Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 119, Issue 2, pp 1031–1045 | Cite as

Psychometric Properties of the Flourishing Scale in a New Zealand Sample

  • Lucy Hone
  • Aaron Jarden
  • Grant Schofield
Article

Abstract

The Flourishing Scale (FS; Diener et al. in Soc Indic Res 97(2):143–156, 2010) was developed to assess psychological flourishing, which can be conceived of as a social-psychological prosperity incorporating important aspects of human functioning. This study takes the FS, which has previously been validated on convenience samples of students, and analyses the underlying structure, psychometric properties, and demographic norms using nationally-representative data from New Zealand’s Sovereign Wellbeing Index (n = 10,009; Human Potential Centre in Sovereign Wellbeing Index: New Zealand’s first measure of wellbeing. Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, 2013). Evidence for the reliability and validity of the FS is presented (Cronbach alpha) and its performance compared to other related scales and behaviors. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the one factor structure of the 8-item FS. Contemporary population norms for the FS are reported, providing a much-needed benchmark for estimation of population health and permitting cross-study and international comparisons. The study provides further evidence that the FS is a valid and reliable brief summary measure of psychological functioning, suited for use with a wide range of age groups and applications.

Keywords

Well-being Subjective well-being Flourishing Flourishing Scale Five Ways to Wellbeing Positive psychology 

References

  1. Aked, J., Marks, N., Cordon, C., & Thompson, S. (2009). Five ways to well-being: A report presented to the foresight project on communicating the evidence base for improving people’s well-being. London: Nef.Google Scholar
  2. Arbuckle, J., & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS 4 user’s reference guide. Chicago: Smallwaters Corporation.Google Scholar
  3. Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on multiplying factors for various Chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16(Series B), 296–298.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, S. L., Nesse, R. M., Vinokur, A. D., & Smith, D. M. (2003). Providing social support may be more beneficial than receiving it: Results from a prospective study of mortality. Psychological Science, 14(4), 320–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245–276. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen, Y., Lee, Y.-T., Pethtel, O. L., Gutowitz, M. S., & Kirk, R. M. (2012). Age differences in goal concordance, time use, and well-being. Educational Gerontology, 38(11), 742–752. doi: 10.1080/03601277.2011.645424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Child, D. (1970). The essentials of factor analysis. London: Cassel Education Limited.Google Scholar
  9. Diener, E. (2009). Assessing well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener (Vol. 3). Oxford: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2008). Happiness: Unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. (2009). Well-being for public policy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Beyond Money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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(2), 143–156. doi: 10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ensel, W. (1986). Measuring depression: The CES-D scale. In N. Lin, A. Dean, & W. Ensel (Eds.), Social support, life events, and depression (pp. 51–70). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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. doi: 10.2307/27520745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Human Potential Centre. (2013). Sovereign Wellbeing Index: New Zealand’s first measure of wellbeing. Auckland, NZ: Auckland University of Technology.Google Scholar
  19. Huppert, F. A. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence regardings its causes and consequences. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1(2), 137–164. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01008.x.Google Scholar
  20. Huppert, F. A., Marks, N., Clark, A., Siegrist, J., Stutzer, A., Vitters, J., et al. (2009). Measuring well-being across Europe: Description of the ESS well-being module and preliminary findings. Social Indicators Research, 91, 301–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Huppert, F. A., & So, T. C. (2009). What percentage of people in Europe are flourishing and what characterises them? Presented at the meeting of the OECD/ISQOLS meeting, Florence.Google Scholar
  22. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36. doi: 10.1007/bf02291575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), 207–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keyes, C. L. M. (2005). Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health [Research Support, Non-US Gov’t]. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(3), 539–548. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.3.539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. NZGSS. (2010). New Zealand Social Survey. Wellington, NZ: Statistics New Zealand.Google Scholar
  28. OECD. (2009). Life satisfaction. In Society at a glance: OECD Social indicators: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/soc_glance-2008-30-en.
  29. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of democracy, 6(1), 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385–401. doi: 10.1177/014662167700100306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Roberts, R. E. (1980). Reliability of the CES-D scale in different ethnic contexts. Psychiatry research, 2(2), 125–134. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(80)90069-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being [Research Support, US Gov’t, P.H.S.]. The American psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141–166. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginners’ guide to structural equation modelling (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  37. Seligman, M. E. (2006). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life (1st Vintage Books ed.). New York: Vintage Books. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/login?url=http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0703/2006277713-d.html, http://ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/login?url=http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0703/2006277713-s.html.
  38. Silva, A. J., & Caetano, A. (2011). Validation of the Flourishing Scale and scale of positive and negative experience in Portugal. Social Indicators Research, 110(2), 469–478.Google Scholar
  39. Spielberger, C. D., Ritterband, L. M., Reheiser, E. C., & Brunner, T. M. (2003). The nature and measurement of depression. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 3(2), 209–234.Google Scholar
  40. Statistics New Zealand. (2006). 2006 New Zealand census data. Retrieved from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/about-2006-census/2006-census-reports.aspx.
  41. Watson, D., Clark, I. 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(6), 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Human Potential CentreAUT UniversityAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations