ArticleBMC psychology2026
General corruption scale: development and psychometric properties.
Article in BMC psychology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCorruption is a pervasive phenomenon that erodes institutional structures and undermines social relations. Despite its widespread impact, little attention has been given to developing and providing empirical evidence of the construct validity and reliability of measures assessing individual differences in support for corruption. This study seeks to address this gap by introducing, for the first time, the General Corruption Scale and presenting the results of a research program designed to provide robust empirical evidence for the quality of its psychometric properties.
methodsIn the first study, content validity was assessed by three experts using the Content Validity Coefficient, confirming the adequacy of the scale’s content. Subsequent studies employed both exploratory (n = 308) and confirmatory (n = 840) factor analyses to evaluate its factorial structure.
resultsResults supported a two-factor model comprising 26 items, organized into Perception of Corruption and Support for Corruption. The model demonstrated satisfactory fit indices and performed better than alternative measurement models. Evidence of nomological validity was established through associations with measures of jeitinho and propensity to trust.
conclusionsThe scale is theoretically aligned with its foundational model and demonstrates evidence of validity and reliability. Further research is recommended to assess its psychometric performance across diverse contexts.
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.