Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 1/2014

01-02-2014

Assessing psychological well-being: self-report instruments for the NIH Toolbox

Auteurs: John M. Salsman, Jin-Shei Lai, Hugh C. Hendrie, Zeeshan Butt, Nicholas Zill, Paul A. Pilkonis, Christopher Peterson, Catherine M. Stoney, Pim Brouwers, David Cella

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 1/2014

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Objective

Psychological well-being (PWB) has a significant relationship with physical and mental health. As a part of the NIH Toolbox for the Assessment of Neurological and Behavioral Function, we developed self-report item banks and short forms to assess PWB.

Study design and setting

Expert feedback and literature review informed the selection of PWB concepts and the development of item pools for positive affect, life satisfaction, and meaning and purpose. Items were tested with a community-dwelling US Internet panel sample of adults aged 18 and above (N = 552). Classical and item response theory (IRT) approaches were used to evaluate unidimensionality, fit of items to the overall measure, and calibrations of those items, including differential item function (DIF).

Results

IRT-calibrated item banks were produced for positive affect (34 items), life satisfaction (16 items), and meaning and purpose (18 items). Their psychometric properties were supported based on the results of factor analysis, fit statistics, and DIF evaluation. All banks measured the concepts precisely (reliability ≥0.90) for more than 98 % of participants.

Conclusion

These adult scales and item banks for PWB provide the flexibility, efficiency, and precision necessary to promote future epidemiological, observational, and intervention research on the relationship of PWB with physical and mental health.
vorige artikel Innovations in e-health
volgende artikel Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) initiative
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Aspinwall, L. G., & Tedeschi, R. G. (2010). The value of positive psychology for health psychology: Progress and pitfalls in examining the relation of positive phenomena to health. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 39(1), 4–15.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Danner, D. D., Snowdon, D. A., & Friesen, W. V. (2001). Positive emotions in early life and longevity: Findings from the nun study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(5), 804–813.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Huppert, F., & Whittington, J. (2003). Evidence for the independence of positive and negative well-being: Implications for quality of life assessment. British Journal of Health Psychology, 8(1), 107–122.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Vaillant, G. E. (2002). Aging well: Surprising guideposts to a happier life from the landmark Harvard study of adult development. Boston: Little, Brown.
6.
Ostir, G. V., Markides, K. S., Black, S. A., & Goodwin, J. S. (2000). Emotional well-being predicts subsequent functional independence and survival. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 48(5), 473–478.PubMed
7.
Chida, Y., & Steptoe, A. (2008). Positive psychological well-being and mortality: A quantitative review of prospective observational studies. Psychosomatic Medicine, 70(7), 741–756.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.CrossRef
9.
Salovey, P., Rothman, A. J., Detweiler, J. B., & Steward, W. T. (2000). Emotional states and physical health. American Psychologist, 55(1), 110–121.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Cohen, S., & Pressman, S. D. (2006). Positive affect and health. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(3), 122–125.CrossRef
11.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Fava, G. A., & Ruini, C. (2003). Development and characteristics of a well-being enhancing psychotherapeutic strategy: Well-being therapy. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 34(1), 45–63.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Keyes, C. L. M., & Haidt, J. (2003). Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRef
14.
Ryan, R. M., Huta, V., & Deci, E. (2008). Living well: A self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 139–170.CrossRef
15.
Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219–235.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence health? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 925–971.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 616–628.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The Meaning in Life Questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(1), 80–93.CrossRef
19.
Chamberlain, K., & Zika, S. (1988). Measuring meaning in life: An examination of three scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 9(3), 589–596.CrossRef
20.
Steger, M., & Kashdan, T. (2007). Stability and specificity of meaning in life and life satisfaction over one year. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8(2), 161–179.CrossRef
21.
Gershon, R. C., Cella, D., Fox, N. A., Havlik, R. J., Hendrie, H. C., & Wagster, M. V. (2010). Assessment of neurological and behavioural function: The NIH Toolbox. Lancet Neurology, 9(2), 138–139.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Nowinski, C. J., Victorson, D., Debb, S. M., & Gershon, R. (2013). Surveying the end user research community: Input on NIH Toolbox criteria. Neurology, 80(11 Supplement 3), S7–S12.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Salsman, J. M., Butt, Z., Pilkonis, P. A., Cyranowski, J. M., Zill, N., Hendrie, H. C., et al. (2013). Emotion assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology, 80(11 Supplement 3), S76–S86.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25.
Lai, J. S., Cella, D., Choi, S. W., Junghaenel, D. U., Christodolou, C., Gershon, R., et al. (2011). How item banks and their application can influence measurement practice in rehabilitation medicine: A PROMIS fatigue item bank example. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92(10 Supplement), S20–S27.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
26.
Pilkonis, P. A., Choi, S. W., Reise, S. P., Stover, A. M., Riley, W. T., & Cella, D. (2011). Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment, 18(3), 263–283.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
27.
Klem, M., Saghafi, E., Abromitis, R., Stover, A., Dew, M., & Pilkonis, P. (2009). Building PROMIS item banks: Librarians as co-investigators. Quality of Life Research, 18(7), 881–888.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
28.
Roster, C. A., Rogers, R. D., Albaum, G., & Klein, D. (2004). A comparison of response characteristics from web and telephone surveys. International Journal of Market Research, 46(3), 359–374.
29.
Liu, H., Cella, D., Gershon, R., Shen, J., Morales, L. S., Riley, W., et al. (2010). Representativeness of the PROMIS internet panel. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(11), 1169–1178.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
30.
Cook, K. F., Kallen, M. A., & Amtmann, D. (2009). Having a fit: Impact of number of items and distribution of data on traditional criteria for assessing IRT’s unidimensionality assumption. Quality of Life Research, 18(4), 447–460.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
31.
Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
Thissen, D. (2003). MULTILOG (Version Windows 7.0). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
34.
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further examination of the performance of S-X2, an item fit index for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 289–298.CrossRef
35.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., de Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., et al. (2009). A simulation study provided sample size guidance for differential item functioning (DIF) studies using short scales. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(3), 288–295.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
37.
Choi, S. W., Gibbons, L. E., & Crane, P. K. (2011). Lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software, 39(8), 1–30.PubMedCentralPubMed
38.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
39.
Lai, J. S., Crane, P. K., & Cella, D. (2006). Factor analysis techniques for assessing sufficient unidimensionality of cancer related fatigue. Quality of Life Research, 15(7), 1179–1190.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Huebner, E. S. (1991). Initial development of the student’s life satisfaction scale. School Psychology International, 12(3), 231–240.CrossRef
42.
Burgdorf, J., & Panksepp, J. (2006). The neurobiology of positive emotions. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(2), 173–187.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Christie, I. C., & Friedman, B. H. (2004). Autonomic specificity of discrete emotion and dimensions of affective space: A multivariate approach. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 51(2), 143–153.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Heller, D., Watson, D., & Hies, R. (2004). The role of person versus situation in life satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin, 130(4), 574–600.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Kobau, R., Zack, M. M., Sniezek, J., Lucas, R. E., & Burns, A. (2010). Well-being assessment: An evaluation of well-being scales for public health and population estimates of well-being among US adults. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 2(3), 272–297.
46.
Reker, G. T., & Chamberlain, K. (2000). Exploring existential meaning: Optimizing human development across the life span. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
47.
Scheier, M., Wrosch, C., Baum, A., Cohen, S., Martire, L., Matthews, K., et al. (2006). The life engagement test: Assessing purpose in life. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29(3), 291–298.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. (2009). Well-being for public policy. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
49.
50.
51.
52.
Metagegevens
Titel
Assessing psychological well-being: self-report instruments for the NIH Toolbox
Auteurs
John M. Salsman
Jin-Shei Lai
Hugh C. Hendrie
Zeeshan Butt
Nicholas Zill
Paul A. Pilkonis
Christopher Peterson
Catherine M. Stoney
Pim Brouwers
David Cella
Publicatiedatum
01-02-2014
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0452-3

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2014

Quality of Life Research 1/2014 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

Poor self-rated health associated with an increased risk of subsequent development of lung cancer

Commentary

Significance, truth and proof of p values: reminders about common misconceptions regarding null hypothesis significance testing

OriginalPaper

Depression and painful conditions: patterns of association with health status and health utility ratings in the general population

Brief Communication

Reproducibility study of Overactive Bladder Symptom Score questionnaire and its response to treatment (RESORT) in Korean population with overactive bladder symptoms

OriginalPaper

Evaluation of a patient-reported continuity of care model for older adults

OriginalPaper

Should patients perception of health status be integrated in the prognostic assessment of heart failure patients? A prospective study