The ABC of happiness: Validation of the tridimensional model of subjective well-being (affect, cognition, and behavior) using Bifactor Polytomous Multidimensional Item Response Theory.

Background: Happiness is often conceptualized as subjective well-being, which comprises people's evaluations of emotional experiences (i.e., the affective dimension: positive and negative feelings and emotions) and judgements of a self-imposed ideal (i.e., the cognitive dimension: life satisfaction). Recent research has established these two dimensions as primary parts of a higher order factor. However, theoretical, conceptual, and empirical work suggest that people's evaluations of harmony in their life (i.e., the sense of balance and capacity to behave and adapt with both acceptance and flexibility to inter- and intrapersonal circumstances) constitutes a third dimension (i.e., the behavioral dimension). This tridemensional conceptualization of subjective well-being has recently been verified using Unidimensional Item Response Theory (UIRT) and Classical Test Theory (CTT). Here, we use a recently developed and more robust approach that combines these two methods (i.e., Multidimensional Item Response Theory, MIRT) to simultaneously address the complex interactions and multidimensionality behind how people feel, think, and behave in relation to happiness in their life. Method: A total of 435 participants (197 males and 238 females) with an age mean of 44.84 (sd = 13.36) responded to the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (10 positive affect items, 10 negative affect items), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (five items), and the Harmony in life Scale (five items). We used Bifactor-Graded Response MIRT for the main analyses. Result: At the general level, each of the 30 items had a strong capacity to discriminate between respondents across all three dimensions of subjective well-being. The investigation of different parameters (e.g., marginal slopes, ECV, IECV) strongly reflected the multidimensionality of subjective well-being at the item, the scale, and the model level. Indeed, subjective well-being could explain 64 % of the common variance in the whole model. Moreover, most of the items measuring positive affect (8/10) and life satisfaction (4/5) and all the items measuring harmony in life (5/5) accounted for a larger amount of variance of subjective well-being compared to that of their respective individual dimensions. The negative affect items, however, measured its own individual concept to a lager extent rather than subjective well-being. Thus, suggesting that the experience of negative affect is a more independent dimension within the whole subjective well-being model. We also found that specific items (e.g., "Alert", "Distressed", "Irritable", "I am satisfied with my life") were the recurrent exceptions in our results. Last but not the least, experiencing high levels in one dimension seems to compensate for low levels in the others and vice versa. Conclusion: As expected, the three subjective well-being dimensions do not work separately. Interestingly, the order and magnitude of the effect by each dimension on subjective well-being mirror how people define happiness in their life: first as harmony, second as satisfaction, third as positive emotions, and fourth, albeit to a much lesser degree, as negative emotions. Ergo, we argue that subjective well-being functions as a complex biopsychosocial adaptive system mirroring our attitude towards life in these three dimensions (A: affective dimension; B: behavioral dimension; C: cognitive dimension). Ergo, researchers and practitioners need to take in to account all three to fully understand, measure, and promote people's experience of the happy life. Moreover, our results also suggest that negative affect, especially regarding high activation unpleasant emotions, need considerable changes and further analyses if it is going to be included as a construct within the affective dimension of a general subjective well-being factor.

Psychometric properties of the Swedish version of the satisfaction with life scale in a sample of individuals with mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Health assessment among individuals with mental health problems often involves measures of ill-being (e.g., anxiety, depression). Health is, however, defined as a state of physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease (WHO, 1948, 2001). Hence, in order to address mental illness during the 21st century, we need to develop methods for the prevention, identification and treatment of mental illness; but also, for the promotion, identification, and maintenance of well-being. In this context, over three decades of subjective well-being research have resulted in the development of measures of positive aspects of human life, such as the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985). Our aim was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in a Swedish population of individuals with mental illness using both Classical Test Theory (CTT) and Item Response Theory (IRT). METHOD: A total of 264 participants (age mean = 43.46, SD = 13.31) diagnosed with different types of mental illness answered to the Swedish version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (five items, 7-point scale: 1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). RESULTS: We found positive and significant relationships between the five items of the scale (r ranging from 0.37 to 0.75), good reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.86), and that the one-factor solution had best goodness of fit (loadings between 0.52-0.88, p < 0.001). Additionally, there were no significant differences in comparative fit indexes regarding gender and occupation status. All items had high discrimination values (between 1.95-3.81), but item 5 ("If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing"); which had a moderate discrimination value (1.17) and the highest estimated difficulty on response 7 (3.06). Moreover, item 2 ("The conditions of my life are excellent") had less discrimination and redundant difficulty with both item 1 ("In most ways my life is close to my ideal"; 2.03) on response 7 and with item 3 ("I am satisfied with my life"; -1.21) on response 1. The five items together provided good information, with especial good reliability and small standard error within -1.00 up to about 2.00 and the highest amount of test information at 0.00 of the level of life satisfaction within this population. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous research, the scale had good reliability and provided good information across most of the latent trait range. In addition, within this population, sociodemographic factors such as gender and occupation status do not influence how individuals respond to the items in the scale. However, the items couldn't measure extreme levels of low/high life satisfaction. We suggest replication of these findings, the test of additional items, and the modification of items 2 and 5 in order to use the scale among individuals with mental illness.

Validation of a general subjective well-being factor using Classical Test Theory.

BACKGROUND: Subjective Well-Being (SWB) is usually conceptualized in terms of an affective (i.e., judgements of biological emotional reactions and experiences) and a cognitive component (i.e., judgements of life satisfaction in relation to a psychological self-imposed ideal). Recently, researchers have suggested that judgements of harmony in life can replace or at least complement the cognitive component of SWB. Here, however, we go beyond that suggestion and propose that harmony in life should be seen as SWB's social component since it is the sense of balance between the individual and the world around her-a process that comprises acceptance, adaptation, and balance. By adding judgements of one's social interactions (i.e., harmony in life) to judgments of one's life satisfaction (psycho) and judgements of one's emotional reactions (bio), we propose a tentatively biopsychosocial model of SWB. As a first step, we used different factorial models in order to determine if both a general factor and specific sub-factors contribute to the biopsychosocial model of SWB. METHOD: A total of 527 participants responded to the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; 20 items), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; five items), and the Harmony in life Scale (HILS; five items). We conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to validate the biopsychosocial model of subjective well-being and a general factor (SWBS). RESULTS: The 20 PANAS items reflected a mixture of general latent structure saturation and specific latent structure saturation, but contributed to their respective specific latent factor (PA: 48%; NA: 49%) more than to the general latent SWBS factor (positive affect: 25%; negative affect: 32%). The five SWLS items contributed to a larger degree to the general SWBS factor (72%) than to life satisfaction itself (22%), while the five HILS items contributed to even a larger degree to the general SWBS factor (98%) than to harmony in life (0%). The bifactor model was the best model compared with all other models we tested (χ2 = 1,660.78, df = 375, p < 0.001); Satorra Bentler χ2 = 1,265.80, df = 375, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.92; Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.91; RMSEA = 0.067. This model of a general SWBS factor explained about 64% of the total variance in the model, while specific SWBS components together explained 15% of the total variance. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests SWB as a general factor in a multidimensional biopsychosocial model. Indeed, as much as 64% of the variance of SWB was explained by this general factor. The SWB components, however, contributed to a different degree to each corresponding factor in the model. For instance, while the affective and cognitive components seem to be their own constructs and also part of the general SWB factor, the social component tested here contributed 0% to its own variance but 98% to the general factor.

Validation of Two Short Personality Inventories Using Self-Descriptions in Natural Language and Quantitative Semantics Test Theory.

