Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Psychometric properties of the Subjective Happiness Scale in Four Asian countries

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Well-Being Assessment

Abstract

While the reliability and validity of the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS) has been studied across several countries, it has not received as much attention in low to upper middle-income countries in Asia. The purpose of this study is to explore the psychometric properties of the SHS in four Southeastern Asian countries. This study is a subset of a larger cross-sectional survey in 27 low and middle-income countries worldwide, which examined health-behaviors among undergraduates. The current study included four low and middle-income countries in Asia, with a total of 2539 participants that completed self‐report instruments assessing socio‐demographic information and a measure of happiness using the SHS. The main data analytical approach was item response theory (IRT). Consistent with previous studies, Item-4 was found to be problematic. Lastly, based on the number of items and the response options, considerations for a revised instrument are recommended if the SHS is to be used in this population.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Babakus, E., & Mangold, W. G. (1992). Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services: An empirical investigation. Health Services Research, 26(6), 767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory (2nd ed.). ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation, University of Maryland. Retrieved May 30, 2020, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED458219

  • Bocell, F. D. (2015). The impact of unmodeled error covariance on measurement models in structural equation modeling [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Washington.

  • Cai, L., Thissen, D., & du Toit, S. (2013). IRTPRO: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling [Computer software]. Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W.-H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22(3), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986022003265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chien, C. L., Chen, P. L., Chu, P. J., Wu, H. Y., Chen, Y. C., & Hsu, S. C. (2020). The Chinese version of the Subjective Happiness Scale: Validation and convergence with multidimensional measures. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38(2), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0734282919837403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalal, K. D., & Carter, T. N. (2014). Negatively worded items, negatively impact surveys. In C. E. Lance & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.), More Statistical and Methodological Myths and Urban Legends: Doctrine, Verity and Fable in Organizational and Social Sciences (pp. 112–128). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. The Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13, 81–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00415

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterlin, R. A. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 27(1), 35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Extremera, N., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2014). The Subjective Happiness Scale: Translation and preliminary psychometric evaluation of a Spanish version. Social Indicators Research, 119(1), 473–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fantom, N., & Serajuddin, U. (2016). The World Bank's classification of countries by income. The World Bank.

  • Figueiredo Damásio, B., Zanon, C., & Helena Roller, S. (2014). Validation and psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the Subjective Happiness Scale. Universitas Psychologica, 13(1), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finstad, K. (2010). Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: Evidence against 5-point scales. Journal of Usability Studies, 5(3), 104–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W., Baldueza, J., Barner-Rasmussen, W., Barzantny, C., Canabal, A., Davila, A., ..., Liang, Y. K. (2009). Rating versus ranking: What is the best way to reduce response and language bias in cross-national research?. International Business Review, 18(4), 417-432.

  • Helliwell, J.F., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. (2015). World Happiness Report 2015. New York, NY: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iani, L., Lauriola, M., Layous, K., & Sirigatti, S. (2014). Happiness in Italy: Translation, factorial structure and norming of the Subjective Happiness Scale in a large community sample. Social Indicators Research, 118(3), 953–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karakasidou, E., Pezirkianidis, C., Stalikas, A., & Galanakis, M. (2016). Standardization of the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS) in a Greek sample. Psychology, 7(14), 1753–1765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd Ed.). Guilford Press.

  • Kobayashi, J., & Aldar, D. (2018). Inequality of well-being in Asia: A comparative analysis of happiness in eight countries. The Senshu Social Well-Being Review, 5, 75–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. W., Jones, P. S., Mineyama, Y., & Zhang, X. E. (2002). Cultural differences in responses to a Likert scale. Research in Nursing & Health, 25(4), 295–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, H. E., Shaw, D., Liao, P. S., & Duan, H. (2020). The Effects of Income on Happiness in East and South Asia: Societal Values Matter? Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(2), 391–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006824100041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect. Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W. (1986). Negative item bias in ratings scales for preadolescent children: A cognitive-developmental phenomenon. Developmental Psychology, 22(1), 37–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masters, G. N. (1982). A rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattei, D., & Schaefer, C. E. (2004). An investigation of validity of the Subjective Happiness Scale. Psychological Reports, 94(1), 288–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2005). Limited and full information estimation and testing in 2n contingency tables: A unified framework. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 1009–1020. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000002069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2014). Assessing approximate fit in categorical data analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49(4), 305–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.911075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moghnie, L., & Kazarian, S. S. (2012). Subjective happiness of Lebanese college youth in Lebanon: Factorial structure and invariance of the Arabic Subjective Happiness Scale. Social Indicators Research, 109(2), 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morizot, J., Ainsworth, A. T., & Reise, S. P. (2007). Toward modern psychometrics. In R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, & R. F. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 407–423). The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. O., Muthén, L. K., & Asparouhov, T. (2015). Estimator choices with categorical outcomes. Mplus and Mplus2015.

