The environmental identity (EID) scale, first published in 2003, was developed to measure individual differences in a stable sense of interdependence and connectedness with nature. Since then, it has been reliably correlated with measures of environmental behavior and concern. However, the original scale was developed based on U.S. college students, raising questions about its validity for other types of populations. This study revised the EID scale and tested it in five countries (four continents) with a total sample size of 1717 participants. Results support strong internal consistency across all locations. Importantly, EID was significantly correlated with behavior and with environmental concern. This research gives us greater confidence that the EID construct is meaningful across different cultural contexts. Because the revised EID was designed to be relevant to a wider range of people and experiences, it is recommended as a replacement for the 2003 version.

The study investigated interrelationships among trait authenticity, context-specific authenticity, and well-being in three samples drawn from England, the United States, and Russia. Six hundred and twenty-eight adults participated: 196 from the United States, 240 from England, and 192 from Russia. The overall sample consisted of 151 men and 477 women with a mean age of 27 years (range = 18 to 56). Authenticity was rated both as a general trait and specific to four contexts: with partner, parents, friends, and work colleagues. Well-being was measured using a measure of positive mental health. English and American samples showed higher mean authenticity levels than the Russian sample. In all three subsamples, within-subjects differences in the context-specific ratings were in the same ordinal series; authenticity was rated highest with partner, followed by friends and parents, and lowest with work colleagues. Context and country showed an interaction in their effect on authenticity; United States and England were higher than Russia in partner, friend, and parent contexts but not in the work context. Trait and context-specific authenticity measures contributed unique and significant variance to a prediction of well-being in all three subsamples.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been a source of fear around the world. We asked whether the measurement of this fear is trustworthy and comparable across countries. In particular, we explored the measurement invariance and cross-cultural replicability of the widely used Fear of COVID-19 scale (FCV-19S), testing community samples from 48 countries (N = 14,558). The findings indicate that the FCV-19S has a somewhat problematic structure, yet the one-factor solution is replicable across cultural contexts and could be used in studies that compare people who vary on gender and educational level. The validity of the scale is supported by a consistent pattern of positive correlations with perceived stress and general anxiety. However, given the unclear structure of the FCV-19S, we recommend using latent factor scores, instead of raw scores, especially in cross-cultural comparisons. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

This study validates the 10-item Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10) on a Russian youth sample. A total of 689 respondents participated (M_age = 20.22, SD_age = 2.08; 526 females). The Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, the International Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Short-Form, the Centre of Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and the Authenticity Scale were used to examine the content validity of CD-RISC-10. Two hypotheses were examined: that the Russian version of the CD-RISC-10 (1) has structural validity (is unifactorial, as the original version) and (2) has convergent validity (which is proven by positive connections with psychological well-being and negative connections with ill-being). According to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), it was shown that the scale really had a unifactorial structure; its reliability was satisfactory (α =.85, ω_h =.84). No age trends in the CD-RISC-10 scores were detected; in males, the scores were higher than in females. As expected, CD-RISC-10 was positively connected with mental well-being, positive affect, self-esteem, and authentic living while negatively connected with depressive symptoms, negative affect, acceptance of external influence, and self-alienation. The Russian version of CD-RISC-10 seems to be a valid, stable, and reliable instrument which may be recommended for use in various areas of research and practice.