Search

Harmony is regarded as important for well-being in many cultures. However, (cultural) differences in the meanings and manifestations of harmony may impact the equivalence of measures of harmony in life, as well as the associations between harmony and other well-being constructs. This study aimed to investigate the factorial, convergent and divergent validity, and measurement invariance of the Harmony in Life Scale (HILS) in South African and Ghanaian samples. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to data from three South African samples (two multicultural samples completed the HILS in English; and a Setswana-speaking sample completed the HILS in Setswana) and one Ghanaian sample (completed the HILS in English). Sample sizes ranged between n = 400 and n = 427. Good fit indices were obtained for all samples, except for the Setswana-speaking sample from South Africa. In all instances the HILS showed good internal consistency reliability and convergent and divergent validity. Full scalar invariance was supported for the two multicultural South African samples, but only partial scalar invariance when data from the Ghanaian sample were added to the analysis. The HILS shows potential for future use in all samples, except the Setswana-speaking sample. Findings emphasise the importance of considering cultural and/or contextual and linguistic differences and how these may influence the measurement of psychological constructs. Future research should qualitatively explore the meanings and manifestations of harmony in various African and other global contexts in local languages. Contribution: This study is the first to investigate the psychometric properties of the original English version of the HILS in South African and Ghanaian samples, as well as a Setswana translation of the scale. The study contributes to the understanding of harmony in life and the measurement thereof in diverse contexts, in this case specifically focused on African samples, and may, in turn, inform interventions and evaluation of interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Basic Psychological Needs Scale (BPNS) is still being used but validation studies that applied confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed that the scale has inadequate psychometric properties. CFA is based upon restrictive statistical assumptions that may result in biased parameter estimates. There are statistical developments that overcome these limitations. This study explored the factorial validity of the scale in three South African student samples who completed the English (n = 326), Afrikaans (n = 478), or Setswana (n = 260) version of the BPNS. CFA, bifactor CFA, exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) and bifactor ESEM were applied to the data. The three-factor bifactor ESEM model yielded the best fit, but model fit was inadequate for the English and Setswana versions, and almost adequate for the Afrikaans version. After removal of problematic items based on substantive reasons, high modification indices, and high expected parameter change values, reduced bifactor ESEM models displayed adequate fit. The general factor showed sufficient reliability scores for all language versions. Subscales exhibited insufficient reliability scores, except for the Competence and Relatedness subscales of the BPNS-Afrikaans. A reduced three-factor bifactor ESEM model was partially metric invariant for the English and Afrikaans groups. The BPNS-Afrikaans showed potential for use, but alternative measures of basic psychological needs should be considered for the English and Setswana groups in the current context. The cross-cultural application of basic psychological needs in a South African context is questioned. An emic approach to exploring and conceptualising basic psychological needs in African contexts is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dimensionality of the Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being (QEWB) has been a topic of debate and divergent findings in the literature up to date. This study investigated the factor structure and measurement invariance of the QEWB in four culturally diverse South African samples using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), bifactor CFA, exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM), and bifactor ESEM. Three student samples completed the English (n = 326), Afrikaans (n = 478), or Setswana (n = 260) version of the QEWB. An adult sample (n = 262) completed the English version. The one-factor structure revealed poor fit for the student samples. Although the four-factor models generally showed slightly better fit than the three-factor models, the latter was preferred for parsimony. The bifactor ESEM model displayed good fit for the student samples, with the general factor and some specific factors attaining sufficient reliability scores, pointing to the potential use of the scale in these samples. Configural invariance between the student samples was supported, but not metric nor scalar invariance. For the adult sample, none of the models displayed good fit and the use of the QEWB in this sample is not recommended. The results point towards the existence of a global eudaimonic well-being factor and, at the same time, the interrelatedness of facets of eudaimonic well-being. It suggests that eudaimonic well-being may be represented by the same items across the three student groups. The influence of developmental phase on the manifestation and measurement of eudaimonic well-being should be explored in future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mental health is considered an integral part of human health. Reliable and valid measurement instruments are needed to assess various facets of mental health in the native language of the people involved. This paper reports on five studies examining evidence for the factorial validity of the Twi versions of five mental health and well-being measurement instruments: Affectometer-2 (AFM-2); Automatic Thought Questionnaire–Positive (ATQ-P); Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale (GSEs); Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9); and Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) in a rural Ghanaian adult sample. Method: Measures were translated and evaluated using a research-committee approach, pilot-tested, and administered to adults (N = 444) randomly selected from four rural poor communities in Ghana. We applied confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), bifactor CFA, exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), and bifactor ESEM to the AFM-2, ATQ-P, and the PHQ-9, and CFA to the GSEs and the SWLS. The omega coefficient of composite reliability was computed for each measure. Results: A two-factor bifactor ESEM model displayed superior model fit for the AFM-2. The total scale and the Negative Affect subscale, but not the Positive Affect subscale, attained sufficient reliability. Two models (a four-factor 22-item bifactor ESEM model and a 5-factor 22-item ESEM model) fitted the data best for the ATQ-P. The bifactor ESEM model displayed a high reliability value for the total scale and satisfactory reliability values for three of its four subscales. For the GSEs, a one-factor CFA model (residuals of items 4 and 5 correlated) demonstrated superior model fit with a high reliability score for the total scale. A two-factor ESEM model outperformed all other models fitted for the PHQ-9, with moderate and satisfactory reliability scores for the subscales. A one-factor CFA model (residuals of item 4 and 5 correlated) demonstrated superior model fit for the SWLS, with a satisfactory reliability value for the total scale. Conclusions: Findings established evidence for the factorial validity of the Twi versions of all five measures, with the global scores, but not all subscale scores, demonstrating satisfactory reliability. These validated measurement instruments can be used to assess mental health and well-being in the research and practice contexts of the current sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to validate the English version of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale with subscales Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness in a South African student sample. The participants were a nonprobability sample of 322 students from a South African university. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the scale's factorial validity. Neither a one-factor nor a three-factor model fitted the original 21-item scale. After problematic items were removed, a 17-item Basic Psychological Needs Scale with a negatively worded method effect fitted the data best, but the fit was inadequate. Although the 17-item scale exhibited good convergent and discriminant validity, the internal consistency reliability remained low. The Basic Psychological Needs Scale had limited application in a South African student sample as a domain-general measure of basic psychological need satisfaction. Questions are raised regarding the extent to which the scale taps the construct under study in the current sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]