ArticlePsicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS2025
Cross-cultural adaptation and search for evidence of validity of the brazilian version of the nonreligious-nonspiritual scale (NRNSS).
Article in Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of non-religious people in the world has increased, which justifies the development and validation of good instruments to assess secularism, i.e., the absence of religiosity and spirituality.
objectiveThe present study aimed to develop a cross-cultural adaptation and search for evidence of the validity of the nonreligious-nonspiritual scale (NRNSS).
methodsFor a congruent scale translation, a cross-cultural adaptation was performed. The search for evidence of validity was carried out through the following steps: (1) evidence of validity based on the internal structure, where an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed, and the internal consistency was verified of the factors obtained; (2) evidence of validity based on converging relationships with external measurements, where correlations were made between the NRNSS factors and the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Duke Religiosity Index (P-DUREL) and the World Health Organization's Quality of Life Instrument-Spirituality, Religion and Personal Beliefs module (WHOQOL-SRPB); and (3) comparison of self-identification categories with NRNSS outcomes using two one-way ANOVA tests, comparing scale scores between different groups (e.g., atheists, agnostics, spiritualists, and religious people). The data collection process took place through a link shared on social networks allowing access to the structured questionnaire.
resultsThe present study obtained the following results: (1) the EFA supported a one-factor model for the scale, but (2) the CFA presented satisfactory indices for the the model composed of two factors, non-religiosity (NR) and non-spirituality (NS); (3) internal consistency indices greater than 0.95 were obtained in all factors indicated in both tested models; (4) all analyzed correlations obtained results as expected, indicating that the scale actually measures the proposed constructs; and (5) decreasing levels of NR and NS were obtained according to the respective beliefs: atheists, agnostics, spiritualists, and religious people.
conclusionThe NRNSS presented favorable psychometric properties, enabling it to be used with two different factors (NR and NS).
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.