top of page

LABWORK FITNESS 2021 Group

Public·3 members
Sarah Love
Sarah Love

Life Satisfaction Scale By Singh And Joseph Pdf 11


The cognitive component has been more closely conceptualized with life satisfaction (Andrews & Withey, 1976), yet despite this, had not previously received much attention for research. Diener et al. (1985) sought to address this and through developing the SWLS, they created a strong tool in the measurement of the cognitive components they felt reflected a subjective sense of wellbeing and life satisfaction.




Life Satisfaction Scale By Singh And Joseph Pdf 11



The SWLS is not designed to help you understand satisfaction in any one specific domain of life, such as your job or relationships; instead, it has been developed to help you get a sense of your satisfaction with your life as a whole.


The scoring for the SWLS works quite simply, by adding up the total of the numbers you score against each of the statements. So, remembering that 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree, the higher your score, the higher your sense of life satisfaction as a whole.


Rather than there being one or two things that you feel would give you greater satisfaction, you might feel that small improvements across all domains of your life would lead to a higher sense of life satisfaction.


As you may have guessed, a score at the very low end of the scale means that you are extremely dissatisfied with your current life circumstances. Again, if this score is due to a recent hard blow in life, such as bereavement, then things may get better over time with the right support.


The SWLS is one of the most widely used measurements for life satisfaction. The shortness and ease of being able to administer the scale to achieve foundation results is key to this, but how reliable does that actually make it?


Further research has confirmed this reliability against other measures of life satisfaction (Pavot et al., 1991, Pavot & Diener, 2008) as well as other measures for happiness (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999). It has also correlated well with scales measuring the meaning of life (Steger et al., 2006) and scales measuring hope (Bailey & Synder, 2007).


The only part of the scale that has been questioned in the research is the use of the fifth statement, as researchers believe it has a weaker association with life satisfaction and instead causes participants to reflect on the desire to change rather than their current sense of life satisfaction (Pavot & Diener, 1993).


As well as happiness and life satisfaction, Diener studied the factors that influence these two areas, including financial health, family upbringing, personality, relationships, and work. He studied these topics across 166 different nations and explored some of the cultural components behind individual happiness.


While the SWLS can offer you an indication of your life satisfaction on a more overall scale, there are other tools and resources that can help you to further explore your sense of satisfaction in specific domain areas of your life.


Once you have your scores for each of the 10 domains, you can reflect on where you have given the lowest scores, why these are low scores, and what you might be able to do to start making positive changes and improve your sense of life satisfaction.


Hi.. Hope you are doing good.. I am doing research for my BS program.. I need your help to suggest me good scale for life satisfaction in high achievers.. As my topic for research is Role of parenting style and coping skills on life satisfaction in high achievers.. Can you please suggest me an authentic cite for the scale please?Thank you!


In addition to economic impact, the clinical and health consequences of illegally-induced and often unsafe abortions have been described elsewhere [4, 5]. However, much less is known about the impact on patient reported outcomes, specifically Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). Westhoff et al. [6], describe improvements in quality of life (measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire) comparing medical to surgical abortions in a setting where abortions are legal, are carried out in a specialist setting, and where both procedures are accompanied by a low risk of complications. No studies were identified that reported on the relationship between complications resulting from illegally-induced abortions and HRQoL, nor the role of social support in moderating this relationship. Social support is particularly important in this setting in light of the significant moral and religious proscriptions to abortions, as well as the attendant social stigma. Lack of social support is commonly cited as a reason for seeking an induced abortion [7], and could conceivably affect HRQoL, even in the absence of abortion or abortion complications. Yet when available, social support is associated with improved psychological outcomes following an abortion, and following treatment for abortion complications [8, 9]. Differences in HRQoL may vary depending on availability of and satisfaction with social support.


