Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The validity and reliability of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory in a Turkish sample

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study evaluated the validity and reliability of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI; Zimbardo & Boyd, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288, 1999) in a Turkish sample. A Turkish version of the ZTPI was administered to participants in Study 1 (n = 554) while another group of participants filled out the ZTPI as well as measures of personality, locus of control, self-esteem, and self-efficacy in Study 2 (n = 234). Test-retest reliability of the ZTPI scores was assessed on the Study 2’s sample (n = 88) over a 2-week period. The Turkish ZTPI demonstrated adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability with minor exceptions. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) supported the five-factor structure of the original scale suggesting that the ZTPI has cross-cultural validity. However, similar to prior adaptation studies, the model fit values ranged from poor to good, suggesting a need for additional research on the psychometric properties of the ZTPI. Finally, the applicability of the deviation from balanced perspective scores was examined and unique relationships were demonstrated: balanced time perspective was associated with high conscientiousness and internal locus of control. Findings are discussed in relation to the time perspective theory, and the recommendations to improve the ZTPI’s structural validity are provided.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Only the weighted averages of correlations above .10 are considered to represent a meaningful association between the variables.

  2. All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and can also be accessed from here: https://osf.io/sbeuz/?view_only=411dd63c9ef144cc8aa1483b4a587d58

  3. The Turkish ZTPI is available upon request from the author.

References

  • Akirmak, U. (2014). How is time perspective related to perceptions of self and of interpersonal relationships? The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17, E92. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anagnostopoulos, F., & Griva, F. (2012). Exploring time perspective in Greek young adults: Validation of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory and relationships with mental health indicators. Social Indicators Research, 106(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9792-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apostolidis, T., & Fieulaine, N. (2004). Validation franc¸ aise de l’e´ chelle de temporalite´ the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. European Review of Applied Psychology, 54, 207–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, M. J., & Benfield, J. a. (2013). Past perspective is related to present relationships: Past-positive and negative time perspectives differentially predict rejection sensitivity. The Psychological Record, 63(3), 615–628. https://doi.org/10.11133/j.tpr.2013.63.3.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boniwell, I. (2005). Beyond time management: How the latest research on time perspective and perceived time use can assist clients with time-related concerns. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 3(2), 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boniwell, I., & Osin, E. (2014). Beyond time management: Time use, performance and well-being. Organizational Psychology, 5(3), 85–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boniwell, I., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). Balancing one’s time perspective in pursuit of optimal functioning. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 165–180). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boniwell, I., Osin, E., Linley, P. A., & Ivanchenko, G. V. (2010). A question of balance: Time perspective and well-being in British and Russian samples. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760903271181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boniwell, I., Osin, E., & Sircova, A. (2014). Introducing time perspective coaching: A new approach to improve time management and enhance well-being. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 12(2), 24–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54, 106–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W., & Kim, E. S. (2003). Cultural diversity in people’s understanding and uses of time. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52(3), 363–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carelli, M. G., Wiberg, B., & Wiberg, M. (2011). Development and construct validation of the Swedish Zimbardo time perspective inventory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(4), 220–227. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cemalcilar, Z., Canbeyli, R., & Sunar, D. (2003). Learned helplessness, therapy, and personality traits: An experimental study. The Journal of Social Psychology, 143(1), 65–81. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540309598431.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1989). The NEO-PI/NEO-FFI manual supplement. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuhadaroglu, F. (1986). Adolesanlarda benlik saygisi. Yayimlanmamis Uzmanlik Tezi. Hacettepe Universitesi, Tip Fakultesi, Psikiyatri Anabilim Dali, Ankara.

  • Dağ, İ. (1991). Rotter’in İç-Dış Kontrol Odağı Ölçeği (RİDKOÖ)‘nin üniversite öğrencileri için güvenirliği ve geçerliği. Psikoloji Dergisi, 7(26), 10–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Morales, J. F. (2006). Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del inventario de pespectiva temporal de Zimbardo. Psicothema, 18, 565–571.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 653–663.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, L., Duncan, E., Sutherland, F., Abernethy, C., & Henry, C. (2008). Time perspective and correlates of wellbeing. Time & Society, 17(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X07086304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunkel, C. S., & Weber, J. L. (2010). Using three levels of personality to predict time perspective. Current Psychology, 29, 95–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

  • Gao, Y.-J. (2011). Time perspective and life satisfaction among young adults in Taiwan. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 39(6), 729–736. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2011.39.6.729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. S. (2018). Turkey’s economy is so hot that it may face a meltdown. The New York Times. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/10/business/turkey-economy-erdogan.html. Accessed 5 Dec 2018.

