↓ Skip to main content

Advancement of the Subjective Vitality Scale: examination of alternative measurement models for Japanese and Singaporeans

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Advancement of the Subjective Vitality Scale: examination of alternative measurement models for Japanese and Singaporeans
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, October 2016
DOI 10.1111/sms.12760
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Kawabata, F. Yamazaki, D. W. Guo, N. L. D. Chatzisarantis

Abstract

The Subjective Vitality Scale (SVS: Ryan & Frederick, 1997) is a 7-item self-report instrument to measure one's level of vitality and has been widely used in psychological studies. However, there have been discrepancies in which version of the SVS (7- or 6-item version) employed between as well as within researchers. Moreover, Item 5 seems not be a good indicator of vitality from a content validity perspective. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the SVS for Japanese and Singaporeans rigorously by comparing 3 measurement models (5-, 6-, and 7-item models). To this end, the scale was first translated from English to Japanese and then the Japanese and English versions of the scale were administered to Japanese (n = 268) and Singaporean undergraduate students (n = 289), respectively. The factorial and concurrent validity of the three models were examined independently on each of the samples. Furthermore, the covariance stability of the vitality responses was assessed over a 4-week time period for another independent Japanese sample (n = 140). The findings from this study indicated that from methodological and content validity perspectives, the 5-item model is considered most preferable for both language versions of the SVS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 17 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 20%
Sports and Recreations 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 19 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 October 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
#2,655
of 2,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,485
of 327,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
#34
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,945 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.