Assessment of mental health, religion and culture: the development and examination of psychometric measures (Part XI)

This Special Issue of Mental Health, Religion & Culture marks Part XI of a series entitled Assessment of Mental Health, Religion and Culture: The development and examination of psychometric measures … (Lewis, 2016a, 2016b, 2016c, 2016d, 2017a, 2017b, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2019a, 2019b, 2019c, 2019d, 2020a, 2020b, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c, 2021d; Lewis & Krok, 2020a, 2020b).

This series aims to provide a dedicated forum for researchers to publish data on newly developed measures, or indeed established measures, that are of practical value for researchers interested in examining the relationship between the constructs of mental health, religion, and culture. Over the last seven years, this series has become a biannual feature in Mental Health, Religion & Culture. The increased frequency of this series attests to its popularity. The series has now become a well-established resource for researchers and practitioners alike.

Previous articles within the series have been presented in three areas. First, those articles focused on the psychometric properties of recently developed new scales. Second, those articles focused on assessing the psychometric properties of published scales translated into another language. Third, those articles focused on assessing the psychometric properties of scales employed in various cultural contexts and religious samples. The present Special Issue continues with this format.

In addition to this Editorial, this Special Issue consists of seven articles. First, one article is presented that has focused on the development of a new scale. Krauss and Silver (2023) report among a sample of secular (n = 351), Christian (n = 1029), and non-Christian (n = 121) samples, the development of Vertical and Horizontal Spiritual Fitness Inventory.

Second, five articles are presented that have focused on the evaluation of the psycho-metric properties of previously published scales that have been translated into other languages. Chagas et al. (2023) report among a sample of 952 Brazilian adults the satisfactory psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Dimensions of Secularity Scale (Schnell, 2015). Megreya et al. (2023) report among a sample of 850 undergraduate university students from two Arab countries (Egypt and Kuwait) the satisfactory psychometric properties of the Arabian versions of the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (Levenson et al., 1995) and the NEO-Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI; Costa & McCrae, 1992). Mutiah et al. (2023) report among a sample of 2740 Indonesian Muslim university students during the COVID-19 pandemic the satisfactory psychometric properties of the Indonesian version of the Family Assessment Device (Epstein et al., 1983). Taylor et al. (2023) report among a sample of 357 Korean adults living in Korea or the United States the satisfactory psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Spiritual Bypass Scale-13 (Fox et al., 2017). Zarzycka et al. (2023) report among two samples (n = 325; n = 389) of Polish Catholic adults the satisfactory psychometric properties of the Polish version of the Religious Support Scale (Fiala et al., 2002).

Third, one article is presented that has focused on the evaluation of the psychometric properties of scales employed in various cultural contexts and religious samples. Martyr and O’Donohue (2023) report among a sample of 1162 Australian churchgoing Catholic population the satisfactory psychometric properties of the 18-item New Indices of Religious Orientation (Francis, 2007).

This Special Issue of Mental Health, Religion & Culture has illustrated the richness of contemporary research that is at present being undertaken on scale development and evaluation pertinent to the field of mental health, religion, and culture, and beyond. This collection, along with the previous ten Special Issues, clearly attest to the on-going momentum of this specific research tradition.

This Special Issue would not have been possible without the assistance of many people. We wish to acknowledge the authors who provided stimulating articles and efficient revisions and our reviewers for their judicious and insightful evaluations of the manuscripts submitted. We are particularly grateful to the regular Editorial Team of Mental Health, Religion & Culture for their continued enthusiasm for this on-going initiative.