Исследование посвящено адаптации и валидизации русскоязычной версии методики Big Five Aspects Scale (BFAS), разработанной Колином Де Янгом. Ее основная особенность заключается в выделении 10 аспектов личности, которые являются факторами более низкого порядка и лежат в основании Большой пятерки личностных черт, а также соотносятся с данными генетических исследований. В эмпирической проверке методики, проводившейся с помощью анкетирования, приняли участие 495 человек. Для проверки факторной структуры использовался конфирматорный факторный анализ, в результате которого русскоязычная версия инструмента была модифицирована. Для проверки валидности BFAS применялись методика индивидуальных ценностей Ш. Шварца и «Стратегия истории жизни», взаимосвязи с которыми имели содержательный характер. Результаты конфирматорного факторного анализа продемонстрировали адекватные индексы соответствия, а значимые корреляции c русскоязычной версией Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2-XS) дополнительно подтвердили конвергентную валидность BFAS.

This paper reviews various estimands used in modern scientific and applied research to operationalize causal inquiries within the Rubin Causal Model framework. I first introduce the most widely utilized average treatment effects, such as ATE, ATT, and ATC. I then describe their popular extensions, including those targeting local and conditional treatment effects; causal interactions and mediation; effects for non-continuous outcomes, as well as for multi-valued and continuous treatments; and longitudinal treatment effects. For each of these estimands, a substantive explanation is provided, along with examples of research questions they can address. The key assumptions necessary for the identification of the most widely used effects are also discussed.

Even in the most egalitarian societies, hierarchies of power and status shape social life. However, power and received status are not synonymous—individuals in positions of power may or may not be accorded the respect corresponding to their role. Using a cooperatively collected dataset from 18,096 participants across 70 cultures, we investigate, through a survey-based correlational design, when perceived position-based power (operationalized as influence and control) of various powerholders is associated with their elevated social status (operationalized as perceived respect and instrumental social value). We document that the positive link between power and status characterizes most cultural regions, except for WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic) and Post-Soviet regions. The strength of this association depends on individual and cultural factors. First, the perceived other-orientation of powerholders amplifies the positive link between perceived power and status. The perceived self-orientation of powerholders weakens this relationship. Second, among cultures characterized by low Self-Expression versus Harmony (e.g., South Korea, Taiwan), high Embeddedness (e.g., Senegal), and high Cultural Tightness (e.g., Malaysia), the association between power and status tends to be particularly strong. The results underline  the importance of both individual perceptions and societal values in how position-based power relates to social status.

Previous research has often demonstrated that liberal values and democratic regimes are associated with higher levels of subjective well-being (SWB). However, consistent results are only found at the country level, while at the individual level the relationship between values, democracy, and SWB is not as clear. This article analyzes recent data from 86 countries and shows that individual SWB depends on whether one’s values match the country’s predominant values and political system. In authoritarian countries, those with more conservative values tend to exhibit higher levels of SWB, reaching a level of happiness comparable to that of an average person in a typical democracy. Conversely, their liberal-minded compatriots often report significantly lower levels of SWB. In democracies, people with more liberal values tend to have higher SWB than do conservatives, although this difference is not as robust as in autocracies. This study emphasizes the importance of political context in the relationship between liberal values and SWB.

Wellbeing levels have been a global concern during the COVID-19 pandemic, but there is a lack of attention to invariance questions that allow a robust examination of wellbeing dynamics across cultures. Questions of temporal stability that are crucial for examining the impact of the pandemic on wellbeing have received even less attention. Some studies suggested that measures may not be stable after the onset of the pandemic. We examine invariance parameters, the factorial structure and variability of wellbeing variables (life satisfaction, pandemic worries, anxiety and depression screenings) across five different cultural contexts from 2020 to 2022 (N = 4387, total observations = 13,161). A three-factor model separating life satisfaction, worry and distress performed best in terms of model fit and parsimony. We observed scalar invariance across times and identified little variability of wellbeing measures during the pandemic, suggesting that wellbeing levels remained stable during the pandemic in each of the countries sampled. In contrast, we only identified metric invariance across countries at each time point, and found a weakening of correlations between life satisfaction and a depressive/anxious symptoms scale in lower income countries. We discuss implications of our findings for discussions of wellbeing dynamics.

Данная статья представляет собой аналитический обзор исследований, посвященных механизмам и эффектам диффузии политики в многоуровневых политических системах. В контексте трансформации исследовательского поля и смещения акцентов на новые модели управления рассматривается эволюция научных подходов к изучению диффузии, ее основные механизмы, а также влияние структурных, институциональных и агентских факторов. Особое внимание уделяется вертикальной диффузии политических инноваций. Заключительная часть статьи посвящена сравнению моделей диффузии политики в западном и незападном политических контекстах на примере сравнительного анализа распространения политических инноваций в многоуровневые политические системы Китая и США.