Construction and validation of a scale for assessing critical social justice attitudes.

Two large studies (combined n = 5,878) set out to construct and validate a scale for assessing critical social justice attitudes. Studies assessed the reliability, factor structure, model fit, and both convergent and divergent validity of the scale. Studies also examined the prevalence of critical social justice attitudes in different populations and the scale's correlations with other variables of interest, including well-being variables: anxiety, depression, and happiness. Participants for Study 1 (n = 848) were university faculty and students, as well as non-academic adults, from Finland. Participants responded to a survey about critical social justice attitudes. Twenty one candidate items were devised for an initial item pool, on which factor analyses were conducted, resulting in a 10-item pilot version of critical social justice attitude scales (CSJAS). Participants for Study 2 were a nationwide sample (n = 5,030) aged 15-84 from Finland. Five new candidate items were introduced, of which two were included in the final, seven-item, version of CSJAS. The final CSJAS scale had high reliability (α = 0.87, ω = 0.88) and a good model fit (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.99, TLI = 0.99, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.04, standardized root mean residual [SRMR] = 0.01, χ2 (14, 5024) = 132.8 (p < 0.001)) as well as convergent and divergent validity. Overall, the study sample rejected critical social justice propositions, with strong rejection from men. Women expressed more than twice as much support for the propositions (d = 1.20). In both studies, CSJAS was correlated with depression, anxiety, and (lack of) happiness, but not more so than being on the political left was. The critical social justice attitude scale was successfully constructed and validated. It had good reliability and model fit.

The effects of app-based mindfulness practice on the well-being of university students and staff.

Mental health problems like anxiety, depression, and stress have been increasing in many countries and the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated their toll. Mindfulness-based interventions have been shown to provide evidence-based treatments for anxiety and depression, and accumulating evidence is emerging in support of using mindfulness apps yielding small-to-moderate treatment effects. The study was a 4-week randomized controlled trial with 561 university students and staff as participants, divided into a treatment group (mindfulness app) and an active control group (psychoeducational online content). Depression, anxiety, and stress were evaluated as primary study outcomes. Saliva cortisol samples were also collected from a subgroup of the treatment arm (n = 29). Using the mindfulness app for four weeks resulted in small reductions in stress (d = .16), and depression (d = .16). Attrition was 28.0%. Subjects who practiced more did not experience additional improvement in wellbeing. Mindfulness apps offer modest but clear benefits to users in terms of improved mental health. They present a promising supplement to traditional mental health services.

A preliminary validation of PMQ-A four-factor questionnaire measuring parental mentalizing.

The present study describes the construction and preliminary validation of a new parental mentalizing scale, PMQ. Based on theory, we hypothesized that one higher-order parental mentalizing factor would comprise four dimensions of parental mentalizing: (1) Parental self-mentalizing (SELF), (2) Parental child-mentalizing (CHILD), (3) Effort (E), and (4) Curiosity (C). After modifying the content of one factor (Effort > Lack of Effort, LE), four-factor structure with one higher-order factor was confirmed in data collected from parents of children aged two to 6 years through social media and email lists (N = 321, 10% male). All factors loaded significantly on the higher-order factor, with acceptable internal consistencies. Next, PMQ factors were compared with the factors of a previously validated questionnaire, parental reflective functioning questionnaire (PRFQ). The PMQ and PRFQ factors were consistently and significantly correlated, indicating the validity of the PMQ as a measure of parental mentalization ability. The continuation of PMQ validation is discussed.

Cognitive, social, and mental health functions of refugee children - screening and supportive actions at school: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Despite a world-leading educational system, an achievement gap in educational outcomes exists between children of refugee background and native-born peers in Finland. To offer targeted support for children at schools, we need to be able to reliably assess and understand the interplay of the aspects of children's cognitive, social, and mental health functions that may explain the underachievement of refugee children. This study tests a novel research-based, universally applicable screening battery for evaluating cognitive, social, and mental health functioning of children at schools and planning supportive actions. It aims to answer research questions about a) the cognitive, social, and mental health functioning of refugee children compared with non-refugee immigrant and native-born children, b) the interplay of these different functions among refugee and other children, c) whether implementing a screening battery can inform schools in planning supportive actions for (refugee) children, and d) whether such supportive actions result in improvements in cognitive, social, and mental health functioning. METHODS: Four hundred fifty children aged 10-12 will be recruited from primary schools, including 150 children of refugee background, 150 of non-refugee immigrant background, and 150 native-born Finnish children. A screening battery including tasks and questionnaires on different aspects of cognitive, social, and mental health functioning will be used to assess the children in their classrooms at the start and end of a school year. Supporting information will also be collected from parents and teachers. The information gathered will be collated into class-level feedback reports for teachers and, with parental permission, individualized reports for multiprofessional student welfare bodies, for informing supportive actions. Correlational and latent profile analyses, ANOVAs, and linear regression will be used to answer the research questions. DISCUSSION: This study will help clarify how the interplay of cognitive, social, and mental health factors may explain underachievement at school among refugee children. It will provide evidence about the extent to which a standardized screening battery could be helpful in informing and planning supportive actions for children at schools, and whether such supportive actions can lead to positive cognitive, social, or mental health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study will be preregistered on the Open Science Framework.

Two is more valid than one, but is six even better? The factor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS).

INTRODUCTION: Self-compassion refers to a non-evaluative, interconnected and mindful attitude towards oneself especially when facing difficulties or feelings of personal inadequacies. The Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) is a frequently used instrument designed to measure self-compassion either by using the six subscale scores, or by calculating a total score, averaged across all 26 items. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to examine the factor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale, and in particular, whether the widely used six-factor model and the unidimensional model can be confirmed. METHODS: The internal structure of the SCS was examined using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Six different models (a one-factor model, an oblique six-factor model, a higher-order model, an oblique two-factor model, a bi-factor model with one general factor (bifactor model) and a bi-factor model with two general factors, i.e. two-bifactor model) were tested in a sample of adolescents (n = 1725; 50.3% female; mean age = 16.56, SD = 1.95). All models were replicated using responses collected five months after the first data collection from 1497 students (W2), who were largely, but not completely, the same students involved in W1 data collection. RESULTS: Fit indices for the two-factor model implied an acceptable fit, but none of the remaining models tested met the criteria for an adequate solution. Although the fit indices for the six-factor model suggested an acceptable fit to the data, in this model the negative components of the SCS were highly correlated with each other, especially with the over-identification factor. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide evidence to support the use of the separate self-compassion- and self-coldness -scores rather than the overall score of the SCS. Although the fit indices supported the six-factor model, the use of six subscale scores cannot be recommended on the basis of our results given the extremely high correlations within this model between some factors.