The Purpose in Life Scale: Psychometric Properties for Social Drinkers and Drinkers in Alcohol Treatment

Abstract

The aim of the present research was to further investigate (a) the structure of the Purpose in Life test (PIL) using confirmatory factor analytic techniques,(b) the reliability of PIL scores, and (c) the validity of the PIL. Participants were 357 social drinkers (not in alcohol treatment) and 137 treatment drinkers (in alcohol treatment). With the exclusion of 3 items, a unidimensional measurement model for the PIL provided an adequate fit for social and treatment drinkers. Model invariance analysis indicated that 6 of 17 PIL items had different pattern coefficients for the two groups of drinkers. The 17 items of the PIL demonstrated good measurement reliability for both groups of drinkers and good criterion-related validity

Meaning-in-Life in Nursing Home Patients: A Validation Study of the Purpose-in-Life Test

“…Originally, the PIL was a one-dimensional construct, designed to measure meaning-in-life. However, several factor-analytic investigations of the PIL, with markedly differing results, have been published over the years (Dufton & Perlman, 1986;Jonsén et al, 2010;Marsch et al, 2003;McGregor & Little, 1998;Molcar & Stuempfig, 1988;Morgan & Farsides, 2007;Schulenberg & Melton, 2010;Shek, 1988;Steger, 2006;Waisberg & Starr, 1999;Walters & Klein, 1980). With specific regard to the PIL, researchers cannot seem to agree on the dimensionality of the instrument or on which items cluster together to compose a factor (Schulenberg & Melton, 2010).…”

“…After rotation, we compared the loading tables, showing that the two-factor solutions had the "cleanest" factor structure; however, some cross-loadings appeared (Table 2). Therefore, we decided to test the previously published one-factor models (Crumbaugh & Maholick, 1964;Marsch et al, 2003;Steger 2006), two-factor models (Dufton & Perlman, 1986;McGregor & Little, 1998;Molcar & Stuempfig, 1988;Morgan & Farsides, 2007;Schulenberg & Melton, 2010;Shek, 1988;Waisberg & Starr, 1999), and the recently documented three-factor (Jonsén et al, 2010) model of the PIL by means of CFA, as well as the two-factor model resulting from the current EFA. Reliability is further investigated inside the CFA analysis, composite reliability is presented in Table 3; values .0.6 are desirable, whereas 5 0.7 or higher is good (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988;Hair et al, 2010).…”

“…A recent study showed that several factor-analytic investigations of the PIL have been published over the years (Schulenberg & Melton, 2010). They differ markedly in terms of the procedures employed and results; two primary factor-analytic studies propose onefactor models of the PIL (Marsch, Smith, Piek, & Saunders, 2003;Steger, 2006) reporting one 17-item and one 16-item one-dimensional model, respectively. Furthermore, various two-factor models of the PIL have been published (Dufton & Perlman, 1986;McGregor & Little, 1998;Molcar & Stuempfig, 1988;Morgan & Farsides, 2007;Schulenberg & Melton, 2010;Shek 1988;Waisberg & Starr, 1999;Walters & Klein, 1980), as well as a recent three-factor structure (Jonsén et al, 2010).…”

Perceived benefits and church participation

“…Hoge and Polk (1980) used four items from the PIL (Crumbaugh, 1968) index to measure subjective deprivation as the antecedent of church participation. Although the measures have been extensively used in the literature (Kopp et al, 1998;Marsh et al, 2003), the fact that it has been four decades since the measure was invented necessitated the modification of the wordings to suit the research context under examination. Akin to the other constructs, respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they believe church participation can help them to achieve their ultimate PIL.…”

Implicit Religion and the Quest for Meaning

“…The present study employs the Purpose in Life Test developed by Crumbaugh and Maholick (1969), a well-established measure which pioneered research in this field and has been used in a number of recent studies, including investigating the relationship between purpose in life and: alcohol treatment (Marsh, Smith, Piek and Saunders 2003), belief in a just world (Bègue and Bastounis 2003), bullying (Stien, Dukes and Warren 2007), meditation (Kulik and Szewczyk 2002), and successful aging (Flood and Scharer 2006).…”