No abstract

No abstract

There is need for reliable and valid behavioral measures for field research. Five sets of data were analyzed, in which diary as well as interview approaches were taken. Results suggest that scores derived from one-week diaries have satisfactory construct validity (convergent, predictive and nomological); that, for salient activities, they are less subjective to retrospective bias than are interview data and that, for this reason, interview-diary discrepancies may be useful for hypothesis testing. For items of neutral value, interview and diary provided remarkably similar values. A one-day diary was not an adequate substitute for a one-week diary. Attrition related to diary-keeping resulted in under-representation of certain groups (e.g., low income, little education, minority ethnicity, poor health), and conclusions would be different if based on diarists' responses or those of the intact sample.

There is a need for conceptual models that accommodate data on older as well as younger adults. The Campbell et al. (1976) model of life quality proved more successful in accounting for life-domain satisfactions for persons 54 and younger than for those 55 and older. The model for this study includes as predictors the discrepancies of own situation from the 4 most powerful reference frames used by Campbell et al. (aspiration, typical American, best ever had, and close friends), plus equity. Typical American, equity, and best ever had were the most successful reference frames in accounting for independent variance in satisfactions with 13 domains of life experience for adults 25-98. Aspiration, unlike any of the other 4 predictors, appears to exhibit an age-group interaction effect: In several cases it is related more closely to domain satisfaction for people under 55 than for those older. Reference frame-own situation differences, summed across domains, were effective in predicting overall well being or life quality.

Well-being, life satisfaction, morale, or affect valence is often used as an outcome in studies of adult life. Many instruments are available, and choice among them is difficult. There is need for information regarding the structure underlying what they measure and, in view of rising interest in adult-span models and investigations, for instruments that are unbiased with respect to age. Analysis of the items in several instruments showed four factors that seem to define the dimensions underlying these measures and that are constant across age (25 and older) and gender. Reliable scales developed on the basis of the factors provide measures that are, for all practical purposes, unbiased with respect to age and gender. Both factors and scales were cross-validated with a second sample.