Factorial validity and measurement invariance of the Psychosocial Uncertainty Scale

Abstract

This study presents the development of the Psychosocial Uncertainty Scale (PS-US), which articulates the perception of uncertainty in the social context and its psychological experience. It was validated with a sample of 1596 students and active professionals (employed and unemployed). By randomly dividing this sample in three sub-samples, the following analyses were performed: exploratory factor analysis (sample one: N = 827); preliminary confirmatory factor analysis identifying the final version of the scale (sample two: N = 382); confirmatory factor analysis (sample three: N = 387). Multi-group analysis was used to assess measurement invariance, gender, sociocultural level, and group of origin invariance, by using samples two and three. Group differences were explored with the complete sample through Multiple Indicators and Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Models. Associations between this scale and the Uncertainty response Scale were explored through Structural Equation Modelling. Exploratory and confirmatory analyses’ results showed good internal consistency and overall good psychometric qualities. The scale reached full metric invariance across groups, gender, SCL level and group of origin. Results highlight the sensitivity of the scale towards social vulnerability, proving the existence of sociocultural levels’ effects on experiences of psychosocial uncertainty within working contexts, relationships and community living and self-defeating beliefs; and gender and students versus professionals’ effects on psychosocial uncertainty. Furthermore, the scale associated significantly with Uncertainty Response Scale’s dimensions, specifically with emotional uncertainty, which can be considered a self-defeating strategy. Results suggest that emotional coping strategies, are explained by psychosocial uncertainty by 57%, and so, may have social origins.

Neoliberal Economic Policies’ Effects on Perceptions of Social Justice and Sociopolitical Participation in Portugal

“…After testing the factorial and measurement validity of all scales as previously mentioned, a Structural Equation Model (SEM) was performed to test if financial access has effects on psychosocial uncertainty and emotional uncertainty (expecting it to protect against it), personal agency and SPC (potentially increasing both), and on SDO; if dimensions of psychosocial uncertainty have effects on emotional coping, personal agency, SPC, and SDO, expecting psychosocial uncertainty to have greater effects than emotional coping and personal agency, possibly undermining SPC and having effects on greater levels of SDO (while personal agency could have the inverse effect), if SPC has a negative effect on SDO, and to explore which of these variables may act as mediators in this model. The definition of each effect tested was based on the literature review and previous results on the relationship between financial access, psychosocial uncertainty, and emotional coping ( Lucas Casanova, 2021 ; Lucas Casanova et al, 2021 ), adding direct effects of financial access on SPCS and SDO (as suggested by the literature review). Regarding the relationship between psychosocial uncertainty, SPC and SDO, preliminary models were tested for psychosocial uncertainty and SPC, and psychosocial uncertainty and SDO.…”

“…The URS and PS-US were also previously validated for Portuguese ( Lucas Casanova et al, 2019b , 2021 ). Here, only the dimension emotional coping of the URS will be used since it proved to be the one that had more explanatory power for issues concerned with socioeconomic circumstances and its relationship with the dimensions of the PS-US in previous studies ( Lucas Casanova et al, 2021 ).…”

“…Nevertheless, the use of these individual variables may reflect these socioeconomic and political circumstances. Thus, the study tests a theoretical model of the relationship between financial access; psychosocial uncertainty (the interaction between the perception of uncertainty in the social context and its psychological experience) ( Marris, 1996 ), which has effects on coping strategies towards uncertainty, mostly in terms of emotional coping ( Lucas Casanova et al, 2021 ); with personal agency ( Fryer, 1992 , 1998 ); beliefs of sociopolitical control (SPC) (studied as the intrapersonal component of psychological empowerment – Zimmerman and Zahniser, 1991 ; Zimmerman, 1995 ; Peterson et al, 2006 , 2011 ); and their potential effects on beliefs of social dominance orientation (SDO) and social inequality as political strategies, which may allow an analysis of meso level effects ( Sidanius and Pratto, 1999 ; Pratto et al, 2006 ) — a hypothesis that, to the best of our knowledge, has not yet been tested.…”

“…The scale is composed of three dimensions: psychological consequences of uncertainty within work (concerns with work perceived as a consequence of uncertainty in the social context), relationships and community living (experiences of community deficit or distrust, perceived as a consequence of uncertainty), and self-defeating beliefs in coping with uncertainty (beliefs in not being able to cope with uncertainty). Based on this, the Psychosocial Uncertainty Scale (PS-US) was developed ( Lucas Casanova et al, 2021 ). Results show women and workers (compared to students) experience more psychosocial uncertainty and its psychological consequences within work, as well as self-defeating beliefs in the possibility of coping with uncertainty.…”

“…Results show women and workers (compared to students) experience more psychosocial uncertainty and its psychological consequences within work, as well as self-defeating beliefs in the possibility of coping with uncertainty. Moreover, the participants from lower sociocultural levels experience more psychosocial uncertainty and its psychological consequences within work, relationships and community living, and self-defeating beliefs in coping with uncertainty ( Lucas Casanova et al, 2021 ).…”