TY  - JOUR
TI  - A Russian Version of the Engagement With Beauty Scale: The Multitrait-Multimethod Model
T2  - Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics
IS  - Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics
KW  - aesthetic responsiveness
KW  - psychometrics
KW  - gender differences
KW  - educational specialization
KW  - multitrait-multimethod model
AB  - The aim of the study was a Russian adaptation of the EBS 2.0 questionnaire (Diessner et al., 2008; 2015) measuring aesthetic responsiveness to the beauty of nature, art, ideas and moral behaviour. Besides, the hypothesis of responsiveness to technics' beauty as part of aesthetic responsiveness and the multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) model additionally distinguishing engagement scales (cognitive, somatic, emotional, spiritual) in the EBS structure were tested. The original EBS was translated into Russian, extended by an experimental Technical Beauty scale, and completed by 191 Russian lyceum students, 48% females and 52% males, 14−17 years old from classes with advanced study of mathematics, or natural sciences, or humanities. The CFA demonstrated the consistency of the the Beautiful Ideas subscale added to EBS 2.0 with the rest of the EBS. The Technical Beauty scale did not revealed such a consistency, and was excluded from analysis. The MTMM model showed good fit, with half of loadings on engagement scales being insignificant. In the reliability analysis Cronbach's α reached 0.92 for the EBS total score, 0.82−0.90 for beauty scales and 0.66−0.75 for engagement scales. The ANOVA revealed that girls rated in EBS total scores higher than boys, while humanitarians and physicists did higher than chemists and mathematicians. Furthermore, girls and boys differed in beauty scales and engagement scales profiles. Within-group factors of beauty and engagement interacted too. Thus, the EBS Russian version demonstrated good psychometric qualities in the sample of academically successful adolescents; the MTMM model matched the data. The revealed differences in aesthetic responsiveness profiles also confirm that the questionnaire is valid and the proposed model is appropriate.
AU  - Pavel Sabadosh
UR  - https://psy-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-14-1/205842910.html
PY  - 2017
SP  - 7-21
VL  - 14