Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluating the reliability and validity of the Questionnaire on Well-Being: a validation study for a clinically informed measurement of subjective well-being
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Clinical psychology. University of Iceland, Iceland.ORCID iD: 0009-0000-5703-1068
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Work and organizational psychology.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0736-9225
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Clinical psychology.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2172-8813
2025 (English)In: Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, ISSN 1650-6073, E-ISSN 1651-2316, Vol. 54, no 2, p. 208-230Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Researchers and clinicians are becoming increasingly aware of the importance of assessing positive functioning to inform clinical outcomes. This paper evaluates the Questionnaire on Well-Being (QWB, available for free https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GSC3R), a clinically informed instrument that assesses subjective well-being, across two studies. Study One, consisting of treatment-seeking individuals in an assertiveness training sample (n = 495), explored the factorial structure of the QWB, assessed the four-week test-retest reliability, criterion-related validity, and identified a preliminary cutoff point for the QWB with clinical significance. Study Two, including participants from the general public (n = 1561), confirmed the factorial structure of the QWB and further evaluated criterion-related validity. The results provided support for a unidimensional structure for the QWB. Furthermore, the QWB exhibited excellent internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93 and 0.94 in Study One and Two, respectively), high test-retest reliability (ICC3 = .50 at a four-week follow-up in Study One), and appropriate criterion-related validity demonstrating positive correlations with positive affect and negative correlations with psychopathology. Finally, a cutoff point on the QWB below 50 was associated with marked psychopathology. These findings provide preliminary support for the usage of the QWB in clinical and non-clinical settings, establishing the QWB as a reliable indicator of subjective well-being.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2025. Vol. 54, no 2, p. 208-230
Keywords [en]
Questionnaire on Well-Being, subjective well-being, validation study, confirmatory factor analysis, reliability analysis, cutoff point analysis
National Category
Psychology Applied Psychology
Research subject
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-238832DOI: 10.1080/16506073.2024.2402992ISI: 001310435200001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85204124658OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-238832DiVA, id: diva2:1933465
Note

For correction, see: Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 54(2), 303–304. DOI: 10.1080/16506073.2024.2415217

Available from: 2025-01-31 Created: 2025-01-31 Last updated: 2025-02-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Hlynsson, Jón IngiSjöberg, AndersCarlbring, Per

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hlynsson, Jón IngiSjöberg, AndersCarlbring, Per
By organisation
Clinical psychologyWork and organizational psychology
In the same journal
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
PsychologyApplied Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 60 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf