Measuring Quality of Life: A Case for Re-Examining the Assessment of Domain Importance Weighting

Measuring Quality of Life: A Case for Re-Examining the Assessment of Domain Importance Weighting

Domain importance weighting has long been a topic of debate in the study of quality of life (QoL). The purpose of this study is to examine the adequacy of popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting with QoL measures that follow a formative-indicator approach. Using both empirical...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Applied Research in Quality of Life 2014-03, Vol.9 (1), p.63-77
Hauptverfasser: Hsieh, Chang-ming, Kenagy, Gretchen P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Evaluation
Political Science
Quality of life
Quality of Life Research
Regression analysis
Social Sciences
Sociology
Variables
Weighting
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 77
container_issue 1
container_start_page 63
container_title Applied Research in Quality of Life
container_volume 9
creator Hsieh, Chang-ming
Kenagy, Gretchen P.
description Domain importance weighting has long been a topic of debate in the study of quality of life (QoL). The purpose of this study is to examine the adequacy of popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting with QoL measures that follow a formative-indicator approach. Using both empirical and simulation data, this study found that neither of the two popular methods of evaluating the performance of domain importance weighting in QoL measures, correlation and moderated regression analysis, was ideal in capturing the actual function domain importance weighting posited in the data. More specifically, results from the popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting could be quite misleading when QoL measures were constructed using a formative-indicator approach. These findings call for a careful re-examination of results from previous studies using those popular approaches to assess domain importance weighting in QoL measures.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11482-013-9215-0
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2918663831</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2918663831</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-f366ca05bcd318f337ffbd3ab4938c61d782abddb5e86d1bf81ed00839629bee3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwAewssTZ47MZx2FXlVakIgUAsjZOM21TNAzuR6N-TKAhWrOYuzr0jHULOgV8C5_FVAJhpwThIlgiIGD8gE9AxMBHF6vA369kxOQlhy3mkVSIm5OMRbeh8Ua3pc2d3RbuntaOrwuE1ndOFDUhd7ekLstsvWxbVALYbpPMQMIQSq3bgb-rSFhVdlk3tW1tlSN-xWG_anj4lR87uAp793Cl5u7t9XTyw1dP9cjFfsUxq0TInlcosj9Isl6CdlLFzaS5tOkukzhTksRY2zfM0Qq1ySJ0GzDnXMlEiSRHllFyMu42vPzsMrdnWna_6l0YkoJWSWkJPwUhlvg7BozONL0rr9wa4GUSaUaTpRZpBpOF9R4yd0Aye0P8t_1_6BqDgdfo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2918663831</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Measuring Quality of Life: A Case for Re-Examining the Assessment of Domain Importance Weighting</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><source>ProQuest Central</source><creator>Hsieh, Chang-ming ; Kenagy, Gretchen P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hsieh, Chang-ming ; Kenagy, Gretchen P.</creatorcontrib><description>Domain importance weighting has long been a topic of debate in the study of quality of life (QoL). The purpose of this study is to examine the adequacy of popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting with QoL measures that follow a formative-indicator approach. Using both empirical and simulation data, this study found that neither of the two popular methods of evaluating the performance of domain importance weighting in QoL measures, correlation and moderated regression analysis, was ideal in capturing the actual function domain importance weighting posited in the data. More specifically, results from the popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting could be quite misleading when QoL measures were constructed using a formative-indicator approach. These findings call for a careful re-examination of results from previous studies using those popular approaches to assess domain importance weighting in QoL measures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1871-2584</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1871-2576</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11482-013-9215-0</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Evaluation ; Political Science ; Quality of life ; Quality of Life Research ; Regression analysis ; Social Sciences ; Sociology ; Variables ; Weighting</subject><ispartof>Applied Research in Quality of Life, 2014-03, Vol.9 (1), p.63-77</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and The International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) 2013</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and The International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) 2013.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-f366ca05bcd318f337ffbd3ab4938c61d782abddb5e86d1bf81ed00839629bee3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-f366ca05bcd318f337ffbd3ab4938c61d782abddb5e86d1bf81ed00839629bee3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11482-013-9215-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2918663831?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21367,27321,27901,27902,33721,33751,41464,42533,43781,51294</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hsieh, Chang-ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kenagy, Gretchen P.</creatorcontrib><title>Measuring Quality of Life: A Case for Re-Examining the Assessment of Domain Importance Weighting</title><title>Applied Research in Quality of Life</title><addtitle>Applied Research Quality Life</addtitle><description>Domain importance weighting has long been a topic of debate in the study of quality of life (QoL). The purpose of this study is to examine the adequacy of popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting with QoL measures that follow a formative-indicator approach. Using both empirical and simulation data, this study found that neither of the two popular methods of evaluating the performance of domain importance weighting in QoL measures, correlation and moderated regression analysis, was ideal in capturing the actual function domain importance weighting posited in the data. More specifically, results from the popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting could be quite misleading when QoL measures were constructed using a formative-indicator approach. These findings call for a careful re-examination of results from previous studies using those popular approaches to assess domain importance weighting in QoL measures.</description><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Political Science</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Quality of Life Research</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Variables</subject><subject>Weighting</subject><issn>1871-2584</issn><issn>1871-2576</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwAewssTZ47MZx2FXlVakIgUAsjZOM21TNAzuR6N-TKAhWrOYuzr0jHULOgV8C5_FVAJhpwThIlgiIGD8gE9AxMBHF6vA369kxOQlhy3mkVSIm5OMRbeh8Ua3pc2d3RbuntaOrwuE1ndOFDUhd7ekLstsvWxbVALYbpPMQMIQSq3bgb-rSFhVdlk3tW1tlSN-xWG_anj4lR87uAp793Cl5u7t9XTyw1dP9cjFfsUxq0TInlcosj9Isl6CdlLFzaS5tOkukzhTksRY2zfM0Qq1ySJ0GzDnXMlEiSRHllFyMu42vPzsMrdnWna_6l0YkoJWSWkJPwUhlvg7BozONL0rr9wa4GUSaUaTpRZpBpOF9R4yd0Aye0P8t_1_6BqDgdfo</recordid><startdate>20140301</startdate><enddate>20140301</enddate><creator>Hsieh, Chang-ming</creator><creator>Kenagy, Gretchen P.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140301</creationdate><title>Measuring Quality of Life: A Case for Re-Examining the Assessment of Domain Importance Weighting</title><author>Hsieh, Chang-ming ; Kenagy, Gretchen P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-f366ca05bcd318f337ffbd3ab4938c61d782abddb5e86d1bf81ed00839629bee3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Political Science</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Quality of Life Research</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Variables</topic><topic>Weighting</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hsieh, Chang-ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kenagy, Gretchen P.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Applied Research in Quality of Life</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hsieh, Chang-ming</au><au>Kenagy, Gretchen P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Measuring Quality of Life: A Case for Re-Examining the Assessment of Domain Importance Weighting</atitle><jtitle>Applied Research in Quality of Life</jtitle><stitle>Applied Research Quality Life</stitle><date>2014-03-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>63</spage><epage>77</epage><pages>63-77</pages><issn>1871-2584</issn><eissn>1871-2576</eissn><abstract>Domain importance weighting has long been a topic of debate in the study of quality of life (QoL). The purpose of this study is to examine the adequacy of popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting with QoL measures that follow a formative-indicator approach. Using both empirical and simulation data, this study found that neither of the two popular methods of evaluating the performance of domain importance weighting in QoL measures, correlation and moderated regression analysis, was ideal in capturing the actual function domain importance weighting posited in the data. More specifically, results from the popular approaches used to assess domain importance weighting could be quite misleading when QoL measures were constructed using a formative-indicator approach. These findings call for a careful re-examination of results from previous studies using those popular approaches to assess domain importance weighting in QoL measures.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s11482-013-9215-0</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1871-2584
ispartof Applied Research in Quality of Life, 2014-03, Vol.9 (1), p.63-77
issn 1871-2584
1871-2576
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2918663831
source Sociological Abstracts; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings; ProQuest Central
subjects Evaluation
Political Science
Quality of life
Quality of Life Research
Regression analysis
Social Sciences
Sociology
Variables
Weighting
title Measuring Quality of Life: A Case for Re-Examining the Assessment of Domain Importance Weighting
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T01%3A11%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measuring%20Quality%20of%20Life:%20A%20Case%20for%20Re-Examining%20the%20Assessment%20of%20Domain%20Importance%20Weighting&rft.jtitle=Applied%20Research%20in%20Quality%20of%20Life&rft.au=Hsieh,%20Chang-ming&rft.date=2014-03-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=63&rft.epage=77&rft.pages=63-77&rft.issn=1871-2584&rft.eissn=1871-2576&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11482-013-9215-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2918663831%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2918663831&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true