BACKGROUND: If individual differences are relevant and prominent features of personality, then they are expected to be encoded in natural language, thus manifesting themselves in single words. Recently, the quantification of text data using advanced natural language processing techniques offers innovative opportunities to map people's own words and narratives to their responses to self-reports. Here, we demonstrate the usefulness of self-descriptions in natural language and what we tentatively call Quantitative Semantic Test Theory (QuSTT) to validate two short inventories that measure character traits. METHOD: In Study 1, participants (N 1 = 997) responded to the Short Character Inventory, which measures self-directedness, cooperativeness, and self-transcendence. In Study 2, participants (N 2 = 2373) responded to Short Dark Triad, which measures Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. In both studies, respondents were asked to generate 10 self-descriptive words. We used the Latent Semantic Algorithm to quantify the meaning of each trait using the participants' self-descriptive words. We then used these semantic representations to predict the self-reported scores. In a second set of analyses, we used word-frequency analyses to map the self-descriptive words to each of the participants' trait scores (i.e., one-dimensional analysis) and character profiles (i.e., three-dimensional analysis). RESULTS: The semantic representation of each character trait was related to each corresponding self-reported score. However, participants' self-transcendence and Machiavellianism scores demonstrated similar relationships to all three semantic representations of the character traits in their respective personality model. The one-dimensional analyses showed that, for example, "loving" was indicative of both high cooperativeness and self-transcendence, while "compassionate," "kind," and "caring" was unique for individuals high in cooperativeness. The words "kind" and "caring" indicated low levels of Machiavellianism and psychopathy, whereas "shy" or "introvert" indicated low narcissism. We also found specific keywords that unify or that make the individuals in some profiles unique. CONCLUSION: Despite being short, both inventories capture individuals' identity as expected. Nevertheless, our method also points out some shortcomings and overlaps between traits measured with these inventories. We suggest that self-descriptive words can be quantified to validate measures of psychological constructs (e.g., prevalence in self-descriptions or QuSTT) and that this method may complement traditional methods for testing the validity of psychological measures.

Validation of Subjective Well-Being Measures Using Item Response Theory.

Background: Subjective well-being refers to the extent to which a person believes or feels that her life is going well. It is considered as one of the best available proxies for a broader, more canonical form of well-being. For over 30 years, one important distinction in the conceptualization of subjective well-being is the contrast between more affective evaluations of biological emotional reactions and more cognitive evaluations of one's life in relation to a psychologically self-imposed ideal. More recently, researchers have suggested the addition of harmony in life, comprising behavioral evaluations of how one is doing in a social context. Since measures used to assess subjective well-being are self-reports, often validated only using Classical Test Theory, our aim was to focus on the psychometric properties of the measures using Item Response Theory. Method: A total of 1000 participants responded to the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule. At random, half of the participants answered to the Satisfaction with Life Scale or to the Harmony in life Scale. First, we evaluate and provide enough evidence of unidimensionality for each scale. Next, we conducted graded response models to validate the psychometric properties of the subjective well-being scales. Results: All scales showed varied frequency item distribution, high discrimination values (Alphas), and had different difficulty parameters (Beta) on each response options. For example, we identified items that respondents found difficult to endorse at the highest/lowest point of the scales (e.g., "Proud" for positive affect; item 5, "If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing," for life satisfaction; and item 3, "I am in harmony," for harmony in life). In addition, all scales could cover a good portion of the range of subjective well-being (Theta): -2.50 to 2.30 for positive affect, -1.00 to 3.50 for negative affect, -2.40 to 2.50 for life satisfaction, and -2.40 to 2.50 for harmony in life. Importantly, for all scales, there were weak reliability for respondents with extreme latent scores of subjective well-being. Conclusion: The affective component, especially low levels of negative affect, were less accurately measured, while both the cognitive and social component were covered to an equal degree. There was less reliability for respondents with extreme latent scores of subjective well-being. Thus, to improve reliability at the level of the scale, at the item level and at the level of the response scale for each item, we point out specific items that need to be modified or added. Moreover, the data presented here can be used as normative data for each of the subjective well-being constructs.

