The psychometric properties of a new 28-item self-report measure of mentalization, the Mentalization Scale (MentS), were examined in 2 studies: with a sample of employed adults and university students (N = 288 + 278) and with a sample of persons with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and matched controls (N = 62 + 62). Besides the MentS, both studies employed measures of attachment and the Big Five; Study 1 also included assessments of empathy and emotional intelligence. MentS whole-scale internal consistency was good in the community and acceptable in the clinical sample (α = .84 and .75, respectively). A principal components analysis of Study 1 data yielded 3 interpretable factors, or subscales: Self-Related Mentalization (MentS-S), Other-Related Mentalization (MentS-O), and Motivation to Mentalize (MentS-M). These showed acceptable reliabilities (α = .74-.79), except for MentS-M in the clinical sample (α = .60). MentS scores further exhibited a coherent pattern of correlations with cognate constructs and the Big Five, relating positively to empathy, trait and ability emotional intelligence, openness, extraversion, and conscientiousness, and negatively to attachment avoidance and anxiety, and neuroticism. Persons with BPD scored significantly lower on MentS total and MentS-S. The proposed scale is thus deemed suitable for quick, yet meaningful, assessments of mentalization in both individual differences research and clinical contexts.

In the present study we examined psychometric properties of the Serbian translation of the Empathy Quotient scale (S-EQ). The translated version of the EQ was applied on a sample of 694 high-school students. A sub-sample consisting of 375 high-school students also completed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), another widely used empathy measure. The following statistical analyses were applied: internal consistency analysis, explanatory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factor analyses, and factor congruence analysis. Correlation with IRI and gender differences were calculated to demonstrate validity of the instrument. Results show that the Serbian 40-item version of EQ has lower reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = .782) than the original. The originally proposed one factor structure of the instrument was not confirmed. The short version with 28 items showed better reliablity (alpha= .807). The three-factor solution (cognitive empathy, emotional reactivity, and social skills) showed good cross-sample stability (Tucker congruence coefficient over .8) but the results of CFA confirmed the solution proposed in the reviewed literature only partially. The mean scores are similar to those obtained in the other studies, and, as expected, women have significantly higher scores than men. Correlations with all subscales of IRI are statistically significant for the first two subscales of EQ, but not for the „social skills.” We concluded that the Serbian version of the „Empathy Quotient” is a useful research tool which can contribute to cross-cultural studies of empathy, although its psychometric characteristics are not as good as those obtained in the original study. We also suggest that a 28-item should be used preferably to the original 40-item version. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 179018: Identification, measurement and development of cognitive and emotional competences important for a society oriented to European integrations

We present details about the validation of the Serbian version of the Experiences in Close Relationships-Revised questionnaire modified to measure attachment in close relationships in general (SM-ECR-R). Its psychometric features were examined with 2 samples of students (N = 719 and N = 91) and 1 group of employed adults (N = 259). The results obtained in the student sample were equivalent to those obtained in validation studies worldwide, whereas in the more heterogeneous sample of employed adults, internal consistency of both avoidance and anxiety was lower and their intercorrelation was higher. Test-retest reliability was satisfactory, and relations with measures of attachment, empathy, and personality structure were meaningful. The results support the SM-ECR-R as a reliable and valid research instrument, but its internal structure and consistency might vary in different samples, depending on age, education, gender, and culture.

No abstract