3
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta
2024, Vol. 50, Nº 183, 3-20
ISSN: 0211-7339
Prosociality and Mental Health Indicators in Portuguese
Adolescents – Validation of Prosocialness Scale
Indicadores de prosocialidad y salud mental en adolescentes
portugueses - Validación de la escala de prosocialidad
Ana Gouveia1
Marina Cunha1,2
Ana Galhardo1,2
Diogo Carreiras1,2
1Instituto Superior Miguel Torga (ISMT). Postal Address: Largo da Cruz de Celas, n.º1, 3000-132, Coimbra, Portugal
2CINEICC – Center for Research in Neuropsychology and Cognitive and Behavioral Intervention – Faculty of
Psychology and Education Sciences of the University of Coimbra. Postal address: Rua do Colégio Novo, 3000-115,
Coimbra, Portugal
Resumen
Nuestra investigación tuvo como objetivo validar
la Escala de Prosocialidad (PS) entre adolescentes por-
tugueses. Intentamos examinar su estructura facto-
rial, la invarianza del modelo según el sexo biológico,
la conabilidad y la asociación con variables sociode-
mográcas y otras variables relevantes. Nuestra mues-
tra incluyó a 454 adolescentes de 13 a 17 años que
completaron medidas de autoinforme que evaluaban
la exibilidad psicológica, las emociones negativas,
la salud mental y el comportamiento prosocial. El PS
demostró una estructura bifactorial que comprende
un factor latente (prosocialidad) y dos factores espe-
cícos (acciones y sentimientos). Mostró consistencia
interna y conabilidad test-retest satisfactorias.
Además, mostró correlaciones positivas con la e-
xibilidad psicológica y la salud mental, mientras que
se correlacionaba negativamente con estados afecti-
vos negativos. El PS surgió como un instrumento vá-
lido y conable para medir conductas prosociales, y
promete ser aplicado como herramienta de detección
en entornos educativos y clínicos. También puede fa-
cilitar la evaluación de intervenciones destinadas a
fomentar una conducta prosocial.
PalabRas clave
prosocialidad; PS; adolescentes; evaluación psicomé-
trica; validación.
abstRact
Our research aimed to validate the Prosocial-
ness Scale (PS) among Portuguese adolescents. We
sought to examine its factorial structure, model in-
variance across biological sex, reliability, and asso-
ciation with sociodemographic and other relevant
variables. Our sample included 454 adolescents
aged 13 to 17 who completed self-report measures
assessing psychological exibility, negative emo-
tions, mental health, and prosocial behavior. The PS
demonstrated a bifactorial structure comprising a la-
tent factor (prosociality) and two specic factors (ac-
tions and feelings). It exhibited satisfactory internal
consistency and test-retest reliability.
Moreover, it showed positive correlations with
psychological exibility and mental health while ne-
gatively correlating with negative aective states. The
PS emerged as a valid and reliable instrument for gau-
ging prosocial behaviors, holding promise for appli-
cation as a screening tool in educational and clinical
settings. It may also facilitate the evaluation of inter-
ventions aimed at fostering prosocial conduct.
KeywoRds
prosociality; PS; adolescents; psychometric as-
sessment; validation.
Correspondencia: Ana Gouveia. Instituto Superior Miguel Torga (ISMT). Largo da Cruz de Celas, n.º1, 3000-132, Coimbra, Portugal.
E-mail: anactfgouveia@gmail.com
Recibido: 18/02/2024; aceptado: 10/05/2024
4PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
Introduction
Prosociality is dened as a voluntary so-
cial behavior that benets others (e.g., giving,
helping, sharing) and contributing to the well-
being of people. The literature describes this
concept as multidimensional and multicultural
(e.g., Carlo & Padilla-Walker et al., 2020; Pfat-
theicher et al., 2022). This means that prosocial
behavior cannot be reduced to a single de-
nition or understanding, as dierent cultural
factors inuence it and can be expressed in
various ways, depending on the context and
social norms of a given community (Carlo &
Padilla-Walker et al., 2020). Prosocial behav-
ior is crucial for developing reciprocal social
relationships, particularly during childhood
and adolescence when there is a greater need
to belong to a social environment or group
(Crone & Achterberg, 2022). It should also be
considered that this behavior can be triggered
by intrinsic motivations related to others’ well-
being (e.g., altruism) or extrinsic motivations,
such as aversion to suering and the desire to
be appreciated by others (Batson, 2011).
Some studies have sought to clarify the re-
lationship between prosocial behavior, altru-
ism, empathy, and compassion (e.g., Brethel-
Haurwitz et al., 2020; Carlo, 2014; DeSteno,
2015; Pfattheicher et al., 2022). Altruism is a
set of actions that are intrinsically motivated
with the aim of beneting others without the
existence of a reward, aiming to increase the
well-being of the other. (Carlo, 2014). Prosocial
behavior, in turn, reects a wider category of
welfare promotion actions based on multiple
motivations, including altruism, selshness, or
unspecied (Pfattheicher et al., 2022). Spinrad
and Gal (2018) indicated that altruistic moti-
vations can be based on empathy, which is
an aective response that arises from the ap-
prehension or understanding of another per-
son’s emotional state. Thus, it is possible to
nd that empathy works as a driving dimen-
sion of prosocial behavior (Van der Graa et al.,
2018), being the pillar of social understanding
and interaction (Stietz et al., 2019). Exploring
the nature of the motivation underlying the
prosocial response, as well as the development
of this type of motivation, leads us to develop
compassion (Gilbert, 2017). Compassion, a
natural and innate trait present in the human
motivational system, can function as a protec-
tive factor for individual well-being (Zessin et
al., 2015) associated with emotional resilience
(MacBeth & Gumley, 2012). Self-compassion
refers to the positive way a person relates to
himself, which involves a warm and encourag-
ing attitude toward himself, recognizing, and
accepting his own weaknesses and limitations
without excessive judgment or criticism (Gil-
bert, 2019; Ne, 2019).
The development of prosocial behavior is a
continuing process that needs to be better un-
derstood. According to Pastorelli et al. (2016),
this behavior can be learned through observa-
tion and verbal behavior, resulting in the mod-
eling of information acquired from an early
stage of child development. During this pro-
cess, parents play a key role as the rst contact
of socialization, as their prosocial actions can
inuence their children and perpetuate these
actions throughout life. There is evidence that
positive parenting may be related to children’s
prosocial behavior (Gross et al., 2017).
5
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
Studies have shown that adolescents with a
good level of prosocial behavior reveal healthy
social functioning that contributes to their
well-being (Carlo, 2014; Spinrad & Eisenberg,
2014). More specically, at this stage of life,
prosocial behavior is strongly linked to posi-
tive cognitive, socioemotional, and psycho-
logical factors (e.g., moral judgment, empathy,
gratitude, and emotional regulation) relevant
to promoting social adjustment (Alessandri et
al., 2014). Conversely, in situations with weak
development of prosocial attitudes, young
people tend to manifest a higher risk of inter-
nalization problems (e.g., higher levels of de-
pression and loneliness) and externalization
(Memmott-Elison et al., 2020).
Adolescents’ temperamental characteristics
and individual dierences, such as emotional
self-regulation and inhibitory control, seem to
be related to prosocial behavior (Eisenberg et
al., 2006). Positive self-regulation allows teen-
agers to control their personal impulses and
needs so that they can prioritize the needs of
others and carry out actions that benet those
people. Thus, positive self-regulation is an im-
portant competence for adolescent prosocial
behavior, helping them balance their own
needs with the needs of others. For example,
Memmott-Elison et al. (2020) showed that indi-
viduals with higher levels of prosociality had a
higher level of emotional self-regulation.
Biological, cognitive, and social changes oc-
cur during adolescence. At this stage, young
people develop cognitive skills that allow for
more abstract thinking and greater psychoso-
cial maturity with increased social responsi-
bilities and expectations (Memmott-Elison et
al., 2020). However, negative emotional states
such as depression, anxiety, and stress strong-
ly impact adolescents and can negatively af-
fect their quality of life and functioning abil-
ity (World Health Organization, 2021). In the
study by Lappalainem et al. (2021), approxi-
mately 10-20% of young people experienced
mental health problems, with some starting
at 14 years of age. Other studies have shown
that factors such as sensitivity to interpersonal
relationships and concern about social as-
sessment can increase symptoms of depres-
sion (Blakemore & Mills, 2014). In conclusion,
all these changes sustained by brain maturity
that typically occur at this stage, condition-
ing the capacity for emotional self-regulation
of young people, support the relevance of the
development of prosocial behaviors in adoles-
cence (Brittian & Humphries, 2015). Accord-
ing to Schacter and Margolin (2019), prosocial
behavior in teenagers is related to an increase
in positive mood, including in adolescents di-
agnosed with depression. This suggests that
prosociality can meet the social and emotional
needs of young people (Schacter & Margolin,
2019).
Considering the importance of prosocial
behaviors in childhood and adolescence, and
since school is necessarily part of the lives of
these young people, it is appropriate to high-
light the fundamental role of the school envi-
ronment in the development of these behav-
iors (Caprara et al., 2014). It is believed that
promoting prosociality in school can contrib-
ute positively to adolescent learning and ad-
aptation as well as protect them from social
rejection. The transmission of the importance
6PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
of prosocial behavior seems to potentiate
greater social success and positively impact
adolescents’ academic and social paths of ado-
lescents (Bergin, 2014). Recent data disclosed
through a media outlet showed an increase in
episodes of bullying in the school context in
Portugal, reinforcing the relevance of school
investments in programs and activities that
promote prosocial behaviors and research that
widens reliable forms of assessment of proso-
ciality (Lusa, 2022).
Despite the importance of this topic in gen-
eral human development, there are few stud-
ies in Portugal on prosociality, namely, on in-
struments to measure prosocial behaviors in
adolescence. At the same time, even in interna-
tional studies, the available instruments have
presented psychometric limitations, not high-
lighting some of the multidimensional nature
of prosocial behaviors or their use in dierent
types of samples (Carlo et al., 2010; Mestre et
al., 2015). Thus, the need for instruments that
reliably evaluate prosociality in adolescence
becomes evident.
For children and adolescents, some instru-
ments seek to evaluate prosociality, such as
The Prosocial Behavior Questionnaire (PBQ;
Sánchez-Queija et al., 2006) and the Adoles-
cents (PSSA; Rodríguez & Pérez, 2011). The PBQ
was developed to assess prosociality in more
specic contexts, such as non-governmental
organizations (Martí-Vilar et al., 2019; Sánchez-
Queija et al., 2016). The primary objective of
PSSA for adolescents is to assess prosociality
through four factors: a) perspective-taking; b)
solidarity; c) help response; d) caring altruism
(Rodríguez & Pérez, 2011; Martí-Vilar et al.,
2019). Alternatively, the Prosocialness Scale
(PS; Caprara et al., 2005) focuses solely on
prosociality (feelings and actions), unlike other
instruments that, in addition to prosociality,
encompasses similar constructs. PS, used in
adults and adolescents, aims to analyze an indi-
vidual’s tendency to manifest prosocial behav-
iors in dierent circumstances (Caprara et al.,
2005). Their items, formulated simply to be an-
swered by adults and adolescents, aim to eval-
uate four types of prosocial behaviors (sharing,
helping, caring, and feeling empathy) (Caprara
et al., 2005; Carrizales et al., 2017). In reference
to psychometric data, this instrument shows
good reliability, with the overall score reveal-
ing good internal consistency (with Cronbach’s
alpha ranging between .82 and .94) in samples
of adolescents and adults from various coun-
tries (Caprara et al., 2005; Kanacri et al., 2021).
In addition to its psychometric qualities, the PS
is a short and easy-to-ll instrument that dem-
onstrates sensitivity to the situation context.
In this sense, it is possible to assess the pres-
ence of prosocial actions at a given time (e.g., “I
am available to volunteer for activities to help
those in need.”).
Based on the review presented, it was con-
sidered a relevant contribution to validating
PS for Portuguese adolescents, ending the
scarcity of research in this area. Additionally,
the availability of this instrument for adoles-
cents, along with its version for adults, allows
us to extend the research over time, allowing
the analysis of the eect of age on prosociality
and its relationship with indicators of mental
health or psychological well-being. The Por-
tuguese version of this instrument not only
7
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
covers all ese-speaking communities but also
identies possible specic cultural aspects and
enables cross-cultural studies on prosocial be-
havior.
The general objective of this study was to an-
alyze the psychometric characteristics of the PS
in a sample of adolescents from a Portuguese
population. The specic objectives were as fol-
lows: a) to analyze the factor structure of the PS;
b) to explore the quality of the items and reliabil-
ity of the scale; c) to test the time stability in the
four-week interval; d) to analyze the convergent
and divergent validity through the association
between the PS and indicators of prosocial be-
havior, mental health indicators, psychological
exibility, and negative emotional states; and e)
to explore the relationship between prosocial-
ity and sociodemographic variables (e.g., age,
schooling, and biological sex).
Based on the results of previous investiga-
tions, we expected to obtain a one- or two-
factor structure and good internal consistency
in the Portuguese version of the PS. A positive
correlation was found between prosocial be-
havior, psychological well-being, and psycho-
logical exibility, and a negative association
between prosocial behavior and symptoms of
psychopathology. It was expected that PS re-
sults would vary between biological sexes, and
there would be a greater predisposition of girls
to display higher values.
Materials and Method
Participants
The sample consisted of adolescents resid-
ing in Portugal, more specically in the central
area of Portugal and the autonomous region
of Madeira, meeting the following inclusion
criteria: a) aged between 13 and 17 years; b)
students attending the third cycle of primary
and secondary education or equivalent; and c)
absence of cognitive diculties impeding the
understanding of questionnaires.
This study included a total of 454 adoles-
cents, of which 260 were female (57.3%), 186
were male (40.9%), and 8 (1.8%) were not iden-
tied as either male or female. The participants
were between 13 and 17 years old (M = 14.96,
SD = 1.11), had schooling between the 7th and
12th years (M = 9.55, SD = 1.11), and attended
public or private schools.
Instruments
The participants’ assessment protocol re-
quired the completion of a sociodemographic
questionnaire (e.g., age, biological sex, and ed-
ucational status) and ve self-response ques-
tionnaires assessing prosociality, psychologi-
cal exibility, negative emotional states, and
mental health.
PS (Caprara et al., 2005) is a 16-item self-re-
sponse tool that evaluates four types of proso-
cial behaviors: sharing, helping, caring, and
feeling empathy. Each item is answered on a
5-point Likert scale ranging from Never/Never
(1) to Always/Nearly Always (5), and the high-
er the nal score, the greater the presence of
prosocial actions in adolescents. The original
version of this scale showed excellent reliabil-
ity, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .94 in a sample
of Italian adolescents and adults (Kanacri et al.,
2021).
The Psy-Flex (Gloster et al., 2021; Portu-
guese version for Adolescents – PsyFlex-A,
8PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
Soares et al., 2023) consists of six items that
evaluate the six dimensions of psychological
exibility according to the theoretical model
of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
(Hayes et al., 2012). Items are answered on a
scale ranging from Almost Never (1) to Almost
Always (5). Higher scores indicate greater psy-
chological exibility. The Portuguese version
of this instrument has an internal consistency
of α =.77 (Soares et al., 2023). In this study, the
PsyFlex-A showed adequate internal consist-
ency (α = .86).
The Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS)
21 (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995; Portuguese
version of Pais-Ribeiro et al., 2004) consists of
three subscales, with seven items each, which
evaluate the symptoms of anxiety, depression,
and stress, with a total of 21 items. The subject
was asked to answer if the statement applied
to him “last week’.” It is a self-responsive ques-
tionnaire, where the answers to each item are
given on a 4-point scale ranging from Nothing
applied to me (0) to It applies to me most of the
time (3). Higher scores correspond to more neg-
ative emotional states. In this study, only anxi-
ety and depression subscales were used. In the
Portuguese version of the DASS-21, the authors
obtained adequate internal consistency for the
scales of depression (α = .85), anxiety (α = .74),
and stress (α = .81) (Pais-Ribeiro et al. 2004). In
our sample, the scales of depression and anxi-
ety revealed good internal consistency, with al-
pha values equal to αdepression αdepression = .92
and angst αanxiety = .88, respectively.
The Mental Health Continuum – Short Form
– MHC-SF (Keyes, 2009; Portuguese version of
Matos et al., 2010) is a self-response tool con-
sisting of 14 items that evaluate subjective well-
being in three factors: emotional, social, and
psychological welfare. Items are answered on a
Likert scale of 6 points ranging from Never (0)
to Every day (5). Higher scores indicate positive
emotional well-being and psychological func-
tioning. The results obtained for the internal
consistency of the Portuguese version of the
MHC-SF were good for the overall scale score
(α = .90) and for emotional well-being factors (α
= .85), social well-being (α = .80), and psycho-
logical well-being (α = .83) (Matos et al., 2010).
In the present study, the MHC-SF showed good
internal consistency for the overall scale (α =
.93) and for, emotional well-being factors (α =
.87), social (α = .85), and psychological (α = .85).
The Strengths and Diculties Questionnaire
(SDQ (Goodman, 2001; Fleitlich et al., 2005) is
organized into ve subscales: emotional symp-
toms, behavioral problems, hyperactivity/inat-
tention, relationship problems with peers, and
prosocial behavior. The scale consists of 25
items; however, in this study, only the subscale
of prosocial behavior, composed of ve items,
was used. To answer the items, the participant
had a response scale that varied between Not
True (0) and Very True (2). In the Portuguese ver-
sion, the instrument has adequate psychomet-
ric quality and acceptable internal consistency
(α = .74) (Fleitlich et al., 2005; Conceição & Car-
valho, 2013). In the present study, the prosocial
subscale showed appropriate internal consist-
ency, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .68.
Procedure
Authorization was requested from the au-
thors to translate and validate the Prosocial-
9
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
ity Scale for the Portuguese population using
adult and adolescent samples. It is important
to note that, in the version for adolescents, only
the instructions are dierent, reformulated in
a more friendly language, while the formula-
tion of the items of the adult version is called
the Prosocialness Scale for Adults (PSA). In this
sense, the PS English-to-Portuguese transla-
tion procedure description is not included in
this paper but has been included in the PSA
validation study (Tomás & Cunha, 2023). Au-
thorizations were also collected from various
authors to use Portuguese versions of the in-
struments selected for this study.
The elaboration of the protocol included a
face sheet with brief information on the study,
consent of educational ocers or legal repre-
sentatives, informed consent of the participant,
collection of sociodemographic data (age, bio-
logical sex, and schooling), and PS accompa-
nied by self-response instruments aimed at
evaluating prosociality (SDQ), psychological
exibility (PsyFlex-A), negative emotional states
(DASS-21), and mental health (MHC – SF).
This study was approved by the Ethics Com-
mittee of the Instituto Superior Miguel Torga
(CE-P05-23). Since the sample collection took
place in schools in central Portugal and the
autonomous region of Madeira, the project
was also submitted and approved by the Di-
rectorate-General for Education (DGE) (survey
number 0082000029) and by the Regional Di-
rectorate for Education of Madeira. After the
authorization of the entities, approval of the
management of the schools that intended to
participate in this study was required, as well
as the consent of the educational ocials.
