Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Validation of the Flourishing Scale and Scale of Positive and Negative Experience in Portugal

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Flourishing Scale (FS) and the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience (SPANE) created by Diener et al. (Soc Indic Res 97:143–156, 2010) are instruments that assess psychological flourishing and feelings (positive and negative, and the difference between the two). In this study, the psychometric properties of both scales were explored by using two Portuguese samples (I: n = 734; II: n = 194). Reliability analysis and a multi-group confirmatory factorial analysis (MCFA) of both scales were performed. To examine the validity of FS and SPANE we analyzed their correlations with other well-being and happiness measures. Results showed that the Portuguese versions of both scales have good psychometric properties, and they also showed convergent validity. Results also demonstrated the unidimensional structure of the FS and a two-factor solution for the SPANE. The multi-group CFA of both scales evidenced an invariant structure. Both Portuguese versions of the scales behave consistently with the original and may be used in future studies of well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantril, H. (1965). The pattern of human concerns. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

  • Cummins, R. A. (2003). Normative life satisfaction: Measurement issues and a homeostatic model. Social Indicators Research, 64, 225–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Lucas, R. (1999). Personality, and subjective well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–229). New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (1991). Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 119–139). New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (2009). Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. Social Indicators Research Series, 39, 213–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., Oishi, S., et al. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97, 143–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henson, R. K. (2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Wellbeing Group. (2006). Personal Wellbeing Index (4th Edn.). Melbourne, Australian Centre on Quality of Life, School of Psychology, Deakin University, ISBN 1 74156 048 9. Retrieved June 9, 2011, from http://www.deakin.edu.au/research/acqol/instruments/wellbeing-index/pwi-a-english.pdf.

  • Keyes, C., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. (2002). Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, L. A., & Napa, C. K. (1998). What makes a life good? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 156–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, I., & Little, B. R. (1998). Personal projects, happiness, and meaning: On doing well and being yourself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 494–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). To be happy or to be self-fulfilled: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. In S. Fiske (Ed.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 52, pp. 141–166). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews/Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryff, C. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1.069–1.081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the MI literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 678–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 54, 1063–1070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was partially supported by FCT grant SFRH/BD/72455/2010 and by FCT grant PTDC/PSI/73347/2006.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Junça Silva.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silva, A.J., Caetano, A. Validation of the Flourishing Scale and Scale of Positive and Negative Experience in Portugal. Soc Indic Res 110, 469–478 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9938-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9938-y

Keywords

Navigation