Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factor structure and measurement invariance of the Subjective Vitality Scale: evidence from Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong

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

Abstract

Purpose

This study translates the Subjective Vitality Scale (SVS) into Chinese and examines its factor structure and measurement invariance in a sample of Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong.

Methods

Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong were invited to participate in the study. Four models of the SVS (a 7-item model, two 6-item models and a 5-item model) were compared using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The internal consistency reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, and the criterion validity was assessed using bivariate correlations between subjective vitality and positive and negative affect. Finally, measurement invariance across genders and time points was examined to evaluate the invariance of the SVS model.

Results

The results of the CFA analysis indicated that the 5-item measurement model fit the data better than the other three models. The Cronbach’s alpha was above 0.70 (0.92), revealing excellent internal consistency reliability, and the SVS was significantly associated with positive affect and negatively associated with negative affect, indicating criterion validity. Finally, the measurement invariance analysis of the 5-item model displayed strict invariance across genders and time points.

Conclusions

The results support the 5-item measurement model of the Chinese version of the SVS. This model has excellent internal consistency reliability, supports the criterion validity of the instrument and demonstrates strict invariance across genders and time points. In summary, the findings suggest that the 5-item Chinese version of the SVS is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the subjective vitality of Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hays, R. D., & Morales, L. S. (2001). The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life. Annals of Medicine, 33(5), 350–357.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hirsch, J. K., Molnar, D., Chang, E. C., & Sirois, F. M. (2015). Future orientation and health quality of life in primary care: Vitality as a mediator. Quality of Life Research, 24, 1653–1659.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. In S. Fiske (Ed.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 52, pp. 141–166). Palo Alto: Annual Reviews Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-Being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Found.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 678–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2008). From ego depletion to vitality: Theory and findings concerning the facilitation of energy available to the self. Social Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 702–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Avlund, K. (2010). Fatigue in older adults: An early indicator of the aging process? Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 22(2), 100–115.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529–565.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bjorner, J. B., Wallenstein, G. V., Martin, M. C., Lin, P., Blaisdell-Gross, B., Tak, P. C., & Mody, S. H. (2007). Interpreting score differences in the SF-36 Vitality scale: Using clinical conditions and functional outcomes to define the minimally important difference. Current Medical Research & Opinion, 23, 731–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Buchwald, D., Pearlman, T., Umali, J., Schmaling, K., & Katon, W. (1996). Functional status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, other fatiguing illnesses, and healthy individuals. American Journal of Medicine, 101, 364–370.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Maynard, S., Keijzers, G., Hansen, A. M., et al. (2015). Associations of subjective vitality with DNA damage, cardiovascular risk factors and physical performance. Acta Physiology (Oxf), 213(1), 156–170.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kawabata, M., Yamazaki, F., Guo, D. W., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2017). Advancement of the Subjective Vitality Scale: Examination of alternative measurement models for Japanese and Singaporeans. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 27(12), 1793–1800.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Castillo, I., Tomás, I., & Balaguer, I. (2017). The Spanish-version of the Subjective Vitality Scale: Psychometric properties and evidence of validity. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 20, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Couto, N., Antunes, R., Monteiro, D., Moutão, J., Marinho, D., & Cid, L. (2017). Validation of the Subjective Vitality Scale and study of the vitality of elderly people according to their physical activity. Revista Brasileira de Cineantropometria & Desempenho Humano, 19(3), 261–269. https://doi.org/10.5007/1980-0037.2017v19n3p261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Akin, U., Akin, A., & Ug˘ur (2016). Mediating role of mindfulness on the associations of friendship quality and subjective vitality. Psychological Report, 119(2), 516–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bostic, T. J., Rubio, D. M., & Hood, M. (2000). A validation of the Subjective Vitality Scale using structural equation modeling. Social Indicators Research, 52, 313–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ryan, R. M., Weinstein, N., Bernstein, J., Brown, K. W., Mistretta, L., & Gagne, M. (2010). Vitalizing effects of being outdoors and in nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 159–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cordeiro, P., et al. (2016). The Portuguese validation of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale: Concurrent and longitudinal relations to well-being and ill-being. Psychologica Belgica, 56(3), 193–209.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu, J. D., & Chung, P. K. (2014). Development and initial validation of the psychological needs satisfaction scale in physical education. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 18(2), 101–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu, J. D., Bartholomew, K., & Chung, P. K. (2017). Perceptions of teachers’ interpersonal styles and well-being and ill-being in secondary school physical education students: The role of need satisfaction and need frustration. School Mental Health, 9, 360–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Molina-García, J., Castillo, I., & Queralt, A. (2011). Leisure-time physical activity and psychological well-being in university students. Psychological Report, 109(2), 453–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Taylor, I., & Lonsdale, C. (2010). Cultural differences in the relationships between autonomy support, psychological need satisfaction, subjective vitality, and effort in British and Chinese physical education. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 32, 655–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Park, S., Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C., Ntoumanis, N., Stenling, A., Fenton, S. A. M., & Veldhuijzen, J. J. C. S., & van Zanten. (2017). Profiles of physical function, physical activity, and sedentary behavior and their associations with mental health in residents of assisted living facilities. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-being, 9(1), 60–80.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rouse, P. C., Van Zanten, J.J., Ntoumanis, N., Metsios, G. S., Chen, Y., George, D., Kitas, G. D., & Duda, J. L. (2015). Measuring the positive psychological well-being of people with rheumatoid arthritis: A cross-sectional validation of the subjective vitality scale. Arthritis Research & Therapy, 17, 312. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13075-015-0827-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 552–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chen, F. F., Sousa, K. H., & West, S. G. (2005). Teacher’s corner: Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 12(3), 471–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Thompson, E. R. (2007). Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 227–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D. (1993). Cross-Cultural adaptation of health-related qualify of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46, 1417–1432.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hu, L. T., & 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Horn, J. L., & Mcardle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117–144.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all students and their parents who gave their consent to participate in this study. Special thanks go to all physical education teachers and school principals who allow us to access to students in their classes and schools. Special thanks also go to the research assistants who helped to collect data for this study.

Funding

This study was supported by the General Research Fund, Research Grant Council, Hong Kong SAR, China (No. 12401814).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Education, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China

    Jing-Dong Liu

  2. Department of Physical Education, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong, China

    Pak-Kwong Chung

Authors
  1. Jing-Dong Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pak-Kwong Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pak-Kwong Chung.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by Committee on the Use of Human and Animal Subjects in Teaching and Research, Hong Kong Baptist University. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants and their parents who participated in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, JD., Chung, PK. Factor structure and measurement invariance of the Subjective Vitality Scale: evidence from Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong. Qual Life Res 28, 233–239 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1990-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1990-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation