presents the demographic characteristics of the sample. Participants were on average 80.5 ± 7.1 years old with a range of 65 to 100 years. Within the sample, 82% of the elders were Caucasian, 86% reported being married or living with another, and 66% indicated some post-high school education.
Demographic Characteristics (N = 154)
The mean MAPA score was 214.3 ± 83.3 with a range of 47–426. Two-week test-retest reliability was 0.84 (p < .01) and internal consistency for the MAPA scale was good (α = 0.85). Three activity items were found to have very low item-total correlations [playing games (−0.01), medical visits (0.02), and using public transportation (0.09)], though they were retained to support the content validity of the MAPA.
Negative intra-individual meaning scores on average consisted of 15 activities (SD = 3.8, range 6–22) and had a mean value of 62.2 ± 57.4 and a range of 0–302. The positive intra-individual meaning scores consisted of a mean of 10 activities (SD = 4.9, range 0–22) and had a mean of 142.7 ± 79.0 and a range of 0–404. Paired t-tests indicated that the negative intra-individual meaning scores were comprised of significantly greater numbers of activities (t = 6.98, p < .001) yet evidenced lower summed frequency × meaning scores (t = −9.20, p < .001) compared to positive intra-individual meaning scores.
The criterion-related variables demonstrated adequate internal consistency. The measures of psycho-social well being had a mean coefficient alpha of 0.85 ± 0.05, range 0.77–0.89. The SF-36v2 scales had a mean coefficient alpha of 0.82 ± 0.10, range 0.62–0.93, though at 0.62 the bodily pain subtest of the SF-36v2 was relatively low (see ).
Descriptive Statistics for Criterion Variables
Pearson product-moment correlations revealed that the MAPA was significantly associated with nearly every criterion indicator (see ). Correlations with measures of life satisfaction included the LSI-Z (r = 0.38, p < .01) and the SWLS (r = 0.24, p < .01), whereas the MAPA was negatively correlated with the CES-D (r = −0.36, p < .01). The MAPA evidenced the largest correlations with the EMAS (r = 0.42, p < .01) a measure of meaningful activity, and the PIL (r = 0.50, p < .01) a measure of purpose and meaning in life.
Zero-Order Correlations between Criterion Variables and MAPA
The SF-36v2 mental health scales demonstrated statistically significant positive correlations with the MAPA, with a mean correlation of 0.35 (median r = 0.36). The physical health scales of version 2 of the SF-36 Health Survey had a mean correlation of 0.26 (median r = 0.27) with the MAPA. Only one subtest, bodily pain (r = 0.13, p = .10), was not statistically significantly related to the MAPA.
There were no statistically significant zero-order correlations between the negative intra-individual meaning score of the MAPA and the criterion variables (see ). Alternately, the positive intra-individual meaning score of the MAPA evidenced statistically significant correlations with 10 of 13 criterion variables. It appeared that MAPA activities imbued with less than average intra-personal meaning were not related to any of the criterion measures, whereas MAPA activities with average to greater than average intra-personal meaning produced correlations that approximated the entire MAPA scale.
Zero-Order Correlations between Criterion Variables and MAPA Intra-Individual Variables
Regression Models with the MAPA Predicting Criterion-Related Variables
The MAPA was found to be a substantial contributor to the prediction of each of the five psychological well-being indicators (see ). A review of standardized betas revealed that the MAPA consistently provided the largest contribution of all model variables to the prediction of these measures. The largest MAPA standardized betas were obtained in the prediction of the EMAS and PIL; a similar pattern was also found in the zero-order correlations. Notably, general health from the SF-36v2 added meaningful variance to four of these five models.
Psychosocial Well-Being Regression Models
When the SF-36v2 mental health variables were modeled, the MAPA again added to the prediction of every criterion-related measure (see ). However, the MAPA explained the greatest amount of variance for just one model (role emotional), though this standardized beta was only slightly greater than that of general health. Rather, general health appeared to be the most substantial contributor in the SF-36v2 mental health models. Finally, the MAPA aided in the prediction of three of the four SF-36v2 physical health measures; failing in its contribution to bodily pain (see ).
SF-36v2 Mental Health Regression Models
SF-36v2 Physical Health Regression Models