Abstract
The flexible goal adjustment (FLEX) and tenacious goal pursuit (TEN) scales are used regularly in aging research. The current study examined their validity in a sample of 517 women (30-75 years) in multiple ways. Overall, the findings show that the scales do not clearly distinguish between FLEX and TEN. The direction in which the items were formulated was just as important as what was being measured. Moreover, face validity of the inversely phrased items in particular appeared to be weak. On the basis of these findings, the authors recommend a revision of the concept definitions as well as of the items.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 174-180 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Psychology and Aging |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Mar-2011 |
Keywords
- psychological adaptation
- self-regulation
- goals
- validity
- confirmatory factor analysis
- SECONDARY CONTROL
- SELF-REGULATION
- LATER LIFE
- OLD-AGE
- CHALLENGES
- STRATEGIES
- RESOURCES
- HEALTH
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The Tenacious Goal Pursuit and Flexible Goal Adjustment Scales: A Validation Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver