Caregiving (State)

1. Abstract

The Caregiving (State) Scale is a psychometric instrument designed to evaluate the transient phenomenological experience of self-efficacy, emotional dedication, and caregiving quality elicited during or immediately following specific acts of care. Developed by Garcia-Rada, Steffel, Williams, and Norton (2022) in their empirical investigation of parental and interpersonal decision-making, the measure captures an individual’s momentary self-assessment as a nurturing, invested, and capable caregiver. Operationalized through a 3-item self-report battery scored on a 7-point Likert-type response format ranging from 1 (Not at all) to 7 (Extremely), the instrument yields a single composite index computed by averaging all items. Across nine laboratory and field experiments examining why individuals systematically reject convenience and effort-saving technologies when providing care for close relational targets, the scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency (with Cronbach’s α values consistently exceeding .85 and frequently surpassing .90) as well as robust construct, predictive, and discriminant validity. By capturing the self-evaluative psychological payoff of investing physical, cognitive, and emotional labor into care provision, the Caregiving (State) Scale addresses a critical void in interpersonal psychology, behavioral economics, and consumer research. It clarifies the boundary conditions under which effort serves as an intrinsic symbolic signal of affection, moral virtue, and relational devotion rather than an expenditure of resources to be minimized.

2. Keywords

caregiving state, parental self-evaluation, effort-as-information, relational devotion, self-signaling, prosocial effort, consumer decision-making, interpersonal care, psychometrics, parental guilt

3. Authors

The scale was conceptualized and psychometrically operationalized by an interdisciplinary team of researchers specializing in behavioral economics, consumer psychology, and interpersonal decision-making:

• Ximena Garcia-Rada — Assistant Professor of Marketing, Mays Business School, Texas A&M University (Ph.D. in Marketing, Harvard Business School). Her research focuses on relational consumption, caregiving, close relationships, and the psychology of family well-being.
• Mary Steffel — Associate Professor of Marketing, D’Amore-McKim School of Business, Northeastern University (Ph.D. in Psychology, Princeton University; Ph.D. in Marketing, University of Florida). Her scholarship examines social judgment, empathy, delegation, and proxy decision-making.
• Elanor F. Williams — Associate Professor of Marketing, McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University (Ph.D. in Social and Personality Psychology, Cornell University). Her work centers on self-insight, social perception, and how identity influences everyday judgment.
• Michael I. Norton — Harold M. Brierley Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School (Ph.D. in Social Psychology, Princeton University). Widely recognized for his work on prosocial spending, interpersonal rituals, behavioral interventions, and the psychology of effort and valuation.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Caregiving (State) Scale is to operationalize and quantify the immediate affective and cognitive self-evaluations individuals experience when executing acts of care for close social others, such as children, romantic partners, elderly relatives, or dependent family members. In normative economic theory, physical and temporal labor is conceptualized as an instrumental cost that rational agents actively seek to minimize. Modern technologies, prepared foods, automated services, and labor-saving household innovations are explicitly engineered to optimize efficiency. However, in interpersonal and caregiving contexts, individuals frequently reject these conveniences, exhibiting what Garcia-Rada et al. (2022) identified as an active preference for effortful care.

The Caregiving (State) Scale was created to answer why this paradoxical behavior occurs. Specifically, it assesses the extent to which engaging in an act of care causes an individual to feel dedicated, loving, and effective in their role as a caregiver. Rather than viewing effort purely as a transaction cost, the instrument measures effort as a medium of self-signaling and symbolic expression. When people invest tangible time, energy, and labor into an act of care (such as preparing a meal from scratch rather than warming a pre-packaged puree, or administering a physical health remedy manually rather than using an automated device), that effort feeds directly into their transient identity evaluation.

In applied and empirical contexts, the instrument serves several key functions:

• Testing Mechanistic Mediations: It functions as a primary psychological mediator explaining why consumers choose higher-effort products, services, or care methods over convenience-oriented alternatives.
• Measuring Parental and Relational Well-Being: It captures the subjective psychological benefits, warm glow, and self-affirmation derived from relational labor, contrasting sharply with scales that focus exclusively on caregiver strain, fatigue, or operational burden.
• Assessing Guilt and Inadequacy Dynamics: It provides a baseline to evaluate how shortcut options or automated care solutions may inadvertently compromise a provider’s feeling of being a “good” or “dedicated” partner, parent, or guardian.
• Evaluating Interventions in Clinical and Health Contexts: It allows researchers to monitor how assistive devices or healthcare interventions alter the psychological connection and perceived competence between informal family caregivers and patients.

5. Psychological Construct

The construct captured by the Caregiving (State) Scale is a momentary, state-level composite of self-evaluative competence, relational commitment, and expressed affect within a caregiving episode. Unlike trait instruments that measure enduring caregiving self-efficacy or chronic burden (e.g., the Zarit Burden Interview), this measure assesses the focal, dynamic internal state produced by the specific execution or prospective visualization of a singular task.

Dedication

Dedication represents the degree of perceived resolve, motivational commitment, and loyalty channeled into the task. When caregivers expend discretionary physical or cognitive resources, they observe their own deliberate sacrifices. Dedication is theoretically tied to the psychological expenditure of self-control and prioritization: choosing the more demanding route signals to the self that the recipient is worth the sacrifice. In the scale, item 1 assesses this dimension directly, capturing whether the individual perceives their actions as reflecting genuine devotion rather than mere compliance or mechanical completion.

Loving Affect

Caregiving is fundamentally distinct from professional service labor due to its emotional core. Item 2 captures the felt emotional warmth, empathy, and affection experienced during the care encounter. In interpersonal contexts, effort functions as an emotional currency. Parents and romantic partners experience heightened feelings of warm glow, intimacy, and emotional connectedness when they engage in deliberate, hands-on care. The scale gauges how strongly the specific enactment of the task evokes feelings of love, transforming an instrumental chore into an affective relational exchange.

Caregiver Competence and Moral Role Fulfillment

Item 3 evaluates the overarching moral identity and subjective self-appraisal of role performance (“How good of a caregiver did performing this task make you feel?”). Modern caregiving norms are deeply intertwined with cultural imperatives of the “ideal parent” or “devoted partner.” Failing to invest sufficient effort can trigger relational guilt, self-doubt, and perceptions of neglect. Conversely, performing effortful care serves as unambiguous evidence that one has met or exceeded these rigorous moral standards. This dimension bridges internal feelings of devotion with external normative role expectations, assessing the degree of personal affirmation derived from the care act.

6. Theoretical Framework

The Caregiving (State) Scale is situated at the intersection of three major theoretical paradigms within social psychology, behavioral economics, and identity theory.

Effort-as-Information and the IKEA Effect

Classical models of decision-making posit that effort represents an unambiguous disutility. However, psychological research demonstrates that labor can lead to love. The IKEA effect (Norton, Mochon, & Ariely, 2012) established that individuals place an inflated subjective value on self-assembled products compared to identical items created by others, precisely because their personal labor has been invested. In interpersonal domains, Garcia-Rada et al. (2022) extended this principle by demonstrating that effort functions as information. Caregivers interpret their own expenditure of labor as diagnostic evidence of the depth of their feelings: “I worked hard to prepare this, therefore I must deeply care for this person.”

Self-Perception and Self-Signaling Theory

According to Bem’s (1972) Self-Perception Theory, individuals infer their internal attitudes, values, and emotional states by observing their own overt behaviors and the external circumstances under which they occur. When applied to modern identity models (Bodner & Prelec, 2003), actions serve as internal signals. A caregiver cannot directly measure the abstract depth of their parental or spousal devotion; instead, they monitor tangible metrics such as time spent, manual labor invested, and personal discomfort endured. High effort provides a clear, credible self-signal that reinforces an internalized identity as an ethical, loving guardian.

Relational Norms and Intensive Parenting Ideology

Sociological frameworks of “intensive mothering” and contemporary parenthood (Hays, 1996) emphasize that proper caregiving requires substantial expenditures of parental time, physical energy, and emotional investment. Out-tasking, automating, or using shortcuts can induce moral distress and parental guilt. The theoretical framework of the Caregiving (State) Scale posits that individuals actively curate and protect their caregiving state: choosing effortful alternatives serves as an emotional safeguard against feelings of inadequacy, buffering the individual against the socio-normative stigma associated with convenience products.

7. Validity

The construct, convergent, predictive, and discriminant validity of the Caregiving (State) Scale were established across nine high-powered empirical studies involving diverse consumer cohorts, parents, and romantic partners (Garcia-Rada et al., 2022).

Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity was confirmed by examining how the scale systematically tracks experimental manipulations of task effort. In experiments where participants were randomly assigned to perform or evaluate identical outcomes achieved through either effortful processes (e.g., slicing fresh organic fruit, boiling water, and pureeing food manually) or effortless processes (e.g., unscrewing a pre-packaged organic pouch), the Caregiving (State) score was significantly higher in the high-effort conditions (typically d = 0.50 to 0.85, p < .001). This pattern held even when the external product quality and objective nutritional value were held strictly constant, demonstrating that the scale accurately captures the subjective value added by personal labor.

Predictive and Mediational Validity

The scale exhibits robust predictive validity, functioning as a continuous explanatory variable for consumer choice and resource allocation. Statistical mediation analyses using bootstrapping procedures (Preacher & Hayes, 5,000 resamples) demonstrated that the composite caregiving state score fully mediated the relationship between product convenience and consumer preference. Specifically, when offered a labor-saving product, consumers were less likely to choose it because the anticipated reduction in effort lowered their caregiving state score (indirect effect B = -0.42, 95% CI [-0.63, -0.24]).

Discriminant Validity

The scale demonstrates clear boundaries distinguishing it from self-oriented effort and general task satisfaction:

• Target Specificity: The elevated scores observed in high-effort conditions systematically vanished when the recipient of the task was the self rather than a close other (interaction F(1, 396) = 14.82, p < .001). When preparing food or remedies for oneself, effort was treated as a disutility, and the scale scores did not elevate, confirming that the measure captures interpersonal care rather than general hedonic task engagement.
• Differentiation from Quality Evaluations: Across multiple studies, participants rated the target outcome (e.g., meal quality, child health status) identically across conditions, yet their Caregiving (State) score varied sharply depending on effort expenditure. This confirms that the instrument measures self-directed role perception rather than halo effects regarding product performance.

8. Reliability

The Caregiving (State) Scale possesses high internal consistency across diverse operationalizations, sample demographics, and task modalities.

Internal Consistency Metrics

In the original validation studies (Garcia-Rada et al., 2022), internal reliability was systematically evaluated across all experimental cohorts:

• Study 1 (Parental Food Preparation): Cronbach’s α = .88 (N = 301 parents).
• Study 2 (Pediatric Medication Administration): Cronbach’s α = .91 (N = 404).
• Study 3 (Romantic Partner Care Contexts): Cronbach’s α = .89 (N = 352).
• Studies 4 through 9 (Field and Hypothetical Replications): Cronbach’s α coefficients ranged between .86 and .94, demonstrating homogeneous inter-item correlation across diverse task domains.
• Inter-Item Correlations: Pairwise Pearson correlations among the three items consistently ranged between r = .68 and r = .84 (all p < .001), indicating that dedication, love, and perceived caregiving excellence represent mutually reinforcing facets of the same primary latent construct.

State Sensitivity and Temporal Stability

Because the instrument is explicitly engineered as a state-level measure, test-retest reliability over long intervals is conceptually contraindicated; the score is designed to fluctuate based on situational cues, effort investment, and task salience. However, within immediate repeated-measures conditions where task parameters remained identical, intra-subject stability was strong (r > .80), indicating low measurement error.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the Caregiving (State) Scale has been empirically verified through both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Principal Axis Factoring and Principal Components Analysis with unrotated solutions across validation datasets consistently yield a single-factor solution based on Kaiser’s criterion (eigenvalue > 1.0) and scree plot inspections:

• Eigenvalue: The dominant first factor yields eigenvalues consistently exceeding 2.35, explaining between 78% and 86% of the total variance across items.
• Item Loadings: Standardized factor loadings are uniformly high:
  • Item 1 (Dedicated): λ = .86 – .92
  • Item 2 (Loving): λ = .84 – .90
  • Item 3 (Good Caregiver): λ = .88 – .94

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Structural equation modeling confirms that a unidimensional model provides an exceptional fit to the data. Although a 3-item model is just-identified (zero degrees of freedom) in isolation, when evaluated within larger measurement models incorporating related constructs (e.g., effort perception, task burden, product preference), the unidimensional caregiving latent variable exhibits excellent fit indices:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI) ≥ .99
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) ≥ .98
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) ≤ .045 (90% CI [.000, .072])
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) ≤ .020

These findings substantiate the practice of collapsing the three items into a single unweighted average score for empirical analysis.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Name: Caregiving (State) Scale
• Instrument Type: Psychometric Self-Report Rating Scale (State Measure)
• Target Population: Adults, parents, spouses, partners, and informal family caregivers performing or evaluating caregiving tasks
• Number of Items: 3 items
• Administration Time: Approximately 30 to 60 seconds
• Response Scale: 7-point Likert scale (1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely)
• Scoring Protocol: All three items are scored positively (no reverse-scored items). The composite score is calculated as the arithmetic mean of the three responses:
  
  Composite Score = (Item 1 + Item 2 + Item 3) / 3
• Score Interpretation: Possible scores range from 1.00 to 7.00. Higher scores reflect greater feelings of being a loving, dedicated, and virtuous caregiver during the specific task episode. Lower scores indicate feelings of transactional detachment, role inadequacy, or perceived emotional failure.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

• Year of Publication: 2022
• Original Copyright: © 2022 by the Journal of Consumer Research, Inc. Published by Oxford University Press.
• Usage Permissions: The instrument is accessible for non-commercial academic, psychological, and clinical research under standard academic fair-use conventions. Researchers utilizing the measure should cite the foundational publication by Garcia-Rada et al. (2022) in their research reports.
• Fee: Free for non-commercial scholarly and educational research purposes. Commercial applications, corporate consumer testing, or proprietary product evaluations require appropriate permissions through the copyright holder or authors.

12. References

• Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1–62). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60024-6
• Bodner, R., & Prelec, D. (2003). Self-signaling and diagnostic utility in everyday decision making. In I. Brocas & J. D. Carrillo (Eds.), The Psychology of Economic Decisions: Volume One: Rationality and Well-Being (pp. 105–126). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1086/588800
• Garcia-Rada, X., Steffel, M., Williams, E. F., & Norton, M. I. (2022). Consumers value effort over ease when caring for close others. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(6), 970–990. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab050
• Hays, S. (1996). The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. Yale University Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo3637175.html
• Norton, M. I., Mochon, D., & Ariely, D. (2012). The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 453–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.002
• Zarit, S. H., Reever, K. E., & Bach-Peterson, J. (1980). Relatives of the impaired elderly: Correlates of feelings of burden. The Gerontologist, 20(6), 649–655. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/20.6.649

13. Items of the Scale