Premium
The construct validity of subjective well‐being measures: An assessment via quantitative research syntheses
Author(s) -
Okun Morris A.,
Stock William A.
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
journal of community psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.585
H-Index - 86
eISSN - 1520-6629
pISSN - 0090-4392
DOI - 10.1002/1520-6629(198710)15:4<481::aid-jcop2290150406>3.0.co;2-e
Subject(s) - subjective well being , psychology , happiness , neuroticism , life satisfaction , construct validity , reliability (semiconductor) , construct (python library) , well being , validity , incremental validity , social psychology , clinical psychology , psychometrics , personality , computer science , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , psychotherapist , programming language
The construct validity of subjective well‐being was assessed by quantitative research syntheses of U.S. studies of the correlates of subjective well‐being appearing before 1980. The classes of evidence examined in this article include reports of reliability, estimates of correlation between different measures of subjective well‐being, and estimates of correlation between measures of subjective well‐being and measures of other constructs (adjustment, neuroticism, and work and family satisfaction). Generally, measures of subjective well‐being showed adequate reliability ( M = .80). Measures of subjective well‐being were moderately associated with adjustment ( M = .38), neuroticism ( M = − .33), and work ( M = .33) and family ( M = .29) satisfaction. Although measures of subjective well‐being were substantially interrelated ( M = .52), validity coefficients based on two different subjective well‐being measures purported to tap the construct of happiness ( M = .45) were slightly lower than validity coefficients based on subjective well‐being measures purported to tap the constructs of happiness and life satisfaction ( M = .49). In selecting measures of subjective well‐being, community psychologists are urged to consider their theoretical framework and traditional psychometric criteria.