EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Validation of the Italian Versions of the Flourishing Scale and of the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience

Laura Giuntoli, Francesco Ceccarini, Claudio Sica and Corrado Caudek

SAGE Open, 2017, vol. 7, issue 1, 2158244016682293

Abstract: Researchers are divided between those who consider well-being as a single global construct and those who maintain the need to keep the hedonic and eudaimonic components of well-being separate. Diener et al. proposed two separate scales for measuring well-being: the Flourishing Scale (FS) for eudaimonic well-being and the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience (SPANE) for hedonic well-being. The aim of this article is to validate the Italian versions of the FS and SPANE, and to provide support for the usefulness of distinct measures of well-being components. In Study 1, we examined an Italian undergraduate student sample ( n = 684), whereas in Study 2 we considered two samples of unemployed ( n = 282) and healthy control individuals ( n = 426). Through multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, we demonstrated that the Italian FS and SPANE obtained strict measurement invariance across administration methods (paper-and-pencil and Internet) and strong measurement invariance across different groups (unemployed individuals seeking work and a healthy control group). In our data, we found a superior fit for a two-factor model over a one-factor model of well-being, which suggests the utility of separate measures of well-being components. Concurrent validity was verified with other well-being, depression, and anxiety measures. Furthermore, we showed that flourishing is more strongly related to the cognitive component of subjective well-being than hedonic affect. In summary, the Italian FS and SPANE are reliable and valid instruments, and may be beneficial in their applications in future Italian studies on well-being.

Keywords: hedonic well-being; eudaimonic well-being; flourishing; positive affect; negative affect; unemployed (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (12)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244016682293 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:1:p:2158244016682293

DOI: 10.1177/2158244016682293

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in SAGE Open
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:1:p:2158244016682293