Social Indicators Research

, Volume 121, Issue 1, pp 291–312 | Cite as

The Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF) as a Measure of Well-Being in the Italian Context

  • Giovanna Petrillo
  • Vincenza Capone
  • Daniela Caso
  • Corey L. M. Keyes
Article

Abstract

We examined the structure, reliability, construct validity, and gender invariance of the Italian version of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (Italian MHC–SF), a self-report questionnaire for positive mental health assessment developed by Keyes. The scale was administered to 1,438 Italian respondents, mainly from central and southern Italy, between the ages of 18 and 89 years (m = 47.12; SD = 19.56). Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the three-factors solution (emotional, psychological, and social) and a latent factor consisting of the three dimensions of well-being, and that the structure of the scale was the same for males and females. Results revealed a high internal reliability and moderate test–retest reliability. The subscales correlated positively with corresponding aspects of well-being and functioning, showing convergent validity. The scale correlated negatively and moderately with measures of mental illness, showing divergent validity. Exploratory factor analysis supported the hypothesis of two separate, but correlated, factors for mental health and mental illness, showing discriminant validity and support for the two-continua model. A categorical diagnosis of the presence of mental health and the absence of mental health was applied to the sample. The Italian MHC–SF is a reliable and valid instrument to measure well-being and the positive aspects of mental health.

Keywords

MHC–SF Italian adaption Positive mental health Well-being Mental illness Flourishing people 

