Current Psychology

, Volume 36, Issue 1, pp 39–47 | Cite as

The Less is More: The 17-Item Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory

  • Gábor Orosz
  • Edina Dombi
  • István Tóth-Király
  • Christine Roland-Lévy
Article

Abstract

In this article the goal was the examination of the factorial structure of a short, Hungarian version of Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI; Zimbardo and Boyd Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288, 1999) in a sample of 1370 participants, comparing alternative factor structures through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). According to the results the short, 17 item version of ZTPI includes the original five factors and has appropriate model fit indices. Furthermore, it is reliable in terms of internal consistency and temporal stability. In the light of previous ZTPI validations with severe shortcomings, the present results might encourage radical shortening of the original ZTPI scale.

Keywords

Time perspective Zimbardo time perspective inventory Validity CFA Hungary 

References

  1. Adams, J., & White, M. (2009). Time perspective in socioeconomic inequalities in smoking and body mass index. Health Psychology, 28(1), 83–90. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.28.1.83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anagnostopoulos, F., & Griva, F. (2012). Exploring time perspective in Greek young adults: validation of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory and relationship with mental health indicators. Social Indicators Research, 106(1), 41–59. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9792-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Apostolidis, T., & Fieulaine, N. (2004). Validation française de l’échelle de temporalité the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. European Review of Applied Psychology, 54, 207–217. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2004.03.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(31), 86–91.Google Scholar
  5. Beiser, M., & Hyman, I. (1997). Refugees’ time perspective and mental health. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 154(7), 996–1002. doi:10.1176/ajp.154.7.996.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Boniwell, I., Osin, E., Linley, P. A., & Ivanchenko, G. V. (2010). A question of balance: time perspective and well-being in British and Russian samples. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(1), 24–40. doi:10.1080/17439760903271181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boniwell, I., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). Balancing one’s time perspective in pursuit of optimal functioning. In P. A. Linley, & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 165–180). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  9. Carelli, M. G., Wiberg, B., & Wiberg, M. (2011). Development and construct validation of the Swedish Zimbardo time perspective inventory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(4), 220–227. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carstensen, L. L., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). The influence of HIV status and age on cognitive representations of others. Health Psychology, 17(6), 494–503. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.17.6.494.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309–319. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corral-Verdugo, V., Fraijo-Sing, B., & Pinheiro, J. Q. (2006). Sustainable behavior and time perspective: present, past, and future orientations and their relationship with water conservation behavior. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 40(2), 139–147.Google Scholar
  13. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. D’Alessio, M., Guarino, A., De Pascalis, V., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2003). Testing Zimbardo’s Stanford time perspective inventory (STPI)-short form: an Italian study. Time and Society, 12(2–3), 333–347. doi:10.1177/0961463X030122010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Diaz-Morales, J. F. (2006). Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del inventario de perspectiva temporal de Zimbardo. Psicothema, 18, 565–571.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dunken, C. S., & Weber, J. L. (2010). Using three levels of personality to predict time perspective. Current Psychology, 29(2), 95–103. doi:10.1007/s12144-010-9074-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fortunato, V. J., & Furey, J. (2009). The theory of mindtime and the relationships between thinking perspective and the big five personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(4), 241–246. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.03.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gao, Y.-J. (2011). Time perspective and life satisfaction among young adults in Taiwan. Social Behavior and Personality, 39(6), 729–736. doi:10.2224/sbp.2011.39.6.729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guthrie, L. C., Butler, S. C., & Ward, M. M. (2009). Time perspective and socioeconomic status: a link to socioeconomic disparities in health? Social Science & Medicine, 68(12), 2145–2151. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hall, P. A., & Fong, G. T. (2003). The effects of a brief time perspective intervention for increasing physical activity among young adults. Psychology and Health, 18(6), 685–706. doi:10.1080/0887044031000110447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Husman, J., & Shell, D. F. (2008). Beliefs and perceptions about the future: a measurement of future time perspective. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(2), 166–175. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keough, K. A., Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Who’s smoking, drinking, and using drugs? Time perspective as a predictor of substance use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(2), 149–164. doi:10.1207/S15324834BA210207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kolesovs, A. (2004). Gender differences in time perspective of high school students in Latvia. Baltic Journal Psychology, 5(1), 14–20.Google Scholar
  25. Kolesovs, A. (2009). Factorial validity of the Latvian and Russian versions of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory in Latvia. Baltic Journal of Psychology, 10(1–2), 55–64.Google Scholar
  26. Košťál, J., Klicperová-Baker, M., Lukavská, K., & Lukavský, J. (2015). Short version of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI–short) with and without the Future-Negative scale, verified on nationally representative samples. Time & Society. doi:10.1177/0961463X15577254.Google Scholar
  27. Kruger, D. J., Reischl, T., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2008). Time perspective as a mechanism for functional developmental adaptation. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(1), 1–22. doi:10.1037/h0099336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lamm, H., Schmidt, R. W., & Trommsdorff, G. (1976). Sex and social class as determinants of future orientation in adolescents. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(3), 317–326. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.34.3.317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liniauskaite, A., & Kairys, A. (2009). The Lithuanian version of the zimbardo time perspective inventory (ZTPI). Psichologija, 40, 66–87.Google Scholar
  30. Luyckx, K., Lens, W., Smits, I., & Goossens, L. (2010). Time perspective and identity formation: short-term longitudinal dynamics in college students. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34(3), 238–247. doi:10.1177/0165025409350957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McInerney, D. A. (2004). A discussion of future time perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 16(2), 141–151. doi:10.1023/B:EDPR.0000026610.18125.a3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McKay, M. T., Worrell, F. C., Temple, E. C., Perry, J. L., Cole, J. C., & Mello, Z. R. (2015). Less is not always more: the case of the 36-item short form of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 68–71. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Milfont, T. L., Andrade, T. L., Belo, R. P., & Pessoa, V. S. (2008). Testing Zimbardo time perspective inventory in a Brazilian sample. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 42(1), 49–58.Google Scholar
  34. Muthén, B. O., & Muthén, L. K. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed., ). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  35. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed., ). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  36. Nurmi, J. E. (1991). How do adolescents see their future? A review of the development of future orientation and planning. Developmental Review, 11(1), 1–59. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(91)90002-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nuttin, J. R. (1964). The future time perspective in human motivation and learning. Acta Psychologica, 23, 60–82. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(64)90075-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Orkibi, H. (2014). Psychometric properties of the short version of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 38(2), 219–245. doi:10.1177/0163278714531601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rothspan, S., & Read, S. J. (1996). Present versus future time perspective and HIV risk among heterosexual college students. Health Psychology, 15(2), 131–134. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.15.2.131.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Schreiber, J. B., Stage, F. K., King, J., Nora, A., & Barlow, E. A. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: a review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–338. doi:10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schweizer, K. (2011). On the changing role of Cronbach’s α in the evaluation of the quality of a measure. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(3), 143–144. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Seema, R., & Sircova, A. (2013). Mindfulness – a time perspective? Estonian study. Baltic Journal of Psychology, 14(1,2), 4–21.Google Scholar
  43. Shannon, L. (1975). Development of time perspective in three cultural groups: a cultural difference or an expectancy interpretation. Developmental Psychology, 11(1), 114–115. doi:10.1037/h0076120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sircova, A., Mitina, O. V., Boyd, J., Davydova, I. S., Zimbardo, F., Nepryakho, T. L., et al. (2007). The phenomenon of time perspective across different cultures: review of research using ZTPI scale. Journal of Cultural-Historical Psychology, 4, 18–35.Google Scholar
  45. Sircova, A., van de Vijver, F. J., Osin, E., Milfont, T. L., Fieulaine, N., Kislali-Erginbilgic, A.,... & Davydova, I. (2014). A global look at time a 24-country study of the equivalence of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. Sage Open, 4(1). doi:10.1177/2158244013515686
  46. Webster, J. D. (2011). A new measure of time perspective: initial psychometric findings for the balanced time perspective scale (BTPS). Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 43(2), 111–118. doi:10.1037/a0022801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wills, T. A., Sandy, J. M., & Yaeger, A. M. (2001). Time perspective and early-onset substance use: a model based on stress-coping theory. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15(2), 118–125. doi:10.1037/0893-164X.15.2.118.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Worrell, F. C., & Mello, Z. R. (2007). Reliability and validity of Zimbardo time perspective inventory scores in academically talented adolescents. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(3), 487–504. doi:10.1177/0013164406296985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Worrell, F. C., & Mello, Z. R. (2009). Convergent and discriminant validity of time attitude scores on the adolescent time perspective inventory. Research on Child and Adolescent Development, 2, 185–196.Google Scholar
  50. Zaleski, Z., Chlewinski, Z., & Lens, W. (1994). Importance of an optimism-pessimism in predicting solution to world problems: An intercultural study. In Z. Zaleski (Ed.), Psychology of future orientation (pp. 207–228). Lublin: Catholic University of Lublin Press.Google Scholar
  51. Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: a valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2008). The time paradox: the new psychology of time. London: Rider Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gábor Orosz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Edina Dombi
    • 3
  • István Tóth-Király
    • 1
  • Christine Roland-Lévy
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of PsychologyUniversity of Eötvös LorándBudapestHungary
  2. 2.MTA Research Centre for Natural SciencesInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience and PsychologyBudapestHungary
  3. 3.Juhász Gyula Faculty of Education, Department of Applied Pedagogy and PsychologyUniversity of SzegedSzegedHungary
  4. 4.Département de PsychologieUniversité de Reims Champagne-ArdenneReimsFrance

Personalised recommendations