ArticleAssessment2022
Measurement Invariance of the Subjective Happiness Scale Across Countries, Gender, Age, and Time.
Article in Assessment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Invariance and Construct Validity of HiTOP Dimensions Across Race and Ethnicity in the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study.Assessment · 2025Article
- The relationship between green tea consumption and happiness.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Neural Electrical Correlates of Subjective Happiness.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Social impact of happiness on transformational leadership in students from Colombian universities.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Time estimation is associated with the levels of distress in patients prior to starting radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Assessing measurement invariance of the SEGUE framework among Chinese and Ghanaian patients: A cross-sectional study.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Misophonia, self-harm and suicidal ideation.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2023Article
- Validating the Unmind Index as a measure of mental health and wellbeing among adults in USA, Australia, and New Zealand.PloS one · 2023Article
- Initial Assessment of a Brief Health, Fitness, and Spirituality Survey for Epidemiological Research: A Pilot Study.Journal of lifestyle medicine · 2022Article
- Brain conditions mediate the association between aging and happiness.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine measurement invariance of the Subjective Happiness Scale across countries, gender, and age groups and across time by multigroup confirmatory factor analysis. Altogether, 4,977 participants from nine European, American, and Australian countries were included in the study. Our results revealed that both configural and metric invariance held across countries, but scalar invariance was only partially confirmed with one item yielding varying intercepts in different countries. Measurement invariance was also confirmed across gender and age groups. Longitudinal measurement invariance was examined on a subsample of 478 English-speaking participants and was fully confirmed across five consecutive assessment points. Factor means were compared between groups and across time, and good convergent validity of the Subjective Happiness Scale was found in relation to a measure of temporal satisfaction with life. Overall, our results demonstrate that self-reported happiness was measured similarly in nine different countries, gender and age groups and over time, and provide a solid foundation for meaningful cross-group and cross-time comparisons in subjective happiness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.