Zhiwei Zhou, Wei Qi, Qinqhuan He, Jie Wen, Miao Miao
{"title":"Which One is the Best for Evaluating the Multidimensional Structure of Meaning in Life Among Chinese: A Comparison of Three Multidimensional Scales","authors":"Zhiwei Zhou, Wei Qi, Qinqhuan He, Jie Wen, Miao Miao","doi":"10.1007/s11482-024-10307-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Meaning in life (MIL) plays a critical role in promoting physical and mental health. Given the multidimensional nature of MIL, further research is needed to distinguish between different MIL components. The present study focused on three similar but distinct multidimensional measures (the Multidimensional Existential Meaning Scale, MEMS; the Multidimensional MIL Scale, MMILS; the Quadripartite Existential Meaning Scale, QEMS), aiming to validate the Chinese versions of these measures and to compare their predictive effects on subjective well-being, indicated by positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction. Data were collected from two Chinese samples. Sample 1 (<i>N</i> = 393) was used for factor analysis, while Sample 2 (<i>N</i> = 447) was used for the evaluation of measurement invariance, reliability, and predictive relationships of different MIL measures on subjective well-being. Results showed that all three MIL measurements (MEMS, QEMS, and modified MMILS) demonstrated good reliability and validity and positively predicted subjective well-being. Moreover, QEMS showed significant incremental validity in predicting both positive affect and negative affect when controlling for the effects of the other MIL measures. These findings suggest that compared with MEMS and MMILS, QEMS may be a more suitable multidimensional MIL measure in the Chinese context. Further research is needed to examine these findings in other cultural contexts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51483,"journal":{"name":"Applied Research in Quality of Life","volume":"19 4","pages":"1791 - 1810"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Research in Quality of Life","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11482-024-10307-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Meaning in life (MIL) plays a critical role in promoting physical and mental health. Given the multidimensional nature of MIL, further research is needed to distinguish between different MIL components. The present study focused on three similar but distinct multidimensional measures (the Multidimensional Existential Meaning Scale, MEMS; the Multidimensional MIL Scale, MMILS; the Quadripartite Existential Meaning Scale, QEMS), aiming to validate the Chinese versions of these measures and to compare their predictive effects on subjective well-being, indicated by positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction. Data were collected from two Chinese samples. Sample 1 (N = 393) was used for factor analysis, while Sample 2 (N = 447) was used for the evaluation of measurement invariance, reliability, and predictive relationships of different MIL measures on subjective well-being. Results showed that all three MIL measurements (MEMS, QEMS, and modified MMILS) demonstrated good reliability and validity and positively predicted subjective well-being. Moreover, QEMS showed significant incremental validity in predicting both positive affect and negative affect when controlling for the effects of the other MIL measures. These findings suggest that compared with MEMS and MMILS, QEMS may be a more suitable multidimensional MIL measure in the Chinese context. Further research is needed to examine these findings in other cultural contexts.
期刊介绍:
The aim of this journal is to publish conceptual, methodological and empirical papers dealing with quality-of-life studies in the applied areas of the natural and social sciences. As the official journal of the ISQOLS, it is designed to attract papers that have direct implications for, or impact on practical applications of research on the quality-of-life. We welcome papers crafted from interdisciplinary, inter-professional and international perspectives. This research should guide decision making in a variety of professions, industries, nonprofit, and government sectors, including healthcare, travel and tourism, marketing, corporate management, community planning, social work, public administration, and human resource management. The goal is to help decision makers apply performance measures and outcome assessment techniques based on concepts such as well-being, human satisfaction, human development, happiness, wellness and quality-of-life. The Editorial Review Board is divided into specific sections indicating the broad scope of practice covered by the journal. The section editors are distinguished scholars from many countries across the globe.