4.6 Article

Psychometric Properties of the Satisfaction with Life Scale among Turkish University Students, Correctional Officers, and Elderly Adults

Journal

SOCIAL INDICATORS RESEARCH
Volume 99, Issue 3, Pages 413-429

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11205-010-9589-4

Keywords

Satisfaction with Life Scale; SWLS; University students; Elderly; Correctional officers; Confirmatory factor analysis; Reliability; Concurrent validity; Discriminant validity; Multi-group comparison

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to extensively examine the psychometric properties of adapted version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) in different Turkish samples. In order to test the psychometric properties of the SWLS three separate and independent samples are utilized in this study, namely university students (n = 547), correctional officers (n = 166), and elderly adults (n = 123). Concerning the reliability of the scale, internal consistency and item-total correlation coefficients are found to be satisfactory for all three samples. As for the validity studies, concurrent validity of the scale is supported in all three samples by revealing the association of SWLS with conceptually related measures, which included depression, self-esteem, positive affect and negative affect, work stress, and monthly income measures. Discriminant validity is examined only in the sample of university students, and SWLS revealed a non-significant correlation with a conceptually unrelated construct (i.e., willingness to self-censor). Consistent with the original scale, a single-factor solution model reveals an adequate fit in all three different samples. Furthermore, confirmatory factor analysis with multi-group comparisons performed demonstrates that SWLS has the same theoretical structure for three different groups on the basis of a single-factor solution model. The theoretical and practical implications of this study are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available