The Validity and Reliability of Subjective Well-Being Instruments in Early Adolescents

Authors

  • Sunarsih Sunarsih Postgraduate of Psychology, Yogyakarta State University Jl. Colombo No.1, Karang Malang, Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia
  • Farida Harahap Postgraduate of Psychology, Yogyakarta State University Jl. Colombo No.1, Karang Malang, Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia
  • Habibullah Habibullah Postgraduate of Mathematics Education, Yogyakarta State University Jl. Colombo No.1, Karang Malang, Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia
  • Muslim Afandi Postgraduate of Islamic Education Management, Islamic University of Sulthan Syarif Kasim Riau Jalan HR. Soebrantas Panam Km. 15 No. 155, Kampar, Riau 28293, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v11i2.6461

Keywords:

validity, reliability, subjective well-being, early adolescents

Abstract

This research aimed to produce empirical evidence about the validity and reliability of subjective well-being instruments by modifying the instruments. This research’s subjects were 394 early adolescent respondents ranging in age from 12-13 years old in Sleman regency, Yogyakarta, using a random sampling technique. The validity of subjective well-being instruments was measured by using expert judgment and calculating Gregory’s formula. Instrument reliability was measured by Cronbach’s Alpha calculation. The results show that the subjective well-being instrument in the modified early adolescents has good validity and reliability so that the modification of this instrument can be used to measure the condition of subjective well-being in early adolescents in Indonesia.

Author Biographies

Sunarsih Sunarsih, Postgraduate of Psychology, Yogyakarta State University Jl. Colombo No.1, Karang Malang, Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia

Postgraduate Yogyakarta State University

Farida Harahap, Postgraduate of Psychology, Yogyakarta State University Jl. Colombo No.1, Karang Malang, Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia

Lecturer of Postgraduate Yogyakarta State University

Habibullah Habibullah, Postgraduate of Mathematics Education, Yogyakarta State University Jl. Colombo No.1, Karang Malang, Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia

Postgraduate Yogyakarta State University

Muslim Afandi, Postgraduate of Islamic Education Management, Islamic University of Sulthan Syarif Kasim Riau Jalan HR. Soebrantas Panam Km. 15 No. 155, Kampar, Riau 28293, Indonesia

Lecturer of Postgraduate Islamic University of Sulthan Syarif Kasim Riau

References

Abidin, Z. (2017). Meningkatkan keterampilan membaca siswa kelas XI IPA-6 melalui metode SQ3R SMA Negeri 1 Bontonompo, Kecamatan Bontonompo, Kabupaten Gowa. Jurnal Nalar Pendidikan, 5(1), 55–63.

Akhtar, H. (2019). Evaluasi properti psikometris dan perbandingan model pengukuran konstruk subjective well-being. Jurnal Psikologi, 18(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.14710/jp.18.1.29-40.

Allen, M. J., & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Wadsworth: Waveland Press.

Arifin, Z. (2017). Kriteria instrumen dalam suatu penelitian. Jurnal Theorems (The Original Research of Mathematics), 2(1), 28–36. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.31949/th.v2i1.57.

Azwar, S. (2019). Penyusunan skala psikologi (2nd Ed.). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Bajaj, B., & Pande, N. (2016). Mediating role of resilience in the impact of mindfulness on life satisfaction and affect as indices of subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 93, 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.005.

Casas, F. (2017). Analysing the comparability of 3 multi-item subjective well-being psychometric scales among 15 countries using samples of 10 and 12-year-olds. Child Indicators Research, 10(2), 297–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-015-9360-0.

Daukantaitė, D., Hefferon, K., & Sikström, S. (2016). The harmony in life scale complements the satisfaction with life scale: Expanding the conceptualization of the cognitive component of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 126(2), 893–919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0903-z.

Diener, E. (2009). The science of well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener. In The Science of Well-Being. Oxford Scholarship Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567523.001.0001.

Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of Life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145056.

Garson, G. D. (2013). Validity and reliability (Statistical Aasociates blue book series). Statistical Publishing Associates.

Giyati, & Wardani, I. R. K. (2016). Ciri-ciri kepribadian dan kepatutan sosial sebagai prediktor subjective well-being (kesejahteraan subyektif) pada remaja akhir. Analitika, 8(1), 10–24.

Gregory, R. J. (2010). Tes psikologi: Sejarah, prinsip, dan aplikasi. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Holder, M. D. (2012). Happiness in children: Measurement, correlates and enhancement of positive subjective well-being. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

Navarro, D., Montserrat, C., Malo, S., González, M., Casas, F., & Crous, G. (2015). Subjective well-being: What do adolescents say? Child and Family Social Work, 22(1), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12215.

Nima, A. A., Cloninger, K. M., Persson, B. N., Sikström, S., & Garcia, D. (2020). Validation of subjective well-being measures using item response theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03036.

Ronen, T., Hamama, L., Rosenbaum, M., & Mishely-Yarlap, A. (2016). Subjective well-being in adolescence: The role of self-control, social support, age, gender, and familial crisis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(1), 81–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-014-9585-5.

Sierra, J. O., Solana, R. A., Luis, E. C., Nalda, F. N., & Pedrero, E. F. (2017). Subjective well-being in adolescence: New psychometric evidences on the satisfaction with life scale. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(2), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2017.1360179.

Steinmayr, R., Crede, J., McElvany, N., & Wirthwein, L. (2016). Subjective well-being, test anxiety, academic achievement: Testing for reciprocal effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01994.

Suryani., & Hendryadi. (2015). Metode riset kuantitatif: Teori dan aplikasi pada penelitian bidang manajemen dan ekonomi Islam. Jakarta: Prenada Media Group.

Tian, L., Yu, T., & Huebner, E. S. (2017). Achievement goal orientations and adolescents’ subjective well-being in school: The mediating roles of academic social comparison directions. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00037.

Trizano-Hermosilla, I., & Alvarado, J. M. (2016). Best alternatives to Cronbach’s alpha reliability in realistic conditions: Congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769.

Wheatley, D. (2017). Time well spent: Subjective well-being and the organization of time. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield International.

Yang, Y., Li, P., & Kou, Y. (2017). Orientations to happiness and subjective well-being in Chinese adolescents. Child Indicators Research, 10(4), 881–897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-016-9410-2.

Downloads

Published

2020-10-16