Presentation at the 2018 Western Positive Psychology Association

1. Introducing The
Multidimensional Well-Being
Assessment (MWA):
An Inclusive, Multiculturally-
Informed Measure
Shelly P. Harrell, Ph.D.
Pepperdine University

2.  Studies show that the presence of well-being, not
just the absence of negative symptoms, is related to
physical health, longevity, and reduced mortality
(Ryff and Singer, 1998; Lindfors, 2013).
 Positive well-being is receiving increasingly greater
attention in the theoretical, empirical and applied
literature in psychology and mental health.
Importance of Well-Being

3.  There is consistent evidence that positive well-being and
psychopathology are separate, but related, constructs
(Keyes, Shmotkin, & Ryff, 2002).
 The absence of mental illness does not automatically confer
optimal mental health and functioning.
 There is a need for instruments to comprehensively assess
positive well-being outcomes of psychotherapy and other
psychosocial interventions
Foundations of MWA Development:
The Clinical Context

4.  The primary conceptual frameworks for
understanding and measuring well-being have been
◦ Subjective evaluation of life satisfaction and experience of
positive emotion (the hedonic tradition)
◦ Psychological and meaning-oriented aspects (the
eudaimonic tradition)
◦ Domain-specific quality of life (e.g., social, functional,
physical health)
Conceptualizing Well-Being

5.  Developing an understanding of well-being in the context of
diversity is critical. Existing measures of well-being have
given limited attention to diversity in their conceptual
foundation and in the development of item content.
 Conceptions of well-being have not commonly been
developed the in a way that integrates culture and context
from inception,
 As such, measures of well-being generally have not emerged
from a conceptualization that is inclusive and multiculturally-
grounded.
Well-Being in Culture and Context

6.  Some scales have attempted to gain cross-cultural validity
AFTER the scale has been developed within a relatively
monocultural lens
 These efforts have mainly been accomplished through gathering
international data and comparing countries, rather than
examining diverse experiences of well-being within the same
national context.
 The conceptualization, measurement, and empirical study of
well-being should include attention to these groups in the
context of their sociopolitical histories and current conditions.
Culture and Well-Being Measurement

7.  Psycho: Biopsychorelational Processes
◦ Multiple interacting person processes (e.g.,
cognitive, affective, somatic, etc.)
 Eco: Socioecological Contexts
◦ Multiple environmental levels of analysis (e.g.,
organizational, social networks, institutional,
sociohistorical, geopolitical)
 Cultural: Patterns of Knowledge, Meaning, Behavior
◦ Multiple, intersecting dimensions of sociocultural
diversity
My Lens: “Psychoecocultural”
(Harrell, 2014; 2015)

9.  The Multidimensional Well-Being Assessment
(MWA) was developed to meet the need to
establish a multiculturally-informed, inclusive, and
comprehensive measure of well-being that takes
into account the multiple contexts of living and the
variability of valuing these contexts between and
within cultures.
Multicultural Lens of Well-Being

10.  More spectifically, two primary goals guided the development
of The Multidimensional Well-Being Assessment (MWA):
◦ (1) to develop a well-being measure more inclusive of aspects of
well-being that may be particularly relevant to racial/ethnic
groups that are not white or of European decent, people from
more collectivistic cultures, as well as those of lower
socioeconomic status, and
◦ (2) to develop a measure that has utility in applied contexts,
particularly with respect to psychologically-based interventions
such as psychotherapy and life coaching.
Goals of the Developing the MWA

11.  Development of the MWA was informed by guidelines
for scale construction offered by DeVellis (2012) and
Clark and Watson (1995).
 A comprehensive literature review on the construct of
well-being, measures of well-being, and well-being in
diverse cultural groups was conducted that resulted in
the Multidimensional-Contextual Model of Well-Being
(Harrell, et. al., 2012) positing five core life contexts
within which well-being is experienced: Relational,
Collective, Transcendent, Psychological, and
Physical.
Scale Development

