< Back to Newsletter


Structural, Convergent Validity and Reliability of Positive Psychology Scales on Egyptian Athletes.

Marei Salama-Younes, PhD. Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt

Corresponding author: Dr. Marei Salama-Younes: Psychology, Sociology and Evaluation in Sport field Dept., Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt: Email: msalamayounes@hotmail.fr

Valid and reliable positive psychology scales are rarely used in Arab countries for Arab athletes. More precisely, there are no valid scales measuring positive psychology aspects ofathletes. The aim of the present research is to translate and examine the structural, convergent validity, and reliability of some positive psychology scales on Egyptian athletes. The following scales were used in the present research:

            Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS). It is a 15-itemsingle factor self-report scale designed to assess one’s general tendency for acceptance and attention over time (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Respondents rated the degree to which they function without awareness of present experience in daily life, covering cognitive, emotional, physical, and interpersonal dimensions. Items were rated on a 6-point Likert scale (1 = almost always to 6 = almost never).

            Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). It consists of 6 items. Items 1, 3, and 5 are positively worded and items 2, 4 and 6 are negatively worded (Smith et al., 2008).Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree).

            Subjective Vitality Scale (SVS).The short version of SVS consists of 6 items and assesses individual differences (Bostic, Rubio, & Hood, 2000). Items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 7= strongly agree).

             Passion Scale (PS). It consists of 6 items and 2 subscales, in which each item assesses a precise type of passion: harmonious and obsessive passions (Marsh et al., 2013).Items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1= not agree at all to 7= very strongly agree).

Flourishing Scale (FS).
It is a brief 8-item summary measure of respondent’s self-perceived success on important areas such as relationships, self-esteem, purpose, and optimism (Diener et al., 2010).Items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 7= strongly agree). The scale provides a single psychological well-being score.


Participants and Procedure

Arabic versions were created using forward-and-backward translations by four bilingual professionals. Then, a professional linguist revised the created Arabic versions (Hess, Sénécal, & Vallerand, 2000). We used five scales in which each assessesone aspect of positive psychology.

The participants of the study were all Egyptians male athletes (n= 386). They were from Cairo, Giza, Banha, and Sadat cities. The mean of their age was 22.03 years and the standarddeviation was 8.73. They were members of the Egyptian national teamor a first team. They practiced a variety of individual and collective sports. The scales were completed immediately before beginning their training sessions. Participants were informed beforehand about the objectives of the study. They were told that their participation was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time. Both oral and written instructions were given to help them understanding the items (i.e., there were no right or wrong answers to the questions and they should state freely what they think). They were reassured about the confidentiality of their responses. SPSS 22.00 was used to perform internal consistency statistics (Cronbach alpha). LISREL 8.7 was used to examine the confirmatory factor analyses (Byrne, 2013).           


Scale score reliability was assessed by calculating Cronbach’s acoefficient, with values of 0.70 or greater considered as satisfactory. Results showed that all five scales had avalues above that. 

Table 1. Goodness-of-fit of the confirmatory factor analysis models (n = 386).

Scales χ2 df GFI NFI RMR RMSEA χ2 / df Alpha
MAAS 151.01 14 0.93 0.94 0.03 0.04 10.78* 0.80
BRS 7.24 5 0.97 0.97 0.04 0.05 1.45** 0.83
SVS 54.54 5 0.92 0.93 0.05 0.07 10.90* 0.78
PS 116.52 10 0.94 0.94 0.06 0.06 11.65* 0.71
FS  16.56 7 0.97 0.97 0.02 0.03 2.37** 0.93

Note: GFI = Goodness of Fit Index, NFI = Normed Fit Index, RMR = Root Mean Square Residual, RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation. * p< .01; ** p< .001.

We performed confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) to assess the five instruments’ structure. The intention was to indicate if the model fits the data well. There is a variety of suggestions in the literature about the number, type, and cut-off values for goodness-of-fit required to report confirmatory factor analyses (Byrne, 1998). The goodness-of-fit indexes of MAAS, BRS, SVS, PS, andFS wereacceptable in terms of χ2/df ratio, GFI, RMR, andRMSEA. The correlations among the total scores of the five instruments were positive and significant at p< .01. They ranged between 0.28 and 0.51. 

Discussion and Conclusions

Although the factor structure and internal consistency of these scales have rarely been examined on Egyptian athletes (Salama-Younes, 2011; Salama-Younes & Hashim, 2018), the results presented here can encourage researchers to have trust on using the adapted Arabic versions. Furthermore, the correlations among the total scores of the five instruments were positive and significant at p< .01. The scales assessed many aspects of well-being that were expected to be positively correlated. This study represents an early step on a project aimed at evaluating and promoting positive development and resiliency of Egyptian athletes.


Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013). The assessment of mindfulness with self-report measures: Existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness, 4(3), 191-202.

Bostic, T. J., Rubio, D. M., & Hood, M. (2000). A validation of the subjective vitality scale using structural equation modeling. Social indicators research, 52(3), 313-324.

Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 84(4), 822.

Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic Concepts. Hove, England: Psychology Press.

Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming: Hove, England: Psychology Press.

Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D.-w., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143-156.

Hess, U., Sénécal, S., & Vallerand, R. (2000). Les méthodes quantitative et qualitative de recherche en psychologie. Méthodes de recherche en psychologie, 507-529.

Hess, U., Sénécal, S., & Vallerand, R. (2000b). Les méthodes quantitative et qualitative de recherche en psychologie. R J Vallerand et U. Hess (Eds.). Méthodes de recherche en psychologie. Boucherville: Gaëtan Morin.

Marsh, H. W., Vallerand, R. J., Lafrenière, M.-A. K., Parker, P., Morin, A. J., Carbonneau, N., Guay, F. (2013). Passion: Does one scale fit all? Construct validity of two-factor passion scale and psychometric invariance over different activities and languages. Psychological assessment, 25(3), 796.

Salama-Younes, M. (2011). Validation of the mental health continuum short form and Subjective Vitality Scale with Egyptian adolescent athletes The human pursuit of well-being(pp. 221-234). New York: Springer.

Salama-Younes, M., & Hashim, M. (2018). Passion, vitality and life satisfaction for physically active old adults. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(3), 309-319.

Smith, B. W., Dalen, J., Wiggins, K., Tooley, E., Christopher, P., & Bernard, J. (2008). The brief resilience scale: Assessing the ability to bounce back. International journal of behavioral medicine, 15(3), 194-200.