ArticlePeerJ2024
Italian adaptation of the Multidimensional Iowa Suggestibility Scale (MISS).
Article in PeerJ, 2024. 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.
- Acute effects of psilocybin on the dynamics of gaze fixations during visual aesthetic perception.Scientific reports · 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.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Suggestibility is a personality trait that reflects a general tendency to accept messages. The Multidimensional Iowa Suggestibility Scale (MISS) is a self-report scale developed to measure the degree of individuals' perceptions of their suggestibility. This study aimed to adapt the MISS in an Italian sample. Methods: We conducted two studies. In the first study, 345 subjects (270 females (78%), mean age = 36.21 years ± 14.06 SD) completed the translated Italian version of the MISS, composed of five subscales (consumer suggestibility; persuadability; sensation contagion; physiological reactivity; peer conformity). We investigated the structural validity of the scale through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) testing four measurement models (unidimensional, four-factor, hierarchical four factors, and bifactor) and explored reliability in terms of internal consistency through the McDonald's omega. In the second study, we cross-validated the MISS on a new independent sample. We enrolled 277 participants (196 females (71%), mean age 30.56, SD = 12.58) who underwent the new version of the scale. We performed factor analyses to test structural validity and compared four measurement models. Then, we investigated reliability and conducted a latent variable analysis to explore divergent validity. Results: The CFA in the first study revealed a bifactor solution of the MISS. This structure was interpretable and provided an adequate fit for the data. The final version of the scale was reduced to forty-six items with globally good indices of adaptation. The scale also demonstrated acceptable reliability in terms of internal consistency through the McDonald's Hierarchical Omega. In the second study, we found that the bifactor structure was confirmed. Factor loadings inspection revealed that there was no justification to report only the separate scores for the subscales. We also found that the scale showed good internal consistency, but mixed evidence for divergent validity. Conclusions: In the end, the Italian version of the MISS demonstrated good psychometric properties which will be discussed in detail below.
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.