PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 1, 2024Heliyon1 citationsOpen Access

Validation of the brief version of the Susceptibility to Persuasion-II scale and evaluation of measurement invariance across age and gender in the Canadian general population

View Full Paper
XTXuyan TangUniversity of British ColumbiaJLJoyce S. T. LamUniversity of British ColumbiaBGBernie GarrettUniversity of British Columbia

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Measurement tools that can assess personality traits rendering people more susceptible to engagement with and compliance in scams can help identify at-risk populations. The brief, 30-item version of the Susceptibility to Persuasion-II (StP–II–B) scale is a recently developed instrument for assessing 10 personality traits that play a role in scam compliance; however, psychometric evidence supporting the use of this scale is limited. This study aimed to validate the StP–II–B by examining its internal consistency reliability, factor structure, as well as age- and gender-related measurement invariance with a sample of 1287 Canadians aged 16 years and older. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a 10-factor structure identified in previous research. Good internal consistency reliability was obtained for each of the 10 subscales. This 10-factor structure was found to be invariant across age and gender at configural, metric, and scalar levels, suggesting that the StP–II–B was conceptualized in the same way across age and gender and that meaningful comparisons of factor scores could be made. Age and gender differences were found in most factors, with younger individuals and men scoring higher than older individuals and women. This study supports the use of the StP–II–B as a valid and reliable scale for measuring personality traits associated with scam compliance in the Canadian general population and offers insights into age and gender cohorts that may be at higher risk of scam victimization.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Tang et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e76911b6db6435876de0d3https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27751
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition.1996 · 2,462 citations
  2. 2Public Attitudes Toward Advertising: More Favorable Than You Might Think1998 · 541 citations
  3. 3Gender Differences in Risk Behaviour: Does Nurture Matter?2012 · 396 citations
  4. 4The psychology of scams: Provoking and committing errors of judgement2009 · 65 citations
  5. 5Phishing suspiciousness in older and younger adults: The role of executive functioning2017 · 84 citations