The Relationship Between Posttraumatic Growth and Psychosocial Variables in Survivors of State Terrorism and Their Relatives.

The present study explores reports of growth in survivors and family members of victims of state terrorism (N = 254) in Chile from 1973 to 1990. The results indicate the presence of reports of posttraumatic growth (M = 4.69) and a positive and statistically significant correlation with variables related to the life impact of the stressful events (r = .46), social sharing of emotions (r = .32), deliberate rumination (r = .37), positive reappraisal (r = .35), reconciliation (r = .39), spiritual practices (r = .33), and meaning in life (r = .51). The relationship between growth and forgiveness is not statistically significant. The variables that best predict posttraumatic growth are positive reappraisal (ß = .28), life impact (ß = .24), meaning in life ß = .23), and reconciliation (ß = .20). The forward-method hierarchical model indicates that these variables are significant predictors of growth levels, R2 = .53, F(8, 210) = 30.08, p < .001. The results indicate that a large proportion of the victims of state terrorism manage to grow after these experiences, and the redefinition of meaning in life and the positive reappraisal of the traumatic experiences are the elements that make it possible to create a new narrative about the past.

Validation of the positive and negative affect scale in the Chilean population and its application on migrant people. / Validación de la escala de afecto positivo y negativo en población chilena y su aplicación en personas migrantes residentes en Chile.

INTRODUCTION: Although the positive and negative affect scale proposed by Mroczek and Kolarz has not been as widely used as other instruments, the adequate psychometric properties reported and the simplicity of the application, make it an adequate instrument to measure the hedonic component of subjective well-being. Thus, the scale validation in Chile will allow researchers to have a short and reliable instrument available in order to measure subjective well-being. OBJECTIVE: The initial objective of this study was to in Chile the "Positive and negative affect scale" proposed by Mroczek and Kolarz. METHODS: A non-probabilistic sample of 155 Chileans and a sample of 308 adult immigrants residing in Chile from Colombia, Peru and Venezuela were recruited. The sample of Chileans was used to validate the scale. The construct validity (Cronbach's Alpha and exploratory factor analysis) and the concurrent validity through bivariate correlations with other measures were estimated. Finally, the differences in affect expression by Chileans in comparison with migrants’ people were evaluated. RESULTS: The reliability index was Alpha = 0.92 for the positive affect sub-scale and Alpha = 0.75 for the negative affect sub-scale. The exploratory factor analysis reproduced in the same way the factorial loadings proposed in the original instrument with saturations greater than 0.35 per item. Colombian and Venezuelan migrants show greater expression of positive affect than Chileans, while this difference is not observed when comparing Chileans with Peruvians. CONCLUSION: The positive and negative affect scale has adequate psychometric properties to measure the expression of affect (hedonic well-being) in the Chilean population.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Aunque la escala de afecto positivo y negativo propuesta por Mroczek y Kolarz no ha sido tan ampliamente utilizada como otros instrumentos, las adecuadas propiedades psicométricas publicadas hasta ahora, sumado a la rapidez de su aplicación; la sitúan como un instrumento adecuado para medir el componente hedónico del bienestar subjetivo. En este sentido, la validación de la escala en Chile permitirá a los investigadores tener a disposición un instrumento breve y fiable con el cual medir el bienestar subjetivo. OBJETIVO: El objetivo inicial de este estudio fue validar en Chile la escala de afecto positivo y negativo propuesta por Mroczek y Kolarz. MÉTODOS: Se reclutó a una muestra no probabilística de 155 chilenos junto con una muestra de 308 inmigrantes adultos residentes en Chile de nacionalidades colombiana, peruana y venezolana. La muestra de chilenos se utilizó para la validación de la escala. Se evaluó la validez de constructo (Alfa de Cronbach y análisis factorial exploratorio), y luego la validez concurrente a través de correlaciones bivariadas con la medida de “sentimiento de felicidad” de Wold (1995) y de “satisfacción con la vida” de Keyes, Shmotkin and Ryff (2002). Finalmente, se valoraron las diferencias en la expresión de afecto de los chilenos en comparación con la de los migrantes. RESULTADOS: El índice de fiabilidad fue de Alfa = 0,92 para la subescala de afecto positivo y de Alfa = 0,75 para la subescala de afecto negativo. El análisis factorial exploratorio reprodujo de manera idéntica las cargas factoriales propuestas en el instrumento original con saturaciones de los ítems mayor a 0,35 por factor. Los migrantes colombianos y venezolanos muestran mayor expresión de afecto positivo que los chilenos, mientras que esta diferencia no se observa al comparar chilenos con peruanos. CONCLUSIÓN: La escala de afecto positivo y negativo presenta propiedades psicométricas adecuadas para medir la expresión de afecto (bienestar hedónico) en la población chilena.

New Evidence of Construct Validity Problems for Pettigrew and Meertens' (1995) Blatant and Subtle Prejudice Scale.

Given the current debate over the distinction between subtle and blatant prejudice, this study provides new evidence regarding problems with the construct validity of the Pettigrew and Meertens' Blatant and Subtle Prejudice Scale. To assess these issues, an existing data sample of 896 Chilean participants collected in 2010 was reanalyzed. The main analysis method used was a confirmatory factor analysis. The model that best represented the original theory (a model of two correlated second-order factors) had an improper solution due to the unidentified model. The scale has substantial psychometric problems, and it was not possible to distinguish between subtle and blatant prejudice.