, K., & Cordova-Rubio, N. (2011). Evaluación de la Felicidad: Análisis Psicométrico de la Escala de Felicidad Subjetiva en Población Chilena. Terapia Psicológica, 29(1), 127–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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(6), 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983). The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 67(6), 361–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luca Iani
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marco Lauriola
    • 2
  • Kristin Layous
    • 3
  • Saulo Sirigatti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Human SciencesEuropean University of RomeRomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Social and Developmental PsychologyUniversity of Rome “Sapienza”RomeItaly
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations