Background: This study examines the relationship between perceived demands (workload and organizational constraints) of teachers’ work during the online period of schooling during the COVID-19 crisis and well-being (emotions, engagement, and job crafting), with work passion as a mediator. Methods: The survey was carried out on a sample of 383 teachers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Scale of Organizational Constraints and the Workload Scale, the Passion Scale adapted for work, the Job Crafting Questionnaire, the Utrecht Scale of Work Engagement, and the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience was used. Results: Harmonious passion strengthened the positive relationships between workload and organizational constraints and job crafting and weakened the negative relationship with positive emotions and the positive one with negative emotions. The positive relationship between workload and engagement has been strengthened by harmonious passion. The negative relationship between organizational constraints and engagement became positive and weaker. Relationships between variables were weakened, i.e., workload and engagement, organizational constraints and job crafting, or strengthened, i.e., organizational constraints and engagement, by an obsessive passion. In tested models, obsessive passion has the opposite effect and is weaker than harmonious passion. Conclusion: The structural equation modeling (SEM) confirmed that work passion, mainly harmonious, is a mechanism explaining the relationship between the demands of forced work from home with teachers’ well-being.

Developing valid and reliable measures of psychological responses to climate change is of high importance, as this facilitates our understanding of people’s psychological responses, including their pro-environmental behavior. Recently, the Climate Change Worry Scale (CCWS) was introduced. This study aimed to develop the first Polish version of the CCWS and explore its psychometric properties. Our sample comprised 420 Polish adults aged 18–70, with a mean age of 26.20 (standard deviation = 10.61) years. The CCWS’s factor structure was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis. McDonald’s omega and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed to assess internal consistency reliability. Pearson correlations between climate change worry (CCW) and experience of climate change (i.e., an individual’s level of perception of being affected by climate change), pro-environmental behavior, ill-being (i.e., anxiety and depression symptoms), and well-being were calculated. Our results support the strong factorial validity of the CCWS, conforming to its intended one-factor solution, with excellent internal consistency reliability for the total scale score (i.e., McDonald’s omega and Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.93). We noted large positive correlations between CCW and experiences of climate change, as well as pro-environmental behavior, and medium positive correlations with psychopathology symptoms. CCW scores were not associated with well-being. As the CCWS represents a measure of a specific manifestation of worry, we also examined its discriminant validity against more general psychological distress markers, and it evidenced strong validity in this regard. Overall, the Polish version of the CCWS appears to have strong psychometric properties, and will therefore be a useful tool to use in research on psychological responses to climate change.

Background/Objectives: The Hogg Eco-Anxiety Scale (HEAS-13) is a thirteen-item measure of eco-anxiety, with four dimensions: (1) affective symptoms, (2) rumination, (3) behavioural symptoms, and (4) anxiety about personal impact. Being a recently developed questionnaire, data on its psychometrics are limited. The aim of this study was to introduce a Polish version of the HEAS-13 and examine its psychometric properties. Methods: Our sample consisted of 634 Polish-speaking adults, with ages ranging from 18 to 67 years. We assessed the HEAS-13’s factor structure, internal consistency, test–retest reliabilities, and its concurrent validity via relationships with climate-related variables, psychopathology symptoms, and well-being. We put emphasis on examining the discriminant validity of the HEAS-13 against general psychological distress. Results: As expected, the Polish HEAS-13 demonstrated strong factorial validity with an intended four-factor structure. The internal consistency and test–retest reliabilities of the scale were good and moderate, respectively. Higher levels of eco-anxiety were associated with higher environmental concerns, the experience of climate change (i.e., one’s perception of being affected by climate change), pro-environmental behavioural engagement, climate change worry, anxiety, and depressive symptoms, as well as lower levels of well-being. We empirically supported the strong discriminant validity of the HEAS-13, demonstrating that eco-anxiety was separable from general psychological distress. We also noted that females, younger people, and those with lower educational levels experienced higher eco-anxiety. To facilitate the use of this measure, we propose a potential screening cut-off value for the HEAS-13, which can indicate meaningfully elevated levels of eco-anxiety. Conclusions: Overall, the Polish version of the HEAS-13 has strong psychometric properties, usefully enabling the examination of climate-related anxiety. Our findings highlight its potential in cross-cultural research and healthcare practice.

Background: The Perth Emotional Reactivity Scale – Short Form (PERS-S) is an 18-item self-report questionnaire that assesses emo-tional reactivity. The PERS-S measures activation, intensity, and duration of negative and positive emotions. The study aims to validate the Polish version of the PERS-S. Participants and procedure: The study was performed on a sample of 675 people aged 18-80 (M = 28.88, SD = 13.17, 56.15% female). The factor structure and measurement invariance across gender, age and educational categories were verified with confirmato-ry factor analysis. Convergent and divergent validity were assessed based on the relationship between the PERS-S scale and the Emotional Reactivity scale taken from the Formal Characteristics of Behaviour–Temperament Invento-ry, the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire, the Perceived Stress Scale, the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale and the Subjective Vitality Scale. Results: The intended 6-factor model was an excellent fit for the data (CFI = .963; TLI = .953; RMSEA = .053, 90% CI [.046; .061]; SRMR = .057) and was invariant across gender, educational level and age groups. All PERS-S subscales corre-lated with another emotional reactivity questionnaire, stress, emotion regulation strategies, well-being and vitality as expected. The reliability was high for all subscales (α > .70); it was slightly lower only for the positive-activation sub-scale (α = .68). Due to gender differences in emotional reactivity traits, group norms (sten scale) were calculated sep-arately for females and males. Conclusions: The Polish version of the PERS-S has strong psychometric properties. Its practical applications are discussed.

W stronę medycyny psychosomatycznej. Właściwości psychometryczne polskiej wersji Subiektywnej listy dolegliwości Giessen (GBB-8) i rozpowszechnienie symptomów somatycznych wśród dorosłych Polaków

The Perth Emotional Reactivity Scale (PERS) is a 30-item self-report questionnaire that assesses the ease of activation, intensity, and duration of negative and positive emotions. Our study aimed to introduce and validate the Polish version of the PERS. The study was performed on a sample of 491 people (349 females and 142 males) aged 18–84 (M = 24.78, SD = 10.96). The factor structure was verified with confirmatory factor analysis. Convergent and divergent validity were assessed based on the relationship between the PERS and markers of anxiety, depression, and stress. For assessing criterion validity, we conducted a set of multiple regression analyses to examine whether PERS scores could predict significant variance in these mental health symptoms. We examined discriminant validity by conducting a second-order exploratory factor analysis of PERS scores and anxiety, depression, and stress symptoms. Our results indicated strong factorial validity, conforming to the intended 6-factor (subscale) structure. As expected, all PERS subscales correlated in expected directions with markers of anxiety, depression, and stress symptoms. The PERS showed good discriminant validity in terms of measuring an emotional reactivity construct across positive and negative emotions that was separable from people’s current level of distress. Internal consistency reliability was also good. Overall, the Polish version of the PERS appears to have good psychometric properties as a comprehensive measure of emotional reactivity.