The application of the study followed the
ethical and deontological standards of re-
search by Portuguese psychologists. Participa-
tion was voluntary and anonymous, and par-
ticipants could give up at any time without any
harm to them. The data were treated conden-
tially and aggregated for research purposes
only.
The protocols were answered individually
in a classroom context in the researcher’s pres-
ence, which took approximately 15 minutes. It
is important to note that the test-retest study
was conducted in randomly selected classes.
In these, students were asked to ll in a code
consisting of the initials of the rst and last
name, accompanied by the last three digits of
the telephone contact, so that the data could
be matched between the rst and second four
weeks later. The collection took place between
February 13 and March 30, 2023, in public
schools in the central region of Portugal and
the Autonomous Region of Madeira.
Statistical Analysis
The data were analyzed using Predictive
Analytics Software (PAWS, version 29, SPSS,
AMOS) and JASP software package (JASP Team,
2018). Parametric tests were used, supported
by the sample size (N = 454) and exploration of
the variables that proposed a normal distribu-
tion, with acceptable values of asymmetry (Sk
< | 3 |) and kurtosis (Ku < | 10 |) (Kline, 2005).
Descriptive statistics were used to charac-
terize the sample, calculating averages and
standard deviations for the continuous vari-
ables (age and school years) and frequencies
10 PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
and percentages for the categorical variable
(biological sex).
The analysis of the factor structure of the PS
was carried out through the AMOS program
using the robust method of estimation of the
maximum probability. The plausibility of dif-
ferent factor models was tested:1) a one-factor
model, 2) a two-correlated latent factor model,
3) a hierarchical model of two rst-order specif-
ic factors and a second-order global factor, and
4) a bifactorial model. By using the Mahalano-
bis square distance (D2) and Mardia test, it was
possible to conrm the multivariate normality
of the items. The quality of the overall model ad-
justment was assessed using the following indi-
cators: chi-square statistic (χ2/gl), Comparative
Fit Index (CFI), Tucker & Lewis Index (TLI), Root
Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA),
and Standardized Root Median Square Residual
(SRMR). In the interpretation of these indices,
the following criteria were considered (Hu &
Bentler, 1999): GFI, CFI, and TLI ≥.90, acceptable
and ≥.95, desirable; RMSEA ≤.05, very good ad-
justment; ≤.08, acceptable adjustments. For the
comparison of alternative factor models, the ex-
pected cross-validation index (ECVI) was used,
with lower ECVI values indicating higher and
more stable models for the study population
(Kline, 2005). Local adjustment of the items was
analyzed using standardized regression weights
and multiple square correlations. According to
Tabachnick and Fidell (2007), values equal to or
higher than .40 for factor weights and equal to
or greater than .25 for multiple correlations to
the square are considered appropriate.
To explore the psychometric qualities of the
PS items, their respective averages, standard
deviations, asymmetry, shortness values, total
item correlation, and Cronbach’s alpha if item-
eliminated were calculated. Reliability was also
conrmed by calculating composite reliability
(CR) using an online calculator (https://www.
thestatisticalmind.com/composite-reliability/).
The intraclass correlation coecient (ICC)
was used to assess the test-retest reliability of
the overall score and scale factors over a 4-week
interval. According to Koo and Li (2016), values
below .50 reveal poor reliability; between .50
and .75, moderate stability; values between .75
and .90 are considered good and greater than
.90 is considered excellent.
Pearson’s correlation coecient, r, was cal-
culated to analyze the association between PS
factors, overall scores, and other variables in
the study. The interpretation of correlations was
based on the classication of Pallant (2016), ac-
cording to which values of r between .10 and
.29 equal to weak correlation, between .30 and
.49 indicate moderate, and values between .50
and 1 reveal strong.
The comparison of average PS values among
male and female adolescents who participated
in this study was performed using a t-test for in-
dependent samples. The size of the eect was
examined by calculating Cohen’s d value. Ac-
cording to Sawilowksy (2009), eect sizes d =
0.01 are considered very small, d = 0.20 as small,
d = 0.50 as averages, d = 0.80 as large, d > 1.20 as
very large, and d = 2.00 as huge.
Results
Conrmatory Factor Analysis
The analysis of the PS factor structure was
guided by studies conducted by Kanacri et al.
11
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
(2021), in which four plausible factor models
for PS were evaluated in ve dierent samples.
Model 1 represents a one-factor model with
the presence of a single factor that reveals a
global trend of prosocial behavior; model 2
represents the existence of two correlated fac-
tors (prosocial actions and prosocial feelings)
that reect a general behavioral dimension;
model 3 evaluates the plausibility of a hierar-
chy between two specic factors and a gen-
eral construct, that is, a factorial model with
two rst-order latent factors (prosocial actions
and prosocial feelings), and the second level is
a global factor; nally model 4 refers to a bi-
factorial approach, which includes two specic
factors (prosocial actions and prosocial feel-
ings) and, at the same conceptual level, a third
(general) factor that reects the commonali-
ties of all items.
Table 1 lists the adjustment rates for the
various tested models. Model four was the
only model that revealed appropriate values.
In comparison, ECVI also conrmed the
superiority of the bifactorial model (Figure 1)
over other models.
The factor weights of the bifactorial model
ranged between .42 and .84 for the general
prosocial factor, between -.07 and .73 for the
prosocial action factor, and between .19 and
.54 for the prosocial feelings factor. Items 3,
6, 10, and 13 did not signicantly saturate the
specic factor related to prosocial actions, sug-
gesting that these items were pure markers of
the global dimension of prosociality and fewer
indicators of prosocial actions (Table 2).
Item Analysis and Global Internal Consistency
The asymmetry values obtained varied be-
tween -1.03 (item 10) and -.26 (item 11), and
the atting values were between -.94 (item 4)
and .73 (item 5), indicating the acceptance of a
normal distribution of the variables.
PS demonstrated excellent internal con-
sistency, with a Cronbach alpha of .92 for the
overall score and .90 and .79 for the prosocial
actions and feelings factors, respectively. The
Models χ2df RMSEA CFI TLI SRMR ECVI
M1: One-factor model 539.93 104 .10
(.09 - .10) .87 .86 .06 .33
M2: Two correlated factors 455.31 103 .09
(.08 - .10) .90 .88 -05 .15
M3: Second-order factor 456.32 102 .09
(.08 - .10) .90 .88 .05 1.151
M4: Bifactorial 320.23 88 .08
(.07 - .09) .93 .91 .04 .92
Table 1
Results of PS Measurement Invariance Tests (N = 454)
Note: χ2 = Chi-square Goodness-of-t Statistic; df = Degrees of Freedom; RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of
Approximation; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index; SRMR = Standardized Root Mean Square
Residual; ECVI = Expected Cross Validation Index
12 PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
validity of this construction was further con-
rmed by composite reliability (CR) calcula-
tion, revealing a value of .92 for the total scale,
.90 for the prosocial action factor, and .70 for
the sentiment factor. The means, standard
deviations, item-total correlations, and Cron-
bach’s alpha if the item was removed from the
PS items are presented in Table 2.
Test-Retest Reliability
The PS scale was again completed by 75
participants, 37 females and 38 males (Mage =
14.64, SDage = 1.25), with an interval of 4 weeks
to analyze test-retest reliability. The intraclass
correlation coecient (ICC) was .76 [.72 - .79,
CI95%], indicating good time stability. The
prosocial action factor revealed a coecient
of .77 [.72–.80, CI95%] and a prosocial feelings
factor of .64 [.59–.70, CI95%), indicating mod-
erate stability. Pearson’s correlation coecient
(r = .78, p < .001) was also calculated, conrm-
ing the strong association between PS values
at both times.
Figure 1. Bifactorial Model of PS
13
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
Items M (SD) r α Factorial Weights
GPF SF
Prosocial Actions (α = .90)
I am pleased to help my friends/colleagues in their activities. 4.16 (0.87) .67 .91 0.68* 0.23*
I share my things with my friends. 3.93 (0.81) .51 .92 0.42* 0.73*
I try to help others. 4.21 (0.83) .73 .91 0.78* 0.07
I am available to volunteer for activities to help those in need. 3.62 (1.18) .58 .92 0.60* 0.15*
I immediately help those in need. .89 (0.95) .67 .91 0.73* 0.02
I do what I can to help others avoid getting into trouble. .99 (0.89) .63 .92 0.62* 0.19*
I am willing to make my knowledge and abilities available to
others. 4.00 (0.89) .59 .92 0.56* 0.28*
I try to console those who are sad. 4.07 (1.01) .73 .91 0.81* -0.07
I easily lend money or other things. 3.32 (1.11) .52 .92 0.50* 0.26*
I try to be close to and take care of those in need. .86 (0.97) .77 .91 0.84* -0.01
I easily share any good opportunity that comes to me with my
friends. .83 (1.03) .57 .92 0.54* 0.31*
I spend time with friends who feel lonely. 3.75 (0.94) .60 .92 0.62* 0.10*
Prosocial Feelings (α = .79)
I am empathic towards those in need. 4.09 (0.95) .62 .92 0.62* 0.19*
I intensely feel what others feel. 3.30 (1.06) .53 .92 0.50* 0.29*
I easily put myself in the shoes of those who are in discomfort. 3.70 (1.07) .68 .91 0.69* 0.54*
I immediately sense my friends’ discomfort even when they
don’t tell me directly. 3.97 (1.00) .60 .92 0.61* 0.39*
Table 2
PS Items and Total Psychometric Characteristics (N = 454)
Note. PS = Prosocialness Scale; M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; r = Correct item-total Correlation; α = Cronbach
if item deleted; GPF = General Prosocial Factor; SF = Specic Factor
*p > .05
14 PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
Associations with Other Variables
The overall score and PS factors demonstrat-
ed a strong positive association with prosocial
behaviors, as evaluated by the SDQ subscale,
thus showing good convergent validity. To-
tal PS and action factors strongly correlated
with psychological exibility, as assessed by
PsyFlex-A, and mental health perception. The
prosocial feelings factor positively correlated
with PsyFlex-A and mental health perceptions.
In turn, the PS (total and factor actions)
showed a weak negative association with
anxiety symptoms and a moderate association
with depression symptoms evaluated by the
DASS-21 sub-scales of anxieties and depres-
sion, respectively.
Analysis of Sociodemographic Variables
Analysis of the average overall PS score ac-
cording to biological sex showed a signicant
dierence [t(444) = -6.27, p < .001], with girls (M
= 64.40, SD = 9.06) showing higher prosocial-
ity values than boys (M = 58.37, SD = 11.22),
with the average eect size (dCohen = 0.60). Boys
and girls also diered signicantly in the aver-
age values of prosocial actions ([t(444) = -5.60,
p < .001] and prosocial feelings [t(444) = –6.56,
p < .001], with girls showing higher values for
both factors, with eects of average size (dCohen
= 0.54 and dCohen = 0.63, respectively).
Age was not shown to be associated with
the overall PS score (r = 0,03, p = .565), nor with
specic factors, prosocial actions (r = 0,02, p =
.757), and prosocial feelings factor (r = 0,55, p
= .262). The years of schooling presented a sig-
nicant, although weak, positive correlation
with the general factors of prosociality (r = 12,
p = .014), prosocial actions (r = 11, p = .021),
and prosocial feelings (r = 0,11, p = .019).
Discussion
The concept of prosociality encompasses
the action of beneting others, which, in turn,
potentiates the development of reciprocal so-
cial relationships, which are determinants of
the mental health and well-being of the indi-
vidual (Crone & Achterberg, 2022).
Providing a tool to measure prosocial be-
havior in adolescents reliably is useful, facili-
tating the early identication of possible dif-
Table 3
Correlations Between the Variables
PS Prosocial Actions Prosocial Feelings SDQ DASS-21
Anxiety
DASS-21
Depression PsyFlex-A
Prosocial Actions .98** - - - - - -
Prosocial Feelings .85** .72** - - - - -
SDQ .71** .71** .57** - - - -
DASS-21 Anxiety -.18** -.21** -.06 -.23** - - -
DASS-21 Depression -.35** -.38** -.20** -.39** .78** - -
PsyFlex-A .56** .56* .47** .45** -.45** -.56** -
MHC-SF .57** .59** .40** .52** -.58** -.74** .66**
Note. PS = Prosocialness Scale; SDQ = Strengths and Diculties Questionnaire; DASS-21 = Depression Anxiety
Stress Scale; MHC-SF = Mental Health Continuum – Short Form. ** p < .001
15
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
culties in social interaction, contributing to
the general well-being of adolescents, and
strengthening healthy social relationships.
Given the scarcity of instruments available to
children and adolescents and the robust char-
acteristics of PS, this study sought to validate
this scale for adolescents. For this purpose, a
sample of 454 Portuguese students from the
7th to 12th year of school in the central region
of Portugal and the autonomous region of Ma-
deira was used.
In the factor structure analysis, the results
of this study showed that the bifactorial ap-
proach turns out to be the most appropriate.
In other words, the results supported a model
in which prosocial responses were charac-
terized by a general latent factor (prosocial-
ity) and two other specic factors (prosocial
actions and prosocial feelings). These data
are aligned with those found in the study by
Kanacri et al. (2021), with the bifactorial model
suggesting:1) there is a general factor that ex-
plains the similarity between shared prosocial
tendencies (through specic actions or feel-
ings), and 2) there are two main specic fac-
tors. In this sense, although there are dierent
ways to express prosocial actions or feelings,
a general factor explains their similarity. This
suggests that, while people may have dier-
ent ways of manifesting prosocial behaviors,
these forms are based on shared values and
motivations that are essential for prosociality.
Indeed, according to the suggestions (Caprara
et al., 2005), the results highlight that proso-
cial actions and feelings evaluate two aspects
of prosocial tendencies, both dierent from a
general disposition.
The reliability of the PS was conrmed by
determining Cronbach’s alpha and composite
reliability. Over the 4-week interval, the time-
stability study showed adequate test-retest
reliability, revealing a strong contribution to
the study because this procedure was not per-
formed in the original study.
As expected, the overall PS score was posi-
tively correlated with psychological exibility
and mental health. In contrast, it was nega-
tively correlated with measures of negative
aective states (anxiety and depression). The
same is to say that the higher the individual’s
tendency to help others, the greater their ex-
ibility or adaptability in general, as well as their
sense of well-being on an emotional, social,
and psychological level. In turn, the greater
the manifestation of prosocial behaviors, the
lower the experience of negative emotional
states (anxiety and depression). These results
align with other studies that have shown a
positive association between prosociality and
psychological well-being (Evans et al., 2018)
and psychologically exible behavior (Crone
et al., 2022).
Other studies have conrmed that prosoci-
ality is negatively associated with depression
and anxiety (Padilla-Walker et al., 2020; Setter-
eld et al., 2016). In summary, the data suggest
a pattern of association that, although it can
vary in dierent contexts and individuals, can
be elucidated in various ways, such as building
healthy relationships, social connection, and
the development of a purpose, thus contrib-
uting to a positive link between prosocial be-
haviors and psychological well-being. The data
also showed that prosocial actions and feelings
16 PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
were related in ways that were dierent from
the variables studied. Prosocial actions were
identied as a strong factor, whereas prosocial
feelings had lower correlations.
In analysing the sociodemographic vari-
ables, age was not associated with PS proso-
ciality. This result may have been conditioned
by the sample in question, where the age vari-
ability was small, from 13 to 17 years, thus im-
plying a cautious interpretation of the role of
this variable. Other studies should deepen the
understanding of the relationship between
prosociality and age. In addition, factors other
than age may also inuence adolescent proso-
ciality. Prosociality is inuenced by a variety
of factors, including education (Mesurado et
al., 2018), social experiences (Baumsteiger,
2019), culture (Baumstiger, 2019), and genetics
(House, 2018) which can minimize or suppress
the eect of age.
When analyzing sex dierences, statistically
signicant dierences were found, with girls
showing higher values of prosocial behavior.
This result can be explained by the fact that
women have a greater tendency to show aec-
tion and emotional concern in early childhood
than men (Eisenberg et al., 2006). According to
Caprara et al. (2005), items related to empathy
and emotional support are more associated
with the female sex, while items related to im-
mediate help, knowledge sharing, and oppor-
tunities are more related to men.
In the present study, it was possible to nd
some limitations that must be considered,
namely the impossibility of generalizing the
results to the Portuguese population. The use
of self-response tools throughout the process
may have conditioned the data obtained, and
it is important to note that in adolescents, the
desirability of manifesting prosocial behaviors
to obtain approval from others, that is, the
manifestation of concerns about self-presen-
tation, can send the answers given by them.
Given these limitations, future studies with a
community-representative sample, as well as
the use of other assessment methods (e.g.,
structured interviews or behavioral observa-
tions) and other sources of information (e.g.,
parents and teachers) may be aspects to be
considered and in turn, enrich the results due
to reduced submissions.
The current study has enabled a new and
brief instrument for the Portuguese adoles-
cent population, contributing to research on
the eectiveness of interventions aimed at
promoting prosocial behaviors, such as inter-
ventions based on mindfulness and compas-
sion (Quaglia et al., 2016; Bibeau et al., 2016),
both in the clinical and health elds, as well as
in the educational context. Investing in proso-
ciality in the school context also plays a crucial
role, mainly because it can contribute to the
learning and good adaptation of students,
protecting them from the possible negative
consequences of nding themselves, for ex-
ample, in an environment of rejection from
peers (Caprara et al., 2014).
Overall, the results suggest that this Portu-
guese version is a reliable and valid measure for
evaluating prosociality in adolescents, allowing
its use in other Portuguese-speaking countries
and conducting cross-cultural studies.
17
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
References
Alessandri, G., Luengo Kanacri, B. P. L.,
Eisenberg, N., Zuanò, A., Milioni, M.,
Vecchione, M., & Caprara, G. V. (2014).
Prosociality during the transition from
late adolescence to young adulthood:
The role of eortful control and ego-
resiliency. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 40(11), 1451–1465. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0146167214549321
Batson, C. D. (2011). Altruism in humans. Oxford
University Press.
Baumsteiger, R. (2019). What the world needs
now: An intervention for promoting
prosocial behavior. Basic and Applied Social
Psychology, 41(4), 215–229. https://doi.org/
10.1080/01973533.2019.1639507
Bergin, C. (2014). Educating students to
be prosocial at school. In L. M. Padilla-
Walker & G. Carlo (Eds.), Prosocial
Development: A multidimensional
approach (pp. 279–301). Oxford University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:o
so/9780199964772.003.0014
Bibeau, M., Dionne, F., & Leblanc, J. (2016).
Can compassion meditation contribute
to the development of psychotherapists‘
empathy? A review. Mindfulness, 7(1), 255–
0439-y
Blakemore, S. J., & Mills, K. L. (2014). Is
adolescence a sensitive period for
sociocultural processing? Annual
Review of Psychology, 65(1), 187–207-
2017. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-
psych-010213-115202
Brethel-Haurwitz, K. M., Stoianova, M., & Marsh,
A. A. (2020). Empathic emotion regulation in
prosocial behaviour and altruism. Cognition
and Emotion, 34(8), 1532–1548. https://doi.
org/10.1080/02699931.2020.1783517
Brittian, A. S., & Humphries, M. L. (2015).
Prosocial behavior during adolescence.
International encyclopedia of the social
Behavioral Science, 2, 221–227. https://doi.
org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.23190-5
Caprara, G. V., Kanacri, B. P. L., Gerbino, M.,
Zuanò, A., Alessandri, G., Vecchio, G.,
Caprara, E., Pastorelli, C., & Bridglall, B.
(2014). Positive eects of promoting
prosocial behavior in early adolescence:
Evidence from a school-based intervention.
International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 38(4), 386–396. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0165025414531464
Caprara, G. V., Steca, P., Zelli, A., & Capanna,
C. (2005). A new scale for measuring
adults‘ prosocialness. European Journal
of Psychological Assessment, 21(2), 77–89.
Carlo, G. (2014). The development and
correlates of prosocial moral behaviors. In
M. Killen & J. G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook
of moral development (2nd ed., pp. 208-234).
Psychology Press.
Carlo, G., & Padilla-Walker, L. (2020).
Adolescents‘ prosocial behaviors through
a multidimensional and multicultural lens.
Child Development Perspectives, 14(4), 265–
272. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12391
Carlo, G., Knight, G. P., McGinley, M.,
Zamboanga, B. L., & Jarvis, L. H. (2010).
The multidimensionality of prosocial
behaviors and evidence of measurement
equivalence in Mexican American and
European American early adolescents.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20(2),
334–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-
7795.2010.00637.x
Carrizales, A., Perchec, C., & Lannegrand-
Willems, L. (2017). Brief report: How many
dimensions in the prosocial behavior scale?
Psychometric investigation in french-
speaking adolescents. European Journal of
Developmental Psychology, 16(3), 340–348.
19952
Conceição, A., & Carvalho, M. (2013). Problemas
emocionais e comportamentais em
jovens: Relações com o temperamento,
as estratégias de coping e de regulação
emocional e a identicação de expressões
faciais. Psychologica, 56, 83–100. https://doi.
org/10.14195/1647-8606_56_5
Crone, E. A., & Achterberg, M. (2022). Prosocial
development in adolescence. Current
Opinion in Psychology, 44, 220–225. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.09.020
18 PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
Crone, E. A., Sweijen, S. W., Te Brinke, L. W., & Van
de Groep, S. (2022). Pathways for engaging
in prosocial behavior in adolescence.
Advances in Child Development and Behavior,
63, 149–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/
bs.acdb.2022.03.003
DeSteno, D. (2015). Compassion and altruism:
How our minds determine who is worthy
of help. Current Opinion in Behavioral
Sciences, 3, 80–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cobeha.2015.02.002
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2006).
Prosocial development. In N. Eisenberg,
W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook
of child psychology: Social, emotional and
personality development (6th ed., pp.646-718).
John Wiley.
Evans, C. B. R., Smokowski, P. R., Rose, R. A.,
Mercado, M. C., & Marshall, K. J. (2018).
Cumulative Bullying Experiences,
Adolescent Behavioral and Mental Health,
and Academic Achievement: An Integrative
Model of Perpetration, Victimization, and
Bystander Behavior. Journal of Child and
Family Studies, 27, 2415–2428. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10826-018-1078-4
Fleitlich, B., Loureiro, M. J., Fonseca, A.,
& Gaspar, F. (2005). Questionário de
capacidades e de diculdades (SDQ-Por)
[Strengths and Diculties Questionnaire
– Portuguese Version]. https://portefolio-
mpap.webnode.pt/escala-sdq/
Gilbert, P. (2017). Compassion: Concepts,
research and applications. Routledge.
Gilbert, P. (2019). Explorations into the nature
and function of compassion. Current
Opinion in Psychology, 28, 108–114. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.12.002
Gloster, A. T., Block, V. J., Klotsche, J., Villanueva,
J., Rinner, M. T. B., Benoy, C., Walter,
M., Karekla, M., & Bader, K. (2021). Psy-
Flex: A contextually sensitive measure
of psychological exibility. Journal of
Contextual Behavioral Science, 22, 13–23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2021.09.001
Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of
the strengths and diculties questionnaire.
Journal of the American Academy of Child
and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337–
200111000-00015
Gross, J. T., Stern, J. A., Brett, B. E., & Cassidy, J.
(2017). The multifaceted nature of prosocial
behavior in children: Links with attachment
theory and research. Social Development,
26(4), 661–678. https://doi.org/10.1111/
sode.12242
House, B. R. (2018). How do social norms
inuence prosocial development? Current
Opinion in Psychology, 20, 87–91. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.011
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cuto criteria
for t indexes in covariance structure
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new
alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
JASP Team. (2018). JASP (version 0.9) [Computer
software].
Kanacri, B. P. L., Eisenberg, N., Tramontano,
C., Zuano, A., Caprara, M. G., Regner,
E., Zhu, L., Pastorelli, C., & Caprara, G. V.
(2021). Measuring prosocial behaviors:
Psychometric properties and cross-national
validation of the prosociality scale in ve
countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 693174.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.693174
Keyes, C. L. M. (2009). The nature and
importance of positive mental health in
America‘s adolescents. In M. J. Furlong, R.
Gilman & S. Huebner (Eds.), Handbook of
positive psychology in schools (2nd ed., pp.
9-23). Routledge.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of
structural equation modeling (2nd ed).
Guilford Press.
Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline
of selecting and reporting intraclass
correlation coecients for reliability
research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine,
15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jcm.2016.02.012
Lappalainen, R., Lappalainen, P., Puolakanaho,
A., Hirvonen, R., Eklund, K., Ahonen, T.,
Muotka, J., & Kiuru, N. (2021). The Youth
Compass -the eectiveness of an online
acceptance and commitment therapy
program to promote adolescent mental
19
ANA GOUVEIA · MARINA CUNHA · ANA GALHARDO · DIOGO CARREIRAS
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
health: A randomized controlled trial.
Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science,
20, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jcbs.2021.01.007
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The
structure of negative emotional states:
Comparison of the depression anxiety stress
scales (DASS) with the beck depression and
anxiety inventories. Behaviour Research
and Therapy, 33(3), 335–343. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U
Lusa. (2022, 20 de outubro). Casos de bullying em
contexto escolar aumentaram 37% no último
ano letivo. Expresso. https://expresso.pt/
sociedade/2022-10-20-Casos-de-bullying-
em-contexto-escolar-aumentaram-37-no-
ultimo-ano-letivo-51017dad
MacBeth, A., & Gumley, A. (2012). Exploring
compassion: A meta-analysis of the
association between self-compassion
and psychopathology. Clinical Psychology
Review, 32(6), 545–552. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.06.003
Martí-Vilar, M., Corell-García, L., & Merino-Soto,
C. (2019). Systematic review of prosocial
behavior measures. Revista de Psicología,
37(1), 349–377. https://doi.org/10.18800/
psico.201901.012
Matos, A. P., André, R. S., Cherpe, S., Rodrigues,
D., Figueira, C., & Pinto, A. M. (2010).
Estudo psicométrico preliminar da mental
health continuum – Short form – For
youth numa amostra de adolescentes
portugueses.Psychologica, 53(53), 131–156.
Memmott-Elison, M. K., Holmgren, H. G.,
Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Hawkins, A. J. (2020).
Associations between prosocial behavior,
externalizing behaviors, and internalizing
symptoms during adolescence: A meta-
analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 80(1),
98–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
adolescence.2020.01.012
Mestre, M. V., Carlo, G., Samper, P., Tur-Porcar,
A. M., & Mestre, A. L. (2015). Psychometric
evidence of a multidimensional measure of
prosocial behaviors for Spanish adolescents.
Journal of Genetic Psychology, 176(3–4),
260–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022132
5.2015.1052726
Mesurado, B., Guerra, P., Richaud, M. C., &
Rodriguez, L. M. (2018). Eectiveness of
prosocial behavior interventions: A meta-
analysis. Psychiatry and Neuroscience Update,
259–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-95360-1_21
Ne, K. D. (2019). Setting the record straight
about the self-compassion scale.
Mindfulness, 10(1), 200–202. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12671-018-1061-6
Padilla-Walker, L. M., Millett, M. A., & Memmott-
Elison, M. K. (2020). Can helping others
strengthen teens? Character strengths as
mediators between prosocial behavior
and adolescents’ internalizing symptoms.
Journal of Adolescence, 79(1), 70–80. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.01.001
Pais-Ribeiro, J. L., Honrado, A. A. J. D., & Leal,
I. (2004). Contribuição para o estudo da
adaptação portuguesa das escalas de
ansiedade, depressão e stress (EADS) de 21
itens de Lovibond e Lovibond. Psicologia,
Saúde e Doenças, 5(2), 229–239.
Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS survival manual: A step
by step guide to data analysis using SPSS
program (6th ed). McGraw-Hill Education.
Pastorelli, C., Lansford, J. E., Luengo Kanacri,
B. P., Malone, P. S., Di Giunta, L., Bacchini,
D., Bombi, A. S., Zelli, A., Miranda, M. C.,
Bornstein, M. H., Tapanya, S., Uribe Tirado, L.
M., Alampay, L. P., Al-Hassan, S. M., Chang,
L., Deater-Deckard, K., Dodge, K. A., Oburu,
P., Skinner, A. T., & Sorbring, E. (2016).
Positive parenting and children‘s prosocial
behavior in eight countries. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied
Disciplines, 57(7), 824–834. https://doi.
org/10.1111/jcpp.12477
Pfattheicher, S., Nielsen, Y. A., & Thielmann, I.
(2022). Prosocial behavior and altruism: A
review of concepts and denitions. Current
Opinion in Psychology, 44, 124–129. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.021
Quaglia, J. T., Braun, S. E., Freeman, S. P.,
McDaniel, M. A., & Brown, K. W. (2016). Meta-
analytic evidence for eects of mindfulness
training on dimensions of self-reported
20 PROSOCIALITY AND MENTAL HEALTH INDICATORS IN PORTUGUESE ADOLESCENTS – VALIDATION ...
Análisis y Modicación de Conducta, 2024, vol. 50, nº 183
dispositional mindfulness. Psychological
Assessment, 28(7), 803–818. https://doi.
org/10.1037/pas0000268
Rodríguez, M. M., & Pérez, C. D. S. (2011).
Construcción y validación de una escala
para evaluar habilidades prosociales
en adolescentes [Apresentação Oral]
Congresso Nacional de Investigación
Educativa, México, XI.
Sánchez-Queija, I., Oliva, A., & Parra, Á. (2006).
Empatía y conducta prosocial durante
la adolescencia. Revista de Psicología
Social, 21(3), 259–271. https://doi.
org/10.1174/021347406778538230
Sawilowsky, S. S. (2009). New eect size
rules of thumb. Journal of Modern Applied
Statistical Methods, 8(2), 597–599. https://
doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1257035100
Schacter, H. L., & Margolin, G. (2019). When it
feels good to give: Depressive symptoms,
daily prosocial behavior, and adolescent
org/10.1037/emo0000494
Settereld, M., Walsh, M., Frey, A. L., & McCabe,
C. (2016). Increased social anhedonia and
reduced helping behaviour in young people
with high depressive symptomatology.
Journal of Aective Disorders, 205, 372–377.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.08.020
Soares, R., Cunha, M., Massano-Cardoso, I., &
Galhardo, A. (2023). Assessing psychological
exibility in adolescents: Validation of
PsyFlex-A. Revista Portuguesa de Investigação
Comportamental e Social, 9(1), 1–18. https://
doi.org/10.31211/rpics.2023.9.1.284
Spinrad, T. L., & Eisenberg, N. (2014).
Empathy, prosocial behavior, and positive
development in schools. In K. Allen, M. J.
Furlong, D. Vella-Brodrick & S. Suldo (Eds.),
Handbook of positive psychology in schools
(3rd ed., pp. 82-98). Routledge.
Spinrad, T. L., & Gal, D. E. (2018). Fostering
prosocial behavior and empathy in young
children. Current Opinion in Psychology,
20, 40–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
copsyc.2017.08.004
Stietz, J., Jauk, E., Krach, S., & Kanske, P. (2019).
Dissociating Empathy From Perspective-
Taking: Evidence From Intra- and Inter-
Individual Dierences Research. Frontiers
in Psychiatry, 10(126), 126. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00126
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using
multivariate statistic (5th ed). Allyn & Bacon.
Tomás, A. B., & Cunha, M. (2023). Pró-
sociabilidade e saúde mental: Validação da
versão portuguesa da prosocialness scale
for adults [Dissertação de mestrado não
publicada]. Instituto Superior Miguel Torga.
Van der Graa, J., Carlo, G., Crocetti, E., Koot, H.
M., & Branje, S. (2018). Prosocial behavior
in adolescence: Gender dierences in
development and links with empathy.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(5),
1086–1099. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10964-017-0786-1
World Health Organization. (2021). Adolescent
mental health. https://www.who.int/
news-room/fact-sheets/detail/adolescent-
mental-health. World Health Organization.
Zessin, U., Dickhäuser, O., & Garbade, S. (2015).
The relationship between self-compassion
and well-being: A meta-analysis. Applied
Psychology. Health and Well-Being, 7(3), 340–
364. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12051
