Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 52, Issue 3, pp 313–324 | Cite as

A Validation of the Subjective Vitality Scale Using Structural Equation Modeling

  • Terence J Bostic
  • Doris McGartland Rubio
  • Mark Hood
Article

Abstract

Ryan and Frederick’s (1997) measure of vitality, thesubjective feeling of being alive and alert, wasdeveloped in the context of a single factor analysis.The present investigation employed structural equationmodeling (SEM) to assess construct validity andutility of the new measure. A large sample (N = 526) wascollected in two waves, allowing the investigators tofurther develop the model proposed by Ryan andFrederick, and to then validate it on a second dataset. The final model is presented, and the process ofachieving that model is discussed, as are the relativestrengths of SEM in test development.

Keywords

Equation Modeling Final Model Structural Equation Construct Validity Structural Equation Modeling 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bollen, K.: 1989, Structural Equations with LatentVariables (Willey & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
  2. Cahng, L.: 1995, ‘Connotatively consistent and reversed connotatively inconsistent items are not fully equivalent: Generalizability study’, Education and Psychological Measurement 55, pp. 991–997.Google Scholar
  3. Cronbach, L.J.: 1951, ‘Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests’, Psychometrica 16, pp. 297–334.Google Scholar
  4. Hoyle, R.: 1995, Structural Equation Modeling; Concepts, Issues, and Application (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
  5. Liao, W.: 1990, T’ai Chi Classics (Shambahala Publications, Boston, MA).Google Scholar
  6. MacCallum, R.: 1986, ‘Specification searches in covariance structure modeling’, Psychological Bulletin 100, pp. 107–120.Google Scholar
  7. McNair, D.M., M. Lorr and L.F. Droppleman: 1971, Profile of Mood States Manual (Educational and Industrial Testing Service, San Diego).Google Scholar
  8. Miller, B.: 1995, ‘Coefficient alpha: A basic introduction from the perspective if classical test theory and structural equation modeling’, Structural Equation Modeling 2, pp. 255–273.Google Scholar
  9. Nunnally, J. and I.H. Bernstein: 1994, Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
  10. Ryan, R.M. and C. Frederick: 1997, ‘On energy, personality and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being’, Journal of Personality 65, pp. 529–565.Google Scholar
  11. Reddy, S.: 1991, ‘Effects of ignoring correlated measurement error in structural equation models’, Education and Psychological Measurement 52, pp. 549–570.Google Scholar
  12. Schreisheim, C.A. and R.J. Eisenbach: 1996, ‘The exploratory and confirmatory factor-analytic investigation of item wording effects on the obtained factor structures of survey questionnaire measures’, Journal of Management 2, 1177–1193.Google Scholar
  13. Schriesheim, C.A., R.J. Eisenbach and K.D. Hill: 1991, ‘The effects of negation and polar opposites on questionnaire reliability and validity: An experimental investigation’, Education and Psychological Measurement 51, pp. 67–78.Google Scholar
  14. Schumaker, R.E. and R.G. Lomax: 1996, A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ).Google Scholar
  15. Tabachnik, B.G. and L.S. Fidel: 1996, Using Multivariate Statistics, 3rd ed. (Harper Collins, New York).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Terence J Bostic
    • 1
  • Doris McGartland Rubio
    • 1
  • Mark Hood
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, College of Arts & SciencesSaint Louis UniversitySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations