The scale responses are scored by averaging the responses of the benign envy and malicious envy subscales, respectively.
* Dispositional Benign and Malicious Envy Scale (BeMaS) * BeMaS; Lange, J., & Crusius, J. (2015). Dispositional envy revisited: Unraveling the motivational dynamics of benign and malicious envy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214564959 COMPUTE ben_envy = MEAN(benign1, benign2, benign3, benign4, benign5). COMPUTE mal_envy = MEAN(malicious1, malicious2, malicious3, malicious4, malicious5). EXECUTE.
If you named the variables according to their order, you will need to average the following items:
- benign envy: 1, 3, 4, 7, 9
- malicious envy: 2, 5, 6, 8, 10
* Dispositional Benign and Malicious Envy Scale (BeMaS) * Lange, J., & Crusius, J. (2015). Dispositional envy revisited: Unraveling the motivational dynamics of benign and malicious envy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214564959 COMPUTE ben_envy = MEAN(bemas1, bemas3, bemas4, bemas7, bemas9). COMPUTE mal_envy = MEAN(bemas2, bemas5, bemas6, bemas8, bemas10). EXECUTE.
Validity: Please refer to Lange and Crusius (2015) for information on the factorial structure, convergent and discriminant validity, and criterion validity gathered during scale validation.
Internal consistency (Lange & Crusius, 2015, including Supplementary Data): Benign envy subcscale: Cronbach’s α = .79 - .90 Malicious envy subcscale: Cronbach’s α = .83 - .91
Temporal stability (3-4 weeks; Lange & Crusius, 2015, Supplementary Data): Benign envy subcscale: r(174) = .67, p < .001 Malicious envy subcscale: r(174) = .66, p < .001
We are sometimes asked how the averaged subscale values can be interpreted.
The averaged values for subscale items can be used to investigate differences on this subscale between participants. Thus, higher values for the benign envy subcscale items mean that participants agreed more to items reflecting higher dispositional benign envy than other participants. Respectively, higher values for the malicious envy items mean that participants score higher on dispositional malicious envy than other participants.
Note that the mean values of the benign envy subscale and the malicious envy subscale cannot be directly compared to each other. Because of their content, people are less likely to agree to malicious envy items than to benign envy items. That is, the subscales differ in “item difficulty”. Thus, it would be incorrect to conclude that benign envy is more prevalent than malicious envy based on a higher mean value on the former subscale, for example.
Prior research using the BeMaS has been conducted with non-representative convenience samples. Normative data such as percentiles or cut-off values are not available. The scale is not intended as a diagnostic instrument.