Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32516333›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Measurement invariance of the moral vitalism scale across 28 cultural groups.

Maksim Rudnev, Christin-Melanie Vauclair, Samira Aminihajibashi, Maja Becker, Michal Bilewicz, José Luis Castellanos Guevara, Emma Collier-Baker, Carla Crespo, Paul Eastwick, Ronald Fischer and 21 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

31 authors.

Maksim RudnevNational Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-2714-3840
Christin-Melanie VauclairInstituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), CIS-IUL, Lisboa, Portugal.
Samira AminihajibashiDepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-5819-0298
Maja BeckerCLLE, Université de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1187-1699
Michal BilewiczUniversity of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
José Luis Castellanos GuevaraConSol, Mexico, Mexico.
Emma Collier-BakerUniversity of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Carla CrespoCICPSI, Faculty of Psychology, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Paul EastwickUniversity of California, Davis, California, United States of America.
Ronald FischerVictoria University of Wellington & Instituto D'Or de Pesquisa e Ensino, Wellington, New Zealand.
Malte FrieseSaarland University, Saarbrucken, Germany.
Angel GomezUniversidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Madrid, Spain.
Valeschka GuerraUniversidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Katja HankeUniversity of Applied Management Studies, Mannheim, Germany.
Nic HooperUniversity of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Li-Li HuangNational Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Minoru KarasawaNagoya University, Nagoya, Japan.
Peter KuppensKULeuven-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Steve LoughnanUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Müjde PekerMEF University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Cesar PelayUniversidad Central de Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela.
Afroditi PinaUniversity of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Marianna SachkovaRussian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-2982-8410
Tamar SaguyInterdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Herzliya, Israel.
Junqi ShiZhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Mia Silfver-KuhalampiUniversity of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Florencia SortheixUniversity of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
William SwannUniversity of Texas Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Jennifer Yuk-Yue TongSingapore Management University, Singapore.
Victoria Wai-Lan YeungLingnan University, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Brock BastianUniversity of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Moral vitalism refers to a tendency to view good and evil as actual forces that can influence people and events. The Moral Vitalism Scale had been designed to assess moral vitalism in a brief survey form. Previous studies established the reliability and validity of the scale in US-American and Australian samples. In this study, the cross-cultural comparability of the scale was tested across 28 different cultural groups worldwide through measurement invariance tests. A series of exact invariance tests marginally supported partial metric invariance, however, an approximate invariance approach provided evidence of partial scalar invariance for a 5-item measure. The established level of measurement invariance allows for comparisons of latent means across cultures. We conclude that the brief measure of moral vitalism is invariant across 28 cultures and can be used to estimate levels of moral vitalism with the same precision across very different cultural settings.

Indexed as

MoralsAdultAmericasAsiaAustraliaCross-Cultural ComparisonEuropeFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMexicoNew ZealandPsychometricsUnited StatesVenezuela

Identifiers

PMID32516333
PMCPMC7282638

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.