  • Nagata, C., Ido, M., Shimizu, H., Misao, A., & Matsuura, H. (1996). Choice of response scale for health measurement: Comparison of 4, 5, and 7-point scales and visual analog scale. Journal of Epidemiology, 6(4), 192–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nan, H., Ni, M. Y., Lee, P. H., Tam, W. W., Lam, T. H., Leung, G. M., & McDowell, I. (2014). Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Subjective Happiness Scale: Evidence from the Hong Kong FAMILY Cohort. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 21(4), 646–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, Y. K. (2002). East-Asian happiness gap. Pacific Economic Review, 7(1), 51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngoo, Y. T., Tey, N. P., & Tan, E. C. (2015). Determinants of life satisfaction in Asia. Social Indicators Research, 124(1), 141–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, B. P., Crawford, M. R., & Holder, M. D. (2015). An item response theory analysis of the Subjective Happiness Scale. Social Indicators Research, 124(1), 249–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2000). Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(1), 50–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216000241003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peltzer, K., Pengpid, S., & James, C. (2016). The globalization of whitening: Prevalence of skin lighteners (or bleachers) use and its social correlates among university students in 26 countries. International Journal of Dermatology, 55(2), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijd.12860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prakash, R., & Garg, P. (2019). Comparative assessment of HDI with Composite Development Index (CDI). Insights into Regional Development, 1(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.9770/IRD.2019.1.1(5)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quezada, L., Landero, R., & González, M. T. (2016). A validity and reliability study of the Subjective Happiness Scale in Mexico. Journal of Happiness and Well-Being, 4(1), 90–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reese, L. M. (1995). The impact of local dependencies on some LSAT outcomes. Statistical Report. LSAC Research Report Series. Retrieved May 25, 2020, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED469244

  • Sachdev, S. B., & Verma, H. V. (2004). Relative importance of service quality dimensions: A multisectoral study. Journal of Services Research, 4(1), 94–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, 34(1), 1–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03372160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimai, S., Otake, K., Utsuki, N., Ikemi, A., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2004). Development of a Japanese version of the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), and examination of its validity and reliability. Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi, 51, 845–853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simms, L. J., Zelazny, K., Williams, T. F., & Bernstein, L. (2019). Does the number of response options matter? Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000648

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sireci, S. G., Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (1991). On the reliability of testlet-based tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28(3), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1991.tb00356.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spagnoli, P., Caetano, A., & Silva, A. (2012). Psychometric properties of a Portuguese version of the Subjective Happiness Scale. Social Indicators Research, 105(1), 137–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swain, S. D., Weathers, D., & Niedrich, R. W. (2008). Assessing three sources of misresponse to reversed Likert items. Journal of Marketing Research, 45, 116–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swami, V. (2008). Translation and validation of the Malay subjective happiness scale. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 347–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swami, V., Stieger, S., Voracek, M., Dressler, S. G., Eisma, L., & Furnham, A. (2009). Psychometric evaluation of the Tagalog and German Subjective Happiness Scales and a cross-cultural comparison. Social Indicators Research, 93(2), 393–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Mooney, J. A. (1989). Trace lines for testlets: A use of multiple-categorical-response models. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26(3), 247–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1989.tb00331.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Sonderen, E., Sanderman, R., & Coyne, J. C. (2013). Ineffectiveness of reverse wording of questionnaire items: Let’s learn from cows in the rain. PloS one, 8(7).

  • Vela, J. C., Lerma, E., & Ikonomopoulos, J. (2017). Evaluation of the life satisfaction and subjective happiness scales with Mexican American high school and college students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 39(1), 34–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, R., Hempton, B., Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2008). Cultural differences: Why do Asians avoid extreme responses. Survey Practice, 1(3), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zenisky, A. L., Hambleton, R. K., & Sired, S. G. (2002). Identification and evaluation of local item dependencies in the medical college admissions Test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39(4), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2002.tb01144.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education and Human Development, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA, MS6D222030, USA

    Marvin Powell

  2. Department of Sociology, Psychology, and Social Work, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica

    Caryl James Bateman

  3. Center On Developmental Disabilities, Kansas University, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA

    Daria Gerasimova

  4. Department of Kinesiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    André Bateman

  5. Department of Research Administration and Development, University of Limpopo, Limpopo, South Africa

    Karl Peltzer

Authors
  1. Marvin Powell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caryl James Bateman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daria Gerasimova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. André Bateman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Karl Peltzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marvin Powell.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Aspects and Conflict of Interest

Participants were informed of the research study aims. Participation in the survey was voluntary and anonymous. Authors declare no conflict of interests.

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

Powell, M., Bateman, C.J., Gerasimova, D. et al. Psychometric properties of the Subjective Happiness Scale in Four Asian countries. J well-being assess 4, 495–509 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41543-021-00045-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41543-021-00045-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation