Counseling psychologists often work with clients to increase their well-being as well as to decrease their distress. One important aspect of well-being, highlighted particularly in humanistic theories of the counseling process, is perceived meaning in life. However, poor measurement has hampered research on meaning in life. In 3 studies, evidence is provided for the internal consistency, temporal stability, factor structure, and validity of the Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ), a new 10-item measure of the presence of, and the search for, meaning in life. A multitrait-multimethod matrix demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity of the MLQ subscales across time and informants, in comparison with 2 other meaning scales. The MLQ offers several improvements over current meaning in life measures, including no item overlap with distress measures, a stable factor structure, better discriminant validity, a briefer format, and the ability to measure the search for meaning.Keywords: meaning in life, purpose in life, measurement, scale construction, well-beingIn recent years the construct of meaning in life has received renewed attention and legitimacy, perhaps in conjunction with a growing focus on positive traits and psychological strengths (Ryan & Deci, 2001;Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Invariably, meaning in life is regarded as a positive variable-an indicator of well-being (Ryff, 1989), a facilitator of adaptive coping (Park & Folkman, 1997), or a marker of therapeutic growth (Crumbaugh & Maholick, 1964;Frankl, 1965). A recent report in the Journal of Counseling Psychology advocated for the understanding and assessment of well-being variables such as meaning in life in order to promote client growth and recovery (Lent, 2004). Despite substantial progress over the 40-year history of empirical research on meaning and the resurgence presently occurring, existing research seems unable to answer many fundamental questions about the construct. We argue that better measurement will help advance this research by providing a measure of therapeutic outcome and personal growth that counseling psychologists historically have been interested in, particularly those influenced by the humanistic tradition of promoting growth and not simply decreasing symptoms. The purpose of the present research was to develop an improved measure of meaning in life. Overview of Meaning in Life LiteratureThe definition of meaning in life varies throughout the field, ranging from coherence in one's life (Battista & Almond, 1973;Reker & Wong, 1988) to goal directedness or purposefulness (e.g., Ryff & Singer, 1998) to "the ontological significance of life from the point of view of the experiencing individual" (Crumbaugh & Maholick, 1964, p. 201). Others offer semantic definitions (e.g., "What does my life mean?"; Baumeister, 1991;Yalom, 1980). Likewise, there is diversity in perspectives regarding how to achieve meaning in life. Because there is no universal meaning that can fit everyone's life (Frankl, 1965), each person must crea...

The purpose of these studies was to assess the validity of self-reported stress-related growth (SRG). In Study 1, individuals with breast cancer (n ϭ 70) generally did not report greater well-being than a matched comparison group (n ϭ 70). In Study 2, there were no significant differences in well-being between undergraduate students who said that something positive had come out of their worst stressor (n ϭ 34) and those who reported no positives (n ϭ 34). In Study 3, specific domains of SRG assessed in undergraduate students (n ϭ 96) generally were not uniquely related to corresponding well-being measures. Thus, the authors found fairly little evidence for the validity of self-reported SRG. Future research directions are highlighted.

The notion that traumatic events shatter survivors' fundamental assumptions about the world has been accepted as a truism in the trauma literature, although tests of this hypothesis provide a somewhat mixed picture. Because this research has relied heavily on the World Assumptions Scale (WAS), it is unclear whether these inconsistent results are due to problems with assumptive world theory, improper tests of the theory, or problems with the WAS. Data were gathered from 742 undergraduate students at four universities to assess the psychometric properties of the WAS. Findings suggest several shortcomings of the WAS, including temporal instability, and mixed evidence regarding construct validity. Implications for trauma research are discussed.