Having meaning in life is a protective factor for psychological well-being. Accurate assessment of this construct needs a valid and reliable tool.
Purpose
This study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Farsi version of the meaning of life questionnaire in patients with cancer.
Method
In this cross-sectional study, after translating the questionnaire to Farsi, in a sample of 212 patients with cancer, feasibility, content and convergent validity, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency, stability, and responsiveness were evaluated.
Results
The results show that the content validity ratio of all ten items was greater than 0.49. Also, the modified Kappa coefficient of each item was greater than 0.6. The maximum likelihood exploratory factor analysis extracted one factor, which explains 76.13% of the total variance of the sample. Item nine was removed. The confirmatory factor analysis results show that the one-factor model had good fit indices. The Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, composite reliability, MaxR, and intraclass correlation coefficient were 0.96, 0.96, 0.96, 0.96, and 0.98, respectively. The questionnaires had responsiveness and its response time was 3 s.
Conclusion and policy summary
The nine-item Farsi version of the meaning of life questionnaire has good validity and reliability and responsiveness.
LeeV. The existential plight of cancer: meaning making as a concrete approach to the intangible search for meaning. Support Care Cancer2008; 16: 779–785.
2.
JimHSAndersenBL. Meaning in life mediates the relationship between social and physical functioning and distress in cancer survivors. Br J Health Psychol2007; 12: 363–381.
3.
van der SpekNVosJvan Uden-KraanCF, et al.Meaning making in cancer survivors: a focus group study. PLoS One2013; 8: e76089–e.
4.
ChanWC. Factor structure of the Chinese version of the meaning in life questionnaire among Hong Kong Chinese caregivers. Health Soc Work2014; 39: 135–143.
5.
StegerMFFrazierPOishiS,et al.The meaning in life questionnaire: assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. J Couns Psychol2006; 53: 80–90.
6.
StegerMFKashdanTBSullivanBA,et al.Understanding the search for meaning in life: personality, cognitive style, and the dynamic between seeking and experiencing meaning. J Pers2008; 76: 199–228.
7.
BrunelliCBianchiEMurruL, et al.Italian Validation of the purpose in life (PIL) test and the seeking of noetic goals (SONG) test in a population of cancer patients. Support Care Cancer2012; 20: 2775–2783.
8.
XiaHZGaoLYueH,et al.Exploring meaning in the life of Chinese breast cancer survivors. Cancer Nurs2018; 41: 124–130.
9.
Chika ChukwuorjiJEkpedohoEAIfeagwaziCM,et al.Psychometric properties of the meaning in life questionnaire - Hausa version among internally displaced persons in Nigeria. Transcult Psychiatry2019; 56: 103–122.
10.
DamásioBFKollerSH. Meaning in life questionnaire: adaptation process and psychometric properties of the Brazilian version. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología2015; 47: 185–195.
11.
BrandstätterMBaumannUBorasioGD,et al.Systematic review of meaning in life assessment instruments. Psychooncology2012; 21: 1034–1052.
12.
CrumbaughJCMaholickLT. An experimental study in existentialism: the psychometric approach to Frankl's concept of noogenic neurosis. J Clin Psychol1964; 20: 200–207.
13.
BattistaJAlmondR. The development of meaning in life. Psychiatry1973; 36: 409–427.
14.
HallfordDJMellorDCumminsRA,et al.Meaning in life in earlier and later older-adulthood: confirmatory factor analysis and correlates of the meaning in life questionnaire. J Appl Gerontol2018; 37: 1270–1294.
15.
TemaneLKhumaloIPWissingMP. Validation of the meaning in life questionnaire in a South African context. Journal of Psychology in Africa2014; 24: 51–60.
16.
StegerMFKawabataYShimaiS,et al.The meaningful life in Japan and the United States: levels and correlates of meaning in life. J Res Pers2008; 42: 660–678.
17.
SchutteLWissingMPEllisSM,et al.Rasch analysis of the meaning in life questionnaire among adults from South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. Health Qual Life Outcomes2016; 14: 12. –.
