Life Satisfaction Questionnaire. Primary data from the standardization sample 1994.

Research Questions/Hypotheses:

It was not the intention to examine specific hypotheses. However, it was expected that in using the expanded item pool it would be possible to reproduce the previous 8 scales and to develop 2 additional scales covering the areas of friends, acquaintances, family, and home.

Research Design:

Normalized Test Procedure; single measurement

Measurement Instruments/Apparatus:

Initial Method Study
In a first method study examining cardiovascular patients during the rehabilitation process, various methods had been used in addition to the 56 items of the original FLZ-form (Fahrenberg et al., 1986). Following this, a detailed interview of the patients and an independent assessment by the interviewer was conducted. Only the FLZ scale documented changes during the rehabilitation process. This result led to the conclusion that the FLZ scales were best suited to describe the inter- and intraindividual variability in life satisfaction in a standardized form. The present form of the questionnaire on life satisfaction came about by adding the 2 scales friends, relatives (9, also known as “social integration”) and place of residence (10, Schumacher & Brähler Laubach, 1995). The other 8 scale items are almost identical to the original version.

Scale Analysis
Analysis of the test methodology of the FLZ-scales involved item, factor, and cluster analysis. As the allocation of the 70 items within the 10 scale is fixed, the aim is not a construction of new scales, but rather a methodological review. 2 approaches were used in the factor analysis of the items as a basis of comparison: the factorization of the 70 items due to a missing-data correlation matrix involving all the subjects and the factorization of 49 items of 7 scales with a complete sample set. Factors analysis was carried out using the principal component method (commonality 1, varimax rotation) on the basis of a separately calculated missing-data correlation matrix. Programs from the SAS/STAT (SAS Institute Inc. 1996) were used, including PROC CLUSTER, PROC CORR, PROC FACTOR, PROC GLM, PROC MEANS, and PROC REG along with special programs. Even in the subsequent item analysis, correlation calculations, and analyses of variance, no missing data were replaced, but were conducted – depending on the analysis – with the reduced number of subjects (pairwise exclusion). Variation between results may be due to different methods, the various algorithms (PROC statements in SAS and SPSS), and by differences in the treatment of missing data. The factor analysis and the cluster analysis, based on Ward’s method (minimum variance cluster analysis), clearly confirm the assignment of each item to their respective scale (see Fahrenberg et al., 2000, pp. 32-33.). The norms are based on a representative population survey of 2,870 people. The norms are divided by gender and 7 age groups. The FLZ, as a standardized questionnaire, has a high implementation and evaluation objectivity and a high reliability. The consistency coefficients based on the normative sample (Cronbach’s alpha) are between 0.82 and 0.94.

Validity
As opposed to many other questionnaires, the importance of context and logical validity in this questionnaire must be underlined. Based on subjective views, is difficult to establish how these self-assessments of a person’s behavior, their objective living conditions, or the judgment of caregivers can be measured. The test manual presents the numerous relationships between the FLZ scales, sociodemographic characteristics, and the other questionnaire scales. Significant correlations are found between FLZ scale values and personality traits such as emotionality (FPI-R), social resonance, positive mood, and social potency (Giessen Test) along with the frequency of physical complaints (FBL-R, GBB), the memories of their parents’ parenting style (FEE), and the expression interpersonal problems (IIP). There are also correlations between social class, physical complaints, sleep disturbances, hospital and rehabilitation stays, number of surgeries, doctor visits, medication intake, and retirement. Satisfaction varies in different areas of life as they age. Older compared to younger subjects are more satisfied with finances and more dissatisfied with the health.
Participants received other questionnaires along with the FLZ. The data and the results of the questionnaires are here excluded (see Fahrenberg et al., 2000; Schumacher et al., 1995.). 

Questionnaires included:
(1) Giessen Test (GT)
(2) Giessen Complaint Sheet – short form GBB-24,
(3) Life Satisfaction Questionnaire (FLZ)
(4) Fear Coping Inventory (Angstbewältigungs-Inventar ABI),
(5) opinions (4 items),
(6) attitude towards authority (4 items),
(7) attitude to health (4 items),
(8) Parenting Style Questionnaire (FEE)
(9) Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP).

Structure of the questionnaire
The 70 FLZ items include a 7-point response scale to rate satisfaction.

Data Collection Method:

Data collection in the presence of an experimenter 

• Individual Administration

Population:

Population of the Federal Republic of Germany (old and new federal states) aged 14 years or older. Disproportionately more people were interviewed in the new federal states. Generalizations about the total population of the Germany had to be weighted between 0.665 and 0.335 for the population in the West (1,958) and the East (912) (see USUMA weighting factors). Though the differences between these 2 subsamples were significant in most of the FLZ scales, they still remained minor enough (see test manual) so that a reconstruction and normalization of FLZ could be avoided.

Survey Time Period:

1994-11-00 to 1994-11-00

Sample:

Quota sample

Gender Distribution:

55% female subjects (n=1578)

45% male subjects (n=1292)

Age Distribution: 14 years or older

Spatial Coverage (Country/Region/City): Germany

Subject Recruitment:

As part of a multi-themed survey, the households were randomly surveyed (210 sample points each in East and West Germany) as were the respondents chosen from each household (Schumacher et al., 1995). The survey covered 3,047 residents (aged 14-92 years) of the old and new German states. Participants were visited at home and interviewed there by trained interviewers of USUMA.

Sample Size:

2870 individuals

Return/Drop Out: