Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development and initial validation of a short three-dimensional inventory of character strengths

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Character strength is described as a positive and organized pattern of emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. It serves as a schema that organizes categories of information toward the self, others, and the world, and provides the self-aware knowledge that facilitates the pursuit of goals, values, and ethical principles. Recent research has suggested that three reliable factors emerge from the measures of character strengths: caring, inquisitiveness, and self-control. The goal of this paper is to develop a psychometrically sound short measure of character strength.

Methods

The questions were addressed in two studies using two independent samples: a cross-cultural (i.e., 518 Asians and 556 Westerners) sample, and a cross-population (i.e., 175 community participants and 171 inpatients) sample in China.

Results

Findings from the exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis suggested a cross-cultural three-factor model of character strength that could be measured by the Three-dimensional Inventory of Character Strengths (TICS). A multigroup confirmatory factor analysis further indicated that the number of factors and factor loadings was invariant in the medical and community samples. This result indicated that the brief inventory could be applied to a medical context. Internal reliability, content validity, and predictive validity were good, although the predictive validity of the three character strengths for psychological symptoms in the medical sample was more modest than that in the community sample.

Conclusions

TICS is expected to be used for screening populations at risk, and a tool to aid mental health professionals in group-based treatment/intervention planning. It also should be noted that this short inventory should be used with caution for individual decision making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2009). Character strengths research and practice. Journal of College and Character, 10(4), 1–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 263–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cloninger, C. R. (2004). Feeling good: The science of well being. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boardman, S., & Doraiswamy, P. M. (2015). Integrating positive psychiatry into clinical practice. In D. V. Jeste & B. W. Palmer (Eds.), Positive psychiatry: A clinical handbook. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Niemiec, R. M. (2013). VIA character strengths: Research and practice (the first 10 years). In H. H. Knoop & A. D. Fave (Eds.), Well-being and cultures: Perspectives from positive psychology (pp. 11–29). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Rashid, T., & Ostermann, R. F. (2009). Strength-based assessment in clinical practice. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65(5), 488–498.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bird, V. J., Le Boutillier, C., Leamy, M., Larsen, J., G Oades, L., Williams, J., et al. (2012). Assessing the strengths of mental health consumers: A systematic review. Psychological Assessment, 24(4), 1024–1033. doi:10.1037/a0028983.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ho, S. M. Y., Rochelle, T. L. R., Law, L. S. C., Duan, W., Bai, Y., Shih, S.-M., et al. (2014). Methodological issues in positive psychology research with diverse populations: Exploring strengths among Chinese adults. In J. T. Pedrotti & L. M. Edwards (Eds.), Perspectives on the intersection of multiculturalism & positive psychology (pp. 45–57). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. McGrath, R. E. (2015). Integrating psychological and cultural perspectives on virtue: The hierarchical structure of character strengths. Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(5), 407–424. doi:10.1080/17439760.2014.994222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Joseph, S., & Wood, A. (2010). Assessment of positive functioning in clinical psychology: Theoretical and practical issues. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 830–838.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dahlsgaard, K., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Shared virtue: The convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of General Psychology, 9(3), 203–213. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.9.3.203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative” description of personality”: The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216–1229. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Macdonald, C., Bore, M., & Munro, D. (2008). Values in action scale and the Big 5: An empirical indication of structure. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(4), 787–799. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.10.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ruch, W., Proyer, R. T., Seligman, M. E. P., Peterson, C., Park, N., & Harzer, C. (2010). Values in action inventory of strengths (VIA-IS): Adaptation and validation of the German version and the development of a peer-rating form. Journal of Individual Differences, 31(3), 138–149. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Singh, K., & Choubisa, R. (2010). Empirical validation of values in action-inventory of strengths (VIA-IS) in Indian context. Psychological Studies, 55(2), 151–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Peterson, C., & Park, N. (2004). Classification and measurement of character strengths: Implications for practice. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 433–446). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Azañedo, C. M., Fernández-Abascal, E. G., & Barraca, J. (2014). Character strengths in Spain: Validation of the values in action inventory of strengths (VIA-IS) in a Spanish sample. Clínica y Salud, 25(2), 123–130. doi:10.1016/j.clysa.2014.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brdar, I., & Kashdan, T. B. (2010). Character strengths and well-being in Croatia: An empirical investigation of structure and correlates. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 151–154. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Khumalo, I. P., Wissing, M. P., & Temane, Q. M. (2008). Exploring the validity of the values-in-action inventory of strengths (VIA-IS) in an African context. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 18(1), 133–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Shryack, J., Steger, M. F., Krueger, R. F., & Kallie, C. S. (2010). The structure of virtue: An empirical investigation of the dimensionality of the virtues in action inventory of strengths. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(6), 714–719. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2010). Does it matter where we live?: The urban psychology of character strengths. American Psychologist, 65(6), 535–547. doi:10.1037/a0019621.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kristjánsson, K. (2010). Positive psychology, happiness, and virtue: The troublesome conceptual issues. Review of General Psychology, 14(4), 296–310. doi:10.1037/a0020781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ho, S. M. Y., Duan, W., & Tang, S. C. M. (2014). The psychology of virtue and happiness in western and asian thought. In N. E. Snow & F. V. Trivigno (Eds.), The philosophy and psychology of character and happiness (pp. 215–238). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cheung, F. M., van de Vijver, F. J., & Leong, F. T. (2011). Toward a new approach to the study of personality in culture. American Psychologist, 66(7), 593–603. doi:10.1037/a0022389.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Leong, F. T., Leung, K., & Cheung, F. M. (2010). Integrating cross-cultural psychology research methods into ethnic minority psychology. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(4), 590–597. doi:10.1037/a0020127.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Duan, W., Ho, S. M. Y., Bai, Y., Tang, X., Zhang, Y., Li, T., et al. (2012). Factor structure of the Chinese Virtues Questionnaire. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(6), 680–688. doi:10.1177/1049731512450074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Duan, W., Ho, S. M. Y., Bai, Y., & Tang, X. (2013). Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese Virtues Questionnaire. Research on Social Work Practice, 23(3), 336–345. doi:10.1177/1049731513477214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sims, A., Barker, C., Price, C., & Fornells-Ambrojo, M. (2015). Psychological impact of identifying character strengths in people with psychosis. Psychosis, 7(2), 179–182. doi:10.1080/17522439.2014.925485.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ziegler, M., Kemper, C. J., & Kruyen, P. (2014). Short Scales—Five misunderstandings and ways to overcome them. Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 185–189. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Buschor, C., Proyer, R. T., & Ruch, W. (2013). Self-and peer-rated character strengths: How do they relate to satisfaction with life and orientations to happiness? The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(2), 116–127. doi:10.1080/17439760.2012.758305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Duan, W., Bai, Y., Tang, X., Siu, P. Y., Chan, R. K. H., & Ho, S. M. Y. (2012). Virtues and positive mental health. Hong Kong Journal of Mental Health, 38(5), 24–31.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gillham, J., Adams-Deutsch, Z., Werner, J., Reivich, K., Coulter-Heindl, V., Linkins, M., et al. (2011). Character strengths predict subjective well-being during adolescence. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(1), 31–44. doi:10.1080/17439760.2010.536773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Güsewell, A., & Ruch, W. (2012). Are only emotional strengths emotional? Character strengths and disposition to positive emotions. Applied Psychology, 4(2), 218–239. doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2012.01070.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Proctor, C., Maltby, J., & Linley, P. A. (2011). Strengths use as a predictor of well-being and health-related quality of life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(1), 153–169. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9181-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Duan, W. (2016). The benefits of personal strengths in mental health of stressed students: A longitudinal investigation. Quality of Life Research, 25(11), 2879–2888. doi:10.1007/s11136-016-1320-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Duan, W., Ho, S. M. Y., Siu, B. P. Y., Li, T., & Zhang, Y. (2015). Role of virtues and perceived life stress in affecting psychological symptoms among Chinese college students. Journal of American College Health, 63(1), 32–39. doi:10.1080/07448481.2014.963109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Littman-Ovadia, H., & Steger, M. (2010). Character strengths and well-being among volunteers and employees: Toward an integrative model. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(6), 419–430. doi:10.1080/17439760.2010.516765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60(5), 410–421. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Duan, W., Ho, S. M. Y., Tang, X., Li, T., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Character strength-based intervention to promote satisfaction with life in the Chinese university context. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(6), 1347–1361. doi:10.1007/s10902-013-9479-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Wood, A. M., Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Kashdan, T. B., & Hurling, R. (2011). Using personal and psychological strengths leads to increases in well-being over time: A longitudinal study and the development of the strengths use questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 15–19. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.08.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Duan, W., Guo, P., & Gan, P. (2015). Relationships among trait resilience, virtues, post-traumatic stress disorder, and post-traumatic growth. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0125707. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0125707.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Peterson, C., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. (2006). Greater strengths of character and recovery from illness. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(1), 17–26. doi:10.1080/17439760500372739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Proyer, R. T., & Ruch, W. (2009). How virtuous are gelotophobes? Self-and peer-reported character strengths among those who fear being laughed at. Humor-International Journal of Humor Research, 22(1–2), 145–163. doi:10.1515/HUMR.2009.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mongrain, M., Anselmo-Matthews, T., et al. (2012). Do positive psychology exercises work? A replication of Seligman et al. (2005). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 68(4), 382–389. doi:10.1002/jclp.21839.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. McGrath, R. E. (2015). Measurement invariance in translations of the VIA inventory of strengths. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Marsh, H. W., Ellis, L. A., Parada, R. H., Richards, G., & Heubeck, B. G. (2005). A short version of the self description questionnaire II: operationalizing criteria for short-form evaluation with new applications of confirmatory factor analyses. Psychological Assessment, 17(1), 81–102. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.17.1.81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide (Seventh Edition ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

  49. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1995). Manual for the depression anxiety and stress scales (2 edn.). Sydney: Psychological Foundation.

