Psychometric properties of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory in Hong Kong adolescents

Abstract

The present study examined the factor structure and discriminant validity of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory in a sample of 8422 Hong Kong Chinese adolescents aged between 12 and 19 (3649 boys). Participants completed the ZTPI, Beck Depression Inventory II and Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders. Principal component analysis identified six factors (37 items), five of which corresponded to the original one and a new factor, present-impulsive. T-test results indicated that compared to low depression adolescents and low anxiety adolescents, high depression adolescents and high anxiety adolescents scored higher on the past-negative, present-impulsive, and present-fatalistic subscales but lower on the past-positive, present-hedonistic, and future subscales. It is suggested that the inventory can be used to help adolescents reflect on their time perspectives and to aid the development of psycho-educational programs that can help adolescents develop a more balanced perspective on time.

Keywords

Time perspective depression anxiety Hong Kong Chinese adolescents Zimbardo time perspective inventory

Zimbardo and Boyd’s (1999) time perspective model posited that our perspectives on time impact different aspects of life including our emotions, judgments, decisions, expectations, and behaviors. As noted by Keough et al. (1999), “our view of ourselves, our world, and our relationships is filtered through temporally based cognitive processes” (p. 150). Time perspective is conceptualized as a cognitive style that parcels personal experiences into past, present, and future categories (Zimbardo et al., 1997). In this model, the temporal frame influences our reconstruction of the past, our interpretation of current experiences, and our goals and plans for the future. In this way, it affects the way we encode ourselves and our experiences and thus influences our current decisions and future behaviors. Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) introduced three fundamental time dimensions, namely, past (past-negative, past-positive), present (present-hedonistic, present-fatalistic), and future. Individuals do not use only one temporal frame but do usually develop a tendency to use one more than others, which becomes the dominant or most influential temporal frame (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999). This implies that a cognitive bias is formed towards a past, present, or future orientation when processing ongoing experiences. Studies have reported that a dominant present-hedonistic time perspective or a weak future perspective is related to social problems including binge eating and drinking, alcohol and drug abuse, risky driving, and delinquency, whereas a past-negative perspective is associated with mental health problems (e.g., Beek et al., 2010; Keough et al.,1999; Laghi et al., 2012; Oyserman and Markus, 1990; Zimbardo et al., 1997).

The time perspective model maintains that when the past temporal frame has influence, the focus is on the reconstructed memory of similar past experiences (Zimbardo et al., 1997). Whether the memory of analogous experiences is happy or miserable affects the interpretation of the present situation, decisions, and behaviors. A past-negative time perspective is thought to develop from dramatic and aversive memories, and embodies a pessimistic and negative attitude towards the past that may extend to the present and future. A past-positive temporal frame is thought to build on a warm and joyful reconstruction of the past. Contrary to the past-negative perspective, it signifies a positive attitude towards not only the past but also the present and the future. The influences of the past time frame on present emotions have been documented in research showing that past-negative and past-positive perspectives are related to adolescents' life satisfaction and happiness in the negative and positive direction, respectively (Boniwell et al., 2010). Regarding influences on future expectation, it is found that past-positive was related to an overprediction of future energetic arousal, while on the contrary, the past-negative perspective was associated with an underprediction of future hedonic tone (Stolarski et al., 2014). Past-negative time frame has also been found to be associated with depression, self-reported unhappiness, and low self-esteem in college students (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999).

Zimbardo and Boyd’s (1999) model also holds that a present-oriented person lives in the present and thus is more likely to be influenced by cues and stimuli in the present environment or context, including the reactions of other people and one's current bodily sensation and emotions. Should the present perspective be hedonistic, high value is placed on immediate pleasures, sensation seeking, and proximal goals. Future consequences or rewards are thought to be too remote to have much influence on people with a dominant present-hedonistic time frame. The implication is that although present-oriented persons are high in subjective sense of happiness, they are also weak in resisting temptation, delaying gratification, and self-regulation. Several studies have reported that among adolescents and young people, a present-hedonistic perspective is associated with substance, tobacco and alcohol use, and risky driving (Keough et al., 1999; Zambianchi et al., 2010; Zimbardo et al., 1997).

Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) maintain that some present-oriented individuals have a fatalistic rather than a hedonistic view. A present-fatalistic perspective denotes a belief in the uncontrollability of the future and a pessimistic attitude toward the present. The emotional and behavioral consequences are thought to be depression, anxiety, and resignation (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999). Studies conducted with college and high school students have reported that a present-fatalistic perspective is associated positively with depression, trait anxiety, and suicidal ideation but inversely with self-esteem, proactive coping, and dispositional optimism (Anagnostopoulos and Griva, 2012; Laghi et al., 2009; Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999).

Lastly, the time perspective model describes individuals who favor a future-oriented temporal frame as having a strong sense of purpose for the future. They can clearly articulate their future goals and foresee the future implications of their present decisions and behaviors (Simon et al., 2004), entailing resistance to an array of attractive distractions for future rewards. These characteristics imply that future-oriented individuals have high self-confidence, high motivation, and a strong sense of mastery. Several studies have found support for these characteristics about the future time frame. Future perspective has been found to be inversely related to depression, sense of hopelessness, risky driving, and substance use (Keough, Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999; Wiliford and Branmlett, 1995; Zimbardo et al., 1997), but positively related to self-regulation and goal setting (Worrell and Mello, 2007).

However, Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) also pointed out that the future orientation can have drawbacks. The future-oriented individuals may become too instrumental or outcome-orientated. For the sake of future achievement, they may forgo present pleasure such as the intrinsic gratification and enjoyment derived from making friends and learning.

Researchers have suggested that achieving a balanced time perspective (BTP) is important for psychological well-being (e.g., Boniwell and Zimbardo, 2004). In general, individuals with a BTP hold relatively dominant past-positive, present-hedonistic, and future perspectives and they are less affected by past-negative and present-fatalistic perspectives. But most important of all, a BTP denotes the individual's flexibility in shifting among different time perspectives according to the situational demands and available personal resources (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999).

Given the evidence that time perspective is related to various domains of daily life including mental health, subjective sense of happiness, risky behaviors, and self-concept and that a BTP would help maintaining psychological well-being, research on adolescents’ time perspectives would generate translational findings for professionals working with young people. One critical developmental task of adolescents is searching for an identity (Erikson, 1968). This period is labeled as a psychological moratorium during which adolescents explore and experiment with various kinds of experiences (Chan and Chan, 2013; Erikson, 1968). The process of identity formation involves decisions related to different domains such as a career path, religion, political stance, philosophy of life, and gender role. During the process, adolescents look back and review their past. They also look forward to visualize and set goals for the future (Erikson, 1968; Zambianchi and Ricci, 2014). As expressed by Zimbardo and Boyd (1999), “time permeates and defines people's existence” (p. 1276), implying that adolescents' temporal frame has substantial influences on their identity formation (Worrell and Mello, 2007).

With this in view, a valid and reliable tool for assessing adolescents' time perspectives is needed. The current study is built on previous research in two ways. First, it tested the validity of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory (ZTPI, Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999) for use with adolescents. This measure was designed to assess time frames in both adolescents and adults. However, although there is extensive evidence of its validity in college students and adults (e.g., Beek et al., 2010; Keough et al., 1999; Stolarski et al., 2014; Zimbardo et al., 1997), research conducted with adolescents is relatively limited. Second, the current study expands research on the ZTPI by testing its factor structure and discriminant validity in a Chinese sample. Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) pointed out that ZTPI was developed and tested in individualistic societies and its relevancy to societies that emphasize more on collectivistic values and interdependence is yet to be established. Because Chinese value interdependence, they may have different conceptualizations and values attached to time (Levine, 1997). Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) have called for cross-cultural adaptation of the ZTPI. To achieve these two goals, the present study included a sample of Chinese adolescents. The study first explored the factor structure of the ZTPI when used with Chinese adolescents. Then the discriminant validity of the ZTPI would be investigated by examining the associations between time perspective and depressive and anxiety symptoms. It was hypothesized that both depressive and anxiety symptoms would correlate positively with the past-negative and present-fatalistic perspectives but negatively with past-positive, present-hedonistic, and future perspectives.

Methods

A total of 8422 Chinese adolescents from 19 Hong Kong secondary schools participated in this study. The sample included 3649 boys and 4656 girls aged between 12 and 19. Their mean age was 14.93 (SD = 1.79). The information of 117 participants was missing.

