Abstract
The Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF), measuring emotional, social, and psychological well-being, has scarcely been validated in clinical populations. We evaluated MHC-SF in 203 patients with affective disorders and 163 nonclinical participants. Traditional confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), bifactor CFA, three-factor exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), and bifactor ESEM models were compared. Convergent/discriminant validity was tested against classic well-being validators and current mood state. All three subscales were significantly lower in patients. Test-retest reliability in patients was moderate. Bifactor ESEM fitted data best and displayed full scalar gender and partial scalar invariance across groups. Factor strength indices suggested that MHC-SF is primarily unidimensional, especially in patients. However, subscales differed considerably on size, internal consistency, distinctness, discriminant validity, and temporal stability. MHC-SF was valid and reliable for monitoring well-being in both clinical and nonclinical samples, but further research is needed before safely concluding on its dimensionality.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call