18.
SchulenbergSEStrackKMBuchananEM. The meaning in life questionnaire: psychometric properties with individuals with serious mental illness in an inpatient setting. J Clin Psychol2011; 67: 1210–1219.
19.
RoseLMZaskABurtonLJ. Psychometric properties of the meaning in life questionnaire (MLQ) in a sample of Australian adolescents. Int J Adolesc Youth2017; 22: 68–77.
20.
NegriLBassiMDelle FaveA. Italian Validation of the meaning in life questionnaire: factor structure, reliability, convergent, and discriminant validity. Psychol Rep2019; 123: 578–600.
21.
BoyrazGLightseyORJrCanA. The Turkish version of the meaning in life questionnaire: assessing the measurement invariance across Turkish and American adult samples. J Pers Assess2013; 95: 423–431.
22.
NaghiyaeeMBahmaniBAsgariA. The psychometric properties of the meaning in life questionnaire (MLQ) in patients with life-threatening illnesses. Scientific World J2020; 2020: 8361602.
23.
PezirkianidisCGalanakisMKarakasidouI,et al.Validation of the meaning in life questionnaire (MLQ) in a Greek sample. Psychology2016; 7: 1518–1530.
24.
ChanWCH. Assessing meaning in life in social work practice: validation of the meaning in life questionnaire among clinical samples. Br J Social Work2017; 47: 9–27.
25.
BoyrazGLightseyORCanA. The Turkish version of the meaning in life questionnaire: assessing the measurement invariance across Turkish and American adult samples. J Pers Assess2013; 95: 423–431.
26.
HallfordDJMellorDCumminsRA,et al.Meaning in life in earlier and later older-adulthood: confirmatory factor analysis and correlates of the meaning in life questionnaire. J Appl Gerontol2016; 37: 1270–1294.
27.
SinghKJunnarkarMJaswalS,et al.Validation of meaning in life questionnaire in Hindi (MLQ-H). Mental Health. Religion & Culture2016; 19: 448–458.
28.
Chika ChukwuorjiJEkpedohoEAIfeagwaziCM,et al.Psychometric properties of the meaning in life questionnaire – Hausa version among internally displaced persons in Nigeria. Transcult Psychiatry2018; 56: 103–122.
29.
NilssonJGardulfA. Lepp MJJoNE and Practice. Process of translation and adaptation of the Nurse Professional Competence (NPC) Scale. 2016; 6: 100.
30.
PolitDFYFM. Measurement and measurement of change: A primer for the health professions. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer, 2016.
31.
LawsheCH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol1975; 28: 563–575.
32.
Pahlevan SharifSNia HS. Factor analysis and structural equation modeling with SPSS and AMOS. Tehran: Jame-e-Negar, 2022.
33.
MacphersonRPesolaFLeamyM, et al.The relationship between clinical and recovery dimensions of outcome in mental health. Schizophr Res2016; 175: 142–147.
34.
FinchH. Comparison of the performance of varimax and promax rotations: factor structure recovery for dichotomous items. J Educ Meas2006; 43: 39–52.
35.
LimSJahngS. Determining the number of factors using parallel analysis and its recent variants. Psychol Methods2019; 24: 452–467.
36.
SheLPahlevan SharifSSharif NiaH. Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the modified online compulsive buying scale among Chinese young consumers. J Asia-Pacific Business2021; 22: 121–133.
37.
Nia HSZareiyanAEbadiA. Test development process in health sciences. Tehran: Jame-e-Negar, 2022.
38.
WrightAHannonJHegedusEJ,et al.Clinimetrics corner: a closer look at the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). J Man Manip Ther2012; 20: 160–166.
39.
TerweeCBBotSDde BoerMR, et al.Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol2007; 60: 34–42.
40.
RaoprasertTIslamSMN. Designing an efficient management system: modeling of convergence factors exemplified by the case of Japanese businesses in Thailand. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag, 2010.
