ArticlePloS one2020
Development and initial psychometric assessment of the race-related attitudes and multiculturalism scale in Australia.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Associations among externalizing psychopathology, personality, and behavioral traits: Models of an externalizing spectrum in youth.Personality disorders · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe present study aims to develop the Race-related Attitudes and Multiculturalism Scale (RRAMS), as well as to perform an initial psychometric assessment of this instrument in a national sample of Australian adults.
methodsThe sample comprised 2,714 Australian adults who took part in the 2013 National Dental Telephone Interview Survey (NDTIS), which includes a telephone-based interview and a follow-up postal questionnaire. We used Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) to evaluate the RRAMS' factorial structure (n = 271) and then proceeded with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to confirm the proposed structure in an independent sample (n = 2,443). Measurement invariance was evaluated according to sex, age and educational attainment. Construct validity was assessed through known-groups comparisons. Internal consistency was assessed with McDonald's ΩH and ordinal α. Multiple imputation by chained equations was adopted to handle missing data.
resultsEFA indicated that, after excluding 4 out of the 12 items, a two-factor structure provided a good fit to the data. This configural structure was then confirmed in an independent sample by means of CFA (χ2(19) = 341.070, p<0.001, CFI = 0.974, RMSEA = 0.083; 90% CI [0.076, 0.091]). Measurement invariance analyses suggested that the RRAMS items can be used to compare men/women, respondents with/without tertiary education and young/older participants. The "Anglo-centric/Assimilationist attitudes" (ΩH = 0.83, αORDINAL = 0.85) and "Inclusive/Pluralistic attitudes" subscales (ΩH = 0.77, αORDINAL = 0.79) showed adequate reliability. Men and participants with low education had higher Anglo-centric/assimilationist attitudes and lower inclusive/pluralistic attitudes, suggesting construct validity.
conclusionsThe RRAMS appears to be a valid and reliable measure to evaluate multiculturalist attitudes in the Australian context. The instrument may be useful in the assessment and monitoring of interventions aiming to promote multiculturalist inclusive attitudes and to increase social cohesion in Australia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.