The Universality of Quality of Life: An Empirical Approach Using the Whoqol

  • Mick J. Power
  • M. Bullinger
  • The Whoqol Group
Part of the Social Indicators Research Series book series (SINS, volume 16)

Abstract

This chapter examines first some general issues about the concept of quality of life, in particular, in relation to unidimensional versus multidimensional approaches. These issues are then examined in relation to the WHOQOL group of measures. Analyses are then summarised from a variety of datasets that have been collected with the WHOQOL measures that address the issue of universality versus cultural-specificity of aspects of quality of life. While the data provide clear support for universal aspects of quality of life, nevertheless, it is also argued that there is a need to respect the limitations of this universality.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association (1994)Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(Fourth Edition). Author, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. J. C. (1995).EOSfor Windows Users Guide.Encino, Multivariate Software, Inc, CA.Google Scholar
  3. Bullinger, M (2001). The challenge of cross-cultural quality of life assessmentPsychology and Health(in press)Google Scholar
  4. Bullinger, M., Power, M. J., Aaronson, N. K., Cella, D. F., & Anderson, R. T. (1996) Creating and evaluating cross-cultural instruments. In B. Spilker (Ed.)Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials(2nd Ed.). Lippincott-Raven, Hagerstown, MDGoogle Scholar
  5. Cummins, R.A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos.Social Indicators Research 38303–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dupuy, H.J. (1984). The Psychological General Well-Being (PGWB) Index. In N K Wenger, M.E Mattson, C.D. Furberg, & J. Elinson (Eds)Assessment of quality of life in clinical trials of cardiovascular therapies.New York: Le Jacq.Google Scholar
  7. EuroQOL Group (1990). EuroQOL — a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life.Health Policy 16199–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hagerty, M.R., Cummins, R.A., Ferris, A.L., Land, K., Michalos, A.C., Peterson, M, Sharpe, A., Sirgy, J., & Vogel, J (2001). Quality of life indexes for national policy Review and agenda for research.Social Indicators Research 551–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jenkins, J.H., Kleinman, A. and Good, B.J. (1991). Cross-cultural studies of depression. In J. Becker, A. Kleinman (Eds.)Psychosocial Aspects of DepressionHillsdale, N.J.: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
  10. Karnofsky, D., & Burchenal, J (1949).The Clinical Evaluation of Chemotherapeutic Agents in CancerNew York: Columbia Press.Google Scholar
  11. Maslow, A.H. (1970).Motivation and Personality(2). New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  12. Power, M.J., Bullinger, M., Harper, A., WHOQOL Group (1999) The World Health Organization WHOQOL-100’ Tests of the universality of quality of life in 15 different cultural groups worldwide.Health Psychology 18495–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Power, M.J., & Dalgleish, T. (1997).Cognition and Emotion: From Order to Disorder.Hove. Psychology PressGoogle Scholar
  14. Sen, A (2001). Economic progress and health. In D.A. Leon,G. Watt (Eds.)Poverty, Inequality, and Health: An International Perspective.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Spilker, B. (1990). Introduction In B. Spilker (Ed)Quality of Life Assessments in Clinical Trials.New York: Raven Press.Google Scholar
  16. Spilker, B. (1996). Introduction. In B. Spilker (ed.)Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials(2nd Ed.). Lippincott-Raven, Hagerstown, MD.Google Scholar
  17. Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2001).Using Multivariate Statistics(4th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  18. Torrance, G.W. (1996) Designing and conducting cost-utility analyses. In B. Spilker (ed.)Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials(2nd Ed.). Lippincott-Raven, Hagerstown, MD.Google Scholar
  19. Ware, J. E. (1996). The SF-36 health survey. In B Spilker (Ed.)Ouality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials(2nd Ed.). Lippincott-Raven, Hagerstown, MD.Google Scholar
  20. Ware, J.E., Sherbourne, C.D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health status survey (SF-36): 1. Conceptual framework and item selection.Medical Care 30473–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. The WHOQOL Group (1995). The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL). Position paper from the World Health Organization.Social Science and Medicine 411403–1409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Psychological The WHOQOL Group (1998a) The World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties.Social Science and Medicine 461569–1585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. The WHOQOL Group (1998b). Development of The World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF Quality of Life Assessment.Psychological Medicine 28551–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. World Health Organization (1958).The First Ten Years of the World Health Organization.Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mick J. Power
    • 1
  • M. Bullinger
  • The Whoqol Group
  1. 1.Dept of PsychiatryRoyal Edinburgh HospitalEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations