Measuring meaning and peace with the facit-spiritual well-being scale: Distinction without a difference?

Amy H. Peterman, Charlie L. Reeve, Eboni C. Winford, Sian Cotton, John M. Salsman, Richard Mcquellon, Joel Tsevat, Cassie Campbell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

69 Scopus citations


The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp; Peterman, Fitchett, Brady, Hernandez, & Cella, 2002) has become a widely used measure of spirituality; however, there remain questions about its specific factor structure and the validity of scores from its separate scales. Specifically, it remains unclear whether the Meaning and Peace scales denote distinct factors. The present study addresses previous limitations by examining the extent to which the Meaning and Peace scales relate differentially to a variety of physical and mental health variables across 4 sets of data from adults with a number of chronic health conditions. Although a model with separate but correlated factors fit the data better, discriminant validity analyses indicated limited differences in the pattern of associations each scale showed with a wide array of commonly used health and quality-of-life measures. In total, the results suggest that people may distinguish between the concepts of Meaning and Peace, but the observed relations with health outcomes are primarily due to variance shared between the 2 factors. Additional research is needed to better understand the separate and joint role of Meaning and Peace in the quality of life of people with chronic illness

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)127-137
Number of pages11
JournalPsychological Assessment
Issue number1
StatePublished - Mar 2014
Externally publishedYes


  • Construct validity
  • Facit-sp
  • Factor analysis
  • Health outcomes
  • Spirituality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Clinical Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Measuring meaning and peace with the facit-spiritual well-being scale: Distinction without a difference?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this