Sex: 50.1/49.9% M/F Percentage with children: 24.5 Percentage ever divorced: 13.0 Percentage with current gambling problem: 1.5 Percentage with at least one traffic ticket in last year: 8.0 Percentage arrested at least once: 21.5 Percentage arrested more than once: 10.3 Percentage with >$10,000 credit card debt: 7.9 30.65 percent subjects with BMI>30 (obese) 7.28 percent subjects with BMI>40 (extreme obesity)

[+]

Identified

The ZPTI was designed to capture different facets of perspective on time encompassing the past, present, and future (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999; 2015). How one thinks about time has been linked to a broad range of behavioral, health, and psychological outcomes. In a paper summarizing the development of the ZPTI, Zimbardo and Boyd (1999; 2015) reviewed a large body of research, both qualitative and quantitative, supporting this assertion. A present orientation, for example, relates to risk behaviors ranging from substance use, risky driving, and sexual risk behaviors, to delaying required participation in research participant pool studies. Conversely, a future orientation relates to planning and healthful behaviors (e.g., breast cancer screenings). Time perspectives also relate to coping during stress, with more negative outcomes for Past-Negative and Present-Fatalistic time orientations; this has been extended to coping with homelessness. Although time perspective did not predict a return to stable housing, it did relate to time usage while in the shelter (e.g., looking for employment or watching TV). This body of work suggests that targeting the way someone is predisposed to think about time through reframing and other interventions could have powerful and widespread effects on behavior in multiple domains.

[+] PMCID, PUBMED ID, or CITATION

Text Citation: Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271-1288.

Text Citation: Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2015). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. In Time perspective theory; review, research and application (pp. 17-55). Springer International Publishing.

Measured

Although developing the five factors on the ZPTI took many years, Zuckerman and Boyd (1999; 2015) reported only the final exploratory and confirmatory analyses. In a sample of 606 undergraduate students, exploratory factor analysis confirmed the five-factor solution uncovered in previous iterations of the survey. This structure was then tested in a new sample of 361 students using confirmatory factor analysis. All loadings but two exceeded the standardized cutoff of .30 (one was -.26, another .29), and fit indices were favorable (Χ2/df = 2.30). Test-retest was examined in a sample of 58 undergraduate students, and, over the course of four weeks, scores remained stable, rs > .70.
Zuckerman and Boyd (1999; 2015) also reported on convergent and discriminant validity for the ZPTI. In a sample of 205 undergraduate students, scores on ZPTI subscales correlated in theoretically predictable ways across a wide variety of measures (e.g., Past-Negative and emotional stability, r = -.45; Past-Positive and friendliness, r = .22). The highest correlations (Past-Negative and depression, r = .59, and Future and conscientiousness, r = .57) were further examined in a factor analysis to examine the separability of these constructs. Analyses confirmed that these scales did indeed load onto different factors.

[+] PMCID, PUBMED ID, or CITATION

Text Citation: Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271-1288.

Text Citation: Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2015). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. In Time perspective theory; review, research and application (pp. 17-55). Springer International Publishing.

[+] Demographics

Sex: 50.1/49.9% M/F
Percentage with children: 24.5
Percentage ever divorced: 13.0
Percentage with current gambling problem: 1.5
Percentage with at least one traffic ticket in last year: 8.0
Percentage arrested at least once: 21.5
Percentage arrested more than once: 10.3
Percentage with >$10,000 credit card debt: 7.9
30.65 percent subjects with BMI>30 (obese)
7.28 percent subjects with BMI>40 (extreme obesity)

Influenced

This measure has not been influenced yet.

Validated

This measure has not been validated yet.

Access Measure

Additional Resources

Time Perspective Survey Visit Link

SOBC Validation Process

The Science of Behavior Change (SOBC) program seeks to promote basic research on the initiation, personalization and maintenance of behavior change. By integrating work across disciplines, this effort will lead to an improved understanding of the underlying principles of behavior change. The SOBC program aims to implement a mechanisms-focused, experimental medicine approach to behavior change research and to develop the tools required to implement such an approach. The experimental medicine approach involves: identifying an intervention target, developing measures to permit verification of the target, engaging the target through experimentation or intervention, and testing the degree to which target engagement produces the desired behavior change.

Within the SOBC Measures Repository, researchers have access to measures of mechanistic targets that have been (or are in the processing of being) validated by SOBC Research Network Members and other experts in the field. The SOBC Validation Process includes three important stages of evaluation for each proposed measure: Identification, Measurement, and Influence.

The first stage of validation requires a measure to be Identified within the field; there must be theoretical support for the specific measure of the proposed mechanistic target or potential mechanism of behavior change. This evidence may include references for the proposed measure, or theoretical support for the construct that the proposed measure is intended to assess. The second stage of validation requires demonstration that the level and change in level of the chosen mechanistic target can be Measured with the proposed measure (assay). For example, if the proposed measure is a questionnaire, the score on the measure should indicate the activity of the target process, and it must have strong psychometric properties. The third stage of validation requires demonstration that the measure can be Influenced; there must be evidence that the measured target is malleable and responsive to manipulation. Evidence relating to each stage includes at least one peer-reviewed publication or original data presentation (if no peer-reviewed research is available to support the claim) and is evaluated by SOBC Research Network Members and experts in the field.

Once a measure has gone through these three stages, it will then either be Validated or Not validated according to SOBC Research Network standards. If a measure is Validated, then change in the measured target was reliably associated with Behavior Change. If a measure is Not validated, then change in the measured target was not reliably associated with Behavior Change. Why would we share measures that are not validated? The SOBC Research Network values open, rigorous, and transparent research. Our goal is to make meaningful progress and develop replicable and effective interventions in behavior change science. Therefore, the SOBC sees value in providing other researchers in the field with information regarding measures that work and measures that fall short for specific targets. Further, a measure that is not validated for one target in one population may be validated in another target or population.

Want to learn more? For any questions regarding the SOBC Validation Process or Measures Repository, please email info@scienceofbehaviorchange.org.

Identified

Has the mechanism been identified as a potential target for behavior change? This section summarizes theoretical support for the mechanism.

Measured

Have the psychometric properties of this measure been assessed? This section includes information such as content validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability.

Influenced

Has a study manipulation led to change in the mechanism? This section addresses evidence that this measure is modifiable by experimental manipulation or clinical intervention.

Not Validated

Has a change in this mechanism been associated with behavior change? This section addresses empirical evidence that causing change in the measure reliably produces subsequent behavior change.