INTRODUCTION:

Most of the concepts on self restraint in the western psychological research were restricted up to the level of food habits–diet controls restraint. The latest studies carried out by Kkeli N^[1] reveals that the calorific value splurges scale were developed as a part of the psychological instrument. Obesity self restraint measures were also studied by Van Strien T^[2]. Some studies on self restraint relation to maturity^[3] were also made. Obviously, these dietary scales and obesity studies results have led to the studies of well being^[4].

In this paper we have elaborated the concept of self restraint through Indian yoga sciences^[5]. The concept of self restraint or yama is explained and discussed in the Indian yoga text booksin the form of aphorisms as “ahimsa satyaasteyabrahmacharyaaparigrahayama”^[6,7]It may be translated as non-harming (ahimsa), truthfulness (satya), abstention from stealing (asteya), walking with awareness (brahmacharya), and non-possessiveness (aparigraha) and thesefive principles are called mahavratam (great vow) when they are followed universally without the any restriction of class, place, time, and circumstances^[8]. The qualitative explanation of these five principles^{[9,
10, 11]} of yama: ahinsa: restricts any types of violence not only by self but also towards society. Satya is an essential requirement of healthy personal & social life without which formation of a faithful society is impossible^[12]. Asteya: is essential for corruption free society^[13]. Brahmacharya is walking with awareness and self study for higher order things^[14]. Aparigraha is non possessiveness of any resources than what is required for one self^[15]. It’s also sets an example for all the members of the society^[16].

Self restraint has been given a different interpretation by defining it as a suppression of egoistic desires and distress^[17] and its scale is developed as super ordinate dimension of self reported adjustment. Self restraint has significant role in self-control, social health and well being^[18,19].Linking self restraint’s five vows which not only brings individual wellness but also creates the foundations for healthy behavioral society^[61-65], self-esteem, interpersonal skills and educational attainment^[20], Self development values can improve Psychological problems of individuals especially adolescent groups^[21,22,23]. Yoga Self restraint regulates emotions, thought, behaviors towards well-being and social bonding^[24]. Well being of the society and individual includes various parameters such as life satisfaction, happiness, self regulation and moral observances^[25-31], In all the above references there was no mention of standardization of scale development for the yoga concept of self restraint. Hence, we conceptualized, developed and carried out the psychometric analysis for five items of self restraint and tested for its validity and reliability. With these moral and physical benefits/values of the individual, how it gets benefited to the society, a sense of connectedness through one’s own personality may be compared with the western concept of behavioral traits. Based on the above conceptualization process of yoga self restraint or yama, the hypothesis may be stated as,

HYPOTHESIS:

We hypothesized that yoga self-restraint may be related to social health and wellbeing.

Conceptual Frame:

The conceptual frame work of yoga self restraint is designed based on five principles relation with self and society’s well being. The basic five codes of yama are non-violence, truthfulness, non-stealing, celibacy, and non-possessiveness ^[32]. These codes of conduct covers the ethical commandments or guidelines that deals with underlying principles governing one’s own development and also with other human beings. The aphorisms^[33] related to yama are used in designing the frame; Ahimsa pratishthayam tat sannidhovaira-tyagah (practice of non injury affects other people who come near to the practitioner will naturally lose any feelings of hostility), satyapratishthayam kriyaphalaashrayatvam (As truthfulness is achieved, the fruits of actions naturally result according to the will of the practitioner), asteyapratisthayamsarvaratnaupasthanam (When non-stealing is established, all wealth comes on its own), brahmacharyapratisthayamviryalabhah (When walking with awareness of the highest reality is firmly established, then a great strength, vitality is acquired), aparigrahasthairyejanmakathantasambodhah (When one is steadfast in non-possessiveness with the senses, there arises knowledge of the why and how of past and future).

Fig 1: Yoga Self-restraint frame domain

The frame shows five principles of self restraint in the outermost circle, its benefits to individual and society wellness are shown in the second and third circles (Fig. 1). In the literature^[66-69], the benefits are related to value systems. In a way these may be comparable to the benefits of yama. The values are given as “don’ts” in one’s life.

Method:

Sampling:

A sample size of 1,153 individuals was selected based on convenient sampling basis. DeVellis RF^[34]recommends a ratio of 1:15 or 1:20 as an ideal sample size. Learning from the literature, a sample size of greater than 200 was decided to ensure the sample adequacy. The study was conducted in Bhopal city of Madhya Pradesh state, India. An age group of 10-18 years participants was considered as the criterion for inclusion in the study. The individuals who consented to provide data were considered in the sample size selection. The data were collected from 5 April to 4 May 2018.

The study was conducted among in Bhopal region of Madhya Pradesh state, India. Schools, which have Yoga as a part the curriculum, were considered for selection. Out of 52 secondary schools with Yoga curriculum in the region, 20 were selected randomly. In India, Yoga is included in the curriculum from sixth standard. Hence, students studying six and above standards were considered for selection of sample. From the each selected school, students who consented to participate in the study and provide information were included. DeVellis, R. F., (2016) recommends a ratio of 1:15 or 1:20 as an ideal sample size. Going by this criterion, a sample size of greater than 540 is adequate since the initial pool of items was 50. We selected 1,153 students with their consent to test psychometric properties. The data were collected from 5 April to 4 May 2018. The demographic details of the subjects are given in Table 1.

Procedures of scale development:

Scale development is a systematic process that is carried out at different stages of analysis. Following recommendations of DeVellis RF^[34] and Pasquali L^[35] scale development for the present study was accomplished in three stages viz; item generation, theoretical analysis and psychometric analysis.

Item Generation:

Content domain was specified through review of literature related to yoga self restraint specified in yoga philosophy. Among the eight limbs of yoga, the self-restraint conceptual model (Fig.1) that relates beliefs with social health and wellbeing^{[36, 37]}was considered to specify the content domain. The model comprises of five concepts namely non-violence, truthfulness, non-stealing, celibacy, and non-possessiveness^[36], the researcher considered all five concepts as the constructs for scale development. Item pool generation provides a conceptual endorsement for the initial item pool^[38]. The present research employed combination of deductive and inductive methods of initial item pool generation as recommended by Kapuscinski AN and Masters KS^[39]. The researchers reviewed literature related to the Health Benefit Model, Yoga self restraint and social health behavior to acquire basic comprehension about the concept and take leads for developing constructs and items. The researchers also interacted with experts in the fields of yoga science and obtained qualitative information regarding the content domains and objective of the research. The information was analyzed and related with the concept of yoga self restraint to generate pool initial items. As a result, 50 items were developed under the selected content domains. Items worded negatively for the construct were reverse coded and scored. Following the recommendations by^[34,35,40]parameters such simplicity, clarity, specificity, capability to ensure variability of response and freeness from bias of the items were carefully considered while drafting the items.

Theoretical analysis:

Content validity:

Content validity of the initial items was assessed to make sure that the items are representative of the identified construct i.e. Yoga self restraint^[32]. The researchers, in order to assess content validity of the initial items clearly defined the conceptual framework (Fig.1) of yoga self restraint by undertaking a thorough literature review and seeking expert opinion. The expert panel comprised of 4 experts; one Vedic philosophy expert from Texas, USA, another expert from alternative and complementary medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rhishikesh, statistical expert and a psychology professor Sastra university, yoga expert from University of Patanjali, Haridwar, India. The experts assessed the relevance of items in relation to the content domain applying a tool namely Content Validity Index (CVI) developed by Waltz^[41]. The experts rated each item against a four-point scale (1=Note relevant, 2= Somewhat relevant, 3=Quite relevant and 4=Highly relevant). A score of 3 or 4 indicates that the content represented by each item was considered valid and in harmony with the theory that is being measured and they are retained. The items which received score 1 or 2 were rejected from the scale indicates that the theoretically or practically irrelevant questions or any ambiguous items that apparently repeated the essential content of other items.

Face validity:

Visual appearance of the tool such as consistency of the style, formatting, readability and feasibility as prescribed by Devon HA^[42] were tested by applying the initial level scale with 40 individuals. The respondents were asked to judge the user-friendliness of the tool. Feedback from the respondents was incorporated to improve the tool. This process was helpful to assess ambiguity and skewedness i.e. respondents providing very similar answer to all the items.

Psychometric analysis:

The psychometric analysis involves a number of quantitative techniques to test construct validity and reliability of the scale. Construct validity according to Posakoff PM^[43] is the quantity to which interpretation can be meaningfully constructed from the observed scores to the hypothetical constructs about which the observations are meant to hold information. In addition to construct validity, convergent validity, criterion validity and discriminate validity of the scale were tested quantitatively. DeVellis RF^[34] strongly recommends the combined use of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to achieve consistent results of the psychometric indices. Hence, these validity tests were done using EFA and CFA. Reliability, a quantification method producing the consistent results on recurring examinations^[34]was measured in terms of indicators namely Cronbach Alpha, Spearman-Brown coefficient, composite reliability and average variance extraction. Concurrent validity was assessed by calculating the correlation between the scores of the present scale and an established scale namely Yoga Self Efficacy Scale.

Data collection and analysis:

In this study the scale was with five options ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ (score 1) to ‘strongly agree’ (score 5). Each of the items in the scale is an agreement statement on the five point Likert scale^[44], which is a quantitative technique meant for measuring psychological variables like attitude, perception, anxiety, stress, beliefs etc. All the items in the scale were positively stated about Yoga self restraint. The summated score of all the items was treated as the quantifiable measure of the construct and it was considered for all quantitative analytical purposes. All items included in the Likert scale were considered as continuous variables. The scale was prepared in English and Hindi to facilitate respondents’ comprehension over the statements. The questionnaire was filled by the respondents. Factors are extracted and a factor structure including the correlation between the factors is proposed by EFA. The proposed factor structure is hypothesized and tested in CFA. It the statistical results fits with the hypothesized model the researcher can conclude that the factor structure is valid^[45]. Hence, the study evaluated the scale using both EFA and CFA. IBM SPSS 25 software version was used to calculate descriptive statistics, correlation matrix, EFA and Cronbach Alpha value. IBM SPSS Amos 25 software version was used to perform CFA. Convergent validity was verified using the Average Variance Extracted, a statistic calculated from values of factor loads. Construct validity was assessed by computing model fitness indices namely p value of Chi square, RMSEA, GFI, AGFI, CFI, TLI, NFI and Chisq/df which were the outputs of confirmatory factor analysis. Discriminate validity was examined by measuring the level of redundancy of items through Modification Indices (MI).

RESULTS:

General characteristics of the sample

A sample size of 1,153 healthy participants was selected for the study from the different cross sections of the society to test the psychometric properties of the YSRS. They were adolescents (mean age of 14±4 SD) covering both male 571 (49.52%) and female 582 (50.48%) populations. Among the total participants 96.21% practiced yoga as a theory and practical subject. The demographic details of the subjects are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Characteristics of participants.

Characteristics	Total Sample
	Total (N = 1153)		Male (N = 571)		Female (N = 582)
	N	%	N	%	N	%
10-12 years	286	24.8	145	50.69	141	49.3
13-14 years	290	25.15	144	49.66	146	50.34
15-16 Years	288	24.97	139	48.26	149	51.74
17-18 Years	289	25.07	143	49.48	146	50.52

Item generation^:

We developed the instrument for yoga self restraint on the lines of methodology given by Montero I & León OG^[40]. As a result based on the conceptual frame work of yoga self restraint (Fig 1), 50 items were developed under the selected major content domain viz; yoga self restraint. We divided the 50 items into five sub domains such as non-injury (10 items), truthfulness (10 items), abstention from stealing (10 items), living with awareness of the highest reality (10 items), and non-possessiveness (10 items) were generated as the initial pool of items.

Theoretical analysis:

The initial item pool consisting of 50 items was vetted by four experts to assess the degree to which the items taken together constitute an adequate operational definition of a construct^[41]i.e. content validity. The experts reviewed the initial item pool using a CVI rating tool. CVI was calculated following the recommendation of Waltz C^[41]. The experts gave their rating individually. Then, for each item, the index was calculated as the number of experts giving a rating 3 or 4 and this was divided by total number of experts. The items for which the index was less than 0.75 were considered to be irrelevant eliminated from the original list. From the initial pool, 11 items on the draft YSRS were deemed to be invalid because they yielded CVIs of 1/4=0.25 to 2/4=0.50 and were removed with CVI lower than 0.75^[46], All the remaining items were valid with CVIs ranging from 0.75 (3/4) to 1 (4/4) and were retained which resulted in a 39-item questionnaire. After modifying the scale based on rating by the experts, the scale was individually administered with 40 persons who regularly practiced Yoga. Each statement was read out to the respondent and in reply, the respondent stated what he/she understood from the item. If the content what the respondent comprehended and what had been conceived by the researchers matched, the item would be considered to be qualified. If mismatch was identified, the researcher was asked, “Why did you mean the statement like this?” The response would uncover issues present in the items like vagueness, ambiguity, leading words/sentence, unfamiliar words, complicated sentence, closed ended statement, sensitive statement etc. Based on this information, statements were rephrased. The modified statements were once again read out to the respondent and feedback was received and accordingly modified. The 39 items developed after content validity testing and cognitive interviews with select respondents.

Psychometric analysis:

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA):

The scale evolved after theoretical analysis with 39 items was administered to 1,153 participants. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted using the scores obtained from the survey. The Kaiser–Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure was used to assess the sample adequacyand to prove the correlation matrix is an identity matrix Bartlett's Test of Sphericity is calculated. KMO value was 0.61which enabled further item reduction. Following the EFA, 12 items were excluded from the 39-item scale, which resulted in 27-items and five factor variables with KMO value was 0.85 and It was significant (p<0.001). Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity value which tests association between the variables was χ2=12836.55 and it was significant (p<0.001).

