Measurement Invariance of the Day Reconstruction Method: Results from the COURAGE in Europe Project
- 339 Downloads
Given the growing interest in the study of subjective well-being as a measure of social progress, instruments that produce valid and reliable scores and that can be used within and across countries are needed. The aim of the present study was to analyze the measurement equivalence of the Day Reconstruction Method in its brief version, using nationally representative samples from Finland, Poland, and Spain obtained within the COURAGE in Europe project. The goodness-of-fit of a two-correlated-factors model and the reliability of the scores obtained were assessed. Cross-country invariance was tested employing a multiple group confirmatory factor analysis, through sequential constraint imposition. In each country, measurement invariance was tested across time frames (morning, afternoon and evening) and days of the week (weekday and weekend). The results found support for the hypothesis of a two-correlated-factors (positive and negative affect) structure; the reliability of the positive, the negative and the net affect scores showed appropriate values. A high equivalence across the three national samples was found: all items except one showed strong measurement invariance indicating that respondents from Finland, Poland, and Spain attribute the same meaning to the latent construct under study, and the levels of the underlying items are equal in all three countries. Similar results were found for the measurement equivalence across time frames and days of the week. Our findings support the assumption of comparability across the different samples considered; in general, higher positive affect and lower negative affect were found in Finland, in the evening and at the weekend.
KeywordsSubjective well-being Day Reconstruction Method Multiple group confirmatory factor analysis Measurement invariance
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under Grant Agreement Number 223071 (COURAGE in Europe), from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III-FIS research Grants Number PS09/00295 and PS09/01845, and from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation ACI-Promociona (ACI2009-1010). The study was supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), and the AGES-CM Programme (AGES-S2010/BMD-2422). M.M. is grateful to the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness for the postdoctoral fellowship (Reference No. FPDI-2013-15793). B.O. is grateful to the Sara Borrell postdoctoral programme (Reference No. CD12/00429) supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the World Health Organization.
Research Involving Human Participants
Ethical approvals were obtained from all participant institutions. Informed consent from each individual was also obtained.
- Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Miret, M., Caballero, F. F., Olaya, B., Haro, J. M., Kowal, P., et al. (2013). Multi-country evaluation of affective experience: validation of an abbreviated version of the day reconstruction method in seven countries. PLoS One, 8(4), e61534. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
- Caballero, F. F., Miret, M., Olaya, B., Perales, J., López-Ridaura, R., Haro, J. M., et al. (2014). Evaluation of affect in Mexico and Spain: Psychometric properties and usefulness of an abbreviated version of the day reconstruction method. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 915–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Devins, G. M., Beiser, M., Dion, R., Pelletier, L. G., & Edwards, R. G. (1997). Cross-cultural measurement of psychological well-being: The psychometric equivalence of Cantonese, Vietnamese, and Laotian translations of the affect balance scale. American Journal of Public Health, 87, 794–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dorans, N. J., & Schmitt, A. P. (1991). Constructed response and differential item functioning: A pragmatic approach. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
- Elosua, P., & López-Jáuregui, A. (2002). Indicadores de dimensionalidad para ítems binarios. Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento, 4, 121–137.Google Scholar
- Gregorich, S. E. (2006). Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. [Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Review]. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S78–S94. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245454.12228.8f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Leonardi, M., Chatterji, S., Koskinen, S., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Haro, J. M., Frisoni, G., et al. (2013). Determinants of health and disability in ageing population: The COURAGE in Europe Project (Collaborative Research on Ageing in Europe). Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy,. doi: 10.1002/cpp.1856.Google Scholar
- McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Mulaik, S. A. (1972). The foundations of factor analysis. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus user’s guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- StataCorp. (2010). Stata statistical software. Release 11. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.Google Scholar
- The World Bank (2010). http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI/countries?display=default.
- The World Bank (2011). http://data.worldbank.org/country.
- The World Health Organization (2013). http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/.
- Üstün, T. B., Chatterji, S., Mechbal, A., Murray, C. J. L., & WHS Collaborating groups (2005). Quality assurance in surveys: Standards, guidelines and procedures. In Department of Economic and Social Affairs Statistic Division of the United Nations (Ed.), Household surveys in developing and transition countries. New York: United Nations Statistics Division.Google Scholar
- Vázquez, C., & Hervás, G. (2013). Addressing current challenges in cross-cultural measurement of well-being: The pemberton happiness index. In A. D. Fave & H. H. Koop (Eds.), Well-being and cultures. Perspectives from positive psychology (pp. 31–49). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Wainer, H., & Thissen, D. (2001). True score theory: The traditional method. In D. Thissen & H. Wainer (Eds.), Test Scoring. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Watkins, L. (2010). The cross-cultural appropriateness of survey-based value(s) research: A review of methodological issues and suggestion of alternative methodology. International Marketing Review, 27(6), 694–716.Google Scholar
- Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. E. (2009). The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
- Zieky, M. (1993). Practical questions in the use of DIF statistics in test development. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 337–347). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar