Time perspective and alcohol-use indicators in France and the United Kingdom: results across adolescents, university students, and treatment outpatients

Factor Structure of Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) in a Norwegian Convenience Sample

“…For instance, 25-item (Wakefield et al, 2010), 20-item (Przepiorka et al, 2016), 18-item (Košťál et al, 2015), 17-item (Orosz et al, 2017) and 15-item (Košťál et al, 2015;McKay et al, 2014;Zhang et al, 2013) versions have been suggested. Although they were found to be psychometrically sound in the initial research reports, findings have been difficult to replicate (McKay et al, 2014(McKay et al, , 2015Worrell et al, 2018). For instance, in a Norwegian sample using factors from the 25-item version, it was necessary to remove one item to improve model fit for the purposes of a SEM-analysis (Pozolotina & Olsen, 2018).…”

“…For instance, in a Norwegian sample using factors from the 25-item version, it was necessary to remove one item to improve model fit for the purposes of a SEM-analysis (Pozolotina & Olsen, 2018). Furthermore, the development of these short versions has been criticized for being too dependent on a data-driven approach as opposed to being theory-based (Temple et al, 2017;Worrell et al, 2018). Using a data-driven approach also increases the risk of over-fitting and poor external validity.…”

“…Time perspective can be understood as a fundamental cognitive dimension dividing human experience into past, present and future . Time perspective has, for instance, been used to investigate differences in risk taking, health-promoting behaviour, quality of life, aging and as a predictor of drug use (Boyd & Zimbardo, 2005;Hamilton et al, 2003;Keough et al, 1999;Loose et al, 2018;Preau et al, 2007;Rohr et al, 2017;Stolarski et al, 2018;Zimbardo et al, 1997).…”

“…Exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) has been employed as an alternative and complementary approach with promising results (Sobol-Kwapinska et al, 2018;Temple et al, 2017). ESEM can be especially suitable for complex models with many items and factors that are conceptually closely related (Worrell et al, 2018). The ESEM approach can be seen Carelli et al (2011).…”

What Are the Optimal Levels of Time Perspectives? Deviation from the Balanced Time Perspective-Revisited (DBTP-r)

“…In the present paper we focused on DBTP-r associations with various indicators of well-being, which was a natural choice taking into account both the initial conceptualisation of balanced time perspective and the fact that the construct has been developed within the framework of positive psychology (Boniwell Table 5: Pearson correlations between indicators of well-being and deviation from the balanced time perspective in original (DBTP) and revisited (DBTP-r) form, and comparison (z) of correlation coefficients for DBTP and DBTP-r. & Zimbardo, 2004;Zhang et al, 2013). The traditional DBTP coefficient proved to be associated with (for review see Stolarski, Zajenkowski, Jankowski, & Szymaniak, 2020): intelligence (Zajenkowski, Stolarski, Maciantowicz, Malesza, & Witowska, 2016), personality (Birkás, Matuz, & Csathó, 2018), self-compassion (Phillips, 2018), greater relationship satisfaction (Stolarski, Wojtkowska, & Kwiecińska, 2016), lower depression and anxiety (Papastamatelou, Unger, Giotakos, & Anthanasiadou, 2015), fewer PTSD symptoms after a traumatic experience (Stolarski & Cyniak-Cieciura, 2016), greater mindfulness (Stolarski, Vowinckel, Jankowski, & Zajenkowski, 2016), sense of coherence (Wiesmann, Ballas, & Hannich, 2018), greater self-control (Orkibi & Ronen, 2018), less compulsive buying (Unger, Lyu, & Zimbardo, 2018), less alcohol consumption (Loose et al, 2018), or more healthful leisure choices (Garcia & Ruíz, 2015). Determining whether the DBTP-r would prove more, or at least equally, predictive of these vital outcomes is an important task before the novel indicator becomes a commonly accepted way to assess temporal balance.…”