Instruments

ZTPI

The ZTPI (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999) was designed to measure the time perspective of adolescents and adults. The scale contains 56 items and 5 subscales: Past-negative (10 items; e.g., “Painful past experiences keep being replayed in my mind”), past-positive (9 items; e.g., “It gives me pleasure to think about my past”), present-hedonistic (15 items; e.g., “Taking risks keeps my life from becoming boring”), present-fatalistic (9 items; e.g., “Fate determines much in my life”), and future (13 items; “ I am able to resist temptations when I know that there is work to be done”). Participants are requested to rate “how characteristic is each of the item of you” from 1 (very uncharacteristic) to 5 (very characteristic).

The translation of the ZTPI was conducted by a research team in the field of adolescent mental health. First, the ZTPI was translated into Chinese by a bilingual professor in psychology. Next, a clinical psychologist and a team of three social workers in the field of adolescent mental health compared the Chinese version with the English version and amended any discrepancies. The whole team then proofread and revised the Chinese version of the ZTPI together. Finally, 10 Chinese-speaking adolescents completed the Chinese version of the ZTPI to test the meaning and readability of the items. Final revisions were then made accordingly.

Beck Depression inventory II

The Chinese version of the Beck Depression inventory II (BDI-II; Steer et al., 1999) was used to assess adolescent depressive symptoms. The BDI-II was developed to reflect the diagnostic criteria of major depression disorder d described in the DSM-IV (Steer et al., 1999). It consists of 21 items. Each item consists of four statements graded in severity of one depressive symptom from 0 to 3. The option “0” means that the symptom was not experienced in the past two weeks. Ratings of 1 to 3 imply mild, moderate, and severe levels of symptoms, respectively. The last item asks about changes in sexual interest. In some studies on depressive symptoms in Hong Kong adolescents, this item was omitted because sexual behavior is a sensitive issue in the Hong Kong-Chinese context, and the BDI-II total scores were divided by 20 and multiplied by 21 (e.g., Byrne et al., 2004; Stewart et al., 2003). The current study followed this practice and adopted the 20-item version. In the present study, the Cronbach’s alpha was .92. Beck and his colleagues suggested that a total score of 30 or above indicates severe depression. This cutoff was adopted to identify a group of adolescents with high depressive symptoms.

Screen for Child Anxiety-Related Emotional Disorders

Adolescents' anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Chinese version of the anxiety screen for Child Anxiety-Related Emotional Disorders (SCARED; Birmaher et al., 1999). The scale consists of 41 items. Participants are asked to rate from 0 (never) to 2 (always) to report the frequency with which they experienced the situation described in each of the 41 items during the past three months. An example situation is “When I get frightened, I feel like throwing up.” Possible total scores range from 0 to 82.The total score of the SCARED can be used as a measure of anxiety level. Research suggests that the SCARED is appropriate for assessing the anxiety of Chinese adolescents in Mainland China and Hong Kong (Chan et al., 2015; Su et al.,2008). The Cronbach’s alpha was .94 in the present sample.

According to the scoring system suggested by Birmaher et al. (1999), a total score of 30 or above may indicate a clinically significant level of anxiety. In the current study, this cutoff was adopted to identify a group of high anxiety adolescents.

Results

Statistical analyses

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted with principal component analysis to examine the factor structure of the ZTPI when used with Chinese adolescents. The internal consistency of the subscales was examined by calculating Cronbach’s alphas. The discriminant validity of the ZTPI was examined by assessing how the ZTPI scores were related to the BDI-II and the SCARED total scores. The participants were divided into low and high (BDI ≥ 30; n = 476) depression groups to compare their scores in the ZTPI subscales. The sample was also divided into low and high (SCARED ≥ 30; n = 2276) anxiety groups, again to compare their scores in the ZTPI subscales.

Factor structure of the ZTPI

EFA was conducted with the principal component method. Varimax rotation was used to find the best interpretable clusters of factors. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure was 0.94, which verified the sampling adequacy for EFA. The p value for Bartlett’s test of sphericity was smaller than 0.001, indicating that correlations among items were sufficiently large for EFA. A six-factor model with 37 items was suggested by the results. Specifically, all six components had eigenvalues larger than Kaiser’s criterion of 1 and in combination explained a total of 43.48% of the variance. Communalities of the 37 items ranged from .41 to .69. Table 1 shows the factor loadings after varimax rotation.

Table 1.

Summary of exploratory factor analysis results with 6 factors extracted for the original ZTPI items (n = 4201).

	Rotated factor loadings
Items	F1	F2	F3	F4	F5	F6
21_Future	0.72
40_Future	0.70
45_Future	0.68
13_Future.	0.64
51_Future	0.55
10_Future	0.54
56_Future^a	−0.50
30_Future	0.50
43_Future	0.47
34_Negative past		0.76
50_Negative past		0.75
16_Negative past		0.68
22_Negative past		0.67
54_Negative past		0.56
27_Negative past		0.48
33_Negative past		0.47
36_Negative past		0.40
7_Past-positive			0.79
29_Past-positive			0.76
2_Past-positive			0.73
20_Past-positive			0.70
11_Past-positive			0.68
15_Past-positive			0.58
31_Present-hedonistic				0.78
42_Present-hedonistic				0.75
26_Present-hedonistic				0.73
32_Present-hedonistic				0.58
28_Present-hedonistic				0.48
38_Present-fatalistic					0.78
39_Present-fatalistic					0.73
37_Present-fatalistic					0.62
3_ Present-fatalistic					0.49
14_ Present-fatalistic					0.48
8_Present-hedonistic						0.62
44_Present-hedonistic						0.56
46_Present-hedonistic						0.52
23_Present-hedonistic						0.51

Note: The name appears behind each item number is the subscale in the original ZTPI.

Reverse coding item.

The items that loaded on Factor 1 (9 items), Factor 2 (8 items), Factor 3 (6 items), and Factor 5 (5 items) came from the original future, past-negative, past-positive, and present-fatalistic subscales, respectively. Items in Factor 4 (5 items) and Factor 6 (4 items) came from the original present-hedonistic subscale. The Factor 4 items emphasized the idea that seeking excitement and fun at the present moment and enjoying the process is more important than achieving the goal (e.g., “Taking risks keeps my life from becoming boring”). Therefore, this factor retained the original present-hedonistic label. The Factor 6 items implied following impulses (e.g., “I do things impulsively” and “I find myself getting swept up in the excitement of the moment”). Therefore, this new factor was labeled present-impulsive. In other words, the original present-hedonistic subscale was split into two subscales, measuring two different present perspectives, the present-hedonistic and the present-impulsive, both are related to present enjoyment. The six-factor ZTPI-37 was adopted for further analyses.

Reliability

The Cronbach’s alpha of the ZTPI-37 in the present study was .89. The alphas of the six factors ranged between .71 and .84 (see Table 2).

Table 2.

Cronbach alphas of six factors in ZTPI-37 and correlations with BDI and SCARED scores.

	Time perspectives
	Labels in original ZTPI	New labels in ZTPI-37	Cronbach alphas	BDI	SCARED
Factor 1 (9 items)	Future	Future	.81	−.18***	−.08***
Factor 2 (8 items)	Past-negative	Past-negative	.83	.39***	.33***
Factor 3 (6 items)	Past-positive	Past-positive	.84	−.17***	−.08***
Factor 4 (5 items)	Present-hedonistic	Present-hedonistic	.82	−.05***	−.09***
Factor 5 (5 items)	Present-fatalistic	Present-fatalistic	.75	.18***	.08***
Factor 6 (4 items)	/	Present-impulsive	.71	.18***	.13***

Note: ***p < .0001.

Discriminant validity

Correlations between the ZTPI, and BDI-II and SCARED scores are listed in Table 2. Independent-samples t-tests (see Table 3) indicated that compared to the low depression group, the high depression group had significantly lower scores on the future subscale (F1), present-hedonistic subscale (F4), and positive-past subscale (F3) but significantly higher scores on the present-impulsive subscale (F6), present-fatalistic subscale (F5), and negative-past subscale (F2). The same differences were also found between the low and high anxiety groups.

Table 3.

Means and standard deviations of the six factors in the ZTPI-37 and T-test results.

	BDI <30	BDI ≥30	t-test results	SCARED <30	SCARED ≥30	T-test results
Factor 1 (Future)	3.21 (0.56)	2.95 (0.68)	8.55***	3.20 (0.58)	3.15 (0.55)	3.17**
Factor 2 (Past-negative)	3.23 (0.71)	3.80 (0.79)	−16.28***	3.15 (0.72)	3.61 (0.65)	−27.85***
Factor 3 (Past-positive)	3.63 (0.79)	3.22 (1.05)	8.76***	3.63 (0.80)	3.53 (0.86)	4.83***
Factor 4 (Present-hedonistic)	3.42 (0.80)	3.27 (0.98)	3.35**	3.44 (0.82)	3.34 (0.82)	5.31***
Factor 5 (Present-fatalistic)	3.12 (0.72)	3.48 (0.83)	−9.71***	3.11 (0.75)	3.25 (0.68)	−7.95***
Factor 6 (Present-impulsive)	3.04 (0.78)	3.38 (0.85)	−9.00***	3.01 (0.80)	3.23 (0.75)	−11.52***

Note: The labels in parentheses refer to the new labels for the subscales in ZTPI-37; **p < .01; ***p < .0001.

Discussion

The present study is the first to examine the psychometric properties of the ZTPI in a Chinese adolescent sample. The results suggest the utility of a short form of the ZTPI, consisting of 37 items (ZTPI-37). ZTPI-37 was composed of six components, reflecting past, present, and future time perspectives. The high Cronbach alphas suggest that the six subscales have reasonable internal consistency. Discriminant validity of the ZTPI-37 was evidenced by significantly different subscale scores in comparisons of adolescents showing high and low symptoms of depression and high and low symptoms of anxiety.

The original ZTPI consists of 56 items measuring five time perspectives, namely, past-negative, past-positive, present-hedonistic, present-fatalistic, and future. When used with Chinese adolescents, the EFA results in the present study suggested that there were six distinct time perspectives, five of which corresponded to the five time perspectives assessed in the original ZTPI. Four items from the original present-hedonistic subscale loaded on a new factor which is labeled as present-impulsive perspective.

Factor 1 consisted of nine items solely from the original future perspective subscale. The original future perspective was found to be a negative predictor of depressive symptoms and hopelessness (Wiliford and Bramlett, 1995) but a positive predictor of problem solving coping (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999). In line with the previous findings, Factor 1 was negatively associated with depressive symptoms and that low depression adolescents scored higher on this factor than high depression adolescents. The core characteristic of depression is the cognitive triad of negative self-concept, a negative world view and a negative view of the future (Beck, 1967). Depressed people experience a strong sense of helplessness (Abramson et al., 1978) which is the opposite of the strong sense of control underlying a future perspective. Current results also show that a future perspective was related inversely to anxiety symptoms. However, the negative association between a future perspective and the SCARED was relatively mild compared to its association with the BDI-II. This attenuation may be related to the nature of the SCARED which is designed to measure symptoms of specific anxiety disorders such as separation and social anxiety disorders rather than general stress level.

In the current study, Factor 5 (present-fatalistic) consisted of five original present-fatalistic items. A present-fatalistic perspective reveals a strong sense of uncontrollability about the future. Since planning for future is perceived to be meaningless, individuals with a dominant present-fatalistic perspective tend to be stuck at the present. They overuse the present perspective because they believe that they have “no future". This explains why, in the present study, it was associated positively with depressive and anxiety symptoms. Depression is characterized by the negative cognitive triad and a strong sense of hopelessness (Abramson et al., 1978; Beck, 1967). A sense of uncontrollability about the future also denotes that anxiety will be elicited. Based on the findings, it may be concluded that adolescents with a dominant present-fatalistic perspective are more vulnerable to depression and anxiety. In the present sample, both high depression and high anxiety groups scored higher on this subscale compared to low depression and low anxiety groups.

Like the original ZTPI, the ZTPI-37 consists of two past perspective subscales, namely past-negative (Factor 2) and past-positive (Factor 3). A past-negative perspective is related to psychiatric problems (Anagnostopoulos and Griva, 2012; Beek et al., 2010) and people who ruminate over unhappy memory are more susceptible to depressive and anxiety symptoms (Chan et al., 2015; Nolen-Hoeksema, 2000). In accord with previous findings, in the present study, adolescents reporting severe depressive symptoms and those reporting severe anxiety symptoms tended to embrace a negative perspective of their past as compared to their counterparts who reported fewer depressive or anxiety symptoms. By contrast, adolescents who reported less depressive or anxiety symptoms scored higher on the past-positive perspective than adolescents who reported more depressive and anxiety symptoms. The results support the discriminant validity of the two past perspective subscales when used with Chinese adolescents.

Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) asserted that people with a dominant present-hedonistic perspective are pleasure seeking and impulsive. Previous results with this temporal perspective were contradictory. The original present-hedonistic perspective has been shown to be related positively to life satisfaction (Zhang & Howell, 2011; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999) and subjective happiness (Drake, Duncan, Sutherland, Abernethy, & Henry, 2008). However, this perspective was also found to be related positively to depression (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). The ambiguous findings may imply that the items in the subscale measure more than one construct and they relate to mental well-being in opposite directions.

In the present study, the original present-hedonistic items loaded on two factors (Factor 4 and Factor 6.) Items in Factor 4 were more related to seeking excitement and enjoying the process, whereas items in Factor 6 were related more to going along with impulses without considering possible negative consequences. According to the content of the items, Factor 4 retains the original label of present-hedonistic and Factor 6 is labeled as present-impulsive. These two factors were related to depressive and anxiety symptoms in opposite directions. Compared to the low depression group and the low anxiety group, both high depression and high anxiety adolescents reported higher scores for present-impulsive perspective but lower scores for present-hedonistic perspective. The results help to explain the inconsistent findings reported in previous studies and support that the original present-hedonistic subscale measure two present perspectives. The findings also suggest that following impulses without considering the negative results may be a risk factor for poor mental health, while enjoying pleasure and excitement may serve a protective function.

The current study makes several important contributions to the literature on time perspective. It is the first study to validate the Chinese version of the ZTPI, facilitating studies on the importance of time perspective in the Chinese population. Second, the shortened version of the ZTPI developed in the current study facilitates research on time perspective in the modern world where time–pressure is an important issue. The less time required for completion of the inventory can help to increase the reliability and validity (Zhang et al., 2013). Third, the ZTPI-37 helps to clarify the impact of a present-hedonistic perspective by separating present impulsivity items from the present-hedonistic subscale.

In line with Western findings, the present findings provide supporting evidence that different perspectives of time exert essential influences on adolescent mental health. Previous studies show that a high percentage of Hong Kong adolescents reported severe depressive or anxiety symptoms (Chan, 2012; Chan et al., 2015), highlighting the need for more resources to provide intervention programs for adolescents in Hong Kong. Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) emphasized that intervention strategies aiming at behavioral changes may not be effective if they do not help to build the necessary cognitive scaffolding and suggested that the temporal perspective framework is a highly relevant cognitive scaffolding. Zimbardo and Boyd explained that a future orientation can help adolescents to visualize the positive outcomes of their present effort, and a past-positive orientation can help adolescents develop a belief that the future is within control. It is suggested that the ZTPI-37 can be used as an assessment tool in the counseling or therapy process focusing on cognitive changes. It can be used to identify youths with dominant past-negative, present-impulsive, or present-fatalistic perspectives for time perspective retraining.

Whereas future, positive-past, and present-hedonistic perspectives appear to be protective against depression and anxiety symptoms (Drake et al., 2008; Keough et al., 1999), it must also be noted that adolescents who over-emphasize future may be restrained from enjoying the pleasure derived from the process of learning, making friends, or exploring different philosophies (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999). Indulging in an overly positive view about the past may result in over-optimism, too much emphasis on pleasure seeking, and weakened self-discipline. School personnel and service providers can consider making use of the ZTPI-37 to help adolescents reflect on their time perspectives and design psycho-educational programs accordingly to help adolescents develop a more BTP.

Despite the contributions made by the current study, it must be noted that the ZTPI-37 is a newly revised scale, the validity of which has yet to be further established. One limitation of the current study is the self-report nature of the data on adolescent mental health. Data obtained from clinical interviews may be more valid. However, while a large sample is required to examine the psychometric properties of a scale, it is difficult to conduct clinical interviews with a large sample. It is suggested that the next step for studies on the ZTPI-37 is to compare the time perspectives of non-clinical adolescents with a clinical sample.

Other than looking into the predictive power of time perspective over hypothesized outcome variables such as depression and anxiety symptoms as in the present study, the validity of the ZTPI-37 and the new present-impulsive perspective can also be examined through investigating how they are related to hypothesized predictors such as personality traits. Studies have shown that extraverts tended to hold a relatively strong present-hedonistic perspective, and conscientiousness and emotional stability were associated with the present-hedonistic negatively (Dunkel and Decker, 2010). Theoretically speaking, extraversion and emotional instability would be related to the new present-impulsive perspective in the positive direction. Furthermore, the new present-hedonistic time perspective, with the present-impulsive items taken out, may relate to conscientiousness and emotional stability in the positive rather than negative direction. Future research in this area would help to further establish the validity of the ZTPI-37.

Regarding research in the impacts of time perspective in general, a couple of suggestions can be made. First, it is suggested that future studies should examine how time perspective is related to outcomes in domains other than psychological well-being and risky behaviors. One area in which time perspective would have potential contribution but has been scarcely researched is the educational setting. It has been hypothesized that adolescents with a dominant future perspective are skilled at delaying gratification and self-regulated learning (e.g., Miller and Brickman, 2004) but no studies have been conducted to test this hypothesis. In addition, the educational implications of other time perspectives, future studies should try to extend the application of this research to educational settings by examining how different time perspectives are related to academic motivation, academic self-efficacy, and other educational outcomes.

Second, researchers have suggested that a future-negative perspective should be included (Carelli et al., 2011). In the model introduced by Zimbardo and Boyd (1999), the future time perspective is different from the other two time perspectives in the sense that it is single-dimensional, containing a positive future view but not a negative future view. Given that some mental health problems such as depressive and anxiety symptoms are characterized by negative future views, it would be important to include a future-negative subscale in the ZTPI.

As discussed above, a BTP is important for psychological well-being. The current finding of a differentiation between present-impulsive and present-hedonistic implies that a BTP would be characterized by a relatively dominant present-hedonistic and a relatively weak present-impulsive perspective. Should a future-negative perspective be identified, a BTP should also include a weak future-negative perspective. We suggest that future studies on time perspective should first aim to extend the ZTPI-37 to include a future-negative perspective. The next step should then be examining the validity of this extended ZTPI-37 by investigating how different time perspectives and the BTP generated from it are related to indicators of different outcome variables.

The present study supports the reliability and validity of the ZTPI-37 in assessing the time perspectives of Chinese adolescents. The ZTPI-27 consists of two past perspectives (past-negative and past-positive), three present perspectives (present-hedonistic, present-impulsive and present-fatalistic), and one future perspective. Past-negative, present-impulsive, and present-fatalistic perspectives appeared to be risk factors for adolescent depressive and anxiety symptoms, whereas past-positive, present-hedonistic, and future perspectives appeared to act as protective factors. Importantly, current findings provide support for the dominant model of time perspective and have potential for practical application.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Abramson

Seligman

MEP

Teasdale

(1978) Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 87: 49–74.

Anagnostopoulos

Griva

(2012) Exploring time perspective in Greek young adults: Validation of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory and relationships with mental health indicators. Social Indices Research 106: 41–59.

Beck

(1967) Depression, New York: Harper and Row.

Beek

Berghuis

Kerkhof

et al. (2010) Time perspective, personality and psychopathology: Zimbardo's time perspective inventory in psychiatry. Time and Society 20: 364–374.

Birmaher

Brent

Chiappetta

et al. (1999) Psychometric properties of the screen for child anxiety related emotional disorders (SCARED): A replication study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 38: 1230–1236.

Boniwell

(2010) A question of balance: Time perspective and well-being in British and Russian samples. Journal of Positive Psychology 5: 24–40.

Boniwell

Zimbardo

(2004) Balancing time perspective in pursuit of optimal functioning. In: Linley

Joseph

(eds) Positive Psychology in Practice, New Jersey: Wiley, pp. 165–178.

Byrne

Stewart

Lee

PWH

(2004) Validating the beck depression inventory-II for Hong Kong community adolescents. International Journal of Testing 4: 199–216.

Carelli

Wiberg

(2011) Development and construct validation of the Swedish Zimbardo time perspective inventory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 27: 220–227.

10.

Chan

(2012) Early adolescent depressive mood: Direct and indirect effects of attributional styles and coping. Child Psychiatry and Human Development 43: 455–470.

11.

Chan

(2013) Adolescents’ susceptibility to peer pressure: Relations to parent-adolescent relationship and adolescents’ emotional autonomy from parents. Youth and Society 45: 286–302.

12.

Chan

Kwok

(2015) Ruminative and catastrophizing cognitive styles mediate the association between daily hassles and high anxiety in Hong Kong adolescents. Child Psychiatry and Human Development 46: 57–66.

13.

Drake

Duncan

Sutherland

et al. (2008) Time perspective and correlates of well-being. Time and Society 17: 47–61.

14.

Dunkel

Decker

(2010) Using three levels of personality to predict time perspective. Current Psychology 29: 95–103.

15.

Erikson

(1968) Identity: Youth and Crisis, New York, NY: Norton.

16.

Keough

Zimbardo

Boyd

(1999) ‘Who's drinking, smoking and using drugs? Time perspective as a predictor of substance use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 21: 149–164.

17.

Laghi

Baiocco

Alessio

et al. (2009) Suicidal ideation and time perspective in high school students. European Psychiatry 24: 41–46.

18.

Laghi F, Baumgartner E and Baiocco, R (2012) Time perspective and psychosocial positive functioning among Italian adolescents who binge eat and drink. Journal of Adolescence 35: 1277–1284.

19.

Levine

(1997) A Geography of Time: The Temporal Misadventures of a Social Psychologist, or how Every Culture Keeps Time Just a Little Bit Differently, New York: Basic Books.

20.

Miller

Brickman

(2004) A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review 16: 9–33.

21.

Nolen-Hoeksema

(2000) The role of rumination in depressive disorders and mixed anxiety/depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 109: 504–511.

22.

Oyserman

Markus

(1990) Possible selves and delinquency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59: 112–125.

23.

Simon

Vansteenkiste

Lens

et al. (2004) ‘Placing motivation and future time perspective in a temporal perspecitive. Educational Psychology Review 16: 121–139.

24.

Steer

Ball

Ranieri

et al. (1999) Dimensions in the Beck Depression Inventory-II in clinically depressed patients. Journal of Clinical Psychology 55: 117–128.

25.

Stewart SM, Byrne MB, Lee PWH, et al. (2003) Personal versus interpersonal contributions to depressive symptoms among Hong Kong adolescents. International Journal of Psychology 38: 160–169.

26.

Stolarski

Matthews

Postek

et al. (2014) How we feel in a matter of time: Relationships between time perspectives and mood. Journal of Happiness Studies 15: 809–827.

27.

Wang

Fan

et al. (2008) Reliability and validity of the screen for child anxiety-related emotional disorders (SCARED) in Chinese children. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 22: 612–621.

28.

Wiliford

Branmlett

(1995) Time perspective of substance use patients: Comparison of the scales in Stanford Time Perspective Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory and Beck Hopelessness Scale. Psychological Reports 77: 899–905.

29.

Worrell

Mello

(2007) The reliability and validity of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory scores in academically talented adolescents. Educational and Psychological Measurement 67: 487–504.

30.

Zambianchi

Ricci Bitti

(2014) The role of proactive coping strategies, time perspective, perceived efficacy on affect regulation, divergent thinking and family communication in promoting social well-being in emerging adulthood. Social Indicators Research 116: 493–507.

31.

Zambianchi

Ricci Bitti

Gremigni

(2010) Time perspective, personal agenda, and adoption of risk behaviours in adolescence. Psicologia Clinica dello Sviluppo 14: 397–414.

32.

Zhang

Howell

(2011) Do time perspective predict unique variance in life satisfaction beyond personality traits? Personality and Individual Differences 50: 1261–1266.

33.

Zhang

Howell

Bowerman

(2013) Validating a brief measure of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory. Time and Society 22: 391–409.

34.

Zimbardo

Boyd

(1999) Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 1271–1288.

35.

Zimbardo

Kenough

Boyd

(1997) Present time perspective as a predictor of risky driving. Personality and Individual Differences 23: 1007–1023.