Advertisement

Longitudinal measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in adolescence

  • Igor EsnaolaEmail author
  • Manuel Benito
  • Iratxe Antonio-Agirre
  • Inge Axpe
  • Margarita Lorenzo
Article

Abstract

Purpose

The main purpose of this research was to examine the longitudinal measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) in adolescence.

Method

The sample was composed by 484 adolescents from Spain, 46.7% were males. All participants belonged to six academic levels from Grade 7 to Grade 12, and answered the questionnaires at two different times: at the beginning (Mage1 = 14.95, SD1 = 1.81) and at the end of the school year (Mage2 = 15.61, SD2 = 1.81). The reliability of the scale was obtained through Cronbach’s alpha, Guttman lambda, and MacDonald’s Omega total. The multiple group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) was used to examine the fit of the unifactorial model to data and to test the measurement of longitudinal invariance of the scale across two time points (at the beginning T1, and the end T2, of the academic year), and the time points and groups (gender and age).

Results

The values of the single-factor SWLS structure were T1 (CFI1 = 1.000, TLI1 = .997, RMSEA1 = .080, and SRMR1 = .028), and T2 (CFI2 = .997, TLI2 = .995, RMSEA2 = .032, and SRMR2 = .034). On the other hand, values of the reliability and composite reliability when analyzing both time points together as well as separately were as follows: Cronbach’s alpha = .86, Guttman’s lambda = .84, McDonald’s Omega total = .89. Results confirmed the longitudinal invariance of SWLS. The differences in gender and age were not significant and the small differences across time points showed that the means of the latent factor remained the same over time in both variables.

Conclusion

The present study confirmed the single-factor structure of the SWLS in Spanish adolescents, as well as a good reliability and composite reliability. The full longitudinal measurement invariance was also found and there were negligible differences across time points considering gender and age. If these findings are further replicated, the scale could be used to compare the life satisfaction across two time points considering different age and gender groups.

Keywords

SWLS Longitudinal measurement invariance Adolescence Life satisfaction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors Igor Esnaola, Iratxe Antonio-Agirre, and Inge Axpe are members of the Consolidated Research Group IT934-16 of the Basque University System. The study is part of the Research Project PPG17/61 of the University of the Basque Country and the Project EDU2017-83949-P of the State subprogram of Knowledge Generation of the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

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. Ethical permission to conduct the study was obtained from the Committee on Ethics of Research and Teaching (CEID) from the University of University of the Basque Country.

Informed consent

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

References

  1. 1.
    Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. E. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Emerson, S. D., Guhn, M., & Gadermann, A. M. (2017). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale: Reviewing three decades of research. Quality of Life Research, 26, 2251–2264.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1552-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., Corte-Real, N., & Fonseca, A. M. (2016). Factorial invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in adolescents from Spain and Portugal. Psicothema, 28, 353–356.  https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.1.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Atienza, F. L., Pons, D., Balaguer, I., & García-Merita, M. L. (2000). Propiedades psicométricas de la escala de satisfacción con la vida en adolescentes. Psicothema, 12, 331–336.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bai, X., Wu, C., Zheng, R., & Ren, X. (2011). The psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale using a nationally representative sample of China. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12, 183–197.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-010-9186-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clench-Aas, J., Nes, R. B., Dalgard, O. D., & Aarø, L. E. (2011). Dimensionality and measurement invariance in the Satisfaction With Life Scale in Norway. Quality of Life Research, 20, 1307–1317.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9859-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Esnaola, I., Benito, M., Antonio-Agirre, I., Freeman, J., & Sarasa, M. (2017). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) by country, gender and age. Psicothema, 29, 596–601.  https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.394.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Glaesmer, H., Grande, G., Braehler, E., & Roth, M. (2011). The German version of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27, 127–132.  https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moksnes, U. K., Løhre, A., Byrn, D. G., & Haugan, G. (2014). Satisfaction With Life Scale in adolescents: Evaluation of factor structure and gender invariance in a Norwegian sample. Social Indicators Research, 118, 657–671.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0451-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Silva, A. D., Taveira, M. C., Marques, C., & Gouveia, V. V. (2015). Satisfaction With Life Scale among adolescents and young adults in Portugal: Extending evidence of construct validity. Social Indicators Research, 92, 489–496.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0587-9.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.5.2.164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu, C. H., Chen, L. H., & Tsai, Y. M. (2009). Longitudinal invariance analysis of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 396–401.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.11.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jovanović, V. (2016). The validity of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in adolescents and a comparison with single-item life satisfaction measures: A preliminary study. Quality of Life Research, 25, 3173–3180.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1331-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pons, D., Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., & García-Merita, M. L. (2000). Satisfaction With Life Scale: Analysis of factorial invariance for adolescents and elderly persons. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91, 62–68.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.707778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tomás, J. M., Gutiérrez, M., Sancho, P., & Romero, I. (2015). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) by gender and age in Angola. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 182–186.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Timmons, A. C. (2010). Establishing factorial invariance for multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis. KUant Guide, 22.1. Retrieved from http://crmda.dept.ku.edu/resources/kuantguides/22.Factorial_Invariance_Guide.pdf.
  18. 18.
    Meredith, W., & Teresi, J. A. (2006). An essay on measurement and factorial invariance. Medical Care, 44, S69–S77.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000245438.73837.89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wu, A. D., Li, Z., & Zumbo, B. (2007). Decoding the meaning of factorial invariance and updating the practice of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis: A demonstration with TIMSS data. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 12, 1–26.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., & García-Merita, M. L. (2003). Satisfaction With Life Scale: Analysis of factorial invariance across sexes. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1255–1260.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00332-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Siedlecki, K. L., Tucker-Drob, E. M., Oishi, S., & Salthouse, T. A. (2008). Life satisfaction across adulthood: Different determinants at different ages? The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3, 153–164.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760701834602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hultell, D., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2008). A psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in a Swedish nationwide sample of university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1070–1079.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jovanović, V. (2017). Measurement invariance of the Serbian version of the Satisfaction With Life Scale across age, gender, and time. European Journal of Psychological Assessment.  https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000410.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gana, K., Bailly, N., Saada, Y., Joulain, M., & Alaphilippe, D. (2013). Does life satisfaction change in old age: Results from an 8-year longitudinal study. The Journals of Gerontology B, 68, 540–552.  https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbs093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Salmela-Aro, K., & Tuominen-Soini, H. (2010). Adolescents’ life satisfaction during the transition to post-comprehensive education: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 683–701.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-009-9156-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Salmela-Aro, K., & Tynkkynen, L. (2010). Trajectories of life satisfaction across the transition to post-compulsory education: Do adolescents follow different pathways? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 870–881.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9464-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shek, D. T. L., & Liu, T. T. (2014). Life satisfaction in junior secondary school students in Hong Kong: A 3-year longitudinal study. Social Indicator Research, 117, 777–794.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0398-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    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.  https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Moreira, P. S., Santos, N., Castanho, T., Amorim, L., Portugal-Nunes, C., Sousa, N., et al. (2018). Longitudinal measurement invariance of memory performance and executive functioning in healthy aging. PLoS ONE.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204012.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hawes, S. W., Byrd, A. L., Kelley, S. E., Gonzalez, R., Edens, J. F., & Pardini, D. A. (2018). Psychopathic features across development: Assessing longitudinal invariance among Caucasian and African American youths. Journal of Research in Personality, 73, 180–188.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.02.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Widaman, K. F., Ferrer, E., & Conger, R. D. (2010). Factorial invariance within longitudinal structural equation models: Measuring the same construct across time. Child Development Perspectives, 4(1), 10–18.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00110.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liu, Y., Millsap, R. E., West, S. G., Tein, J. Y., Tanaka, R., & Grimm, K. J. (2017). Testing measurement invariance in longitudinal data with ordered-categorical measures. Psychological Methods, 22(3), 486–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14, 464–504.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hirschfeld, G., & von Brachel, R. (2014). Multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis in R: A tutorial in measurement invariance with continuous and ordinal indicators. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 19, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hancock, G. R. (2001). Effect size, power, and sample size determination for structured means modeling and mimic approaches to between-groups hypothesis testing of means on a single latent construct. Psychometrika, 66, 373–388.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171–189.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Siddall, J., Huebner, E. S., & Jiang, X. (2013). A prospective study of differential sources of school-related social support and adolescent global life satisfaction. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 83, 107–114.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ajop.12006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Suldo, S. M., Bateman, L. P., & Gelley, C. D. (2014). Understanding and promoting school satisfaction in children and adolescents. In M. J. Furlong, R. Gilman, & E. S. Huebner (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in schools (2nd ed., pp. 365–380). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Weber, M., & Huebner, E. S. (2015). Early adolescents’ personality and life satisfaction: A closer look at global vs. domain-specific satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 31–36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Porubanova-Norquist, M. (2012). Character as a predictor of life satisfaction in Czech adolescent sample: 3-Year follow-up study. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 231–235.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.03.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UPV/EHUDonostia-San SebastiánSpain
  2. 2.UPV/EHUBilbaoSpain
  3. 3.UPV/EHUVitoria-GasteizSpain
  4. 4.Centro Superior de Música del País Vasco MusikeneDonostia-San SebastiánSpain

Personalised recommendations