The present study aims to validate the interRAI Child and Youth Mental Health (interRAI ChYMH), Disruptive/Aggression Behaviour Scale (DABS) and Hyperactive/Distraction Scale (HDS). Data were collected from children/youth aged 4-18 (N = 3464) across 39 mental health agencies in Ontario, Canada. Unrestricted factor analysis using polychoric correlation matrices and Samejima's graded item response theory (IRT) parameterizations were conducted for both measures. Scores on the HDS and DABS were also compared amongst children/youth diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and disruptive behaviour disorder (DBD) respectively using DSM-IV criteria. Results from the factor analysis and IRT analysis demonstrated good measurement properties. Using a receiver operating characteristics curve, the area under the curve (AUC) for the HDS and DABS is 0.79 and 0.75 for a diagnosis of ADHD and DBD respectively. Overall, converging results suggest that the interRAI HDS and DABS may serve as effective measures that detect externalizing mental health indicators.

The present study aims to develop and validate an Italian version of the Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS). A large sample of Italian-speaking participants (N = 1139) completed the BSCS and measures of personality and individual dispositions. A clinical sample (N = 217) was administered the Italian version and an English-speaking sample (N = 274) completed the original version to test measurement invariance. Using confirmatory factor analysis, the best fit was observed for a shortened two-factor model (i.e., impulse control and self-discipline). Metric invariance across languages and partial strong invariance across genders, ages, and clinical status were demonstrated. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability for the total scale were adequate, and validity was established based on its correlations with related constructs and confirming that males and young individuals are more likely to have lower self-control. Results support the use of the shortened BSCS version to assess selfcontrol in Italian-speaking individuals.

All available peer-reviewed literature on humor and gender differences was screened and evaluated according to a priori defined QUALSYST criteria. The 77 papers surpassing a conservative quality criterion generated seven emergent themes around humor and gender differences. In short, men score higher in the aggressive humor style (M > F), while no other gender differences were consistently reported in humor-related traits (M = F). In the prediction of negative outcomes (stress, loneliness, depression), differential effects for humor in both genders are reported, but not consistently (M F). Gender differences exist for the appreciation of sexual humor (M > F), even in mixed target stimuli, and hostile humor (both genders appreciate opposite gender target stimuli more). Gender differences are absent in nonsense and neutral humor (M = F). For humor production, three samples showed no gender differences (M = F), while three samples suggested men are funnier (M > F) and one that women are funnier (M < F). No studies reporting differences in humor comprehension were identified (M = F). For humor use and communication, gender differences were found across methods (M F), yet, they depend on the context (e.g., workplace) and may thus resemble gender roles rather than "natural differences". Moreover, few studies provide hard data on actual humor use and communication in different domains. When exposed to humor stimuli, different neural responses of men and women in prefrontal cortex activations (or selected parts) were found (M F). Also, self-report data suggest that both genders value a sense of humor in their partner (M = F), yet women typically value the humor production abilities more than humor receptivity, while for men, the woman's receptivity of their own humor is more important than a woman's humor production abilities, in line with gender stereotypes (M F). To conclude, much progress has been achieved in the past 15 years to overcome methodological flaws in early works on humor and gender differences. Importantly, attention should be paid to disentangling actual gender differences from gender role expectations and gender stereotypes. Methodologically, designs need to be checked for potential bias (i.e. self-reports may accentuate roles and stereotypes) and more hard data is needed to substantiate claims from self-report studies.

Purpose This study aims to understand the association between positive personal resources (i.e., optimism, hope, courage, trait mindfulness, and self-efficacy), resilience, and psychological distress (i.e., anxiety, depression, stress) in women with breast cancer and breast cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that personal positive resources can directly influence resilience, which in turn prevented psychological distress. Methods The research sample consisted of 409 Italian women (49% patients, 51% survivors) who were administered a questionnaire to assess positive resources, resiliency, and distress. structural equation model (SEM) analysis was carried out to confirm the hypothetical-theoretical model. Results Personal positive resources had a direct positive effect on resilience, which prevented from distress. These results were observed across cancer patients and survivors, and regardless the level of direct exposure to COVID-19. Conclusions In both patients and survivors, the relationships between positive personal resources, resilience, and psychological distress is strong enough to be not influenced by the level of exposure to COVID-19 and despite COVID-19 pandemic caused the disruption of active treatment plans and delays in routine check-ups. Implications for cancer survivors Implications of this study suggest the urgency to screen positive resources and to identify women with lower resilience and a potentially higher susceptibility to develop psychological distress. For these women, our findings suggest the implementation of psychological interventions that build resilience.

No abstract