Psychometric Properties of the Reminiscence Functions Scale for the Portuguese Population: A Preliminary Report

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess the psychometric properties of a version in Portuguese of the Reminiscence Functions Scale. Total sample was composed of 628 participants aged between 18 and 92 years, divided into three groups according to their age (18-24 years, n = 249; 26-54 years, n = 174; 55 and older, n = 205). Results indicated a five-factor solution for the Portuguese version of the Reminiscence Functions Scale, which accounted for 54% of the variance with good internal consistency (mean alpha = 0.86). Age and gender differences emerged regarding reminiscence functions. These results demonstrate that, while significant cultural differences exist, the psychometric properties of the Reminiscence Functions Scale are adequate for the Portuguese population.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Arabic version of the reminiscence functions scale with strict measurement invariance across gender

“…To do so, we used empirical data from a new sample of Jordanian participants while testing its measurement invariance across gender. Cronbach's α values (internal consistency) for the six factors of the adjusted AARFS are marginally higher than those reported for the original RFS (Webster, 1993, 1997) and other versions of the RFS such as the Spanish (Ros et al, 2016), Canadian (Robitaille et al, 2010), Chinese (Lou & Choy, 2014), and Portuguese (Gonçalves et al, 2010) versions. This indicates good internal consistency for the six‐factor ARFS.…”

“…Although former quantitative studies support the seven and eight‐factor models of the RFS (Webster, 1993, 1997), no known studies on the factorial validity of this scale have been conducted among Arabic speakers. Variations of the RFS factor model have been supported through EFA and CFA, starting with the original seven and eight‐factor English versions (Webster, 1993, 1997), and including a seven‐factor modified version (Shellman & Zhang, 2014), a five‐factor Portuguese version (Gonçalves et al, 2010), and a four‐factor Chinese version (Lou & Choy, 2014). Mixed results from factor analyses of the original RFS and other translated versions of the RFS (Lou & Choy, 2014; Robitaille et al, 2010; Ros et al, 2016) have demonstrated the need to continue testing the psychometric properties of the RFS to confirm its validity among diverse populations and cultural contexts.…”

“…Portuguese version (Gonçalves et al, 2010), and a four-factor Chinese version (Lou & Choy, 2014). Mixed results from factor analyses of the original RFS and other translated versions of the RFS (Lou & Choy, 2014;Robitaille et al, 2010;Ros et al, 2016) have demonstrated the need to continue testing the psychometric properties of the RFS to confirm its validity among diverse populations and cultural contexts.…”

“…While there is a proliferation of RFS application in Western cultures to predict and examine reminiscence functions (King et al, 2017; Lou & Choy, 2014; Satorres et al, 2020), the absence of a psychometrically sound research tool in the Arabic language emerges as an issue that may influence effective reminiscence intervention in clinical settings. Moreover, the RFS psychometric features have been established in several languages, such as Chinese (Lou & Choy, 2014), Spanish (Ros et al, 2016), and Portuguese (Gonçalves et al, 2010). Jordan is primarily an Arabic‐speaking country that remains understudied.…”