Analysis of the Psychometric Properties of Positive Psychological Functioning Scale
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The present study examine the psychometric qualities of the Romanian version of the Positive Psychological Functioning FPP scale (Merino and Privado, 2015) and was conducted on a sample of 220 participants from the general population. The Positive Psychological Functioning can be conceptualized as a second-order factor that encompassing eleven dimensions (autonomy, resilience, self-esteem, purpose in life, enjoyment, optimism, curiosity, creativity, humor, environmental mastery and vitality). The results obtained in the present approach showed that the hierarchical factor model presented a relatively good fit χ²(484) = 1150.28, p < .001, χ²/df = 2.37, RMSEA = .079, RMR = .047, CFI = .89 with a value of the reliability alpha coefficient for the eleven subscales as well as the whole instrument of .83-.96.; and reconfirm the conclusions of the validation studies conducted in the Spanish, Mexican and Portuguese cultural contexts, as long on the factorial structure and on the psychometric properties of the instrument. The Positive Psychological Functioning FPP scale is a new tool that provides an image of the configuration of psychological resources that is available to the adult persons and allows a short general and specific assessment of healthy psychological functioning
Article Details
References
BĂBAN, A., Stres şi personalitate, Cluj-Napoca, Editura Dacia, 1998.
BRIGGS, N.E., MacCALLUM, R.C., Recovery of weak common factors by maximum likelihood and ordinary least squares estimation, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 1, 2003, p. 25–56.
COSTA, P.T., Jr., McCrAE, R.R., The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R), în BOYLE G. J., MATTHEWS G., SAKLFSKE D. H., (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment, Personality measurement and testing, Sage Publications, 2, 2008, p. 179–198.
COSTELLO, A., OSBORNE, J., Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis, Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10, 2005, p. 1–9.
COZZARELLI, C., Personality and self-efficacy as predictors of coping with abortion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 6, 1993, p. 1224–1236.
CULLATI, S., KLIEGEL, M., WIDMER, E., Development of reserves over the life course and onset of vulnerability in later life, Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 2018, p. 551–558.
DIENER, E., EMMONS, R.E., LARSEN, R.J., GRIFFIN, S., The Satisfaction With Life Scale, Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 1, 1985, p. 71–75.
FABRIGAR, L.R., WEGENER, D.T., MaccALLUM, R., STRAHAN, E.J., Evaluating the Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Psychological Research, Psychological Methods, 4, 3, 1999, p. 272–299.
FORNELL, C., LARCKER, D.F., Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 1, 1981, p. 39–50.
FREDRICKSON, B.L., The eudaimonics of positive emotions, în VITTERSØ J., International handbooks of quality-of-life. Handbook of eudaimonic well-being, Springer International Publishing AG, 2016, p. 183–190.
GAO, S., MOKHTARIAN, P.L, JOHNSTON, R.A., Non-normality of Data in Structural Equation Models, UC Berkeley: University of California Transportation Center, Presentation at the Transportation Research Board’s 87th Annual Meeting Washington, D.C., 2008, disponibil pe https://escholarship.org/uc/item/11q 0s48s
GOLDBERG, L.R., JOHNSON, J.A., EBER, H.W., HOGAN, R., ASHTON, M.C., CLONINGER, C.R., GOUGH, H.C., The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures, Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 2006, p. 84–96.
HAIR, J.F., BLACK, WC., BABIN, B., ANDRESON, R.E., Multivariate Data Analysis (6th Edition), New Jersey: Pearson, 2006.
HALBESLEBEN, J.R.B., NEVEU, J.P., PAUSTIAN-UNDERDAHL, S.C., WESTMAN, M., Getting to the “COR”: Understanding the Role of Resources in Conservation of Resources Theory, Journal of Management, 40, 5, p. 1334–1364.
HALLOW, L.L., Behavior of some elliptical theory estimators with non-normality data in a covariance structures framework: A Monte Carlo study, University of California (lucrare de doctorat), Los Angeles, 1985.
HOBFOLL, S.E, Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress, American Psychologist, 44, 3, 1989, p. 513–524.
HOBFOLL, S.E., HALBESLEBEN, J., NEVEU, J.P., & WESTMAN, M., Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences, Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 2018, p. 103–128.
HOBFOLL, S.E., Social and psychological resources and adaptation, Review of General Psychology, 6, 4, 2002, p. 307–324.
HUTA, V., RYAN, R., Pursuing Pleasure or Virtue: The Differential and Overlapping Well-Being Benefits of Hedonic and Eudaimonic Motives, Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 6, 2010, p. 735–762.
ILIESCU, D., POPA, M., DIMACHE, R., Adaptarea românească a Setului International de Itemi de Personalitate: IPIP-Ro, Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 13, 1, 2015, p. 83–112.
KALLAY, É., RUS, C., Psychometric properties of the 44-item version of Ryff’s Psychological Well-Being Scale, European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 30, 1, 2014, p. 15–21.
KASHDAN, T.B., GALLAGHER, M.W., SILVIA, P., BREEN, W.E., TERHAR, D., STEGER, M.F., The Curiosity and Exploration Inventory-II: Development, factor structure, and initial psychometrics, Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 2009, p. 987–998.
LEINER, D. J., SoSci Survey (verisunea 3.2.31, 2021) [Computer software]. Disponibil pe https://www.soscisurvey.de.
LUSTREA, A., GHAZI, L.A., PREDESCU, M., Adapting and validating Ryff`s psychological well-being scale on Romanian student population, Educatia 21 Journal, 1, 16, 2018, p. 118–126.
MERINO, M.D., PRIVADO J., Positive Psychological Functioning. Evidence for a new construct and its measurement, Anales de Psicología, 31, 1, 2015, p. 45–54.
MERINO, M.D., PRIVADO, J., GRACIA, Z., Validación mexicana de la Escala de Funcionamiento Psicológico Positivo. Perspectivas en torno al estudio del bienestar y su medida, Salud Mental, 38, 2, 2015, p. 109–115.
OLIVEIRA, E.P., MERINO, M.D., PRIVADO, J., ALMEIDA, L.S., Escala de Funcionamento Psicológico Positivo: Adaptação e estudos iniciais de validação em universitários Portugueses, Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico y Evaluación Psicologica, 48, 3, 2018, p. 151–162.
OSBORNE, J., COSTELLO, A., KELLOW, J., Best practices in exploratory factor analysis, în OSBORNE, J. (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods, SAGE Publications, 2008, p. 86–99.
PETERSON, C., SELIGMAN, M.E.P., Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2004.
RINI, C.K., DUNKEL-SCHETTER, C., WADHWA, P.D., SANDMAN, C.A., Psychological adaptation and birth outcomes: The role of personal resources, stress, and sociocultural context in pregnancy, Health Psychology, 18, 4, 1999, p. 333–345.
ROBU, V., PRUTEANU L.M., Evaluarea rezilienţei adolescenţilor: Proprietăţi psihometrice ale unui instrument – Brief Resilience Scale, Revista de Psihologie, 61, 2, Editura Academiei Române 2015, p. 109–120.
ROBU, V., SANDOVICI, A., PRUTEANU, L.M., Scala Rosenberg pentru evaluarea stimei de sine: Uni- sau multidimensionalitate? Rezultate ale unui studiu psihometric în populaţia de adolescenţi, Revista de Psihologie, 61, 3, 2015, p. 203–210.
ROSENBERG, M., Society and the adolescent self-image, New Jersey Princeton University Press, 1965.
RUTTER, M., Resilience in the face of adversity: Protective factors and resistance to psychiatric disorders, British Journal of Psychiatric, 147, 1985, p. 598–611.
RYAN, R.M., DECI, E.L., On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being, Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 2001, p. 141–166.
RYAN, R.M., FREDERICK, C., On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being, Journal of Personality, 65, 3, 1997, p. 529–565.
RYFF, C.D., Happiness Is Everything, or Is It?, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 6, 1989, p. 1069–1081.
SAVA, F., Analiza datelor în cercetarea psihologică. Metode statistice complementare, Edit. ASCR Cluj-Napoca, 2004.
SCHEIER, M., CARVER, C., Dispositional optimism and well-being: The influence of generalized outcome expectancies on health, Journal of Personality, 55, 1987, p. 169–210.
SCHEIER, M.F., CARVER, C.S., BRIDGES, M.W., Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A re-evaluation of the Life Orientation Test, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1994, p. 1063–1078.
SCHERMELLEH-ENGEL, K., MOOSBRUGGER, H., MULLER, H., Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-Fit Measures, Methods of Psychological Research, 8, 2, 2003, p. 23–74.
SCHWARZER, R., JERUSALEM, M., Self-efficacy measurement and generalized self-efficacy scale, în WEINMAN, J., WRIGHT, S., JOHNSTON M. (Ed.), Measures in health psychology: A users’s portfolio. Causal control beliefs, Windsor: NFER-NELSON, 1995, p. 33–39.
SMITH, B.W., DALEN, J., WIGGINS, K., TOOLEY, E., CHRISTOPHER, P., BERNARD, J., The Brief Resilience Scale: Assessing the ability to bounce back, International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 15, 3, 2008, p. 194–200.
STEVENS, M.J., CONSTANTINESCU, P.M., LAMBRU I., BUTUCESCU, A., SANDU, C.G., USCATESCU, L., Romanian adaptation of the satisfaction with life scale, Journal of Psychological and Educational Research, 20, 1, 2012, p. 17–33.
YOUNG, J. G., What is Creativity?, The Journal of Creative Behavior, 19, 2, 1985, p. 77–87.