Next Article in Journal
Innovative Development Finance for Health Sector Development: Focusing on the Air Ticket Solidarity Levy System in the Republic of Korea
Next Article in Special Issue
Objective Comparison of Achievement Motivation and Competitiveness among Semi-Professional Male and Female Football Players
Previous Article in Journal
How Does the Sustainable Investment Climate Affect Firm Geographic Diversification in China? Managerial Discretion as a Mediator
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparison between the KPNP and Daedo Protection Scoring Systems through a Technical-Tactical Analysis of Elite Taekwondo Athletes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 5
10.3390/su14052765
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Validation and Factorial Invariance of the Life Skills Ability Scale in Mexican Higher Education Students

by
Argenis P. Vergara-Torres
,
Verónica Ortiz-Rodríguez
,
Orlando Reyes-Hernández
,
Jeanette M. López-Walle
,
Raquel Morquecho-Sánchez
and
José Tristán
*
Facultad de Organización Deportiva, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, San Nicolás de los Garza 66455, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(5), 2765; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052765
Submission received: 23 December 2021 / Revised: 18 February 2022 / Accepted: 21 February 2022 / Published: 26 February 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Methodological, Technical-Tactical and Biopsychosocial Perspectives in Opposition Sports)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The objective of this study was to validate the Life Skills Ability Scale through internal consistency and construct validity in the context of higher education in Mexico. In study 1, the reliability and factor structure of the scale were evaluated with a sample of 525 higher education students (Mage = 19.94 years, SD = 3.85). In study 2, the factor invariance of the instrument was analyzed based on sample gender, which consisted of 707 higher education students (Mage = 20.03 years, SD = 4.19). The results showed adequate reliability and construct validity with a second order model and an eight-factor structure (teamwork, goal-setting, time management, emotional skills, communication, social skills, leadership, problem-solving, and decision-making). Likewise, there was measure equivalence between men and women. In conclusion, the Spanish version of the Life Skills Ability Scale in a Mexican context is a reliable and valid instrument that allows the assessment of life skills in higher education students.

1. Introduction

Life skills are relevant for adequate development in educational, extracurricular, social, sports, and professional settings [1,2,3]. In changing and uncertain environments, their importance has also become evident [4,5,6]. Life skills can be defined as “abilities or skills that the individuals need to achieve success in life within a sociocultural setting” [7] (p. 51) and are considered a key component sought by employers during personnel selection [8,9] and for self-employment [10].
Within the Incheon Declaration Education 2030 [11] of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [12], a substantial increase in the number of youths and adults with necessary technical and professional competencies for employment and entrepreneurial activity has been proposed. This proposal also expresses the importance and need for developing cognitive and noncognitive skills, such as problem-solving, teamwork, and communication. It has been found that the development of different skills during higher education is essential for forming future experts and leaders, and economic prosperity [9,11,13].
These skills have been called soft skills [14,15], generic skills [16,17], or key competencies [18]. Previous research [2,19] has shown that skills such as teamwork, goal-setting, time management, emotional skills, communication, social skills, leadership, problem-solving and decision-making are related to better employment opportunities [8,9,20], physical wellbeing [21], psychological wellbeing, academic self-efficacy, quality of life related health [2], self-confidence [19], self-esteem [22], happiness [23], and healthy lifestyle habits such as a reduction in tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana consumption [24,25,26]. Life skills are not only identified in the work or educational environment, but also in different contexts, where demands are often changing and challenging, so developing them should be a priority [27,28,29].
In Mexico, research regarding life skills has focused on the adolescent population, finding that programs based on promoting life skills improve the level of knowledge regarding these skills [30] and the knowledge and attitudes regarding safe sexual behavior [31,32]. In addition, nondrug consuming students have greater life skill perceptions [33]. Some life skills, such as teamwork, leadership, decision-making, problem-solving, and communication skills, have been studied in higher education populations [34,35]. Nevertheless, some others have been little explored, such as emotional skills, goal-setting, and time management. In the same way, research that has analyzed these skills [34,35] has focused on engineering students, and these studies have been conducted with instruments designed for these studies.
On the other hand, there is some work in which Spanish language instruments have been proposed to measure life skills in higher education settings [36,37]. The work by Díaz Posada et al. [36] was one of the first approaches in the Spanish language to measure life skills in a higher education setting. In their study, they propose an 80-item scale distributed between 10 factors using as a basis the life skills proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) [38]. Later, Santana Campas et al. [37] proposed the adaptation and validation of the scale by Díaz Posada et al. [36] in a Mexican context in a sample of higher education students; however, both studies reported, in most of their subscales, internal consistency values below those considered adequate [39,40]. Likewise, these studies do not present conclusive evidence of construct validity. Only the study by Santana Campas et al. [37] reported confirmatory factor analysis results. The information about the tested models is limited, and there seem to be certain contradictions in the goodness of fit indices that are considered adequate (the GFI value that the study considered adequate was < 0.9; however, the literature indicates that values close to 1.00 are considered a good fit; see Hooper et al. [41]).
Another aspect to point out is that the scale developed by Díaz Posada et al. [36] and validated in the Mexican context by Santana Campas et al. [37], which takes the life skills model proposed by the WHO [38,42], focuses on the skills needed by children, adolescents, and young people for the prevention of health problems and to perform in everyday life. It does not emphasize the skills required for professional success that could also be sought after by employers, considering that one of the purposes of higher education is to provide students with the skills needed to enter the job market [43].
Considering the aforementioned, Cronin et al. [2] developed an instrument called the Life Skills Ability Scale, which measures eight life skills in higher education students that focus on employability. This scale showed factor and concurrent validity and internal consistency in students from the United Kingdom.
The importance of having valid, reliable, standardized instruments that permit a contextualized assessment of the different study variables has been reported in the literature [44,45,46]. An instrument that measures life skills in higher education populations will assess if educational programs provide students with life and work skills and not only a focus on academic achievement. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way teaching processes [47] and work environments are developed, and it has been found that the life skills required by employers may have changed before and after the pandemic [4,5], so assessing them becomes even more relevant.
Similarly, previous studies have found differences concerning gender in some life skills considered in the Cronin et al. [2] scale; for example, it has been reported that women have less participation when working in a team [48], and better scores in the establishment of academic goals [49] and time management [50]. Gender differences in leadership perceptions [51,52] and social skills [53] have also been found. In general, it is important to consider the possible differences in gender in studies related to higher education [54]. Considering the aforementioned, the general objective of this study was to validate the Life Skills Ability Scale [2] through internal consistency and construct validity in the context of higher education in Mexico. Two specific objectives were proposed to answer the general objective: (1) test three alternative factor models (univariate, eight factors, and second order) and analyze the internal consistency of the instrument in a univariate manner with eight factors (Study 1), and (2) analyze factor invariance according to student gender and verify the internal consistency and correlation between factors according to gender (Study 2).

2. Study 1

In this study, three alternative factor models were tested: the first unifactorial, the second with eight factors, and a third, a second order model, where the eight hypothesized factors are grouped into a single factor; in addition, the internal consistency of the eight subscales and the global scale, and the correlations between them, were analyzed.

2.1. Methods

2.1.1. Participants

The participants were 525 higher education students (189 (36%) women, 336 (64%) men; Mage = 19.94 years, SD = 3.85) enrolled in different undergraduate and graduate physical activity and sports programs in the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico. The gender ratio in the participants is due to the fact that, in higher education programs related to physical activity and sport in Mexico, the proportion of men is higher than that of women. The students were distributed in the following programs: from a bachelor’s degree program, 512 (53.7%, first year, 12%, second year, 27.5%, third year, and 6.7% fourth year), 11 from master’s programs, and two from a doctoral program. All the subjects that made up the sample, being regular students of higher education academic programs, were susceptible to being considered as participants in order to fulfill the objectives of the study.

2.1.2. Instrument

The Life Skills Ability Scale by Cronin et al. [2] and its preliminary version in a Mexican context [55] was used after performing back translation from English to Mexican Spanish under the supervision of experts. A pilot study was performed, and the final version was completed. An exploratory factor analysis was carried out that demonstrated the grouping of 43 items into eight factors, which corresponded to the original scale in English. The eight factors were teamwork (seven items), goal-setting (seven items), time management (four items), emotional skills (four items), communication (four items), social skills (five items), leadership (eight items), and problem-solving and decision-making (four items). The items were preceded by the heading “I’m capable of…” and the option was a Likert-type five-point response going from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (completely agree). An example of an item is “helping another team/group member to carry out a task.” The preliminary version in the Mexican context of the Life Skills Ability Scale [55] demonstrated adequate initial psychometric properties (Bartlett sphericity: χ2 = 15,549.55, df = 903, p < 0.001; KMO = 0.96; α values between 0.83 and 0.91 for the subscales and 0.97 for the global scale).

2.1.3. Procedure

After approval by the Comité de Investigación de la Facultad de Organización Deportiva (REPRIN-FOD-87, 1 September 2020) and the authorities of the different school programs, the instrument was applied during a class on a regular school day. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, classes were taught virtually through the Microsoft Teams© videoconferencing platform. The number of classes and duration of the school days remained the same as in the face to face modality. In addition, the contents of the different subjects were not modified due to the migration to the virtual system; however, this fact did represent limitations in the performance of practical activities involving social contact, so these had to be adapted to the restrictive measures implied by the confinement. Practical activities such as dancing, physical tests or communication of guidelines and instructions (typical of a physical education teacher or coach), could be performed as long as they were carried out alone or with family members or people living in the same household. Other activities, such as academic expositions or written or audiovisual projects that had to be carried out in collaboration with other classmates, were also maintained by adapting to the social distancing measures. Data collection occurred between September and October 2020. The interviewers were previously trained to ensure homogeneity in the data collection process. They informed the participants about the study objectives, its voluntary nature, that there were no correct and incorrect answers, and the importance of honesty in the answers. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. Only those who provided informed consent participated in the study. After this, the interviewer shared the link to the questionnaire and was on hand to answer any questions. The application process took between 10 and 15 min, being careful to follow the ethical protocols recommended by the American Psychological Association (APA) and the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki.

2.1.4. Data Analysis

The data obtained were organized with SPSS software version 25. A descriptive analysis was performed using means, standard deviation, asymmetry, and kurtosis. Reliability was defined with Cronbach’s alpha and correlations with Spearman’s rho. Three models were evaluated to test the factor structure; the first grouped all scale items into one factor named life skills. In the second model, the items were organized into eight factors proposed by the original scales [2]; for the third model, the eight factors were grouped into only one second order factor called life skills. The confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed with AMOS software version 24, considering the following goodness of fit indices: chi-squared degrees of freedom (χ2/df), the comparative fit index (CFI), the incremental fit index (IFI), the root mean approximation error (RMSEA) and the Akaike information criterion (AIC).

2.2. Results

The descriptive statistics and reliability of the analyzed variables are shown in Table 1. The internal consistency analysis revealed adequate values for each of the subscales (n = 525, α values between 0.84 and 0.93) and the global scale (α = 0.97), obtaining coefficients above 0.70, as recommended in the literature [39,40]. To determine normality in data distribution, skewness and kurtosis coefficients in ranges of 1, −1, as recommended by Ferrando and Anguiano-Carrasco [56], were used.
The correlations between the different subscales are presented in Table 2; in the absence of normality, these results were obtained with Spearman’s rho. All correlations between the subscales were positive and statistically significant.
Due to the lack of normality of the data in the confirmatory factor analysis, bootstrap resampling [57,58,59] and the asymptotically distribution free (ADF) methods were used. The confirmatory factor analysis results for each of the hypothesized models are shown in Table 3. Considering χ2/df values less than three [60], a RMSEA of 0.08 [61] and CFI and IFI greater than 0.90 [62], the eight factor and the second order models had adequate goodness of fit, which did not happen with the unifactorial model that had better internal consistency (see Table 1). In the case of the eight factor and second order models, all the factor saturations were significant (p < 0.001) and greater than 0.60; therefore, we found evidence of factorial validity in both models compared with the unifactorial model, which had item factor saturation in the range of 0.56 to 0.73, which were all significant (p < 0.001).
A comparison of the two was made to determine if any model had a better fit. Considering CFI and IFI difference values greater than 0.01 [63,64], and of 0.015 for RMSEA [65], no relevant difference was found between the two (ΔCFI = 0.009; ΔIFI = 0.009; ΔRMSEA = 0.003). However, when contrasting the AIC values, it has been suggested that smaller values indicate a better fit [41,66], with the eight factor model presenting better parsimony. Nevertheless, the second order model was chosen, which also presents a good fit and allows us to obtain more information on how life skills behave by analyzing them grouped in a second order factor.

