4.7 Article

An Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of the Temporal Satisfaction With Life Scale

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.795478

关键词

life satisfaction; assessment; psychometric; wellbeing; positive assessment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the scale structure of the Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale using a large international and multicultural sample, recommending a shortened version for better model fit. It also provides more comprehensive correlations between the temporal dimensions and wellbeing/illbeing measures compared to previous studies.
The Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale measures judgements of life satisfaction using 15 items, according to three temporal dimensions: past, present, and future. However, only seven studies have looked at the psychometric properties of the Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale, and this has been individually across vastly different countries and cultures (Canada, China, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, and United-States), and with different populations, such as undergraduate students, adults, and older adults. In addition, these studies have highlighted issues regarding the replicability of the validity of the scale structure and optimal number of items. In this study we use a large international and multicultural sample (n = 6,912) from the International Wellbeing Study and investigate the scale structure of the Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale, resulting in the recommendation that a shortened 12-item version provides a better model fit compared to the original 15-item version. More in-depth correlates with aspects of wellbeing and illbeing, in relation to past, present, and future life satisfaction, are also presented than have been previously, which found positive correlations between the temporal dimensions of the Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale and wellbeing, as well as negative correlations with illbeing measures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据