Maximum Likelihood Analysis method of factor extraction with Promax Rotation was used and five factors were extracted explaining 58.46% within 1σ of the total variance. Results of the Scree plot technique indicated extraction of five factors from the 27 variables. Factor loading measures ranged from 0.45 to 0.87. Since all the factor load values of all the 27 variables were greater than 0.45, all of them were retained in the scale for next level confirmatory factor analysis. Table 2 shows variance contributed by each factor and their corresponding Eigen values.

Table 2: Exploratory factor analysis of 27 items YSR scale

Domain/Item	Component with factor loadings
Domain/Item	1	2	3	4	5
Factor 1: Asteya (AS)
AS 1: I don’t steal anybody’s wealth.	0.77
AS 2: I collect what I need.	0.85
AS 3: Stealing idea of somebody is not good.	0.85
AS 4: I don’t think to get another property without owner’s permission	0.87
AS 5: Non stealing is human right.	0.85
AS 6: Non stealing is feeless.	0.8
AS 7: Non stealing is a courageous act .	0.81
Factor 2: Satya (S)
S1: Be truthful.		0.75
S2: Truth is a virtue to be practiced.		0.77
S3: Truth is humbleness.		0.6
S4: Truth is balanced harmonious existence.		0.59
S5: Truth brings dignity and friendship.		0.57
Factor 3: Aparigraha (AP)
AP1: Non possessiveness is self.			0.7
AP2: Non possession is overall goodness society.			0.77
AP3: Non possessiveness is beneficial to others.			0.62
AP4: Non possessiveness gives moral strength.			0.57
AP5: Non possessiveness is selfless action.			0.56
Factor 4: Ahinsa (AH)
AH1: Feeling of no hostility.				0.69
AH2: Hardly harm anyone.				0.8
AH3: I don’t abuse.				0.69
AH4: Awareness not to harm animals.				0.45
AH5:Non violence is weapon of peace.				0.5
Factor 5: Bramhacharya (B)
B1: celibacy is character building.					0.7
B2: celibacy brings discipline in life.					0.76
B3: celibacy is strict discipline.					0.58
B4: celibacy defines all universal value systems.					0.54
B5: celibacy brings vitality in life.					0.53
Eigenvalue	5.19	2.85	2.81	2.52	2.39
% of variance	19.22	10.57	10.43	9.36	8.86
Cumulative %	19.22	29.8	40.23	49.6	58.46

Note. Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood. Rotation Method: Promax. Only factor loadings greater than .40 are reported, in order to aid interpretation of the factor structure. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy: 0.85.

To undertake the most appropriate interpretation, the loading values were carefully examined using Hair ^[47] guideline for practical significance, which indicates a factor loading of ±0.3 for which the item is of minimal significance, ±0.4 indicates it is more important, and ±0.5 indicates the factor is significant.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA):

The researchers conducted a CFA applying a structural equation modeling to test a hypothetically developed factor structure through EFA with five latent factors and 27 observed variables. The model obtained from confirmatory analysis is presented in Fig 2.

Fig. 2 Yoga self restraint model through CFA Abbreviations; AS=Asteya, S=Satya, AP=Aparigraha, AH=Ahinsa, B=Brahmacharya

The hierarchical model shown in Fig.3 was retained as the model with the good fit because it indicates that each of the five factors were interrelated with first-order and second order extracted factors termed as health and wellbeing through yama (WBtY).

Fig. 3 Hierarchical model of YSRS for wellness (WBtY)

Retention of this model is supported by the assumption that these five sub domains led to one larger scale^[49]. The model shows factor loading values and the standardized maximum likelihood parameter estimates (path coefficients) with strong correlations.

Construct validity:

In confirmatory factor analysis many indices of model fitness are used to test construct validity. Hair JF^[48]recommends to use at least one index from model fit categories namely absolute fit, incremental fit and Parsimonious fit. Results obtained in the present study on model fitness indices are presented in Table 3.

Table 3: Model fitness indices computed for the compared with acceptable levels

Name of category	Name of index	Accepted level	Study result
Incremental fit	Comparative Fit Index (CFI)	>0.90	0.93
	Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)	>0.90	0.93
	Normed Fit Index (NFI)	>0.90	0.91
	Adjusted Goodness of Fit (AGFI)	>0.90	0.92
Parsimonious fit	Chi Square/Degrees of Freedom (Chi-square/df)	<3 High	3.67*
Absolute fit	Discrepancy Chi Square (Chi-square)	P>0.05	0.0001
	Root Mean Square of Error Approximation (RMSEA)	<0.08	0.04
	Goodness of Fit Index (GFI)	>0.90	0.93

Note: *According to Wheaton^[60] the ratio of Normed Chi square/df <5.0 is reasonable.

Table 3 illustrates three different types of indices viz; absolute, incremental and parsimonious values. All three indices minimum level was achieved^[49].

Convergent validity:

We performed three additional factor extractions to confirm the model structure, presented in Table 5. This table shows item quality (Chi-square), composite reliability (CR), and average variance extraction (AVE) were quantified to test convergent validity. Statistical significance of all the items in the model indicates presence of convergent validity. All factors had values of .50 or higher, demonstrating that the observed variable sufficiently reflected its construct’s latent variable^[50]. Factors with a CR of .96 were considered good^[51], and all factors appropriately exceeded this level. The acceptable AVE of 0.50 ranged between .40 and .69^[52]; all five–order factors demonstrated values within this range, exhibiting good strength.

Concurrent validity

A Yoga Self Efficacy Scale (YSES) developed by Birdee GS^[37]with 3 constructs and 12 items was selected to test concurrent validity of the present scale. YSES has been developed to measure self-efficacy among the practitioners of Yoga. The tool has been evolved based on the theory of self-efficacy. YSES has robust internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.93 and good construct validity measures. When the scale was administered in our study, it had Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.876. The scores of the scale developed in the present study were correlated with YSES. Since the data were not normally distributed, non-parametric tool of association measurement namely Spearman’s correlation coefficient was applied. Both the scores were positively correlated (ρ=0.87) and it was significant (p<0.001). Presence of criterion validity was proved due to positive and significant correlation coefficient between the newly developed scale and an established scale.

Reliability:

Internal consistency of the 27 item five factor scale was determined by calculating Cronbach’s alpha measure and composite reliability measure. The Crobbach’s alpha value was 0.74. Composite reliability measure was 0.96.

Test-retest reliability:

was carried out for a month’s time in 304 participants. The Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Cronbach’s alpha and one-sample statistics was used to calculate the test-retest reliability. ICC of average measures was ranged from 0.76 to 0.93 for entire scale was 0.75 considered an adequate reliability score^[53]. The Overall scale reliability for the items was better, with Cronbach’s alpha for the subscale ranging from .76 to .94 and over all being .74 for the entire scale. These results confirmed that five factor YSRS has good stability. Test-retest analysis data mean 3.87 with t-value 71.42 were same over a month’s time showed better consistency.

DISCUSSION:

Systematic steps as prescribed in the literature of psychometric research were adopted to develop this instrument. The yoga self-restraint scale concept developed based on ancient Indian yoga philosophical texts as an extensive literature review (deductive method) and consulted with relevant people about the subject (inductive method)^[54]. The initial item pool, which had 50 items got reduced to 27 items with five constructs at the end of the study. It has been validated and found to be reliable by using the psychometric analysis. The stated hypothesis that yoga self restraint may be related to social health and wellbeing has been proved with final five regression coefficient values (Table 5). These coefficients were calculated using EFA and CFA statistical analytical techniques on the lines of Barry^[55] to assess the influence of self restraints on social health and well being. In terms of scale’s validity, reliability and factor structure of YSRS. The results of this study suggest that the YSR Scale is providing an appropriate instrument for measuring the Social wellness among adolescents and support the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the measures. We identified five factors of the YSRS scale and these fit the hierarchical model: ahimsa, satya, asteya, brahmacharya, aparigraha.

Each of these five factors exhibited good internal reliability and constituted a model with a good fit (GoF) with the data. The research community, over the years, has developed a number of GOF Indices to test the construct validity. The GoF Indices are categorized into three groups namely absolute fit indices, incremental fit indices and parsimonious fit indices. Absolute fit indices are a quantity of degree of fitness of the model to the empirical data. They offer the most fundamental measure of the fitness^[47]. Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) is another absolute fit index. According to Tanaka JS & Huba GJ^[56] GFI is equivalent to R² in regression analysis. In the lines of R² measure, for GFI also Adjusted index is calculated (AGFI). Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) is a population based index and is less sensitive to sample size. Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) has values range between 0 and 1. Models with values close to 1 show better fit. Likewise, Normed Fit Index (NFI) values range from 0 to 1 and values above 0.90 indicate better fit (Song, H. J., et al. 2011). According to Hair, J. F., et al. (2010) a parsimonious model is significant to prove that the postulated model fits the data in comparison with a complex model. According to Wheaton⁵⁷ the ratio of Normed Chi square/df is reasonable. The ratio obtained in the present study was 3.67 and hence it could be inferred that the value is reasonable to judge that the model has parsimonious fitness. The results of this study suggest that the YSR Scale is providing an appropriate instrument for measuring the Social wellness among adolescents and support the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the measures. We identified five factors of the YSRS scale and these fit the hierarchical model: ahimsa, satya, asteya, brahmacharya, aparigraha. Each of these five factors exhibited good internal reliability and constituted a model with a good fit with the data. Those five factors were moderately correlated with each other, suggesting that they each assess related, although distinct, components of Yoga self restraints or yama.

