Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Proposal for Measuring Children Emotional Well-Being within an Anti-Poverty Measure in Italy: Psychometric Characteristics and Comparative Verification of Results

  • Published:
Child Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Between 2013 and 2015 the Italian Ministry of Labour and Social Policy run an experimental anti-poverty measure in 12 metropolitan areas. The measure provided an income support to households with children (mainly households with low-income and low work intensity) according to a conditional cash transfer scheme and was designed in view of the implementation of the new national measure to fight poverty. In this context, to assessing the improvement of children’s well-being the INAPP Social Inclusion Research group proposed to include a child-centered approach, adapting the MACaD questionnaire (Multidimensional Analysis of Capabilities Deprivation) to the characteristics of children aged 8 through 13 and adolescents aged 14 through 17. The questionnaire was applied to 171 children and 92 adolescents and a set of tools was designed with the aim to measure children’s and adolescents’ emotional well-being. In particular, the tools are: - a Children standard well-being index, based on the system of children’s rights; − a Children’s Emotional Well-Being scale; − an Adolescent’s Emotional Well-Being scale. This paper describe: (i) the Children Standard Well-Being index; (ii) the psychometric and factorial characteristics (through Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis) of the scales for assessing Children’s Emotional Well-Being and Adolescents’ Emotional Well-Being; (iii) the results obtained from the application of the scales; (iv) the comparative verification of the results obtained from the application of the scales, carried out by analysing the data of the International Survey of Children’s Well-Being.

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

Graph 1
Graph 2
Graph 3
Graph 4
Graph 5
Graph 6
Graph 7
Graph 8
Graph 9
Graph 10
Graph 11
Graph 12
Graph 13
Graph 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The children well-being section of the general evaluation questionnaire, was composed of items which assessed school attendance, medical checkups, vaccinations and Body Mass Index.

  2. For more information see bibliographical references about the MACaD model (D’Emilione & Giuliano, 2013; D’Emilione & Raciti, 2012; D’Emilione et al, 2012; D’Emilione et al, 2014; Giuliano et al, 2013; D'Emilione et al., 2016a)

  3. From now on called the Children MACaD Questionnaire

  4. See.: Ben-Arieh (2006, 2005); Brown and Moore (2001)

  5. See: Ben-Arieh (2006, 2005); Lloyd and Emerson (2017); Fattore et al. (2009).

  6. Ben-Arieh (2006), pag. 6

  7. Fattore et al. (2009); Dex & Hollingworth (2012); Gonzèalez-Carrasco (2015); Hicks et al. (2011); Selwin et al., 2017

  8. cfr. Belotti V. (a cura di) (2010)

  9. By endowments we mean some of the resources (material and immaterial) available to the individual such as income, education, or social capital

  10. The concept of functioning is defined as “a state of being and doing”. This “state” refers to an individual condition lived in a given time and characterized by a system of actions and relationships affected by cognitive, psychological, and physical aspects.

  11. The Children Standard Well-Being index variables are the same for adolescents but items formulation has been adjusted to their age.

  12. An item included in the children’s questionnaire has not been replicated in the adolescents’ questionnaire.

  13. Among others: Castilla and Barboza-Palomino (2016).; Bulnes et al. (2008); Pesce et al. (2005), Alfaro et al. (2016)‚ Blumberg et al. (2008)‚ Bradshaw et al. (2007)‚ Casas et al. (2012a, b), Casas & Rees (2015)

  14. In order to build the index, variables using numeric scale of 1 to 4 have been recoded as dummy variables (1 to 2 = deprivation, 3 and 4 = not deprivation).

  15. The classification in five levels has been made considering the space of values ​​defined between the minimum and maximum score in each scale, dividing it by five and positioning the remainder in the extreme levels (low and high) in case of the remainder greater than 1 and in the middle level in case of remainder equal to 1. In detail, the CEW scale has a minimum score of 15 and a maximum of 60. The space of values ​​is defined by 46 scores whose division by 5 generates a remainder of 1. This has been positioned at the middle level. In this way the levels have been formed as follows: low level from 15 to 23, medium-low level from 24 to 32, medium level from 33 to 42, medium-high level from 43 to 51 and high level from 52 to 60. The AEW scale has a minimum score of 12 and a maximum of 48. The space of values ​​is defined by 37 scores whose division by 5 generates a remainder of 2. These have been positioned at the extreme levels (low and high). In this way the levels have been formed as follows: low level from 12 to 19, medium-low level from 20 to 26, average level from 27 to 33, medium-high level from 34 to 40 and high level from 41 to 48.

  16. Children’s Society (2017); UNICEF, 2013

  17. Algeria, Nepal, Estonia, Spain, Colombia, Turkey, Ethiopia, South Korea, Germany, England, Israel, Romania, Norway, Poland, South Africa, Malta.

