Measuring the purpose in life in the adult population: A scoping review
PDF
XML

Supplementary Files

Supplementary File 1 - Searching Strategy
Supplementary File 2 - Quality Appraisal

Keywords

purpose in life
adult
psychometrics
scoping review
psychological well-being

How to Cite

Arunjit, S., Balthip, K., & Latour, J. M. (2024). Measuring the purpose in life in the adult population: A scoping review. Belitung Nursing Journal, 10(2), 126–133. https://doi.org/10.33546/bnj.3176
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar

Link to Google Scholar

Accepted for publication: 2024-03-11
Peer reviewed: Yes

Related articles in


Search Relations - Article by Author(s)

Share this article on:

Abstract

Background: The purpose in life can motivate individuals to realize that life is essential for existence and well-being. Adults might experience crises that can lead to a lack of purpose in life. Consequently, promoting purpose in life is necessary, but it requires a suitable measurement scale.

Objective: This scoping review aimed to identify and map the content, psychometric properties, and answer option scales of instruments intended to measure purpose in life in adult populations.

Design: A scoping review was employed.

Data Sources: The database used was PubMed. The libraries were APA PsycNet, Wiley Online Library, and Cochrane Library. The search strategy was performed between 1 November 2023 and 14 February 2024.

Review Methods: This review used the scoping review framework described by Arksey and O’Malley. The identified instruments were assessed for quality based on the COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. This study also used the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) reporting guideline.

Results: A total of 348 studies were identified, and seven articles were involved in the final synthesis. These seven articles included five instruments measuring the concept of purpose in life, of which two instruments had two versions: 1) Purpose in Life Test (20 items, 4 items); 2) Life Engagement Test (6 items); 3) Psychological Well-Being (120 items, 18 items); 4) Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (9 items); and 5) National Institutes of Health Tuberculosis Meaning and Purpose Scale Age 18+ (18 items). The validity of all instruments was tested using factor analysis, known groups, face, concurrent, convergent, discriminant, and construct validity. The reliability of four instruments was tested by Cronbach’s alpha and Spearman-Brown formula.

Conclusion: Five instruments measuring purpose in life in the adult population with adequate psychometric properties were identified. The clinical implication of this study suggests that nurses may consider employing an appropriate instrument to assess the purpose of life in the adult population, thus enabling them to offer holistic, individualized care to adults, particularly addressing the spiritual dimension.

https://doi.org/10.33546/bnj.3176
PDF
XML

Copyright

Copyright (c) 2024 Somrudee Arunjit, Karnsunaphat Balthip, Jos M. Latour

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Article Metrics

Total views 194 [Abstract: 92 | PDF: 100 | Supplementary File 1 - Searching Strategy: 0 | Supplementary File 2 - Quality Appraisal: 0 | XML: 2 ]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

PlumX Metrics

Declaration of Conflicting Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to sincerely thank Associate Professor Kittikorn Nilmanat, Associate Professor Praneed Songwathana, and Assistant Professor Sarana Suwanruangsri of the Faculty of Nursing, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand, for their valuable advice.

Authors’ Contributions

The authors [S.A and K.B] have contributed substantially to the conception, design of the work, and acquisition. All authors [S.A, K.B, J.M.L] contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data. The first author [S.A] drafted the work. The second and third authors [K.B and J.M.L] reviewed it critically for important intellectual content. All authors [S.A, K.B, J.M.L] approved the final version to be published. All authors [S.A, K.B, J.M.L] agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Data Availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article (and its supplementary files).

Declaration of Use of AI in Scientific Writing

The authors have declared that no generative AI and AI-assisted technologies are used in writing.

Ethical Consideration

Not applicable.


References

Anderson, K. A., Fields, N. L., Cassidy, J., & Peters-Beumer, L. (2022). Purpose in life: A reconceptualization for very late life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 23(5), 2337-2348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-022-00512-7

Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

AshaRani, P. V., Lai, D., Koh, J., & Subramaniam, M. (2022). Purpose in life in older adults: A systematic review on conceptualization, measures, and determinants. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(10), 5860. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19105860

Balthip, K., Petchruschatachart, U., Piriyakoontorn, S., Tiraphat, N., & Liamputtong, P. (2016). Application of purpose in life and self-sufficient economic philosophy in enhancing the holistic health promotion of Thai adolescents. Journal of Research in Nursing-Midwifery and Health Sciences, 36(3), 111-130.

Bernstein, D. N., Houck, J. R., Mahmood, B., & Hammert, W. C. (2019). Responsiveness of the PROMIS and its concurrent validity with other region-and condition-specific PROMs in patients undergoing carpal tunnel release. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®, 477(11), 2544-2551. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000773

Brubaker, L., Piault, E. C., Tully, S. E., Evans, C. J., Bavendam, T., Beach, J., Yeh, Y., Kopp, Z. S., Khullar, V., & Kelleher, C. J. (2013). Validation study of the Self‐Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire for lower urinary tract symptoms. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 67(4), 342-350. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12087

Crumbaugh, J. C. (1968). Cross-validation of purpose-in-life test based on Frankl's concepts. Journal of Individual Psychology, 24(1), 74-81.

Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272-299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272

Frankl, V. E. (1992). Man's search for meaning (2nd ed.). Vienna, Austria: Beacon Press.

Hedberg, P., Brulin, C., Aléx, L., & Gustafson, Y. (2011). Purpose in life over a five-year period: A longitudinal study in a very old population. International Psychogeriatrics, 23(5), 806-813. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610210002279

Hill, P. L., & Turiano, N. A. (2014). Purpose in life as a predictor of mortality across adulthood. Psychological Science, 25(7), 1482-1486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614531799

Hu, L. t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Kaplan, R. L., Khoury, C. E., Field, E. R. S., & Mokhbat, J. (2016). Living day by day: The meaning of living with HIV/AIDS among women in Lebanon. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 3, 2333393616650082. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393616650082

Kim, E. S., Chen, Y., Nakamura, J. S., Ryff, C. D., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2022). Sense of purpose in life and subsequent physical, behavioral, and psychosocial health: An outcome-wide approach. American Journal of Health Promotion, 36(1), 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1177/08901171211038545

Kim, E. S., Sun, J. K., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2013). Purpose in life and reduced incidence of stroke in older adults: 'The Health and Retirement Study'. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 74(5), 427-432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2013.01.013

Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012

Lewis, N. A. (2017). Sense of purpose in life and risk for onset of chronic illness [Master’s Thesis, Carleton University]. Hyrax. https://repository.library.carleton.ca/files/7w62f925w

Mokkink, L. B., Prinsen, C. A., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., Vet, H. C. d., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (User manual, Issue. https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-syst-review-for-PROMs-manual_version-1_feb-2018.pdf

Nilchantuk, C. (2020). Assessment tools for measuring meaning in life. Ratchaphruek Journal, 18(3), 1-10.

Pasunon, P. (2015). Validity of questionnaire for social science research. Journal of Social Sciences Srinakharinwirot University, 18(18), 375-396.

Pearson, E. L., Windsor, T. D., Crisp, D. A., Butterworth, P., Pilkington, P. D., & Anstey, K. J. (2013). Normative data and longitudinal invariance of the Life Engagement Test (LET) in a community sample of older adults. Quality of Life Research, 22, 327-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0146-2

Reawtaisong, P., & Supwirapakorn, W. (2017). The effects of logotherapy on meaning in life of the elderly with cancer. Journal of The Police Nurses, 9(1), 47-58.

Reker, G. T. (1977). The purpose‐in‐life test in an inmate population: An empirical investigation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(3), 688-693. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(197707)33:3<688::AID-JCLP2270330316>3.0.CO;2-F

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069-1081. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069

Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719-727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719

Salsman, J. M., Lai, J.-S., Hendrie, H. C., Butt, Z., Zill, N., Pilkonis, P. A., Peterson, C., Stoney, C. M., Brouwers, P., & Cella, D. (2014). Assessing psychological well-being: self-report instruments for the NIH Toolbox. Quality of Life Research, 23, 205-215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0452-3

Scheier, M. F., Wrosch, C., Baum, A., Cohen, S., Martire, L. M., Matthews, K. A., Schulz, R., & Zdaniuk, B. (2006). The life engagement test: Assessing purpose in life. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29, 291-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-005-9044-1

Schulenberg, S. E., Schnetzer, L. W., & Buchanan, E. M. (2011). The purpose in life test-short form: Development and psychometric support. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12, 861-876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-010-9231-9

Schultz, D. (2015). Measuring purpose in life: A review. Graduate Student Journal of Psychology, 16, 5-24. https://doi.org/10.52214/gsjp.v16i.10896

Tkatch, R., Wu, L., MacLeod, S., Ungar, R., Albright, L., Russell, D., Murphy, J., Schaeffer, J., & Yeh, C. S. (2021). Reducing loneliness and improving well-being among older adults with animatronic pets. Aging & Mental Health, 25(7), 1239-1245. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2020.1758906

Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., & Weeks, L. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467-473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850

Yamacharuen, R. (2019). Zotero collecting/managing/sharing/citing [in Thai]. https://clibdoc.psu.ac.th/public31/KM-KYL/work-manual/ratana.pdf


Readers are able to give us their valuable feedbacks here. The comments will be reviewed by the editors and then published here. Important Note: The "Comments" related to the Galley Proof PDF must NOT be submitted via this form. Authors should submit their comments on their galley proofs only via system