Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing psychological well-being: self-report instruments for the NIH Toolbox

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Psychological well-being (PWB) has a significant relationship with physical and mental health. As a part of the NIH Toolbox for the Assessment of Neurological and Behavioral Function, we developed self-report item banks and short forms to assess PWB.

Study design and setting

Expert feedback and literature review informed the selection of PWB concepts and the development of item pools for positive affect, life satisfaction, and meaning and purpose. Items were tested with a community-dwelling US Internet panel sample of adults aged 18 and above (N = 552). Classical and item response theory (IRT) approaches were used to evaluate unidimensionality, fit of items to the overall measure, and calibrations of those items, including differential item function (DIF).

Results

IRT-calibrated item banks were produced for positive affect (34 items), life satisfaction (16 items), and meaning and purpose (18 items). Their psychometric properties were supported based on the results of factor analysis, fit statistics, and DIF evaluation. All banks measured the concepts precisely (reliability ≥0.90) for more than 98 % of participants.

Conclusion

These adult scales and item banks for PWB provide the flexibility, efficiency, and precision necessary to promote future epidemiological, observational, and intervention research on the relationship of PWB with physical and mental health.

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

  1. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aspinwall, L. G., & Tedeschi, R. G. (2010). The value of positive psychology for health psychology: Progress and pitfalls in examining the relation of positive phenomena to health. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 39(1), 4–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Danner, D. D., Snowdon, D. A., & Friesen, W. V. (2001). Positive emotions in early life and longevity: Findings from the nun study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(5), 804–813.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Huppert, F., & Whittington, J. (2003). Evidence for the independence of positive and negative well-being: Implications for quality of life assessment. British Journal of Health Psychology, 8(1), 107–122.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vaillant, G. E. (2002). Aging well: Surprising guideposts to a happier life from the landmark Harvard study of adult development. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ostir, G. V., Markides, K. S., Black, S. A., & Goodwin, J. S. (2000). Emotional well-being predicts subsequent functional independence and survival. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 48(5), 473–478.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chida, Y., & Steptoe, A. (2008). Positive psychological well-being and mortality: A quantitative review of prospective observational studies. Psychosomatic Medicine, 70(7), 741–756.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Salovey, P., Rothman, A. J., Detweiler, J. B., & Steward, W. T. (2000). Emotional states and physical health. American Psychologist, 55(1), 110–121.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen, S., & Pressman, S. D. (2006). Positive affect and health. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(3), 122–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fava, G. A., & Ruini, C. (2003). Development and characteristics of a well-being enhancing psychotherapeutic strategy: Well-being therapy. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 34(1), 45–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Keyes, C. L. M., & Haidt, J. (2003). Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Ryan, R. M., Huta, V., & Deci, E. (2008). Living well: A self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 139–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219–235.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence health? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 925–971.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 616–628.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The Meaning in Life Questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(1), 80–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chamberlain, K., & Zika, S. (1988). Measuring meaning in life: An examination of three scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 9(3), 589–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Steger, M., & Kashdan, T. (2007). Stability and specificity of meaning in life and life satisfaction over one year. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8(2), 161–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gershon, R. C., Cella, D., Fox, N. A., Havlik, R. J., Hendrie, H. C., & Wagster, M. V. (2010). Assessment of neurological and behavioural function: The NIH Toolbox. Lancet Neurology, 9(2), 138–139.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nowinski, C. J., Victorson, D., Debb, S. M., & Gershon, R. (2013). Surveying the end user research community: Input on NIH Toolbox criteria. Neurology, 80(11 Supplement 3), S7–S12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Salsman, J. M., Butt, Z., Pilkonis, P. A., Cyranowski, J. M., Zill, N., Hendrie, H. C., et al. (2013). Emotion assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology, 80(11 Supplement 3), S76–S86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lai, J. S., Cella, D., Choi, S. W., Junghaenel, D. U., Christodolou, C., Gershon, R., et al. (2011). How item banks and their application can influence measurement practice in rehabilitation medicine: A PROMIS fatigue item bank example. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92(10 Supplement), S20–S27.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pilkonis, P. A., Choi, S. W., Reise, S. P., Stover, A. M., Riley, W. T., & Cella, D. (2011). Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment, 18(3), 263–283.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Klem, M., Saghafi, E., Abromitis, R., Stover, A., Dew, M., & Pilkonis, P. (2009). Building PROMIS item banks: Librarians as co-investigators. Quality of Life Research, 18(7), 881–888.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Roster, C. A., Rogers, R. D., Albaum, G., & Klein, D. (2004). A comparison of response characteristics from web and telephone surveys. International Journal of Market Research, 46(3), 359–374.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Liu, H., Cella, D., Gershon, R., Shen, J., Morales, L. S., Riley, W., et al. (2010). Representativeness of the PROMIS internet panel. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1169–1178.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cook, K. F., Kallen, M. A., & Amtmann, D. (2009). Having a fit: Impact of number of items and distribution of data on traditional criteria for assessing IRT’s unidimensionality assumption. Quality of Life Research, 18(4), 447–460.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores (Psychometrika Monograph No. 17). Richmond, VA: Psychometric Society. Retrieved from http://www.psychometrika.org/journal/online/MN17.pdf

  33. Thissen, D. (2003). MULTILOG (Version Windows 7.0). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further examination of the performance of S-X2, an item fit index for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 289–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., de Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., et al. (2009). A simulation study provided sample size guidance for differential item functioning (DIF) studies using short scales. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(3), 288–295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Choi, S. W., Gibbons, L. E., & Crane, P. K. (2011). Lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software, 39(8), 1–30.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lai, J. S., Crane, P. K., & Cella, D. (2006). Factor analysis techniques for assessing sufficient unidimensionality of cancer related fatigue. Quality of Life Research, 15(7), 1179–1190.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Huebner, E. S. (1991). Initial development of the student’s life satisfaction scale. School Psychology International, 12(3), 231–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Burgdorf, J., & Panksepp, J. (2006). The neurobiology of positive emotions. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(2), 173–187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Christie, I. C., & Friedman, B. H. (2004). Autonomic specificity of discrete emotion and dimensions of affective space: A multivariate approach. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 51(2), 143–153.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Heller, D., Watson, D., & Hies, R. (2004). The role of person versus situation in life satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin, 130(4), 574–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Kobau, R., Zack, M. M., Sniezek, J., Lucas, R. E., & Burns, A. (2010). Well-being assessment: An evaluation of well-being scales for public health and population estimates of well-being among US adults. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 2(3), 272–297.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Reker, G. T., & Chamberlain, K. (2000). Exploring existential meaning: Optimizing human development across the life span. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Scheier, M., Wrosch, C., Baum, A., Cohen, S., Martire, L., Matthews, K., et al. (2006). The life engagement test: Assessing purpose in life. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29(3), 291–298.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. (2009). Well-being for public policy. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  49. Gallup Inc. (2011). Gallup world poll: Wellbeing. Retrieved May 20, 2011, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/wellbeing.aspx.

  50. OECD. (2011). Better life initiative: Measuring well-being and progress. Retrieved May 25, 2011, from http://www.oecd.org/document/0/0,3746,en_2649_201185_47837376_1_1_1_1,00.html.

  51. Office for National Statistics. (2007). Working paper: Measuring societal wellbeing in the UK. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_social/Measuring-Societal-Wellbeing.pdf.

  52. Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. -P. (2009). Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress. Retrieved May 25, 2011, from http://www.stat.si/doc/drzstat/Stiglitz%20report.pdf.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was funded in whole or in part with federal funds from the Blueprint for Neuroscience Research and the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, National Institutes of Health, under Contract No. HHS-N-260-2006-00007-C. Preparation of this manuscript was supported in part by NIH grants KL2RR025740 from the National Center for Research Resources and 5K07CA158008-01A1 from the National Cancer Institute. The authors would like to thank the subdomain consultants, Felicia Huppert, Ph.D., Alice Carter, Ph.D., Marianne Brady, Ph.D., Dilip Jeste, MD, Colin Depp, Ph.D., and Bruce Cuthbert, Ph.D., and members of the NIH project team, Gitanjali Taneja, Ph.D., and Sarah Knox, Ph.D., who provided critical and constructive expertise during the development of the NIH Toolbox Emotion measurement battery.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 625 North Michigan Ave., Suite 2700, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    John M. Salsman, Jin-Shei Lai, Zeeshan Butt & David Cella

  2. Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    John M. Salsman, Jin-Shei Lai & David Cella

  3. Center for Aging Research, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA

    Hugh C. Hendrie

  4. Comprehensive Transplant Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Zeeshan Butt

  5. Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

    John M. Salsman, Jin-Shei Lai, Zeeshan Butt & David Cella

  6. Westat, Inc., Rockville, MD, USA

    Nicholas Zill

  7. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Paul A. Pilkonis

  8. Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Christopher Peterson

  9. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Catherine M. Stoney

  10. Division of AIDS Research, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Pim Brouwers

Authors
  1. John M. Salsman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jin-Shei Lai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hugh C. Hendrie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zeeshan Butt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nicholas Zill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Paul A. Pilkonis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christopher Peterson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Catherine M. Stoney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Pim Brouwers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. David Cella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John M. Salsman.

Appendix

Appendix

Toolbox psychological well-being adult item banks

Positive affecta

1

I felt cheerful

2

I felt attentive

3

I felt relaxed

4

I felt delighted

5

I felt inspired

6

I felt fearless

7

I felt happy

8

I felt joyful

9

I felt excited

10

I felt proud

11

I felt lively

12

I felt at ease

13

I felt enthusiastic

14

I felt determined

15

I felt interested

16

I felt confident

17

I felt able to concentrate

18

I was thinking creatively

19

I liked myself

20

My future looked good

21

I smiled and laughed a lot

22

I felt peaceful

23

I was able to reach down deep into myself for comfort

24

I felt a sense of harmony within myself

25

I generally enjoyed the things I did

26

I felt lighthearted

27

I felt satisfied

28

I felt good-natured

29

I felt useful

30

I felt optimistic

31

I felt interested in other people

32

I felt understood

33

I felt grateful

34

I felt content

Life satisfactionb

1

In most ways my life is close to my ideal

2

If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing

3

I am satisfied with my life

4

So far I have gotten the important things I want in life

5

The conditions of my life are excellent

6

My life is going well

7

My life is just right

8

I would like to change many things in my life

9

I wish I had a different kind of life

10

I have a good life

11

I have what I want in life

12

My life is better than most people’s

13

I am satisfied with my family life

14

I am satisfied with my health

15

I am satisfied with my achievement of my goals

16

I am satisfied with my leisure

Meaning and purposec

1

I understand my life’s meaning

2

My life has a clear sense of purpose

3

I have a good sense of what makes my life meaningful

4

I have discovered a satisfying life purpose

5

My life has no clear purpose

6

I generally feel that what I do in my life is valuable and worthwhile

7

I feel grateful for each day

8

My daily life is full of things that are interesting to me

9

There is not enough purpose in my life

10

To me, the things I do are all worthwhile

11

Most of what I do seems trivial and unimportant to me

12

I value my activities a lot

13

I don’t care very much about the things I do

14

I have lots of reasons for living

15

I have a reason for living

16

My life has been productive

17

I feel a sense of purpose in my life

18

My life lacks meaning and purpose

  1. aResponse options for the positive affect item bank were: “1 = Not at all, 2 = A little bit, 3 = Somewhat, 4 = Quite a bit, 5 = Very much”
  2. bResponse options for the life satisfaction item bank were: “1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Slightly disagree, 4 = Neither agree nor disagree, 5 = Slightly agree, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strongly agree” for items 1–5 and “1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree” for items 6–16
  3. cResponse options for the meaning and purpose item bank were: “1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree” for items 1–14, and “1 = Not at all, 2 = A little bit, 3 = Somewhat, 4 = Quite a bit, 5 = Very much” for items 15–18

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Salsman, J.M., Lai, JS., Hendrie, H.C. et al. Assessing psychological well-being: self-report instruments for the NIH Toolbox. Qual Life Res 23, 205–215 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0452-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0452-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation