Measurement Invariance of the Subjective Well-Being Scale in Low-Burden Settings: Psychometric Evaluation of the EBS-8 in Chile

Item	Mean	M	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis
Item 1	4.244	4	1.476	−.371	−.971
Item 2	4.154	4	1.457	−.414	−.815
Item 3	3.997	4	1.476	−.303	−.910
Item 4	4.130	4	1.506	−.396	−.943
Item 5	4.097	4	1.500	−.377	−.934
Item 6	4.074	4	1.533	−.378	−.966
Item 7	3.766	4	1.543	−.176	−1.001
Item 8	3.957	4	1.516	−.188	−1.078

[i] Note. M = Median; SD = Standard Deviation. Skewness and kurtosis values are presented for assessing univariate normality.

Table 1b

Inter-Item Pearson Correlation Matrix for EBS-8 Items

Item	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. Item 1	—
2. Item 2	.900**	—
3. Item 3	.888**	.896**	—
4. Item 4	.875**	.916**	.889**	—
5. Item 5	.896**	.930**	.910**	.926**	—
6. Item 6	.858**	.890**	.890**	.916**	.915**	—
7. Item 7	.831**	.864**	.865**	.874**	.891**	.900**	—
8. Item 8	.767**	.795**	.770**	.826**	.811**	.823**	.829**	—

Note. All inter-item correlations are Pearson coefficients.

** p < .01 (2-tailed).

Table 2

Internal Consistency Analysis of the EBS-8 Items

Item	Scale Mean if Item Deleted	Scale Variance if Item Deleted	Corrected Item-Total Correlation	Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
Item1	28.1739	98.768	.910	.979
Item2	28.2642	98.336	.940	.978
Item3	28.4214	98.352	.926	.979
Item4	28.2876	97.266	.946	.978
Item5	28.3211	97.131	.956	.977
Item6	28.3445	96.884	.941	.978
Item7	28.6522	97.328	.917	.979
Item8	28.4615	99.800	.844	.983

[i] Note. Corrected item–total correlations and Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted are reported. All values reflect internal consistency indicators for the EBS-8.

Table 3

Total Variance Explained for the EBS-8 Factor Structure

Component	Initial Eigenvalues			Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Factor	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %
1	7.090	88.627	88.627	6.965	87.058	87.058
2	.292	3.654	92.281	—	—	—
3	.164	2.050	94.332	—	—	—
4	.124	1.550	95.882	—	—	—
5	.104	1.300	97.182	—	—	—
6	.091	1.134	98.316	—	—	—
7	.071	.885	99.200	—	—	—
8	.064	.800	100.000	—	—	—

[i] Note. Only one factor had an initial eigenvalue greater than 1, accounting for 88.63% of the variance before extraction. After extraction using Principal Axis Factoring, the single factor accounted for 87.06% of the variance.

Table 4

Factor Matrix for the EBS-8 Items

Item	Factor 1 Loading
Item1	.967
Item2	.957
Item3	.951
Item4	.951
Item5	.937
Item6	.926
Item7	.920
Item8	.850

[i] Note. Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring. Factor loadings reflect unrotated factor structure.

Table 5

Goodness of Fit Indices for the EBS-8 Unifactorial Model

Fit Index	Recommended Threshold / Criterion	Unifactorial Model Value
χ²	Lower is better	93.924 (df = 20)
χ²/df	< 3	4.70
CFI	> 0.95	0.989
TLI	> 0.95	0.985
NNFI	> 0.95	0.985
NFI	> 0.90	0.986
RMSEA	< 0.08	0.081 [0.065–0.098]
SRMR	< 0.08	0.011
AIC	Lower is better	9,404.669
BIC	Lower is better	9,473.973
GFI	> 0.90	0.959
MFI	> 0.90	0.936

[i] Note. χ² = Chi-square; df = degrees of freedom; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index; NNFI = Non-Normed Fit Index; NFI = Normed Fit Index; RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation [90% Confidence Interval]; SRMR = Standardized Root Mean Square Residual; AIC = Akaike Information Criterion; BIC = Bayesian Information Criterion; GFI = Goodness of Fit Index; MFI = McDonald's Fit Index.

Table 6a

Measurement Invariance of EBS-8 Across Gender: Overall Model Fit Indices

Invariance Level	χ²	df	p (Model)	CFI	TLI	RMSEA
Configural	128.773	40	< .001	.987	.982	.089
Metric	134.384	47	< .001	.987	.985	.081
Scalar	152.040	54	< .001	.985	.985	.080
Strict	174.945	62	< .001	.983	.985	.081
Structural	175.840	64	< .001	.983	.986	.079

Table 6b

Nested Model Comparisons Across Invariance Levels

Invariance Level	Δχ²	Δdf	p (Δχ²)	ΔCFI	ΔTLI	ΔRMSEA
Configural	—	—	—	—	—	—
Metric	5.611	7	.586	.000	+.003	−.008
Scalar	17.656	7	.014	−.002	.000	−.001
Strict	22.905	8	.003	−.002	.000	+.001
Structural	0.895	2	.639	.000	+.001	−.002

[i] Note. χ² = chi-square statistic; df = degrees of freedom; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis Index; RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation. p (Model) refers to the overall model chi-square test; p (Δχ²) refers to the chi-square difference test between successive nested models. ΔCFI, ΔTLI, and ΔRMSEA represent changes relative to the preceding model. Models were estimated using maximum likelihood (ML), treating the six-category items as continuous variables.

Table 7

Convergent Validity: Inter-Correlations Between DASS-21 Subscales and EBS-8

Variable	1	2	3	4
1. EBS-8	—
2. Depression (DASS-21)	−0.471***	—
3. Anxiety (DASS-21)	−0.360***	0.745***	—
4. Stress (DASS-21)	−0.371***	0.777***	0.817***	—

Note. All values represent Pearson correlation coefficients. EBS-8 = Subjective Well-Being Scale (eight-item version); DASS-21 = Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21.

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

Ítem	1 TD	2 D	3 LD	4 LA	5 A	6 TA
1. Me gusta mi vida.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
2. Soy una persona feliz.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
3. Estoy satisfecho(a) con mi vida.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
4. Mi vida me trae alegría.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
5. Mi vida es feliz.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
6. Disfruto de mi vida.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
7. Mi vida es maravillosa.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
8. Estoy “de buenas”.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯

Item	1 SD	2 D	3 SDi	4 SA	5 A	6 SAg
1. I like my life.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
2. I am a happy person.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
3. I am satisfied with my life.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
4. My life brings me joy.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
5. My life is happy.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
6. I enjoy my life.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
7. My life is wonderful.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯
8. I’m in a good mood.	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯	◯

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.56508/mhgcj.v9i1.376 | Journal eISSN: 2612-2138

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 263 - 290

Submitted on: Aug 24, 2026

Accepted on: Nov 1, 2026

Published on: Nov 7, 2026

Published by: International Platform on Mental Health

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: Volume open

Keywords:

Mental Health,

Subjective Well-Being,

EBS-8,

Measurement Invariance,

Psychometric Validation,

Psychological Distress,

Latin America

Related subjects:

Business and economics,

Psychiatry, psychotherapy,

Social sciences,

Psychology,

Psychology, other

© 2026 Jonathan Martínez-Líbano, María-Mercedes Yeomans-Cabrera, Angelo Andrés Rodríguez Oyarce, Catalina Genoveva Muñoz Strale, Miguel Ángel Albalá Genol, Raquel María Guevara Ingelmo, Guillermo Daniel Felipe Barahona-Fuentes, published by International Platform on Mental Health
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 9 (2026): Issue 1 (January 2026)

Measurement Invariance of the Subjective Well-Being Scale in Low-Burden Settings: Psychometric Evaluation of the EBS-8 in Chile

Table 1a

Table 1b

Table 2

Table 3

Figure 1

Table 4

Table 5

Figure 2.

Table 6a

Table 6b

Table 7

Paradigm

My account