Despite the widely use and multiple validations of the EURO-D scale, its factor structure is still under debate. Exploratory Graph Analysis (EGA), a novel network psychometric method, offers a promising approach to examining dimensionality. Methodology: 45,390 participants (mean age = 71.27, 57.4% women) from 26 European countries. The sample was randomly split into a derivation sample (n = 22,823) and a cross-validation sample (n = 22,567). EGA was applied to the derivation sample to determine the structure of the EURO-D scale, utilizing two estimation methods: Graphical Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (GLASSO) and Triangulated Maximally Filtered Graph (TMFG). The identified factor structures were then tested via Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in the cross-validation sample for model fit. Results: EGA consistently revealed a two-factor structure with minor differences in the placement of suicidality and fatigue items across estimation methods. CFA results confirmed an adequate model fit for both solutions. Conclusion: This study combines exploratory (EGA) and confirmatory (CFA) approaches, supporting a two-factor structure for the EU-RO-D scale with alternative placements for fatigue and suicidality items. Results are discussed in contrast to previous studies reporting two and three-factor solutions with different assignments of these items.

Microaggressions have been a topic of significant debate in the psychological and social sciences. Despite an extensive body of empirical evidence, numerous misconceptions persist. This paper deconstructs common misconceptions surrounding microaggressions and addresses their origins, underlying biases, and empirical refutations. We explain the mechanisms that cause and maintain microaggressions through a CBT lens. We examine widely propagated misconceptions, including claims that microaggressions lack scientific validity, are too subjective to measure, and are not indicative of racism or other forms of prejudice. Drawing on the substantial literature base, including validated psychometric scales, experimental studies, and cross-cultural analyses, we demonstrate that microaggressions are not only real but also have significant psychological and social consequences. Empirical evidence links microaggressions to outcomes such as depression, anxiety, and lower self-esteem, reinforcing their relevance in clinical, educational, and workplace settings. CBT models provide a useful lens for understanding how individuals navigate the psychological complexities associated with microaggressive behaviours, helping explain why some people resist acknowledging microaggressions and their consequences. Lastly, we highlight the importance of education for reducing the prevalence of microaggressions and mitigating their harmful effects. Our goal is to provide clinicians with correct information so that they may skilfully and empathetically help clients experiencing microaggressions, and to no longer accept microaggressions as a harmless, misunderstood, or dismissed phenomenon. By debunking these misconceptions, this work contributes to a more scientifically grounded understanding of microaggressions, emphasizing the necessity of continued research and intervention efforts to address the impact of discrimination in society.

Key learning aims

1. (1) Build awareness around the various misconceptions associated with microaggressions.

2. (2) Knowledge of why these misconceptions exist, where they came from, and why they are important to consider and refute.

3. (3) Refuting misconceptions with scientific explanations and evidence.

4. (4) Understand how CBT clinicians can better prevent and respond to microaggressions.

Bilinguals vary in their daily-life language use and switching behaviours, which are also frequently studied in relation to other processes (e.g., executive control). Measuring daily-life language use and switching often relies on self-reported questionnaires, but little is known about the validity of these questionnaires. Here, we present two studies examining test–retest reliability and validity of language-use questionnaires (relative to Ecological Momentary Assessment, Study 1) and language-switching questionnaires and tasks (relative to recorded daily-life conversations, small-scale Study 2). Test–retest reliability and validity of the LSBQ (Anderson et al., 2018) were high and moderate, respectively, suggesting this questionnaire can capture daily-life language use well. Although only examined with a small sample size, Study 2 suggested relatively low validity of most language-switching questionnaires, with short language-production tasks potentially offering a more valid assessment. Together, these studies suggest that tools are available to reliably capture language use and switching with (a certain degree of) validity.

Mental health conditions among youths are increasing rapidly, taking into consideration their biological, psychological and social development in the time of technological advancement with its associated challenges. Therefore, this study examined the psychometric properties of eight mental health scales among Ghanaian youth. A total of 708 youths (62.1% females; 10–29 years) from junior high schools, senior high schools and a university were recruited to respond to measures on depression, anxiety, somatic symptoms, obsessive–compulsive symptoms, insomnia, smartphone application-based addiction, internet addiction, life satisfaction, stress and cognitive fatigue. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Pearson’s r were used to analyse the data. The findings indicated acceptable CFA fit for all scales (comparative fit index [CFI] >0.9, Tucker–Lewis index [TLI] >0.9, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] <0.08 and standardized root mean square residual [SRMR] <0.08), and internal reliability was satisfactory (Cronbach’s α = 0.774–0.868 and McDonald’s ω = 0.775–0.870). Correlation analyses showed significant relationships between all the measures except for life satisfaction and internet addiction, and stress and life satisfaction. Both the CFA indices and correlation analyses indicate that all the mental health measures demonstrate acceptable initial evidence of reliability and construct validity.

Accountability in grant-making requires a valid, fair and transparent selection process. This study proposes a four-step framework for validating such a process: determine standards for qualified applicants, assess inter-reviewer reliability, assess factorial validity, and assess reliability. This framework is applied to the Corporation for National and Community Service’s 2013 RSVP grant-making process. The standards were close to the highest points of reliability. Inter-reviewer reliability was above 0.90, a common threshold for high-stakes measurement. After conducting confirmatory factor analysis, the final model merged two of the original five domains of selection criteria, resulting in four domains. The final model was found to have strict measurement invariance, high convergent validity, and measurement reliability between 0.88 and 0.93 for all domains. The results validate the 2013 review process and indicated that the scores exhibited high degrees of reliability, giving public assurance that the process was sufficiently objective and accurately reflected program priorities.

This study examines the psychometric properties of a new self-report instrument to measure organisational connectedness (The Four-Dimensional Connectedness Scale; 4DCS) in two volunteer samples: state emergency service volunteers and volunteer ambulance workers. Confirmatory factor analyses in both studies supported the proposed four-factor structure of the 4DCS (other workers, recipients, task and values). In addition, confirmatory factor analyses showed that connectedness, commitment and engagement were separate constructs—a three-factor model with a Connectedness factor, a Commitment factor and an Engagement factor fitted best to the data. Moreover, hierarchical multiple regression analyses revealed that connectedness and engagement each shared unique variance with job satisfaction and intention to continue. The results confirm the factorial, discriminant and predictive validity of connectedness relative to engagement and commitment. It is concluded that the 4DCS has acceptable psychometric properties and that the instrument can be used to study volunteer wellbeing.

Expert surveys have been used to measure a wide variety of phenomena in political science, ranging from party positions, to corruption, to the quality of democracy and elections. However, expert judgments raise important validity concerns, both about the object being measured as well as the experts. It is argued in this article that the context of evaluation is also important to consider when assessing the validity of expert surveys. This is even more important for expert surveys with a comprehensive, worldwide scope, such as democracy or corruption indices. This article tests the validity of expert judgments about election integrity – a topic of increasing concern to both the international community and academics. Evaluating expert judgments of election integrity provides an important contribution to the literature evaluating the validity of expert surveys as instruments of measurement as: (1) the object under study is particularly complex to define and multifaceted; and (2) election integrity is measured in widely varying institutional contexts, ranging from electoral autocracies to liberal democracies. Three potential sources of bias are analysed (the object, the experts and the context), using a unique new dataset on election integrity entitled the ‘Perceptions of Electoral Integrity’ dataset. The data include over 800 experts in 66 parliamentary and presidential elections worldwide. It is found that validity of expert judgments about election integrity is increased if experts are asked to provide factual information (rather than evaluative judgments), and if they are asked to evaluate election day (rather than pre‐election) integrity. It is also found that ideologically polarised elections and elections of lower integrity increase expert disagreement about election integrity. The article concludes with suggestions for researchers using the expert survey data on election integrity on how to check the validity of their data and adjust their analyses accordingly, and outlines some remaining challenges for future data collection using expert surveys.

Democracy measurement is an ever growing and increasingly important research area. Nevertheless, lively discussions concerning the qualities of different measurement approaches are seldom combined with an adequate perspective on the underlying methodological framework. This article argues that a substantial theoretical perspective is only a sufficient condition for improving contemporary democracy measurement. Theoretical considerations have to be accompanied by an equally well-developed measurement concept. On the basis of examples taken from prominent approaches, potential for improvement becomes obvious. Any improvement is not just an end in itself but necessary if these measures are used as variables in all areas of research.

Over recent decades, comparative political scientists have developed new measures at a rate of knots that evaluate the quality of democratic regimes. These indices have been broadly applied to assess the quality of democracy cross-nationally and to test the generalisability of theories regarding its causes and effects. However, the validity of these inferences is jeopardised by the fact that the quality of democracy is an abstract and contested concept. In order to address this eventuality, researchers constructing indices measuring the quality of democracy as well as researchers applying these indices should critically examine the quality of the indices. Owing to the absence of a standardised framework that is both suitable for the evaluation of contested concepts and that includes explicit coding rules so as to be directly applicable, this article seeks to fill this gap. The application of our framework is demonstrated by an evaluation of the Sustainable Governance Indicators, the Global Democracy Ranking and the Democracy Barometer. As indicated by our evaluation, the framework is a practical tool that helps to assess the conceptual foundation, validity, reliability and replicability of indices. In addition, it can be used to study the quality of indices in a comparable manner.

While there is an abundant use of macro data in the social sciences, little attention is given to the sources or the construction of these data. Owing to the restricted amount of indices or items, researchers most often apply the ‘available data at hand’. Since the opportunities to analyse data are constantly increasing and the availability of macro indicators is improving as well, one may be enticed to incorporate even qualitatively inferior indicators for the sake of statistically significant results. The pitfalls of applying biased indicators or using instruments with unknown methodological characteristics are biased estimates, false statistical inferences and, as one potential consequence, the derivation of misleading policy recommendations. This Special Issue assembles contributions that attempt to stimulate the missing debate about the criteria of assessing aggregate data and their measurement properties for comparative analyses.

In recent years, the L2 Motivational Self System has faced increasing scrutiny over its theoretical clarity and empirical rigor. One element of this model, the L2 Learning Experience, remains ambiguously defined and theoretically underdeveloped. This study examined the content validity of the L2 Learning Experience scale and its potential overlap with intrinsic motivation, a cornerstone of self-determination theory. Using a panel of experts, we assessed to what extent items traditionally associated with the L2 Learning Experience scale align with their intended construct. Findings revealed that the items were predominantly identified as intrinsic motivation, not the L2 Learning Experience. These results suggest a significant overlap between the two constructs and raise concerns about a potential jangle fallacy. Our results also underscore the need for greater theoretical and terminological clarity in the field. Aligning language learning motivation research with broader psychological frameworks could lead to more parsimonious and robust theoretical models.