  51. Wang, K., Shi, H.-S., Geng, F.-L., Zou, L.-Q., Tan, S.-P., Wang, Y., et al. (2016). Cross-cultural validation of the depression anxiety stress scale–21 in China. Psychological Assessment, 28(5), e88–e100. doi:10.1037/pas0000207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543. doi:10.1007/BF02294825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Byrne, B. M. (2012). Structureal equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, application, and programming. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464–504. doi:10.1080/10705510701301834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Ho, S. M. Y., Li, W. L., Duan, W., Siu, B. P. Y., Yau, S., Yeung, G., et al. (2016). A brief strengths scale for individuals with mental health issues. Psychological Assessment, 28(2), 147–157. doi:10.1037/pas0000164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Duan, W., & Ho, S. M. Y. (2016). Three-dimensional model of strengths: Examination of invariance across gender, age, education levels, and marriage status. Community Mental Health Journal. doi:10.1007/s10597-016-0038-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bellier-Teichmann, T., & Pomini, V. (2015). Evolving from clinical to positive psychology: understanding and measuring patients’ strengths: A pilot study. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 45(2), 99–108. doi:10.1007/s10879-014-9287-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Cloninger, C. R., Svrakic, D. M., & Przybeck, T. R. (1993). A psychobiological model of temperament and character. Archives of General Psychiatry, 50(12), 975–990. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820240059008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Haidt, J. (2006). The happiness hypothesis: Finding modern truth in ancient wisdom. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Cloninger, C. R. (2013). What makes people healthy, happy, and fulfilled in the face of current world challenges? Mens Sana Monographs, 11(1), 16–24. doi:10.4103/0973-1229.109288.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 99–103. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ruch, W., Martínez-Martí, M. L., Proyer, R. T., & Harzer, C. (2014). The character strengths rating form (CSRF): Development and initial assessment of a 24-item rating scale to assess character strengths. Personality and Individual Differences, 68, 53–58. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Bontempo, D. E., & Hofer, S. M. (2007). Assessing factorial invariance in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. In A. D. Ong & M. V. Dulmen (Eds.), Oxford handbook of methods in positive psychology (pp. 153–175). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Proyer, R. T., Gander, F., Wellenzohn, S., & Ruch, W. (2015). Strengths-based positive psychology interventions: A randomized placebo-controlled online trial on long-term effects for a signature strengths-vs. a lesser strengths-intervention. Frontiers in Psychology. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00456.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Hamilton, N. A., Kitzman, H., & Guyotte, S. (2006). Enhancing health and emotion: Mindfulness as a missing link between cognitive therapy and positive psychology. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 20(2), 123–134. doi:10.1891/jcop.20.2.123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Seligman, M. E. P. (2015). Chris Peterson’s unfinished masterwork: The real mental illnesses. The Journal of Positive Psychology. doi:10.1080/17439760.2014.888582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Heene, M., Bollmann, S., & Bühner, M. (2014). Much ado about nothing, or much to do about something? Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 245–249. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Kruyen, P. M., Emons, W. H. M., & Sijtsma, K. (2013). Shortening the S-STAI: Consequences for research and clinical practice. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 75(2), 167–172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Kruyen, P. M., Emons, W. H. M., & Sijtsma, K. (2012). Test length and decision quality in personnel selection: When is short too short? International Journal of Testing, 12(4), 321–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Emons, W. H. M., Sijtsma, K., & Meijer, R. R. (2007). On the consistency of individual classification using short scales. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 105–120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Ziegler, M., Poropat, A., & Mell, J. (2014). Does the length of a questionnaire matter? Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 250–261. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Su, R., Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2014). The development and validation of the comprehensive inventory of thriving (CIT) and the brief inventory of thriving (BIT). Applied Psychology, 6(3), 251–279.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Duan, W., Guan, Y., & Gan, F. (2016). Brief inventory of thriving: A comprehensive measurement of wellbeing. Chinese Sociological Dialogue, 1(1), 15–31. doi:10.1177/2397200916665230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Rammstedt, B., & Beierlein, C. (2014). Can’t we make it any shorter? Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 212–220. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Sandy, C. J., Gosling, S. D., & Koelkebeck, T. (2014). Psychometric comparison of automated versus rational methods of scale abbreviation. Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 221–235. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Cloninger, C. R. (1994). The temperament and character inventory (TCI): A guide to its development and use. St. Louis, MO: Center for Psychobiology of Personality, Washington University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors thank their participants for their generous contributions to this research. We thank Pengfei Guo in Hospital (T. M. C.) Afflicted Southwest Medical University, Pei Gan in The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, and Deqiang Ning in School of Electronic and Optical Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology for their help in data collection. We also appreciate Professor Robert McGrath in Fairleigh Dicinson University for his comments on the early manuscript.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Wuhan University Humanities and Social Sciences Academic Development Program for Young Scholars “Sociology of Happiness and Positive Education” (Grant No: Whu2016019).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, Wuhan University, 299 Bayi Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan, Hubei, People’s Republic of China

    Wenjie Duan & He Bu

Authors
  1. Wenjie Duan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. He Bu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wenjie Duan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author, Wenjie Duan, declares no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Duan, W., Bu, H. Development and initial validation of a short three-dimensional inventory of character strengths. Qual Life Res 26, 2519–2531 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1579-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1579-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation