The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Model and the various psychometric instruments developed and validated based on this model are well established in clinical and research settings. However, evidence regarding the psychometric validity, reliability, and equivalence across multiple countries of residence, languages, or gender identities, including gender-diverse individuals, is lacking to date. Using data from the International Sex Survey (N = 82,243), confirmatory factor analyses and measurement invariance analyses were performed on the preestablished five-factor structure of the 20-item short version of the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale to examine whether (a) psychometric validity and reliability and (b) psychometric equivalence hold across 34 country-of-residence-related, 22 language-related, and three gender-identity-related groups. The results of the present study extend the latter psychometric instrument’s well-established relevance to 26 countries, 13 languages, and three gender identities. Most notably, psychometric validity and reliability were evidenced across nine novel translations included in the present study (i.e., Croatian, English, German, Hebrew, Korean, Macedonian, Polish, Portuguese—Portugal, and Spanish—Latin American) and psychometric equivalence was evidenced across all three gender identities included in the present study (i.e., women, men, and gender-diverse individuals).

Existing research shows that children’s responses to rewards and punishments are essential for understanding attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and callous-unemotional traits. The present study developed the Contingency Response Rating Scale (CRRS) to fulfill the need for a reliable and valid measure of children’s contingency response style that is brief, easy to use in applied settings, and provides additional information to existing clinical measures. We examined the psychometric properties of the CRRS in a sample of 196 children (ages 5–12), most of whom were referred to evaluate attention and behavior problems in an outpatient clinic. Using principal axis factoring, we identified five factors: (a) punishment ineffectiveness, (b) reward ineffectiveness, (c) punishment dysregulation, (d) reward dysregulation, and (e) contingency insensitivity. The subscales based on these factors showed acceptable test–retest and internal consistency reliability, and scale intercorrelations varied from low to moderate. The subscales also captured significant variance not explained by child or parent demographics and were associated with measures of psychopathology and impairment. The results provide preliminary evidence that the CRRS may be a helpful tool for assessing reward and punishment sensitivity in children with attention and behavior problems.

Transitioning back to work after maternity leave is increasingly common. While differences exist, for many mothers this transition represents a stressor. This study aimed to define the construct of maternal postpartum work resumption stress and develop and validate a self-report measure in a low-risk sample of Dutch mothers. First, the item pool (N = 71) and face and content validity of the questionnaire were established. Next, two independent samples of mothers returning to work (N = 298, N = 291) were recruited to identify factor structure, reduce the number of items, and assess the dimensionality, reliability, convergent and discriminant validity of the questionnaire. Based on exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, the reliable and valid REturn to Work INventory (REWINd) with 30 items across three factors was established. While further validation is needed, REWINd can be used to further study the nature and consequences of maternal postpartum work resumption stress.

The ability to quantify within-person changes in mental health is central to the mission of clinical psychology. Typically, this is done using total or mean scores on symptom measures; however, this approach assumes that measures quantify the same construct, the same way, each time the measure is completed. Without this quality, termed longitudinal measurement invariance, an observed difference between timepoints might be partially attributable to changing measurement properties rather than changes in comparable symptom measurements. This concern is amplified in research using different forms of a measure across developmental periods due to potential differences in reporting styles, item-wording, and developmental context. This study provides the strongest support for the longitudinal measurement invariance of the Anxiety Scale, Depression/Affective Problems: Cognitive Subscale, and the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Scale; moderate support for the Depression/Affective Problems Scale and the Somatic Scale, and poor support for the Depression/Affective Problems: Somatic Symptoms Subscale of the Dutch Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment Youth Self-Report and Adult Self-Report in a sample of 1,309 individuals (N = 1,090 population-based, N = 219 clinic-based/referred to an outpatient clinic before age 11 years) across six waves of data (mean ages = 11 years at Wave 1 and 26 years at Wave 6).

As previous studies have shown that personality disorder (PD) assessment in older adults is often hampered because assessment tools are tailored toward younger adults, establishing the age-neutrality of novel tools is crucial. This study primarily aimed to evaluate the age-neutrality of the Level of Personality Functioning Brief Form (LPFS-BF 2.0) and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Modified + (PID-5-BF+M), using a sample of 254 community-dwelling adults. The analysis of Differential Item Functioning (DIF) demonstrated the age-neutrality of both instruments, with only 8.3% of LPFS-BF 2.0 items and 5.6% of PID-5-BF+M items exhibiting DIF. Differential Test Functioning (DTF) analyses revealed large DTF for the LPFS-BF 2.0 total score, indicating that age-specific norms might be necessary for this score. In summary, this study supports the use of these instruments in both older and younger adults, enhancing the assessment of PDs across the life span.

The adoption of open science practices (OSPs) is crucial for promoting transparency and robustness in research. We conducted a systematic review to assess the frequency and trends of OSPs in psychometric studies focusing on measures of suicidal thoughts and behavior. We analyzed publications from two international databases, examining the use of OSPs such as open access publication, preregistration, provision of open materials, and data sharing. Our findings indicate a lack of adherence to OSPs in psychometric studies of suicide. The majority of manuscripts were published under restricted access, and preregistrations were not utilized. The provision of open materials and data was rare, with limited access to instruments and analysis scripts. Open access versions (preprints/postprints) were scarce. The low adoption of OSPs in psychometric studies of suicide calls for urgent action. Embracing a culture of open science will enhance transparency, reproducibility, and the impact of research in suicide prevention efforts.

The Hearts and Flowers (H&F) task is a computerized executive functioning (EF) assessment that has been used to measure EF from early childhood to adulthood. It provides data on accuracy and reaction time (RT) across three different task blocks (hearts, flowers, and mixed). However, there is a lack of consensus in the field on how to score the task that makes it difficult to interpret findings across studies. The current study, which includes a demographically diverse population of kindergarteners from Boston Public Schools (N = 946), compares the predictive and concurrent validity of 30 ways of scoring H&F, each with a different combination of accuracy, RT, and task block(s). Our exploratory results provide evidence supporting the use of a two-vector average score based on Zelazo et al.'s approach of adding accuracy and RT scores together only after individuals pass a certain accuracy threshold. Findings have implications for scoring future tablet-based developmental assessments.

The PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) and the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) are two of the most widely used and well-validated PTSD measures providing total and subscale scores that correspond with DSM-5 PTSD symptoms. However, there is little information about the utility of subscale scores above and beyond the total score for either measure. The current study compared the proposed DSM-5 four-factor model to a bifactor model across both measures using a sample of veterans (N = 1,240) presenting to a Veterans Affairs (VA) PTSD specialty clinic. The correlated factors and bifactor models for both measures evidenced marginal-to-acceptable fit and were retained for further evaluation. Bifactor specific indices suggested that both measures exhibited a strong general factor but weak lower-order factors. Structural regressions revealed that most of the lower-order factors provided little utility in predicting relevant outcomes. Although additional research is needed to make definitive statements about the utility of PCL-5 and CAPS-5 subscales, study findings point to numerous weaknesses. As such, caution should be exercised when using or interpreting subscale scores in future research.

In typical Dark Triad (DT) questionnaires, generic items oftentimes refer to "others" or "people" in general. Hence, respondents have to mentally aggregate their behavior across several kinds of "others" (e.g., work colleagues, family members, and friends). It remains unknown if individuals consider different kinds of interaction partners equally or if their self-reports contain "hidden" interaction partner-specific tendencies. To shed light on this issue, we assessed generic and contextualized DT items (referring to family, friends, work, and strangers; N = 814 from the general population). The correlated trait-correlated (method - 1) model was used to investigate preregistered research questions. On average, generic DT items showed the strongest association with work-contextualized DT items and the weakest association with family-contextualized DT items. However, the associations varied considerably across DT items and traits. In sum, our results suggest that hidden framings exist in some DT items, which may impact their ability to predict relevant criteria due to contextual (a)symmetries. The generalizability of the findings to other DT instruments, items, and participant groups should be examined in future research.

The Stress Appraisal Measure (SAM) captures six different types of cognitive appraisals in anticipation of an upcoming stressful situation. The goal of this article was to examine the factorial structure and the validity of the scale in the French language while accounting for existing limitations in the literature. These include factorial structure instability and low internal consistency for specific subscales across multiple validation studies in other languages. In the first study (N = 425), the results from an exploratory factor analysis reliably suggested the removal of five items, the bridging of the threat and challenge subscales as one, and a new general five-factor structure. The new structure and its construct, convergent, and discriminant validity were confirmed in a second study (N = 308). We discuss the relevance of this five-factor scale for the studies focused on individual differences in stress and appraisals.