Displaying publications 81 - 85 of 85 in total

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Lewczuk K, Marcowski P, Wizła M, Gola M, Nagy L, Koós M, et al.
    J Atten Disord, 2024 Feb;28(4):512-530.
    PMID: 38180045 DOI: 10.1177/10870547231215518
    OBJECTIVE: We analyzed adult ADHD symptoms in a cross-cultural context, including investigating the occurrence and potential correlates of adult ADHD and psychometric examination of the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) Screener.

    METHOD: Our analysis is based on a large-scale research project involving 42 countries (International Sex Survey, N=72,627, 57% women, Mage=32.84; SDage=12.57).

    RESULTS: The ASRS Screener demonstrated good reliability and validity, along with partial invariance across different languages, countries, and genders. The occurrence of being at risk for adult ADHD was relatively high (21.4% for women, 18.1% for men). The highest scores were obtained in the US, Canada, and other English-speaking Western countries, with significantly lower scores among East Asian and non-English-speaking European countries. Moreover, ADHD symptom severity and occurrence were especially high among gender-diverse individuals. Significant associations between adult ADHD symptoms and age, mental and sexual health, and socioeconomic status were observed.

    CONCLUSIONS: Present results show significant cross-cultural variability in adult ADHD occurrence as well as highlight important factors related to adult ADHD. Moreover, the importance of further research on adult ADHD in previously understudied populations (non-Western countries) and minority groups (gender-diverse individuals) is stressed. Lastly, the present analysis is consistent with previous evidence showing low specificity of adult ADHD screening instruments and contributes to the current discussion on accurate adult ADHD screening and diagnosis.

  2. Quintana GR, Ponce FP, Escudero-Pastén JI, Santibáñez-Palma JF, Nagy L, Koós M, et al.
    J Affect Disord, 2024 Apr 01;350:991-1006.
    PMID: 38244805 DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.01.127
    BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety are among the most prevalent mental health issues experienced worldwide. However, whereas cross-cultural studies utilize psychometrically valid and reliable scales, fewer can meaningfully compare these conditions across different groups. To address this gap, the current study aimed to psychometrically assess the Brief Symptomatology Index (BSI) in 42 countries.

    METHODS: Using data from the International Sex Survey (N = 82,243; Mage = 32.39; SDage = 12.52; women: n = 46,874; 57 %), we examined the reliability of depression and anxiety symptom scores of the BSI-18, as well as evaluated evidence of construct, invariance, and criterion-related validity in predicting clinically relevant variables across countries, languages, genders, and sexual orientations.

    RESULTS: Results corroborated an invariant, two-factor structure across all groups tested, exhibiting excellent reliability estimates for both subscales. The 'caseness' criterion effectively discriminated among those at low and high risk of depression and anxiety, yielding differential effects on the clinical criteria examined.

    LIMITATIONS: The predictive validation was not made against a clinical diagnosis, and the full BSI-18 scale was not examined (excluding the somatization sub-dimension), limiting the validation scope of the BSI-18. Finally, the study was conducted online, mainly by advertisements through social media, ultimately skewing our sample towards women, younger, and highly educated populations.

    CONCLUSIONS: The results support that the BSI-12 is a valid and reliable assessment tool for assessing depression and anxiety symptoms across countries, languages, genders, and sexual orientations. Further, its caseness criterion can discriminate well between participants at high and low risk of depression and anxiety.

  3. Lin CY, Tsai MC, Koós M, Nagy L, Kraus SW, Demetrovics Z, et al.
    Int J Clin Health Psychol, 2024;24(2):100461.
    PMID: 38706570 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100461
    BACKGROUND: The three-item Sexual Distress Scale (SDS-3) has been frequently used to assess distress related to sexuality in public health surveys and research on sexual wellbeing. However, its psychometric properties and measurement invariance across cultural, gender and sexual subgroups have not yet been examined. This multinational study aimed to validate the SDS-3 and test its psychometric properties, including measurement invariance across language, country, gender identity, and sexual orientation groups.

    METHODS: We used global survey data from 82,243 individuals (Mean age=32.39 years; 40.3 % men, 57.0 % women, 2.8 % non-binary, and 0.6 % other genders) participating in the International Sexual Survey (ISS; https://internationalsexsurvey.org/) across 42 countries and 26 languages. Participants completed the SDS-3, as well as questions regarding sociodemographic characteristics, including gender identity and sexual orientation.

    RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported a unidimensional factor structure for the SDS-3, and multi-group CFA (MGCFA) suggested that this factor structure was invariant across countries, languages, gender identities, and sexual orientations. Cronbach's α for the unidimensional score was 0.83 (range between 0.76 and 0.89), and McDonald's ω was 0.84 (range between 0.76 and 0.90). Participants who did not experience sexual problems had significantly lower SDS-3 total scores (M = 2.99; SD=2.54) compared to those who reported sexual problems (M = 5.60; SD=3.00), with a large effect size (Cohen's d = 1.01 [95 % CI=-1.03, -0.98]; p < 0.001).

    CONCLUSION: The SDS-3 has a unidimensional factor structure and appears to be valid and reliable for measuring sexual distress among individuals from different countries, gender identities, and sexual orientations.

  4. Jovanović V, Rudnev M, Abdelrahman M, Abdul Kadir NB, Adebayo DF, Akaliyski P, et al.
    Psychol Assess, 2024 Jan;36(1):14-29.
    PMID: 38010780 DOI: 10.1037/pas0001270
    Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS) is a widely used measure that captures somatic symptoms of coronavirus-related anxiety. In a large-scale collaboration spanning 60 countries (Ntotal = 21,513), we examined the CAS's measurement invariance and assessed the convergent validity of CAS scores in relation to the fear of COVID-19 (FCV-19S) and the satisfaction with life (SWLS-3) scales. We utilized both conventional exact invariance tests and alignment procedures, with results revealing that the single-factor model fit the data well in almost all countries. Partial scalar invariance was supported in a subset of 56 countries. To ensure the robustness of results, given the unbalanced samples, we employed resampling techniques both with and without replacement and found the results were more stable in larger samples. The alignment procedure demonstrated a high degree of measurement invariance with 9% of the parameters exhibiting noninvariance. We also conducted simulations of alignment using the parameters estimated in the current model. Findings demonstrated reliability of the means but indicated challenges in estimating the latent variances. Strong positive correlations between CAS and FCV-19S estimated with all three different approaches were found in most countries. Correlations of CAS and SWLS-3 were weak and negative but significantly differed from zero in several countries. Overall, the study provided support for the measurement invariance of the CAS and offered evidence of its convergent validity while also highlighting issues with variance estimation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
  5. Karakulak A, Tepe B, Dimitrova R, Abdelrahman M, Akaliyski P, Alaseel R, et al.
    Commun Psychol, 2023 Dec 15;1(1):43.
    PMID: 39242865 DOI: 10.1038/s44271-023-00046-5
    With the COVID-19 pandemic, behavioural scientists aimed to illuminate reasons why people comply with (or not) large-scale cooperative activities. Here we investigated the motives that underlie support for COVID-19 preventive behaviours in a sample of 12,758 individuals from 34 countries. We hypothesized that the associations of empathic prosocial concern and fear of disease with support towards preventive COVID-19 behaviours would be moderated by trust in the government. Results suggest that the association between fear of disease and support for COVID-19 preventive behaviours was strongest when trust in the government was weak (both at individual- and country-level). Conversely, the association with empathic prosocial concern was strongest when trust in the government was high, but this moderation was only found at individual-level scores of governmental trust. We discuss how motivations may be shaped by socio-cultural context, and outline how findings may contribute to a better understanding of collective action during global crises.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links