Positive Solitude Scale: Theoretical Background, Development and Validation

Abstract

The current set of studies was aimed at examining the theoretical basis, development process, and psychometric properties of a new scale for measuring positive solitude (PS). The theoretical idea behind the development of this construct was to develop a stand-alone scale for measuring the positive aspects of an individual's ability to volitionally choose to spend time by him/herself. Using five different samples, we examined the face validity, exploratory/confirmatory factor analysis results, construct validity, and test–retest reliability of the new scale. The results were replicated across five studies, demonstrating a single factor for the 9-item PS scale which had good convergent and divergent validity and acceptable test–retest reliability. Overall, this new short scale has excellent psychometric properties. This scale may serve as a tool for further examining the phenomenon of PS, a concept that is under-developed in the psychological literature. PS can also be perceived as an important personal asset, when other personal resources may be depleted. A better understanding of the PS phenomenon may thus enhance development of interventions aimed at improving this ability. PS may be especially important for older adults, who sometimes face challenges with engaging in varied social activities and need to cope with more time alone.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    Prof. 1 is a researcher in the field of social sciences, who is also is a clinical psychologist and an expert in the field of loneliness, and gerontology. (2). Prof. 2 is a researcher in the field of social sciences, who is a clinical psychologist with vast experience. He is an expert in social psychology and health psychology who also specializes in gerontology. (3). Doctor 3 is a researcher in the field of social sciences, and an expert in sociology, organizational psychology, loneliness, family life and couplehood. (4). Doctor 4 is a cognitive and clinical psychologist who both treats clients with loneliness as well as researching loneliness in older adults.

  2. 2.

    The baseline goodness of fit measures were X2 = 67.806; DF = 27; Χ2/df = 2.51; CFI = .91; IFI = .91; SRMR = 0.06, RMSEA = .11. We therefore inspected the modification indices in order to improve model fit. This inspection showed that the largest improvement in model fit will result from correlating error term 1 to error term 4 (MI = 18.75). After correlating the error terms, the model fit greatly improved.

References

  1. Baird, B., Smallwood, J., Mrazek, M. D., Kam, J. W., Franklin, M. S., & Schooler, J. W. (2012). Inspired by distraction: Mind wandering facilitates creative incubation. Psychological Science, 23(10), 1117–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612446024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Benyamini, Y., Blumstein, T., Lusky, A., & Modan, B. (2003). Gender differences in the self-rated health-mortality association: Is it poor self-rated health that predicts mortality or excellent self-rated health that predicts survival? The Gerontologist, 43, 396–405. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/43.3.396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bolier, L., Haverman, M., Westerhof, G. J., Riper, H., Smit, F., & Bohlmeijer, E. (2013). Positive psychology interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. BMC Public Health, 13, 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Broder, H. L., McGrath, C., & Cisneros, G. J. (2007). Questionnaire development: Face validity and item impact testing of the child oral health impact profile. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, 35, 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00401.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Burger, J. M. (1995). Individual differences in preference for solitude. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1995.1005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cacioppo, J. T., Cacioppo, S., & Boomsma, D. I. (2014). Evolutionary mechanisms for loneliness. Cognition and Emotion, 28, 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.837379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cacioppo, J. T., & Hawkley, L. C. (2003). Social isolation and health, with an emphasis on underlying mechanisms. Perspectives in biology and medicine, 46(3), S39–S52. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2003.0063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Coplan, R. J., & Armer, M. (2007). A “multitude” of solitude: A closer look at social withdrawal and nonsocial play in early childhood. Child Development Perspectives, 1, 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2007.00006.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Coplan, R. J., Prakash, K., O’Neil, K., & Armer, M. (2004). Do you ‘want’ to play? Distinguishing between conflicted-shyness and social disinterest in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 40, 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.40.2.244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Derogates, L. R. (2001). Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI)-18. Administration, scoring and procedures manual. Minneapolis, MN: NCS Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Detrixhe, J. J., Wallner-Samstag, L., Penn, L. S., & Wong, P. S. (2014). A lonely Idea: Solitude’s separation from psychological research and theory. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 50, 310–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/00107530.2014.897853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. De Winter, J. C., & Dodou, D. (2012). Factor recovery by principal axis factoring and maximum likelihood factor analysis as a function of factor pattern and sample size. Journal of Applied Statistics, 39(4), 695–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gignac, G. E. (2006). Self-reported emotional intelligence and life satisfaction: Testing incremental predictive validity hypotheses via structural equation modeling (SEM) in a small sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(8), 1569–1577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.01.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Goossens, L., Lasgaard, M., Luyckx, K., Vanhalst, J., Mathias, S., & Masy, E. (2009). Loneliness and solitude in adolescence: A confirmatory factor analysis of alternative models. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(8), 890–894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.07.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hannula, M. M., & Lehtinen, E. (2005). Spontaneous focusing on numerosity and mathematical skills of young children. Learning and Instruction, 15, 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.04.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2010). Loneliness matters: A theoretical and empirical review of consequences and mechanisms. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 40, 218–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-010-9210-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ho, P. M., Cooper, A. J., Hall, P. J., & Smillie, L. D. (2015). Factor structure and construct validity of the temporal experience of pleasure scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97, 200–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2014.940625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hong, S., Malik, M. L., & Lee, M. K. (2003). Testing configural, metric, scalar, and latent mean invariance across genders in sociotropy and autonomy using a non-Western sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 636–654. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164403251332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hopkins, W. G. (2000). Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Medicine, 30(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200030010-00001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hopwood, C. J., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). How should the internal structure of personality inventories be evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(3), 332–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310361240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ilies, R., Wagner, D., Wilson, K., Ceja, L., Johnson, M., DeRue, S., & Ilgen, D. (2017). Flow at work and basic psychological needs: effects on well-being. Applied Psychology, 66, 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy, J. A., Jr., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kabat-Zinn, J. (2005). Coming to our senses: Healing ourselves and the world through mindfulness. UK: Hachette UK.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Keyes, C. L., 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 & Psychotherapy, 15(3), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kor, A., Zilcha-Mano, S., Fogel, Y. A., Mikulincer, M., Reid, R. C., & Potenza, M. N. (2014). Psychometric development of the problematic pornography use scale. Addictive Behaviors, 39, 861–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.01.027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Laidlaw, K., Power, M. J., & Schmidt, S. (2007). The attitudes to ageing questionnaire (AAQ): Development and psychometric properties. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 22, 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.1683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Larson, R. (1990). The solitary side of life: An examination of the time people spend alone from childhood to old age. Developmental Review, 10(2), 155–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(90)90008-R.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Larson, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1978). Experiential correlates of time alone in adolescence. Journal of Personality, 46(4), 677–693. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1978.tb00191.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lay, J. C., Pauly, T., Graf, P., Mahmood, A., & Hoppmann, C. A. (2018). Choosing solitude: Age differences in situational and affective correlates of solitude-seeking in midlife and older adulthood. The Journals of Gerontology: Psychological and Sciences Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gby044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lee, J., & Cagle, J. G. (2017). Validating the 11-Item revised university of California Los Angeles scale to assess loneliness among older adults: An evaluation of factor structure and other measurement properties. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 25, 1173–1183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2017.06.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Leung, L. (2015). Using tablet in solitude for stress reduction: An examination of desire for aloneness, leisure boredom, tablet activities, and location of use. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 382–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Long, C. R., & Averill, J. R. (2003). Solitude: An exploration of benefits of being alone. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 33, 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5914.00204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Mrazek, M. D., Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2012). Mindfulness and mind-wandering: Finding convergence through opposing constructs. Emotion, 12, 442–448. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Mroczek, D. K., & Kolarz, C. M. (1998). The effect of age on positive and negative affect: A developmental perspective on happiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1333–1349. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Nguyen, T. V. T., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2018). Solitude as an approach to affective self-regulation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 92–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217733073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Osborne, J. W., & Costello, A. B. (2009). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pan-Pacific Management Review, 12, 131–146. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995627.d8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ost Mor, S., Palgi, Y., & Segel-Karpas, D. (2020). The Definition and categories of positive solitude: Older and younger adults’ perspectives on spending time by themselves. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415020957379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Oswald, A. J., & Wu, S. (2010). Objective confirmation of subjective measures of human well-being: Evidence from the U.S.A. Science, 327, 576–579. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1180606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Pauly, T., Lay, J. C., Nater, U. M., Scott, S. B., & Hoppmann, C. A. (2017). How we experience being alone: Age differences in affective and biological correlates of momentary solitude. Gerontology, 63, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1159/000450608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Peplau, L. A., & Perlman, D. (1982). Perspectives on loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory research and therapy (pp. 1–18). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Pope, K. S. (1978). How gender, solitude, and posture influence the stream of consciousness in the stream of consciousness (pp. 259–299). Boston: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Prenda, K. M., & Lachman, M. E. (2001). Planning for the future: A life management strategy for increasing control and life satisfaction in adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 16, 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.16.2.206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Ferguson, M. L. (1978). Developing a measure of loneliness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 42, 290–294. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4203_11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Salmon, P., & Matarese, S. (2014). Mindfulness meditation: Seeking solitude in community. The Handbook of Solitude: Psychological Perspectives on Social Isolation, Social Withdrawal, and Being Alone. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118427378.ch19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Schuster, T. L., Kessler, R. C., & Aseltine, R. H., Jr. (1990). Supportive interactions, negative interactions, and depressed mood. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00938116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Shrira, A., Bodner, E., & Palgi, Y. (2016). Positivity ratio of flourishing individuals: Examining the moderation effects of methodological variations and chronological age. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2015.1037857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Thomas, V. & Azmitia, M. (2014). Motivation matters: Development of a short form measure of solitude for adolescents and emerging adults. Poster presented at the meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Austin, TX. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3414t2qv.pdf.

  56. Thomas, V., & Azmitia, M. (2019). Motivation matters: Development and validation of the motivation for solitude scale-short form (MSS-SF). Journal of Adolescence, 70, 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.11.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Van Zyl, C. J., Dankaert, E., & Guse, T. (2018). Motivation for solitude: A cross-cultural examination of adolescents from collectivist and individualist cultures in South Africa. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27, 697–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0916-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Wang, J., & Wang, X. (2019). Structural equation modeling, applications using Mplus (2nd ed.). West Sussex: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  59. Winnicott, D. W. (1958). The capacity to be alone. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 39, 416–420.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuval Palgi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 8.

Table 8 Descriptive statistics of students' ratings in step 3 (study 1) of the 34 items

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Palgi, Y., Segel-Karpas, D., Ost Mor, S. et al. Positive Solitude Scale: Theoretical Background, Development and Validation. J Happiness Stud (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-021-00367-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Positive solitude
  • Solitude
  • Loneliness
  • Assessment
  • Validation
  • Psychometrics