13.  An exhaustive pool of over 200 items was
systematically generated for consideration that
reflected the literature and was consistent with the
conceptual model.
 These items were evaluated by an open-discussion
content validation process with a culturally diverse
group of doctoral and master’s level students in
psychology familiar with both multicultural
psychology and the well-being literature
Initial Generation of Items

14.  The number of items were reduced and assigned to
theoretically-derived well-being dimensions using a Q-sort
procedure.
 A preliminary scale was developed and piloted in a sample of 60
African American women in prison (Grills & Villaneuva, 2012)
where it was sensitive to pre-post change in a re-integration
program intervention.
 Additional literature review and content validation discussion
resulted in the addition of dimensions within the Collective and
Physical wellness contexts resulting in a final 160-item scale
with five primary wellness context domains, and fifteen well-
being dimensions (2-4 within each domain).
Scale Development

15.  Individual and subjective well-being; positive, behavioral, emotional, and self-
awareness; also includes transformational processes, that is, personally-defined
indicators of progress on desired outcomes and subjective assessment that change
or growth is occurring.
 4 Dimensions, 40 Items
 Emotional Well-Being (12 items): “I felt strong and empowered”. “I was confident in
myself; my self-esteem was high”. “I felt joy and happiness inside”; “I felt inspired or
excited about something”.
 Functional Well-Being (10 items): “I was productive; I got things done”; “I did a
good job at work, school, or with other responsibilities”; “I kept my word or followed
through, did what I said I would do”; “I had a positive event or activity to look forward
to”.
 Awareness/Experiential Well-Being (6 items): “I was aware of the connection
between my mind, my emotions, and what was going on in my body”; “I took time to
‘smell the roses’, really noticing and enjoying things from my senses”.
 Transformational Well-Being (12 items): “I made progress dealing with a problem
or getting rid of a bad habit”; “I learned something new, became more
knowledgeable”; “I did something to move my life forward or head in the right
direction”.
The Psychological Wellness Context Domain

16.  Includes personal safety, health status and health-enhancing behaviors, as well
as well-being related to the conditions of one's physical environment.
 3 Dimensions, 31 items
 Safety-related Well-Being (8 items): “I felt safe in the neighborhood where I
live”; “I felt safe from sexual violence or exploitation”; “My loved ones were safe
from violence, abuse, or harassment”; I felt safe from threats, verbal abuse,
emotional abuse, or stalking”.
 Health-related Well-Being (12 items): “I felt physically healthy and strong
enough to handle the demands of my daily activities”; “I took good care of my
health”; “I got enough hours of peaceful, uninterrupted sleep”; “I felt comfortable
with my sexuality”.
 Environmental Well-Being (11 items): “I spent time in places with lots of
grass, flowers, trees, and/or clean rivers, lakes, beaches, etc.”; “The place
where I live was mostly free from very loud noises such as traffic, trains,
gunshots, sirens, etc.”.
The Physical Wellness Context Domain

17.  The nature and quality of one's interpersonal relationships.
 2 Dimensions, 27 Items
 Relationship Quality (15 items): “I was able to be myself, to
be “real” with the people I care about”; “There was someone
in my life who really understands me and knows me well”; “I
felt supported and encouraged”; “I felt good about my
friendships”.
 Prosocial Behavior: (12 items): “I did or said something to lift
someone’s spirits”; “I showed patience with a person or
situation”; “I helped someone in need”; “I expressed gratitude
or appreciation to someone”; “I gave good advice or guidance
to someone”.
The Relational Context Domain

18.  Includes a positive sense of community i.e., connection, belonging), social group identity (e.g.,
racial/ethnic, sexual orientation), civic participation, and sense of positive sociopolitical processes
 4 Dimensions, 35 items
 Sociocultural Identity-related Well-Being (12 items): “I felt strongly and emotionally connected
to my culture or another group in society that is important to me”; “I felt secure and grounded by
my roots in my culture or other community I identify with”; “Things that I did during my leisure time
reflected my culture or another community I identify with”.
 Community Well-Being (10 items): “I felt accepted and welcomed by people at my workplace,
school, or other place where I spend a lot of time”; “ I felt a strong sense of belonging in my
neighborhood”
 Participatory Well-Being (8 items): “I volunteered my time in service of people in need, animals,
the environment, or another cause important to me”; “I participated in or contributed to positive
change on a social justice issue or cause”.
 Sociopolitical-National Well-Being (5 items): “I have positive feelings about my home country”;
“My home country was strong and stable in terms of leadership and political matters”.
The Collective Wellness Context Domain

19.  Indicates spirituality, peak experience and higher states of
consciousness or higher purpose. It can also be a connection with
nature, Spirit/Higher Power/God, or meaningful purpose..
 2 Dimensions, 27 items
 Meaning-related Well-Being (14 items): “I was ‘in the zone’, did
something with excellence or perfection”; “I felt connected to all of
humanity regardless of race, nationality, social class, etc.”; “I felt
like my life had meaning, like I’m here for a purpose”.
 Spiritual-Religious Well-Being (13 items): “I enjoyed expressing
and sharing my spirituality with other people or in a faith
community”; “I felt positively connected with the soul or spirit of
another person (living or deceased)”; “I witnessed or experienced
spiritual healing”.
The Transcendent Wellness Context
Domain

20.  A comprehensive demographic questionnaire, the MWA, and selected
validation instruments were administered online and in-person to a diverse
sample recruited from university, community, and social network settings
between 2014-2017.
 Hardcopy participants completed the MWA and demographics only. Online
participants had the option to complete demographics and the MWA only, or
to complete all scales.
 Of the 1297 participants who completed the MWA, 686 (52%) were online
participants. This represents a 56% completion rate of the 1,272 people who
began a questionnaire online.
 In the context of the total number of participants, 478 (37%) completed
validation scales. This represents 70% of the 686 who participated online.
Methods

21.  The Satisfaction with Life Questionnaire (SWLQ; Diener
et al., 1985)
 Personal Well-Being Index (PWI; Cummins et al., 2003)
 Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being (QEWB;
Waterman et al., 2010)
 Scale of Positive and Negative Emotion (SPANE;
Diener et al., 2009)
 Flourishing Scale (Diener et al., 2009)
 Short form of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability
scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960).
Validation Scales Administered

25.  Participants rated their well-being quite positively
overall with Safety, Physical Health, and Relationship
Quality being the highest areas of well-being and
Community Participation, Sociopolitical- National
Context, and Spiritual-Religious dimensions being the
lowest.
 There is evidence of strong internal consistency
reliability across domains and dimensions with
Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .76-.96
 The pattern of validity coefficients suggest strong
convergent and adequate discriminant validity– the
scales performed as expected.
Summary

26.  It is important to assess dimensions of well-being that reflect
the lived experience of diverse groups and take into account
multiple levels of analysis
 Exploratory Factor Analysis procedures are currently
underway. Initial results suggest five factors characterized
generally as follows:
◦ One primary factor that includes items from multiple dimensions
most heavily represented by Psychological, Prosocial, Meaning,
and Identity
◦ Physical Environment and Safety
◦ Spiritual-Religious Well-Being
◦ Relationship Quality
◦ Community Belongingness
Implications and Future Steps

27.  The MWA is one of the first well-being instruments to
explicitly identify cultural diversity considerations in the
development of a comprehensive scale and content of
items
 In addition, the MWA incorporates some aspects of
well-being that have been given minimal attention by
other comprehensive scales, such as transformational
well-being and collective well-being.
 The initial psychometric properties are strong and
encouraging of further development
Conclusion

28. Contact:
Shelly Harrell, Ph.D.
shelly.harrell@pepperdine.edu