Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing the Psychometric Properties of Common Measures of Positive and Negative Emotional Experiences: Implications for the Assessment of Subjective Wellbeing

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

Abstract

Subjective wellbeing (SWB) is frequently measured in the field of positive psychology as an indicator of positive functioning. However, its measurement in the literature is quite heterogeneous, with little guidance on best practices and a lack of empirical comparisons of SWB scales. We seek to offer practical guidance in the measurement of SWB. The current study examined four previously utilized scales: the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), the Scale of Positive and Negative Experiences (SPANE), the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), and the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D). College students (N = 473) completed an online survey, and convergent validity and model fit were assessed for each scale in different structures (i.e., first-order, second-order, and bifactor). Although each scale performed well in most cases, the SPANE and SHS/CES-D combination consistently demonstrated stronger psychometric properties and convergent validity than the PANAS. The bifactor structure fit better than a second-order structure with each scale, but correlations among the second-order and general SWB factors and like-constructs were similar. Although less commonly utilized than the others, we suggest that the SPANE be used more frequently in positive psychological research as a measure of SWB due to its good psychometric properties and strong theoretical basis.

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

  • Andresen, E. M., Malmgren, J. A., Carter, W. B., & Patrick, D. L. (1994). Screening for depression in well older adults: Evaluation of a short form of the CES-D (Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale). American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 10(2), 77–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, E. C., Davies, T., & Lund, C. (2017). Validation of the 10-item Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-10) in Zulu, Xhosa, and Afrikaans populations in South Africa. BMC Psychiatry, 17(6), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Björgvinsson, T., Kertz, S. J., & Bigda-Peyton, J. S. (2013). Psychometric properties of the CES-D-10 in a psychiatric sample. Assessment, 20(4), 429–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolier, L., Haverman, M., Westerhof, G. J., Riper, H., Smit, F., & Bohlmeijer, E. (2013). Positive psychology interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. BMC Public Health, 13(119), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busseri, M. A. (2015). Toward a resolution of the tripartite structure of subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 83(4), 413–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busseri, M. A. (2018). Examining the structure of subjective well-being through meta-analysis of the associations among positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 122, 68–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busseri, M. A., & Sadava, S. W. (2011). A review of the tripartite structure of subjective well-being: Implications for conceptualization, operationalization, analysis, and synthesis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(3), 290–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carleton, R. N., Thibodeau, M. A., Teale, M. J. N., Welch, P. G., Abrams, M. P., Robinson, T., & Asmundson, G. J. G. (2013). The Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale: A review with a theoretical and empirical examination of item content and factor structure. PLoS One, 8(3), e58067.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, F. F., West, S. G., & Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41(2), 189–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, F. F., Jing, Y., Hayes, A., & Lee, J. M. (2012). Two concepts or two approaches? A bifactor analysis of psychological and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(3), 1033–1068.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2004). The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43(3), 245–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (1991). Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), International series in experimental social psychology, Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective (Vol. 21, pp. 119–139). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2018). Advances and open questions in the science of subjective well-being. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Disabato, D. J., Goodman, F. R., Kashdan, T. B., Short, J. L., & Jarden, A. (2016). Different types of well-being? A cross-cultural examination of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Psychological Assessment, 28(5), 471–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiStefano, C., Liu, J., Jiang, N., & Shi, D. (2018). Examination of the weighted root mean square residual: Evidence for trustworthiness? Structural Equation Modeling, 25(3), 453–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dueber, D. M. (2017). Bifactor Indices Calculator: A Microsoft Excel-based tool to calculate various indices relevant to bifactor CFA models. https://doi.org/10.13023/edp.tool.01 [Available at http://sites.education.uky.edu/apslab/resources/].

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, S. N., Nelson, K., & Blaine, D. D. (1999). Psychometric issues in assessment research. In P. C. Kendall, J. N. Butcher, & G. N. Holmbeck (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology (pp. 125–154). Hoboken: Wiley Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • IBM Corp (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. Armonk: IBM Corp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, M., Artin, K. H., & Oxman, M. N. (1999). Screening for depression in the older adult: Criterion validity of the 10-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). JAMA Internal Medicine, 159(15), 1701–1704.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolly, J. B., Dyck, M. J., Kramer, T. A., & Wherry, J. N. (1994). Integration of positive and negative affectivity and cognitive content-specificity: Improved discrimination of anxious and depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103(3), 544–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jovanović, V. (2015). A bifactor model of subjective well-being: A re-examination of the structure of subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 45–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kashdan, T. B., Biswas-Diener, R., & King, L. A. (2008). Reconsidering happiness: The costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(4), 219–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, A. B., & Stone, A. A. (2014). Measuring subjective wellbeing: Progress and challenges. Science, 346(6205), 42–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, R. J., Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). An evaluation of subjective well-being measures. Social Indicators Research, 17(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledgerwood, A., & Sherman, J. W. (2012). Short, sweet, and problematic? The rise of the short report in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(1), 60–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, I. A., & Preacher, K. J. (2013). Calculation for the test of the difference between two dependent correlations with one variable in common [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org.

  • Li, C.-H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 936–949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, F., Bai, X., & Wang, Y. (2013). The scale of positive and negative experience (SPANE): Psychometrics properties and normative data in a large Chinese sample. PLoS One, 8(4), e61137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Wood, A. M., Osborne, G., & Hurling, R. (2009). Measuring happiness: The higher order factor structure of subjective and psychological well-being measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(8), 878–884.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linton, M., Dieppe, P., & Medina-Lara, A. (2016). Review of 99 self-report measures for assessing well-being in adults: Exploring dimensions of well-being and developments over time. BMJ Open, 6(7), e010641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, M., Hofmann, W., Eid, M., & Lucas, R. E. (2012). Subjective well-being and adaptation to life events: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(3), 592–615.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCullough, M. E., Emmons, R. A., & Tsang, J. (2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 112–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meehl, P. E. (1993). Four queries about factor reality. History and Philosophy of Psychology Bulletin, 5(2), 4–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metler, S. J., & Busseri, M. A. (2017). Further evaluation of the tripartite structure of subjective well-being: Evidence from longitudinal and experimental studies. Journal of Personality, 85(2), 192–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohebbi, M., Nguyen, V., McNeil, J. J., Woods, R. L., Nelson, M. R., Shah, R. C., et al. (2018). Psychometric properties of a short form of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D-10) scale for screening depressive symptoms in healthy community dwelling older adults. General Hospital Psychiatry, 51, 118–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavot, W. (2018). The cornerstone of research on subjective well-being: Valid assessment methodology. In E. Diener, S. Oishi, & L. Tay (Eds.), Handbook of well-being. Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2009). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. In E. Diener (Ed.), Assessing well-being: The collected works of ed diener (pp. 139–155). New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, C., Tweed, R., & Morris, D. (2015). The naturally emerging structure of well-being among young adults: “Big two” or other framework? Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(1), 257–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radloff, L. S. (1977). CES-D scale: A self report depression scale for research in the general populations. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahm, T., Heise, E., & Schuldt, M. (2017). Measuring the frequency of emotions—Validation of the scale of positive and negative experience (SPANE) in Germany. PLoS One, 12(2), e0171288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reise, S. P., Scheines, R., Widaman, K. F., & Haviland, M. G. (2013). Multidimensionality and structural coefficient bias in structural equation modeling a bifactor perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(1), 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindskopf, D., & Rose, T. (1988). Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 51–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes. San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016). Applying bifactor statistical indices in the evaluation of psychological measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(3), 223–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The revised UCLA loneliness scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(3), 472–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A re-evaluation of the life orientation test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1063–1078.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, M. E. P., Parks, A. C., & Steen, T. (2004). A balanced psychology and a full life. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 359(1449), 1379–1381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, A. B. (2006). Meta-analysis of the factor structures of four depression questionnaires: Beck, CES-D, Hamilton, and Zung. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(1), 123–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & John, O. P. (2006). Positive emotion dispositions differentially associated with big five personality and attachment style. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 61–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65(5), 467–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Drasgow, F., & Williams, B. A. (2006). Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment: Should ideal point methods be considered for scale development and scoring? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 25–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (2014). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thayer, R. E. (2012). Moods of energy and tension that motivate. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The oxford handbook of human motivation; the oxford handbook of human motivation (Vol. chapter xvii, 579 pages, pp. 408–419). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, T. J. G., & Glidden-Tracey, C. E. (1999). Integration of theory, research design, measurement, and analysis: Toward a reasoned argument. The Counseling Psychologist, 27(3), 299–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1994). The PANAS-X: Manual for the positive and negative affect schedule-expanded form. Ames: The University of Iowa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., Wiese, D., Vaidya, J., & Tellegen, A. (1999). The two general activation systems of affect: Structural findings, evolutionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 820–838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, W., O’Brien, N., Forrest, J. I., Salters, K. A., Patterson, T. L., Montaner, J. S. G., et al. (2012). Validating a shortened depression scale (10 item CSE-D) among HIV-positive people in British Columbia, Canada. PLoS One, 7(7), e40793.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Washington State University Vancouver, 14204 NE Salmon Creek Ave, Vancouver, WA, 98686, USA

    Sean P. M. Rice & Bethany R. Shorey-Fennell

Authors
  1. Sean P. M. Rice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bethany R. Shorey-Fennell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sean P. M. Rice.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1 

(DOCX 97.3 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rice, S.P.M., Shorey-Fennell, B.R. Comparing the Psychometric Properties of Common Measures of Positive and Negative Emotional Experiences: Implications for the Assessment of Subjective Wellbeing. J well-being assess 4, 37–56 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41543-020-00025-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41543-020-00025-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation