Are the dimensions of meaning in life distinct? A bifactor model of comprehension, purpose, and mattering with four samples.

IF 3.8 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED

Journal of Counseling Psychology Pub Date : 2025-06-02 DOI:10.1037/cou0000801

P F Jonah Li, Dubravka Svetina Valdivia, Y Joel Wong

{"title":"Are the dimensions of meaning in life distinct? A bifactor model of comprehension, purpose, and mattering with four samples.","authors":"P F Jonah Li, Dubravka Svetina Valdivia, Y Joel Wong","doi":"10.1037/cou0000801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, the tripartite conceptualization of meaning in life (MIL) including (a) coherence/comprehension, (b) purpose, and (c) significance/mattering has received growing scholarly consensus and some support from factor analytic findings. However, a considerable body of studies has shown that the three MIL dimensions are highly correlated, suggesting the potential for MIL's unidimensionality. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether a bifactor model, compared to other plausible models, best explained the relations among three MIL dimensions, namely, comprehension, purpose, and mattering. Using four different samples (4,041T1 and 2,717T2 midlife adults, 610 adults, 956 college students, and 346 patients with chronic illnesses), results indicated that the bifactor model best fit the data, compared to the unidimensional model and the correlated three-factor model. The bifactor model provided evidence for an overarching MIL factor. Ancillary bifactor indices favored the unidimensionality of MIL. The findings provide conceptual, measurement, and practical implications for MIL researchers and practitioners. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Counseling Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Counseling Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000801","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, the tripartite conceptualization of meaning in life (MIL) including (a) coherence/comprehension, (b) purpose, and (c) significance/mattering has received growing scholarly consensus and some support from factor analytic findings. However, a considerable body of studies has shown that the three MIL dimensions are highly correlated, suggesting the potential for MIL's unidimensionality. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether a bifactor model, compared to other plausible models, best explained the relations among three MIL dimensions, namely, comprehension, purpose, and mattering. Using four different samples (4,041_T1 and 2,717_T2 midlife adults, 610 adults, 956 college students, and 346 patients with chronic illnesses), results indicated that the bifactor model best fit the data, compared to the unidimensional model and the correlated three-factor model. The bifactor model provided evidence for an overarching MIL factor. Ancillary bifactor indices favored the unidimensionality of MIL. The findings provide conceptual, measurement, and practical implications for MIL researchers and practitioners. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文本刊更多论文

人生意义的维度是不同的吗？一个包含四个样本的理解、目的和重要性的双因素模型。

近年来，生活意义的三要素概念化(a)连贯/理解、（b)目的、(c)重要性/重要性）得到了越来越多的学术共识和因子分析结果的支持。然而，大量的研究表明，这三个维度是高度相关的，这表明MIL可能存在单维性。因此，本研究的目的是探讨一个双因素模型，与其他似是而非的模型相比，是否能最好地解释MIL三个维度，即理解、目的和重要性之间的关系。采用4个不同的样本（4041t1和2717t2中年成年人、610成年人、956名大学生和346名慢性疾病患者），结果表明，双因素模型比一维模型和相关的三因素模型更适合数据。双因子模型为总体MIL因子提供了证据。辅助双因子指数倾向于MIL的单维性。研究结果为MIL研究者和从业者提供了概念、测量和实践意义。（PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA，版权所有）。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Counseling Psychology Multiple-

CiteScore

7.60

自引率

7.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Counseling Psychology® publishes empirical research in the areas of counseling activities (including assessment, interventions, consultation, supervision, training, prevention, and psychological education) career development and vocational psychology diversity and underrepresented populations in relation to counseling activities the development of new measures to be used in counseling activities professional issues in counseling psychology In addition, the Journal of Counseling Psychology considers reviews or theoretical contributions that have the potential for stimulating further research in counseling psychology, and conceptual or empirical contributions about methodological issues in counseling psychology research.