Cited by 7Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Contextual similarities in psychological flexibility: the Brazil-Portugal transcultural adaptation of Psy-Flex

Open access
Neto, David D., Mouadeb, Daniella, Lemos, Nanci, da Silva, Ana Nunes, Gloster, Andrew T., Perez, William F.·2024·Current Psychology

Abstract

Psychological Flexibility is an essential concept in Contextual Behavioural Sciences. The development of instruments is vital for its study, and it is an opportunity to reflect on this concept. Among the measures of this construct, Psy-Flex shows promise due to comprehensiveness in assessing the six facets of psychological flexibility and its pragmatic value. In the present study, we sought to translate Psy-Flex to Portuguese and adapt it transculturally for use in Portugal and Brazil. The translation was done independently by Brazilian and Portuguese researchers, and a consensus procedure was done to identify a synthesis. A total of 873 adults from Portugal and Brazil were involved in this study. The participants completed several questionnaires with ACT-related measures (e.g., cognitive fusion, mindful attention) and instruments measuring conceptually related variables (e.g., positive mental health). The results show good psychometric properties of PsyFlex. The one-factor structure of the original instrument was confirmed in both the Portuguese and Brazilian samples. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a good fit of the model to the data (CFI = 0.985, RMSEA = 0.055) of both countries. Furthermore, the Psy-Flex showed convergent validity with related measures in a conceptually expected way. As a transcultural instrument, we argue that both the similarities and differences across samples suggest the broad human nature of psychological flexibility while retaining its context sensitivity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12144-024-06241-9

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Neto, D. D., Mouadeb, D., Lemos, N., da Silva, A. N., Gloster, A. T., & Perez, W. F.
Affiliations
  • ISPA - Instituto Universitário (PT)
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • University of Lucerne (CH)
Corresponding author
Neto, David D.
Venue
Current Psychology
Published
2024-06-26
Volume
43
Issue
31
Pages
25595-25603
ISSN
  • 1046-1310 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-4733
OpenAlex
W4400051692
Cited by
7
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1
FWCI
2.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
ISPA – Instituto Universitário
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
psychological flexibility, cross-cultural adaptation, cross-cultural translation, cognitive fusion, mindful attention, positive mental health, psychometric properties, factor structure, Brazil, Portugal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review