ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Psychometric properties of the purpose in life scale in Peruvian university students.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Purpose in Life is a key psychosocial resource during the university stage, contributing to psychological adjustment and well-being. To date, no psychometric validations of the abbreviated Purpose in Life scale (PILEA-4) have been reported in Latin America. This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the PILEA-4 in a sample of Peruvian university students. Methods: A total of 1,006 students (55.5% women; ages 17-30) from public and private universities in Arequipa, Peru, participated. The PILEA-4 (four Likert-type items) and a Positive Youth Development questionnaire (5Cs) were administered. Due to multivariate non-normality, a unidimensional model was estimated through confirmatory factor analysis using robust maximum likelihood. Model fit was evaluated using χ Results: The unidimensional model showed good global fit (CFI = 0.985; TLI = 0.956; SRMR = 0.023; RMSEA = 0.079, 95% CI 0.054-0.108), with standardized loadings ranging from 0.69 to 0.90. The scale demonstrated high reliability (ω = 0.873) and adequate convergent validity (AVE = 0.641; correlations with the 5Cs ranged from 0.19 to 0.57). Multigroup analyses confirmed measurement invariance across sex up to the strict level, supporting valid comparisons between women and men. Discussion: These findings provide solid psychometric evidence supporting the use of the PILEA-4 as a brief measure for screening and monitoring purpose in life in Peruvian university settings. To our knowledge, this represents the first validation of the PILEA-4 reported in Latin America.
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.