Resources
Scales & Measures
Freely available, validated psychological scales and methodological tools developed by the lab — including the SETPOINT/CABIN vocational interest measures, the CAPTION situation taxonomy, the Comprehensive and Brief Inventories of Thriving (CIT/BIT), the HELPS help-seeking beliefs scale, the RAISE arts-engagement scales, and more. Each entry lists what it measures, its dimensions, and a downloadable instrument. Please cite the associated article when you use a measure.
Beliefs About Seeking and Receiving Help (HELPS)
What it measures: people’s beliefs about seeking and receiving help, and how those beliefs relate to help behaviors and well-being.
Format: 5 belief dimensions · factor-analytically validated · predictive (time-separated) evidence
Dimensions (HELPS)
- Helpful — help is useful
- Enjoyable — the help process is enjoyable
- Lessens — help diminishes me
- indePendence — help threatens my independence
- Safe — helpers can be trusted
Safe and Enjoyable beliefs explained the most variance across help seeking, help receiving, and subjective well-being, and showed incremental validity for receiving help, life satisfaction, and positive affect.
Download scale & supplemental materials (PDF)
How to citeScotney, V. S., & Tay, L. (2025). Beliefs about seeking and receiving help: A mixed-methods analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2025.2549765
Campus Well-Being Measure (CWBM)
What it measures: a holistic, multi-dimensional measure of college-student well-being that predicts academic and behavioral outcomes.
Format: 49 items · validated on two large student samples
Key dimensions
- Grit (most important)
- Positive subjective well-being
- Negative subjective well-being
- + additional holistic well-being themes
Well-being modestly predicted grades, course attendance, time spent in academic buildings, and student-organization involvement; the grit theme was the strongest predictor.
Download the CWBM survey (PDF)
How to citeZhou, S., Weiss, H. A., McCuskey, B., & Tay, L. (2025). College student well-being: Explaining academic and behavioral outcomes from a representative college student sample. Journal of Happiness Studies, 26(5), 75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-025-00906-3
Needs-based Off-job Crafting Scale (NOCS)
What it measures: how people proactively shape their non-work (off-job) time to satisfy six psychological needs that support recovery and well-being.
Format: 18 items · 6 dimensions (3 items each) · 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = very often)
Dimensions (off-job crafting for…)
- Detachment
- Relaxation
- Autonomy
- Mastery
- Meaning
- Affiliation
Kujanpää et al. (2022) developed the NOCS to capture needs-based off-job crafting — the deliberate big or small changes people make to their non-work time to meet personal goals and psychological needs, linked to recovery, well-being, and optimal functioning across cultures and work contexts.
NOCS scale — items & instructions (PDF)
How to citeKujanpää, M., Syrek, C., Tay, L., Kinnunen, U., Mäkikangas, A., Shimazu, A., Wiese, C. W., Brauchli, R., Bauer, G. F., Kerksieck, P., Toyama, H., & de Bloom, J. (2022). Needs-based off-job crafting across different life domains and contexts: Testing a novel conceptual and measurement approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 959296. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.959296
Critical Thinking in AI Use Scale
What it measures: a person’s dispositional tendency to think critically when using generative AI — verifying outputs, seeking to understand how AI works, and reflecting on its broader implications.
Format: 13 items · 3 subscales · 5-point Likert (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
Subscales
- Verification of source & content
- Motivation to understand AI
- Reflection on responsible AI
Lau et al. (2026) developed and validated this scale across six studies (N = 1,341) to capture how people exercise oversight over generative AI outputs — with higher scores predicting more frequent verification, more accurate veracity judgments, and deeper reflection about responsible AI.
Critical Thinking in AI Use Scale — items & instructions (PDF)
How to citeLau, G. R., Low, W. Y., Tay, L., Guevarra, Y. A., Gašević, D., & Hartanto, A. (2026). Understanding critical thinking in generative artificial intelligence use: Development, validation, and correlates of the critical thinking in AI use scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 22, 101103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2026.101103
SETPOINT Vocational Interest Dimensions — Short Scales
What it measures: vocational interests across the eight SETPOINT dimensions, in brief forms for efficient assessment.
Format: three short forms — 8, 24, and 41 items · outperformed RIASEC in predicting occupational membership
The 8 SETPOINT dimensions
- Health Science
- Creative Expression
- Technology
- People
- Organization
- Influence
- Nature
- Things
Measuring interests at the dimension level allows a more nuanced assessment of heterogeneous vocational factors with strong psychometric precision.
Download the short interest measures (PDF)
How to citeHou, D. X., Su, R., & Tay, L. (2024). Measuring SETPOINT vocational interest dimensions: The development and validation of three short scales. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 149, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2023.103959
Mechanisms of Engagement in the Arts & Humanities (RAISE)
What it measures: the five mechanisms through which engagement in the arts and humanities enhances well-being.
Format: multi-factor scales · predictive & concurrent validity for flourishing · measurement equivalence across gender and time
Mechanisms (RAISE)
- Reflection
- Acquisition
- Immersion
- Socialization
- Expression
Each mechanism has a validated factor structure (e.g., reflection: life/worldview, emotional, external; immersion: effort, passage of time), with good test–retest reliability.
Download the RAISE scale (PDF)
How to citeThapa, S., Vaziri, H., Shim, Y., Tay, L., & Pawelski, J. O. (2023). Development and validation of the Mechanisms of Engagement in the Arts and Humanities scales. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000556
Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving for Children (CIT-Child)
What it measures: child well-being — an Italian adaptation of the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT).
Format: 12-factor model · confirmatory factor analysis validated
Developed for Italian children based on the CIT (Su, Tay, & Diener, 2014); CFA supported a 12-factor structure measuring constructs related to, but distinct from, existing instruments.
How to citeRita Andolfi, V., Tay, L., Confalonieri, E., & Traficante, D. (2017). Assessing well-being in children: Italian adaptation of the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving for children (CIT-Child). TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 24(1), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.4473/TPM24.1.8
Attitudinal Learning Inventory (ALI)
What it measures: attitudinal learning — a holistic view of learning and instruction beyond traditional metrics.
Format: 15 items · validated across two samples (N = 1,009)
Dimensions
- Cognitive
- Affective
- Behavioral
- Social
The ALI showed good psychometric properties and correlated with behavioral metrics of class engagement.
How to citeWatson, S. L., Watson, W. R., & Tay, L. (2018). The development and validation of the Attitudinal Learning Inventory (ALI): a measure of attitudinal learning and instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 1601–1617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9625-7
Leisure Affect & Leisure Satisfaction Scales
What it measures: the subjective quality of leisure, and how it relates to well-being across work, family, and life.
Format: two short unidimensional scales · good internal consistency & stability
Scales
- Leisure Affect
- Leisure Satisfaction
Both scales show construct validity through associations with well-being in the work, family, and general-life domains, and are brief and easy to administer.
How to citeKuykendall, L., Xue, L., Lei, X., Tay, L., Cheung, H. K., Kolze, M., Lindsey, A., Silvers, M., & Engelsted, L. (2017). Subjective quality of leisure & worker well-being: Validating measures & testing theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 103(2), 14–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.07.007
Subjective Underemployment Scale (SUS)
What it measures: subjective underemployment across the six major domains identified by Feldman (1996).
Format: 6 domains · convergent validity with work outcomes & job attitudes
Domains
- Pay
- Status
- Field
- Hours
- Involuntary temporary work
- Poverty-wage employment
How to citeAllan, B., Tay, L., & Sterling, M. (2017). The Subjective Underemployment Scale (SUS). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 99, 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.01.001
SETPOINT: A Dimensional Model of Vocational Interests (CABIN)
What it measures: vocational interests using the full SETPOINT framework and the Comprehensive Assessment of Basic Interests (CABIN).
Format: empirically validated 8-dimensional model · CABIN measures 41 basic interests hierarchically
The 8 SETPOINT dimensions
- Health Science
- Creative Expression
- Technology
- People
- Organization
- Influence
- Nature
- Things
Interests are structured hierarchically: specific work activities at the lowest level, basic interests at the intermediate level, and broad-band dimensions at the top.
Download the CABIN scale (PDF)
How to citeSu, R., Tay, L., Liao, H.-Y., Zhang, Q., & Rounds, J. (2019). Toward a dimensional model of vocational interests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(5), 690–714. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000373
CAPTION: Taxonomy of Psychological Situation Characteristics
What it measures: the major dimensions of psychological situations, derived from the largest lexical analysis of situation characteristics at the time.
Format: 7-dimensional model · full- and short-form measures
Dimensions (CAPTION)
- Complexity
- Adversity
- Positive Valence
- Typicality
- Importance
- Humor
- Negative Valence
CAPTION integrates dimensions found across the existing literature into a single comprehensive taxonomy.
CAPTION scale — items & instructions (PDF)
How to citeParrigon, S., Woo, S. E., Tay, L., & Wang, T. (2017). CAPTION-ing the situation: A lexically derived taxonomy of psychological situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(4), 642–681. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000111
Comprehensive & Brief Inventories of Thriving (CIT & BIT)
What it measures: a broad array of psychological well-being constructs (“thriving”) that anticipate health outcomes.
Format: CIT = comprehensive assessment · BIT = 10-item brief screen
Coverage
- Subjective well-being
- Psychological well-being
- Relationships
- Engagement & mastery
- Meaning & optimism
The CIT supports comprehensive well-being assessment in research and clinical settings; the BIT offers a quick overview of core dimensions suitable for medical intake and screening.
CIT full instrument (PDF)BIT full instrument (PDF)
How to citeSu, R., Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2014). The development and validation of the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT) and the Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT). Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 6, 251–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12027
A Practical Guide to IRT Measurement Equivalence Analysis
What it provides: a step-by-step guide to item response theory (IRT) measurement equivalence (ME) / differential item functioning (DIF) analysis.
Includes: overview · walkthrough · three worked illustrations (IRTPRO & Latent GOLD)
Walkthrough (PDF)Illustration 1Illustration 2Illustration 3
How to citeTay, L., Meade, A. W., & Cao, M. (2015). An overview and practical guide to IRT measurement equivalence analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 18(1), 3–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114553062
A Framework for Psychometric Isomorphism (Multilevel Constructs)
What it provides: a conceptual and methodological framework for testing the validity of multilevel construct measures (isomorphism).
Includes: framework · analytic procedure · multilevel IRT & factor-analysis comparison tables
Analytic procedureIRT & FA item parametersMultilevel IRT modelsMultilevel FA models
How to citeTay, L., Woo, S. E., & Vermunt, J. K. (2014). A conceptual and methodological framework for psychometric isomorphism: Validation of multilevel construct measures. Organizational Research Methods, 17(1), 77–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428113517008
