A Health-Related Satisfaction with Life Scale Measure for Use with Cross-National Older Adults: A Validation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Literature suggests some inconsistent results in the validity and reliability of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SwLS) in older samples. The objective was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SwLS in a cross-cultural sample of older adults.Methods: This is a validation study to assess the psychometric properties of the SWLS in a sample of 1291 older adults 75 years of age or older, cross-culturally diverse and living in the community. A confirmatory factor analysis was performed. Item analysis and reliability, were also assessed.Results: The systematic procedure used in the SwLS validation points to a good level of psychometric properties, such as reliability, construct, criterion validity, external validity and divergent criterion validity, suggesting that the SwL is assessing a construct different from the ones evaluated by PANAS and OtLQ.Conclusion: The SwLS has demonstrated reliability, validity, and reproducibility for use in measuring health-related satisfaction with life among older adults in policy programs and interventions in community settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".