1. A Reliability Generalization of the Life Satisfaction Index K. A. Wallace & J. C. Caruso University of Montana Presented at the Annual Meeting of The Gerontological Society of America, November 2002.

2. Purpose To examine score reliability for a widely used measure of life satisfaction, the Life Satisfaction Index (LSI; Neugarten et al., 1961)  Average score reliability  Variation in score reliability as a function of sample characteristics (e.g., gender; mean age; scale length; etc.)

3. Developing Ratings of Life Satisfaction Crafted to assess well-being using a subjective evaluation of one’s own present and/or past life Part of the Kansas City Study of Adult Life (Neugarten et al., 1961)  Thematic analysis of measures of adjustment and morale  5 components of well-being: Zest versus apathy Resolution and fortitude Congruence between desired and achieved goals Self-concept Positive mood tone

4. The Scales Life Satisfaction Index A (LSIA) Life Satisfaction Index B (LSIB) Life Satisfaction Index Z (LSIZ; Wood et al., 1969) 18-item version (Adams, 1969) 8-item version (LSIW; James et al., 1986) 30-item version (Maynard, 1993)

5. Reliability Generalization Meta-analytic technique Examines average score reliability (e.g., Vacha-Haase, 1998) Examines relationships between study characteristics and score reliability Sample size Scale length Mean age of sample Standard deviation of age Gender Mean LSI Standard deviation LSI Language of administration Type of sample

6. Method – Data Collection PsycINFO literature search  Life satisfaction index and LSI 157 possible articles  59.87% no mention of reliability  9.56% indicated LSI reliable test, no data  6.37% cited reliability from previous work  3.18% reported reliability in unusable form .64% not empirical  1.27% could not be obtained  19.11% (30) provided usable reliability information Total of 34 samples used

7. Descriptive Statistics for Sample Characteristics (N=34) Variable M SD Range Sample size235.53328.4620-1571 Scale length17.094.218-30 Mean age61.7917.1720.2-83.3 Std dev age6.893.383-15.7 Proportion female.63.280-1.00 Mean LSI15.5613.013.08-65.5 Std dev LSI3.402.34.52-11.83 Lang of admin.78.420-1.00 Sample type.26.510-1.00

8. Results Average Score Reliability  Mean =.79 (SD =.10)  Median =.79  Range of.56 (.42 to.98) Bivariate correlations  Score reliability was not significantly related to: scale length, mean age, standard deviation of age, proportion female, sample size, mean LSI, or standard deviation LSI t tests  No difference in score reliability as function of language of administration or sample type

9. Discussion Adequate average score reliability for the LSI  File drawer problem? No relationship between score reliability and sample characteristics  Preliminary evidence for adequate reliability of scores generated with LSI across various sample characteristics Limitations?

10. Future Research & Implications Replication Conceptualization of reliability as property of scores (e.g., Wilkinson & APA Task Force on Statistical Inference, 1999) Inclusion of more detailed demographic and reliability information

11. Method – Data Analysis Sample characteristics recorded  Scale length  Mean age, standard deviation of age  Gender (proportion female)  Sample size  Language of administration (Eng=1; Other=0)  Sample type (Instit/Mixed=1; CommResid=0)  Mean and standard deviation of scores