The 27-item YSRS is a short scale that can be administered both for general population and for school setting. The age appropriateness is compared with the adolescent psychiatry of the quality of life^[58]. The psychometric quality of the YSRS are generally comparable to the pattern matrix, goodness of fit and factor loadings of the CFA analysis carried out by Huang CH^[59]. Van den Berg PT & Pitariu H^[^60] has brought out a relationship between wellbeing and personality during societal change. The YSRS scale are positively and significantly correlated with the standardized scale of Birdee’s^[37] Yoga Self-Efficacy Scale to prove existence of concurrent validity.

CONCLUSION:

A yoga Self-restraint scale is described to measure social health and analyze its relation with five self-restraints; non-injury, truthfulness, abstention from stealing, living with awareness of the highest reality, and non-possessiveness. We employed both qualitative and quantitative methods to develop and validate an YSR scale using SPSS and AMOS version 25’s exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses for 1,153 general populations from Bhopal city, India. The standardized estimated regression value is found to be 0.67 which is greater than the required level of ≥ 0.5 and thus showing a good relation between five restraints of yoga to social health and wellbeing of the adolescents. This yoga instrument can facilitate and provide a social health care and wellbeing: self-esteem, interpersonal skills, healthy behaviors, educational attainment. The present study has been undertaken in a cross sectional setting with limited number of samples. There is a scope for further research in the field of eight limbed yoga.

FUNDING:

This research did not receive any grant from funding agencies - public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

Authors and coauthors, declare that they have no conflict of interest.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION:

The main author is the administrative head and the remaining co-authors contributed to the data analysis and its statistical interpretation.

COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS:

Disclosure of potential conflict of interest:

Authors and co-authors declare that they have no conflict of interest to this work.

Research involving human participants and/or animals:

This article does not contain any studies with animals.

Informed consent:

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

REFERENCES:

1. Kkeli N, Michaelides MP, Karekla M. The greek version of the restraint scale: validation in a student sample in cyprus. Hellenic Journal of Psychology. 2018; 15:1-4.

2. van Strien T, Herman CP, Engels RC, Larsen JK, van Leeuwe JF. Construct validation of the Restraint Scale in normal-weight and overweight females. Appetite. 2007 Jul 1;49(1):109-21.

3. Cauffman E, Steinberg L. (Im) maturity of judgment in adolescence: Why adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behavioral sciences & the law. 2000 Dec;18(6):741-60.

4. Sharma RA, Gupta NI, Bijlani RL. Effect of yoga based lifestyle intervention on subjective well-being. Indian J Physiol Pharmacol. 2008 Apr;52(2):123-31.

5. Malhotra AK. An Introduction to Yoga Philosophy: an annotated translation of the Yoga Sutras. Routledge; 2017 Jul 31.

6. White DG. The Yoga Sutra of Patanjali: A Biography. Princeton University Press; 2014 May 25.

7. Satchidananda S. The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali: Translation and Commentary by Sri Swami Satchidananda.

8. Saraswati S, Saraswati SN. Four chapters on freedom: Commentary on the yoga sutras of Patanjali. Nesma Books India; 2002.

9. De Michelis E. A history of modern yoga: Patanjali and western esotericism. A&C Black; 2005 Dec 8.

10. Bharati SV. Yoga Sutras of Patanjali (with the Exposition of Vyasa),(Vol. II: Sadhana-Pada).

11. Ranjan RK, Kumar D. Astanga Yoga: the Eight fold path of Holistic Health.

12. Iyengar BK. Light on yoga.

13. Alter JS. Yoga in modern India: The body between science and philosophy. Princeton University Press; 2004.

14. Adele D. The Yamas & Niyamas: Exploring yoga's ethical practice. Duluth, MN: On-Word Bound Books; 2009.

15. Patanjali SV. The Yoga Sutras Of Patanjali-The Book Of The Spiritual Man (Annotated Edition). Jazzybee Verlag; 2012.

16. Buckingham S. Materializing ecosophy–yoga as an ethical academic practice. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography. 2017 Apr 3;99(2):143-55.

