The applicability of the UCLA loneliness scale in South Africa: Factor structure and dimensionality

Abstract

This study examines the generalisability of the University of California Los Angeles Loneliness Scale Version 3 (UCLA-LS3) in a South African sample of young adults. In particular, it examined the normative data, reliability, and factor structure of this scale. The participants were young adults (N = 337) who were randomly sampled from a university population and they responded to the UCLA Loneliness Scale. It was found that the sample had higher loneliness scores than those reported in the literature, potentially suggesting that loneliness may be a significant mental health concern amongst this group. Women reported higher levels of loneliness than men. Reliability analysis (Cronbach’s alpha) and analysis of the influence of individual items on the mean, variance, and alpha demonstrated that UCLA-LS3 had highly satisfactory internal consistency in the sample. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test four conceptualisations of the factor structure of UCLA-LS3: a one-factor model, a correlated three-factor model, a bifactor model with two subscales, and a bifactor model with three subscales. Notably, CFA demonstrated that the two bifactor models are a better fit than the one-factor and correlated three-factor models and that the bifactor model with three subscales is marginally a better fit than the bifactor model with two subscales. Ancillary bifactor analysis confirmed the dimensionality of the scale as sufficient variance was accounted for by the three subscales, after the variance attributable to the total scale was partitioned out. Therefore, UCLA-LS3 is best conceptualised as comprising of three subscales (isolation, relational connectedness, collective connectedness), in addition to a total scale.

Psychometric Evaluation of Three Versions of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (Full, Eight-Item, and Three-Item Versions) among Sexual Minority Men in Taiwan

“…For example, the scale has robust psychometric properties, such as scale score reliability, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and factorial validity, in a Farsi version among healthy participants [38]. Similar psychometric findings have been reported for the Turkish version [39], Japanese version [40], Danish version [41], English version [42,43], Spanish version [44] and many other language versions [42] across different populations (e.g., older people, adolescents and mothers). However, although the UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3) has been translated into Chinese, to the best of the present authors' knowledge, it has never been validated among a Taiwanese population and no language version has ever been psychometrically evaluated with sexual-minority men.…”

Generalized Resistance Resources in the Time of COVID-19: The Role of Sense of Coherence and Resilience in the Relationship between COVID-19 Fear and Loneliness among Schoolteachers

“…The satisfactory reliability (α = 0.81 and 0.92) of the UCLA-LS was demonstrated in two samples of young adults in South Africa [26,52]. The dimensionality of the UCLA-LS was confirmed by Pretorius in South Africa [53], who reported that it is best conceptualized as a total scale with three subscales.…”

Assessment of Loneliness During the Pandemic: Comparing Various Short Forms of the UCLA Loneliness Scale in South Africa Using Classical Test Theory and Mokken Analysis

“…Two South African studies reported acceptable reliability (0.81 and 0.92) for the UCLA-20 when used with student samples [46,47]. The structure of the UCLA-20 was also confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with ancillary bifactor indices in a South African study [30].…”

“…Other studies have found mixed results. One-factor [25], two-factor [26], three-factor [27,28], and bifactor solutions [29,30] have been reported.…”