Psychological Thought psyct.swu.bg | 2193-7281 South-West University “Neofit Rilski” Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Research Article Test of Invariance of the Anomie Brief Scale with the Alignment Method in 12 Latin American Countries Tomás Caycho-Rodríguez *a, Lindsey W. Vilca b, José Ventura- Leónc, Carlos Carbajal-Leónb , Pablo D. Valenciad, Mario Reyes- Bossioe, Mariel Delgado-Campusanoe, Daniel E. Yupanqui- Lorenzof, Rubí Paredes-Angelesg,h Claudio Rojas-Jarai, Miguel Gallegosi,j,k,l, Mauricio Cervignik,l,m, Pablo Martinon, Roberto Polanco-Carrascoñ, Diego Alejandro Palacioso, Rodrigo Moreta- Herrerap, Antonio Samaniego-Pinhoq, Marlon Elías Lobos-Riverar, Andrés Buschiazzo Figaress, Diana Ximena Puerta-Cortést, Ibraín Enrique Corrales-Reyesu, Raymundo Calderónv, Walter L. Arias Gallegosw, Olimpia Petzoldx, Andrés Camargoy, Julio Toralesz, J. Arkangel Monge Blancoaa, Pedronel Gonzálezab, Vanessa Smith- Castroaac, Wendy Yamilet Matute Riveraab, Daniela Ferrufino- Borjaad, Paula Ceballos-Vásquezae, Agueda Muñoz-del-Carpio- Toiaaf, Jorge Palaciosag, Carmen Burgos-Videlaah, Ana María Eduviges Florez Leónai, Ibeth Vergaraaj, Diego Vegaak, Marion K. Schulmeyerad [a] Faculty of Psychology, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru. [b] South American Center for Education and Research in Public Health, Norbert Wiener University, Lima, Peru. [c] Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Privada del Norte, Lima, Peru. [d] Faculty of Higher Studies Iztacala, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Tlanepantla de Baz, State of Mexico, Mexico. [e] Faculty of Psychology, Peruvian University of Applied Sciences, Lima, Peru. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 350 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 [f] School of Psychology, University of Sciences and Humanities, Lima, Peru. [g] CRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Cayetano Heredia Peruvian University, Lima, Peru. [h] Advances in Psychological Measurement Study Group, National University of San Marcos, Lima, Peru. [i] Faculty of Health Sciences. Department of Psychology, Catholic University of Maule, Talca, Chile. [j] Post-Graduation Program in Psychology, Pontifical Catholic University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. [k] National Council for Scientific and Technical Research, Buenos Aires, Argentina. [l] Faculty of Psychology, National University of Rosario, Rosario, Argentina. [m] Interdisciplinary Center for Research in Health and Behavioral Sciences, Universidad Adventista del Plata, La Plata, Argentina. [n] Behavioral Sciences Research Laboratory, Faculty of Psychology, National University of San Luis, San Luis, Argentina. [ñ] Neuropsychology Notebooks, Center for Academic Studies in Neuropsychology, Rancagua, Chile. [o] Center for Human Development, Mariano Gálvez University, Guatemala, Guatemala. [p] School of Psychology, Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Ambato, Ecuador. [q] School of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, National University of Asunción, Asunción, Paraguay. [r] School of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Technological University of El Salvador, San Salvador, El Salvador. [s] Alfred Adler Uruguay Institute, Center for Adlerian Studies, Montevideo, Uruguay. [t] Psychology Program, University of Ibagué, Ibagué, Colombia. [u] Maxillofacial Surgery Service, Carlos Manuel de Céspedes University General Hospital, University of Medical Sciences of Granma, Bayamo, Granma, Cuba. [v] State College of Intervention Psychologists of Jalisco A.C. Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico [w] Department of Psychology, San Pablo Catholic University, Arequipa, Peru. [x] Lone Star College, Conroe, The United States of America. [y] School of Health and Sport Sciences, University Foundation of the Andean Area, Bogotá, Colombia https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 351 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 [z] Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Universidad Nacional de Asunción, San Lorenzo, Paraguay. [aa] Nicaraguan Association for the Development of Psychology, Managua, Nicaragua. [ab] Research Department, Jesús de Nazareth University, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. [ac] Institute of Psychological Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Costa Rica. [ad] Psychological Research and Counseling Center, Faculty of Humanities, Communication and Arts, Private University of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Santa Cruz, Bolivia. [ae] Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, Chile. [af] Vice-rector for research, Graduate School, School of Human Medicine, Catholic University of Santa María, Arequipa, Peru. [ag] Psychology Major, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad del Valle de Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico. [ah] Institute for Research in Social Sciences and Education, University of Atacama, Copiapó, Chile. [ai] Panamanian Association of Psychologists, Panama City, Panama. [aj] School of Psychology, Latin University of Panama, Panama City, Panama. [ak] School of Psychology, Universidad Latina de Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica. Abstract The Social Anomie Brief Scale (SAS10) is a self-report measure of social anomie against new social standards implemented during the current COVID-19 pandemic. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the invariance of the cross-cultural measurement of the SAS10 in a sample of 12 Latin American countries. Additionally, the difficulty and discrimination characteristics of the items were evaluated using the IRT and social anomie was compared between the participating countries. A total of 4,911 people from 12 Latin American countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela) selected by non-probabilistic snowball sampling participated. The results indicated that the original two-factor model of the SAS10 shows estimation problems and low fit indices in several countries. However, a model of two related dimensions (behavioral and affective) of nine items (SAS-9) presented adequate fit indices in all countries. This model presents adequate estimation of reliability and approximate cross-cultural measurement invariance. Peru was the country with the highest score in the behavioral dimension of social anomie; while Venezuela and Bolivia presented the highest scores in the affective dimension. Mexico was one of the countries with the lowest anomie scores. The results of the IRT would indicate that the characteristics of the SAS-9 items were appropriate. It is concluded that the SAS-9 has shown good psychometric properties https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 352 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 when evaluated in 12 Latin American countries and can be used in future studies that compare social anomie cross-culturally. Keywords: social anomie; COVID-19; invariance; cross-cultural. Table of Contents Method Results Discussion Limitations and future research suggestions Conclusion References Psychological Thought, 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388, https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Received: 2023-01-31. Accepted: 2023-08-24. Published (VoR): 2023-10-31. Handling Editor: Natasha Angelova, South-West University "Neofit Rilski", Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria. *Corresponding author at: Tomás Caycho-Rodríguez, Faculty of Psychology, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru. E-mail: tcay-cho@cientifica.edu.pe This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Common Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) has suggested different public health measures to try to contain the transmission of the virus causing the disease, such as the implementation of healthy lifestyles, social and physical distancing, the use of masks and large-scale social restrictions (Indrayathi et al., 2021). However, many people have not complied with these recommendations (Aschwanden, 2020; Frieden, & Lee, 2020), a large number of people continued to meet with friends at social events, putting themselves and others at risk (Martínez et al., 2021). In this context, and for a better control of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to understand what prompted people not to comply with public health recommendations despite the available scientific evidence. In this sense, it is possible to identify a behavioral factor, referring to the non-compliance with the norms, and an affective factor, referring to the dissatisfaction and concern generated by the new norms implemented during the pandemic (Nosratabadi, & Halvaiepour, 2021; Roblain et al., 2022). Public health measures to try to contain the transmission of the COVID-19 virus generated a conflict between individual needs, the decisions of different governments and regulatory norms that significantly affected people's daily lives by sacrificing individual freedoms for the "greater https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 mailto:tcay-cho@cientifica.edu.pe https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 353 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 good" (Powell et al., 2021). In this context, social anomie is a recurring problem (Vilca et al., 2022) that is understood as the perceived difference between people's desires and the availability of means to achieve those desires. (Merton, 1968). In addition, social anomie is a perception shared by individuals within society, characterized by the perception of disintegration, expressed in the distrust and breakdown of social cohesion, and deregulation, expressed in the perception of inefficiency of political leaders (Teymoori et al., 2017). Anomie causes people to protect their own interests and to be indifferent to the state of health and well-being of others in their community (Roblain et al., 2022). This approach considers anomie as a psychological state characterized by a tendency towards selfishness, rejection of social norms and feelings of isolation from society (Bjarnason, 2009; Fischer, 1973; Konty, 2005). These differences generate a rejection of the norms in force in the society and their normal fulfillment (Parales-Quenza, 2008). Anomie appears and develops in situations of social, economic or health crisis (Teymoori, et al., 2016). Social anomie undermines community relationships and leads to symptoms of stress, frustration, and anxiety (Powell et al., 2021), including a sense that life lacks purpose and helplessness (Teymoori et al., 2016). It has also been suggested that, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the presence of social anomie was related to decreased life satisfaction, happiness, and increased depressive symptoms (Blanco & Díaz, 2007; Brockmann et al., 2009; Lantz, & Harper, 1990). During the pandemic, studies have indicated that anomie may mediate the relationship between conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 and hesitancy to receive the disease vaccine (McCarthy et al., 2022), in addition to being a significant predictor of fear of COVID-19 (Kasapoğlu, 2020). Despite the importance of social anomie, there are few instruments to measure it. The few existing instruments focus on measuring exclusion, uncertainty, degradation and estrangement (Aceituno et al., 2009), early identification of likely political instability (Li et al., 2019) and perception of the state of society based on perceived breakdown of leadership and perceived breakdown of the social fabric (Teymoori et al., 2016). Furthermore, while there are recent adaptations and validations of anomie measures in Latin American countries such as Colombia (Cortazar, 2018; Fleury et al., 2018), they are aimed at assessing general anomie, but none are developed in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic. In this regard, it has been suggested that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic having general measures of aspects of mental health may generate underdiagnosis or overdiagnosis (Ransing et al., 2020). Thus, measures with items designed to identify problems specific to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are needed. In this regard, the Social Anomie Brief Scale (SAS10; Vilca et al., 2022) was recently https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 354 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 developed in Peru to measure social anomie in the face of the new social standards implemented during the current COVID-19 pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Peru was characterized by its limited capacity of the health system, the collapse of health services in the first wave of the pandemic, limited number of intensive care unit (ICU) beds and the lack of oxygen (Schwalb & Seas, 2021). This meant that Peru was the country with the highest number of deaths from COVID-19 per 100,000 inhabitants worldwide (Taylor, 2021). In 2020, 93,851 people died from COVID-19 in Peru, in 2021 the number of deaths reached 202,524; while by 2023 the total number of deaths was 220,673 (Ministerio de Salud [MINSA], 2023). The psychometric results indicated that the SAS10 presents a bifactor structure with good fit indices; in addition to adequate levels of reliability for the general factor and the affective and behavioral dimensions. In the bifactor model, there is a general factor that affects all items and specific factors. In this sense, each of the items load on both the general factor and the specific factors, which makes it possible to identify the variance shared by all the items, and the unique variance, specific to each item (Hukkelberg & Ogden, 2019). This Bifactor model would allow us to have a measure of general social anomie, as well as of the two affective and behavioral dimensions. Although the SAS10 has shown good psychometric indicators, it would be appropriate to have a cross-cultural measure to obtain comparative information on social anomie between different countries. Having this information is specifically important in Latin American countries, where inconsistent compliance with public health measures to contain the progression of COVID-19 has been reported (Garcia et al., 2020). In addition, overconfidence in performing preventive behaviors associated with COVID-19 has recently been shown to exist in 10 Latin American countries (Boruchowicz, & Lopez Boo, 2022). If one wishes to use the SAS10 in a cultural context different from the context in which it was originally developed (in this case Peru), it is not possible to assume the comparability of the SAS10 between these cultural groups, since the construct, in this case social anomie, will depend on the cultural context in which the instrument is used (Caycho-Rodríguez et al., 2022). In this sense, if SAS10 is to be used to compare social anomie in different countries, it is necessary to demonstrate the presence of measurement invariance (MI). However, MI is still a rarely performed procedure despite its interest for cross-cultural research (Boer et al., 2018). Specifically, MI aims to demonstrate that items on self-report measures, such as the SAS10, have the same meaning and whether responses to these same items load on the same factors in different groups where the measure is applied (Vandenberg & Lance, 2000). If MI is not demonstrated, conclusions about https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 355 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 possible cross-cultural differences in social anomie may be biased (Caycho, 2017). Traditionally, cross-cultural MI has been conducted using confirmatory multigroup factor analysis (CFA-MG) that assesses three levels of measurement invariance (configurational, metric, and scalar). However, the AFC-MG has been found to be demanding, especially when a large number of groups are evaluated, since scalar invariance is necessary to conclude that the measure has MI (Cieciuch et al., 2019). In response to this, an alignment method has been developed, based on Bayesian statistical models, which overcomes this problem (Muthen & Asparouhov, 2013). The alignment method evaluates the approximate MI, which allows to obtain means that are as reliable and invariant as possible, thus allowing to compare constructs between groups. This procedure has already been used recently in other self-report measures during the pandemic (e.g., Caycho- Rodríguez et al., 2021; Sawicki et al., 2022). Additionally, the original SAS study10 did not evaluate item characteristics from Item Response Theory (IRT). In recent years, IRT-based models have been used for the development and psychometric evaluation of different measurement instruments (Volk et al., 2021). IRT considers each item of an instrument as a unit of analysis; in addition, it establishes a functional relationship between the latent trait measured (in this case, social anomie), the probability of response to items measuring that same trait, and the difficulty and discrimination characteristics of the items (Crocker & Algina, 1986). Likewise, IRT models assume that the model parameters are independent of the sample and information can be obtained about the degree of accuracy of the items to measure the trait according to its different levels (Hambleton & Jones, 1993; Raykov & Marcoulides, 2013). Considering all of the above, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the cross-cultural MI of the SAS10 in a sample of 12 Latin American countries. Additionally, item difficulty and discrimination characteristics were evaluated using IRT and social anomie was compared among the participating countries. Method The design of the study was transversal, instrumental (Ato et al., 2013) multinational with a non- probabilistic snowball sampling, which was carried out according to the guidelines of the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of measurement instruments health measurement (Mokkink et al., 2018). https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 356 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Participants The participants were 4911 people from 12 Latin American countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela). The inclusion criteria were 1) people aged over 18 years and, 2) to have given informed consent to participate in the study. Table 1 (Appendix) shows that the highest average age belongs to participants living in Guatemala (M = 44; SD = 13.6 years) and Venezuela (M = 43.8; SD = 16.7 years). While the lowest average age belongs to participants living in Mexico (M = 24.9; SD = 8.7 years) and Peru (M = 26.5; SD = 7.9 years). Furthermore, it can be seen that in all countries there is a higher proportion of women (> 60%) than men (< 40%). There is also a higher proportion of singles in most of the countries (> 40%). Regarding the educational level of the participants, it is observed that the majority have completed university studies (> 50%), except in some countries such as Colombia (26%), Argentina (43.8%), Ecuador (43.2%) and Mexico (26.4%), where the proportion is much lower. On the other hand, it can be seen that most of the participants have a permanent job, except in the countries of Colombia (26.7%), Ecuador (35.2%), Mexico (32.6%) and Peru (40.9%). It can also be seen that most of the participants reside in an urban area (> 70%). Regarding the pandemic, most of the participants indicated that they have not had COVID-19 (> 40%) except in Peru (46.3%). However, the majority of participants in almost all countries report that they have had family members (> 50%) and friends with COVID-19 (> 50%). It can also be seen that Venezuela (59.5%) is the country with the most people using social networks as a source of information about the COVID-19 vaccine. Finally, it is observed that the majority of participants from Bolivia (55.2%), Guatemala (49.3%) and Venezuela (52.7%) believe that SARS- CoV-2 was created in a laboratory. Instruments Social Anomie Short Scale (SAS-10, Vilca et al., 2022). The SAS-10 is made up of 10 items with four response options (0= totally disagree to 3= totally agree). The SAS-10 has a two-dimensional structure (affective and behavioral). The sum of the scores of each item gives a total score, where a higher value indicates a greater presence of social anomie. Procedure The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Universidad Privada del Norte (registration number: 20213002) and followed the recommendations of the Helsinki declaration. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 357 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Members of the research team developed an online survey for distribution in the participating countries, taking into account the social constraints due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was developed on the Google Form platform and distributed between 15 and October 25, 2021 through different social networks (WhatsApp, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram) and emails to expand the sample in different countries and age ranges. The first part of the survey consisted of the study objectives and the informed consent document, which informed about voluntary and anonymous participation in the study. Responding to the survey lasted approximately 15 minutes and no financial payment was given for participating in the study. Data Analysis In the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), since the items had four response categories, the Diagonally Weighted Least Squares with Mean and Variance corrected (WLSMV) estimator was used (Brown, 2015). The adjustment criteria used to evaluate the fit of the model were the following: RMSEA (< .08), SRMR (< .08), CFI (> .95), and TLI (> .95) (Kline, 2016; Schumacker & Lomax, 2015). The scale's internal consistency was evaluated through Cronbach's alpha coefficient (Cronbach, 1951) and the omega coefficient (McDonald, 1999). A value greater than .70 was considered adequate (Viladrich et al., 2017). The Multi-Group Factor Analysis Alignment (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2014) was used to evaluate the factorial invariance of the scale according to the participant's country. An unrestricted configural model was first fitted to all groups. Then, this configural model was optimized using a component loss function (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2014). The invariance tolerance criteria for the factorial weights and intercepts were .40 and .20, respectively (Robitzsch, 2020). The power of alignment was also established at .25 for both parameters (Fischer & Karl, 2019). The invariance of the parameters was evaluated through the R2 index; values close to 0 indicate a low degree of invariance; on the contrary, values close to 1 show a high level of invariance (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2014). In addition, a limit of 25% was established for the factorial weights and intercepts so that a value higher than the established one evidenced a scale as non-invariant (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2014). This process was performed for each dimension separately. Once the invariance of the scale was verified, the items were added to obtain a total score for each dimension to compare the differences between the countries. Differences between countries were assessed using Cohen's d test. In Item Response Theory (IRT), an extension of the 2-parameter logistic model (2-PLM) was used for ordered polytomous items (Hambleton et al., 2010), which is based on the Graded Response https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 358 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Model (GRM, Samejima, 1997). Before evaluating the items' parameters, the model's fit was first estimated through the C2 test developed for ordinal items (Cai & Monroe, 2014). The adjustment criteria to assess the GRM model were the following: RMSEA ≤ .05 (Maydeu-Olivares & Joe, 2014) and SRMSR ≤ .05 (Maydeu-Olivares, 2013). For the CFI and TLI values, criteria similar to those used in SEM models (≥ .95) were used (Lubbe & Schuster, 2019). Regarding the item parameters, the discrimination (a) and difficulty (b) parameters were used. The Information Curves for the Items and the scale (IIC and TIC, respectively) were also calculated. All statistical analyzes were performed using the “lavaan” package (Rosseel, 2012) for the AFC, the “sirt” package (Robitzsch, 2020b) for the Alignment method, and the “mirt” package for the GRM (Chalmers, 2012). The RStudio environment (RStudio Team, 2018) for R (R Core Team, 2019) was used in all cases. Results Descriptive analysis Table 2 (Appendix) shows that item 2 ("It bothers me that the new rules and/or laws do not help those who need it most") presents the highest average score in most of the countries. In other words, most of the participants agree with this statement. It can also be seen that item 7 ("When I want something, I don't mind breaking the rules and/or laws of my country") presents the lowest average score, i.e. most participants disagree with this item. All the items present adequate indices of skewness and kurtosis (As < ±2; Ku < ±7; Finney & DiStefano, 2006). Validity based on internal structure Table 3 (Appendix) shows that the ten-item bi-factor model (model 1) shows estimation problems and low fit indices in several countries. Similarly, the model with two related dimensions (model 2) does not show adequate fit indices in most of the countries. In view of this, after a conceptual analysis of the items, item two ("It bothers me that the new rules and/or laws do not help those who need it most") was removed, since it was the only one that referred to other people. The bi- factor model with nine items (model 3) presented serious estimation problems in half of the countries evaluated. Finally, the model with two related factors (model 4) presented adequate fit indices in all countries. It can also be seen that the factorial weight of the items is high in all the countries evaluated and the correlation between both factors varies between .11 and .56 (see Table 4). https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 359 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Table 4. Factor weights and reliability of model 4 items in different countries of the America. Country Factorial Weight (λ) Correlation Reliability (ω) A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 F1 – F2 F1 F2 Argentina (1) .60 ‒ .81 .85 .87 .81 .93 .89 .91 .94 .29 .85 .92 Bolivia (2) .67 ‒ .87 .89 .87 .81 .91 .92 .90 .91 .11 .86 .93 Chile (3) .74 ‒ .82 .78 .90 .83 .92 .88 .89 .92 .40 .86 .92 Colombia (4) .65 ‒ .88 .92 .87 .87 .92 .93 .92 .95 .17 .87 .94 Cuba (5) .76 ‒ .94 .88 .95 .82 .90 .90 .89 .92 .56 .91 .92 Ecuador (6) .68 ‒ .87 .89 .91 .85 .94 .91 .94 .93 .27 .87 .94 Guatemala (7) .63 ‒ .84 .83 .91 .84 .92 .93 .89 .91 .25 .86 .92 México (8) .66 ‒ .80 .78 .88 .85 .93 .93 .91 .91 .41 .83 .93 Paraguay (9) .59 ‒ .84 .91 .91 .77 .91 .90 .90 .94 .33 .86 .92 Perú (10) .64 ‒ .83 .88 .88 .90 .97 .93 .93 .89 .45 .85 .95 Uruguay (11) .78 ‒ .89 .88 .88 .87 .96 .92 .98 .93 .45 .91 .94 Venezuela (12) .69 ‒ .89 .89 .97 .78 .92 .92 .85 .86 .28 .90 .90 Scale reliability As shown in Table 4, both the affective dimension (ω = .83 ̶ .91) and the behavioral dimension (ω = .90 ̶.95) showed adequate reliability indices in all countries. Factor invariance by country Table 5 shows that the factor structure in both factors is invariant for both factor loadings (R2 = .99) and item intercepts (R2 = .99). Regarding the percentage of non-invariant parameters by country, it is observed that all factor weights are invariant (0%) in both the affective and behavioral dimensions. With respect to the intercepts, in the affective dimension there were only three non- invariant parameters (6.2%). In the behavioral dimension, no non-invariant parameters were found (0%). Therefore, these findings support the metric and scalar invariance of the scale. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 360 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Table 5. ML Invariance aligent (IA) in American countries. Dimension Parameters Ítems M SD Countries R2 % Affective Factorial Weight 1 .58 .05 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .99 0.0% 3 .79 .02 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 .80 .04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 5 .83 .04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Intercept 1 1.67 .11 1 2 (3) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .99 6.2% 3 1.70 .14 1 2 3 4 (5) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 1.83 .11 1 2 3 (4) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 5 1.70 .01 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Behavioral Factorial Weight 6 .72 .05 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .99 0% 7 .77 .03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 .83 .04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 9 .77 .03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 .81 .03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Intercept 6 .62 .07 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .99 0% 7 .46 .04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 .62 .09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 9 .49 .04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 .54 .05 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Note: % = Percentage of non-invariant item parameters. The parentheses indicate that the parameter is not invariant for that specific group (country). Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of the affective dimension scores by country. The vast majority of differences were small; however, differences of moderate size were also observed. For example, Bolivia presented higher scores than Argentina (d = -.52), Mexico (d = .75) and Uruguay (d = .54); while Peru obtained higher scores compared to Mexico (d = -.51) and Venezuela scored higher than Mexico (d = -.70). Figure 1. Comparison of the scores of the affective factor of social anomie. On the other hand, Figure 2 presents a graphical representation of the behavioral dimension scores in each country. As in the affective dimension, most of the differences were small; Argentina Bolivia Chile Colombia Cuba Ecuador Guatemala Mexico Paraguay Peru Uruguay Venezuela 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 Affective component of social anomie https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 361 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 however, there were also differences of moderate size. Among the countries that showed a greater difference, Peru scored higher than Argentina (d = -.75), Bolivia (d = -.60), Chile (d = - .60), Cuba (d = -.62), Guatemala (d = -.72) and Mexico (d = -.64). Figure 2. Comparison of the behavioral factor scores of social anomie Item Response Theory Model: Graded Response Model (GRM) Table 6 shows that the GRM model for the affective dimension presents adequate fit indices (C2[df] = 75.77[2]; p < .01; RMSEA = .079; SRMRS = .041; TLI = .98; CFI = .99). Similarly, the behavioral dimension presented acceptable fit indices (C2[df] = 260.68[5]; p < .01; RMSEA = .102; SRMRS = .039; TLI = .98; CFI = .99). It is also observed in Table 6 that all items present discrimination parameters above the value of 1, generally considered as good discrimination (Zickar, et al., 2002). With respect to the difficulty parameters, all the threshold estimators increased monotonically. Argentina Bolivia Chile Colombia Cuba Ecuador Guatemala Mexico Paraguay Peru Uruguay Venezuela 0 5 10 15 Behavioral component of social anomie https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 362 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Table 6. Parameters and fit indexes of the items and fit indexes of the GRM model for each factor. Model Item Parameters Model Fit Indices Item a b1 b2 b3 C2 (df) p RMSEA SRMRS TLI CFI Affective 1 1.77 -1.52 -.47 .78 75.77 (2) <.01 .079 .041 .98 .99 3 3.39 -1.18 -.39 .46 4 3.61 -1.24 -.52 .29 5 4.24 -1.19 -.37 .45 Behavioral 6 2.54 .15 1.64 2.45 260.68 (5) <.01 .102 .039 .98 .99 7 3.78 .38 1.14 1.86 8 3.50 .17 1.34 2.12 9 3.04 .42 1.50 2.15 10 3.50 .39 1.25 2.09 a= discrimination parameters; b= difficulty parameters Regarding the affective dimension, the IIC indicates that item 5 is the precise one, while the ICT indicated that the factor is more reliable or precise in the range of the scale between -1.5 and 1. In the behavioral dimension, the IIC indicated that item 7 is more precise and the ICT shows that the factor is more reliable (precise) in the range of the scale between -.5 and 2.5. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 363 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Tests Information Curves (TIC) of affective factor Tests Information Curves (TIC) of behavior factor Item Information Curves (IIC) of affective factor Item Information Curves (IIC) of behavior factor Figure 3. Item and Test Information Curves for the Scale -4 -2 0 2 4 0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 Test Information Function Ability In fo rm a ti o n -4 -2 0 2 4 0 1 2 3 4 Item Information Curves Ability In fo rm a ti o n as1 as3 as4 as5 -4 -2 0 2 4 0 5 1 0 1 5 Test Information Function Ability In fo rm a ti o n -4 -2 0 2 4 0 1 2 3 4 Item Information Curves Ability In fo rm a ti o n as6 as7 as8 as9 as10 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 364 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Discussion It has been suggested that anomie generates people to trust others less and engage in more selfish behaviors (Jolley et al., 2019; Teymoori et al., 2016), which may increase public health problems associated with the pandemic. However, few instruments exist to measure social anomie. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the cross-cultural MI of the SAS10 in a sample of 12 Latin American countries. First, the results indicate that the original 10- item Bifactor model presents estimation problems and low fit indices in several countries, as does the nine-item Bifactor model. The estimation problem refers to the presence of improper solutions when estimating the model parameters, such as the presence of negative error variances or Heywood cases. Thus, if at the time of estimating a model there are convergence problems or an inadequate solution, then the model is poorly defined and, therefore, results should not be interpreted (Oliver et al., 1999; Tomás et al., 2000). Estimation problems are to be expected because Bifactor models include a larger number of parameters and the loading of some factors is expected to be low due to the distribution of variance between the two factors. Due to the above, other models of two related dimensions with 10 and nine items were tested. The findings indicated that the nine-item two related dimensions (affective and behavioral) model (SAS-9) presented adequate fit indices in all countries. In this model, item two ("It bothers me that the new rules and/or laws do not help those who need it most"), which referred to other external people, was eliminated, while the remaining items refer to oneself, one's own satisfaction, one's own economic income, worsening of one's own situation, one's own needs, among other things. This is related to the conceptualization of anomie at the individual level as a psychological state that has as one of its characteristics the tendency to egoism, personal confusion, lack of meaning and isolation (Konty, 2005). The estimation problems of the Bifactor models and the adequate fit indices of the SAS-9 model with two related dimensions would only allow obtaining scores for each of the dimensions, but not a general social anomie score. This is important to keep in mind, since the calculation of a total score and specific scores by sum weights, based on Bifactor models, presents better accuracy and reliability (Liu & Liu 2017). In addition, the presence of an affective and a behavioral dimension is related to the drivers of non-compliance with public health norms (behavioral) and dissatisfaction and concern about the norms implemented during the pandemic (Nosratabadi, & Halvaiepour, 2021; Roblain et al., 2022). https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 365 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Item analysis using IRT indicated that all SAS-9 items have good discrimination. Therefore, the SAS-9 items can efficiently and clearly differentiate low and high levels of social anomie. In addition, the difficulty parameters were also acceptable, indicating that the nine SAS-9 items explain a wide range of levels of social anomie during the COVID-19 pandemic. That the thresholds of the difficulty parameters increased monotonically would indicate that, a greater presence of the latent trait (in this case social anomie) is needed to answer the higher response categories. The information curves for the items of both dimensions indicated that item 5 ("I feel annoyed by the new rules and/or laws established by the government") was the most accurate for assessing the affective dimension; while item 7 ("When I want something, I don't mind breaking the rules and/or laws of my country") was the most accurate for assessing the behavioral dimension. The fact that both items are the most accurate measures of social anomie could be explained by the fact that the levels of discomfort or annoyance that accompany social isolation and other government-implemented rules lead people to seek to break these rules (Boylan et al., 2021). The IRT results would indicate that the characteristics of the SAS-9 items were appropriate. Finally, the SAS-9 has good reliability for both dimensions in all participating countries, indicating that the SAS-9 is accurate in measuring both dimensions of social anomie during the pandemic. Having identified the best factor structure, in this case SAS-9, we proceeded to evaluate its MU among all the participating countries. The findings of the approximate MI evidenced the presence of approximate MI of the scale. This would suggest that the participants from the 12 countries understand the concept of social anomie, as measured by the SAS-9, in the same way. In this sense, the scores of both dimensions of social anomie and their relationships with other constructs can be compared with confidence in all participating countries. However, the proxy MI test detected some non-invariant items that could be the most problematic for cross-country comparison. These items are: "The new regulations and/or laws cause me dissatisfaction", "I feel annoyed because the new regulations and/or laws of my country do not allow me to cover my basic needs" and "I feel worried because the new regulations and/or laws of my country affect my economic income". Although it is beyond the scope of the present study to provide possible explanations for why these specific items have difficulty being comparable in Chile, Colombia and Cuba, it is possible that cultural differences in their meanings should be explored in depth. There are methodological and substantive aspects, such as the presence of biases due to social desirability, acquiescence, different understanding of the item or others, that could affect the performance of the items differently between countries (Davidov et al., 2018). In this sense, it has https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 366 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 been suggested that in-depth interviews, from a qualitative approach, can be complementary tools to better understand the causes of the lack of invariance of items within a particular country (Raudenská, 2020). When comparing the affective and behavioral dimensions of social anomie between countries, it was observed that the differences were irrelevant or small. However, it was observed that Peru is the country with the highest score in the behavioral dimension of anomie, characterized by breaking laws or norms. This was to be expected if we take into account that, in Peru, good prevention practices against COVID-19 ranged from only 22.5% in rural areas to 28.8% in urban areas (Fernandez-Guzman et al., 2022), is well below that reported in other contexts such as Bangladesh (Ferdous, et al., 2020), Ethiopia (Wondimu et al., 2020), and Palestine (Qutob, & Awartani, 2021) whose good prevention practices ranged from 77% to 99%. This low percentage of people performing good prevention practices has already been observed in previous pandemics in Peru and can be explained by a low level of knowledge about the disease (Ávila et al., 2009). On the other hand, Venezuela and Bolivia presented the highest scores in the affective dimension of social anomie, which would indicate that these countries would present more dissatisfaction and concern for the norms implemented during the pandemic. In the case of Venezuela, this was to be expected since it has been suggested that Venezuelans were optimistic that the world would control and overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, but were very pessimistic about the actions of the public authorities in Venezuela to achieve it (Bates et al., 2021). This could be explained by the negative experiences due to the deep economic and political crisis, as well as the problems in the health system that the country is facing, which diminish confidence in the government's efforts to control COVID-19 (Burki, 2020: Hotez et al., 2017). With respect to Bolivia, the findings are in line with another study indicating a high level of concern among Bolivians about the repercussions of the forced quarantine in the Altiplano country (Loro Ortega, 2021). This concern was explained by uncertainty about the duration of the government's preventive measures and their impact on the country's economy. In addition, a recent study indicated that concerns about corruption in the public sector are an obstacle to an adequate response to the pandemic by the Bolivian government (Velasco-Guachalla et al., 2021). Finally, Mexico was one of the countries with the lowest scores for social anomie, both in its behavioral and affective dimensions. This is to be expected since, at the behavioral level, compliance with prevention and social distancing measures increased significantly as the pandemic dragged on; while, at the affective level, https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 367 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 although there was greater concern about the usefulness of preventive measures imposed by the government, this diminished as time went by (Toledo-Fernández et al., 2021). Limitations and future research suggestions The study has limitations. First, it is necessary to consider the presence of sampling bias due to the use of a non-probabilistic procedure, where anyone was free to participate in the study. In addition, this caused sociodemographic variables such as sex, age and others to be unrepresentative of the general population of each of the participating Latin American countries. Also, while the online survey was useful in reaching participants in different countries, it is unlikely to have reached people who cannot access the Internet. All of the above affects the generalizability of the findings. Thus, it is recommended that future studies include balanced percentages of participants based on different sociodemographic variables. Second, the data from this study were collected between 15 and October 25, 2021, more than one year after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. This is likely to influence the anomie experienced by participants at the time of assessment and could affect certain findings. Third, using self-report measures leads to possible bias due to the presence of socially desirable responses. Fourth, the study was cross-sectional and did not allow us to assess changes in social anomie across different time periods of the pandemic. Fifth, we did not test the validity and MI of the SAS-9 in countries with languages other than Spanish. This suggests that future studies should consider evaluating the relevance of the SAS-9 in cultural contexts other than Spanish-speaking countries. Finally, the association of social anomie with other variables such as stress, frustration, anxiety, life satisfaction, happiness and depressive symptoms was not evaluated (Blanco & Díaz, 2007; Brockmann et al., 2009; Lantz, & Harper, 1990; Powell et al., 2021). This should be considered in future studies to provide evidence of validity based on the relationship with other variables. Despite its limitations, the study has important strengths. In this sense, it is the first to show evidence of validity and cross-cultural MI of a measure of social anomie in the general population of several Latin American countries. In addition, the results supported the usefulness of the SAS- 9 version for use by researchers interested in assessing social anomie by the COVID-19. Assessing social anomie among Latin American countries is fundamental to prevent the negative physical and psychological outcomes of any pandemic disease by following effective measures. Thus, it is concluded that the SAS-9 has shown good psychometric properties when assessed in 12 Latin American countries and can be used in future studies comparing social anomie cross- culturally during periods of health emergencies. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 368 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Conclusion The results of the study have cross-cultural utility to understand the theoretical foundations of social anomie as a multidimensional construct in all the Latin American countries evaluated. In addition, MI evidence would also broaden our understanding of cross-cultural differences in anomie versus COVID-19 and would identify sources of invariance or non-invariance between different countries. This would provide evidence for developing culturally invariant items within self-report measures of anomie in the future. Having a cross-culturally invariant measure generates greater confidence to interpret the possible differences in the levels of anomie between countries as true and not as the product of a measurement error. On Friday the 5th of May, the WHO declared the end of the public health emergency as an international emergency due to COVID-19. However, this does not mean that COVID-19 is no longer a global health threat, as COVID-19 remains a global public health priority. Therefore, studies on the impact of future pandemics on mental health would benefit from including an assessment of anomie either as an outcome measure or as an explanatory variable related to other mental health indicators. Funding/Financial Support The authors have no funding to report. Other Support/Acknowledgement The authors have no support to report. Competing Interests The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 369 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 References Aceituno, R., Asún, R., Ruiz, S., Venegas, J. I., Corbalán, F., & Reinoso, A. (2009). Anomia y alienación en estudiantes secundarios de Santiago de Chile: Resultados iniciales de un estudio comparativo 1989-2007. Psykhe, 18(2), 3-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-22282009000200001 Aschwanden, C. (2020). The false promise of herd immunity for COVID-19. Nature, 587(7832), 26-28. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02948-4 Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Multiple-Group Factor Analysis Alignment. Structural Equation Modeling, 21(4), 495–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.919210 Ato, M., López-García, J. J., & Benavente, A. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología, 29(3), 1038-1059. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511 Ávila, J., Munayco, C. V., Gomez, J., Nunura, J., & Canahuiri, J. (2009). Conocimientos y prácticas sobre la nueva Influenza A (H1N1) en trabajadores de salud y pacientes ambulatorios, Perú (Mayo 2009). [Knowledge and practices about the new Influenza A (H1N1) in health workers and outpatients, Peru (May 2009)]. Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Publica, 26(3), 328-332. Bates, B. R., Tami, A., Carvajal, A., & Grijalva, M. J. (2021). Knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards COVID-19 among Venezuelans during the 2020 epidemic: an online cross-sectional survey. PloS one, 16(4), e0249022. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249022 Bjarnason, T. (2009). Anomie among European adolescents: Conceptual and empirical clarification of a multilevel sociological concept. Sociological Forum, 24(1), 135–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573- 7861.2008.01089.x Blanco, A., & Díaz, D. (2007). Social order and mental health: A social wellbeing approach. Psychology in Spain, 11(1), 61–71. Boer, D., Hanke, K., & He, J. (2018). On detecting systematic measurement error in cross-cultural research: A review and critical reflection on equivalence and invariance tests. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(5), 713-734. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117749042 Boruchowicz, C., & Lopez Boo, F. (2022). Better than my neighbor? Testing for overconfidence in COVID- 19 preventive behaviors in Latin America. BMC Public Health, 22(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13311-9 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-22282009000200001 https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02948-4 https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.919210 https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249022 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2008.01089.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2008.01089.x https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117749042 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13311-9 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 370 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Boylan, J., Seli, P., Scholer, A. A., & Danckert, J. (2021). Boredom in the COVID-19 pandemic: Trait boredom proneness, the desire to act, and rule-breaking. Personality and Individual Differences, 171, 110387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110387 Brockmann, H., Delhey, J., Welzel, C., & Yuan, H. (2009). The China puzzle: Falling happiness in a rising economy. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10(4), 387-405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008- 9095-4 Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, Second Edition. Guilford Publications. https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=tTL2BQAAQBAJ Burki, T. (2020). Covid-19 in Latin America. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 20(5), 547-548. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30303-0 Cai, L., & Monroe, S. (2014). A New Statistic for Evaluating Item Response Theory Models for Ordinal Data. University of California. Caycho, T. (2017). Importancia del análisis de invarianza factorial en estudios comparativos en Ciencias de la Salud. [Importance of factorial invariance analysis in comparative studies in Health Sciences] Revista Cubana de Educacion Medica Superior, 31(2), 1-3. https://www.medigraphic.com/pdfs/educacion/cem-2017/cem172d.pdf Caycho-Rodríguez, T., Valencia, P. D., Vilca, L. W., Carbajal-León, C., Vivanco-Vidal, A., Saroli-Araníbar, D., ... & Flores-Mendoza, C. (2022). Cross-cultural validation of the new version of the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale in twelve Latin American countries. Current Psychology, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02563-0 Caycho-Rodríguez, T., Vilca, L. W., Valencia, P. D., Carbajal-León, C., Vivanco-Vidal, A., Saroli-Araníbar, D., ... & Gallegos, W. L. A. (2021). Cross-Cultural Validation of a New Version in Spanish of Four Items of the Preventive COVID-19 Infection Behaviors Scale (PCIBS) in Twelve Latin American Countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 5088. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.763993 Chalmers, R. P. (2012). Mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06 Chen, W. H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational Behavioral Statistics, 22, 265–289. https://doi.org/10.2307/1165285 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110387 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008-9095-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008-9095-4 https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=tTL2BQAAQBAJ https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30303-0 https://www.medigraphic.com/pdfs/educacion/cem-2017/cem172d.pdf https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02563-0 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.763993 https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06 https://doi.org/10.2307/1165285 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 371 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Cieciuch, J., Davidov, E., Schmidt, P., & Algesheimer, R. (2019). How to obtain comparable measures for cross-national comparisons. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 71(1), 157-186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-019-00598-7 Cortazar, F. R. (2018). Escalas de anomia social: Confiabilidad y estructura factorial en una muestra colombiana. Informes Psicológicos, 18(2), 169-187. Crocker, L. y Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical & modern test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297– 334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555 Davidov, E., Cieciuch, J., & Schmidt, P. (2018, April). The cross-country measurement comparability in the immigration module of the European Social Survey 2014-15. Survey Research Methods, 12(1), 15- 27. Ferdous, M. Z., Islam, M. S., Sikder, M. T., Mosaddek, A. S. M., Zegarra-Valdivia, J. A., & Gozal, D. (2020). Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding COVID-19 outbreak in Bangladesh: An online-based cross-sectional study. PloS one, 15(10), e0239254. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239254 Fernandez-Guzman, D., Soriano-Moreno, D. R., Ccami-Bernal, F., Velasquez-Fernandez, R., Morocho- Alburqueque, N., De-Los-Rios-Pinto, A., ... & Nieto-Gutierrez, W. (2022). Factors associated with prevention practices against COVID-19 in the Peruvian population: Disparities between rural and urban areas. Plos one, 17(5), e0267625. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267625 Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2013). Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 439– 492). IAP Information Age Publishing. Fischer, C. S. (1973). On urban alienations and anomie: Powerlessness and social isolation. American Sociological Review, 38(3), 311-326. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094355 Fischer, R., & Karl, J. A. (2019). A primer to (cross-cultural) multi-group invariance testing possibilities in R. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01507 Fleury, L. F. D. O., Formiga, N. S., & Souza, M. A. D. (2018). Propiedades psicométricas de la escala de Anomia Social de Srole en trabajadores brasileños. Pesquisas e Práticas Psicossociais, 13(4), 1- 16. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-019-00598-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239254 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267625 https://doi.org/10.2307/2094355 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01507 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 372 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Frieden, T. R., & Lee, C. T. (2020). Identifying and interrupting superspreading events—implications for control of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 26(6), 1059- 1066. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2606.200495 Garcia, P. J., Alarcón, A., Bayer, A., Buss, P., Guerra, G., Ribeiro, H., ... & Atun, R. (2020). COVID-19 response in Latin America. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 103(5), 1765- 1772. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.20-0765 Hambleton, R. K., & Jones, R. W. (1993). Comparison of classical test theory and item response theory and their applications to test development. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(3), 38-47. Hotez, P. J., Basanez, M. G., Acosta-Serrano, A., & Grillet, M. E. (2017). Venezuela and its rising vector- borne neglected diseases. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 11(6), e0005423. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005423 Hukkelberg, S., & Ogden, T. (2019). General and specific factors of working alliance in parent training: A bifactor exploratory structural equation modelling approach. Psychotherapy Research, 29(2), 267- 276. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2017.1330574 Hummel, C., Knaul, F. M., Touchton, M., Guachalla, V. X. V., Nelson-Nuñez, J., & Boulding, C. (2021). Poverty, precarious work, and the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from Bolivia. The Lancet Global Health, 9(5), e579-e581. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00001-2 Indrayathi, P. A., Januraga, P. P., Pradnyani, P. E., Ward, P. R., & Gesesew, H. A. (2021). Perceived Social Norms as Determinants of Adherence to Public Health Measures Related to COVID-19 in Bali, Indonesia. Frontiers in Public Health, 9, 269. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.646764 Jolley, D., Douglas, K. M., Leite, A. C., & Schrader, T. (2019). Belief in conspiracy theories and intentions to engage in everyday crime. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(3), 534-549. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12311 Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2018). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-1. https://CRAN.R- project.org/package=semTools Kang, T., & Chen, T. T. (2011). Performance of the generalized S-X2 item fit index for the graded response model. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(1), 89-96. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.20-0765 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005423 https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2017.1330574 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00001-2 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.646764 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12311 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 373 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Kasapoğlu, F. (2020). Examining the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and spiritual well-being. Spiritual Psychology and Counseling, 5(3), 341-354. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article- file/1424749 Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press. Konty, M. (2005). Microanomie: The cognitive foundations of the relationship between anomie and deviance. Criminology, 43(1), 107-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00004.x Lantz, J., & Harper, K. (1990). Anomic depression and the migrating family. Contemporary Family Therapy, 12(2), 153-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00892493 Li, H., Atteslander, P., Tanur, J., y Wang, Q. (1999). Anomie scales: measuring social instability. in A. Peter, B. Gransow y J. Western (Eds.). Comparative anomie research: hidden barriers-hidden potential for social development (pp. 23-46). Sidney, Australia: Ashgate. Liu, Y., & Liu, H. (2017). Reporting overall scores and domain scores of bi-factor models. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(9), 1234–1246. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.01234 Loro Ortega, D. M. (2021). Percepción de riesgo e impacto psicológico del covid-19 durante el periodo de cuarentena en población boliviana. Revista Científica Ciencia Médica, 24(1), 52-58. https://doi.org/10.51581/rccm.v24i1.345 Lubbe, D., & Schuster, C. (2019). A Graded Response Model Framework for Questionnaires With Uniform Response Formats. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43(4), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621618789394 Martínez, D., Parilli, C., Scartascini, C., & Simpser, A. (2021). Let’s (not) get together! The role of social norms on social distancing during COVID-19. PloS one, 16(3), e0247454. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247454 Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2013). Goodness-of-Fit Assessment of Item Response Theory Models. Measurement, 11(3), 71–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2013.831680 Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2014). Assessing Approximate Fit in Categorical Data Analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49(4), 305–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.911075 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1424749 https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1424749 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00004.x https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00892493 https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.01234 https://doi.org/10.51581/rccm.v24i1.345 https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621618789394 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247454 https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2013.831680 https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.911075 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 374 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 McCarthy, M., Murphy, K., Sargeant, E., & Williamson, H. (2022). Examining the relationship between conspiracy theories and COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy: A mediating role for perceived health threats, trust, and anomie? Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 22(1), 106-129. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12291 McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Taylor & Francis. Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. Simon and Schuster. Ministerio de Salud (MINSA, 2023). Sala COVID-19. https://www.dge.gob.pe/covid19.html Mokkink, L. B., Prinsen, C., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L., de Vet, H. C., ... & Mokkink, L. (2018). COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). User manual, 78(1), 6-63. https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-syst-review-for-PROMs- manual_version-1_feb-2018.pdf Muthén, B., & Asparouhov, T. (2014). IRT studies of many groups: The alignment method. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 978. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00978 Nosratabadi, M., & Halvaiepour, Z. (2021). Identifying psychological perceptions of people ignoring the novel COVID-19 warnings: A qualitative thematic analysis in Isfahan, Iran. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-021-09608-w Oliver, A., Tomás, J. M., & Hontangas, P. M. (1999). Efecto del número de indicadores por factor sobre la identificación y estimación en modelos aditivos de análisis factorial confirmatorio. Qüestiió: quaderns d'estadística i investigació operativa, 23(2), 239-259. Paek, I., & Cole, K. (2020). Using R for item response theory model applications. Routledge. Parales-Quenza, C. J. (2008). Anomie and public mental health. Revista de Salud Pública, 10(4), 658-666. Powell, R. A., Kendall, K., Cislaghi, B., & El-Osta, A. (2021). Self-care, social norms and anomie during COVID-19: from contestation of the greater good to building future normative resilience in the UK. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 75(10), 925-926. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech- 2021-217292 Qutob, N., & Awartani, F. (2021). Knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) towards COVID-19 among Palestinians during the COVID-19 outbreak: A cross-sectional survey. PLoS One, 16(1), e0244925. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244925 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12291 https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-syst-review-for-PROMs-manual_version-1_feb-2018.pdf https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-syst-review-for-PROMs-manual_version-1_feb-2018.pdf https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00978 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-021-09608-w http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech-2021-217292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech-2021-217292 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244925 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 375 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 R Core Team. (2019). A language and environment for statistical computing (R version 3.6.1). R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org/ Ransing, R., Ramalho, R., Orsolini, L., Adiukwu, F., Gonzalez-Diaz, J. M., Larnaout, A., ... & Kilic, O. (2020). Can COVID-19 related mental health issues be measured? Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 88, 32- 34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.049 Raudenská, P. (2020). The cross-country and cross-time measurement invariance of positive and negative affect scales: Evidence from European Social Survey. Social Science Research, 86, 102369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.102369 Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2016). On the relationship between classical test theory and item response theory: From one to the other and back. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76(2), 325-338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164415576958 Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. E., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315 Robitzsch, A. (2020a). sirt: Supplementary Item Response Theory Models (R package version 3.9-4). https://cran.r-project.org/package=sirt Robitzsch, A. (2020b). sirt: Supplementary Item Response Theory Models (R package version 3.9-4). Roblain, A., Gale, J., Abboud, S., Arnal, C., Bornand, T., Hanioti, M., ... & Toma, C. (2022). Social control and solidarity during the COVID‐19 pandemic: The direct and indirect effects of causal attribution of insufficient compliance through perceived anomie. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2600 Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02 RStudio Team. (2018). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. RStudio, Inc. http://www.rstudio.com/ Samejima, F. (1997). Graded response model. In W. J. Van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern Item Response Theory (pp. 85–100). New York, Springer. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 http://www.r-project.org/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.049 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.102369 https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164415576958 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315 https://cran.r-project.org/package=sirt https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2600 https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02 http://www.rstudio.com/ Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 376 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Sawicki, A. J., Żemojtel-Piotrowska, M., Balcerowska, J. M., Sawicka, M. J., Piotrowski, J., Sedikides, C., Jonason, P. K., Maltby, J., Adamovic, M., Agada, A. M. D., Ahmed, O., Al-Shawaf, L., Appiah, S. C. Y., Ardi, R., Babakr, Z. H., Bălţătescu, S., Bonato, M., Cowden, R. G., Chobthamkit, P., . . . Zand, S. (2022). The fear of COVID-19 scale: Its structure and measurement invariance across 48 countries. Psychological Assessment, 34(3), 294–310. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001102 Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2015). A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling: Fourth Edition (4th ed.). Routledge. Schwalb, A., & Seas, C. (2021). The COVID-19 pandemic in Peru: what went wrong? The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 104(4), 1176–1178. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.20-1323 Taylor, L. (2021). Covid-19: Why Peru suffers from one of the highest excess death rates in the world. BMJ, 2021, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n611 Teymoori, A., Bastian, B., & Jetten, J. (2017). Towards a psychological analysis of anomie. Political Psychology, 38(6), 1009-1023. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12377 Teymoori, A., Jetten, J., Bastian, B., Ariyanto, A., Autin, F., Ayub, N., ... & Wohl, M. (2016). Revisiting the measurement of anomie. PloS one, 11(7), e0158370. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158370 Toledo-Fernández, A., Betancourt-Ocampo, D., & González-González, A. (2021). Distress, depression, anxiety, and concerns and behaviors related to covid-19 during the first two months of the pandemic: A longitudinal study in adult mexicans. Behavioral Sciences, 11(5), 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11050076 Tomás, J. M., Oliver, A., & Hontangas, P. M. (2000). Análisis factorial confirmatorio de segundo orden y matrices multirrasgo-multimétodo. Psicothema, 12, 534-539. https://reunido.uniovi.es/index.php/PST/article/view/7746 Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002 Velasco Guachalla, V. X., Hummel, C., Nelson-Nuñez, J., & Boulding, C. (2021). Crisis-Doble: Bolivia 2020. Revista de Ciencia Política, 41(2), 211-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-090X2021005000116 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001102 https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.20-1323 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n611 https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12377 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158370 https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11050076 https://reunido.uniovi.es/index.php/PST/article/view/7746 https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002 http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-090X2021005000116 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 377 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Viladrich, C., Angulo-Brunet, A., & Doval, E. (2017). A journey around alpha and omega to estimate internal consistency reliability. Anales de Psicología, 33(3), 755–782. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.33.3.268401 Vilca, L. W., Gonzales, R. D., Pariona-Millán, V., Caycho-Rodríguez, T., & White, M. (2022). Development and Validation of the Social Anomie Brief Scale (SAS-10) Against the New Standards Implemented During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Electronic Journal of General Medicine, 19(3), em375. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejgm/11911 Volk, C., Rosenstiel, S., Demetriou, Y., Sudeck, G., Thiel, A., Wagner, W., & Höner, O. (2021). Health- related fitness knowledge in adolescence: evaluation of a new test considering different psychometric approaches (CTT and IRT). German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12662-021-00735-5 Van der Linden, W. J. (Ed.). (2017). Handbook of Item Response Theory: Volume 2. Statistical Tools. CRC Press. Wondimu, W., Ejigu, A., Ayenew, M., Kidnau, A. W., Niguse, W., Geremaw, M., ... & Berchedi, A. A. (2020). Factors associated with coronavirus disease 2019 prevention practices in three zones of southwest Ethiopia: community-based cross-sectional study. International Journal of General Medicine, 13, 1603-1611. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S288067 Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Three likelihoodbased methods for mean and Covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30(1), 165–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/0081-1750.00078 Zickar, M. J., Russel, S. S., Smith, C. S., Bohle, P., & Tilley, A. J. (2002). Evaluating two morningness scales with item response theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(1), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00131-3 About the Authors Tomás Caycho-Rodríguez, Ph.D. in Psychology. Senior Researcher at the Universidad Científica del Sur, Research Renacyt Distinguished category. His research interests are psychometrics, psychogerontology, cross-cultural research. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.33.3.268401 https://doi.org/10.29333/ejgm/11911 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12662-021-00735-5 https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S288067 https://doi.org/10.1111/0081-1750.00078 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00131-3 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 378 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Lindsey W. Vilca, Master in Psychology. Professor and researcher at the Norbert Wiener University in Lima, Peru. His research interests are psychometrics and clinical and health Psychology. Pablo D. Valencia, PhD Student, School of Higher Studies (F.E.S.) Iztacala, National Autonomous University of Mexico. José Ventura-León, Ph.D. in Psychology. Senior Researcher at the Universidad Privada del Norte, Renacyt Distinguished Researcher. His research interests are psychometrics, network analysis, statistics, clinical psychology. Carlos Carbajal-León, Ph.D. in psychology and Master in Educational Psychology. South American Center for Education and Research in Public Health, Norbert Wiener University, Lima, Peru. Research professor at the Peruvian University of Applied Sciences. Mario Reyes-Bossio, Master in Psychology, University of San Martín de Porres. Researcher at the Peruvian University of Applied Sciences. Mariel Delgado-Campusano, Master in Psychology, Researcher at the Peruvian University of Applied Sciences. Daniel E. Yupanqui-Lorenzo, Researcher at the University of Sciences and Humanities. Rubí Paredes-Angeles, Researcher at the CRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Cayetano Heredia Peruvian University, Lima, Peru. Claudio Rojas-Jara, Master in drug addiction. Master in prevention and treatment of addictive behaviors. Academic of the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Catolica del Maule, Chile. Miguel Gallegos, Ph.D. in Psychology from the National University of Rosario, Argentina, and Doctor of Education from the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Post-doctorate from the National Autonomous University of Mexico, and the Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Minas Gerais, Brazil. Mauricio Cervigni, Ph.D. in Psychology from the National University of Rosario (UNR). Researcher at the National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET - Argentina). Professor-Researcher at the National University of Rosario (UNR). https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Anomie Brief Scale in 12 Latin American Countries 379 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Pablo Martino, Ph.D. in Psychology (National University of San Luis-Arg). Adjunct professor at the Faculty of Psychology, National University of Rosario. National Council for Scientific and Technical Research postdoctoral fellow. Roberto Polanco-Carrasco, Bachelor of Psychology, Scientific Editor of Cuadernos de Neuropsicologıa – Panamerican Journal of Neuropsychology. Director of the Chilean Association of Scientific Journals of Psychology. Diego Alejandro Palacios, Clinical Psychologist, Master in Clinical Psychology and Mental Health. Psychotherapist at the Human Development Center Clinics -CDH- and teacher at the University of San Carlos de Guatemala. Rodrigo Moreta-Herrera, Clinical Psychologist and University Master’s Degree in Psychology. Doctor (c) in Psychology from the University of Girona. Professor and researcher at the Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador. Antonio Samaniego-Pinho, Psychologist with a specialty in Occupational Psychology. Master in Clinical Psychology. Teacher in the career of Psychology at the Faculty of Philosophy (National University of Asuncion). Marlon Elías Lobos Rivera, Psychologist. Master in University Education. Research professor at the School of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Technological University of El Salvador. Andrés Buschiazzo Figares, Degree in Psychology (University of the Republic, Uruguay). Psychotherapist. Academic Director of the Center for Adlerian Studies, Uruguay. Diana Ximena Puerta-Cortés, Ph.D. in Psychology (Ramon LLull University of Barcelona, Spain). Master’s degree in psychology with an emphasis on addictions and violence (Universidad Catolica de Colombia). She is a researcher for the GESS group and director of the NeuroTech research hotbed. Professor at the University of Ibagué in Colombia. Ibraín Enrique Corrales-Reyes, Dentist. Maxillofacial surgeon. Professor and researcher at the Carlos Manuel de Céspedes General University Hospital. Granma University of Medical Sciences. Cuba. Editor of the Cuban Journal of Stomatology and the Cuban Journal of Biomedical Research. Raymundo Calderón, Master of Science in Education. National Director of Psychology, Universidad Del Valle de México. https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Caycho-Rodríguez et al. 380 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2023, Vol. 16(2), 349-388 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v16i2.811 Walter L. Ar