References

  1. Barbaranelli, C. (2007). Analisi dei dati. Tecniche multivariate per la ricerca psicologica e sociale. Milano: Led Edizioni.Google Scholar
  2. Berger-Schmitt, R., & Noll, H. H. (2000). Conceptual framework and structure of a European system of social indicators. EuReporting Working Paper No. 9, Centre for Survey Research and methodology (ZUMA). Mannheim: Mannheim University, Social Indicators Department.Google Scholar
  3. Blasi, E., Nucera, M., Cicatiello, C., & Franco, S. (2012). Socio-demographic components of eudaimonic well-being: A survey in an Italian province. Social Indicators Research,. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0104-y.Google Scholar
  4. Byrne, B. M., Oakland, T., Leong, F. T. L., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Hambleton, R. K., & Cheung, F. M. (2009). A critical analysis of cross-cultural research and testing practices: Implications for improved education and training in psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(2), 94–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Capone, V., & Petrillo, G. (2013). Health promotion in international documents: Strengths and weaknesses from the perspective of community empowerment. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23, 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chiesi, F., & Primi, C. (2008). Le proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana della. Need for Cognition Scale-Short Form. In National Congress Italian Psichology Association—Sezione di Psicologia Sperimentale, Padova, 18–20 September, pp. 1–1.Google Scholar
  8. Cicognani, E., & Pirini, C. (2007). Partecipazione sociale, senso di comunità e benessere: Una ricerca con studenti universitari. Psicologia della Salute, 1, 103–115.Google Scholar
  9. D’Alessio, M., Guarino, A., De Pascalis, V., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2003). Testing Zimbardo’s stanford time perspective inventory (ZPTI): Short form. Time & Society, 12(2–3), 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davidson, W. B., & Cotter, P. R. (1986). Measurement of sense of community within the sphere of city. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 608–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Vellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  12. Delle Fave, A., Brdar, I., Freire, T., Vella-Brodrick, D., & Wissing, M. P. (2011). The eudaimonic and hedonic components of happiness: Qualitative and quantitative findings. Social Indicators Research, 100(2), 185–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Di Fabio, A., & Busoni, L. (2009). Proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana della Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) con studenti universitari. Counseling. Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 2, 201–212.Google Scholar
  14. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psycologist, 55(1), 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). Satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Diener, R., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1–2), 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. A. (1990). Multidimensional assessment of coping: A critical evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(5), 844–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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, 272–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fava, G. A. (1983). Assessing depressive symptoms across cultures: Italian validation of the CES-D self-rating scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 39(2), 249–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goldberg, D. P. (1992). General health questionnaire (GHQ-12). Windsor: NFER-Nelson.Google Scholar
  23. Gonzales, A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1985). Time in perspective. Psychology Today, 19(3), 21–26.Google Scholar
  24. Hooghe, M., & Vanhoutte, B. (2011). Subjective well-being and social capital in Belgian communities. The impact of community characteristics on subjective well-being indicators in Belgium. Social Indicators Research, 100(1), 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Joshanloo, M., Wissing, M. P., Itumeleng, P. K., & Lamers, S. M. A. (2013). Measurement invariance of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF) across three cultural groups. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 755–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kagan, S. (1992). The limits of well-being. In E. F. Paul, F. D. Miller Jr, & J. Paul (Eds.), The good life and the human good (pp. 169–189). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (Eds.). (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell-Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well being. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61(2), 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Behavior Research, 43, 207–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Keyes, C. L. M. (2005). Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 539–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keyes, C. L. M. (2006). Subjective well-being in mental health and human development research worldwide: An Introduction. Social Indicators Research, 77(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keyes, C. L. M. (2007). Promoting and protecting mental health as flourishing: A complementary strategy for improving national mental health. American Psychologist, 62(2), 95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Keyes, C. L. M. (2009a). The nature and importance of positive mental health in America’s adolescents. In R. Gilman, E. Huebner, & M. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in schools (pp. 9–23). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Keyes, C. L. M. (2009b). Atlanta: Brief description of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF). Resource document. Emory University web site. Accessed Jan 25, 2012 from www.sociology.emory.edu/ckeyes.
  35. Keyes, C. L. M., & Annas, J. (2009). Feeling good and functioning well: Distinctive concepts in ancient philosophy and contemporary science. Journal of Positive Psychology, 4, 197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keyes, C. L. M., Eisenberg, D., Perry, G. S., Dube, S. R., Kroenke, K., & Dhingra, S. S. (2012). The relationship of level of positive mental health with current mental disorders in predicting suicidal behavior and academic impairment in college students. Journal of American College Health, 60(2), 126–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keyes, C. L. M., & Shapiro, A. (2004). Social well-being in the United States: A descriptive epidemiology. In Orville G. Brim, Carol Ryff, & Ronald Kessler (Eds.), How healthy are we? A national study of well-being at midlife (pp. 350–372). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  38. Keyes, C. L. M., & Waterman, M. B. (2003). Dimensions of well-being and mental health in adulthood. In M. Bornstein, L. Davidson, C. L. M. Keyes, & K. Moore (Eds.), Well-being: Positive development throughout the life course (pp. 477–497). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  39. Keyes, C. L. M., Wissing, M., Potgieter, J. P., Temane, M., Kruger, A., & van Rooy, S. (2008). Evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC–SF) in Setswana-speaking South Africans. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 15, 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kline, P. (2000). Handbook of psychological testing. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Kokko, K., Korkalainen, A., & Lyyra, A. L. (2012). Structure and continuity of well-being in mid-adulthood: A longitudinal study. Journal of Happiness Studies,. doi:10.1007/s10902-011-9318-y.Google Scholar
  42. Lamers, S. M. A., Glas, C. A. W., Westerhof, G. J., & Bohlmeijer, E. T. (2012). Longitudinal evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF). Measurement invariance across demographics, physical illness, and mental illness. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28(4), 290–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lamers, S. M. A., Westerhof, G. J., Bohlmeijer, E. T., ten Klooster, P. M., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2011). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67, 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McMahan, E. A., & Estes, D. (2010). Hedonic versus eudaimonic conceptions of well-being: Evidence of differential associations with experienced well-being. Social Indicators Research, 103, 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Muthen, L., & Muthen, B. (2007). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén e Muthén.Google Scholar
  46. Nunnally, J., & Berstein, I. (1995). Psychometric theory. New York: Mcgraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  47. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Piccinelli, M., Bisoffi, G., Bon, M. G., Cunico, L., & Tansella, M. (1993). Validity and test–retest reliability of the Italian version of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire in general practice: A comparison between three scoring methods. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 34(3), 198–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Piedrabissi, L., & Santinello, M. (1994). La validità del coping inventory for stressful situations di Endler e Parker. Ricerche di Psicologia, 4(18), 49–63.Google Scholar
  50. Pinquart, M. (2002). Creating and maintaining purpose in life in old age: A meta-analysis. Ageing International, 27, 90–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Prezza, M., Costantini, S., Chiarolanza, V., & di Marco, S. (1999). La Scala italiana del senso di comunità. Psicologia della salute, 3–4, 135–158.Google Scholar
  52. Prezza, M., Trombaccia, F., & Armento, L. (1997). La scala dell’autostima di Rosenberg: Traduzione e validazione italiana. Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata, 223, 35–44.Google Scholar
  53. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychology Measure, 1(3), 385–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Robitschek, C., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2009). Keyes’ model of mental health with personal growth initiative as a parcimonious predictor. Journal of Counseling Psychology., 56, 321–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  56. Ryff, C. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Salama-Younes, M., & Ismaïl, A. (2011). Validation of factor structure of mental health continuum (MHC–SF) for physically active older adults. World Journal of Sport Sciences, 4(1), 20–30.Google Scholar
  59. Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1993). Measurement of perceived self-efficacy: Psychometric scales for cross-cultural research. Berlin: Freie Universität.Google Scholar
  60. Sibilia, L., Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Italian Adaptation of the general self-efficacy scale. Resource document. Ralf Schwarzer web site. Accessed Jan 25, 2012 from http://www.ralfschwarzer.de/.
  61. Terracciano, A., McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T, Jr. (2003). Factorial and construct validity of the Italian positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Thurstone, L. L. (1947). Multiple-factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  63. 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, 1988(54), 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Westerhof, G. J., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2010). Mental illness and mental health: The two continua model across the lifespan. Journal of Adult Development, 17, 110–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanna Petrillo
    • 1
  • Vincenza Capone
    • 1
  • Daniela Caso
    • 1
  • Corey L. M. Keyes
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of HumanitiesUniversity of Naples “Federico II”NaplesItaly
  2. 2.Department of SociologyEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations