Uniwersyteckie Czasopisma NaukowePolish version of the Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being – three factors rather than one
Słowa kluczowe:
eudaimonic well-being, measurement equivalence, the Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being, QEWB, ESEMAbstrakt
Background
In their conception of well-being, Waterman et al. refer to the eudaimonist philosophy in which well-being is the active development of human best potentials and perceiving them as personally expressive.
Participants and procedure
The main objective of the present research was to determine the psychometric properties of the Polish adaptation of the Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being (QEWB) and to verify the structure of the construct. Four studies were performed with a total of 2273 participants. The psychometric properties of the Polish adaptation of the QEWB were proven. To verify the factorial structure, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was used, as well as exploratory structural equation modeling. The factor analysis showed that although assessing the general score of the QEWB is justified, the three-factorial structure fit best (CFI from .929 to .963 and RMSEA from .038 to .052 in all four studies). The criterion validity of the three factors was tested using the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF), measures of procrastination (PPS, NAPS), personality traits (IPIP-BMF-20) and grit (Grit-S).
Results
The results confirm the factorial structure of eudaimonic well-being reported in the literature, which is not fully compatible with the originally described structure.
Conclusions
The current study showed the importance of considering eudaimonic well-being as a multidimensional and multifactorial construct.
Downloads
Bibliografia
Albright, J. J. & Park, H. M. (2006-2009). Confirmatory factor analysis using Amos, LISREL, Mplus, SAS/STAT CALIS. Working Paper. The University Information Technology Services (UITS) Center for Statistical and Mathematical Computing, Indiana University. http://www.indiana.edu/~statmath/stat/all/cfa/index.html.
Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397–438.
Bauer, J. J., McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2008). Narrative identity and eudaimonic well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 81–104.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. London: The Guilford Press.
Choi, J. N., & Moran, S. V. (2009). Why not procrastinate? Development and validation of a New Active Procrastination Scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149, 195–211.
Crisp, R. (2008). Well-being. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2008/entries/well-being).
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective Well-Being. Psychological Bulletin, 95. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2162125
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective well-being. The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 63–73). New York: Oxford University Press.
Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP scales: Tinyyet-effective measures of the Big Five Factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18, 192–203.
Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166–174.
Frede, D. (2009). Nicomachean Ethics VIII. 11-12: Pleasure. In C. Natali (Ed.), Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics, Book VII: Symposium Aristotelicum (pp. 183–207). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hofer, J., Busch H., & Kaertner, J. (2011). Self-regulation and well-being: the influence of identity and motives. European Journal of Personality, 25, 211–224.
Hofer, J., Kaertner, J., Chasiotis, A., Busch, H., & Kiessling, H. (2007). Socio-cultural aspects of identity formation: the relationship between commitment and well-being in student samples from Cameroon and Germany. Identity: an International Journal of Theory and Research, 7, 265–288.
Joshanloo, M. (2015). Revisiting the empirical distinction between hedonic and eudaimonic aspects of well-being using exploratory structural equation modeling. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17, 2023–2036. Published online: 2015-10-23.10. doi: 1007/s10902-015-9683-z
Karaś, D., Cieciuch, J., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2014). The Polish adaptation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF). Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 104–109.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43, 207–222.
Kłym, M., Karaś, D., Najderska, M., & Cieciuch, J. (2014). Polish Version of the Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being (QEWB). 28th International Congress of Applied Psychology, Paris, France. 8-13 July.
Kraut, R. (2012). Aristotle’s Ethics. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/
Lucas, R. E., & Diener, E. (2009). Personality and subjective well-being. The science of well-being. Social Indicators Research Series, 37, 75–102. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-2350-6_4
Luyckx, K., Soenens, B., Goosens, L., Beckx, K., & Wouters, S. (2008). Identity exploration and commitment in late adolescence: correlates of perfectionism and mediating mechanisms on the pathway to well-being. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27, 336–361.
Negru, O., & Crocetti, E. (2010). Dimensions of well-being and identity development in Romanian and Italian emerging adults: a cross-cultural analysis. EHPS, Cluj, Romania.
Robinson, D. N. (1989). Aristotle’s psychology. New York: Columbia University Press.
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.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.
Schutte, L., Wissing, M. P., & Khumalo, I. P. (2013). Further validation of the questionnaire for eudaimonic well-being (QEWB). Psychology of Well-Being: Theory, Research and Practice, 3, 3. http://www.psywb.com/content/3/1/3
Steel, P. (2010). Arousal, avoidant and decisional procrastinators: Do they exist? Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 926–934.
Stępień, M., & Cieciuch, J. (2013). Pure Procrastination Scale. Unpublished manuscript. Warsaw: UKSW.
Stępień, M., & Cieciuch, J. (2014). New Active Procrastination Scale. Unpublished manuscript. Warsaw: UKSW.
Topolewska, E., Skimina, E., Strus, W., Cieciuch, J., & Rowiński, T. (2014). Krótki kwestionariusz do pomiaru Wielkiej Piątki IPIP-BFM-20 [The short questionnaire for measuring Big Five – IPIPBFM-20]. Roczniki Psychologiczne, 17, 367–384.
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–70.
Vleioras, G., & Bosma, A. H. (2005). Are identity styles important for well-being? Journal of Adolescence, 28, 397–409.
Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Ravert, R. D., Williams, M. K., Agocha, V. B, Kim, S. Y., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). The Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being: Psychometric properties, demographic comparisons, and evidence of validity. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 41–61.
Wyszyńska, P., Ponikiewska, K., Karaś, D., Najderska, M., & Cieciuch, J. (2014). The Short Grit Scale. Unpublished manuscript. Warsaw: UKSW.