  18. Ryff (1989)

  19. Based on the classification used by the International Monetary Fund (see World Economic Outlook 2017), the following have been considered as countries with developed economies: Estonia, Spain, South Korea, Germany, England, Israel, Norway, South Africa and Malta

  20. The MACaD variables used to build the NDEPRIVATION5 scale are: have appropriate clothes, have a cell phone, have their own room, have books that are not from school, have access to devices to listen to music.

References

  • Alfaro, J., Guzmán, J., García, C., Sirlopú, D., Reyes, F., & Varela, J. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the personal wellbeing index-school children (PWI-SC) in Chilean school children. Child Indicators Research, 9, 731–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, J. L. (2013). IBM SPSS Amos 22 user’s guide. Amos Development Corporation.

  • Batista Foguet, J. M., & Coenders, G. G. (2012). Modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Madrid: Editorial La Muralla, S. A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belotti V. (a cura di) (2010). Costruire senso, negoziare spazi. Ragazze e ragazzi nella vita quotidiana. Questioni e Documenti n. 50. Firenze: Centro nazionale di documentazione e analisi per l’infanzia e l’adolescenza, Istituto degli Innocenti.

  • Ben-Arieh, A. (2005). Where are the children? Children's role in measuring and monitoring their well-being. Social Indicators Research, 74(3), 573–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Arieh A. (2006). Measuring and monitoring the well-being of young children around the world. Paper commissioned by EFA Global Monitoring Report 2007, Strong foundations: early childhood care and education.

  • Blumberg, S. J., Carle, A. C., O’Connor, K. S., Anderson Moore, K., & Lippman, L. H. (2008). Social competence: Development of an Indicator for children and adolescents. Child Indicator Research, 1, 176–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, J., Hoelscher, P., & Richardson, D. (2007). An index of child well-being in Europe. Social Indicators Research, 80, 133–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B., & Moore, K. (2001). The youth indicators field in research and practice: Current status and targets of Uppartunity. Washington, DC: Child Trends, William T. Grant Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative 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 

  • Bulnes B. M. et al. (2008). Resiliencia y estilos de socialización parental en escolares de 4to y 5to año de secundaria de Lima Metropolitana. Revista IIPSI, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (Lima-Perú), 11(2), 67–91.

  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications and programming. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

  • Casas, F. (2017). Analysing the comparability of 3 multi-item subjective well-being psychometric scales among 15 countries using samples of 10 and 12-year-olds. Child Indicators Research, 10, 297–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casas, F., & Rees, G. (2015). Measures of Children’s subjective well-being: Analysis of the potential for cross-National Comparisons. Child Indicators Research, 8(1), 49–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casas, F., Sarriera, J. C., Alfaro, J., González, M., Malo, S., Bertran, I., Figuer, C., da Cruz, D. A., Bedin, L., Paradiso, A., Weinreich, K., & Valdenegro, B. (2012a). Testing the personal wellbeing index on 12–16 year-old adolescents in 3 different countries with 2 new items. Social Indicators Research, 105, 461–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casas, F., Castellá Sarriera, J., Abs, D., Coenders, G., Alfaro, J., Saforcada, E., & Tonon, E. (2012b). Subjective indicators of personal well-being among adolescents. Performance and results for different scales in Latin-language speaking countries: A contribution to the international debate. Child Indicators Research, 5, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castilla, C. H., & Barboza-Palomino, M. (2016). Validez y confiabilidad de la Escala de Resiliencia en una muestra de estudiantes y adultos de la ciudad de Lima. Revista Peruana de Psicología y Trabajo Social, 5(1), 121–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Children’s Society (2017). Good childhood. Report 2017.

  • Chiorri, C. (2011). Teoria e tecnica psicometrica. Costruire un test psicologico. Milano: McGraw-Hill.

  • Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delle, F. A. (2007). La condivisione del benessere. Il contributo della psicologia positiva. Milano: Franco Angeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dex S., Hollingworth K. (2012). Children’s and young people’s voices on their wellbeing, CWRC WORKING PAPER No. 16, september 2012, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/childrens-and-young-peoples-voices-on-their-wellbeing

  • Fattore, T., Mason, J., & Watson, E. (2009). When children are asked about their well-being: Towards a framework for guiding policy. Child Indicators Research, 2, 57–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzèalez-Carrasco, M., et al. (2015). The assessment of subjective well-being in young children: Strengths and challenges. Journal of Social Research & Policy, 6(2), 71–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, S., Newton, J., Haynes, J., & Evans, J. (2011). Measuring Children’s and young People’s well-being. Office for National Statistics and BRASS. In Cardiff university.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.

    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: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, K., & Lai, K. (2011). Accuracy in parameter estimation for the root mean square error of approximation: Sample size planning for narrow confidence intervals. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, K., & Emerson, L. (2017). (re)examining the relationship between Children’s subjective wellbeing and their perceptions of participation rights. Child Indicators Research, 10(3), 591–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidciplinary Journal, 11, 320–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2002). Giustizia Sociale e Dignità Umana. In Bologna: il Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2003). Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Feminist Economics, 9(2–3), 33–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2004). Beyond the social contract: Capabilities and global justice. Oxford Development Studies, 32(1), 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2011a). Capabilities, entitlements, rights: Supplementation and critique. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12(1), 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2011b). Creating capabilities. The human development approach. Harvard. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

  • Pesce, R. P., Assis, S. G., Avanci, J. Q., Santos, N. C., Malaquias, J. V., & Carvalhaes, R. (2005). Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the resilience scale. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 21(2), 436–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 6(1), 93–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robeyns, I. (2006). The capability approach in practice. The journal of Political Philosophy, 14(3), 351–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and Eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review Psychology, 52, 141–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savahl, S., Casas, F., & Adams, S. (2017). Children’s subjective well-being: Multi-group analysis among a sample of children from two socio-economic status groups in the western cape, South Africa. Child Indicator Research, 10, 473–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selwin, J., Wood, M., & Newman, T. (2017). Looked after children and young people in England: Developing measures of subjective well-being. Child Indicator Research, 10, 363–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1982). Inequality reexamined. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1984). Well-being, agency and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1992). Choice, welfare and measurement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. Nussbaum & A. K. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–53). Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (2000). Lo sviluppo è libertà. Milano: Mondadori.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen A. K. (2005). Razionalità e libertà. Bologna: il Mulino.

  • Sen, A. K. (2009). L’idea di giustizia. Milano: Mondadori.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNICEF (2013). Children’s Subjective well being in rich countries. Innocenti Report Working Paper 2013/3.

Bibliographical References about the MACaD Model:

  • D’Emilione M., Giuliano G. (2013). Emergenze capitoline. Esclusione sociale e finanziaria: dinamiche di un campione di utenti dei servizi sociali di Roma. Rivista del Microcredito e della Microfinanza, n. 2, Ente Nazionale Microcredito, http://rivista.microcredito.gov.it/images/r2/microfinanza2-26.pdf

  • D’Emilione M., Raciti P. (2012). Sinergie tra ricerca e governo locale nell’analisi multidimensionale della povertà: presentazione di un’esperienza in progress. Rassegna di Servizio Sociale, 1 january – march 2012.

  • D’Emilione M., Fabrizi L., Giuliano G., Raciti P., Tenaglia S., Vivaldi Vera P. (2012). Gli utenti dei servizi sociali nello spazio delle capabilities: una applicazione del Modello MACaD. ISFOL Occasional Paper, 4/2012.

  • D’Emilione M., Fabrizi L., Giuliano G., Raciti P., Tenaglia S., Vivaldi Vera P. (2014). Esclusione sociale e esclusione finanziaria nell’area metropolitana di Napoli: l’applicazione del modello MACAD. ISFOL. OP ISFOL, n.17/2014.

  • D’Emilione M., Fabrizi L., Giuliano G., Raciti P., Tenaglia S., Vivaldi Vera P. (2016a). Multidimensional approach to an analysis of individual deprivation: the M.A.C.a.D. Model and the results of empirical investigation. RFSE, Forum for Social Economics, https://doi.org/10.1080/07360932.2014.995200.

  • D’Emilione, M., Giuliano, G., & Vivaldi, V. P. (2016b). Will Children of Social Care Services Users be Future Users? Results of a Pilot Research in Rome. In G. Schweiger & G. Graf (Eds.), The Well-Being of Children. Philosophical and Social Scientific Approaches (pp. 142–159). Berlin: De Gruyter Open.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giuliano, G., Raciti, P., & Tenaglia, S. (2013). Misurare le capacità trasformative degli individui nello spazio delle capabilities. Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione, 55, 128–150.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Professor Ferran Casas, University of Girona, for his substantive comments and methodological suggestions; likewise thank the colleagues of the INAPP research team, Matteo D’Emilione and Giovannina Assunta Giuliano, for the valuable theoretical, methodological and technical support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute for the Analysis of Public Policies (Istituto Nazionale per l’Analisi delle Politiche Pubbliche – INAPP), Rome, Italy

    Paolo Raciti & Paloma Vivaldi Vera

Authors
  1. Paolo Raciti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paloma Vivaldi Vera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Paolo Raciti or Paloma Vivaldi Vera.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Raciti, P., Vivaldi Vera, P. A Proposal for Measuring Children Emotional Well-Being within an Anti-Poverty Measure in Italy: Psychometric Characteristics and Comparative Verification of Results. Child Ind Res 12, 1187–1219 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9582-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9582-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation