Which One is the Best for Evaluating the Multidimensional Structure of Meaning in Life Among Chinese: A Comparison of Three Multidimensional Scales

Meaning in life (MIL) plays a critical role in promoting physical and mental health. Given the multidimensional nature of MIL, further research is needed to distinguish between different MIL components. The present study focused on three similar but distinct multidimensional measures (the Multidimensional Existential Meaning Scale, MEMS; the Multidimensional MIL Scale, MMILS; the Quadripartite Existential Meaning Scale, QEMS), aiming to validate the Chinese versions of these measures and to compare their predictive effects on subjective well-being, indicated by positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction. Data were collected from two Chinese samples. Sample 1 (N = 393) was used for factor analysis, while Sample 2 (N = 447) was used for the evaluation of measurement invariance, reliability, and predictive relationships of different MIL measures on subjective well-being. Results showed that all three MIL measurements (MEMS, QEMS, and modified MMILS) demonstrated good reliability and validity and positively predicted subjective well-being. Moreover, QEMS showed significant incremental validity in predicting both positive affect and negative affect when controlling for the effects of the other MIL measures. These findings suggest that compared with MEMS and MMILS, QEMS may be a more suitable multidimensional MIL measure in the Chinese context. Further research is needed to examine these findings in other cultural contexts.