In our study, the adverse effects of abortion complications on HRQoL were maintained even after adjusting for potential confounders including age, social support, HIV status and socioeconomic indicators, demonstrated by the significant difference in mean EQ-5D utility score in adjusted models. Social support measures were included in the regression models first as a potential confounder, because lack of social support, especially from immediate family, has been cited as a reason why a woman may seek an abortion [7]. However, lack of social support may also independently be associated with poor health related quality of life. Studies in settings where abortion is legal have shown that social support may lead to improved psychological outcomes following an induced abortion [8, 9]. We therefore extended a similar argument to the treatment of abortion complications, assuming that social support would be protective in the association between abortion complications and HRQoL. On average, women in each group reported similar levels of social support. However, we found that the impact of abortion complications on HRQoL was dependent on the number of people who a respondent listed as providing support (SSQN score) and the level of satisfaction with the support received (SSQS score). Our model suggests a paradoxical effect of SSQN score on the difference in HRQoL between our study groups where a one unit higher average number of people providing social support, was associated with larger mean differences in HRQoL, when comparing women with abortion complications and those visiting the hospital for routine obstetric care. This implies that women treated for abortion complications have worse HRQoL, the larger the average number of people providing social support, when compared to those receiving routine obstetric care. One potential explanation for this finding may result from an inherent desire for confidentiality in this setting of substantial anti-abortion stigma. Women who experience abortion complications might prefer to confide in fewer people, whereas in the comparison group (the routine obstetric participants, for whom there was likely no stigma), having more people in whom to confide is associated with higher utility. On the other hand, the more satisfied a woman was with the support she received, the smaller the difference between the groups in utility scores, suggesting a tendency towards at least similar HRQoL. HRQoL may be better if women experiencing abortion complications were highly satisfied with the support offered by those few people in whom they confide. We find these results plausible in a setting of high religious morality, legal proscriptions, and substantial anti-abortion stigma, all of which might prevent women from wanting to confide in more people.


Household headship with decision-making power may have a positive influence on life satisfaction in older adults. This study examines the associations of several types of household headship with life satisfaction among older adults in India.


It was found that about 1.3% of older male and 1.5% of older females had nominal headship status in their household. Higher percentage of older males (42%) and females (48.3%) who had nominal headship status had low life satisfaction. In multivariable analysis, older adults who practiced nominal headship had significantly higher odds of low life satisfaction in reference to older adults who practiced functional headship [Adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.87; confidence interval (CI): 1.45,2.42]. Interaction model reveals that older men who practised nominal headship had significantly higher odds of low life satisfaction in reference to older men who practised functional headship [AOR: 2.34; CI: 1.59,3.45]. Similarly, older women who practised nominal headship had 55% significantly higher likelihood to have low life satisfaction in reference to older men who practised functional headship [AOR: 1.55; CI: 1.09, 2.18].


Table 2 represents percentage of older adults with the degree of life satisfaction by their background characteristics in India. Higher percentage of older males (42%) and females (48.3%) who had nominal headship status had low life satisfaction.


Table 3 represents the logistic regression estimates for life satisfaction among older adults by their background characteristics. There were 653 missing cases in SRH variable therefore the regression model was run on 30,811 cases. Model-1 which represents unadjusted odds revealed that older adults who practiced nominal headship had significantly higher odds to suffer from low life satisfaction in reference to older adults who practiced functional headship [UOR: 2.31; CI: 1.80,2.95]. Even older adults who were not head neither take any decision had significantly higher odds to suffer from low life satisfaction in comparison to older adults who practiced functional headship [UOR: 1.77; CI: 1.51,2.09].


Model-2 revealed adjusted odds and it was found that older adults who practiced nominal headship had significantly higher odds to suffer from low life satisfaction in reference to older adults who practiced functional headship [AOR: 1.87; CI: 1.45,2.42]. Even older adults who were not head neither take any decision had significantly higher odds to suffer from low life satisfaction in comparison to older adults who practiced functional headship [AOR: 1.52; CI: 1.28,1.81]. Model-3 revealed interaction effects (adjusted for all the background characteristics) and it was found that older males who practised nominal headship had significantly higher odds to have low life satisfaction in reference to older men who practised functional headship [AOR: 2.30; CI: 1.55,3.45]. Similarly, older females who practised nominal headship had 55% significantly higher likelihood to have low life satisfaction in reference to older men who practised functional headship [AOR: 1.55; CI: 1.09, 2.18]. Table-S1 in supplementary file represents the sensitivity analysis by sex differences.


About

Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...

Members

bottom of page