Psicothema was founded in Asturias (northern Spain) in 1989, and is published jointly by the Psychology Faculty of the University of Oviedo and the Psychological Association of the Principality of Asturias (Colegio Oficial de Psicología del Principado de Asturias).
We currently publish four issues per year, which accounts for some 100 articles annually. We admit work from both the basic and applied research fields, and from all areas of Psychology, all manuscripts being anonymously reviewed prior to publication.
Adrián García-Selva1 , Marie-Carmen Neipp1 , Ángel Solanes-Puchol1 , Beatriz Martín-del-Río1 and Stewart I. Donaldson2
1 University of Miguel Hernandez (Spain),
2 Claremont Graduate University (USA)
Background: Donaldson & Donaldson (2021b) developed a scale to assess Positive Functioning at Work, adding four new blocks to strengthen the original PERMA framework in the workplace. The aim of the present study was to validate this scale in a Spanish sample. Method: 698 Spanish workers participated, 59% were women and 41% were men, 71.6% were employees and 71.2% belonged to the basic worker level. Results: Confirmatory Factor Analysis showed a good fit of the nine-factor model (χ2/df = 2.441; RMSEA = .056, 90% IC (.049, .063); SRMR =. 062; CFI = .926; TLI = .916), the bifactor model (χ2/df = 1.703; RMSEA = .044, 90% CI [.037, .050]; SRMR = .050; CFI = .959; TLI = .952) and the ESEM model (χ2/df = 1.736; RMSEA = .041, 90% CI [.033, .049]; SRMR = .017; CFI = .976; TLI = .942). The adapted scale also demonstrated good internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s α of .90 for the scale, and evidence of discriminant, criterion, predictive, and incremental validity with other well-being and performance measures, as well as measurement invariance across educational levels. Conclusions: This scale provides a comprehensive measurement tool that can help in the design of workplace programs and interventions.
Antecedentes: Donaldson & Donaldson (2021b) desarrollaron una escala para evaluar el Funcionamiento Positivo en el Trabajo añadiendo cuatro nuevos bloques para reforzar el marco PERMA en el ámbito laboral. El objetivo del presente estudio fue validar esta escala en muestra española. Método: Participaron 698 trabajadores españoles, el 59% eran mujeres y el 41% hombres, el 71,6% eran asalariados y el 71,2% eran trabajadores básicos. Resultados: Los análisis factoriales confirmatorios mostraron buen ajuste del modelo de nueve factores (χ2/df = 2.441; RMSEA = .056, 90% IC (.049, .063); SRMR =. 062; CFI = .926; TLI = .916), del modelo bifactorial (χ2/df = 1.703; RMSEA = .044, 90% CI [.037, .050]; SRMR = .050; CFI = .959; TLI = .952) y del modelo ESEM (χ2/df = 1.736; RMSEA = .041, 90% CI [.033, .049]; SRMR = .017; CFI = .976; TLI = .942). La escala también mostró una buena consistencia interna, con un α de Cronbach de .90. También mostró validez discriminante, de criterio, predictiva y de incremento con otras medidas de bienestar y rendimiento, también invarianza en el nivel educativo. Conclusiones: Esta escala es una herramienta de medición integral que puede ayudar a diseñar programas e intervenciones en el trabajo.
SPANISH
ENGLISH
https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2023.341