A multilevel factor analysis of the short form of the Centrality of Event Scale

The Centrality of Event Scale (CES) has frequently been used to measure the degree to which positive and negative life events are perceived central to a person's identity and life story; and previous research suggests that individuals rate their most positive memory as more central compared to their most negative one. When comparing the centrality of two (or more) memories within individuals, one needs to ensure that the CES (or its short form) is equally valid for different types of events (i.e., positive and negative) as well as on different levels of analyses (i.e., on the between-person and the within-person level), pointing to the issue of measurement invariance.

Three-hundred sixty-five adults (18-89 years of age) reported up to ten positive and up to ten negative autobiographical memories. For each memory reported, participants completed the seven-item short form of the CES, which measures three different components of centrality: Events can form a central component of identity (two items), a turning point in the life story (three items), and a reference point for everyday inferences (two items).

Based on exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, we found a two-factor structure (Self-Perception and Life-Course) to fit the data best at both levels of analyses and for both positive and negative events. Strict measurement invariance could be applied for positive and negative events at between-person level and at within-person level. The two factors, which measure the impact of an event on either a person's self-perception or their (future) life course, were rated higher for positive compared to negative memories. This difference, however, was stronger for the self-perception factor.

The present study provides a first examination of the factorial structure of the CES short form on two levels (within and between persons) as well as for two types of life events (positive and negative). Whereas, a unidimensional scale might be sufficient to measure the centrality of stressful or traumatic life events, a more fine-graded measure seems better suited to understand the different roles of positive and negative life events for a person's identity and life story.