|
Article Excerpt
Counselors and researchers interested in examining meaning in life often use the Life Regard Index (LRI; J. Battista & R. Almond, 1973). In this study, confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) of several factor models based on J. Battista & R. Almond's work failed to support the structural validity of the LRI. CFA results suggested an influence of positive and negative item wording, and subsequent exploratory factor analyses suggested 3 factors for the LRI.
**********
Meaning in life is a construct receiving a resurgence of interest from counselors and other practitioners as well as researchers. Historically, the need for meaning has been regarded as an innate human drive (Frankl, 1963), a proposition that attracted considerable theoretical and empirical attention in the 1960s and 1970s. Humanistic and existentialist therapeutic orientations have maintained an interest in meaning in life, while the current interest in psychological well-being (e.g., Ryff & Singer, 1998) and "positive psychology" (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) has introduced the meaning-in-life construct to a new generation of practitioners and researchers. The importance of meaning in life to well-being is considered to be substantial (e.g., King, Hicks, Krull, & Del Gaiso, 2006). Previous research has suggested that meaning in life is a core component of positive human functioning (Ryff & Singer, 1998) or a key feature of the "good life" (King & Napa, 1998).
Existing research has consistently indicated a positive relation between meaning in life and well-being. For instance, meaning in life has been associated with greater happiness (Debats, van der Lubbe, & Wezeman, 1993); life satisfaction and positive affect (e.g., Chamberlain & Zika, 1988; Steger, Frazier, Oishi, & Kaler, 2006); religiosity (Steger & Frazier, 2005); internal locus of control (Reker & Peacock, 1981; Ryff, 1989); maturity and self-actualization (Compton, Smith, Cornish, & Qualls, 1996); as well as vitality, optimism, and self-esteem (Steger et al., 2006). Those reporting less meaning in life also report more hopelessness and greater likelihood of suicide (Edwards & Holden, 2001), more suicidal ideation and substance abuse (e.g., Harlow, Newcomb, & Bentler, 1986), worse adjustment to trauma (Steger, Frazier, & Zacchanini, in press), and a greater need for therapy (Battista & Almond, 1973). Thus, meaning in life appears to be a robust indicator of healthy human functioning and is of interest to researchers and practicing counselors alike.
Some of the findings from previous research might be called into question if concerns that meaning-in-life scales are confounded with other constructs prove to be well-founded. Most meaning-in-life research has used either the Purpose in Life test (PIL; Crumbaugh & Maholick, 1964) or the Life Regard Index (LRI; Battista & Almond, 1973). In addition, some investigators have used the Sense of Coherence scale (SOC; Antonovsky, 1987) because they assumed that it measures meaning in life, although it is more accurately described as a measure of coping disposition (see Sammallahti, Holi, Komulainen, & Aalberg, 1996). Measures of meaning in life, the PIL and LRI in particular, have received criticism for including items that appear to assess constructs with which a measure of meaning in life should theoretically correlate (Dyck, 1987; Frazier, Oishi, & Steger, 2003; Garfield, 1973; Klinger, 1977; Mascaro, Rose, & Morey, 2004; Steger, 2006; Steger et al., 2006; Yalom, 1980). For instance, the LRI contains the items "I have a real passion in my life," "I get so excited by what I'm doing that I find new stores of energy I didn't know I had," "Nothing very outstanding ever seems to happen to me," and "I feel really good about my life." Such items probably tap into a variety of constructs, running the risk of confounding meaning-in-life measurement with measurement of passion, energy, and general happiness. Previous research has provided several indications of such confounding. For example, correlations approaching or exceeding .70 in absolute value have been reported between the LRI and happiness (.73; Debats et al., 1993) as well as depression (-.64; Debats et al., 1993). In most of these cases, the Fulfillment subscale had higher correlations than did the full scale score with happiness (.72; Debats, 1996), life satisfaction (.68; Chamberlain & Zika, 1988), depression (-.67; Debats, 1996), and a variable indicating positive affect and emotional ties (.74; Zika & Chamberlain, 1992). This confounding of meaning-in-life content with the variables most often used to provide evidence of construct validity confuses the theoretical terrain of meaning-in-life research. In addition, it suggests the inclusion of additional content that might create instability in the factor structure of the LRI.
The inconsistency of results regarding the factor structure of the LRI have stimulated confusion and debate about how best to interpret the proposed scales (e.g., Harris & Standard, 2001). Empirical testing of the LRI has revealed structures different from the structures originally theorized (Chamberlain & Zika, 1988; Debats et al., 1993; Harris & Standard, 2001; Van Ranst & Marcoen, 1997). The factor solutions obtained by these researchers deviated not only from the published structure but also from each other. Moreover, the hypothetical factor structure proposed by Battista and Almond (1973) accounts for a relatively small part of the variance in LRI scores (37.5%; Debats et al., 1993). In some cases, post hoc revision of the LRI has been proposed because of concerns about item wording or factor structure (e.g., Debats, 1998; Debats et al., 1993). Thus, previous research has suggested that the LRI does not conform to expectations. However, despite calls for additional evaluation of the LRI (Chamberlain & Zika, 1988), there have been few systematic investigations of its factor structure, and the LRI continues to be used in research involving meaning in life (e.g., Halama, 2002; Jensen, Sveback, & Gotestam, 2004; King et al., 2006; Mascaro et al., 2004).
The purpose of the present study was to examine the structural validity of the LRI. Battista and Almond (1973) originally defined meaning in life as synonymous with their conceptualization of life regard. Life regard results when people commit to what Battista and Almond called a "concept" in their lives that provides a framework for comprehending one's existence. This concept also supplies people with reasonable, valued goals. Making progress toward these goals gives people an enjoyable sense that they are fulfilling their life's purpose. Battista and Almond conceived of the LRI as having two subscales, Framework and Fulfillment, that form a higher order meaning-in-life construct. These two subscales are thought to represent a meaningful life framework or life goal by which people understand the purpose of their existence (Framework subscale) and the sense of fulfillment that accompanies realizing this framework (Fulfillment subscale). The two subscales have often been assessed as if they represent the cognitive (Framework subscale) and affective (Fulfillment subscale) aspects of meaning in life (e.g., Debats, 1998). The LRI consists of equal numbers of positively and negatively worded items tapping on each of the two constructs, framework and fulfillment. In this study, four factor models based on the...
|
