CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 379Psychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Multidimensional Existential Meaning Scale: A tripartite approach to measuring meaning in life

George, Login S., Park, Crystal L.·2017·The Journal of Positive Psychology
DOI 10.1080/17439760.2016.1209546
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

To address conceptual difficulties and advance research on meaning in life (MIL), it may be useful to adopt a tripartite view of meaning as consisting of comprehension, purpose, and mattering. This paper discusses the development of the Multidimensional Existential Meaning Scale (MEMS), which explicitly assesses these three subconstructs. Results from three samples of undergraduates showed the MEMS to have favorable psychometric properties (e.g. good factor structure and reliability) and demonstrated that it can effectively differentiate the three subconstructs of meaning. Regression and relative importance analyses showed that each MEMS subscale carried predictive power for relevant variables and other meaning measures. Additionally, the MEMS subscales demonstrated theoretically consistent, differential associations with other variables (e.g. dogmatism, behavioral activation, and spirituality). Overall, results suggest that the MEMS may offer more conceptual precision than existing measures, and it may open new avenues of research and facilitate a more nuanced understanding of MIL.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17439760.2016.1209546

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 73 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Becker E, 1973, The denial of death
  2. 10.1207/s15327752 · DOI
  3. Fetzer Institute/National Institute on Aging Working Group, 1999, Multidimensional measurement of religiousness/spirituality for use in health research
  4. 10.1007/978-94-007-6527-6 · DOI
  5. Klinger E., 1998, The human quest for meaning: A handbook of psychological research and clinical applications, 27
  6. Reker G. T., 1992, Manual of the life attitude profile-revised
  7. Wong P. T. P., 1998, The human quest for meaning: A handbook of psychological research and clinical applications, 111

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 379

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
George, L. S., & Park, C. L.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
George, Login S.
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Positive Psychology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2016-07-26
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
613-627
ISSN
  • 1743-9760 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-9779
DOI
10.1080/17439760.2016.1209546
OpenAlex
W2504320773
Cited by
379
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 66 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1
FWCI
19.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Journal of Positive Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
meaning in life, existential meaning, purpose, mattering, comprehension, scale development, psychometric properties, dogmatism, behavioral activation, spirituality, relative importance analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review