Bifactor Analysis of the Mental Health Continuum—Short Form (MHC

Abstract

This report examined the factor structure of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF) using bifactor analysis to evaluate a general well-being factor and the three group factors that correspond with emotional, social, and psychological well-being. Using a sample of 902 South African psychology students (M age = 21.1 yr., SD = 2.7), the MHC–SF was examined using confirmatory factor models, (1) a one-factor model conceptualizing well-being as unidimensional, (2) a correlated three-factor model corresponding with Keyes' model, and (3) a bifactor solution with a general well-being factor and three orthogonalized group factors. The bifactor solution fitted the best and evidenced a strong general well-being factor and three comparatively weak residualized group factors. These findings contribute to the literature by facilitating an examination of the strength of a general well-being factor as contrasted with the multidimensional components of emotional, social, and psychological well-being and advance a case for the interpretation of both the general and multidimensional components. The results inform considerations regarding the employ of the scale in statistical procedures such as multiple regression analysis and structural equation modeling.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baer

R. A.

Smith

G. T.

Hopkins

Krietemeyer

Toney

(2006) Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27–45. DOI: 10.1177/1073191105283504

Chen

F. F.

Hayes

Carver

C. S.

Laurenceau

J. P.

Zhang

(2012) Modeling general and specific variance in multifaceted constructs: A comparison of the bifactor model to other approaches. Journal of Personality, 80, 219–251.

Diener

(1984) Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542

Forero

Maydeu-Olivares

Gallardo-Pujol

(2009) Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: A Monte Carlo study comparing DWLS and UWLS. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 625–641. DOI: 10.1080/10705510903203573

Gustafsson

J. E.

Aberg-Bengtsson

(2010) Unidimensionality and the interpretability of psychological instruments. In Embretson

S. E.

(Ed.), Measuring psychological constructs. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pp. 97–121.

Holzinger

Swineford

(1937) The bifactor method. Psychometrika, 2, 41–54.

Joshanloo

Wissing

M. P.

Khumalo

I. P.

Lamers

S. M. A.

(2013) Measurement invariance of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF) across three cultural groups. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 755–759. DOI: 10-1016/j.paid.2013.06.002

Karaś

Cieciuch

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2014) The Polish adaptation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF). Personality and Individual Differences 69, 104–109. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.011

Keyes

C. L. M.

(1998) Social well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 121–140. DOI:10.2307/2787065

10.

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2002) The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43, 207–222. DOI: 10.2307/3090197

11.

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2009) Brief description of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF). Retrieved January 19, 2015, from http://calmhsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/MHC-SFEnglish.pdf.

12.

Keyes

C. L. M.

Wissing

Potgieter

J. P.

Temane

Kruger

van Rooy

(2008) Evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF) in Setswana-speaking South Africans. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 15, 181–192. DOI: 10.1002/cpp.572

13.

Lamers

S. M. A.

Glas

C. A. W.

Westerhof

G. J.

Bohlmeijer

E. T.

(2012) Longitudinal evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC–SF). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28, 290–296. DOI: 10.1027/1015-579-a000109

14.

Lamers

S. M. A.

Westerhof

G. J.

Bohlmeijer

E. T.

ten Klooster

P. M.

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2011) Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67, 99–110. DOI: 10.1002/jclp.20741

15.

Pedhazur

E. J.

(1997) Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. (3rd ed.) Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

16.

Petrillo

Capone

Caso

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2014) The Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF) as a measure of well-being in the Italian context. Social Indicators Research, 121, 291–312. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-014-0629-3

17.

Reise

S. P.

(2012) The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667–696.

18.

Reise

S. P.

Bonifay

W. E.

Haviland

M. G.

(2013) Scoring and modeling psychological measures in the presence of multidimensionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95, 129–140. DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2012.725437

19.

Rosseel

(2012) Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.

20.

Ryff

C. D.

(1989) Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069

21.

R Core Development Team. (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/.

22.

Zinbarg

R. E.

Revelle

Yovel

(2005) Cronbach's α, Revelle's β, and McDonald's ω_h: Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133. DOI: 10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7

Bifactor Analysis of the Mental Health Continuum—Short Form (MHC—SF)

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References