The positive event scale: Measuring uplift frequency and intensity in an adult sample
The positive event scale: Measuring uplift frequency and intensity in an adult sample
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11205-005-4096-8
复制
发表时间：
2006-08-01
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Arentz, Alexandra
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Maybery, D. J.;Jones-Ellis, Jenny;Arentz, Alexandra
在数量有限的采用积极事件（提升）测量的研究中，没有一个公布了关于所使用量表的详细心理测量信息（Maybery和Graham， 2001, Stress and Health 17, pp. 91-104）。本文以大学生为研究对象，采用概念上不同的测量策略（即测量事件频率和强度），对面向成年中年人群的提升测量的成分结构、并发效度和信度进行了检验。在373名参与者中，73%是女性，大部分是有报酬的工作（72%），有固定关系（69%），62%有孩子，样本的平均年龄为41.83岁（SD = 16.14）。主成分分析表明，43个隆起的频率和强度得分大体上一致。9个提升因素分别是朋友、社交活动、工作、与同事、主管、配偶/伴侣、父母、孩子和家庭的互动。每个子量表的频率和强度得分之间存在中等到强烈的相关性。子量表具有非常好的信度，与幸福工具（生活满意度和积极影响）和选定的人格变量具有弱至中度的相关性，并且正如预期的那样，与痛苦或消极影响没有相关性。结果突出了一个普遍清晰的提升因素结构，包括一系列来自积极事件域的人际、社会和工作子尺度。这些发现通过提高对个体提升事件来源的概念理解，扩展了先前的研究，并为未来的研究提供了有效和可靠的衡量标准。
Of the limited number of studies employing positive event (uplift) measures none have published detailed psychometric information about the scale that was used (Maybery and Graham, 2001, Stress and Health 17, pp. 91-104). Building on previous work with university students and employing conceptually distinct measurement strategies (i.e. measuring event frequency and intensity), this paper examined the component structure, concurrent validity and reliability of an uplift measure designed for an adult middle aged population. The 373 participants were 73% female, largely in paid work (72%), in permanent relationships (69%), 62% having children and the sample having a mean age of 41.83 years (SD = 16.14). Principal component analyses of separate frequency and intensity scores from 43 uplifts highlighted generally consistent component structures. The nine uplift factors were friends, social events, work, interactions with workers, with supervisor, spouse/partner, parents, children and household. There were moderate to strong correlations between frequency and intensity scores for each subscale. The subscales had very good reliabilities and weak to moderate correlations with well-being instruments (life satisfaction and positive affect) and selected personality variables, and as expected there were no correlations with distress or negative affect. The results highlight a generally clear uplift factor structure that includes a range of interpersonal, social and work subscales from the positive event domains. The findings extend previous research by improving the conceptual understanding of the sources of uplifting events for individuals and provide a valid and reliable measure for future research.