Skip to main content
Brief Report

Measurement Invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in South Korea

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000745

Abstract: This study examined the cross-group and temporal measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in Korea. A nationally representative sample (N = 13,824) and a convenience sample collected at four-time points over approximately 14 months (N = 338) were used. Full measurement invariance (i.e., equal factor loadings and intercepts) was supported across groups based on gender, age, education, data collection method (face-to-face versus non-face-to-face), and two alternative translations of the scale. Temporal measurement invariance was also supported. Accordingly, the same underlying construct is measured, and the items of the scale are understood and answered similarly across groups and across time in Korea. Supplemental analysis revealed that Item 5 was not invariant between Korea and Japan, with Korean respondents tending to rate this item higher than Japanese respondents.

References

  • Berry, K., Rana, R., Lockwood, A., Fletcher, L., & Pratt, D. (2019). Factors associated with inattentive responding in online survey research. Personality and Individual Differences, 149, 157–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.043 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Braekman, E., Berete, F., Charafeddine, R., Demarest, S., Drieskens, S., Gisle, L., Molenberghs, G., Tafforeau, J., Van der Heyden, J., & Van Hal, G. (2018). Measurement agreement of the self-administered questionnaire of the Belgian Health Interview Survey: Paper-and-pencil versus web-based mode. PLoS One, 13(5), Article e0197434. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197434 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Emerson, S. D., Guhn, M., & Gadermann, A. M. (2017). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale: Reviewing three decades of research. Quality of Life Research, 26(9), 2251–2264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1552-2 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hilgert, L., Kroh, M., & Richter, D. (2016). The effect of face-to-face interviewing on personality measurement. Journal of Research in Personality, 63, 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.05.006 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jovanović, V. (2019). Measurement invariance of the Serbian version of the Satisfaction With Life Scale across age, gender, and time. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 555–563. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000410 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Koo, J. S. (2019). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) across age and gender. Journal of the Korean Psychological Association: Cultural and Social Issues, 25(4), 305–323. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Newsom, J. T. (2015). Longitudinal structural equation modeling: A comprehensive introduction. Routledge. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wu, C.-H., Chen, L. H., & Tsai, Y.-M. (2009). Longitudinal invariance analysis of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(4), 396–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.11.002 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar