Cross-sectional validation reveals strong psychometric properties of the Arabic CIPS-10 in undergraduates, suggesting a reliable assessment tool.
A BSTRACT Aims: The impostor phenomenon (IP) has been linked to anxiety, depression, and burnout. The widely used 20-item Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale (CIPS-20) may be burdensome in research and applied contexts. While a 10-item short form (CIPS-10) has demonstrated strong psychometric performance internationally, the Arabic version has not been psychometrically tested. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the structural and construct validity of the Arabic CIPS-10. Settings, Design, Methods, and Materials: We conducted a cross-sectional validation study ted using a secondary analysis of Arabic CIPS-20 and new data from 679 undergraduates (mean age 21.0 years, SD = 1.92) from three Saudi universities who completed an electronic survey that included the CIPS-20 and IPSS-3. Statistical Analysis Used: Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω assessed internal consistency. We used principal component analysis (PCA) and Pearson’s correlations to examine structural validity and convergent validity, respectively. Results: The Arabic CIPS-10 demonstrated excellent reliability (α =0.888; ω =0.889), with satisfactory item–rest correlations (0.505–0.742). Sampling adequacy was high (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin [KMO] =0.913), and Bartlett’s test was significant (χ²(45) =2855, P < .001). The PCA supported a unidimensional structure, with the first component (eigenvalue = 5.02) explaining 50.2% of the variance and factor loadings ranging from 0.590 to 0.811. The CIPS-10 correlated strongly with the CIPS-20 (r = 0.963, 95% CI 0.957–0.968, P < .001) and moderately with the IPSS-3 (r = 0.532, 95% CI 0.425–0.624, P < .001). Conclusions: The Arabic CIPS-10 is psychometrically sound and efficient, offering a practical alternative to the full CIPS-20 for assessing the impostor phenomenon in Arabic-speaking populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alsaad et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: