Objective: In order to find how rating the WHOQOL-BREF and DASS scales are combined to produce an overall measure of quality of life and satisfaction with health rating, a QOL-DASS model was designed ; and the strength of this hypothesized model was examined using the structural equation modeling
Method: Participants included a sample of 103 voluntary males who were divided into two groups of unhealthy (N=55) and healthy (N=48). To assess satisfaction and negative emotions of depression, anxiety and stress among the participants, they were asked to fill out the WHOQOLBREF and The Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-42
Results: Our findings on running the hypothesized model of QOL-DASS indicated that the proposed model of QOL-DASS fitted the data well for the both healthy and unhealthy groups
Conclusions: Our findings with CFA to evaluate the hypothesized model of QOL-DASS indicated that the different satisfaction domain ratings and the negative emotions of depression, anxiety and stress as the observed variables can represent the underlying constructs of general health and quality of life on both healthy and unhealthy groups.
Keywords: WHOQOL-BREF, DASS, Structural Equation Modeling, Quality of Life, Depression, Anxiety, Stress (Stress Disorder, Traumatic...)
Iran J Psychiatry 2011; 6:43-46
Various definitions of quality of life have been proposed by different researchers. However, it seems that no general agreement exists on the accepted definition of QOL in the extensive literature which has been generated on this subject over the past thirty years (1). Farquhar (2) states that quality of life 'is a problematic concept as different people value different things' (p. 1440); even Aristotle makes mention of this capricious notion by saying that each man, or even the same man, may value different things at certain periods of his life depending on his health and/or wealth.
In relation to health, quality of life is defined in terms of difference between reality, or perception of reality, and expectations (3). Quality of life has also been referred to as an affective response to one's role situation and values (4). The World Health Organisation (WHO) has defined "Quality Of Life" as "an individual's perception of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns" (5). The WHO states that quality of life is affected by an interaction of the individual's health, mental state, spirituality, relationship and elements of their environment (5).
It is now recognized that quality of life extends beyond a strict medical discourse into areas such as sociology, psychology, environmental studies, social work and social policy. In the 1960s, social scientists became more interested in the issue of quality of living, and particularly in the relationship between economic and social indicators of life quality on one hand, and the subjective evaluation of these circumstances on the other (6). To define quality of life, social scientists have focused on objective (e.g. Income, housing, educational level) or subjective (e.g. happiness, life satisfaction, wellbeing) components of quality of life (7).
Many terms are used synonymously with quality of life in the literature such as happiness, life satisfaction, and subjective well-being.
Subjective well-being is composed of several components including global life satisfaction, contentment with specific life domains, the presence of frequent positive affect (pleasant moods and emotions), and a relative absence of negative affect (unpleasant moods and emotions). Three main components of subjective well-being (SWB), namely pleasant (positive) affect, unpleasant (negative) affect and life satisfaction have been distinguished by researchers (8; 4; 9; 10; 11; 12). In this classification, life satisfaction represents a global cognitive evaluation or judgment of one's satisfaction with his/her life. …