17. Weinberger DA, Schwartz GE. Distress and restraint as superordinate dimensions of self‐reported adjustment: A typological perspective. Journal of personality. 1990 Jun;58(2):381-417.

18. Zell AL, Baumeister RF. How religion can support self-control and moral behavior.

19. Field T. Yoga clinical research review. Complementary therapies in clinical practice. 2011 Feb 1;17(1):1-8.

20. Sullivan MB, Moonaz S, Weber K, Taylor JN, Schmalzl L. Toward an explanatory framework for yoga therapy informed by philosophical and ethical perspectives. Altern. Ther. Health Med. 2018 Jan 1;24:38-47.

21. Kuntsevich V, Bushell WC, Theise ND. Mechanisms of yogic practices in health, aging, and disease. Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine: A Journal of Translational and Personalized Medicine. 2010 Sep;77(5):559-69.

22. Balasubramaniam M, Telles S, Doraiswamy PM. Yoga on our minds: a systematic review of yoga for neuropsychiatric disorders. Frontiers in PSYCHIATRY. 2013 Jan 25;3:117.

23. Li AW, Goldsmith CA. The effects of yoga on anxiety and stress. Altern Med Rev. 2012 Mar 1;17(1):21-35.

24. Telles S, Singh N. Science of the mind: ancient yoga texts and modern studies. Psychiatric Clinics. 2013 Mar 1;36(1):93-108.

25. Woodyard C. Exploring the therapeutic effects of yoga and its ability to increase quality of life. International journal of yoga. 2011 Jul;4(2):49.

26. Baer RA. The third wave: new directions in cognitive-behavioral intervention. Psyccritiques. 2005 Dec 1;50(52).

27. Chambers R, Gullone E, Allen NB. Mindful emotion regulation: An integrative review. Clinical psychology review. 2009 Aug 1;29(6):560-72.

28. Taylor AG, Goehler LE, Galper DI, Innes KE, Bourguignon C. Top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in mind-body medicine: development of an integrative framework for psychophysiological research. EXPLORE: the Journal of Science and Healing. 2010 Jan 1;6(1):29-41.

29. Van den Hurk PA, Janssen BH, Giommi F, Barendregt HP, Gielen SC. Mindfulness meditation associated with alterations in bottom-up processing: psychophysiological evidence for reduced reactivity. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2010 Nov 1;78(2):151-7.

30. Hölzel BK, Lazar SW, Gard T, Schuman-Olivier Z, Vago DR, Ott U. How does mindfulness meditation work? Proposing mechanisms of action from a conceptual and neural perspective. Perspectives on psychological science. 2011 Nov;6(6):537-59.

31. Westbrook C, Creswell JD, Tabibnia G, Julson E, Kober H, Tindle HA. Mindful attention reduces neural and self-reported cue-induced craving in smokers. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience. 2011 Nov 22;8(1):73-84.

32. Bhavanani YD. Yoga sutras of patanjali: an overview.

33. Saraswati S, Saraswati SN. Four chapters on freedom: Commentary on the yoga sutras of Patanjali. Nesma Books India; 2002.

34. DeVellis RF. Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage publications; 2016 Apr 12.

35. Pasquali L. Instrumentação psicológica: Fundamentos e práticas [Psychological instrumentation: Bases and practices] Porto Alegre. RS: Artmed. [Links]. 2010.

36. Raina M, Singh K. The Ashtanga Yoga Hindi Scale: An assessment tool based on Eastern philosophy of Yoga. Journal of religion and health. 2018 Feb 1;57(1):12-25.

37. Birdee GS, Sohl SJ, Wallston K. Development and psychometric properties of the Yoga Self-Efficacy Scale (YSES). BMC complementary and alternative medicine. 2015 Dec;16(1):3.

38. Hutz CS, Bandeira DR, Trentini CM. Psicometria. Artmed Editora; 2015 Jul 1.

39. Kapuscinski AN, Masters KS. The current status of measures of spirituality: A critical review of scale development. Psycholog Relig Spiritual. 2010 Nov;2(4):191.

40. Montero I, León OG. A guide for naming research studies in Psychology. international Journal of clinical and Health psychology. 2007;7(3).

41. Waltz CF, Strickland OL, Lenz ER, editors. Measurement in nursing and health research. Springer publishing company; 2010 Apr 17.

42. DeVon HA, Block ME, Moyle‐Wright P, Ernst DM, Hayden SJ, Lazzara DJ, Savoy SM, Kostas‐Polston E. A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. Journal of Nursing scholarship. 2007 Jun, 39(2):155-64.

43. Podsakoff PM, House RJ. Leadership effectiveness: Past perspectives and future directions for research. InOrganizational behavior 2013 Mar 7 (pp. 55-92). Routledge.

44. Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology. 1932.

45. Babbie E, Wagner III WE, Zaino J. Adventures in social research: Data analysis using IBM® SPSS® Statistics. Sage Publications; 2018 May 15.

46. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2007 Jan 1;60(1):34-42.

47. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. pdf.

48. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate data analysis with readings Macmillan Publishing Company. New York. 1992.

49. Awang Z. Structural equation modeling using AMOS graphic. Penerbit Universiti Teknologi MARA; 2012.

50. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education; 2007.

51. Raines-Eudy R. Using structural equation modeling to test for differential reliability and validity: An empirical demonstration. Structural Equation Modeling. 2000 Jan 1;7(1):124-41.

52. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research. 1981 Feb 1:39-50.

53. McCoach DB, Gable RK, Madura JP. Instrument development in the affective domain. New York, NY: Springer. doi. 2013 May 9;10:978-1.

54. Hoon Song J, Uhm D, Won Yoon S. Organizational knowledge creation practice: Comprehensive and systematic processes for scale development. Leadersh Organ Dev J. 2011 May 10;32(3):243-59.

55. Barry AE, Chaney EH, Stellefson ML, Chaney JD. SO YOU WANT TO DEVELOP A SURVEY: PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SCALE DEVELOPMENT. American Journal of Health Studies. 2011 Jun 1;26(2).

56. Tanaka JS, Huba GJ. A general coefficient of determination for covariance structure models under arbitrary GLS estimation. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology. 1989 Nov;42(2):233-9.

57. Wheaton B, Muthen B, Alwin DF, Summers GF. Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociol Methodol. 1977 Jan 1; 8:84-136.

58. Ravens-Sieberer U, Karow A, Barthel D, Klasen F. How to assess quality of life in child and adolescent psychiatry. Dialogues in clinical neuroscience. 2014 Jun;16(2):147.

59. Huang CH, Wang TF, Tang FI, Chen IJ, Yu S. Development and validation of a Quality of Life Scale for elementary school students. International journal of clinical and health psychology. 2017 May 1;17(2):180-91.

60. van den Berg PT, Pitariu H. The relationships between personality and well-being during societal change. Personality and individual differences. 2005 Jul 1;39(1):229-34.

61. Alok Pandey. Level of Agricultural Development of sample Village in Ambedkar Nagar District (U.P.). Int. J. Rev. and Res. Social Sci. 2018; 6(2): 162-164.

62. Md. Karar Ahmad. Role of Post-Disaster Rehabilitation Agencies in India: A Review. Int. J. Rev. and Res. Social Sci. 2018; 6(2):194-198.

63. रजनी सीमान्त वर्ग में शिक्षा के स्वरूप का अध्ययन. Int. J. Rev. and Res. Social Sci. 2018; 6(2): 133-140 .

64. रश्मि चैाबे छत्तीसगढ़ में शिक्षा का विकास एवं आर्य समाज की भूमिका. Int. J. Rev. & Res. Social Sci. 1(2): Oct. - Dec. 2013; Page 48-51.

65. Rajesh Shukla. Liberation of Women in the Indian Context. Int. J. Rev. & Res. Social Sci. 1(2): Oct. - Dec. 2013; Page 45-47.

66. Alekh Kumar Sahu, Dolamani Sahu. Role of Education in Controlling of Environmental Pollution. Int. J. Rev. & Res. Social Sci. 1(1): July –Sept. 2013; Page 27-28.

67. खोमन लाल साहूण् भारतीय स्कूलों की वर्तमान परिदृश्य. Int. J. Rev. and Res. Social Sci. 2018; 6(2): 115-117 .

68. सुमन गर्गए कमला वशिष्ठए नरेन्द्र कुमार गर्ग अनुसंधान की प्रक्रिया में संबंधित साहित्य के अध्ययन की प्रासंगिकता. Int. J. Rev. & Res. Social Sci. 1(1): July –Sept. 2013; Page 18-20.

69. महेन्द्र कुमार प्रेमी अर्थ का सामाजिक व नैतिक मूल्य. दर्शनशास्त्रीय परिपेक्ष्य में. Int. J. Rev. & Res. Social Sci. 1(2): Oct. - Dec. 2013; Page 31-33.

Received on 09.10.2018 Modified on 11.11.2018

Int. J. Rev. and Res. Social Sci. 2019; 7(1):01-09.

DOI: 10.5958/2454-2687.2019.00001.7