  • Göregenli, M. (1995). Toplumumuzda bireycilik-toplulukçuluk eğilimleri. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi (Turkish Journal of Psychology), 11, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Güell, P., Orchard, M., Yopo, M., & Jiménez-Molina, Á. (2015). Time perspectives and subjective wellbeing in Chile. Social Indicators Research, 123(1), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0727-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, Y., Chen, Z., & Feng, T. (2017). Neural substrates underlying balanced time perspective: A combined voxel-based morphometry and resting-state functional connectivity study. Behavioral Brain Research, 332, 237–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2017.06.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haghighatgoo, M., Besharat, M. A., & Zebardast, A. (2011). The relationship between controlling styles and time perspective in students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 912–915.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., & Levy, P. E. (2008). Getting to the core of self-evaluation: A review and recommendations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(3), 391–413. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kairys, A. (2010). Correlations between time perspectives and personality traits in different age groups. Bridges / Tiltai, 51(2), 159–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kairys, A., & Liniauskaite, A. (2015). Time perspective and personality. In M. Stolarski, N. Fieulaine, & W. van Beek (Eds.), Time perspective theory; Review, research and application: Essays in honor of Philip G. Zimbardo (pp. 99–113). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07368-2_6.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kislali-Erginbilgic, A. (n.d.). The reliability and validity of Zimbardo time perspective inventory scores in Turkish university students. Unpublished data.

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Laghi, F., Baiocco, R., Liga, F., Guarino, A., & Baumgartner, E. (2013). Identity status differences among Italian adolescents: Associations with time perspective. Children and Youth Services Review, 35, 482–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, K. S., & Wong, C. S. (1999). Multidimensional constructs in structural equation analysis: An illustration using the job perception and job satisfaction constructs. Journal of Management, 25, 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lennings, C. J. (2000). Optimism, satisfaction and time perspective in the elderly. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 51, 167–181.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in the social sciences: Selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liniauskaite, A., & Kairys, A. (2009). The Lithuanian version of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory (ZTPI). Psichologija, 40, 66–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 616–628. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.71.3.616.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., & Browne, M. W. (1993). The use of causal indicators in covariance structure models: Some practical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 533–541.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Balla, J. R., & Grayson, D. (1998). Is more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 181–220.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., & members of the Personality Profiles of Cultures Project. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer's perspective: Data from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 547–561. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.547.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milfont, T. L., Andrade, P. R., Belo, R. P., & Pessoa, V. S. (2008). Testing zimbardo time perspective inventory in a Brazilian sample. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 42(1), 49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moritz, S., & Bartz-Beielstein, T. (2017). imputeTS: time series missing value imputation in R. The R Journal, 9(1), 207–218. https://journal.r-project.org/archive/2017/RJ-2017-009/index.html. Accessed 10 Sept 2018.

  • Ortuño, V., & Gamboa, V. (2009). Estrutura factorial do Zimbardo time perspective inventory—ZTPI numa amostra de estudantes universitários portugueses [factorial structure of Zimbardo time perspective inventory—ZTPI in a sample of Portuguese university students]. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 27, 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osburn, H. G. (2000). Coefficient alpha and related internal consistency reliability coefficients. Psychological Methods, 5(3), 343–355. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.5.3.343.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oyanadel, C., & Buela-Casal, G. (2014). Time perception and psychopathology: Influence of time perspective on quality of life of severe mental illness. Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría, 42(3), 99–107.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J. L., McKay, M. T., Worrell, F. C., Živkovič, U., Mello, Z. R., & Musil, B. (2015). Measuring time perspective in adolescents: Can you get the right answer by asking the wrong questions? Personality and Individual Differences, 78, 53–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.01.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2017) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 10 Sept 2018.

  • Revelle, W. (2018). psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research (Version 1.8.12) [Computer software]. Retrieved fromhttps://cran.r-project.org/package=psych. Accessed 20 Jan 2019.

  • Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36 URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/. Accessed 9 June 2018.

  • Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8(4), 350–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.8.4.350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seema, R., & Sircova, A. (2013). Mindfulness – A time perspective? Estonian study. Baltic Journal of Psychology, 14(2), 4–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seema, R., Sircova, A., & Baltin, A. (2014). Transcendental future – Is it a healthy belief or a time perspective? The transcendental-future time perspective inventory (ttpi) in Estonian. Trames, 18(1), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.3176/tr.2014.1.04.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherer, M., & Adams, C. H. (1983). Construct validation of the self-efficacy scale. Psychological Reports, 53, 899–902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipp, A. J., Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2009). Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2cp41947e.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sircova, A., van de Vijver, F. J. R., Osin, E., Milfont, T. L., Fieulaine, N., Kislali-Erginbilgic, A., et al. (2014). A global look at time: A 24-country study of the equivalence of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. SAGE Open, 4, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013515686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sircova, A., Van De Vijer, F. J. R., Osin, E., et al. (2015). Time perspective profiles of cultures. In M. Stolarski, N. Fieulaine, & W. van Beek (Eds.), Time perspective theory: Review, research, and application. Essays in honor of Phillip G. Zimbardo (pp. 169–187). Zug: Springer.

  • Stolarski, M., & Cyniak-Cieciura, M. (2016). Balanced and less traumatized: Balanced time perspective mediates the relationship between temperament and severity of ptsd syndrome in motor vehicle accident survivor sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 456–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolarski, M., Bitner, J., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2011). Time perspective, emotional intelligence and discounting of delayed awards. Time and Society, 20(3), 346–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X11414296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolarski, M., Matthews, G., Postek, S., Zimbardo, P. G., & Bitner, J. (2014). How we feel is a matter of time: Relationships between time perspectives and mood. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9450-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolarski, M., Wiberg, W., & Osin, E. (2015). Assessing temporal harmony: The issue of a balanced time perspective. In M. Stolarski, N. Fieulaine, & W. van Beek (Eds.), Time perspective theory; Review, research and application: Essays in honor of Philip G. Zimbardo (pp. 55–71). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07368-2_3.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sunar, D. (1996). Turkish adaptation of the NEO-FFI. Unpublished manuscript, Bogazici University, Istanbul.

  • Sword, R. M., Sword, R. K., Brunskill, S. R., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2014). Time perspective therapy: A new time-based metaphor therapy for PTSD. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 19(3), 197–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics, 5th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, J. D. (2011). A new measure of time perspective: Initial psychometric findings for the balanced time perspective scale (BTPS). Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 43(2), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiberg, M., Sircova, A., Wiberg, B., & Carelli, M. G. (2012). Operationalizing balanced time perspective in a Swedish sample. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 95–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, J. V., Heimpel, S. A., & Michela, J. L. (2003). Savoring versus dampening: Self-esteem differences in regulating positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 566–580.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Worrell, F. C., & Mello, Z. R. (2007). The reliability and validity of Zimbardo time perspective inventory scores in academically talented adolescents. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(3), 487–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406296985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worrell, F. C., McKay, M. T., & Andretta, J. R. (2015). Concurrent validity of Zimbardo time perspective inventory profiles: A secondary analysis of data from the United Kingdom. Journal of Adolescence, 42, 128–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.04.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yildirim, F., & İlhan, İ. Ö. (2010). The validity and reliability of the general self-efficacy scale-Turkish form. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 21(4), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajenkowski, M., Stolarski, M., Maciantowicz, O., Malesza, M., & Witowska, J. (2016a). Time to be smart: Uncovering a complex interplay between intelligence and time perspectives. Intelligence, 58, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2016.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zajenkowski, M., Stolarski, M., Witowska, J., Maciantowicz, O., & Lowicki, P. (2016b). Fluid intelligence as a mediator of the relationship between executive control and balanced time perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1844. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01844.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J. W., & Howell, R. T. (2011). Do time perspectives predict unique variances in life satisfaction beyond personality traits? Personality and Individual Differences, 50(8), 1261–1266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J. W., Howell, R. T., & Stolarski, M. (2013). Comparing three methods to measure a balanced time perspective: The relationship between a balanced time perspective and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(1), 169–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-012-9322-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. (2008). The time paradox: the new psychology of time that will change your life. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Umit Akirmak

Authors
  1. Umit Akirmak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Umit Akirmak.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akirmak, U. The validity and reliability of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory in a Turkish sample. Curr Psychol 40, 2327–2340 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-0153-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-0153-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation