life satisfaction construct used by test developers. Item analysis then yielded two preliminary instruments: (1) the Life Satisfaction Index A (LSIA) consisting of 25 attitude items; and (2) the Life Satisfaction Index B (LSIB) consisting of 17 open-ended questions and check-list items.
Both instruments were administered to a diverse ages sample (N=92). The results of an item analysis were said to show a need for further refinement of the instruments resulting in several items being discarded. These refinements produced the final instrument used in this dissertation.
Validity coefficients were relatively low in the sample used in the original psychometric testing of the instrument, ranging from .39 to .47. However, this was explained by the fact that the original sample subjects represented a group that were relatively high or superior in life satisfaction.
Test-retest reliabilities were observed to be good. For two-week and one-month intervals, reliability correlation coefficients were .78 and .71 respectively.
Although this scale was originally developed using college-age students, over the years it has been utilized on people of all ages (Goldstein & Hersen, 1984; Kaplan & Saccuzzo, 1982).
Item-total score point biserial correlations were computed to determine internal consistency of the instrument using the original sample. These varied from .65 to .87. No other psychometric data were reported.
Evaluation Relative To Question # 1
It can be seen that some but not all of the instruments used in the study were developed using a population of older men. However, as indicated, there have been several studies which routinely used these instruments for older samples, a fact which supports this study's use of the instruments for older male retirees.
Moreover, while reliability and validity data are not extensive for the questionnaires, the data that is available suggests that they are relatively so...