Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T13:16:00.729Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Confirmatory Analysis of the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale and its Relationship with Morale in Older Canadian Adults

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2010

Edward Helmes ,
Richard D. Goffin  and
Roland D. Chrisjohn
Edward Helmes*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, James Cook University
Richard D. Goffin
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario
Roland D. Chrisjohn
Affiliation:
Department of Native Studies, St. Thomas University
*
*Correspondence and requests for offprints should be sent to / La correspondance et les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à: Edward Helmes, Ph.D. Department of Psychology James Cook University Townsville Qld 4811 (edward.helmes@jcu.edu.au)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The measurement of psychological constructs depends upon clear definitions and demonstrated relationships among items, scales, and relevant theories. In this study, we examined these relationships for the measurement of affect as reflected in the popular Bradburn Affect Balance Scale (ABS). Results of confirmatory analyses of data from 187 older Canadian adults (Mean age, 69.7 years) showed that a two-dimensional structure fitted the item data much better than the unidimensional, bipolar model suggested by the original scoring key. The two dimensions showed parallel patterns of correlations with two measures of morale and with a measure of social desirability, but these patterns differed from that of the conventional unidimensional ABS score. Results suggested that the ABS should be used with caution and with scoring for two distinguishable dimensions.

Résumé

La mesure des constructions psychologiques dépend des définitions objectives et des relations démontrées entre les items, les échelles et les théories pertinentes. Dans cette étude nous avons examiné ces relations pour la mesure de l’émotion telle que reflétée par l’«Affect Balance Scale» de Bradburn . Les résultats des analyses confirmatoires des données de 187 adultes canadiens âgés (âge moyen: 69.7) montrent qu’une structure bidimensionnelle rend mieux compte des données que le modèle unidimensionnel bipolaire suggéré par la clé de correction originale. Les deux dimensions, cependant, ont montré des modèles parallèles de corrélations avec deux mesures du« morale » et une mesure de la désirabilité sociale, mais ces modèles différaient du score d’ABS unidimensionnel classique. Les résultats suggèrent que l’«Affect Balance Scale» de Bradburn devrait être utilisée prudemment et qu’il faut rendre le score de deux dimensions faciles à distinguer.

Keywords

affectéquilibre d’affectanalyse corroborant des facteursmoralaînésaffectaffect balanceconfirmatory factor analysismoraleolder adults
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , June 2010 , pp. 259 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguinis, H., & Harden, E.E. (2008). Sample size rules of thumb: Evaluating three common practices. In Lance, C.E. & Vandenburg, R.J. (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 267–286). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, F., & Withey, S. (1976). Social indicators of well-being. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P.M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P.M. (2006). EQS structural equation program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
Bradburn, N. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen, K.A. & Long, J.S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Charles, S.T., Reynolds, C.A., & Gatz, M. (2001). Age-related differences and change in positive and negative affect over 23 years. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 136–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cronbach, L.J., & Furby, L. (1970). How should we measure ‘change’—Or should we? Psychological Bulletin, 74, 68–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dick, H.R., & Friedsam, H.J. (1964). Adjustment of residents of two homes for the aged. Social Problems, 11, 282–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diener, E., & Emmons, R.A. (1985). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1105–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diener, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 41, 71–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilhooly, M.L.M. (1984). The impact of care-giving on care-givers: Factors associated with the psychological well-being of people supporting a dementing relative in the community. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 57, 35–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goffin, R.D. (2007). Assessing the adequacy of structural equation models: Golden rules and editorial policies. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 831–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J.A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, S.D. (1982). Psychological well-being in Great Britain: An evaluation of the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 3, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, D.N. (1984). Personality research form manual (3rd ed.). Port Huron, MI: Research Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
Kempen, G.I. (1992). Psychometric properties of Bradburn’s Affect Balance Scale among elderly persons. Psychological Reports, 70, 638.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kercher, K. (1992). Assessing subjective well-being in the old-old: The PANAS as a measure of orthogonal dimensions of positive and negative affect. Research on Aging, 14, 131–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, K.A., & Mueller, D.J. (2001). To balance or not to balance: Confirmatory factor analysis of the affect-balance scale. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2, 289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutner, B., Fanshel, D., Togo, A., & Langer, T. (1956). Five hundred over sixty: A community in aging. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
Lawton, M.P. (1972). The dimensions of morale. In Kent, D., Kastenbaum, R., & Sherwood, S. (Eds.), Research planning and action for the elderly. New York: Behavioral Publications.Google Scholar
Lawton, M.P., Ruckdeschel, K., Winter, L., & Kleban, M.H. (1999). Affect-experiential personality types in middle and late adulthood. Journal of Mental Health and Aging, 5, 223–239.Google Scholar
Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.Google Scholar
MacCallum, R.C., Browne, M.W., & Sugawara, H.M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macintosh, R. (1998). A confirmatory factor analysis of the Affect Balance Scale in 38 nations: A research note. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maitland, S.B., Dixon, R.A., Hultsch, D.F., & Hertzog, C. (2001). Well-being as a moving target: Measurement equivalence of the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale. Journal of Gerontology, 56, P69–P77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McMullin, J.A., & Marshall, V.W. (1996). Family, friends, stress, and well-being: Does childlessness make a difference? Canadian Journal on Aging, 15, 355–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkinson, M.A., Albert, S.M., Luborsky, M.R., & Moss, M. (1994). Exploring the validity of the Affect Balance Scale with a sample of family caregivers. Journals of Gerontology, 49, S264–S275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richardson, V.E. (2007). A dual process model of grief counseling: Findings from the Changing Lives of Older Couples (CLOC) study. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 48, 311–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, B.W., & DelVecchio, W.F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, J.A., & Carroll, J.M. (1999a). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, J.A., & Carroll, J.M. (1999b). The phoenix of bipolarity: Reply to Watson and Tellegen (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125, 611–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schimmack, U. (2008). The structure of subjective well-being. In Eid, M. & Larsen, R.J. (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 97–123). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Shmotkin, D. (1990). Subjective well-being as a function of age and gender: A multivariate look for differentiated trends. Social Indicators Research, 23, 201–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A.E., Sim, J., Scharf, T., & Phillipson, C. (2004). Determinants of quality of life amongst older people in deprived neighbourhoods. Ageing & Society, 24, 793–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J.L. (1995). Well-being: Results of the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale in the 1991 survey on ageing and independence. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Health Canada.Google Scholar
Stacey, C.A., & Gatz, M. (1991). Cross-sectional age differences and longitudinal change on the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale. Journals of Gerontology, 46, 76–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stock, W.A., Okun, M.A., & Benito, J.G. (1994). Subjective well-being measures: Reliability and validity among Spanish elders. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 38, 221–235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Streiner, D.L., & Norman, G.R. (2008). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (4th ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Systat Software. (2007). SYSTAT 12 for Windows. Chicago: Systat Software.Google Scholar
Tellegen, A., Watson, D., & Clark, L.A. (1999). On the dimensional and hierarchical structure of affect. Psychological Science, 10, 297–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D., Clark, L.E., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1999). Issues in the dimensional structure of affect—Effects of descriptors, measurement error, and response formats: Comment on Russell and Carroll (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125, 601–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yik, M.S.M., Russell, J.A., & Barrett, L.F. (1999). Structure of self-reported current affect: Integration and beyond. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 600–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar