ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Psychometric properties of the wellbeing literacy 6-item scale in Chinese military academy cadets.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
Background: Positive psychology is a vibrant field of study, and conceptualizations of the components of well-being have received a great deal of attention from researchers. The study of well-being literacy thus provides an innovative perspective for enhancing and sustaining individuals' experiences of well-being. Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the wellbeing literacy 6-item (Well-Lit 6) scale in Chinese military academy cadets. Methods: A total of 3,218 undergraduate students from five military academies in China were recruited to complete questionnaires online. Results: (1) The items of the scale showed high discrimination; (2) The alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.986 and the split-half reliability was 0.981, indicating high homogeneous reliability and split-half reliability; (3) The scale model fitted well and displayed structural validity; (4) The correlation between well-being literacy and related indicators was significant, and the calibration correlation and convergent-discriminant validity of the scale were high; (5) After gradually adding demographic variables, known predictors factors and well-being literacy, the Conclusion: The Chinese version of the Well-Lit 6 is reliable and valid in predicting and accessing the subjective well-being, life satisfaction, emotion regulation, and psychological resilience of Chinese military academy cadets.
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.