Challenges for Adapting Positive Psychology and Well-Being Measures for Educational Uses in Mexico

• In Event: 28.068 - Measuring the Impact of Positive Education in International Educational Contexts

Abstract

1. Objectives or purposes
The objective of this presentation is to present the process of building a measurement framework for a set of tools used customarily to evaluate well-being from a positive psychology perspective.  Specifically, this presentation describes challenges and strategies deployed to support validity evidence when positive psychology tools are administered in a second language/culture environment in Mexico.

2. Perspective(s) or theoretical framework
This presentation depicts the process of developing a measurement framework to strengthen validity evidence for the Mexican-Spanish version of the PERMA-Profiler tool (Butler & Kern, 2016). To address construct equivalence across languages and cultures, rationale and methodology used in this presentation reflect guidelines recommended by international organizations from psychology, education, and testing fields (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, & Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing; International Test Commission, 2010).

3. Methods, techniques, or modes of inquiry
Three questions were addressed in this study: 1) What pragmatic challenges arise when developing a measurement framework to strengthen validity evidence for the PERMA-Profiler beyond a sole structural evidence? 2) How alike structural properties of a set of well-being tools adapted to Mexico are to their reported original version? 3) What structural differences emerge for the alternative versions when compared to their original peers? This paper includes descriptions of the adaptation processes conducted to obtain the Mexican Spanish-language version of three well-being measurements: the PERMA-Profiler (Butler & Kern, 2016), the Positive and Negative Affective Schedule (PANAS; Crawford & Henry, 2004),  and the Satisfaction with Life Schedule (SWLF; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). In addition, the psychometric strategies executed to evaluate their validity properties are discussed.

4. Data sources, evidence, objects, or materials
Data source comprises a combined set of information collected from high school and college students from a private multi-campus Mexican university. Data was collected during Fall 2015 term. This dataset includes responses to the Mexican Spanish-Language versions of three well-being measurements: 1) PERMA-Profiler, (n= 23,748), PANAS (n=4,625), and 3) SWLS (n=4,787).
5. Results and/or substantiated conclusions or warrants for arguments/point of view
Preliminary outcomes suggested the existence of validity evidence for using the tools in Mexico. Confirmatory factor analysis showed the PERMA-Profiler presented a five-factor model model (χ2(80) = 10490.87, p < .01, CFI =0.95, SRMR = .032) whereas the PANAS tool reported good fit for a two factor model (χ2(169) = 3688.463, p < .01, CFI =0.92, SRMR = .045). As for the SWLS, a one-factor model is tenable (χ2(5) = 209.11, p < .01, CFI =0.99, SRMR = .015). As test adaptors should provide evidence of the instrument’s internal structure as well as associations with other variables beyond initial translation processes (Gudmundsson, 2009), further steps will be conducted to evaluate for discriminant and convergent properties among scores from these tools. Similarly, this report will document challenges occurring when adapting tools developed in the United States of America to a Mexican educational environment.

Author

• Antonio Valdivia, Universidad Tecmilenio