Modus operandi and affect in Sweden: the Swedish version of the Regulatory Mode Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: The Regulatory Mode Questionnaire (RMQ) is the most used and internationally well-known instrument for the measurement of individual differences in the two self-regulatory modes: locomotion (i.e., the aspect of self-regulation that is concerned with movement from state to state) and assessment (i.e., the comparative aspect of self-regulation). The aim of the present study was to verify the independence of the two regulatory modes, as postulated by the Regulatory Mode Theory (Kruglanski et al., 2000), and the psychometric properties of the RMQ in the Swedish context. Furthermore, we investigated the relationship between regulatory modes (locomotion and assessment) and affective well-being (i.e., positive affect and negative affect). METHOD: A total of 655 university and high school students in the West of Sweden (males = 408 females = 242, and five participants who didn't report their gender; agemean = 21.93 ± 6.51) responded to the RMQ and the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule. We conducted two confirmatory factor analyses using structural equation modeling (SEM). A third SEM was conducted to test the relationship between locomotion and assessment to positive affect and negative affect. RESULTS: The first analyses confirmed the unidimensional factor structure of locomotion and assessment and both scales showed good reliability. The assessment scale, however, was modified by dropping item 10 ("I don't spend much time thinking about ways others could improve themselves".) because it showed low loading (.07, p = .115). Furthermore, the effect of locomotion on positive affect was stronger than the effect of assessment on positive affect (Z = -15.16, p < .001), while the effect of assessment on negative affect was stronger than the effect of locomotion on negative affect (Z = 10.73, p < .001). CONCLUSION: The factor structure of the Swedish version of the RMQ is, as Regulatory Mode Theory suggests, unidimensional and it showed good reliability. The scales discriminated between the two affective well-being dimensions. We suggest that the Swedish version of the RMQ, with only minor modifications, is a useful instrument to tap individual differences in locomotion and assessment. Hence, the present study contributes to the validation of the RMQ in the Swedish culture and adds support to the theoretical framework of self-regulatory mode.

Italian and Swedish adolescents: differences and associations in subjective well-being and psychological well-being.

BACKGROUND: One important aspect of subjective judgments about one's well-being (i.e., subjective well-being: life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect) is that cultural features, such as, nationality seem to shape cognitive judgments about the "the ideal life." In this comparative study we examined differences in subjective well-being and psychological well-being between Italian and Swedish adolescents and tested if the relationship between the three constructs of subjective well-being (i.e., satisfaction with life, positive affect, and negative affect) and psychological well-being was moderated by the adolescents' nationality. METHOD: Italian (n = 255) and Swedish (n = 277) adolescents answered to the Satisfaction with Life Scale, the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule, and Ryff's Scales of Psychological Well-Being. Differences between samples were tested using a Multiple Analysis of Variance. We also conducted a multiple group analysis (Italy and Sweden) using Structural Equation Modelling to investigate the relationship between all three subjective well-being constructs and psychological well-being. RESULTS: Italian adolescents scored significantly higher in satisfaction with life than Swedish adolescents. Additionally, across countries, girls scored significantly higher in negative affect than boys. In both countries, all three constructs of subjective well-being were significantly associated to adolescents' psychological well-being. Nevertheless, while the effect of the relationship between affect and psychological well-being was almost the same across countries, life satisfaction was more strongly related to psychological well-being among Swedish adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that there are larger variations between these two cultures in the cognitive construct of subjective well-being than in the affective construct. Accordingly, associations between the cognitive component, not the affective component, of subjective well-being and psychological well-being differ between countries as well.

Time perspective and well-being: Swedish survey questionnaires and data.

The data pertains 448 Swedes' responses to questionnaires on time perspective (Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory), temporal life satisfaction (Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale), affect (Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule), and psychological well-being (Ryff׳s Scales of Psychological Well-Being-short version). The data was collected among university students and individuals at a training facility (see U. Sailer, P. Rosenberg, A.A. Nima, A. Gamble, T. Gärling, T. Archer, D. Garcia, 2014; [1]). Since there were no differences in any of the other background variables, but exercise frequency, all subsequent analyses were conducted on the 448 participants as one single sample. In this article we include the Swedish versions of the questionnaires used to operationalize the time perspective and well-being variables. The data is available, SPSS file, as Supplementary material in this article. We used the Expectation-Maximization Algorithm to input missing values. Little׳s Chi-Square test for Missing Completely at Random showed a χ (2)=67.25 (df=53, p=.09) for men and χ (2)=77.65 (df=72, p=.31) for women. These values suggested that the Expectation-Maximization Algorithm was suitable to use on this data for missing data imputation.

Questions of time and affect: a person's affectivity profile, time perspective, and well-being.

Background. A "balanced" time perspective has been suggested to have a positive influence on well-being: a sentimental and positive view of the past (high Past Positive), a less pessimistic attitude toward the past (low Past Negative), the desire of experiencing pleasure with slight concern for future consequences (high Present Hedonistic), a less fatalistic and hopeless view of the future (low Present Fatalistic), and the ability to find reward in achieving specific long-term goals (high Future). We used the affective profiles model (i.e., combinations of individuals' experience of high/low positive/negative affectivity) to investigate differences between individuals in time perspective dimensions and to investigate if the influence of time perspective dimensions on well-being was moderated by the individual's type of profile. Method. Participants (N = 720) answered to the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule, the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory and two measures of well-being: the Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale and Ryff's Scales of Psychological Well-Being-short version. A Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was conducted to identify differences in time perspective dimensions and well-being among individuals with distinct affective profiles. Four structural equation models (SEM) were used to investigate which time perspective dimensions predicted well-being for individuals in each profile. Results. Comparisons between individuals at the extreme of the affective profiles model suggested that individuals with a self-fulfilling profile (high positive/low negative affect) were characterized by a "balanced" time perspective and higher well-being compared to individuals with a self-destructive profile (low positive/high negative affect). However, a different pattern emerged when individuals who differed in one affect dimension but matched in the other were compared to each other. For instance, decreases in the past negative time perspective dimension lead to high positive affect when negative affect is high (i.e., self-destructive vs. high affective) but to low negative affect when positive affect was high (i.e., high affective vs. self-fulfilling). The moderation analyses showed, for example, that for individuals with a self-destructive profile, psychological well-being was significantly predicted by the past negative, present fatalistic and future time perspectives. Among individuals with a high affective or a self-fulfilling profile, psychological well-being was significantly predicted by the present fatalistic dimension. Conclusions. The interactions found here go beyond the postulation of a "balanced" time perspective being the only way to promote well-being. Instead, we present a more person-centered approach to achieve higher levels of emotional, cognitive, and psychological well-being.

A happier and less sinister past, a more hedonistic and less fatalistic present and a more structured future: time perspective and well-being.

Background. Previous studies have established a link between how people relate to their past, present, and future (i.e., time perspective) and subjective well-being (i.e., life satisfaction, positive and negative affect). Time perspective comprises five dimensions: Past Positive, Past Negative, Present Hedonistic, Present Fatalistic, and Future. Life satisfaction can also be evaluated in relation to different time frames. Moreover, approach related positive affect is associated to a different concept of well-being labeled psychological well-being. In the present study we extend previous findings by investigating the effect of time perspective on the time frame of evaluations of life satisfaction (past, present, future) and by investigating the relationship between time perspective and psychological well-being. Method. Questionnaires on time perspective (Zimbardo's Time Perspective Inventory), temporal life satisfaction (Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale), affect (Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule), and psychological well-being (Scales of Psychological Well-Being-short version) were answered by 453 individuals. Two different structural equation models were tested, one of the relationship between time perspective and temporal life satisfaction, and the other of the relationship between time perspective, affect and psychological well-being. Results. Time perspective affected life satisfaction depending on the time scale on which it was evaluated-memory of a negative past influenced life satisfaction in all time frames, and a positive view of the past influenced both past and future life satisfaction. Moreover, less rumination about past negative events (i.e., low score on Past Negative), the tendency to take risks in the present to achieve happy feelings and/or avoid boredom (i.e., high scores on Present Hedonistic), and a less hopeless and pessimistic view about the present (low scores on Present Fatalistic) were associated with higher levels of psychological well-being and positive affect. These same time perspective dimensions were associated with lower levels of negative affect. The Future time perspective dimension (i.e., approaching life with self-control, punctuality, and planning for the future) was associated with both psychological well-being and positive affect. Conclusions. High levels of both subjective and psychological well-being are related to a happier and a less sinister past, a more hedonistic and less fatalistic present, as well as to a more structured future.

The relationship between the JobMatchTalent test and the NEO PI-R: construct validation of an instrument designed for recruitment of personnel.

BACKGROUND: Personality measures in recruitment situations need to (1) cover the Big-Five model of personality and (2) focus on interpersonal requirements of jobs. We investigated the relationship between the JobMatchTalent test and the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO PI-R). The JobMatchTalent consists of three areas (i.e., Stability Patterns, Action Patterns, and Relation Patterns) divided in 10 main scales providing a deeper picture of the employee (e.g., Work Structure, Tolerance). METHOD: The participants (N = 390) were recruited from the professional network LinkedIn and completed online versions of both instruments. We used correlation analysis to investigate the construct validity of the JobMatchTalent test by identifying significant correlation coefficients no lower than ±.30 (i.e., convergent validity) and those with nonsignificant correlations (i.e., discriminant validity). Regression analyses were used to investigate the variance of the NEO PI-R dimensions that was explained by the JobMatchTalent test. RESULTS: Four of the NEO PI-R dimensions showed considerable overlap with the following JobMatchTalent main scales: (1) Work structure and Decision Characteristics, which both are measures of thoughtfulness, planning, and order (i.e., Conscientiousness); (2) Inner drive, Activity, Drive, Acting, and Communication, which represent different aspects of being outgoing and extrovert (i.e., Extraversion); (3) Tolerance and Social interest, which measure a person's interest and ability to create social relations (i.e., Agreeableness); and (4) Stress Index, a measure of emotional stability (i.e., the opposite of Neuroticism). All 5 NEO PI-R dimensions overlapped with the JobMatchTalent sub-scales. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that 4 of the NEO PI-R dimensions are logically categorized along the JobMatchTalent main scales: (1) Order and Thoughtfulness, (2) Energy and Extraversion, (3) Social Adaptation and Interest, and (4) Emotion Control. Hence, it suggests substantial overlap between the instruments, but also that the two instruments cannot be considered as equivalent to assess individual differences in recruitment situations.

Anxiety, affect, self-esteem, and stress: mediation and moderation effects on depression.

BACKGROUND: Mediation analysis investigates whether a variable (i.e., mediator) changes in regard to an independent variable, in turn, affecting a dependent variable. Moderation analysis, on the other hand, investigates whether the statistical interaction between independent variables predict a dependent variable. Although this difference between these two types of analysis is explicit in current literature, there is still confusion with regard to the mediating and moderating effects of different variables on depression. The purpose of this study was to assess the mediating and moderating effects of anxiety, stress, positive affect, and negative affect on depression. METHODS: Two hundred and two university students (males  = 93, females  = 113) completed questionnaires assessing anxiety, stress, self-esteem, positive and negative affect, and depression. Mediation and moderation analyses were conducted using techniques based on standard multiple regression and hierarchical regression analyses. MAIN FINDINGS: The results indicated that (i) anxiety partially mediated the effects of both stress and self-esteem upon depression, (ii) that stress partially mediated the effects of anxiety and positive affect upon depression, (iii) that stress completely mediated the effects of self-esteem on depression, and (iv) that there was a significant interaction between stress and negative affect, and between positive affect and negative affect upon depression. CONCLUSION: The study highlights different research questions that can be investigated depending on whether researchers decide to use the same variables as mediators and/or moderators.