3. Study 2

In this study, the factor invariance of the second order factorial model was analyzed based on student gender, and its internal consistency and correlation between factors according to gender were verified.

3.1. Methods

3.1.1. Participants

The sample consisted of 707 higher education students (353 (49.9%) women, 354 (50.1%) men; Mage = 20.03 years, SD = 4.19) that participate in different physical activity and sports academic programs in the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico. The students were distributed in the following programs: in the bachelor’s degree program, 689 (53.5%, first year, 11.3%, second year, 26.1%, third year, and 9.2%, fourth year), 14 in master’s programs and four in a doctorate program.

3.1.2. Instruments

The Mexican Spanish language version of the Life Skills Ability Scale described in Study 1 was used.

3.1.3. Procedure

The procedure for data collection was carried out according to the ethical considerations recommended by the APA and the Declaration of Helsinki. A procedure similar to Study 1 was used.

3.1.4. Data Analysis

The data were processed using SPSS version 25 software in which descriptive analysis, internal consistency, correlations, and t test for independent samples were performed. The invariance analysis was performed using AMOS software version 24. The goodness of fit indices described in Study 1 were used to determine factor invariance based on gender.

3.2. Results

The descriptive values and internal consistency of each of the analyzed subscales are shown in Table 1. Satisfactory reliability values for the global scale (n = 707, α = 0.97) and all the subscales (α values between 0.84 and 0.93) were found. Likewise, as shown in Table 2, all the factor correlations were positive and significant (p < 0.01). Table 4 shows the correlation values between factors according to gender. It can be seen that all correlations were positive and significant (p < 0.01).
A t-test for independent samples was performed to determine if differences existed between men and women in the perception of the eight life skills. Significant differences were found for Teamwork (Mman = 4.30, Mwoman = 4.39; p < 0.05, d = 0.15), Goal-setting (Mman = 4.23, Mwoman = 4.34; p < 0.05, d = 0.16) and Leadership (Mman = 4.13, Mwoman = 4.27; p < 0.01, d = 0.21) with small effect sizes [67].
Based on the results obtained in Study 1, in addition to the fact that, in the literature, differences in life skills have been found between men and women [48,49,50,51,52,53,54], the second order model was chosen to analyze gender equivalence, since, in this model, all life skills are considered, as well as their grouping in a second order factor. The first step consisted of performing a preliminary analysis that separately examined the factor structure of the Spanish version of the Life Skills Ability Scale in a sample of men (model M0a) and women (model M0b). As shown in Table 5, the model M0a model was satisfactory but not the M0b model; despite this, all the estimated parameters in both models were statistically significant, and the item factor saturations were in the range of 0.70 to 0.80 (model M0a) and 0.62 to 0.87 (model M0b).
The next step consisted of performing a multisample analysis, for which new nested models were created (see Table 5). Model 1 (M1) examined the structural invariance of the Spanish version of the Life Skills Ability Scale in two analyzed groups (Hf: the same format without restriction), obtaining adequate goodness of fit, which provides evidence that the factorial structure of the scale does not vary in the two compared groups. Model 1 was considered a reference for the following nested restrictions.
Model 2 (M2) tested the equivalence of the factor loading matrix (HΧ: ΛΧ(H) = ΛΧ(M)), where (H) represented the group of men, and (M) the group of women. This model had adequate fit indices, and, when comparing them with those of M1, the differences were not greater than those of the criterion value (see Study results 1: ΔCFI = 0.001; ΔIFI = 0.001; ΔRMSEA = 0.00), indicating that there were no differences between both models (M1 and M2); therefore, there are no differences between factor loads according to gender.
Model 3 (M3) added equivalence between intercepts (HΛΧτ: ΛΧ(H) = ΛΧ(M); τ(H) = τ(M)) and presented adequate goodness of fit indices. There were no relevant differences (ΔCFI = 0.001; ΔIFI = 0.001; ΔRMSEA = 0.00) when compared with the base model (M1); thus, the equivalence of factor saturations and intercepts can be accepted. Since an adequate fit in models M2 and M3 was obtained, the next step was to determine if there were differences between the means of the latent variables and estimate the size of the effect (i.e., the magnitude of the difference). With that purpose, factor loading, intercept, and latent mean invariance of the subscales were imposed on Model 4 (M4). The model presented adequate fit indices, and no relevant differences were found (ΔCFI = 0.001; ΔIFI = 0.001; ΔRMSEA = 0.00) compared with the base model (M1); thus, the invariance between latent means was confirmed. In the last of the nested models, Model 5 (M5), the differences between the latent means of the two groups were estimated. No relevant differences were found (ΔCFI = 0.006; ΔIFI = 0.006; ΔRMSEA = 0.00) when compared with the base model, so the equivalence of measure is also confirmed in this model.
On the other hand, it has been pointed out that the models with greater restrictions tend to increase their AIC values indicating less parsimony; however, in this study, when performing the AIC contrast, a lower increase was found (AICM5-AICM1 = 4359.26 – 4324.28 = 34.98).
Finally, Figure 1 shows the standardized solution of the confirmatory factor analysis and the factor invariance of the Spanish version of the Life Skills Ability Scale. In it, we can see that, in the base model without restrictions and in the models for men and women, all the associations were positive and statistically significant (p < 0.01); in addition, all the items saturated significantly and were above 0.60. In the case of the base model without restrictions, communication is the factor that explains life skills to the greatest extent (β = 0.89, p < 0.01). In comparison, time management is associated to the least extent (β = 0.60, p < 0.01). On the other hand, when analyzing the models between men and women, the association values were slightly higher in men, except for leadership, where women had a higher score, and in social skills, where equivalent scores were seen.

4. Overall Discussion and Conclusions

Assessing the skills that allow higher education students to enter employment is especially relevant. Although some studies have proposed measurement scales for these abilities, these scales do not have adequate psychometric properties and have some limitations that could lead to measurement biases. Therefore, the main contribution of this study is to provide a valid, reliable, and standard scale that evaluates the degree to which higher education students perceive their life skills.
With this concept in mind, the main objective of this work was to validate the Life Skills Ability Scale, through its internal consistency and construct validity, in the context of higher education in Mexico. For this, two studies were carried out in which evidence of adequate internal consistency and construct validity was found with different factorial models (unifactorial, eight factors, second order, and invariance based on gender).
In Study 1, the results showed satisfactory goodness of fit indices for the eight factor and second order models. This finding provides evidence of the factorial validity of the scale and indicates that life skills can be measured in eight factors and that these factors explain a second order factor which can be called Life Skills. These results agree with those reported by Cronin et al. [2], which found validity in similar models and allows mentioning that the Mexican Spanish language version of the Life Skills Ability Scale is valid for evaluating teamwork, goal-setting, time management, emotional skills, communication, social skills, leadership, problem-solving and decision-making in higher education students.
Adequate internal consistency values were found in Study 1 and Study 2 [39,40] for the eight subscales and the global scale, which provides evidence of the instrument’s reliability. Furthermore, both studies had positive and statistically significant correlations (p < 0.01) between all life skills. Future studies across other target groups (e.g., other cultures, age groups) and in other subjects can also move this line of research forward to determine the extent to which the Life Skills Ability Scale can be considered a valid measure in other environments different to the population of physical activity and sports programs.
On the other hand, the mean life skill scores showed relatively high values, almost all being above four, with teamwork being the highest life skill and time management the lowest; in addition, the latter was the only one to score below four. These results are consistent with the study conducted by González Gallegos [68], since the employers participating in his study indicate that the strength of graduates of academic programs in physical activity and sport is that they have developed the ability to work as part of a team. In addition, the program and the university educational model establish that teamwork skills must be developed in students during their academic career. This finding points to the relevance of having the Spanish language version of the Life Skills Ability Scale, since it would be possible to analyze whether contextual variables such as learning tasks or a teacher’s behavior affect students’ perceptions of their life skills.
As previous studies have pointed out [47], the COVID-19 pandemic forced the different educational institutions to transfer their classes to the virtual system, which also brought changes in interactions and students’ perceptions of the instructional processes [47,69], and, in turn, could have had an impact on the construct validity of the instrument; however, the structure of the Spanish language version of the Life Skills Ability Scale, grouped into eight factors and a second order factor, corresponds to the original theoretical conception of the scale [2], which provides evidence of nomological validity. In this sense, studies that have tested construct validity in other instruments in the context of pandemics [70,71,72] have used confirmatory factor analyses, the same analyses performed in the present study. With respect to convergent validity, although, in this study, the scale presented was not associated with other instruments, it is possible to demonstrate that the relationships between the factors are positive and significant both in study 1 and 2, and between gender, while, with respect to discriminant validity, and although there was no other contrast instrument, it is possible to point out that, since there are significant differences between gender, the instrument presented is stable in the factors despite the differences between means, so it is capable of discriminating between gender. Nevertheless, as related research has suggested [70,71,72], it is necessary to continue testing the instrument to corroborate its construct validity at postpandemic times.
When comparing the mean values of Study 2, there were significant differences between men and women in teamwork, goal-setting, and leadership, with women being those who presented higher means. However, small effect sizes were found when measuring the effect size to determine the size of the difference [67].
Concerning the above, previous studies have indicated gender based differences in these skills. The study by Meadows and Sekaquaptewa [48] found that women have lower participation than men when working as a team, while Doung et al. [52] reported that women perceive less effectiveness in their leadership than men. However, in this study, women reported perceiving themselves as more capable of working in a team than men. In the same way, Valle et al. [49] found that women scored higher than men in setting academic goals, which is similar to what was found in this study. In the literature, it has been shown that the type of program [73,74] or university, and the interactions between student–faculty [75], affect several variables according to gender; however, more studies are needed to clarify these differences.
In Study 2, a factorial invariance analysis was carried out to determine the equivalence of the measure in men and women of the Mexican Spanish language version of the Life Skills Ability Scale. The results found a good fit for the base model without restrictions and the men model; this was not the case for women. This finding could be explained by the differences found in the previously mentioned latent means. Despite this, all the associations between factors were positive and statistically significant in both models, as were the factor saturations of all the items; in addition, when contrasting the base model without restrictions with the subsequent nested models, no relevant differences were found. Therefore, it is possible to confirm the equivalence of the scale measurement.
There are other aspects to consider regarding the assessment of life skills. One of them is that we already have proposals for the transfer of life skills acquired in the practice of sport to settings outside sport [76,77,78]; future studies using the Life Skills Ability Scale in the Spanish language could explore whether these models work in higher education contexts. Likewise, it is a fact that the COVID-19 pandemic has changed many of the practices and requirements of the professional marketplace [79] and assessing the life skills needed to meet these new requirements will be critical. It has previously been noted that there is little coordination between employers, institutions of higher education, and students or recent graduates in establishing what skills are critical for job success [80]. Having an instrument to address the above points is another of the contributions of this work.
As for limitations, it is important to note that this study only had physical activity and sports academic programs participants. Future studies should test the instrument with other higher education populations. It is also necessary to indicate that, like all self reports, this instrument is not free from possible biases related to a desirable social status and precision in the responses. Future studies could explore other methodologies to measure life skills (e.g., external evaluators). In addition, a point that can be considered a limitation is the fact that this study was conducted during the period of confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have affected the participants’ perception of their life skills. Longitudinal or postpandemic studies will be important to determine the behavior of these skills once conditions for face to face or social proximity activities exist. Finally, future studies could test life skills with other variables and under various theoretical perspectives (e.g., self-determination theory [81] or the achievement goals theory [82]) and analyze the viability of the instrument at other educational levels (e.g., preparatory school).
In conclusion, the Life Skills Ability Scale is a valid and reliable instrument that assesses life skills in higher education students in Mexico. This instrument may help higher education institutions not only to improve their academic programs and the teaching practices of their professors with a view to enhancing the life skills of their students, but also to improve their extracurricular activities. It can also be used by employers in their recruitment processes and for the continuous improvement of their staff. The Spanish language version of the Life Skills Ability Scale can be found in the Supplementary Materials.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su14052765/s1, The Mexican version of the Life Skills Ability Scale.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.P.V.-T., V.O.-R. and J.T.; methodology, J.T. and J.M.L.-W.; software, A.P.V.-T. and V.O.-R.; validation, A.P.V.-T., O.R.-H. and J.M.L.-W.; formal analysis, A.P.V.-T., O.R.-H. and J.M.L.-W.; investigation, V.O.-R., R.M.-S. and A.P.V.-T.; resources, V.O.-R., R.M.-S. and J.T.; data curation, A.P.V.-T.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P.V.-T. and V.O.-R.; writing—review and editing, A.P.V.-T., V.O.-R., O.R.-H., R.M.-S., J.M.L.-W. and J.T.; visualization, A.P.V.-T., V.O.-R., O.R.-H., R.M.-S., J.M.L.-W. and J.T.; supervision, A.P.V.-T. and J.T.; project administration, A.P.V.-T., V.O.-R. and J.T.; funding acquisition, J.T. and R.M.-S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was partially funded by the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) and the Programa de Apoyo a la Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (PAICYT) with project number EHA1928-21.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Facultad de Organización Deportiva (REPRIN-FOD-87, 1 September 2020).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current research are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Cronin, L.D.; Allen, J. Development and Initial Validation of the Life Skills Scale for Sport. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 2017, 28, 105–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cronin, L.; Allen, J.; Ellison, P.; Marchant, D.; Levy, A.; Harwood, C. Development and initial validation of the life skills ability scale for higher education students. Stud. High. Educ. 2019, 46, 1011–1024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Steptoe, A.; Wardle, J. Life Skills, Wealth, Health, and Wellbeing in Later Life. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 4354–4359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Huang, A.; De la Mora, E.; Marsh, J.; Workman, H. COVID-19 and the future of work in the hospitality industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 97, 102986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sato, S.; Kang, T.; Daigo, E.; Matsuoka, H.; Harada, M. Graduate employability and higher education’s contributions to human resource development in sport business before and after COVID-19. J. Hosp. Leis. Sports Tour. Educ. 2021, 28, 100306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Totskaya, N. Increasing Employability Through Development of Generic Skills: Considerations for Remote Course Delivery During COVID-19 Pandemic. In Strategic Innovative Marketing and Tourism in the COVID-19 Era; Kavoura, A., Havlovic, S.J., Totskaya, N., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 69–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Binkley, M.R.; Sternberg, R.; Jones, S.; Nohara, D.; Murray, T.S.; Clermont, Y. Moving Towards Measurement: The Overarching Conceptual Framework for the ALL Study. In Measuring Adult Literacy and Life Skills: New Frameworks for Assessment, 1st ed.; Murray, T.S., Clermont, Y., Binkley, M., Eds.; Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2005; pp. 46–86. [Google Scholar]
  8. Ibarraran, P.; Ripani, L.; Taboada, B.; Villa, J.M.; Garcia, B. Life skills, employability and training for disadvantaged youth: Evidence from a randomized evaluation design. IZA J. Labor Dev. 2014, 3, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Lowden, K.; Hall, S.; Elliot, D.; Lewin, J. Employers’ Perceptions of the Employability Skills of New Graduates; Edge Foundation: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  10. Roodt, J. Self-employment and the required skills. Manag. Dyn. 2005, 14, 18–33. [Google Scholar]
  11. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4: Ensure Inclusive and Equitable Quality Education and Promote Lifelong Learning Opportunities for All. 2015. Available online: https://iite.unesco.org/publications/education-2030-incheon-declaration-framework-action-towards-inclusive-equitable-quality-education-lifelong-learning/ (accessed on 16 December 2021).
  12. Organization Nations United. The Sustainable Development Agenda. Available online: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/development-agenda/ (accessed on 16 December 2021).
