Skip to main content

Development, validity and reliability of the short multidimensional positive mental health instrument

Quality of Life Research volume 23, pages 1459–1477 (2014)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

The 47-item positive mental health (PMH) instrument measures the level of PMH in multiethnic adult Asian populations. This study aimed to (1) develop a short PMH instrument and (2) establish its validity and reliability among the adult Singapore population.

Methods

Two separate studies were conducted among adult community-dwelling Singapore residents of Chinese, Malay or Indian ethnicity where participants completed self-administered questionnaires. In the first study, secondary data analysis was conducted using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to shorten the PMH instrument. In the second study, the newly developed short PMH instrument and other scales were administered to 201 residents to establish its factor structure, validity and reliability.

Results

A 20-item short PMH instrument fulfilling a higher-order six-factor structure was developed following secondary analysis. The mean age of the participants in the second study was 41 years and about 53 % were women. One item with poor factor loading was further removed to generate a 19-item version of the PMH instrument. CFA demonstrated a first-order six-factor model of the short PMH instrument. The PMH-19 instrument and its subscales fulfilled criterion validity hypotheses. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability of the PMH-19 instrument were high (Cronbach’s α coefficient = 0.87; intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.93, respectively).

Conclusions

The 19-item PMH instrument is multidimensional, valid and reliable, and most importantly, with its reduced administration time, the short PMH instrument can be used to measure and evaluate PMH in Asian communities.

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

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fordyce, M. W. (1988). A review of research on the happiness measures: A sixty-second index of happiness and mental health. Social Indicators Research, 20(4), 355–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 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, 47, 1063–1070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1999). Reports of subjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications. In D. Kahneman & E. Diener (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 61–84). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2004). Are Scandinavians happier than Asians? Issues in comparing nations on subjective well-being. Asian Economic and Political Issues, 10, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719–727.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M., Sigmon, S. T., et al. (1991). The will and the ways: Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 570–585.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The Meaning in Life Questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 80–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Westerhof, G. J., & Keyes, C. L. (2010). Mental illness and mental health: The two continua model across the lifespan. Journal of Adult Development, 17(2), 110–119.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Davidson, S., Sewel, K., Tse, D., & O’Connor, R. (2009). Well? What do you think? (2008) The Fourth National Scottish Survey of Public Attitudes to Mental Wellbeing and Mental Health Problems. Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research Queens Printers of Scotland.

  12. Waldron, S. (2010). Measuring subjective wellbeing in the UK. Working paper, Office for National Statistics.

  13. Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., Platt, S., Joseph, S., Weich, S., et al. (2007). The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 27(5), 63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vaingankar, J. A., Subramaniam, M., Lim, Y. W., Sherbourne, C., Luo, N., Ryan, G., et al. (2012). From well-being to positive mental health: Conceptualization and qualitative development of an instrument in Singapore. Quality of Life Research, 21, 1785–1794.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Puchalski, C. M. (2010). Religion, medicine and spirituality: what we know, what we don’t know and what we do. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 11(Suppl 1), 45–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kalra, G., Bhui, K. S., & Bhugra, D. (2012). Sikhism, spirituality and psychiatry. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 5, 339–343.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Singh, Y., Sharma, R., & Talwar, A. (2012). Immediate and long-term effects of meditation on acute stress reactivity, cognitive functions, and intelligence. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 18, 46–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2010). Quality of life, subjective well-being, and religiosity in Muslim college students. Quality of Life Research, 19, 1133–1143.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Shah, R., Kulhara, P., Grover, S., Kumar, S., Malhotra, R., & Tyagi, S. (2011). Relationship between spirituality/religiousness and coping in patients with residual schizophrenia. Quality of Life Research, 20, 1053–1060.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang, C. W., Chan, C. L., Ng, S. M., & Ho, A. H. (2008). The impact of spirituality on health-related quality of life among Chinese older adults with vision impairment. Aging and Mental Health, 12, 267–275.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Koenig, H. G., Zaben, F. A., & Khalifa, D. A. (2012). Religion, spirituality and mental health in the West and the Middle East. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 5, 180–182.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vaingankar, J. A., Subramaniam, M., Chong, S. A., Abdin, E., Edelen, M. O., Picco, L., et al. (2011). The positive mental health instrument: Development and validation of a culturally relevant scale in a multi-ethnic Asian population. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9, 92.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kalantar, J. S., & Talley, N. J. (1999). The effects of lottery incentive and length of questionnaire on health survey response rates: A randomized study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 52(11), 1117–1122.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tubach, F., Baron, G., Falissard, B., Logeart, I., Dougados, M., Bellamy, N., et al. (2005). Using patients’ and rheumatologists’ opinions to specify a short form of the WOMAC functional subscale. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 64, 75–79.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Smart, R. G., Hughes, D. P. H., Johnston, L. D., Anumonye, A., Khant, U., Medina-Mora, M. E., et al. (1980). A methodology for student drug-use surveys. Geneva: World Health Organization, Offset Publication, 50.

  26. Ware, J. E. (2000). SF-36 health survey update. Spine, 25, 3130–3139.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2010). Mplus user’s guide. Sixth edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

  28. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Browne, M. W., & Cudek, R. (1993). Alternate 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 

  31. Cramm, J. M., Strating, M. M., de Vreede, P. L., Steverink, N., & Nieboer, A. P. (2012). Validation of the self-management ability scale (SMAS) and development and validation of a shorter scale (SMAS-S) among older patients shortly after hospitalization. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10(1), 9. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-10-9.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: Consider the Brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 92–100.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Robitschek, C. (1998). Personal growth initiative: The construct and its measure. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 30(4), 183–198.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The Multi-dimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 30–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Underwood, L. G. (2006). Ordinary spiritual experience: Qualitative research, interpretive guidelines, and population distribution for the daily spiritual experience scale. Archive for the Psychology of Religion/Archiv für Religionspsychologie, 28, 181–218.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Stewart-Brown, S., Tennant, A., Tennant, R., Platt, S., Parkinson, J., & Weich, S. (2009). Internal construct validity of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS): A Rasch analysis using data from the Scottish Health Education Population Survey. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 7, 15.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Brooks, R. (1996). EuroQoL: The current state of play. Health Policy, 37(1), 53–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Monahan, P. O., & Löwe, B. (2007). Anxiety disorders in primary care: Prevalence, impairment, comorbidity and detection. Annals of Internal Medicine, 146(5), 317–325.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kroenke, K., & Spitzer, R. L. (2002). The PHQ-9: A new depression diagnostic and severity measure. Psychiatric Annals, 32, 509–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Goldberg, D. P. (1972). The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Marx, R. G., Menezes, A., Horovitz, L., Jones, E. C., & Warren, R. F. (2003). A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(8), 730–735.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Andrich, D. (1988). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrica, 43, 561–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Master, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrica, 47, 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(3), 370.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Mair, P., & Hatzinger, R. (2007). Extended Rasch modeling: The eRm package for the application of IRT models in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 20, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Stochl, J., Croudace, T., Perez, J., Bichwood, M., Lester, H., Marshall, M., et al. (2013). Usefulness of EQ-5D for evaluation of health-related quality of life in young adults with first-episode psychosis. Quality of Life Research, 22, 1055–1063.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Batinic, B., & Gnambs, T. (2011). Evaluation of measurement precision with Rasch-type models: The case of the short Generalized Opinion Leadership Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 53–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Kline, P. (1979). Psychometrics and psychology. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Bland, M., & Altman, D. (1996). Measurement error and correlation coefficients. British Medical Journal, 313, 41–42.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. NHS Health Scotland. (2008). Mental Health Improvement: Evidence and Practice Guide 5: Selecting scales to assess mental wellbeing in adults. Edinburgh: NHS Health Scotland.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Stewart-Brown, S., Tennant, A., Tennant, R., Platt, S., Parkinson, J., & Weich, S. (2009). Internal construct validity of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): A Rasch analysis using data from the Scottish health education population survey. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(7), 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Lewis, F. M. (2002). Health behavior and health education, theory, research and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  54. World Health Organization. (2004). Promoting mental health: Concepts emerging evidence and practice. Summary report 2004.

  55. Worsley, L. (Ed.). (2006). The resilience donut: The secrets of strong kids. Sydney: Wild and Wolley Press.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Slade, M. (2010). Mental illness and well-being: The central importance of positive psychology and recovery approaches. BMC Health Services Research, 10, 26.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., Platt, S., Joseph, S., Weich, S., et al. (2007). The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5, 63.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Stevelink, S. A., Hoekstra, T., Nardi, S. M., van der Zee, C. H., Banstola, N., Premkumar, R., et al. (2012). Development and structural validation of a shortened version of the Participation Scale. Disability Rehabilitation, 34(19), 1596–1607.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(30), 370.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Bartram, D. J., Sinclair, J. M., & Baldwin, D. S. (2013). Further validation of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) in the UK veterinary profession: Rasch analysis. Quality Life Research, 22, 379–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., & Haviland, M. G. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessessment, 92(6), 544–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Maheswaran, H., Weich, S., Powell, J., & Stewart-Brown, S. (2012). Evaluating the responsiveness of the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): Group and individual level analysis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10, 156.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first study was funded by the Singapore Millennium Foundation of the Temasek Trust and the Ministry of Health, Singapore. The second study was supported by funding from the Woodbridge Hospital Endowment.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Research Division, Institute of Mental Health, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, 539747, Singapore

    Janhavi Ajit Vaingankar, Mythily Subramaniam, Edimansyah Abdin, Louisa Picco, Boon Yiang Chua, Goi Khia Eng, Rajeswari Sambasivam, Saleha Shafie, Yunjue Zhang & Siow Ann Chong

Authors
  1. Janhavi Ajit Vaingankar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mythily Subramaniam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Edimansyah Abdin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Louisa Picco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Boon Yiang Chua
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Goi Khia Eng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rajeswari Sambasivam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Saleha Shafie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yunjue Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Siow Ann Chong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Janhavi Ajit Vaingankar.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 114 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vaingankar, J.A., Subramaniam, M., Abdin, E. et al. Development, validity and reliability of the short multidimensional positive mental health instrument. Qual Life Res 23, 1459–1477 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0589-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0589-0

Keywords

  • Test–retest
  • Factor analysis
  • Ethnicity
  • Multidimensional scale
  • Asian