Adaptation of a shortened version of Peterson and Seligman’s Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) with a Russian-language sample

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) designed by C. Peterson and M. Seligman is in widespread use in modern psychological research. It includes 240 questions aimed at describing personal qualities relating to a person’s strengths and virtues of character. In 2002, M. Seligman published an abridged version of the VIA-IS in English, measuring the same strengths as the full version of the inventory, but containing 48 items instead of 240. There is no doubt about the convenience of using the abridged version of this questionnaire for conducting large-scale studies on large samples of respondents. Following this logic, the purpose of this research was to adapt this shortened version of the VIA-IS for a Russian-speaking sample. Examination of data gathered from 239 respondents revealed sufficient internal consistency of the inventory: all six of the scales demonstrated sufficient values of Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. Verification of the inventory for retest reliability, carried out six months after the first testing, yielded positive results: it was determined that the correlation coefficients of the data on the scales were within required values for adequate test-retest reliability. A convergent validity test also showed good results. The conformity of the factor structure of the Russian-language abbreviated VIA-IS to the original English-language abbreviated inventory was verified using confirmatory factor analysis. In conclusion, the Russian-language version of the abridged VIA-IS can be used for the psychological measurement of personality strengths of mentally healthy Russian respondents within the context of the positive psychology framework.

About the authors

Sergey A. Bashkatov

Bashkir State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: s_bashkatov@list.ru

Sc. Doctor of Biology, Ph.D. in Psychology, Professor, is Dean of the Biology Department

32 Zaki Validi St, Ufa, 450076, Russian Federation

References

  1. Baturin, N.A., & Melnikova, N.N. (2012). Vremennyi standart trebovanii k psikhodiagnosticheskim metodikam i procedura sertifikacii metodik. Tekhnologiya razrabotki psihodiagnosticheskih metodik. Chelyabinsk: YUUrGU Publ. (In Russ.)
  2. Bashkatov, S.A. (2013). Raznourovnevye faktory lichnostnogo blagopoluchiya. Ph.D. in Psychology Thesis. Chelyabinsk: South Ural State University. (In Russ.)
  3. Bradburn, N. (1969). The Structure of Psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldene Pab.
  4. Braun, G. (2020). Issledovanie struktury dannyh i ocenka razmernosti: Eksploratornyi i konfirmatornyi faktornyi analiz. Teoriya i praktika razrabotki testov: Prikladnaya psihometrika v psikhologii i obrazovanii. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola ekonomiki Publ. (In Russ.) Retrieved October 15, 2020, from https://ioe.hse.ru/data/2019/05/07/1502507409/%D0%AD%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B8%CC%86%20%D0%B8%20%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%84%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B8%CC%86%20%D1%84%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B8%CC%86%20%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7.pdf
  5. Burovihina, I.A., Leontyev, D.A., & Osin, E.N. (2007). Sily kharaktera kak resursy lichnosti podrostka: Opyt primeneniya profilya lichnykh dostoinstv. Psikhologicheskaya Diagnostika, (1), 107–127. (In Russ.)
  6. Diener, E., & Seligman, M.E.P. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575.
  7. Eidman, E.V. (2010). Lichnostnyi oprosnik NEO PI-R: Retcenziya. Ezhegodnik professional'nyh recenzij i obzorov. Metodiki psikhologicheskoi diagnostiki i izmereniya (pp. 37–43). Chelyabinsk: YUUrGU Publ. (In Russ.)
  8. Fesenko, P.P. (2005). Osmyslennost' zhizni i psikhologicheskoe blagopoluchie lichnosti. Ph.D. in Psychology Thesis. Mocow: RSHU Publ. (In Russ.)
  9. Gordeeva, T.O. (2011). Optimizm kak sostavlyayushchaya lichnostnogo potenciala. In D.A. Leontyev (Ed.), Lichnostnyj potencial: struktura i diagnostika (pp. 131–177). Moscow: Smysl Publ. (In Russ.)
  10. Kulikov, L.V, Dmitrieva, M.S., Dolina, M.Yu., Ivanov, O.V., Rozanova, M.A., & Timoshenko, T.G. (1997). Faktory psikhologicheskogo blagopoluchiya lichnosti. Anan'evskie chteniya – 97: Conference Proceeding, 3(1), 342–350. Saint Petersburg: SPbSU Publ. (In Russ.)
  11. Leontyev, D.A. (2011). Podhod cherez pozitivnye cherty lichnosti: Ot psikhicheskogo blagopoluchiya k dobrodetelyam i silam kharaktera. In D.A. Leontyev (Ed.), Lichnostnyj potencial: Struktura i diagnostika (pp. 76–91). Moscow: Smysl Publ. (In Russ.)
  12. McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T., & Martin, T.A. (2005). The NEO-PI-3: A more readable Revised Neo Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84(3), 261–270. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8403_05
  13. Minyurova, S.A., & Zausenko, I.V. (2013). Personal determinants of psychological well-being of a teacher. Pedagogicheskoe Obrazovanie v Rossii, (1), 94–101. (In Russ.)
  14. Naumenko, A.S. (2010). Lichnostnyj oprosnik NEO PI-R: Recenziya. Ezhegodnik professional'nykh recenzii i obzorov. Metodiki psikhologicheskoi diagnostiki i izmereniya (pp. 43–49). Chelyabinsk: YUUrGU Publ. (In Russ.)
  15. Novikova, I.A., & Vorobyeva, A.A. (2019). The Five-Factor Model. In K.D. Keith (Ed.), Cross-Cultural Psychology: Contemporary Themes and Perspectives (pp. 685–706). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119519348.ch33
  16. Orel, V.E., & Senin, I.G. (2008). Lichnostnye oprosniki NEO PI-R i NEO FFI: Manual. Yaroslavl: NPC “Psihodiagnostika” Publ. (In Russ.)
  17. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M.E.P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York: Oxford Press.
  18. Revelle, W. (2019). psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research (R package). Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych
  19. Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self‐determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well‐being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
  20. Ryff, C.D., & Keyes, C.L.M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719–727.
  21. Seligman, M.E.P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. New York: Free Press.
  22. Seligman, M. (2006). Novaya pozitivnaya psihologiya: Nauchnyj vzglyad na schast'e i smysl zhizni. Moscow: Sofiya Publ. (In Russ.)
  23. Seligman, M.E.P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Free Press.
  24. Seligman, M. (2013). Put' k protcvetaniyu: Novoe ponimanie schast'ya i blagopoluchiya. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov i Ferber Publ. (In Russ.)
  25. Sidorenko, E.V. (2002) Metody matematicheskoj obrabotki v psihologii. Saint Petersburg: Rech Publ. (In Russ.)
  26. Shamionov, R.M. (2008). Samosoznanie i sub"ektivnoe blagopoluchie lichnosti. In R.M. Shamionov (Ed.), Problemy social'noj psihologii lichnosti. Saratov: SGU Publ. (In Russ.)

Copyright (c) 2020 Bashkatov S.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies