Download - The Comprehensive Measure of Meaning: Psychological and ......psychological literature and research as merely one component of meaningfulness as a whole. Most frequently used in empirical

Hanson, J.A. and VanderWeele, T.J., The Comprehensive Measure of Meaning: psychological and philosophical foundations. In: M. Lee, L.D. Kubzansky, and T.J. VanderWeele (Eds.). Measuring Well-Being: Interdisciplinary Perspectives from the Social Sciences and the Humanities. Oxford University Press, forthcoming.

1

TheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaning:PsychologicalandPhilosophicalFoundations

JeffreyA.HansonandTylerJ.VanderWeele

HarvardUniversityAbstract.Thetopicofmeaninghasbeenofinterestbothinphilosophyandinpsychology.Thepsychologyresearchcommunityhasputforwardanumberofinstrumentstomeasuremeaning.Considerabledebatehastakenplacewithinphilosophyastotheobjectiveversussubjectivestatusofmeaninginlifeandontheglobalversusindividualorpersonalaspectsofmeaning.Herewemakeuseofanemergingconsensusinthepsychologyliteratureconcerningatripartitestructureofmeaningascognitivecoherence,affectivesignificance,andmotivationaldirection.However,weenrichthisunderstandingwithimportantdistinctionsdrawnfromthephilosophicalliteraturetodistinguishsubdomainswithinthistripartiteunderstanding.Weusetherelevantphilosophicaldistinctionstoclassifyexistingmeasurementitemsintoaseven-foldstructureintendedtomorecomprehensivelyassessanindividual’ssenseofmeaning.Theproposedmeasure,withthreeitemsineachsubdomaindrawnfrompreviousscales,constituteswhatweputforwardastheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaning.Wehopethatthismeasurewillenrichtheempiricalresearchontheassessmentof,andonthecausesandeffectsof,havingasenseofmeaning.Introduction Meaningisnowwidelyrecognizedasessentialtohumanwell-being,andnumerousstudieshavedocumentedtheassociationbetweenperceivedmeaningfulnessandahostofimprovedpsychologicalbenefits.Baumeister(1991)hasarguedthatameaningfullifemaybecompatibleinsignificantwayswithbeingunhappy,butahappylifeisimpossiblewithoutmeaning.Howasenseofmeaningsupportshappinessheshowsatsomelengthwithconsiderableevidencedrawnfromcontemporarypsychologicalresearch(pp.214-218).SimilarlySteger(2009)providesathoroughcatalogueofstudiesthathaveshownthat“peoplewhobelievetheirliveshavemeaningorpurposeappeartobebetteroff,”includingbybeinghappier,enjoyinggreateroverallwell-being,andreportinghigherlifesatisfaction,controlovertheirlives,andworksatisfaction.Theyalsoexperiencelessnegativeaffect,depression(seealsoMascaro&Rosen,2005;Chenetal.,2019;andfordepressionandpost-traumaticstressseeOwens,Steger,Whitesell,&Herrera,2009),anxiety,workaholism,suicidalideation(seealsoHeisel&Flett,2004),substanceabuse,andneedfortherapy.Thesebenefitsarealsorelativelystableandindependentfromotherformsofwell-beingwhentrackedoverthecourseofayear(p.680).Finally,HeintzelmanandKing(2014a)canvassadditionalevidencethat“self-reportsofmeaninginlifeareassociatedwithhigherqualityoflife,especiallywithage,superiorself-reportedhealth,anddecreasedmortality”(p.561)withyetfurtherevidencefromarecent


2

meta-analysisthatasenseofpurposeinlifeisassociatedwithbetterphysicalhealthandgreaterlongevity(Cohenetal.,2016). Theimportanceofmeaninginlifeisnolongerindisputeinpsychologicalresearch.Asthetopichasgainedtraction,thanksinparttotheadventofpositivepsychologyasatransformativemovementwithinthediscipline,thequestionofmeaninginlifeasamatterofphilosophicresearchandinvestigationhasundergoneaparallelrevivalinanalytic,Anglo-Americandiscourseafterdecadesofneglect(Metz,2002;Hepburn,1966;Adams,2002;Wiggins,1976).Thatneglectislargelyattributabletothedominanceoflogicalpositivism,accordingtowhichtheveryquestionofthemeaningoflifeisincoherent,asmeaningwasconceivedasastrictlysemanticphenomenon.Withthecollapseoflogicalpositivism’shegemony,thequestionofthemeaningoflifehasmigratedintonewterrain.MostEnglish-speakingphilosopherswritingonthesubjecttodaydosoundertheconvictionthatmeaningisnotmerelyafeatureofsentencesbutafeatureofthesortofvaluehumanlivescanhave(Thomson,2003;Cottingham,2003;Metz,2002;Metz,2013;Wolf,2010;Wolf,2015;Landau,2017).Thisfeatureofvalueiswidelyagreedtobeirreducibletoeitherhappiness(whichisoftenconceivedhedonically)ormoralworth(whichisconceivedinavarietyofwaysthatarecompatiblewithalifealsobeingcalledmeaningful).Giventhebroadconsensussharedinbothpsychologicalandphilosophicaldiscoursesonthevalueandimportanceofmeaning,oneurgentchallengetopsychologicalresearchonmeaningishowtomeasureit. Thephilosophicaldiscussionmaybeabletolendyetfurtherassistancetopsychologicalresearch.Becausetheissueofmeaningisbeingrediscoveredinadiscoursethatprizesanalyticalprecision,rigorousdistinctions,andclarityofterms,philosophicalcategorizationscanbringsomevaluableclaritytosocialscienceinvestigation.Pastandpersistentconceptualambiguitiesandconflationsoftermshavealreadybeendecriedinanumberofimportantstudies(Heintzelman&King,2014a;Martela&Steger,2016;George&Park,2016),andinthisarticlewedrawonphilosophicaldistinctionstoresolvesomeoftheseproblems,atleastwhenitcomestomeasuringmeaning.Thisvolumeisconcernedwithmeasuringwell-being,oneelementofwhichismeaning(Ryff,1989;Su,Tay,&Diener,2014;VanderWeele,2017).Ourproposedmeasure,theComprehensiveMeasureofMeaning(orCMM)isprimarilyintendedtoincorporatetheresultsofphilosophicaldiscussionintoanestablishedframeworkcomingtopredominatethepsychologicalliteratureonmeasuringmeaning.Futureworkwillassessthepsychometricpropertiesofthemeasure.TheCMMprincipallymakesuseofawidevarietyofitems,ortheiradaptation,alreadyemployedinpreviousscalesbutcategorizestheseinwaysconsistentwithimportantdistinctionsderivedfromthephilosophicalliterature.Weproceedinthreeparts.Inthefirstsection,wediscussshortcomingsinpreviousmeasuresofmeaningdevisedbypsychologicalmethods.AreaderinterestedonlyintheCMMitselfcouldskiptothesecondpart.Inthatsecondpartweexplaintheemergingconsensusthatisforminginthepsychologicalliteraturearoundatripartiteconceptionofmeaningmeasurement,comprisingcoherence,significance,anddirection.InthethirdpartweexposittheCMM,showinghowitusesthisemergingconsensusbutintroducesnewandmorediscriminatingdistinctionswithinitinspiredbyphilosophicaldiscussionstomakeourinstrumentthemostcomprehensiveandtargetedyetdevised.


3

1. ExistingMeasuresofMeaningTheattempttomeasuremeaningfulnesshasitsownhistory,towhichwenowturn.The

earliestinstrumentscurrentlyregardedasrelevanttomeasuringmeaningwereinfactrestrictedinscopetoinvestigationsofpurpose,atargetwidelyregardedincontemporarypsychologicalliteratureandresearchasmerelyonecomponentofmeaningfulnessasawhole.MostfrequentlyusedinempiricalresearchamongtheseearlysurveysisthePurposeinLifetest(PIL)(Crumbaugh&Maholick,1964;Bronk,2014,p.22).ThePurposeinLifetest,whilewidelyusedandcriticallystudied(Crumbaugh,1968;Pinquart,2002,p.96),hasalsoreceivedsustainedandrepeatedcriticisms,ofteninthecontextofjustificationsfortheimplementationofnewmeasures.ManyoftheitemsonthePILseemtohavemoretodowithlifesatisfactionorenthusiasmlevelsthanpurposefulness(e.g.,“Mylifeis:empty,filledonlywithdespair”/“runningoverwithexcitingthings;”“Iamusually:bored”/“enthusiastic”).Steger,Frazier,Oishi,andKaler(2006)pointoutthatitemsliketheseaswellas“Ifeelreallygoodaboutmylife”“couldtapanynumberofconstructsasidefrommeaning,suchasmood”(p.81).AcomparableconcernisraisedbyDamon,Menon,andBronk(2003),whoalsoquestionthePIL’streatmentof“meaning”and“purpose”assynonyms(p.122),adistinctiontheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaning(CMM),likesomerecentothers(George&Park,2017),seekstoupholdbecausepurposeisnowviewedasjustonesubconstructbelongingtomeaning,purposebeingmoreend-directedandmeaningconcerninganunderstandingofthegreatercontext.LikewisethePIL’sinclusionofanitemconcerningtheattractivenessofsuicideseemsdistractingandatbesttangentialtotheissueofpurpose(Stegeretal.,2006,p.81).Yalom(1980)inparticularlodgedacriticismagainstthePIL(despiteitsuseinover50PhDdissertationsbythattime)tothiseffect:“Although,forexample,lifesatisfactionorconsiderationofsuicidemayberelatedtomeaninginlife,theyareevenmoreobviouslyrelatedtootherpsychologicalstates—mostnotablydepression”(p.456).YalomarguedthatthePILsufferedfrom“substantial,indeeddevastating”conceptualconfusion,lackofmethodologicalexplanation,andambiguityinitemterminology(pp.456-457),yethereluctantlyconcededthattheinstrumentwas(then)“theonlygameintown”(p.457).

EbersoleandQuiringclaimed(1989)tohaveconfirmedamodestsocialdesirabilitycorrelationwithPILscoresallegedinamuchearlierunpublishedstudyaswellassuspectedbyreviewersofthePIL(Domino,1972;Yalom,1980,p.456),whileremainingagnosticastowhetherthiscorrelationshouldberegardedasconfoundingtheresultsofthePIL(Ebersole&Quiring,p.306).Dyck(1987)raisedapotentialobjectiontothePILonthegroundsthatitwasfashionedwithtwosetsofcriteriainview—existentialrelevanceandpatientdiscriminability.Thesecriteriadepended,somewhatvaguely,onwhatCrumbaughandMaholickcalleda“backgroundintheliteratureofexistentialism,particularlyinlogotherapy,andaguessastowhattypeofmaterialwoulddiscriminatepatientsfromnonpatients”(1964,p.201),buttheirindependencefromoneanotherwasunknown(Dyck,1987,p.441).Moreover,DyckpointedoutthatthePILdoesnotconvincinglypickoutadistinctpathologybutratherseemstocorrelatesignificantlywithabsenceofdepression(p.442;Frazier,Oishi&Steger,2003,p.257).ThisconfusionisaparticularproblemforthepreceptsofthelogotherapeuticapproachrelieduponbythePIL’sauthors,accordingtowhichlackofpurposeisapathologyinitsownright


4

referredtoas“noogenicneurosis”(CrumbaughandMaholick,1964;Garfield,1973).AdditionalstudiesdesignedtoascertainwhetherdepressionandlowpurposeinlifeasmeasuredbythePILwereindistinguishablefromeachotherseemedtoindicatethatthetwoarenotfactoriallyindependent(Dyck,1986;Reker&Cousins,1979).Asearlyas1972,BraunquestionedthediscriminantvalidityofthePIL,andasrecentlyas2004,Schulenberg(2004)founda-.70correlationbetweenPILscoresandOutcomeQuestionnaireSymptomaticFunctioningsubscalescores(OQ-45.2SD),whicharemeanttoassesssymptomaticproblemsrelatingtoanxiety,depression,andsubstanceabuse.Insum,multiplestudiesfinding“different,multiplefactorstructures”haveleftunclear“theunderlyingstructureofthePIL,”whichtheauthorsneverspecifiedinthefirstplace(Frazieretal.,2003,p.258;seealsoChamberlain&Zika,1988;McGregor&Little,1998;Reker&Cousins,1979).Furthermore,whilethePILaspirestovalue-neutrality,qualitativeresearchundertakenbyC.A.Garfield(1973)causedhimtolodgeanobjectionagainstthePILthatitscoreconceptswereperceivedinradicallydifferentwaysbydifferentgroupswithinadiversesamplingoftest-takers.WhileitwasapparenttohimthatthePILmeasureddifferencesinperceivedpurpose,thewaytounderstandpurposewassodifferentindifferentdemographicsthattheresultswerenotentirelyreliable.“Culturalcontamination,”Garfieldcontended,washigh(p.403),leadinghimtoconcludethat“thereisreasonabledoubtastotheconsistencyofthemeaningsoftestitemsacrosssubculturalgroups”(p.405).Finally,sincethePILusesdifferentwordsorphrasesforanchorsacrosseachofitsdifferentitems,confusiononthepartofrespondentsseemsalmostunavoidable(Bronk,2014,p.25;Schulenberg,2004,p.480).Whetherthescaleanchors(whichvaryfromitemtoitem)weretrulybipolarhasalsobeenquestioned.Forinstance,thePILpositsthat“wantingtohave‘ninemorelivesjustlikethisone’”istheoppositeof“prefer[ring]nevertohavebeenborn,”anodddichotomy(Edwards,2007,p.49).Becauseweareconvincedthatpurposeisasubsetofmeaning,andfurtherpersuadedthatthePILsuffersfromsignificantproblemsdespiteitsapparentlygenerallyacceptablepsychometricproperties(Schulenberg,2004,pp.479-480;Bronk,2014,p.24)welargelyavoidedusingPILitemsfortheCMM.

Inthealmost40yearssinceYalomsharplycritiquedthePILnotonlyhavehisconcernsbeenechoed,butavarietyofinstrumentswithsimilaraimstothePILhavebeenintroduced.CrumbaughhimselfdevisedacompanioninstrumenttothePIL,theSeekingofNoeticGoalstest(SONG),whichwasmeanttoassessthesearchformeaningorperceivedabsenceofitratherthanpresenceofachievedmeaning.SONGscoreshoweverwerenotshowntobereliablyinverselyproportionaltoPILscores(Bronk,2014,p.27),andthetestwasaccusedofconceptualinconsistencyandcompoundingratherthanreducingtheproblemofoverlapbetweenthepathologicalnoogenicneurosisPILwasmeanttodiagnoseversusdepression(Dyck,1987,p.445).Finally,inthedecadessincetheintroductionoftheSONG,ithasbecomeapparentonthebasisofnumerousstudiesthattherelationshipbetweenperceivedpresenceofmeaningandperceivedabsenceisconsiderablymorecomplexthanCrumbaughtheorized(Schulenberg,2014,p.695).OfparticularimportancehereisHeintzelmanandKing’sconclusionthatiftheneedformeaningisafundamentaloneforhumanbeingsthenitwouldstandtoreasonthatsearchingformeaningwouldbecompatiblewithperceivedmeaningbeingalreadypresentinthesubject.“Ifmeaninginlifeisacentralhumanmotivation,”theysuggest,“theneveninthepresenceofmeaning,thedesireformeaningmightpersist”(Heintzelman&King,


5

2014b,p.570).DespitesomeearlyenthusiasmforthepotentialofcombiningthePILandSONGinresearchandclinicalsettings(Reker&Cousins,1979),seriousobjectionshavebeenraised,andtheSONGtesthasrarelybeenusedforresearch(Stegeretal.,2006;p.81);onlyoneofitsitemsappearsintheCMM.

G.T.Reker(Reker&Peacock,1981)claimedtohaveconfirmedthecomplementarynatureofthePILandSONG(p.264)andonthebasisofthejudgmentthattogetherthesetwoinstrumentsprovidedevidenceforamultidimensionallifeattitudeconstruct(consistinginfactof“10interpretableindependentdimensions”(p.264))soughttoconsolidatethetwomeasuresintoone“singlereliableandvalidinstrumentthatwouldmeasurethemultidimensionalnatureofattitudestowardlife”(p.264).TheresultwastheLifeAttitudeProfile(LAP),whichoriginallyencompassed56itemsandwaslaterslightlyabbreviatedtoastillarguablycumbersome48items(Bronk,pp.27-28;Reker&Peacock,1981;Erci,2008).TheLAPisthereforelikethePILandSONGinbeinginspiredbyFrankl’sconceptionofexistentialmeaning(Frankl,1984),anditaimedtoconsolidateratherthanchallengethisbasicinspiration.ThemostseriousdefectintheLAPissharedbyitspredecessors,namely,thattheseinstrumentsassessanumberofconstructsperhapsrelatedtomeaningbutnotperceivedmeaningassuch.“TheLAPwouldappeartohaveinheritedtheseproblemsalongwiththePILitemsitincorporated”(Frazieretal.,2003,p.260).TheLAPalsorepeatsSONGitemslike“Ifeeltheneedforadventureand‘newworldstoconquer’”and“Ihopeforsomethingexcitinginthefuture,”sentimentsthatseemmorelikeindicationsofpresentdissatisfactionorescapistimpulsesratherthanasearchformeaningperse.AsFrazieretal.(2003)pointout,“atheoreticalbasisforincorporatingdeathconcernswasnotexplicated,”(p.258)otherthanabreezydeclarationbytheinstrumentauthorsthat“deathconcernsareapartoflife”(Reker&Peacock,1981,p.264).TheLAPalsobetraysadistasteforboredom,featuringreverse-codeditemslike“Lifetomeseemsboringanduneventful.”Againaquestioncouldberaisedhereastowhetheranitemlikethistrulytargetsperceivedmeaning.HeintzelmanandKing(2014b)haveshownforexamplethat“naturalregularityandroutinesandpatterns”aswellas“mundanehabits”constituteanunder-appreciatedsourceofmeaninginmanypeople’slives(pp.157-158).Theserecentfindingscorrectalong-standingbiasinthephilosophicalandpsychologicalliteraturetowardexcitement,novelty,andstimulus,asifmeaningcanonlybefoundin“profoundevents”(p.158)or“highlyvivid”(p.157)momentsratherthanordinaryones.Manyearlymeasuresofmeaningshareinthisbias,disfavoringordinaryandroutineactivities,asifthesewereanimpedimentratherthananaidtomeaningfulliving.

TheLifeRegardIndexwascreatedinlargeparttoaddressconcernsthatthePIL(andbyimplicationtheLAP)istoovalue-loaded.Theauthorsspecifyinparticularthefactthat“thePILimpliesthatthemoresomeoneseeshimselfasresponsibleandthemoreheperceiveshislifetobeunderhisowncontrol,thegreaterhisdegreeofpositiveliferegard”(Battista&Almond,1973,p.411).Onthebasisofthisobservation,theyconcludethat“Althoughtheseareinterestinghypothesestobetested,itisnotclearapriorithattheexperienceofone’slifeasmeaningfulisrelatedtothesebeliefs”(p.411).WhileBattistaandAlmonddistinguishwhattheycallpositiveliferegardfromperceivedmeaningfulness,andtheyintendtomeasuretheformerratherthanthelatter,thepointthatthePILisbiasedtowardresponsibility,control,andautonomyasingredientsofperceivedmeaningorpurposeisoneworthconsidering.Eschewing


6

whattheycalled“philosophical”theoriesaboutthemeaningoflife,theauthorstriedtodevelopwhattheyviewasavalue-freeorrelativisticapproach,onethatwouldallowforgreaterlatitudeinrespondents’thinkingaboutwhatconstitutesmeaningfulliving.Infurtheranceofthatend,BattistaandAlmondendupjettisoningtheterm“meaningfullife”infavorof“positiveliferegard,”intheirwords“toavoidanyconfusionandconflictingdefinitions”(p.410).TheLRIthenismeanttobeagnosticaboutwhichsystemsofbeliefscanserveasapotentiallyfulfillingframeworkandopentothefactthatmanysuchsystemsarecapableofpotentiallyprovidingsuchfulfillment(p.414).

Debats,Drost,andHansen(1993)confirmedthattheseintentionsfortheLRIaresuccessfullyattainedintheirstudy(p.344),andtheydocumentotherstudieswithpositiveresultsforclinicaluseoftheLRI(p.338).ChamberlainandZika(1988),however,weremoreskepticalastowhetherthepurportedstructureoftheLRI,whichtheauthorsintendedtocomprisetwofactors,frameworkandfulfillment,actuallyholdsupundersecond-orderanalysis(p.595).RekerandWong(1988)alsoraisedconcernsthatpositivelife-regardisinfactnotreducibletomeaningbutisinsteadcloselyrelatedtoself-esteem(p.235)(“OtherpeopleseemtofeelbetterabouttheirlivesthanIdo”).Thisisaseriousconcern,giventhatpreviouslydevisedinstrumentshavealsobeenrepeatedlycriticizedforfailingtotargetaspecificconstructofmeaningfulnessratherthanpositiveaffectorsomeothercloselyrelatedconstructofasimilarsortlikeabsenceofdepression.Edwards(2007)tooregistersadrawbacktotheeffectthattheLRI’sitemsarerepetitive(p.52),andnoexplanationwasgivenastotheirderivationorselection(p.51).Suspicionsthatpositiveliferegardhasmoretodowithaffectorself-esteemratherthanmeaningperseremainthough.MorganandFarsides(2009)mentionthattheLRI’s“multi-dimensionalityatthesecond-orderlevelimpliesthatitmayalsotapcontentthatisperipheraltothemeaninginlifeconstruct”(p.199).InalargelyappreciativerevisitingoftheLRI,Debats(1998)neverthelessconcludedthat“severalstudiesshowedthatLRIscorescorrelatedmostsignificantlywithscoresonvariouswell-beingmeasures,”apointthatcountsinfavoroftheclinicalrelevanceofperceivedmeaning(p.256).However,predictably,thismeansthatthedirectionofcausalitycannotbedeterminedwithoutlongitudinalstudy(p.256).Furthermore,DebatsdrawsattentiontoevidencesuggestingthatsubjectsfromdifferentculturalbackgroundsscoredifferentlythanpredictedontheLRI,againimplyingapossiblebias(pp.255-256).

Intheendthough,weagreewithBattistaandAlmondthatempiricaltestingshoulddiscriminatebetweenformulaeofasingle,“philosophical”meaningoflifeandrelativistic,pluralconceptions.Whiletheypreferthelatter,andweagreethatthisisboundtobethepreferredapproachforsocialscienceresearch,theyconcedethat“thecontentionofphilosophicaltheoriesthatthereisa‘higher’or‘ultimate’meaningtolifeisespeciallychallengingtotherelativisticperspective,”andtheycallforfurthercriticalexaminationoftheassumptionsunderlyingbothpositions(p.425).Similarly,Debatsmakesthecrucialpointthat“theconceptualframeworkfromwhichtheLRIwasderivedviewspersonalmeaningasessentiallyasubjective,personalexperience”(p.256).Thiscouldstandinfactasacritiqueofallthemeasurescanvassedsofar.ContinuingwithDebats’simportantpoint,“thereisasyetnofinalresolutiontothedebateabouttherelativeweightthatobjective(moral)andsubjective(experiential)criteriashouldhaveindeterminingwhatessentiallyconstitutes‘personal


7

meaning’”(p.256).Itmaybeobjectedthatsocialscientificinvestigationcannotresolvethisdebate,andwetakethepoint.However,thequestionofobjectivevs.subjectivesourcesofmeaninginlifeisonethatisverymuchaliveincontemporaryphilosophicaldiscussions(Metz,2013;Wolf,2010,2015),andwethinkitcrucialtoinvestigateatleastpeople’sperceptionsoftheobjectivevalueoftheirendeavorsasapotentialsourceofperceivedmeaning.Ourmeasurecannotprovideevidenceforthestrengthofanyonephilosophicaltheoryofthemeaningoflifeorforthegenuineobjectivevalueofthesourcesofpeople’sperceivedmeaninginlife(nomeasurecould),butitdoesseektodocumentrespondents’perceptionthatsuchphilosophicaltheorieshaveaninfluenceontheirlivesandthattheiractivitiesareobjectivelyvaluable.WewillreturntotheimpactthatthisviewhadonourshapingoftheCMMinthefinalsectionofthispaper.

FurtherrefinementsthattheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaningemployswerederivedfrominsightsprovidedbyMorganandFarsides(2009)intheirdevelopmentoftheMeaningfulLifeMeasure(MLM).SpeakingofthePIL,LRI,andRyff’sPsychologicalWell-Beingscales,theywritethat“anadditionalproblemwithallthreescalesisthattheyvariouslyincludeitemswithmultiplecontentdomainsorpotentiallyconfoundingclauses(e.g.‘IhavesomegoalsoraimsthatwouldpersonallygivemeagreatdealofsatisfactionifIcouldaccomplishthem’;‘IfIshoulddietoday,Iwouldfeelthatlifehasbeenveryworthwhile’;‘IfeelgoodwhenIthinkofwhatI’vedoneinthepast,andwhatIhopetodointhefuture’)”(p.199)orsimilarlyfromRyff(1989)thenegativelywordeditem,“Ilivelifeonedayatatimeanddon’treallythinkaboutthefuture.”Wehavesoughtlikewisetoabstainfromusingitemswiththislevelofpotentiallyconfusingcomplexity.Similarly,wefollowMorganandFarsidesintheirobservationthatmanyitemsincommonuseassessasenseoflife’smeaningasbeingcontingentonsomeotherfactorlikeacceptanceofdeath,andsowehaveforegoneitemsthatseemtodependonsomeotherfactor.Thatbeingsaid,theMLMstilllargelydrawsonPILandLRIforitsitems,andthusoncemorepotentialproblemspersist.Besidesthereservationsalreadysurveyed,MacDonald,Wong,andGingras(2012)pointoutthattheMLMistoonarrowtobeacomprehensivemeasureofthemeaningconstruct,asitisfocusedalmostentirelyonpurpose.Aswewillsoonsee,purposeisindeedavitalcomponentofthemeaningconstruct,butitisonlyacomponentaccordingtotheemergingconsensusaroundmeasuringmeaningfulness.Someofthemorerecentscales(e.g.Krause,2004;Stegeretal.,2006;George&Park,2017),discussedfurtherbelow,arguablydoaccuratelytargetmeaningfulness.However,aswillbearguedinthethirdpartofthischapter,noneyetdoessowiththeprecision,finerdistinctions,andbreadththatwillbepossibleintheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaning(George&Park,2017,p.615).

2. EmergingConsensus

Inthelastseveralyears,broadagreementhasbeenachievedintheconceptualizationof

perceivedmeaning.Itisnowwidelyconsideredessentialtocapturecognitive,affective,andmotivationalaspectsofperceivedmeaning.Thefirstsubconstruct,sometimesreferredtoascoherence(ourpreferredterm),referstoacognitivegrasponthesenseorintelligibilityofone’sexistence,theintellectualperceptionthatone’slifehangstogetherorexpressesanintelligiblepatternornarrativethatmakessenseofexistence.Thesecondconstruct,whichwe


8

callsignificance,referstoafeltimportanceorvaluetoone’sexistenceand/oractivitiesandpursuits.Finally,thethirdsubconstructreferstotheperceivedinterestanddesirabilityofgoalsandobjectivesthatdirectchoiceandputplansandprojectsinmotion.Thisthirdsubconstructisoftenreferredtoas“purpose,”butforreasonswedescribebelowweprefer“direction.”ThesecomponentswerehammeredoutintheirpresentshapeatleastasearlyasRekerandWong’s1988article“AgingasanIndividualProcess.”Theretheauthorsdescribefirsta“cognitivecomponent[that]hastodowithmakingsenseofone’sexperiencesinlife;”seconda“motivationalcomponent...[that]referstothevaluesystemconstructedbyeachindividual[where]valuesareessentiallyguidesforliving,dictatingwhatgoalswepursueandhowweliveourlives;andthird,an“affectivecomponent”thatcapturesthe“feelingsofsatisfactionandfulfillment”thataccompany“therealizationofpersonalmeaning”(pp.220-221).Thisthreefoldschemabuildsonanearlierdefinitionofmeaningas“cognizanceoforder,coherenceandpurposeinone’sexistence,thepursuitandattainmentofworthwhilegoals,andanaccompanyingsenseoffulfillment”(p.357;Reker&Wong,1988,p.221).

HicksandKing(2009)notethatmotivationalandcognitivecomponentshavebeentakenintoaccountbypreviouspsychologicaldefinitionsofmeaninginlife.Expandingonthisbaseandmovinginthedirectionofatripartiteunderstandingofmeaning,theauthorsofferwhattheycallan“expansiveconceptualdefinition:‘Livesmaybeexperiencedasmeaningfulwhentheyarefelttohavesignificancebeyondthetrivialormomentary,tohavepurpose,ortohaveacoherencethattranscendschaos’”(p.641).Hereagainwefindabroadconceptualdefinitionthatseekstoaccountforanaffectivecomponenttodowithfeltsignificance,amotivationalsenseofpurpose,andacognitivegrasponcoherence.Concentratingonwhattheytaketohavebeentheleastexploredofthesethreesubconstructs,affectivesignificance,theyshowhowperceptionsofmeaningaredistinguishablefrompositiveaffectorhappiness(p.646),withwhichtheaffectivesubconstructofmeaningmightotherwisebeconfused.

Steger(2012a)bycontrastfocusesattentiononcognitivecoherenceandmotivationalpurpose,speakingoftheformerasasourceforgeneratingthelatter,adefensibleinterpretationthathassomesupportintheliterature(seeWong,1998,p.405,fig.19.1).OnSteger’sanalysis,thecognitivecomponentofmeaninggroundsusinourlifeexperiences,coalescingmemoriesintoacontinuousnarrative,articulatingtheoriesabouthowtheworldaroundusoperates,andtestingtheoriesabouthowweareperceivedbyothers.Thecognitivecomponentthusfacilitatesintegratingnewexperiencesintoawebofextantassociations,increasingasenseofintegrationandunifiedcoherenceacrosstheselfanditswide-rangingexperiences.Thiscognitivebasisprovidesafoundationforassigningvaluetodesirablepursuitsandaspirations,whichinturngiverisetogoalsandplanstoaccomplishinserviceoflargeraims.Inthiswayheexplainshowthemeaningconstructdiffersfromrelatedphenomena.Byunitingthecognitiveandmotivationaldomains,meaningcontrolsanumberofotherimportantsubsidiaryprocessesofassigningvalueandshapingdecision-making(p.166).Steger’sworkthoroughlydocumentsthemanypositivecorrelationsbetweenhighmeaninginlifeandvariousothermarkersofpsychologicalandsociologicalwell-being(pp.167-175).

HeintzelmanandKing(2014b)exploreinsomedepththecognitivecomponent,buttheyaffirmthethreefolddistinctionascomprehensiveandclearaswellasbeingincreasinglyemployedintheliterature.Thethreecommonthemestheyidentifyare“purpose(i.e.,goal


9

direction),significance(i.e.,mattering),andcoherence(i.e.,thepresenceofreliableconnections)”(p.154).CitingtheearlierdefinitionofferedbySteger(2012a),theyhighlightwithunderliningandparentheticalitalicizedinsertionstheterminologyhechoosesaspickingoutthesamethreethemestheyargueformthecoreofanincreasinglypopularexhaustiveunderstandingofmeaning:“Meaningisthewebofconnections,understandings,andinterpretationsthathelpuscomprehendourexperience(coherence)andformulateplansdirectingourenergiestotheachievementofourdesiredfuture(purpose).Meaningprovidesuswiththesensethatourlivesmatter(significance),thattheymakesense(coherence),andthattheyaremorethanthesumofourseconds,days,andyears(significance)”(p.154,quotedfromSteger,2012a,p.165).

MartelaandSteger(2016)undertakeasimilaractofeditorializingwhentheyquotefromKing,Hicks,KrullandDelGaiso(2006),andaddnumeralstopickoutwhattheytaketobetheimplicittripartitestructureofKingetal.’sdefinition:“Livesmaybeexperiencedasmeaningfulwhen[1]theyarefelttohavesignificancebeyondthetrivialormomentary,[2]tohavepurpose,or[3]tohaveacoherencethattranscendschaos”(p.531,quotedfromKingetal.,2006,p.180).Theonlyfurthermodificationthatmightbedesirableinthisparticularquoteisthattheword“or”beforethenumeral“3”mightbechangedto“and,”agrammaticalmovethatwouldmorenearlyreflectthecurrentthinkingonmeaningasathreefoldstructure.InMartelaandSteger’sjudgment,“Wethusseemtobemovingtowardunderstandingmeaninginlifeashavingthreefacets:one’slifehavingvalueandsignificance,havingabroaderpurposeinlife,andone’slifebeingcoherentandmakingsense”(p.531).

King,Heintzelman,andWard(2016)alsorecapitulatetheKing,Hicks,Krull,andDeGaisodefinitionandidentifytherein

threecentralcomponentsofmeaning[that]arehighlightedinthisdefinitionandthroughouttheliteratureonthistopic:purpose,significance,andcoherence.Purposereferstohavinggoalsanddirectioninlife.Significanceentailsthedegreetowhichapersonbelieveshisorherlifehasvalue,worth,andimportance.Coherence,characterizedbysomemodicumofpredictabilityandroutine,allowslifetomakessensetothepersonlivingit.(p.212)Finally,GeorgeandPark(2016)alsoconcludethat“recently,atripartiteviewofMIL

[meaninginlife]ascomposedofthreedistinctsubconstructs—comprehension,purpose,andmattering—hasbeengainingmomentum”(p.205).GeorgeandParkalsoaccountforwhattheytaketobetheadvantagesofthisgrowingmomentumbehindaconsensusview.First,theyareoptimisticthatthisagreementwillfurnishfurthermuch-neededconceptualclarityinresearchintomeaninginlife(p.205),adevelopmenthailedasprogressbyMartelaandSteger(2016)aswell(p.531).GeorgeandPark(2016)alsoseeanadvantagetothetripartiteschemainasmuchastheytakeitthiswillfacilitateintegrationofresearchonmeaninginlifeintoalargerbodyofresearchonmeaningingeneral,liketheworkthatisbeingdoneonmeaning-makingforinstance(pp.205,206).Theirdefinitionofmeaninginlifeparallelstoalargeextenttheformulaswehavealreadyconsidered.Forthemmeaninginlifecanbeunderstoodas“theextenttowhichone’slifeisexperiencedasmakingsense,asbeingdirectedandmotivatedbyvaluedgoals,andasmatteringintheworld”(p.206,emphasisoriginal).Atthesametimeastheywittinglycorroborateabasicstructurecommontoothercurrentresearchers,theycallfor


10

futureworktobedoneonestablishingtherelationshipsbetweenthethreesubconstructsandhowtheseinturnrelatetobroaderquestionsofmeaning(p.206).MartelaandSteger(2016)agreethatthereismoreworkyettobedoneonthisfront.Theyurgethat“eventhoughscholarshavepointedtowardthisdistinction,thusfarthecharacteristicsofanddifferencesbetweenthesethreefacetsofmeaninghavenotbeenproperlyfleshedout,”(p.531)andfurthermore,“noresearchuptodatehasproperlyexaminedallthreeproposedfacetsofmeaninginlifesimultaneously”(p.532).GeorgeandPark(2014)hypothesizethatthethreedomainscouldverywellinteract,suchthatlowlevelsinonemightbereflectedintheothersandhighlevelswouldlikelybeseenacrosstheboard(p.214).

Thephilosophicalliteraturealsoprovidesreasonstodrawfurtherrelevantdistinctionswithinthemeaningconstruct.AleadingexpertlikeMetz(2013)clarifiesatthebeginningofhismagnumopusthatdespitephilosophy’sostensibleinterestin“themeaningoflife”hisworkisnotdedicatedtothistopic.Somephilosophers,headmits,“mightalsoorinsteadbeinterestedinconsiderationsofwhethertheuniversehasameaningorofwhetherthehumanspeciesdoes.However,Idonotaddressthese‘holist’or‘cosmic’questionsinthisbook”(p.3).Instead,hepursuesthe“individualistconstrual,”accordingtowhichthephilosopherisconcernedonlytoclarify“how,ifatall,theexistenceofindividualhumanbeingscanbesignificant”(p.3).Onthisemphasis,thetitleofhisbook,MeaninginLife,couldjustaseasilyhavebeenrenderedasMeaninginaLife.Whatthisimportantexampleprovesisthatwhilesomepsychologistsespeciallywriteaboutglobalcoherenceasifitwereexclusivelytheprovinceofphilosophy,evensignificantphilosophersofmeaninginlifedisavowglobalcoherenceasasubjectforresearch.Notallhoweverdoso.Anotherleadingtheorist,Seachris(2013),holdstheviewthatinquiryintothemeaningoflifeisrationalandwarranted.SeachrisandMetzthoughagreethatthereisanimportantdifferencehere.Againterminologyvaries,butthepointstands.Thepointisthatevenifthereissubstantivedivergenceininterestamongphilosophersastowhichsetofquestionsismostinterestingorimportantthereisunanimousagreementthatthereisarelevantdistinctionhereworthpreserving,andtheCMMseekstodojustthatbydistinguishingbetweenaglobalandindividuallevelofperceivedmeaningascoherence.Similarterminologicalissuesofcourseariseinthepsychologyliterature.Haidt(2006),forexample,contrastsquestionsaboutthe“purposeoflife,”whichheconsidersonagrandcosmicscale,withquestionsabout“purposewithinlife,”whichpertaintowhatoneshoulddotohaveafulfillingandmeaningfullife.Hearguesthetwomayberelated,butonemaybeabletoanswerthelatterwithouthavinganswerstotheformer.Theterminology“meaningoflife”and“meaninginlife”aresomewhatambiguousandsoweshallproceedherewiththeuseofthetermscoherence,significance,andpurpose/direction,whicharemorecommonlyemployedinthewritingsonthistripartiteconsensus.

Consequentuponthisgrowingrealizationthatmeaningisbestthoughtofasstructuredaroundthesethreedomainshasbeenanimmediaterecognitionthatpriormeasuresofmeaninginlifewerenotadequate.MartelaandSteger(2016),speakingofthethreedomainsofmeaninginlife,registeraconcernthat“empiricalresearchhasthusfarproceededwithoutdifferentiatingthemfromeachother”(p.533).Withoutthesedistinctionsbeingcarefullydrawn,itemsfrommeasuresliketheMeaninginLifeQuestionnaire,LifeAttitudeProfile,SenseofCoherenceScale,andPurposeinLifetesttapintocoherenceandpurposeforexample,but


11

thesedistinctsubconstructsareambiguouslyruntogetherbysummingscores,andsomemeasurescompoundtheambiguityfurtherbypackinginadditionaldomainstothesethreethatdonothavenearlythesamecrediblegroundsforinclusionintheconstructofmeaning(p.533).InasimilarspiritGeorgeandPark(2016)praisethetripartiteschemaforavoidingthepitfallofcombining“threepotentiallydistinctdimensionsintoasingular,morediffuseconcept”(p.614)whilecondemningpreviousmeasuresforderivingasingle,unidimensionalscore,therebyaggregatingdifferentdomainsandprecludingexaminationofhoweachsubconstructinteractswithrelevantvariables,yieldingsimplisticanddistortedconclusions(pp.614-615).Intheirjudgment,evenexistingmeasuresliketheLifeRegardIndex,LifeAttitudeProfile,andMeaningfulLifeMeasurethathavesubscalesroughlycorrespondingtooneormoreofthethreeagreed-upondomainsofmeaningstilldonotspecificallytargetasinglesubconstructandoftenhaveitemsthatconflatethesubconstructs(p.615;seealsoGeorge&Park,2016,pp.215-216).3. IntroducingtheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaning Withincreasedconceptualclarityitisnowpossibletodeviseameasurethatmoresuccessfullycaptureskeyaspectsofmeaning.AsKingetal.(2016)pointout,althoughthetripartitedefinition,orindeedanydefinition“maynotcaptureeverypossiblenuanceofmeaninginlife,itisanapproximationthatallowsustoviewthisexperiencethroughthelensofscience.Itisaworkableconceptualdefinitionthatpermitsmeasurement”(p.212).Sofaronlyonemeasureofmeaninghasbeendevisedindirectresponsetothetripartiteschema,theMultidimensionalExistentialMeaningScale(MEMS),introducedbyGeorgeandPark(2017).IndevisingtheComprehensiveMeaningMeasure(CMM),wefoundthemostcommongroundwithGeorgeandPark’sMEMS,appreciatedalltheitemstheyuse,andhavenoseriousobjectiontoitoritsuseinempiricalresearch.However,weareconvincedthatmeasuresofmeaningneedfurtherrefinementalonglinesderivedfromphilosophicalargumentandfromhintswithintheexistingpsychologicalliteraturethathavenotbeentakenintoaccountbyanypriormeasure.TheprimarygoalofdesigningtheCMMwastoincorporateyetfurtherdistinctionswithinthetripartitedivision,sowebrokedowneachsubconstructintofurthersubdivisionsinordertocapturestillmorenuanceandspecificityinthewayrespondentsareaskedtothinkabouttheirexperienceofcoherence,significance,anddirection(ourpreferredterminologyforthethreemajorsubconstructs).SelectionofItems IndevisingtheCMMwewerestronglycommittedtousingexistingitemsifatallpossible.WecompiledamasterlistofitemsfromthePurposeinLifetest(Crumbaugh&Maholick,1964),theSettingofNoeticGoalstest(Crumbaugh,1977),theLifeAttitudeProfile-Revised(Erci,2008),theLifeRegardIndex(Debats,vanderLubbe,&Wezeman,1993),the


12

SenseofPurposesInventory-Revised(Sharma,2015),theSatisfactionWithLifeScale(Pavot&Diener,2009),theSenseofCoherenceScale(Antonovsky,1993),CarolRyff’sPurposeinLifeSubscale(Ryff,1989),theMeaningfulLifeMeasure(Morgan&Farsides,2009),thePersonalMeaningProfile(MacDonald,Wong,&Gingras,2012),NealKrause’sMeaninginLifeSubscale(Krause,2004),theSpiritualMeaningScale(Mascaro,Rosen,&Morey,2004),theMeaninginLifeQuestionnaire(Stegeretal.,2006),theMultidimensionalExistentialMeaningScale(George&Park,2017),theLifePurposeQuestionnaire(Hutzell,1989),thePurposeinLifeScale(Robbins&Francis,2000),theLogo-Test(Thege,Martos,Bachner&Kushnir,2010),theSelf-TranscendenceScale(Haugan,Rannestad,Garasen,Hammervold,&Espnes,2011),theLifeEvaluationQuestionnaire(Salmon,Manzi,&Valori,1996),theMeaninginLifeScale(Jim,Purnell,Richardson,Golden-Kreutz,&Andersen,2006),theFunctionalAssessmentofChronicIllnessTherapy-SpiritualWell-BeingScale(Peterman,Fitchett,Brady,Hernandez,&Cella,2002),theMeaninginSufferingTest(Starck,1985),theRevisedYouthPurposeSurvey(Bronk&Finch,2010),andtheInventoryofPositivePsychologicalAttitudes(Kass,Friedman,Leserman,Caudill,Zuttermeister,&Benson,1991).Altogetheralmost700itemswerecompiled,manyofwhichappearedonmorethanonemeasure. Theitemswerethensortedbykeyword,withaviewtoidentifyingwhatcommonthemesweremostprevalent.Asexpected,itemsreferringtomeaning,purpose,significance,goals,coherence,control,satisfaction,understanding,accomplishment,worthwhileness,andfulfillmentaccountedforasizeableportionoftheitems.Idiosyncraticitemsoroutliers(“Itakeinitiative;”“Lifehastreatedmefairly;”“IfIcouldchoose,Iwouldprefernevertohavebeenborn”)receivedlessattentionwhenitcametimetoselectwhichtokeep.

Webegantoexcludeitemsthatwejudgedirrelevanttomeaningperseoritsthreeconstitutivesubconstructs.Asoutlinedinourcriticismsofpreviousmeasuresinthefirstsectionofthispaperabove,wediscounteditemsthathadtodowithconfidenceinthefaceofdeath,aversiontosuicide,orwillingnesstohypotheticallylivethesamelifeoveragain.Similarlyweexcludeditemsthatappealedtomoodorpositiveaffect,manyofwhichprivilegedexuberance,enthusiasm,orpassion,allfeelingsthatseemtousdistinctfromtheconstructofmeaning.Forsimilarreasonsandagaininlightofrecentevidencealludedtoabove,wedidnotuseitemsthatprivilegednovelty,difference,variety,orexcitementandthosethatdowngradedboredom,routine,orhabit.Manyitemsprizedresponsibility,consistency,stability,andcontrol,andmanyalsoemphasizedtheimportanceofaltruism;allsuchitemsweresetasideasagainbeingoffthesubject.WeagreewithMorganandFarsides(2009)that“certainitemsappeartomeasurespecificbeliefsandvalue-outlookssuchasasenseofresponsibility,control,andproductivity”(p.199)andthatthisisreasonenoughtorejectthem.Wealsojudgeditemsthatplaceahighpriorityonautonomyorbeinginstrictcontrolasculturallycontextualandnotimmediatelyrelevant.Thesamewasthecaseforitemsthatstressedanorientationtowardthefutureandthosethatcalledforrespondentstorejectperceivedmaltreatmentatthehandsofothers,perceivedsubjectiontofateorbadfortune,orperceivedunfairness,aimlessness,flightiness,restlessness,indifference,orunrealizedpotential.Theseitemsmaytestpositiveandhealthyattitudes,andthoseattitudesmaybeconducivetomeaning,buttheyarenotintrinsicallyrelatedtomeaningfulnessperse.


13

Avowedlyreligiouscontentoritemsaskingrespondentstoreflectonsectariantheologicalideasorprincipleswerediscardedasbeingtooparticularandculturallybound.Negativelycodeditemswealsodidnotemployonproceduralgroundsastheycangiverisetoerrorsinresponses,andmoreoverthepositiveinterpretationofthenegationofthesenegativelywordeditemsisoftenambiguous(Weijters&Baumgartner,2012;Baumgartner,Weijters,&Pieters,2018).FurtherDistinctionsfromthePhilosophicalLiterature

Ofthosethatremained,itemswerethenchosenfortheirfitnessincapturingthenuanceddomainsofmeaningwesoughttoassess,shapedbydistinctionsinthephilosophicalliteraturethatweoutlinebelow.Withinthecognitivecoherencesubconstruct(1.),wemakeadistinctionbetweenglobal(1.A.)andindividual(1.B.)coherence.Theformer(1.A.)ishavingacomprehensivetheoryoraccountofthemeaningoflifeasawhole,atauniversalscale,andpertainingtohumankindingeneral.Wewouldexpectpersonstoscorehighhereiftheyhaveanexpansivetheoreticalview(moreorlessworkedoutindetail)astothemeaningofhumanexistenceassuch.Thelatter(1.B.)involveshavinganunderstandingofwhooneis,whatonevalues,andhowthisrelatestoone’sunderstandingoftheworld.Inthephilosophicalliterature,thisdistinctionissometimesreferredtoas“meaningoflife”(1.A.),whichmapsontowhatwearecallingglobalcoherence,versus“meaningofmylife”(1.B.),orwhatwearecallingindividualcoherence. Forexample,Seachrisseparatesquestionsdirectedtoward“thecosmicorglobaldimensionofthequestionoflife’smeaning,wherebysomesortofexplanation(perhapsevennarrativeexplanation)issoughtthatwillrendertheuniverseandourliveswithinitintelligible”and“theindividualistorlocaldimensionofthemeaning-of-lifequestion”(p.4).Withregardtothecontentofthecoherenceconstruct,wedoagreewithMartelaandSteger(2016,p.532)andDebatsetal.(1995,p.359)inaffirmingthatadefinitiveanswertothemeaningoflifeisoutofthereachofscientificmethodology.Nomeasurecanadjudicateananswerastothemeaningoflife,butwhatweareassessingiswhetherrespondentshavesuchananswerintheirownminds(globalcoherence)andalsowhetherthereisamorepersonal-levelconvictionthattheirownliveshavemeaning(individualcoherence).InthisrespecttheCMMissomewhatmoreambitiousthanothermeasures.ThePersonalMeaningProfileforexampleconstrainsitselfonlytoquestionsaboutmeaninginlife,bydesign,thoughitsauthorsrecognizethatthereisadistinctionhere:“thePersonalMeaningProfile(PMP)representsacomprehensiveassessmentofone’smeaninginliferatherthanaglobalsubjectiveassessmentoflifeasmeaningful”(MacDonaldetal.,2012,p.359).TheCMMdiffersfromthePMPthereforeinincludingathree-itemgaugeofwhetherrespondentsdoinfacthave“aglobalsubjectiveassessmentoflifeasmeaningful”aswellasathree-itemgaugeofperceivedmeaningfulnessattheindividual(orwhatthePMPcalls“personal”)level.

InthisrespecttheCMMaimstoaccomplishapurposesimilartothatenvisionedbythecreatorsoftheSpiritualMeaningScale(Mascaroetal.,2004).TheysoughttocomplementexistingmeasuresliketheLifeRegardIndexandthePersonalMeaningProfilewithameasurethatwouldtargetwhattheycallspiritualmeaningasopposedtopersonalandimplicitmeaning


14

(p.846).“Positiveliferegard,”astheyrightlynote,“involvesviewingone’sindividuallife,butnotnecessarilylifeitself,ashavingmeaning”(p.847).Theformer,meaninginlife,orwhatYalomcalled“terrestrialmeaning”isdistinctfromwhathecalled“cosmic”meaningorthemeaningoflife,andtheCMMlookstoupholdthisdistinction.ThecreatorsoftheSpiritualMeaningScalealsourgepreservationofthisdistinction.Theywrite,“Weconceiveofspiritualmeaningasacapital‘M’Meaningaroundwhichonecanformasmall‘m,’personalmeaning”(p.847).Thisexpresseswellthedistinctionwearemakingbetweenglobalandindividualcoherence.ThisaspectoftheCMM’sdesignisdirectlyresponsivetoachallengeforfutureresearchlaidoutbyKingetal.(2016)whoobservethatwhile“relationsamongandpotentialdistinctivenessofthesethreefactsofmeaningremainanimportantareaforresearch,psychometricstudieshavesuggestedthatthesefacetsofmeaninginlifemayoccupyalowerlevelinahierarchy,with‘globalmeaning’atthetop”(p.212).

Astothesubconstructconcernedwithsignificance(2.),theCMMdistinguishesbetweensubjectivesignificance(2.A.)andobjectivesignificance(2.B.).Thisdistinctionreflectsamajordebateinthephilosophicalliterature,onetowhichwehopeempiricalresearchwiththeCMMwillcontribute.AtaxonomyproposedanddevelopedbyMetz(2002)hasbecomewidelyaccepted.Accordingtothisclassification,theoriesofmeaninginlifecanbegroupedbywhethertheyaresubjectivistorobjectivistinorientation.Subjectivisttheoriesarethosethatcontendthatwhatmakesalifemeaningfuldependslargelyonthesubjectofthatlifeandthefavorableattitudetheybeartowardtheirlifeanditsperceivedvalueordesirability.Onthemostextremesubjectivistunderstanding,someonewhocollectedmatchboxesandintrinsicallyfoundthismeaningfulcouldnotbecontradictedifthepersongenuinelyfeltitwereameaningfulactivity.Arangeofpossibleattitudesareappealedtobydifferentsubjectivists,butwhatisessentialtothepositionisthatitsufficesforalifetobemeaningfulthattheonelivingthatlifebearanapprovingdispositiontowardit(Metz,2002,pp.792-793).

Objectivists,bycontrast,insistthatalifebeingmeaningfuldependsessentiallyonsomepositivequalityofthatlife,independentlyofwhatapersonlivingsuchalifemightormightnotthinkorbelieveorfeelaboutit.Underthemostextremeobjectivistunderstanding,apediatricianprovidingcareforchildrenwhoengagedintheworkonlyformoneyandfoundnointrinsicinterestorvalueinitwouldstillbedoingmeaningfulwork,independentoftheirattitudetowardthework.Againarangeofpossibleformsofobjectivevaluearereferredtobydifferentobjectivistsasbeingtheessentialcharacteristicsthatameaningfullifemustbear,butobjectivistpositionsareunitedbytheirrequirementthatobjectivefeaturesofalifearewhatmakesthatlifemeaningfulandnolifeismeaningfulmerelyinvirtueofanypositivementalorientationthatapersonmighthavetowardit(p.796;seealsoSeachris,2013,pp.11-13).Itemstheninthesignificancesubconstructaredesignedtotestrespondents’relianceoneithersubjectiveorobjectivebasesfortheperceivedmeaningfulnessoftheirlives.Whereassubjectivesignificance(2.A.)correspondstosubjectivelyfindingone’sactivitiesworthwhile,objectivesignificance(2.B.)correspondstohavingachievements,contributions,oractivitiesthatareobjectivelyvaluableor(dependingonone’stheoryofvalue)perhapsatleastperceivedasvaluablebytheconsensusofothersinarelevantcommunityofjudges(BrogaardandSmith,2005;Darwall,1983).Similartothediscussionofglobalcoherence,self-reportofobjectivesignificanceofcoursedoesnot,andcannot,establishtheexistenceofobjectivevalues.Rather


15

theitemscapturetheextenttowhichtheindividualrespondinghastheperceptionthatthereisobjectivesignificanceintheiractivitiesandcontributions.

Sometheoriesofmeaninginlife,called“hybrid”bysome(Evers&vanSmeden,2016),thoughweprefertheterm“integrated,”maintainthatmeaninginlifedependsonasuitableconcatenationofsubjectiveattitudeswithobjectivevalues.ThemostimportantspokespersonforsuchaviewisWolf(2010,2015),whoinoneofherpithierformulationsofherinfluentialviewwrites,“Ameaningfullifemustsatisfytwocriteria,suitablylinked.First,theremustbeactiveengagement,andsecond,itmustbeengagementin(orwith)projectsofworth.Alifeismeaninglessifitlacksactiveengagementwithanything.Apersonwhoisboredoralienatedfrommostofwhatshespendsherlifedoingisonewhoselifecanbesaidtolackmeaning.Notethatshemayinfactbeperformingfunctionsofworth…Atthesametime,someonewhoisactivelyengagedmayalsoliveameaninglesslife,iftheobjectsofherinvolvementareutterlyworthless”(Wolf,2015,pp.111-112).Accordingtointegratedtheories,partofwhatmakesmeaningfulnessadistinctiveformofvalueisthatitdependsonanappropriatelinkingofbothsubjectiveandobjectiveaspectsoflife(Wolf,2010).Thistheory,whileintuitivelyappealingandtheoreticallypromising,posesadilemmaforempiricalassessment.Itischallengingtoidentifyexistingitemsthatspecificallytapintoperceptionsofmeaningfulnessthatrequirearelationshipofsubjectiveapprovalcorrespondingtoobjectivevalue.SeveralcandidateitemsfromexistingscalesthatmostcloselycorrespondtothishybridorintegratedapproachareproposedintheAppendix.TheCMMkeepstheobjectiveandsubjectiveitemsseparate.Thisallowsthepossibilityofassessingtheextentofalignmentbetweensubjectiveandobjectivebasesofperceivedmeaning.Italsoallowsforassessingcorrelationwiththeproposedhybrid/integrateditemstoassess,tosomeextent,whethertherearereasonsforbelievingthatatleastsomerespondentswhoscorehighonbothsubjectiveandobjectivesignificancemaythinkoftheirlivesasmeaningfulbecausetheytakeitthatsuitablylinkedsubjectiveandobjectivereasonsarebothavailabletothem.

Finally,inthethirdmotivationalsubconstructhavingtodowithpurposeordirection(3.)wedistinguishbetweenthreepossiblelevelsofgoal-direction:mission(3.A.),purposes(3.B.),andgoals(3.C.).Whereasgoals(3.C.)aregenerallyunderstoodasessentiallyanythingonedesirestoaccomplish,purposes(3.B.),incontrast,arelargerlifeaimsthatgenerateandorganizegoals(McKnight&Kashdan,2009).Thehighestlevelofthehierarchy,mission(3.A.),iseffectivelyaunifiedunderstandingofwhatone’slifeshouldbethatgeneratesandguidesallofone’sactivities,goals,andpurposesandadjudicatesbetweenthemwhentheycomeintoconflict.Because,underthisconceptualscheme,“purposes”isitselfthemiddlelevelofthehierarchy,weprefertorefertothisentirebroaderdomainas“direction.”

Thereiswideagreementnowintheliteraturethatpurposeshouldbedistinguishedfrommeaning(thetwowerepreviouslyconflated)(Martela&Steger,2016,pp.531,534;George&Park,2013,p.365;Steger,2012b,p.382)andthattheformerisactuallybestconceivedasacomponentofthelatter.YettheCMMgoesfartherthatthisindistinguishingbetweenthescopeofourvariouspurposes,whichrangefromdailyandsmallobjectivestopotentiallyoneunifyingvisionofwhatone’slifeasawholeshouldbeoraccomplish,acallingorvocationormission.Conceivingofhumanactionasasetofnested,purposivegoalsisatleastasoldasAristotle.Theologicalperspectivesoftenfocusonthehighestlevelofthishierarchy—


16

vocation,calling,ormission(Wingren,1957;JohnPaulII,1981)—anddistinguishitfromgoalsandpurposes.Currentsocialscienceresearchalsosupportsthisbasicoutlook.McKnightandKashdan(2009)argueforadistinctionbetweengoalsaspreciseandproximate,while“purposeprovidesabroadermotivationalcomponentthatstimulatesgoalsandinfluencesbehavior”(p.243).Theyalsorecognizethatapersonmayhavemultiplepurposesindifferentareasoflife(p.244),arealitythatCMMaccommodatesinthepurposes(3.B.)items.Atthesametime,theCMMalsoacknowledgesthepossibilitythatpeoplethinkoftheirlivesasmeaningfultotheextentthattheyareevenmorefullyintegratedaroundonesinglesenseofpersonalmissionorcalling,asensethatwouldunifyandsynthesizealltheirmajorprojectsandthedailytasksundertakeninthefurtherancethereof(Emmons,1999;Rudd,2012).

Evensometheoristswhoareskepticaloftherebeingasingleunifyingstoryofanyparticularindividual’slifeadmitthatthewayidentitygenerallytendsistoward“amoreorlessunifyingandpurpose-givingwhole”(McAdams,p.116).McAdamsinsists“itwouldcertainlybewrongtomaintainthatsuchintegrationinidentityisfullyandunproblematicallycapturedinonelargestoryforeachlife”(pp.116-117),butagainweareinterestednotintherealityoftheself’ssituationbutinpeople’sperceptionofthemeaningfulnessoftheirlives.TheCMMthereforeassessestheextenttowhichrespondents’senseofmeaningisboundupwiththeimpressionthattheyarecalledtoamajorunifyinglifegoal.SoSteger(2012a)foronerecognizes“thevalueoffindinganoverarchinggoalormissiontowhichone’slifecanbededicated”(p.166)suchthatitmeritsinclusioninempiricalmeasuresliketheCMM.InhisworkwithMartela,Stegerreaffirmstheintelligibilityofdistinguishinga“short-termandperhapsevenmundane”senseofpurposeand“amorebroadandover-archinglevel”(Martela&Steger,2016,p.534).Similarly,Mascaroetal.(2004)showthatspiritualmeaningoftheglobalsortcanlinktoasenseof“calling,oroffeelingcalledbyLife(orTao,God,Being,orwhateverForceitisinwhichonebelievesoneselftobeaparticipant)toproceedinacertaindirection”(p.847).Finally,GeorgeandPark(2016)musterawealthofevidenceinsupportofahierarchicalviewofgoalsaccordingtowhich“abstracthigh-levelgoalsgiverisetomoreconcretegoalsbelowthem,whichgiverisetoevenmoreconcretegoalsbelowthem”(p.211).Thehigher-levelgoalsaretheonesthatlieclosesttotheheartofouridentityandgeneratethemundaneactivitiesthatweundertakeinpursuitofourhighestpriorities.Tousetheirexample,“theabstractgoalofbeingagoodparentgivesrisetothegoalofprovidingthechildagoodeducation,whichinturngivesrisetothemoreconcretegoalofdrivingthechildtoschool”(p.211).ThisthreefoldhierarchyispreciselywhattheCMMtriestocapture.

TheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaning

TheCMMincludesthreeitemsineachofthesevensubdomainsdescribedabove.In

selectingthreeitemswithineachsubdomain,anattemptwasmadetoselectitemsthathadsomebreadthandweredistinctfromoneanothersoastoattempttoatleastcrudelycapturetheconceptualizationofeachsubdomainlaidoutabove.Asnotedabove,existingitemswereusedwheneverpossibleasmanyofthesehadalreadybeensubjectedtovariousdegreesofcognitivetesting.Occasionally,whennecessary,modificationstoexistingitemsweremade


17

whentherewereambiguitiesintheitemsorwhensuitableitemsforthespecificsubdomainswerenotfound.

Theproposed21itemsacrossthe7subdomainsareasfollows.Referencestothearticlesandscalesfromwhichtheitemsweredrawnaregiveninthefootnotesalongwithanindicationofthemodificationofanyitem,whenapplicable.

1. Coherence

A. Globali. Ihaveaclearunderstandingoftheultimatemeaningoflife.iii. Themeaningoflifeintheworldaroundusisevidenttome[modified].iiiii. Ihaveaframeworkthatallowsmetounderstandormakesenseof

humanlife[modified].iiiB. Individual

i. Iunderstandmylife’smeaning.ivii. Icanmakesenseofthethingsthathappeninmylife.viii. IhaveaphilosophyoflifethathelpsmeunderstandwhoIam.vi

2. Significance

A. Subjectivei. IamlivingthekindofmeaningfullifeIwanttolive[modified].viiii. Livingisdeeplyfulfilling.viiiiii. IfeellikeIhavefoundareallysignificantmeaninginmylife.ix

B. Objective

i. ThethingsIdoareimportanttootherpeople[modified].xii. Ihaveaccomplishedmuchinlifeasawhole[modified].xiiii. Imakeasignificantcontributiontosociety.xii

3. Direction

A. Missioni. Ihavebeenawareofanall-encompassingandconsumingpurpose

towardwhichmylifehasbeendirected[modified].xiiiii. Ihaveasenseofmissionorcalling.xiviii. Ihaveamissioninlifethatgivesmeasenseofdirection.xv

B. Purposes

i. Ihaveasenseofdirectionandpurposeinlife.xviii. Icandescribemylife’spurposes[modified].xvii

iii. Mycurrentaimsmatchwithmyfutureaspirations.xviii


18

C. Goals

i. InmylifeIhaveverycleargoalsandaims.xix ii. Ihavegoalsinlifethatareveryimportanttome.xx

iii. IhavedefiniteideasofthingsIwanttodo.xxi Thethreeitemsintheglobalcoherencesubdomainassessasenseoftheworld

generally,ofhumanlifespecifically,andoftheultimatemeaningoflife.Thethreeitemsintheindividualcoherencedomainassessthemeaningofone’sownlife,thecapacitytounderstandthemeaningoflifeevents,andaphilosophythathelpsoneunderstandone’sidentity.Thethreeitemsinthesubjectivesignificancesubdomainexpressaperceivedsubjectivesenseofsignificanceofone’slifeasawhole,theprocessofliving,andthekindoflifeonehas.Thethreeitemsintheobjectivesignificancesubdomainassessthethingsthatonedoes,one’slifeasawhole,andone’scontributionsasbeingimportantorsignificant,eitherinwhattheactionsareinandofthemselvesortosociety.Thethreeitemsofthemissionsubdomainexpresshavingamissionorcalling,anawarenessofthatmission,andthatmissiongivingonedirectioninlife.Thethreeitemsinthepurposessubdomainexpresshavingasenseofdirectionorpurpose,one’sawarenessofone’spurposes,andone’smoreimmediategoalsbeingalignedwiththosepurposes.Finally,thethreeitemsinthegoalssubdomainexpresshavinggoals,theimportanceofthosegoals,andanawarenessofthosegoals.

Certainlyeachofthesubdomainscouldbesupplementedwithadditionalitems.However,forabrief21-itemmeasurewithcoverageacrossthe7subdomains,constrainedprincipallybytheavailabilityofexistingitems,thesearetheitemswewouldsuggestandthatformtheCMM.

Insomecases,itwasdifficulttodistinguishthesubdomainofaspecificitemandinthecaseofcertainexistingitems,ambiguitieswereoftenpresent.Someprinciplesusedtocategorizevariousitemswhenthedistinctionsacrosssubdomainswerelessclearareasfollows.Indistinguishingbetweenglobalversusindividualcoherence,referenceto“mylife”ratherthan“life”ingeneralor“humanlife”or“theuniverse”indicatedindividualcoherencewhereasthelatterexpressionsweregenerallycategorizedasrelatingtoglobalcoherence.Indistinguishingcoherencefromobjectivesignificance,ifsomeaspectofvaluewasfoundintheactionoractivityorinaccomplishingsomething,theseitemswereclassifiedasobjectivesignificancewhereasifvaluewasderivedsimplyfromone’sbeing,thenthesewereclassifiedasconcerningcoherence.However,asnotedabove,withmanysuchcoherenceitems,theitemsthemselvesoftenentailedparticularistphilosophicalorreligiousviewsandsowerenotspecificallyconsideredforCMM.Indistinguishingindividualcoherencefromthevariouslevelsofthedirectiondomain,itemsthatindicated“having”goalsoran“awareness”ofgoalsandpurposeswereplacedinthedirectiondomain,whereasthosethatrelatedto“understanding”orpurposesbeingderivedfroma“philosophy”wereplacedintheindividualcoherencesubdomain.Indistinguishingindividualcoherencefromsubjectivesignificance,itemsthatmadereferenceto“values”or“systemsofbelief”wereplacedintheindividualcoherencesubdomain,whereasitemsthatcouldbeaffirmedwithoutaphilosophywereplacedinthesubjectivesignificancesubdomain.Indistinguishingobjectiveandsubjectivesignificance,


19

referenceto“accomplishments”and“achievements”wereoftenplacedintheobjectivesignificancesubdomain,butwhenreferencewasmadetoone’sfeelingstowardthese,thenthiswastakenasthemoreimportantconsiderationandtheitemswereplacedinthesubjectivesignificancedomain;whethertheitemcouldbeaffirmedwithrespecttoatrivialactivitylike“countingpiecesofstring”or“collectingmatchboxes”wasoftenausefultestcase.Indistinguishingthemission,purpose,andgoalssubdomains,theuseofthesingular“acalling”oreven“alifepurpose”wasoftentakenasanindicationofthemissionsubdomain;itemsthatmadereferenceto“purpose”or“purposes”or“lifeaim”weregenerallyplacedinthepurposessubdomain,especiallywhentheitemindicatedorallowedforapluralityofsuchpurposes;itemsthatmadereferencetogoalsortasksordailyactivitiesweregenerallyplacedinthegoalssubdomain.Insomecases,languagewasambiguoussuchastheuseof“lifegoal,”whichmakesuseofthe“goal”terminology,butbeingprefacedby“life”infactsuggestsapurpose.Whethertheitemwouldbeaffirmedbysimplyaimingtopassanexamwasoftenausefultestcasetodistinguishgoalsfrompurposes.Theprinciplesabovearenotintendedtobecomprehensivebutmerelytoindicatesomeoftheconsiderationsthatwentintotheselectionoftheitemsandmightbeusedinthefurtherdistinguishingofitemsiftheseven-foldstructureofCMMisalsoeventuallyusedinothercontexts.

Importantly,theCMMisintendedtoassessthepresenceofmeaninginone’slife.Itisnotintendedtoassessrelatedbutalsoimportantconstructssuchasseekingtofindmeaningorthequestformeaning(Stegeretal.,2006;Crumbaugh,1968)orstrivingfor,makingprogresstoward,orachievinggoalsandpurposes.Thesethingscancertainlybecausesofmeaningbutarearguablyconceptuallydistinctfrommeaningitself.Achievingagoalmaybeasourceofmeaning,butitmayalsoleadtolossofmeaningif,forexample,itsattainmentresultsintherebeingnothingfurtherforwhichoneisstriving.

Conclusion ThemaincontributiononceagainthatweseektomakewiththeCMMistoclarifythedifferentwaysthatmeaningcanbeperceivedaspartofahumanlife.Ascrucialasmeaningistowell-being,itisawelcomedevelopmentinthecurrentstateofscholarshipthatapromisingmeansofmeasuringmeaningisbecomingmoreclearandwell-supported.Thereisnowsolidagreementthatmeaningismultidimensionalandthatitcanbemeasuredbyfocusingonthreesubconstructstappingcognitivecoherence,affectivesignificance,andmotivationaldirection.Withinthesesubconstructsthoughithasbecomeapparentfromphilosophicalreflection(whichsofarhasbeenhappeninglargelyintandemwith,butnotinconversationwith,psychologicalanalysis)thatyetfinerdistinctionscanbemade.TheCMMintendstoclarifyandcodifythesedistinctions,delineatingrefinementsconcerningglobalandindividual“levels”offeltcoherence,subjectiveandobjectivebasesforperceivedsignificance,andvaryingscopesoffeltdirectionacrossarangeofactivitiesfromquotidiantoall-encompassing. WewouldhopethatresearchapplicationsoftheCMMwillprovideyetgreaterconceptualclarityaroundmeaningandwhatitentailsaswellasfurtherinsightintohowthesubdomainsrelatetooneanother.Understandinghowthesethreedomainsrelate,whether


20

therearepredictablecorrelationsamongthem,andtowhatextenteachdomaintargetsadistinctpsychologicalrealityaretasksforimmediatefutureresearch. WiththefurtherdistinctionsorsubdomainswithintheCMM,theworkofunderstandingtheirrelationsbecomesyetmorecomplex.However,webelievethatthesedistinctionsmaybeofimportancebothinpsychologyandinpotentiallyusingdatatoinformphilosophicaldiscussionsandtomoreadequatelyassesspotentialrelationsbetweencoherence,significance,anddirection.WithoutthefurtherdistinctionsoftheCMMitmaybethecasethatspecificmeasures,eventhoseemployingthetripartitestructure,mayunwittinglyonlyencompassspecificsubdomainsofmeaning.Toillustratethis,intheTableweexamineseveralrecentmeasuresofmeaning(Ryff,1989;Krause,2004;Stegeretal.,2006;George&Park,2017)includingonethatexplicitlyemploysthetripartitemodel(George&Park,2017)toevaluatewhichofsevensubdomainsoftheCMMthesemeasuresevaluate.Table.AMappingofSeveralExistingMeaningMeasurestotheSubdomainsofCMM

Noneoftheseothermeasurescapturesallsevensubdomains.Eachmeasuretendstofavoreitherobjectiveorsubjectivesignificancewithoutinclusionofitemsrelatedtotheother.Whenexaminingcoherence,eachhas,atbest,individualcoherenceandneglectsglobalcoherence.Eachcontainsitemsrelatedtothepurposessubdomainbutgenerallyonlyhaseitherthegoalsorthemissionsubdomainbutnottheother,withonlytheKrause(2004)measurearguablyhavingitemscorrespondingtoeachofthethreelevelsofthehierarchyofthedirectiondomain.EventheGeorgeandPark(2017)measure,whichemploysthetripartitemodel,anddoes,ofcourse,indeedhaveitemsrelatedtocoherence,significance,anddirection,focusesforeachofthesubconstructsonlyononeoranotherofthesubdomainsthattheCMMdelineates;ithasindividualbutnotglobalsignificance,objectivebutnotsubjectivesignificance,andgoalsandpurposesbutnothingonmissionorcalling.WebelievetheCMMthushelpsbetterfilloutthevariousdomainsoftheconstructofmeaning. Ofcourse,itmayturnoutthatsomeofthesesubdomainsaremoreimportantthanothersintheireffectsonvariousoutcomesorthatfurtherempiricalworksuggeststhatforcertainuses,assessingonlyasubsetofsubdomainsisadequate.However,onconceptualgroundswethinkthatthesedistinctionsareimportant,anditwillbeofinteresttoseewhetherthatbearsoutinempiricalwork.FurtherworkofcourseremainstobedoneonassessingthepsychometricpropertiesoftheCMM,workwhichwelikewiseplantoundertakeintheyearsahead,withdatacollectionalreadycurrentlyunderway.


21

WeconcludethenwithsomepreliminaryhypothesesaboutwhatwemightexpecttheCMMtorevealinactualuseamongdiversepopulations.

Werecognizethatglobalcoherence(1.A.)andindividualcoherence(1.B.)areindependentofeachother,suchthatapersonmightquiteconsistentlybelievethattheirownlifemakessenseforanynumberofreasonswhilebeingagnosticaboutwhetherlifeassuchiscoherentorevenperhapsdenyingthatitis.Bythesametoken,thoughwewouldhypothesizethatthiswouldbethemoreunusualscenario,apersoncouldbeconvincedthatlifeingeneraliscoherentbutregardtheirownlivesasbeingdeficientincoherence.Insuchcases,whichagainwewouldassumewouldbecomparativelyrare,itisimaginedthatanindividualwouldfeelthemselvestobeinthesituationofhavingastrongtheoreticalviewofhowhumanlifeshouldattainitsintendedmeaningwhilesensingthattheirownpersonalexistencewasfailingtoachievethisstandardoridealofwhatitoughttobe,orthatone’slifeseemeddifficulttounderstandwithinthebroaderglobalcontext.Whichscenariowillprovemorecommonplace,theextenttowhichthetwosubdomainsarecorrelated,andwhichscoresofthetwosubdomainsarehigher,areallopenquestions. Recallthatwithrespecttosignificance,thephilosophicalliteraturehasdividedalongtwodifferentcamps:thesubjectivistaccountsofmeaninginlifeandtheobjectivist.Inviewofthisdistinction,whichadmitsofcourseofaspectrumofpossiblevariations,weseparatesubjectivesignificance(2.A.)andobjectivesignificance(2.B.).Theitemsintheformercategoryaremeanttoassessthedegreetowhichaperson’sownself-appraisalorestimationoftheworthoftheirlifecomesfrominwardsubjectivejudgment,whiletheitemsinthelattercategoryaremeanttoassessthedegreetowhichaperson’sjudgmentabouttheworthoftheirliferestsonwhattheytaketobetheobjectivevalueoftheirprojects,activities,orachievements,eitherinanabsolutesenseoratleastconsideredimportantbytheconsensusofabroadercommunity.Athirdsortofphilosophicaltheoryaboutmeaninginlifeinsiststhatmeaningrequiresaconnectionbetweenobjectivelyvaluableactivitiesorcontributionsandasubjectiveendorsementofthoseactivitiesorcontributions.Formeasuringpurposeswefounditdifficulttoidentifyitemsthatclearlytargetedbothelementsinconcertinthewaythatsuchtheoriesdemand.Nevertheless,wehaveincludedinasupplementalappendixthreeitemsthatwefeelatleastimplicitlyassessthedegreetowhichapersonmightsensethattheirlifeismeaningfulongroundssimultaneouslysubjectiveandobjective(Appendix1.).Weareinterestedthereforeinthefirstplacetodiscovertowhatextentscoresonthesubjectivesignificance(2.A.)itemsandobjectivesignificanceitems(2.B.)tendtocorrelate,andalsohowoftenscoresinoneofthetwosubdomainsarerelativelyhighandintheotherrelativelylow.Shouldoneortheotherofthesubdomainsbeconsistentlyhigher,thatwouldnotnecessarilylendgreatercredibilityorexplanatorypowertoonephilosophicaltheoryoranother,butitwouldcertainlyprovideinformationonhowpeopleexperiencethemeaningoftheirlives,whethertheyfeelthatitisboundupmorewithasubjectivesenseoffulfillmentorwiththeobjectivequalityoftheiractivitiesorcontributions.Shouldthethree“hybrid/integrated”itemsintheAppendixbeused,itwouldbeoffurtherinteresttodiscovertheextenttowhichhighscoresontheseitemscorrelateornotwithhighscoresonthesubjectivesignificance(2.A.)orobjectivesignificance(2.B.)itemsorboth.Inthislastcase,thiswouldagainprovideatleast


22

someadditionalevidencetohelpinformthethird,hybridorintegrated,theoryofmeaninginlifecirculatinginthephilosophicaldebate. Finally,withrespecttodirection,weagainacknowledgethatthethree“levels”ofscope,rangingfrommission(3.A.),topurposes(3.B.),togoals(3.C.)areinprincipleindependent.Apersonwehypothesizecouldscorehighonpurposeswhilenotbeingnecessarilydirectedbyastrongsenseofmission;alternately,apersonmightscorehighonpurposeswhilefeelingthattheirdailygoalswerenotwellalignedatpresentwiththosepurposes.Wepresumethatapersonwhoscoreshighonmission(3.A.)willgenerallyalsoscorehighonpurposes(3.B.)andgoals(3.C.),butwealsocanseehowthismightnotnecessarilybethecase.Insuchaninstance,wewouldimaginethatsuchapersonhasastrongandclearoverallplanfortheirlifebutfeelsthatatthepresenttimetheirdailyactivitiesdonotcontributetosuchaplan.Perhapssomeonebidingtheirtimethroughaperiodofunemploymentandawaitinganopportunitytopursuetheirtruecallinginthefuturewouldfitsuchaprofile.Alternately,wewouldimagineitcouldbequitecommonplaceforapersontoscorehighonpurposes(3.B.)andgoals(3.C.)whilenotnecessarilyfeelingthemselvestobeguidedbyanygreatoverarchingambitionthattheywouldbewillingtodescribeasamissionorcalling(3.A.).Againtherelationshereshouldproveinterestingtoansweringfutureresearchquestions.

Itwouldalsobeofinteresttoseehowthethreedomainsorsubconstructsrelatetooneanother,bothcross-sectionallyordescriptively,andalsoovertimeinanattempttoassesscausalrelations.Thereisbroadagreementthatpurposeisessentialtomeaning,buthowimportantisitforthatsenseofpurposetobeall-encompassinginscope?Isitsufficientforpeopletohaveasenseofpurposeinourmorenarrowdefinition(“purposes,”3.B.)forindividualstoscorehighinmeaning,oralternatively,ishavingamoresingularsenseofmissionimportant?Ifdatawereavailableonthesemeasuresovertime,mightitbepossibletoprovideevidencefortherelativecausaleffectsofeachofthesesubconstructsontheothers?Mightitbethecasethatcoherencemostprofoundlyshapesdirection,andthatdirectionitselfmostpowerfullyaffectsasubsequentsenseofsignificance?AllofthesequestionswouldrequireatleasttwowavesofdatacollectionwiththeCMM,alongwithrichdataonpotentiallyconfoundingvariables. Onefinalwayoffurtherattemptingtounderstandwhatformanyconstitutes“meaning”isourinclusionofafinalfouritemsthatwearecalling“general”intone(Appendix2.).Theseitemsaskforrespondentstogaugetheiroverallimpressionofhowmeaningfultheirlifeis.Shouldtheseitemsbeincluded,itwouldbepossibletoassesscorrelationsbetweenscoresinthesubdomainswithoverallassessmentsofthegeneralmeaningfulnessthatpeopleperceiveintheirlives.Thistoowewouldhopecouldprovidefurtherinsightintoanystrongassociationsbetweenonedomain,orevensubdomain,andanoverallsenseofmeaningfulness,whichinturnmightindicatewhichofthesubconstructsismoreinfluentialonanoverallassessmentofmeaningfulness. WewelcometheuseoftheCMMinvariedsettingsandhopeitwillproveusefulforempiricalresearchtofacilitateadeeperunderstandingontherelationsbetweenthedifferentdomainsandsubdomains,andprovideusefulinformationforhowpeopleactuallyexperiencemeaninginlifeandwithwhatfrequencytheydosoacrossthesesubdomains.WealsorecognizethattheComprehensiveMeasureofMeaningbuildsonotherrecentlyproposed


23

measuresthatalsoarebasedonthetripartitemodel;itisthusourhopethatmappingexistingmeasures,identifyingwhattheyincludeornot,andwheretheyoverlapornotwillbeaneasiertaskgiventhegreaterspecificityofthesubdomainsdeployedhereandtheselectivityusedinassemblingthe21itemsthatconstitutetheCMM.


24

ReferencesAdams,E.M.(2002).Themeaningoflife.InternationalJournalforPhilosophyofReligion,51,71-81.Allin,P.,&Hand,D.J.(2017).Newstatisticsforold?—MeasuringthewellbeingoftheUK.Journalof

theRoyalStatisticalSocietySeriesA:StatisticsinSociety,180(1),3-43.Antonovsky,A.(1993).ThestructureandpropertiesoftheSenseofCoherenceScale.SocialScience

andMedicine,36(6),725-733.Battista,J.,&Almond,R.(1973).Thedevelopmentofmeaninginlife.Psychiatry,36(4),409-427.Baumeister,R.F.(1991)MeaningsofLife.NewYork:GuilfordPress.Baumgartner,H.,Weijters,B.,&Pieters,R.(2018).Misresponsetosurveyquestions:Aconceptual

frameworkandempiricaltestoftheeffectsofreversals,negations,andpolaroppositecoreconcepts.JournalofMarketingResearch,55(6),869-883.

Braun,J.R.(1972).ThePurposeinLifetest.InO.K.Buros(Ed.)TheSeventhMentalMeasurements

Yearbook,(p.531).Lincoln,NE:BurosCenterforTesting.Brogaard,B.,&Smith,B.(2005).Onluck,responsibilityandthemeaningoflife.PhilosophicalPapers,

34(3),443-458.Bronk,K.C.(2014).Purposeinlife:Acriticalcomponentofoptimalyouthdevelopment.Dordrecht,

Netherlands:SpringerScience+BusinessMedia.Bronk,K.C.,&Finch,W.H.(2010).Adolescentcharacteristicsbytypeoflong-termaiminlife.Applied

DevelopmentalScience,14(1),35-44.Campbell,S.W.(2012).TheLifePurposeQuestionnaire:Afactor-analyticinvestigation(Unpublished

master’sthesis).UniversityofMississippi,Oxford,Mississippi.Chamberlain,K.,&Zika,S.(1988).Religiosity,lifemeaning,andwell-being:Somerelationshipsina

sampleofwomen.JournalfortheScientificStudyofReligion,27,411-420.Cohen,R.,Bavishi,C.,&Rozanski,A.(2016).Purposeinlifeanditsrelationshiptoall-causemortality

andcardiovascularevents:Ameta-analysis.PsychosomaticMedicine,78(2),122-133.Chen,Y.,Kim,E.S.,Koh,H.K.,Frazier,A.L.,andVanderWeele,T.J.(2019).Senseofmissionand

subsequenthealthandwell-beingamongyoungadults:anoutcome-wideanalysis.AmericanJournalofEpidemiology,188(4):664-673.


25

Cottingham,J.(2003).Onthemeaningoflife.London,UK:Routledge.Crumbaugh,J.C.(1968).Cross-validationofPurposeinLifetestbasedonFrankl’sconcepts.Journalof

IndividualPsychology,24,74-81.Crumbaugh,J.C.&Maholick,L.T.(1964).Anexperimentalstudyinexistentialism:Thepsychometric

approachtoFrankl’sconceptofnoogenicneurosis.JournalofClinicalPsychology,20(2),200-207.

Damon,W.,Menon,J.,&Bronk,K.C.(2003).Thedevelopmentofpurposeduringadolescence.Applied

DevelopmentalScience,7(3),119-128.Darwall,S.(1983).ImpartialReason.Ithaca,NY:CornellUniversityPress.Debats,D.L.(1998).Measurementofpersonalmeaning:ThepsychometricpropertiesoftheLife

RegardIndex.InP.T.P.Wong&P.S.Fry(Eds.),Thehumanquestformeaning:Ahandbookofpsychologicalresearchandclinicalapplication(pp.237-259).Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.

Debats,D.L.,Drost,J.,&Hansen,P.(1995).Experiencesofmeaninginlife:Acombinedqualitativeand

quantitativeapproach.BritishJournalofPsychology,86,359-375.Debats,D.L.,vanderLubbe,P.M.,&Wezeman,F.R.A.(1993).Onthepsychometricpropertiesofthe

LifeRegardIndex(LRI):Ameasureofmeaningfullife.PersonalityandIndividualDifferences,14(2),337-345

Domino,G.(1972).ThePurposeinLifetest.InO.K.Buros(Ed.)TheSeventhMentalMeasurements

Yearbook,(pp.531-532).Lincoln,NE:BurosCenterforTesting.Dyck,M.J.(1987).Assessinglogotherapeuticconstructs:Conceptualandpsychometricstatusofthe

PurposeinLifeandSeekingofNoeticGoalstests.ClinicalPsychologyReview,7(4),439-447.Ebersole,P.&Quiring,G.(1989).SocialdesirabilityinthePurpose-in-Lifetest.TheJournalof

Psychology,123(3),305-307.Edwards.M.J.(2007).Thedimensionalityandconstructvalidmeasurementoflifemeaning

(Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation).Queen’sUniversity,Kingston,Ontario.Emmons,R.(1999).ThePsychologyofUltimateConcerns:MotivationandSpiritualityinPersonality.

NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress.Erci,B.(2008).Meaninginlifeforpatientswithcancer:ValidationoftheLifeAttitudeProfile-Revised

Scale.JournalofAdvancedNursing,62(6),704-711.


26

Evers,D.,&vanSmeden,G.E.(2016).Meaninginlife:Indefenseofthehybridview.TheSouthernJournalofPhilosophy,54(3),355-371.

Frankl,V.E.(1984)Man’sSearchforMeaning:AnIntroductiontoLogotherapy.NewYork,NY:Simon

andSchuster.Frazier,P.,Oishi,S.,&Steger,M.(2003).Assessingoptimalhumanfunctioning.InW.B.Walsh(Ed.),

Counselingpsychologyandoptimalhumanfunctioning(pp.171-197).Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.Garfield,C.(1973).ApsychometricandclinicalinvestigationofFrankl’sconceptofexistentialvacuum

andanomie.Psychiatry,36,396-408.George,L.S.,&Park,C.L.(2016).Meaninginlifeascomprehension,purpose,andmattering:Toward

integrationandnewresearchquestions.ReviewofGeneralPsychology,20(3),205-220.Haidt,J.(2006).TheHappinessHypothesis.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.Haugan,G.,Rannestad,T.,Garasen,H.,Hammervold,R.,&Espnes,G.A.(2012).TheSelf-

TranscendenceScale:Aninvestigationofthefactorstructureamongnursinghomepatients.JournalofHolisticNursing,30(3),147-159.

Heintzelman,S.J.,&King,L.A.(2014a).Lifeisprettymeaningful.AmericanPsychologist,69(6),561-

574.Heintzelman,S.J.,&King,L.A.(2014b).(Thefeelingof)meaning-as-information.PersonalityandSocial

PsychologyReview,18(2),153-167.Heisel,M.J.,&Flett,G.L.(2004).Purposeinlife,satisfactionwithlife,andsuicideideationinaclinical

sample.JournalofPsychopathologyandBehavioralAssessment,26,127-135.Hepburn,R.W.(1966).Questionsaboutthemeaningoflife.ReligiousStudies,1(2),125-140.Hicks,J.&King,L.(2009).Meaninginlifeasasubjectivejudgmentandalivedexperience.Socialand

PersonalityPsychologyCompass,3(4),638-653.Hutzell,R.R.(1989).InstituteofLogotherapyPress.InJeffries,L.L.(1995)Adolescenceandmeaningin

life.(Doctoraldissertation).RetrievedfromProquestDissertationsPublishing(9542604).UniversityofHouston,Houston,TX.

Jim,H.S.,Purnell,J.Q.,Richardson,S.A.,Golden-Kreutz,D.,&Andersen,B.L.(2006).Measuring

meaninginlifefollowingcancer.QualityofLifeResearch,15,1355-1371.JohnPaulII.(1981).OnHumanWork:LaboremExercens.Washington,DC:USCCBPublishing.


27

Kass,J.D.,Friedman,R.,Leserman,J.,Caudill,M.,Zuttermeister,P.C.,&Benson,H.(1991).An

InventoryofPositivePsychologicalAttitudeswithpotentialrelevancetohealthoutcomes:Validationandpreliminarytesting.BehavioralMedicine,17(3),121-129.

King,L.A.,Heintzelman,S.J.,&Ward,S.J.(2016).Beyondthesearchformeaning:Acontemporary

scienceoftheexperienceofmeaninginlife.CurrentDirectionsinPsychologicalScience,25(4),211-216.

King,L.A.,Hicks,J.A.,Krull,J.L.,&DelGaiso,A.K.(2006).Positiveaffectandtheexperienceof

meaninginlife.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,90(1),179-196.Krause,N.(2004).Stressorsarisinginhighlyvaluedroles,meaninginlife,andthephysicalhealthstatus

ofolderadults.JournalofGerontologySeriesB:PsychologicalSciencesandSocialSciences,59(5),S287-S297.

Landau,I.(2017).Findingmeaninginanimperfectworld.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.MacDonald,M.J.,Wong,P.T.P.,&Gingras,D.T.(2012).Meaning-in-lifemeasuresanddevelopment

ofabriefversionofthePersonalMeaningProfile.InP.T.P.Wong(Ed.),Thehumanquestformeaning:Theories,research,andapplications(2nded.).(pp.357-382).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Martela,F.,&Steger,M.F.(2016).Thethreemeaningsofmeaninginlife:Distinguishingcoherence,

purpose,andsignificance.TheJournalofPositivePsychology,11(5),531-545.Mascaro,N.,&Rosen,D.H.(2005).Existentialmeaning’sroleintheenhancementofhopeand

preventionofdepressivesymptoms.JournalofPersonality,73(4),985-1014.Mascaro,N.,Rosen,D.H.,&Morey,L.C.(2004).Thedevelopment,constructvalidity,andclinical

utilityoftheSpiritualMeaningScale.PersonalityandIndividualDifferences,37,845-860.McAdams,D.P.(2001).Thepsychologyoflifestories.ReviewofGeneralPsychology,5(2),100-122.McGregor,I.,&Little,B.R.(1998).Personalprojects,happiness,andmeaning:Ondoingwellandbeing

yourself.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,74,494-512.McKnight,P.E.,&Kashdan,T.B.(2009).Purposeinlifeasasystemthatcreatesandsustainshealth

andwell-being:Anintegrative,testabletheory.ReviewofGeneralPsychology,13(3),242-251.Metz,T.(2002).Recentworkonthemeaningoflife.Ethics,112,781-814.Metz,T.(2013).Meaninginlife:Ananalyticaccount.Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.


28

Morgan,J.,&Farsides,T.(2009).Measuringmeaninginlife.JournalofHappinessStudies,10,197-214.Owens,G.P.,Steger,M.F.,Whitesell,A.A.,&Herrera,C.J.(2009).Posttraumaticstressdisorder,guilt,

depression,andmeaninginlifeamongmilitaryveterans.JournalofTraumaticStress,22(6),654-657.

Pavot,W.,&Diener,E.(2009).ReviewoftheSatisfactionwithLifeScale.InE.Diener(Ed.),Assessing

Well-Being:TheCollectedWorksofEdDiener(pp.101-118).Dordrecht,Netherlands:SpringerScience+BusinessMedia.

Peterman,A.H.,Fitchett,G.,Brady,M.J.,Hernandez,L.,&Cella,D.(2002).Measuringspiritualwell-

beinginpeoplewithcancer:TheFunctionalAssessmentofChronicIllnessTherapy—SpiritualWell-BeingScale(FACIT-Sp).AnnalsofBehavioralMedicine,24(1),49-58.

Pinquart,M.(2002).Creatingandmaintainingpurposeinlifeinoldage:Ameta-analysis.Ageing

International,27(2),90-114.Reker,G.T.,&Cousins,J.B.(1979).Factorstructure,constructvalidityandreliabilityoftheSeekingof

NoeticGoals(SONG)andPurposeinLife(PIL)tests.JournalofClinicalPsychology,35(1),85-91.Reker,G.T.,&Peacock,E.J.(1981).TheLifeAttitudeProfile(LAP):Amultidimensionalinstrumentfor

assessingattitudestowardlife.CanadianJournalofBehavioralScience,13,64-73.Reker,G.T.,&Wong,P.T.P.(1988).Agingasanindividualprocess.InJ.E.Birren&V.L.Bengtson

(Eds.)Emergenttheoriesofaging(pp.214-246).NewYork,NY:Springer.Robbins,M.,&Francis,L.J.(2000).Religion,personality,andwell-being:Therelationshipbetween

churchattendanceandpurposeinlife.JournalofResearchonChristianEducation,9(2),223-238.

Rudd,A.(2012).Self,value,&narrative:AKierkegaardianapproach.Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.

Ryff,C.D.(1989).Happinessiseverything,orisit?Explorationsonthemeaningofpsychologicalwell-

being.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,57,1069–1081.Salmon,P.,Manzi,F.,&Valori,R.M.(1996).Measuringthemeaningoflifeforpatientswithincurable

cancer:TheLifeEvaluationQuestionnaire(LEQ).EuropeanJournalofCancer,32A(5),755-760.Schulenberg,S.E.(2004).ApsychometricinvestigationoflogotherapymeasuresandtheOutcome

Questionnaire(OQ-45.2).NorthAmericanJournalofPsychology,6(3),477-492.


29

Seachris,J.(Ed.)(2013).Exploringthemeaningoflife:Ananthologyandguide.Chichester,UK:Wiley-Blackwell.

Sharma,G.(2015).SenseofPurposeInventory:Development,psychometricexamination,andconstruct

validation.(Doctoraldissertation).RetrievedfromProquestDissertationsPublishing(3715563).ThePennsylvaniaStateUniversity,StatePark,PA.

Starck,P.L.(1985).Guidelines—MeaninginSufferingTest.Abilene,TX:ViktorFranklInstituteof

Logotherapy.Steger,M.F.(2009)Meaninginlife.InLopez,S.J.,&Snyder,C.R.(Eds.)TheOxfordHandbookof

PositivePsychology.(2nded.).(pp.679-687).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Steger,M.F.(2012a).Experiencingmeaninginlife:Optimalfunctioningatthenexusofwell-being,psychopathology,andspirituality.InP.T.P.Wong(Ed.),Thehumanquestformeaning:Theories,research,andapplications(2nded.).(pp.165-184).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

Steger,M.F.(2012b).Makingmeaninginlife.PsychologicalInquiry,23(4),381-385.Steger,M.F.,Frazier,P.,Oishi,S.,&Kaler,M.(2006).TheMeaninginLifeQuestionnaire:Assessingthe

presenceofandsearchformeaninginlife.JournalofCounselingPsychology,53(1),80-93.

Su,R.,Tay,L.,Diener,E.(2014).Thedevelopmentandvalidationofthecomprehensiveinventoryofthriving(CIT)andthebriefinventoryofthriving(BIT).AppliedPsychology:HealthandWell-Being,6,251–279.

Thege,B.K.,Martos,T.,Bachner,Y.G.,&Kushnir,T.(2010).Developmentandpsychometricevaluationofarevisedmeasureofmeaninginlife:TheLogo-Test-R.StudiaPsychologica,52,133-145.

Thomson,G.(2003).Onthemeaningoflife.London,UK:Wadsworth.

VanderWeele,T.J.(2017).Onthepromotionofhumanflourishing.ProceedingsoftheNational

AcademyofSciences,114(31),8148-8156.Weijters,B.,&Baumgartner,H.(2012).Misresponsetoreversedandnegateditemsinsurveys:A

review.JournalofMarketingResearch,49(5),737-747.

Wiggins,D.(1976).Truth,invention,andthemeaningoflife.InProceedingsoftheBritishAcademy:Vol.62,(pp.331-378).

Wingren,G.(1957).LutheronVocation.Philadelphia,PA:MuhlenbergPress.Wolf,S.(2010).Meaninginlifeandwhyitmatters.Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.


30

Wolf,S.(2015).Thevarietyofvalues:Essaysonmorality,meaning,andlove.Oxford,UK:Oxford

UniversityPress.

Wong,P.T.P.(1998).ImplicittheoriesofmeaningfullifeandthedevelopmentofthePersonalMeaningProfile.InP.T.P.Wong&P.S.Fry(Eds.),Thehumanquestformeaning:Ahandbookofpsychologicalresearchandclinicalapplications(pp.111-140).Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.

Yalom,I.(1980).Existentialpsychotherapy.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.


31

Appendix

Appendix1.IntegratedSignificanceItems:

i. IfinditsatisfyingtothinkaboutwhatIhaveaccomplishedinlife.xxiiii. WhenIthinkaboutwhatIhavedonewithmylifeIfeelworthwhile.xxiiiiii. IfindfulfillmentintheworkIamengagedinorforwhichIampreparing

myself.xxivAppendix2.GeneralMeaningItems: i. Mylifeismeaningful.xxv

ii. Mypurposeinlifeisclear.xxviiii. Overall,towhatextentdoyoufeelthatthethingsyoudoinyourlifeare

worthwhile?xxviiiv. Ifeelmylifehasasenseofmeaning.xxviii


32

iItem#38ontheLifeAttitudeProfile-RevisedScale.Erci,B.(2008).Meaninginlifeforpatientswithcancer:Validationofthe

LifeAttitudeProfile-RevisedScale.JournalofAdvancedNursing,62(6),704-711.Seealso“Ithinkabouttheultimatemeaningof

life,”Item#1ontheSeekingofNoeticGoalsTest.Reker,G.T.,&Cousins,J.B.(1979).Factorstructure,constructvalidityand

reliabilityoftheSeekingofNoeticGoals(SONG)andPurposeinLife(PIL)tests.JournalofClinicalPsychology,35(1),85-91.See

also“Ibelievethatlifehasanultimatepurposeandmeaning,”Item#5onthePersonalMeaningProfile.Wong,P.T.P.(1998).

ImplicittheoriesofameaningfullifeandthedevelopmentofthePersonalMeaningProfile.InWong,P.T.P.,&Fry,P.S.(Eds.)

TheHumanQuestforMeaning:AHandbookofPsychologicalResearchandClinicalApplications.Mahwah,NJ:Lawrence

Erlbaum.

iiItem#7ontheLifeAttitudeProfile-RevisedScale,originallyphrasedas“Themeaningoflifeisevidentintheworldaroundus.”

Erci,2008.

iiiItem#29ontheLifeAttitudeProfile-RevisedScale,originallyphrasedas“Ihaveaframeworkthatallowsmetounderstandor

makesenseofmylife.”Erci,2008.Seealso“Ihaveasystemorframeworkthatallowsmetotrulyunderstandmybeingalive,”

Item#11ontheMeaningfulLifeMeasure.Morgan,J.,&Farsides,T.(2009).Measuringmeaninginlife.JournalofHappiness

Studies,10,197-214.ItemappearsverbatimasItem#28ontheLifeRegardIndex.Debats,D.L.,vanderLubbe,P.M.,&

Wezeman,F.R.A.(1993).OnthepsychometricpropertiesoftheLifeRegardIndex(LRI):Ameasureofmeaningfullife.

PersonalityandIndividualDifferences,14(2),337-345.

ivItem#1ontheMeaninginLifeQuestionnaire.Steger,M.,Frazier,P.,Oishi,S.,&Kaler,M.(2006).TheMeaninginLife

Questionnaire:Assessingthepresenceofandsearchformeaninginlife.JournalofCounselingPsychology,53(1),80-93.

vItem#8ontheMultidimensionalExistentialMeaningScale.George,L.S.&Park,C.L.(2017).TheMultidimensionalExistential

MeaningScale:Atripartiteapproachtomeasuringmeaninginlife.TheJournalofPositivePsychology,126,613-627.

viItem#4A2.Krause,N.(2004).Stressorsarisinginhighlyvaluedroles,meaninginlife,andthephysicalhealthstatusofolder

adults.JournalofGerontologySeriesB:PsychologicalSciencesandSocialSciences,59(5),S287-S297.

viiItem#18ontheLifeAttitudeProfile-RevisedScale,originallyphrasedas“Basically,IamlivingthekindoflifeIwanttolive.”

Erci,2008.

viiiItem#2ontheLifeRegardIndex.Debatsetal.,1993.

ixItem#3BonKrause,2004.

xItem#3under“Self-Worth”ontheComprehensiveInventoryofThriving,originallyphrasedas“TheworkIdoisimportantfor

otherpeople.”Su,R.,Tay,L.,&Diener,E.(2014).ThedevelopmentandvalidationoftheComprehensiveInventoryofThriving

(CIT)andtheBriefInventoryofThriving(BIT).AppliedPsychology:HealthandWell-Being,6(3),251-279.


33

xiItem#9ontheMeaningfulLifeMeasure,originallyreversecodedas“Ihavefailedtoaccomplishmuchinlife.”Morgan&

Farsides,2009.

xiiItem#49onthePersonalMeaningProfile.Wong,1998.Seealso“ThethingsIdocontributetosociety,”Item#2under“Self-

Worth”ontheComprehensiveInventoryofThriving.Suetal.,2014.

xiiiItem#18ontheSeekingofNoeticGoalsTest,originallyphrasedas“Ihavebeenawareofanall-powerfulandconsuming

purposetowardwhichmylifehasbeendirected.”Reker&Cousins,1979.

xivItem#19onthePersonalMeaningProfile.Wong,1998.

xvItem#37ontheLifeAttitudeProfile-Revised.Erci,2008.

xviItem#4onthePurposeinLifeSubscale.Ryff,C.D.(1989).Happinessiseverything,orisit?Explorationsonthemeaningof

psychologicalwell-being.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,57(6),1069-1081.ItemappearsverbatimasItem#4C2.

Krause,2004.

xviiItem#28ontheSenseofPurposeInventory,originallyphrasedas“Icandescribemylife’spurpose.”Sharma,G.(2015).

SenseofPurposeInventory:Development,psychometricexamination,andconstructvalidation.(Doctoraldissertation).

RetrievedfromProquestDissertationsPublishing(3715563).ThePennsylvaniaStateUniversity,StatePark,PA.

xviiiItem#12ontheSenseofPurposeInventory.Sharma,2015.xixItem#2ontheLifeAttitudeProfile-RevisedScale.Erci,2008.Itemisrepeatedverbatimas#16ontheMeaningfulLife

Measure.Morgan&Farsides,2009.Seealso“Inlife,Ihave:(7)cleargoalsandaims,”Item#3onthePurposeinLifeTest.

Crumbaugh,J.C.,&Maholick,L.T.(1964)Anexperimentalstudyinexistentialism:ThepsychometricapproachtoFrankl’s

conceptofnooegenicneurosis.JournalofClinicalPsychology,20(2),200-207.

xxItem#9fromtheMultidimensionalExistentialMeaningScale.George&Park,2017.

xxiItem#3ontheLifePurposeQuestionnaire.Hutzell,R.R.(1989).InstituteofLogotherapyPress.InJeffries,L.L.(1995)

Adolescenceandmeaninginlife.(Doctoraldissertation).RetrievedfromProquestDissertationsPublishing(9542604).University

ofHouston,Houston,TX.xxiiItem#6ontheMeaningfulLifeMeasure.Morgan&Farsides,2009.Itemappearsverbatimas#13onthePurposeinLife

Subscale.Ryff,1989.ItemappearsverbatimasItem#4D2.Krause,2004.xxiiiItem#11ontheInventoryofPositivePsychologicalAttitudes.Kass,J.D.,Friedman,R.,Leserman,J.,Caudill,M.,

Zuttermeister,P.C.,&Benson,H.(1991).AnInventoryofPositivePsychologicalAttitudeswithpotentialrelevancetohealth

outcomes:Validationandpreliminarytesting.BehavioralMedicine,17(3),121-129.


34

xxivItem#3ontheLogo-TestRevised.Thege,B.K.,Martos,T.,Bachner,Y.G.,&Kushnir,T.(2010).Developmentand

psychometricevaluationofarevisedmeasureofmeaninginlife:TheLogo-Test-R.StudiaPsychologica,52,133-145.xxvItem#7ontheSpiritualMeaningScale.Mascaro,N.,Rosen,D.H.,&.Morey,L.C.(2004).Thedevelopment,construct

validity,andclinicalutilityoftheSpiritualMeaningScale.PersonalityandIndividualDifferences,37,845-860.xxviItem#1ontheSenseofPurposeInventory.Sharma,2015.

xxviiItem#2ontheUK’sAnnualPopulationSurvey’sFour-QuestionSurveyofSubjectiveWellbeing.Allin,P.,&Hand,D.J.(2017).

Newstatisticsforold?—MeasuringthewellbeingoftheUK.JournaloftheRoyalStatisticalSocietySeriesA:StatisticsinSociety,

180(1),3-43.xxviiiItem#2onthePurposeinLifeScale.Robbins,M.,&Francis,L.J.(2000).Religion,personality,andwell-being:The

relationshipbetweenchurchattendanceandpurposeinlife.JournalofResearchonChristianEducation,9(2),223-238.

Download - The Comprehensive Measure of Meaning: Psychological and ......psychological literature and research as merely one component of meaningfulness as a whole. Most frequently used in empirical

Top Related