Preferences for Everyday Living Inventory-Nursing Home

Share this page

Overview

Purpose
To assess preference for daily life (e.g. wake up time, type of clothes)
Respondent
Person with a Disability
Administration Method
Interview
Administration Mode
In-person
0
Population
Age Related Disability

Instrument Citation(s)

Survey available at: http://www.polisherresearchinstitute.org/assessment-instruments

Psychometric Citation

  • Van Haitsma, K., Curyto, K., Spector, A., Towsley, G., Kleban, M., Carpenter, B., ... & Koren, M. J. (2012). The preferences for everyday living inventory: Scale development and description of psychosocial preferences responses in community-dwelling elders. The Gerontologist, 53(4), 582-595.

    Type of Publication
    Peer review
    Instrument Language
    English
    Sample: Age (Mean and Range)

    61–102

    Sample: Age Group

    18-64 Years, 65+ Years

    Sample: Countries/State

    New York

    Sample: Disability Type

    Not Reported

    Sample: Gender (%male)

    24

    Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)

    60.6% (n = 320) self-identifying as Caucasian; 22.2% (n = 117) as African American; 9.7% (n = 51) as Hispanic; 6.3% (n = 33) as Caribbean American; 1.1% (n = 6) as Asian American; and 1 person as American Indian

    Sample: Sampling Strategy

    Stratified Random Sample

    Sample: Size

    437

    Reliability: Internal Consistency

    Social Contact, .581; Growth Activities, .664; Diversionary Activities, .158; Self Dominion, .552; and Enlisting Others in Care, .155.

    Validity: Content Validity (e.g., Expert Judgement)

    Preference items from each concept mapping preference domain were represented in the 10 most strongly held preferences in this sample—a finding that lends support to the instrument’s content validity.

    Validity: Face Validity

    Feedback from those who took the preference inventory, and a professional advisory board, suggested the PELI possesses good face validity and comprehensively addresses important psychosocial preferences.

    Validity: Other Evidence

    Convergent and Divergent Validity: ADL and IADL scales were significantly negatively correlated with Self Dominion (r = −0.13, p < .01, respectively) and not correlated with preferences for Enlisting Others in Care.There was a significant relationship between Vitality and preferences for Growth Activities (r = 0.13, p < .01). There was a significant positive correlation between self-reported pain on the SF12 Bodily Pain subscale and Enlisting Others in Care (r = 0.14, p < .01); a significant positive relationship between Bodily Pain and preferences for Growth Activities (r = 0.10, p < .05); a significant positive relationship appeared between Positive Affect and Social Contact, Growth Activities, and Diversionary Activities (r = 0.23, p < .01; r = 0.16, p < .01; r = 0.12, p < .05, respec- tively). There was significant negative correlation between depressive symptoms and negative affect and Diversionary Activities (r = −0.12, p < .05; r = −0.17, p < .01, respectively).

    Study design
    Cross-Sectional