  13. Wolf, R.; Zahner, D.; Benjamin, R. Methodological challenges in international comparative post-secondary assessment programs: Lessons learned and the road Ahead. Stud. High. Educ. 2015, 40, 471–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chamorro-Prezumic, T.; Arteche, A.; Bremner, A.J.; Greven, C.; Furhham, A. Soft skills in higher education: Importance and improvement ratings as a function of individual differences and academic performance. Educ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 221–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Robles, M.M. Executive Perceptions of the Top 10 Soft Skills Needed in Today’s Workplace. Bus. Commun. Q. 2012, 75, 453–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Keneley, M.; Jackling, B. The acquisition of generic skills of culturally-diverse student cohorts. Account. Educ. 2011, 20, 605–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Virtanen, A.; Tynjälä, P. Factors explaining the learning of generic skills: A study of university students’ experiences. Teach. High. Educ. 2019, 24, 880–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Barth, M.; Godemann, J.; Rieckmann, M.; Stoltenberg, U. Developing key competencies for sustainable development in higher education. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2007, 8, 416–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Nasheeda, A.; Abdullah, H.B.; Krauss, S.E.; Ahmed, N.B. A narrative systematic review of life skills education: Effectiveness, research gaps and priorities. Int. J. Adolesc. Youth 2019, 24, 362–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Azevedo, A.; Apfelthaler, G.; Hurst, D. Competency development in business graduates: An industry-driven approach for examining the alignment of undergraduate business education with industry requirements. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2012, 10, 12–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tuttle, J.; Campbell-Heider, N.; David, T.M. Positive adolescent life skills training for high-risk teens: Results of a group intervention study. J. Pediatr. Health Care 2006, 20, 184–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Maryam, E.; Davoud, M.M.; Zahra, G.; Somayeh, B. Effectiveness of life skills training on increasing self-esteem of high school students. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 30, 1043–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Vatankhah, H.; Daryabari, D.; Ghadami, V.; KhanjanShoeibi, E. Teaching how life skills (anger control) affect the happiness and self-esteem of Tonekabon female students. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 116, 123–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Menrath, I.; Mueller-Godeffroy, E.; Pruessmann, C.; Ravens-Sieberer, U.; Ottova, V.; Pruessmann, M.; Erhart, M.; Hillebrandt, D.; Thyen, U. Evaluation of school-based life skills programmes in a high-risk sample: A controlled longitudinal multi-centre study. J. Public Health 2012, 20, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Smith, E.A.; Swisher, J.D.; Vicary, J.R.; Bechtel, L.J.; Minner, D.; Henry, K.L.; Palmer, R. Evaluation of life skills training and infused-life skills training in a rural setting: Outcomes at two years. J. Alcohol Drug Educ. 2004, 48, 51–70. [Google Scholar]
  26. Teyhan, A.; Cornish, R.; Macleod, J.; Boyd, A.; Doerner, R.; Sissons Joshi, M. An evaluation of the impact of “lifeskills” training on road safety, substance use and hospital attendance in adolescence. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2016, 86, 108–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Gulesci, S.; Puente-Beccar, M.; Ubfal, D. Can youth empowerment programs reduce violence against girls during the COVID-19 pandemic? J. Dev. Econ. 2021, 153, 102716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lepeley, M. Soft Skills. The Lingua Franca of Human Centered Management in the Global VUCA Environment. In Soft Skills for Human Centered Management and Global Sustainability; Lepeley, M., Beutell, N.J., Abarca, N., Majluf, N., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 3–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Orgilés, M.; Espada, J.P.; Morales, A. How Super Skills for Life may help children to cope with the COVID-19: Psychological impact and coping styles after the program. Revista de Psicología Clínica con Niños y Adolescentes 2020, 7, 88–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Mojarro, A.L.; Herrera, I.S.; Servín, L. Entrenamiento en habilidades para la vida como estrategia para la atención primaria de conductas adictivas. Psicología Iberoamericana 2017, 25, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Givaudan, M.; Van de Vijver, F.J.R.; Poortinga, Y.H.; Leenen, I.; Pick, S. Effects of a school-based life skills and HIV-prevention program for adolescents in Mexican high schools. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2007, 37, 1141–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Givaudan, M.; Leenen, I.; Van De Vijver, F.J.R.; Poortinga, Y.H.; Pick, S. Longitudinal study of a school based HIV/AIDS early prevention program for Mexican Adolescents. Psychol. Health Med. 2008, 13, 98–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Pérez de la Barrera, C. Habilidades para la vida y consumo de drogas en adolescentes escolarizados mexicanos. Adicciones 2012, 13, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Neri Torres, J.C.; Hernández Herrera, C.A. Los jóvenes universitarios de ingeniería y su percepción sobre las competencias blandas. Revista Iberoamericana para la Investigación y el Desarrollo Educativo 2019, 9, 768–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Hernández Herrera, C.A.; Neri Torres, J.C. Las habilidades blandas en estudiantes de ingeniería de tres instituciones públicas de educación superior. Revista Iberoamericana para la Investigación y el Desarrollo Educativo 2020, 10, e094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Díaz Posada, L.E.; Rosero Burbano, R.F.; Melo Sierra, M.P.; Aponte López, D. Habilidades para la vida: Análisis de las propiedades psicométricas de un test creado para su medición. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Sociales 2013, 4, 181–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Santana Campas, M.A.; Ramos Santana, C.M.; Arellano Montoya, R.E.; Molina del Río, J. Propiedades psicométricas del Test de Habilidades para la Vida en una muestra de jóvenes mexicanos. Avances en Psicología 2018, 26, 225–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. World Health Organization. Life Skills Education for Children and Adolescents in Schools; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  39. Peterson, R.A. A meta-analysis of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. J. Consum. Res. 1994, 21, 381–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Oviedo, H.C.; Campo-Arias, A. An approach to the use of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatría 2005, 34, 572–580. [Google Scholar]
  41. Hooper, D.; Coughlan, J.; Mullen, M. Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Electron. J. Bus. Res. Methods 2008, 6, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. World Health Organization. Partners in Life Skills Education. In Conclusions from United Nations Inter-Agency Meeting; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  43. Sin, C.; Neave, G. Employability deconstructed: Perceptions of Bologna stakeholders. Stud. High. Educ. 2014, 41, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lauffer, A.; Solé, L.; Bernstein, S.; Lopes, M.H.; Francisconi, C.F. Cómo minimizar errores al realizar la adaptación transcultural y la validación de los cuestionarios sobre calidad de vida: Aspectos prácticos. Revista de Gastroenterología de México 2013, 78, 159–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Muñiz, J.; Elosua, P.; Hambleton, R.K. Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: Segunda edición. Psicothema 2013, 25, 151–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Lira, M.T.; Caballero, E. Adaptación transcultural de instrumentos de evaluación en salud: Historia y reflexiones del por qué, cómo y cuándo. Revista Médica Clínica Las Condes 2020, 31, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Joia, L.A.; Lorenzo, M. Zoom In, Zoom Out: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Classroom. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Meadows, L.A.; Sekaquaptewa, D. The influence of gender stereotypes on role adoption in student teams. In Proceedings of the 120th ASEE Annual Conference Exposition, Atlanta, GA, USA, 23–26 June 2013. [Google Scholar]
  49. Valle, A.; Núñez, J.C.; Cabanach, R.G.; González-Pineda, J.A.; Rodríguez, S.; Rosário, P.; Muñoz-Cadavid, M.A.; Cerezo, R. Academic goals and learning quality in higher education students. Span. J. Psychol. 2009, 12, 96–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  50. Kaya, H.; Kaya, N.; Palloş, A.Ö.; Küçük, L. Assessing time-management skills in terms of age, gender, and anxiety levels: A study on nursing and midwifery students in Turkey. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2012, 12, 284–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wielkiewicz, R.M.; Fischer, D.V.; Stelzner, S.P.; Overland, M.; Sinner, A.M. Leadership attitudes and beliefs of incoming first-year college students: A multi-institutional study of gender differences. Int. J. Leadersh. Educ. 2012, 11, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Duong, M.Q.; Wu, C.L.; Hoang, M.K. Student inequalities in Vietnamese higher education? Exploring how gender, socioeconomic status, and university experiences influence leadership efficacy. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2019, 56, 110–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Salavera, C.; Usán, P.; Jarie, L. Styles of humor and social skills in students. Gender differences. Curr. Psychol. 2020, 39, 571–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Harrop, A.; Tattersall, A.; Goody, A. Gender matters in higher education. Educ. Stud. 2020, 33, 385–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Vergara-Torres, A.P.; Ortíz-Rodríguez, V.; Narváez, M.A.; López-Walle, J.M.; Tristán, J. Análisis de las propiedades psicométricas de la Escala de Habilidades para la vida en su traducción al castellano. In Deporte, Educación Física y Ciencias Aplicadas; Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Facultad de Organización Deportiva: Monterrey, Mexico, 2020; p. 65. [Google Scholar]
  56. Ferrando, P.J.; Anguiano-Carrasco, C. El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en psicología. Papeles del Psicólogo 2010, 31, 18–33. [Google Scholar]
  57. West, S.G.; Finch, J.F.; Curran, P.J. Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications; Hoyle, R.H., Ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1995; pp. 56–75. [Google Scholar]
  58. Yung, Y.F.; Bentler, P.M. Bootstrapping techniques in analysis of mean and covariance structures. In Advanced Structural Equation Modeling: Issues and Techniques; Marcoulides, G.A., Schumacker, R.E., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1996; pp. 195–226. [Google Scholar]
  59. Byrne, B.M. Structural equation modeling with amos, eqs, and lisrel: Comparative approaches to testing for the factorial validity of a measuring instrument. Int. J. Test. 2001, 1, 55–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  61. Batista-Foguet, J.M.; Coenders, G.; Alonso, J. Análisis factorial confirmatorio. Su utilidad en la validación de cuestionarios relacionados con la salud. Med. Clin. 2004, 122 (Suppl. 1), 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Evaluating model fit. In Structural Equation Modeling. Concepts, Issues and Applications; Hoyle, R.H., Ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1995; pp. 37–55. [Google Scholar]
  63. Cheung, G.W.; Rensvold, R.B. Evaluating good- ness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. 2002, 9, 233–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Byrne, B.M. Structural Equation Modeling with Amos: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, 3rd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  65. Chen, F.F. Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. 2007, 14, 464–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Akaike, H. Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika 1987, 52, 317–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Lawrence Earlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, MI, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  68. González Gallegos, A.G. Propuesta Metodológica para el Rediseño de la Licenciatura en Ciencias del Ejercicio de la FOD. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, San Nicolás de los Garza, Mexico, 24 August 2021. Available online: http://eprints.uanl.mx/22098/ (accessed on 21 January 2022).
  69. Hong, J.C.; Lee, Y.F.; Ye, J.H. Procrastination predicts online self-regulated learning and online learning ineffectiveness during the coronavirus lockdown. Pers. Individ. Dif. 2021, 174, 110673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Choi, E.; Lee, J.; Lee, S.A. Validation of the Korean version of the obsession with COVID-19 scale and the Coronavirus anxiety scale. Death Stud. 2020, 14, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. García-Lirios, C. Construct validity of a scale to measure the job satisfaction of professors at public universities in central Mexico during COVID-19. Trilogía Ciencia Tecnología Sociedad 2021, 13, e1826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Tzivinikou, S.; Charitaki, G.; Kagkara, D. Distance Education Attitudes (DEAS) During Covid-19 Crisis: Factor Structure, Reliability and Construct Validity of the Brief DEA Scale in Greek-Speaking SEND Teachers. Tech. Knowl. Learn. 2021, 26, 461–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Varma, R. Why so few women enroll in computing? Gender and ethnic differences in students’ perception. Comput. Sci. Educ. 2010, 20, 301–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Xu, D.; Jaggars, S.S. Performance gaps between online and face-to-face courses: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. J. High. Educ. 2014, 85, 633–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Kim, Y.K.; Sax, L.J. Student–faculty interaction in research universities: Differences by student gender, race, social class, and first-generation status. Res. High. Educ. 2009, 50, 437–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Pierce, S.; Kendellen, K.; Camiré, M.; Gould, D. Strategies for coaching for life skills transfer. J. Sport Psychol. Action. 2018, 9, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Pierce, S.; Gould, D.; Camiré, M. Definition and Model of life skills transfer. Int. Rev. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 2016, 10, 186–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Bean, C.; Kramers, S.; Forneris, T.; Camiré, M. The Implicit/Explicit Continuum of Life Skills Development and Transfer. Quest 2018, 70, 456–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Espitia, A.; Mattoo, A.; Rocha, N.; Ruta, M.; Winkler, D. Pandemic trade: COVID-19, remote work and global value chains. World Econ. 2021, 2021, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Succi, C.; Canovi, M. Soft skills to enhance graduate employability: Comparing students and employers’ perceptions. Stud. High. Educ. 2020, 45, 1834–1847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  82. Nicholls, J.G. The Competitive Ethos and Democratic Education; Harvard University Press: Cambrige, MA, USA, 1989. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 14 02765 g001 550
Figure 1. Confirmatory factor analysis of the second order model and factor invariance according to gender. Standardized saturations of the entire sample (n = 707) are shown at the top; on the bottom left, saturations of the sample of men (n = 354) and on the bottom right, the sample of women (n = 353); ** = p < 0.01.
Figure 1. Confirmatory factor analysis of the second order model and factor invariance according to gender. Standardized saturations of the entire sample (n = 707) are shown at the top; on the bottom left, saturations of the sample of men (n = 354) and on the bottom right, the sample of women (n = 353); ** = p < 0.01.
Sustainability 14 02765 g001
Table
Table 1. Descriptive statistics and internal consistency.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics and internal consistency.
Study 1 (n = 525)Study 2 (n = 707)
Life SkillMSDSkewnessKurtosisαMSDSkewnessKurtosisα
Teamwork4.330.64−1.132.180.914.350.63−1.323.130.91
Goal-setting4.310.63−0.961.780.924.290.67−1.142.170.93
Time management3.880.84−0.630.430.913.830.85−0.660.590.91
Emotional skills4.100.79−0.841.000.854.100.77−0.941.310.84
Communication4.180.69−0.790.980.844.150.72−0.941.480.85
Social skills4.100.75−0.680.380.874.070.76−0.790.730.87
Leadership4.200.68−0.911.700.924.200.67−0.981.900.92
Problem-solving4.220.71−0.891.100.904.210.70−0.971.550.90
Total life skills4.180.57−0.982.710.974.180.57−1.102.870.97
Note: M = mean; SD = standard deviation; α = Cronbach’s alpha; Problem-solving = problem-solving and decision-making.
Table
Table 2. Correlations between life skills.
Table 2. Correlations between life skills.
Life Skill1234567
1. Teamwork-
2. Goal-setting0.61/0.62-
3. Time management0.46/0.360.59/0.58-
4. Emotional skills0.52/0.530.59/0.590.59/0.55-
5. Communication0.69/0.520.62/0.580.52/0.470.65/0.61-
6. Social skills0.58/0.520.57/0.510.50/0.410.57/0.520.73/0.67-
7. Leadership0.64/0.620.62/0.610.52/0.480.54/0.540.67/0.640.72/0.70-
8. Problem-solving0.58/0.520.60/0.610.52/0.480.60/0.560.66/0.640.62/0.550.67/0.65
Note: Values before the diagonal correspond to correlations from study 1 (n = 525), values after the diagonal correspond to correlations from study 2 (n = 707). All correlations are significant to p < 0.01; Problem-solving = problem-solving and decision-making.
Table
Table 3. Goodness of fit indices of the proposed models.
Table 3. Goodness of fit indices of the proposed models.
Modelχ2dfχ2/dfCFIIFIRMSEAAIC
One factor model5911.9628606.8740.700.700.116083.962
Eight factor model2071.3368322.490.920.920.052299.336
Second order model2232.5538522.620.910.910.052420.553
Note: χ2 = chi square; df = degrees of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index; IFI = incremental fit index; RMSEA = root mean approximation error; AIC = Akaike information criterion.
Table
Table 4. Correlations between life skills as a function of gender (Study 2).
Table 4. Correlations between life skills as a function of gender (Study 2).
Life Skill1234567
1. Teamwork-
2. Goal-setting0.61/0.62-
3. Time management0.37/0.330.60/0.56-
4. Emotional skills0.53/0.540.62/0.560.58/0.53-
5. Communication0.52/0.520.58/0.580.48/0.460.65/0.59-
6. Social skills0.49/0.530.47/0.540.40/0.430.57/0.460.75/0.58-
7. Leadership0.59/0.630.58/0.630.46/0.490.54/0.540.67/0.620.68/0.71-
8. Problem-solving0.52/0.510.61/0.600.48/0.480.59/0.530.66/0.620.53/0.560.65/0.65
Note: Values before the diagonal correspond to correlations between men (n = 353), values after the diagonal correspond to correlations between women (n = 354). All correlations are significant to level p < 0.01; Problem-solving = problem-solving and decision-making.
Table
Table 5. Goodness of fit indices of the models tested in the invariance of the Spanish version of the Life Skills Ability Scale as a function of gender.
Table 5. Goodness of fit indices of the models tested in the invariance of the Spanish version of the Life Skills Ability Scale as a function of gender.
ModelType of Modelχ2dfχ2/dfCFIIFIRMSEAAICΔdfpΔCFIΔIFIΔRMSEA
M0aBase model men1834.028482.160.920.920.0572030.02
M0bBase model women2098.258482.470.8850.8860.0652294.25
M1Unconstrained base model3932.2816962.310.9040.9040.0434324.28
M2Factor load invariance3983.5017312.300.9030.9030.0434305.50350.000.0010.0010.00
M3M2 + invariance intercepts3987.0717382.290.9030.9030.0434295.07420.000.0010.0010.00
M4M3 + invariance of latent means3989.0817392.290.9030.9030.0434295.08430.000.0010.0010.00
M5M3 + difference of latent means4163.2617942.320.8980.8980.0434359.26980.000.0060.0060.00
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Vergara-Torres, A.P.; Ortiz-Rodríguez, V.; Reyes-Hernández, O.; López-Walle, J.M.; Morquecho-Sánchez, R.; Tristán, J. Validation and Factorial Invariance of the Life Skills Ability Scale in Mexican Higher Education Students. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2765. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052765

AMA Style

Vergara-Torres AP, Ortiz-Rodríguez V, Reyes-Hernández O, López-Walle JM, Morquecho-Sánchez R, Tristán J. Validation and Factorial Invariance of the Life Skills Ability Scale in Mexican Higher Education Students. Sustainability. 2022; 14(5):2765. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052765

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vergara-Torres, Argenis P., Verónica Ortiz-Rodríguez, Orlando Reyes-Hernández, Jeanette M. López-Walle, Raquel Morquecho-Sánchez, and José Tristán. 2022. "Validation and Factorial Invariance of the Life Skills Ability Scale in Mexican Higher Education Students" Sustainability 14, no. 5: 2765. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052765

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop