NWU Institutional Repository

Problematic factorial validity of three language versions of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale (BPNS): why and what are the implications?

dc.contributor.authorSchutte, Lusilda
dc.contributor.authorWissing, Marié P.
dc.contributor.authorEllis, Suria M.
dc.contributor.researchID13012584 - Schutte, Lusilda
dc.contributor.researchID10174524 - Wissing, Maria Philipina
dc.contributor.researchID10188908 - Ellis, Susanna Maria
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-25T08:53:44Z
dc.date.available2018-05-25T08:53:44Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.description.abstractSelf-determination theory is a macrotheory of human motivation that describes fundamental matters such as personality development, goals and aspirations, and self-regulation. Basic psychological needs theory, a subtheory of self-determination theory, postulates that the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are universal and the satisfaction thereof essential for human functioning. Despite the theory’s strong universality claim, almost no studies tested the assumption on the African continent. The present study addressed this by exploring the factorial validity of English, Afrikaans, and Setswana versions of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale (N = 1056). After incorporating a negative-worded method effect and removing several problematic items, the fit of the intended three-factor model was good for the Afrikaans version, marginal for the English version, and poor for the Setswana version. The resulting factors’ reliabilities were low. Configural, metric, and partial scalar invariance were established between the English and Afrikaans versions. Although these findings primarily highlighted problems with the particular scale, there is also the possibility that it could have implications for the validity of the universality assumption of basic psychological needs theory and/or assumptions about denotations or manifestations of the main constructs in various cultural contexts. The study indicated the conceptual and linguistic complexities involved in assessment across diverse and multicultural contextsen_US
dc.identifier.citationSchutte, L. et al. 2018. Problematic factorial validity of three language versions of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale (BPNS): why and what are the implications? Journal of happiness studies, 19(4):1175-1194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9861-2] [en_US
dc.identifier.issn1389-4978
dc.identifier.issn1573-7780 (Online)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10394/26889
dc.identifier.urihttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10902-017-9861-2
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9861-2
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.subjectBasic Psychological Needs Scale (BPNS)en_US
dc.subjectScale validationen_US
dc.subjectMeasurement invarianceen_US
dc.subjectCross-cultural assessmenten_US
dc.subjectSelf-determination theoryen_US
dc.subjectSouth Africaen_US
dc.titleProblematic factorial validity of three language versions of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale (BPNS): why and what are the implications?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.61 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: