Gratitude Questionnaire–20 Items (G20): A Cross-Cultural ...

The most widespread of all is the Gratitude Questionnaire—Six Items Form (GQ-6; McCullough et al., 2002). The GQ-6 is a six item self-report ... ThisarticleispartoftheResearchTopic TheIncredibleChallengeofDigitizingtheHumanBrain Viewall 6 Articles Articles CamilaR.Oliveira FaculdadeMeridional(IMED),Brazil LuisH.Paloski PostgraduatePrograminPsychology,PontificalCatholicUniversityofRioGrandedoSul,Brazil SamuelToledano UniversityofLaLaguna,Spain Theeditorandreviewers'affiliationsarethelatestprovidedontheirLoopresearchprofilesandmaynotreflecttheirsituationatthetimeofreview. Abstract Introduction MaterialsandMethods Results DiscussionandConclusion DataAvailabilityStatement EthicsStatement AuthorContributions Funding ConflictofInterest Acknowledgments SupplementaryMaterial References SuggestaResearchTopic> DownloadArticle DownloadPDF ReadCube EPUB XML(NLM) Supplementary Material Exportcitation EndNote ReferenceManager SimpleTEXTfile BibTex totalviews ViewArticleImpact SuggestaResearchTopic> SHAREON OpenSupplementalData ORIGINALRESEARCHarticle Front.Psychol.,21December2020 |https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.626330 GratitudeQuestionnaire–20Items(G20):ACross-Cultural,PsychometricandCrowdsourcingAnalysis GloriaBernabe-Valero1*,JoséS.Blasco-Magraner2*andMarianelaR.García-March1* 1ResearchTeamMind,Emotion,andBehaviorLab,CatholicUniversityofValenciaSanVicenteMártir,Valencia,Spain 2ColaboratorResearchTeamMind,Emotion,andBehaviorLab,UniversityofValencia,Valencia,Spain Theuseinpsychologyofcrowdsourcingplatformsasamethodofdatacollectionhasbeenincreasinginpopularitybecauseofitsrelativeeaseandversatility.OurgoalistoadapttheGratitudeQuestionnaire–20Items(G20)totheEnglishlanguagebyusingdatacollectedthroughacrowdsourcingplatform.TheG20isacomprehensiveinstrumentthattakesinconsiderationthedifferentbasicprocessesofgratitudeandassessestheconstruct’scognitive,evaluative,emotional,andbehavioralprocesses.WetestthepsychometricpropertiesoftheEnglishversionoftheG20withaProlific(ProA)usersample.WeassesstheadequacyoftheG20forthecrowdsourcingpopulationinitsEnglishversion.Adescriptionofthecharacteristicsoftheparticipantsisconducted.Reliabilityanalysesrevealanoptimalinternalconsistencyoftheadaptedscale.Theresultsarediscussedfromacross-culturalvisionofgratitude.WeconcludethattheGratitudeQuestionnaire–20Items(G20),adaptedtoEnglishwithanAmericansample,isapsychometricallystronginstrumenttomeasuregratitudeusingcrowdsourcingplatformsfordatacollectionand,therefore,areferenceandusefultoolinfutureresearch. Introduction Digitalizationhasrevolutionizedmanyareasofhumanlife;specifically,researchhasadvancedbyleapsandboundswithallthenewpossibilitiesofferedbytherapidchangesintechnology(Moret-Tatayetal.,2019).Oneadvancementthathasradicallychangedinthefieldofpsychologyhasbeentheincreasedpossibilityofrecruitingparticipantsthroughdifferentsocialnetworksandelectronicdevices(Harteisetal.,2020).Thesenewpossibilitiesofdigitizationhaveextendedthevarietyofparticipantsamplepools.Afewdecadesago,mostoftheparticipantsamplescamefromcollegestudents(HauserandSchwarz,2016).Giventhataccesstothestudentpopulationwasthemostaccessibleforuniversityresearchers,theuseofsamplesofuniversitystudentsrepresentedimportantadvancesthatallowedforthevalidationofnumerousassessmentinstrumentsforthestandardpopulation.Despitetheirvalidity,thesestudieshavenotbeenexemptfromcriticismregardingpossiblebiasesduetocertaincharacteristicsofthispopulation.Specifically,oneofthehandicapswiththistypeofsamplewastheagerange,whichinmostcasesrangedbetween18and30years.Incontrast,today,thebreadthofpossiblecontactsisvastduetothegreatproliferationofsocialnetworks.Atpresent,anyonecanrespondtoasurveyfromtheirsmartphone,tablet,orcomputeralmostanywhereandatalmostanytime.Thus,crowdsourcingplatformshaveemergedthatallowrecruitmentnichesorrepresentativesamplesondemand,becomingflexibletoolsforonlineresearch(Bakici,2020).Furthermore,obtainingrepresentativesamplesforstudiesinpsychologybecomesamoreefficientprocessandcanofferusadvancesincross-culturalstudies(Cuccoloetal.,2020).Therefore,theexpansionofcrowdsourcingplatformsforuseinpsychologicalresearchopensawaytoconsolidateotheroptionsinadditiontotheuniversitystudentpopulation.Itwillbenecessarytoanalyzethecharacteristicsofthecrowdsourcingsamplesandcheckhowtheybehavepsychometricallycomparedtostudentsamples. Crowdsourcing,asdescribedbyMajimaetal.(2017),isanonlineactivityinwhichusersvoluntarilytakepartinthecollectionofdatabyundertakingtasksproposedbythecrowdsourcerandreceivesomekindofcompensation,mostlymonetary.TheseplatformsareconsideredbyMajimaetal.(2017)quiteusefulforbehavioralresearchbecausetheyoffertheopportunityofcollectinghigheramountsofdatawithahigherdiversityofparticipantsandafastertheoryand/orexperimentcycleatarelativelylowcost. Severalstudiesinrecentyearshaveexploredthedifferencesbetweenthestandardcollectionapproachandcrowdsourcingdatacollecting,concentratingmostlyonAmazonMTurkasthemainoption.Mostofthesestudiesconcludethatthepositiveeffectindatacollectionissosignificant,thatitisadvisabletousecrowdsourcingforresearchstudies;althoughmoreresearchisneededinordertofullyunderstandthefunctioningofcrowdsourcingineachofthedifferentresearchthemes,andalso,inordertobeabletocontrolvariableslike:age,gender,naivety,personalitytraits,amongothers(PaolacciandChandler,2014;ChoiandLee,2016;Majimaetal.,2017;Peeretal.,2017;Probstetal.,2017;Stewartetal.,2017;Uhlmannetal.,2019). EventhoughMTurkisconsideredasoneofthemostpopularcrowdsourcingplatformsforresearch(Litmanetal.,2017),someflawshavealsobeenfound.Goodmanetal.(2013)foundthatMTurkusersshowlowerratesofself-esteemandlowercognitivecapacities.Theyseemtobelessextravertedandemotionallylessstable,andtheyleantowardhighermaterialismandvaluemoneymorethantime. Regardingspecificvariablessuchasattention,reliability,naivety,demographics,ordishonestbehaviorandcheating,differentstudiescompareMTurkwithothercrowdsourcingplatformslikeProlific(ProA)orCrowdFlower(CF)andfoundthatthesealternativeplatformsofferviablepossibilities.Oneimportantvariableisdemographics.Litmanetal.(2017)foundthatProAparticipantsresidemainlyinEuropeandAsia,MTurkparticipantsaremostlyfromtheUS,andparticipantsrecruitedthroughCFaremoreethnicallydiverse.Therefore,theyadviseresearcherstoconsiderthedemographicvariableswhenchoosingwhichplatformtheywillusesinceitwillhaveanimportanteffectonthepopulationtheyreach. Peeretal.(2017)considerlackofnaivetytobeanimportantproblemwithMTurkparticipantsandfindthatProAandCFofferthepossibilityofrecruitingparticipantswhopresenthigherlevelsofnaivety.TheseauthorsalsofindthatparticipantsrecruitedthroughProAshowhigherlevelsofinternalreliabilitythanCFparticipantsbecauseofthelatter’shigherfailureratesinattentiontasks.ParticipantsthroughProAshowonlyslightlylowerlevelsofattentionthanMTurk,whichdoesnotsignificantlyaffectthemeasurementsofreliability.Also,itisobservedthatProAparticipantsarelesspronetoengageindishonestbehaviororcheatingthanparticipantsfromMTurk.Ingeneral,ProAparticipantsshowbothalowdropoutandafastresponserate.Withagoodattentionlevel,thereliabilityrateishigh,andthereproducibilityisgood.Eventhoughthelevelsofdishonestyaremedium,theyarestilllowerthanthosefoundinMTurk.Withallthis,Peeretal.concludethatProAisthebestalternativetoMTurk.Accordingly,forthepresentwork,whenanalyzingthepsychometricpropertiesoftheG-20withparticipantsrecruitedthoughacrowdsourcingplatform,wehavechosenProAfordatacollection. OuraimistoanalyzethepsychometricpropertiesoftheGratitudeQuestionnaire–20Items(G20)withparticipantsrecruitedthoughProA.SinceRobertEmmonsandMichaelMcCulloughpublishedtheirmonographicwork(EmmonsandMcCullough,2004),ThePsychologyofGratitude(2004)anexpandingareahasemergedthathasmadeevidenttheimportanceofstudyingthisconstructevident.Variousmeasuringinstrumentshavebeencreatedandvalidatedondifferentsamples.ThemostwidespreadofallistheGratitudeQuestionnaire—SixItemsForm(GQ-6;McCulloughetal.,2002).TheGQ-6isasixitemself-reportscalethatfocusesontheemotionalcomponentofthegratitude(Hudeceketal.,2020)andassessesindividualdifferencesinthetendencytoexperiencegratitudeindailylife.TheGQ-6hasalreadybeenvalidatedinseveralotherlanguagesincludingHungarian(Tamásetal.,2014),Dutch(Jans-Bekenetal.,2015),Chinese(Chenetal.,2008),Portuguese(Gouveiaetal.,2019),Spanish(Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2013),andGerman(Hudeceketal.,2020). Anotherwell-knowninstrumentistheGratitudeResentmentandAppreciationTest(GRAT)(Watkinsetal.,2003),a16-itemmeasureofdispositionalgratitude.Inrecentyears,morecomprehensiveinstrumentsongratitudehavebeencreated;i.e.,theMulti-ComponentGratitudeMeasure(MCGM)(Morganetal.,2017)whichalsoassessesattitudinalandbehavioralaspects,andtheGratitudeQuestionnaire–20item(G20,Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014)whichisbasedonaconceptualandcomprehensivedelimitationoftheconceptofgratitude,beingthelatterquestionnairetheobjectofanalysisinthepresentstudy. TheconstructionoftheG20followstheproposeddefinition:“gratitudecouldbeunderstoodasadispositiontorecognize,value,andrespondtothepositiveaspectsofpersonalexistence,experiencedasgiftsreceived”(Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014,p.279).Thisinstrumenthasseveralbenefits:theinclusionofvarioustypesofgratitudedependingontheagentthatarousesit,theaffectivevalenceoftheobjectforwhichgratitudeiselicited,andtheinclusionofvariousmanifestations(cognitive,emotional,andactiontendencies). Asstatedabove,awiderdefinitionofgratitudebasedonthepsychologicalprocessesthatleadtogratitude,wastakenintoaccountwhendevelopingtheG20.Thisdefinitionincludes(1)therecognitionofgifts,(2)theattributiontoanagent,(3)thevaluationoftheobjectofgratitude,and(4)themanifestationofgratitude.Inthisregard,EmmonsandMcNamara(2006)emphasizedtheimportanceofstudyingtheprocessleadingtogratitudeandsupportedtheproposalthatthefour-stepgratitudeprocesswashandledbylimbic-frontalinteractions(DamasioandAnderson,2005).Fromthisneurologicalpointofview,itwasproposedthatfortherecipientofabenefit,thefour-stepprocesswouldimply(1)recognizingthatagifthasbeenreceived,(2)calculatingbenefits/costsassociatedwiththegift,(3)experiencinganemotionthatbeginsinappreciationandemergesintogratitude,(4)withmemoryofthebenefitandbenefactoraswellastheemotionofgratitudeinitiatingandsustainingamotivationalstatetoreciprocatethebenefitreceived(EmmonsandMcNamara,2006,p22.).Thus,neurologicaldatasupportsthatdirectandindirectreciprocityofgratitudefavorhumancooperationbyfacilitatingthereturnofagifttoabenefactor(EmmonsandMcNamara,2006). Inrelationtotheagentstowardwhomgratitudeisexperienced,theG20includesinitsInterpersonalGratitude(IG)scaleexpressionsofgratitudetowardotherpeoplewithdifferentdegreesofclosenessintherelationship(forexample,familymembersandpeoplewhobarelyknoweachother),whichprovidesameasureofgratitudefocusedonothers.TranscendentalGratitudeismeasuredinreferencetothegratitudeexperiencedtowardtranscendentalforces(theexistentialreferentofeachperson,suchasGod,luck,destiny,life,etc.).ThistypeofGratitudedoesnotmakeexplicitreferencetoanyreligionbutencompassesalltranscendentexperiencesfromthemostconcreteandformalizedtothemostsubjective. Theaffectivevalencethattheobjectofgratitudearousesisformulatedbyconsideringboththegratitudeelicitedthroughpleasantexperiences,aswellasthegratitudeelicitedbasedonthevalueapersonassignstoexperiencesthatgeneratesuffering.Theseemotionalaspectsaremeasuredthroughvariousscales,RecognitionofGifts(RG)forpositiveaffectivevalenceandGratitudeinthefaceofSuffering(GS)fornegativevalence. BehavioralmanifestationsofgratitudeareexpresslyevaluatedthroughtheExpressionofGratitudescale(EG).Othercognitive,emotional,andbehavioralmanifestationsareexploredthroughoutalltheG20scales. Thus,theG20isthefocusofourinterestduetothesolidconceptualfoundationonwhichitisbased,aswellasitsexcellentpsychometricproperties.Thisquestionnaire,whichwasconstructedfortheSpanishpopulation(Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014),hasbeenadaptedfortheArgentinepopulation(Klosetal.,2020)andtranslatedintoPortuguesewithaBraziliansample(Ribeiro-Viana,2016). OurpurposeistoanalyzethepsychometricpropertiesoftheG20questionnaireinEnglishandassessthesuitabilityofitsusebyusersofcrowdsourcingplatforms. MaterialsandMethods Threehundredandsix(306)participantswererecruitedfromtheprolificplatformProA,withtheconditionthattheentiresampleberesidentsoftheUnitedStates,whosemainlanguageisEnglish.Fourparticipantswereexcludedbecausetheydidnotmeetthiscriteria,leavingasampleof302participantsofwhich153(51%)werewomenand149(49%)weremen. Across-sectionaldesignwasusedinwhichagesrangingfrom19to82years(M=45.07,ST=15.94)wererepresented.Theparticipantsbygenerationalbreakdownwere:22%between18and29yearsold,17%between30and39yearsold,15%between40and49yearsold,21%between50and59yearsoldand25%were60+yearsandolder.Regardingethnicity:8%wereAsian;15%Black;5%wereofmixedrace,3%other,and69%white.Table1showssociodemographicdatasuchas:employmentstatus,educationallevel,andmaritalstatus. TABLE1 Table1.Sociodemographiccharacteristics. Tocontrolthevariablesoffrequencyofuseandexperiencewithcrowdsourcingplatforms,oneitemwaschosen,(Q1)Frequencyofuseofcrowdsourcingplatforms—Howmanyhoursdoyoudedicatetocrowdsourcingplatforms?(e.g.,Prolific,MTurk,CrowdFlower)Indicatetheapproximatenumberofhoursperweek.Participants’responsestothisquestionrangedbetween0.5and60hperweek(M=8.55,SD=9.29).Followingtheseresults,thegroupwasdividedintotwocategories,(a)lowcrowdsourcing,thoseparticipantswhousetheseplatforms5orlesshoursaweek(N=175),and(b)highcrowdsourcing,thosewhousetheplatformsmorethan5haweek(N=127). Instruments FortheadaptationoftheG20(Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014),aback-translationprocedurewasperformedasrecommendedbytheInternationalTestCommission(ITC)andthepreviousliterature(Muñizetal.,2013).AlloriginalitemswereinitiallytranslatedfromSpanishtoEnglishbyanativeEnglishspeakerwithafluentcommandofSpanish,andthentranslatedbackintoSpanishbyanotherbilingualprofessional.Theresultwasdiscussedamongagroupoffourprofessionalswithcross-culturalexperience:twoAmericans,anIrishpsychologyprofessorandoneoftheauthors,aSpanishpsychologistwithahighdegreeofinternationalexperience.Forthefewitemsthatwereidentifiedaspotentiallymistranslatedorunclear,analternativetranslationwasmadetopreservethemeaningoftheitem.Participantshavetoratetwentyitems(e.g.,“IfeelgratefulwhensomeoneIhardlyknowhelpsmeand/oriskindtome”)onaseven-pointLikertscale(1=stronglydisagreeto7=stronglyagree).ThefinalversionoftheinstrumentappearsinSupplementaryAppendixA. TheG20scalehas4factors:(1)InterpersonalGratitude(IG)—gratitudethatisexperiencedtowardotherpeoplewhenreceivingagiforanactofkindness.Itreferstobenefactorswithdifferenttypesofrelationshipstothebeneficiaryandfocusesontheevaluative,emotionalandbehavioralelementsofgratitude;(2)GratitudeinthefaceofSuffering(GS)—thisfactorreferstotheintegrationofsufferingintheconceptofgratitude.Itassessestheabilitytounderstandsituationsofsufferingasbeneficialandtofeelgratitudedespiteit.Likewise,itassessesifthepersonisabletomoveforwarddespitedifficultiesandtousegratitudeasaresourceforresiliency.Itincludesthecognitive-evaluativeandemotionalelementsofgratitude;(3)RecognitionofGifts(RG)—awarenessofthepositiveaspectsofexistencewhileconsideringthemasgiftsandimplicitlyattributingthesegiftstoatranspersonalagent(e.g.,destiny,luck,nature,ordivineprovidence).Itincludestheprocessthatleadstotherecognitionofassetsandtheirappraisement,aswellasthesocialcomparisonthatgivesrisetotheawarenessofthepositiveaspectsinone’slife;(4)ExpressionofGratitude(EG):theexperienceandexpressionofgratitudetowardtranspersonalforces.Formsofexpressioncanbeverbalexpression,rituals,andanattitudetowardlifeoftryingtobehappy. TheG20obtainedgoodreliabilityindicesinitsconstructionwithaSpanishsample.Cronbach’salphaforeachsubscalewasoptimal(GIα=0.84,GSα=0.78,RDα=0.75,EGα=0.75). Tomeasuretheconvergentvalidity,GratitudeQuestionnaire—SixItemsForm(GQ-6;McCulloughetal.,2002)wasused.Thisquestionnairefocusesontheemotionalcomponentofthegratitude(Hudeceketal.,2020)basedonanunderstandingoftheconceptofgratitudeas“ageneralizedtendencytorecognizeandrespondwithgratefulemotiontotherolesofotherpeople’sbenevolenceinthepositiveexperiencesandoutcomesthatoneobtains”(McCulloughetal.,2002,p.112).Item6wasremovedfortheoreticalandempiricalreasons(seemoreinChenetal.,2008;Bernabe-Valero,2012;Hudeceketal.,2020).ThefinalGQ-5internalconsistencywasα=0.89.Responsesrangefrom1to7onaseven-pointLikertscale(1=stronglydisagreeand7=stronglyagree).Possiblescoresrangedfrom5to35,withhigherscoresindicatingahigherlevelofgratitude. StatisticalAnalysis TheanalysesweredevelopedthroughtheSPSS22andAmos18.0module.CronbachAlphawasemployedtotesttheinternalconsistencyandaconfirmatoryfactoranalysis(CFA)wascarriedoutaccompaniedbythegoodnessoffitindices.Norotationofthedatawasemployed.Confirmationoftheadequacyofthemodelhasbeenusedwithintheabsolutefitindices;thechi-squarestatisticX2,anditsratioamongdegreesoffreedomwherevaluesunder2arerecommendable.Intermsofincrementalfitindices,thecomparativefitindex(CFI)wasselected.Thisfollowsarangeofvaluesbetween0and1andthereferencevalueis0.90.Withinparsimonyadjustmentindices,theerroroftherootmeansquareapproximation(RMSEA)oftheRMSRsimilarly,thesmalleritsvalue,thebetterthefit,thereferencevaluebeing0.05.Finally,ananalysisofinvariancewascarriedout. Results TheinternalconsistencyofthescalesobtainedusingCronbach’salpha,followingthecriteriaofGeorgeandMallery(2003),wasexcellentforGS(α=0.92),goodforIG(α=0.88)andRG(α=0.87),andacceptableforEG(α=0.79). Table2depictstheMean,StandardDeviation,Skewness,andKurtosisforeachsubfactorregardingthewholedataset,andeachgroupunderstudy. TABLE2 Table2.Means,standarddeviation(SD),skewness,andkurtosis. Afterastudenttestforindependentsamples,statisticalsignificantdifferenceswerefoundfortwosubscalesofGratitudeacrossgroups:IG[t(300)=2.27;p<0.01;d’=0.26]EG[t(300)=2.14;p<0.01;d’=0.25]. Table3showsthedescriptivestatisticsoftheG-20scale.WomenachievedahighermeanscoreonthetotalG-20scaleandonthesubscalesIG,RG,andEG,andmenscoredhigheronGS.ThedifferencesweresignificantinIG,t(300)=−3.309,p<0.01. TABLE3 Table3.Mean,standarddeviation(SD)ofGratitudebygender. Totestthecriterionvalidity,theG-20wascorrelatedwithGQ-5.Thiswasdonethroughazero-ordercorrelation(seeTable4)andapartialcorrelationbetweenthegroups,ascanbeseeninTable5.G-20subfactorsdepicteddivergentvaluesforGQ-5.Thecomparisonbetweenzeroandpartialcorrelationsseemstosupportsimilarresultswithoutorcontrollingthedifferentgroups.Ofnote,alackofcorrelationwasfoundbetweenGQ-5andtheothersubscalesofG-20. TABLE4 Table4.ZeroorderPearsoncorrelationforthewholedataset. TABLE5 Table5.PartialPearsoncorrelationinthevariablegroups. Finally,amultigroupanalysiswascarriedoutbetweengroupsreachingafullmetricandscalarinvariance.Figure1showsthefinalfactorstructure,intermsoffactorloadingforthewholedataset.Thegoodnessoffit,ascanbeseeninTable6,isdepictedbyoptimalvalues:χ2=546.260;p<0.001;χ2/df=3.35;IFI=0.87;CFI=0.90;RMSEA=0.08. FIGURE1 Figure1.Factorloadingina4-factorsolution. TABLE6 Table6.Goodness-of-fitontheanalysisofinvariance. DiscussionandConclusion TheaimofthisstudywastoanalyzethepsychometricpropertiesoftheGratitudeQuestionnaire–20item(G20)withaProlific(ProA)userandEnglish-speakingsamplepool.TheresultsindicatethatthestructureofthescalebehavesinasimilarwaytothatobtainedinitsconstructioninSpanish(Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014).Thefourcomponents(IG,GS,RG,andEG)correlatesignificantlywitheachotherandwiththetotalscale,obtainingreliabilityindicesevenhigherthanthoseobtainedwiththeSpanishsample. Theseresultsarecorroborated,afterthemultilevelCFA,groupingtheparticipantsinlowcrowdsourcinguseandhighcrowdsourcinguse,showinganoptimaladjustmentofthescale(fullmetricscalar)forthetwogroups.AlthoughsmalldifferenceshavebeenfoundinthescoresbetweenthetwogroupsinthesubscalesIGandEG,thesedifferencesshowaveryloweffectsize.Thus,wedidexpectgroupsdidnotaffectthelevelofinvariance. ThevalueofthePearsoncoefficientobtainedbycorrelatingtheG20subscaleswiththeGQ-5scalesuggestscross-culturaleffectsofgratitude,sincenosignificantcorrelationshavebeenobtainedbetweenbothconstructs.Ourfindingsarecongruentwithrecentstudiesaboutthecross-culturaldifferencesinthepersonalunderstandingandexpressionofgratitude(Morganetal.,2014;Mendonçaetal.,2018;Mercon-Vargasetal.,2018). Mendonçaetal.(2018)studiedthedifferencesintheexpressionofgratitudeinchildrenandadolescentsacrosssevensocieties(Brazil,China,Guatemala,Russia,SouthKorea,Turkeyasrepresentativeofautonomous-relatedcultures,andtheUnitedStatesasrepresentativeofanautonomous-separateculture)consideringdifferenttypesofgratitude;verbal,concrete,andconnectivegratitude.TheyfoundthatchildrenintheUSexpresshigherlevelsofconcretegratitude,whileinAsiancultures,aswellasintheEasternEuropeancountries,childrenaremorepronetoexpressconnectivegratitude.TheauthorsalsofoundthatverbalgratitudeisthepredominantwayinwhichGuatemalanchildrenexpressgratitude.Mendonçaetal.concludethataculturalframeworkisnecessarytoavoidover-generalizationwhenstudyingthedevelopmentofgratitudeasavirtue. Anotherreasonforthedivergencefoundbetweenthescalescouldbeduetothefactthatone-dimensionalscalessuchastheGQ-5sometimesdonotworkincross-culturalstudiessincetherearedivergentculturalfactorsthatcannotbeconsideredinshortscales.Morganetal.(2014)studythedifferencesbetweentheUnitedStatesandtheUnitedKingdomandconsiderthatgratitudemaycontainacommoncorewithculturallyubiquitousfeatures,inadditiontosociallyconstructedelementsthatchangedependingontheculturebeingstudied(Morganetal.,2014,p25).Theyfindthatthethreemostusedscalesforassessinggratitude,theGQ-6(McCulloughetal.,2002),theGRAT(Watkinsetal.,2003),andtheAppreciationScale(AdlerandFagley,2005),focusmainlyontheemotionalcomponentofgratitudeandconsiderthatthisisnotenoughtobeabletomeasuregratitudeacrosscultures. Followingthesefindings,andinrelationtotheunderstandingofgratitudeineachculture,wehypostatizethatinourstudywhenSpanishandAmericanparticipantsratethedegreetowhichtheyfeelgrateful(bothintheGQ-5andG20items),itispossiblethattheyunderstandcertainelementsdifferently.ThiscircumstancewouldexplainwhytherewasasignificantcorrelationbetweentheG20scaleandtheGQ-5withaSpanishsample(Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014)butasignificantcorrelationdidnotexistbetweentheG20subscalesandtheGQ-5withanAmericansample. Infact,althoughtheGQ-5iswidelyvalidated,theproposalmadebyWoodetal.(2008),inwhichtheconceptisbroadenedbyconsideringitahigherorderfactor,suggeststhatgratitudecouldincludemoreaspectsthanthosemeasuredbytheGQ-5.Thatiswhytheneedforamorecomprehensiveinstrumentwasraised(Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014),onethatwouldincludethedifferentbasicandspecificprocessesthatleadtogratitude(e.g.,theappreciationofgifts,theresignificationofsuffering,etc.)oritsbehavioralmanifestation(e.g.,theexpressionofgratitude,ritualsofthanks-giving,etc.).Subsequently,theconstructionoftheG20contemplatedthemostrelevantandcurrenttheoreticalcontributionsontheconstructofgratitude,tryingtointegratevariousproposals.Thescaleexpandsandincludestheconstruct’scognitive,evaluative,emotional,andbehavioralprocesses. Withafactorfortranspersonalgratitudeandtwoitems(5and6)forinterpersonalgratitude,theG20reflectsSeligman’sconclusionthatexpressinggratitudeisnecessaryfortheprocessofgratitudetobeeffectivelyconcluded(Seligman,2003).Thus,asSeligmanproposes,theG-20includeselementsrelatedto(1)becomingawareofgratifyingexperiencesandnevertakingthemforgranted,and(2)takingthetimetoexpressgratitude. IntheG20,gratitudeisalsoassessedinsituationsinwhichtheexperiencesarenotpleasant,butgeneratesuffering,thusexpandingtheaffectivevalenceoftheobjectofgratitude.Thislastcontributioniscrucial,sincesufferingisarealityinthelivesofmanypeople,butitdoesnotnecessarilydiminishtheabilitytoappreciateandbegratefulforthepositiveaspectsthat,despiteit,lifecontinuestoofferandthatcanbeexperiencedasgifts. Finally,intheG20thedifferentagentstowardgratitudearemadeexplicit.McCulloughetal.(2002)includeintheirdefinitionofgratitudethatitisaresponsetothecontributionbyotherstothewell-beingofthereceiver,buttheGQ-5hasbeencriticizedfornotimposingrestrictionsonitsconstruction,sincenoneofitsitemsmakeexplicitthecontributionofanagent(Anderson,2005).Bycontrast,theG20makesexplicitthedifferentagentstowardgratitude.IntheG20,personalagentsarespecifiedintheIGsubscale(e.g.“someoneIhardlyknowhelpsme,”“someonedoesmeanimportantfavor,”“Igetfrompeopleclosetome”)andtranspersonalagentsintheRGsubscale(e.g.,“IthankedGodorgoodfortuneforit”). TheG20withfourfactorshasbeenabletobereplicatedusinganAmericansamplewithexcellentpsychometricproperties,thankstoitstheoreticalconstructionthatallowsittoexpandthemeasurementbyincludingelementsnotcontemplatedinotherquestionnaires.Futurecross-culturalinvestigationsmayhelptodrawamoreconcisemapofwhichelementsdiffer,andwhicharecommonamongdifferentcultures. Regardinggender,significantdifferencesingratitudehavebeenfoundbetweenmenandwomen,whichisconsistentwithpreviousstudies(Baumgarten-Tramer,1938;LevantandKopecky,1994;Krause,2006;Kashdanetal.,2009;Bernabé-Valeroetal.,2014;Roa-Meggo,2017).Specifically,inthepresentstudy,womenhaveobtainedasignificantlyhigheraverageininterpersonalaspectsbutnotintherestoftheG20componentsorinthetotalscoreofthescale.Thereasonmaybethatsomemenmayunderstandtheexpressionofgratitudeininterpersonalrelationshipsasevidenceofvulnerabilityandweaknessthatcanjeopardizetheirmasculinityandsocialposition.Consequently,theymayadoptanavoidantattitudetowardgratitude,inhibitingitsexpression(Kashdanetal.,2009).Incontrast,women,whoonaveragearemoresensitivetointerpersonalrelationships,emotions,andbehaviorswhosegoalistocreateandmaintainmeaningfulsocialrelationships(Zacarésetal.,2009),perceivegratitudeasmorefunctionalandasanadvantageintheirlives(Timmersetal.,1998;SchwartzandRubel,2005).Inaddition,womenaremorelikelytoacknowledgethegoodwillofothers,expressappreciation,andreinforcethelikelihoodoftheseactsbeingrepeatedcreatingalastingsocialresource(Kashdanetal.,2009). Thepresentworkisbasedonarepresentativesampleintermsofdemographicvariables(age,gender,educationallevel,employment,andmaritalstatus),overcomingthelimitationsofthestandardstudentsamples.ThepsychometricpropertiesoftheG20withEnglishspeakingcrowdsourcingusersweresimilartothepropertiesobtainedintheoriginalSpanishform,withnospecificbiasesbeingfoundinthistypeofsample. Inshort,theresultsofthisstudyallowustoconcludethattheGratitudeQuestionnaire–20Items(G20)adaptedtoEnglishwithanAmericansample,isapsychometricallystronginstrumenttomeasuregratitudeusingcrowdsourcingplatformsfordatacollectionand,therefore,areferenceandusefultoolinfutureresearch. Digitizationhasusheredinanewerabymultiplyingthepossibilitiesformuchmoreefficientresearch.TheEnglishadaptationoftheG20opensapathwaytoextendinternationallyitsuseforthemeasurementofgratitudeandfurthermore,fortheadvancementofcross-culturalstudies. DataAvailabilityStatement Therawdatasupportingtheconclusionsofthisarticlewillbemadeavailablebytheauthors,withoutunduereservation. EthicsStatement ThestudiesinvolvinghumanparticipantswerereviewedandapprovedbytheUniversidadCatólicadeValenciaSanVicenteMártircommittee(numberUCV2017-2018-28).Thepatients/participantsprovidedtheirwritteninformedconsenttoparticipateinthisstudy. AuthorContributions GB-Vconceivedofthepresentedidea.GB-V,JB-M,andMG-Mdevelopedthetheoryandperformedthecomputations.Allauthorsdiscussedtheresultsandcontributedtothefinalmanuscript. Funding ThisresearchhasbeenpossiblethankstotheInternalAidProgramsforEmergingGroups(number:2020-198-001)oftheUniversidadCatólicadeValencia,SanVicenteMártir. ConflictofInterest Theauthorsdeclarethattheresearchwasconductedintheabsenceofanycommercialorfinancialrelationshipsthatcouldbeconstruedasapotentialconflictofinterest. Acknowledgments WethanktheUniversidadCatólicadeValenciaSanVicenteMártirfortheirfinancialsupportandFrontiersinPsychology.Also,wethankProf.Murphy,Mrs.KatherineMatles,andMr.ErinCavesfortheirlinguisticandculturalinput.Andfinally,wethankthereviewersfortheirindicationsthathaveenabledustoperformmoreanalysesthataddrigortothescalethatwehaveadapted. SupplementaryMaterial TheSupplementaryMaterialforthisarticlecanbefoundonlineat:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.626330/full#supplementary-material References Adler,M.G.,andFagley,N.S.(2005).Appreciation:individualdifferencesinfindingvalueandmeaningasauniquepredictorofsubjectivewell-being.J.Person.73,79–114.doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00305.x PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Anderson,N.H.(2005).Howsharperthanaserpent’stooth.J.Soc.Clin.Psychol.24,1077–1080. GoogleScholar Bakici,T.(2020).Comparisonofcrowdsourcingplatformsfromsocial-psychologicalandmotivationalperspectives.Int.J.Inform.Manag.54,102121.doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102121 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Baumgarten-Tramer,F.(1938).“Gratefulness”inchildrenandyoungpeople.J.Genet.Psychol.53,53–66.doi:10.1080/08856559.1938.10533797 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bernabe-Valero,G.(2012).LaGratitudComoActitudExistencial:PapelPredictivodelaReligiosidad,laEspiritualidadyelSentidodelaVida.Doctoraldissertation.Valencia:UniversidadCatólicadeValenciaSanVicenteMártir. GoogleScholar Bernabé-Valero,G.,García-Alandete,J.,andGallego-Pérez,J.F.(2013).Análisiscomparativodedosmodelosdelgratitudequestionnaire-sixitemsform[Comparativeanalysisoftwomodelsofthegratitudequestionnaire-sixitemsform].Rev.Latinoam.Psicol.45,279–288.doi:10.14349/rlp.v45i2.811 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bernabé-Valero,G.,García-Alandete,J.,andGallego-Pérez,J.F.(2014).Construccióndeuncuestionarioparalaevaluacióndelagratitud:elCuestionariodeGratitud–20ítems(G-20).Anal.Psicol.30,278–286.doi:10.6018/analesps.30.1.135511 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Chen,L.H.,Chen,M.-Y.,Kee,Y.H.,andTsai,Y.-M.(2008).Validationofthegratitudequestionnaire(GQ)intaiwaneseundergraduatestudents.J.HappinessStud.10:655.doi:10.1007/s10902-008-9112-7 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Choi,J.H.,andLee,J.S.(2016).Onlinesocialnetworksforcrowdsourcedmultimedia-involvedbehavioraltesting:anempiricalstudy.Front.Psychol.6:1991.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01991 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Cuccolo,K.,Irgens,M.S.,Zlokovich,M.S.,Grahe,J.,andEdlund,J.E.(2020).Whatcrowdsourcingcanoffertocross-culturalpsychologicalscience.CrossCult.Res.1.1069397120950628. GoogleScholar Damasio,A.,andAnderson,S.W.(2005).““Thefrontallobes,”,”inClinicalNeuropsychology,4thEdn,edsK.HeilmanandE.Valenstein(NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress),404–446. GoogleScholar Emmons,R.A.,andMcCullough,M.E.(eds)(2004).ThePsychologyofGratitude.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. GoogleScholar Emmons,R.A.,andMcNamara,P.(2006).Sacredemotionsandaffectiveneuroscience:gratitude,costlysignaling,andthebrain.WhereGodSci.meet1,11–31. GoogleScholar George,D.,andMallery,M.(2003).UsingSPSSforWindowsStepbyStep:ASimpleGuideandReference.Boston,MA:AllynandBacon. GoogleScholar Goodman,J.K.,Cryder,C.E.,andCheema,A.(2013).Datacollectioninaflatworld:thestrengthsandweaknessesofmechanicalturksamples.J.Behav.Decis.Mak.26,213–224.doi:10.1002/bdm.1753 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Gouveia,V.V.,Ribeiro,M.G.C.,deAquino,T.A.A.,Loureto,G.D.L.,Nascimento,B.S.,andRezende,A.T.(2019).Gratitudequestionnarie(GQ-6):evidenceofconstructvalidityinBrazil.Curr.Psychol.46,12221–12229.doi:10.1007/s12144-019-00197-x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Harteis,C.,Goller,M.,andCaruso,C.(2020).Conceptualchangeinthefaceofdigitalization:challengesforworkplacesandworkplacelearning.Front.Educ.5:1.doi:10.3389/feduc.2020.00001 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hauser,D.J.,andSchwarz,N.(2016).Attentiveturkers:MTurkparticipantsperformbetterononlineattentionchecksthandosubjectpoolparticipants.Behav.Res.Methods48,400–407.doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0578-z PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hudecek,M.,Blabst,N.,Morgan,B.,andLermer,E.(2020).MeasuringgratitudeinGermany:validationstudyoftheGermanversionsofthegratitudequestionnaire-sixitemform(GQ-6-G)andthemulti-componentgratitudemeasure(MCGM-G).Front.Psychol.11:590108.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590108 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Jans-Beken,L.,Lataster,J.,Leontjevas,R.,andJacobs,N.(2015).Measuringgratitude:acomparativevalidationofthedutchgratitudequestionnaire(gq6)andshortgratitude,resentment,andappreciationtest(SGRAT).Psychol.Belgica55,19–31.doi:10.5334/pb.bd PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kashdan,T.B.,Mishra,A.,Breen,W.E.,andFroh,J.J.(2009).Genderdifferencesingratitude:examiningappraisals,narratives,thewillingnesstoexpressemotions,andchangesinpsychologicalneeds.J.Pers.77,691–730.doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00562.x PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Klos,M.C.,Balabanian,C.,Lemos,V.,Valero,G.B.,andAlandete,J.G.(2020).PropiedadespsicométricasdelCuestionariodeGratitud(G-20)enunamuestradeadolescentesargentinos.Rev.Argent.CienciasComport.12,50–59. GoogleScholar Krause,N.(2006).Gratitudetowardgod,stress,andhealthinlatelife.Res.Aging28,163–183.doi:10.1177/0164027505284048 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Levant,R.F.Y.,andKopecky,G.(1994).MasculinityReconstructed:ChangingtheRulesofManhood-atWork,inRelationshipsandinFamilyLife.NewYork,NY. GoogleScholar Litman,L.,Robinson,J.,andAbberbock,T.(2017).TurkPrime.com:aversatilecrowdsourcingdataacquisitionplatformforthebehavioralsciences.Behav.Res.Methods49,433–442.doi:10.3758/s13428-016-0727-z PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Majima,Y.,Nishiyama,K.,Nishihara,A.,andHata,R.(2017).ConductingonlinebehavioralresearchusingcrowdsourcingservicesinJapan.Front.Psychol.8:378.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00378 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar McCullough,M.E.,Emmons,R.A.Y.,andTsang,J.A.(2002).Thegratefuldisposition:aconceptualandempiricaltopography.J.Pers.Soc.Psychol.82,112–127.doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.1.112 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Mendonça,S.E.,Merçon-Vargas,E.A.,Payir,A.,andTudge,J.R.(2018).Thedevelopmentofgratitudeinsevensocieties:cross-culturalhighlights.CrossCult.Res.52,135–150.doi:10.1177/1069397117737245 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Mercon-Vargas,E.A.,Poelker,K.E.,andTudge,J.R.(2018).Thedevelopmentofthevirtueofgratitude:theoreticalfoundationsandcross-culturalissues.CrossCult.Res.52,3–18.doi:10.1177/1069397117736517 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Moret-Tatay,C.,Beneyto-Arrojo,M.J.,Gutierrez,E.,Boot,W.R.,andCharness,N.(2019).Aspanishadaptationofthecomputerandmobiledeviceproficiencyquestionnaires(CPQandMDPQ)forolderadults.Front.Psychol.10:1165.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01165 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Morgan,B.,Gulliford,L.,andKristjánsson,K.(2014).GratitudeintheUK:anewprototypeanalysisandacross-culturalcomparison.J.Posit.Psychol.9,281–294.doi:10.1080/17439760.2014.898321 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Morgan,B.,Gulliford,L.,andKristjánsson,K.(2017).Anewapproachtomeasuringmoralvirtues:themulti-componentgratitudemeasure.Pers.Indiv.Differ.107,179–189.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.11.044 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Muñiz,J.,Elosua,P.,andHambleton,R.K.(2013).Directricesparalatraducciónyadaptacióndelostests:segundaedición.Psicothema25,151–157. GoogleScholar Paolacci,G.,andChandler,J.(2014).InsidetheTurk:understandingmechanicalturkasaparticipantpool.Curr.Direct.Psychol.Sci.23,184–188.doi:10.1177/0963721414531598 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Peer,E.,Brandimarte,L.,Samat,S.,andAcquisti,A.(2017).BeyondtheTurk:alternativeplatformsforcrowdsourcingbehavioralresearch.J.Exp.Soc.Psychol.70,153–163.doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Probst,T.,Pryss,R.C.,Langguth,B.,Spiliopoulou,M.,Landgrebe,M.,Vesala,M.,etal.(2017).Outpatienttinnitusclinic,self-helpwebplatform,ormobileapplicationtorecruittinnitusstudysamples?Front.AgingNeurosci.9:113.doi:10.3389/fnagi.2017.00113 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ribeiro-Viana,S.(2016).CuestionáriodeGratitudde20Ítems(G-20):TraduçãoeAdaptaçãoTransculturalParaIdososdoBrasil.Master’sthesis.Brazil:PontifíciaUniversidadeCatólicadoRioGrandedoSul. GoogleScholar Roa-Meggo,Y.(2017).GenderrelationsanddifferencesbetweengratitudeandpersonalityinuniversitystudentsofLima-Perú.Psychol.Avan.Discipl.11,49–56. GoogleScholar Schwartz,S.H.Y.,andRubel,T.(2005).Sexdifferencesinvaluepriorities:cross-culturalandmultimethodstudies.J.Pers.Soc.Psychol.89,1010–1028.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.1010 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Seligman,M.E.P.(2003).LaAuténticaFelicidad.Barcelona:EdicionesB. GoogleScholar Stewart,N.,Chandler,J.,andPaolacci,G.(2017).Crowdsourcingsamplesincognitivescience.TrendsCogn.Sci.21,736–748.doi:10.1016/j.tics.2017.06.007 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tamás,M.,Magdolna,G.,andJudit,D.(2014).HálaKérdõívmagyarváltozatának(GQ-6-H)bemutatásaéspszichometriaielemzés[IntroductionandpsychometricpropertiesoftheHungarianversionoftheGratitudeQuestionnaire(GQ-6-H)].MentálhigiénéPszichoszom.15,203–214.doi:10.1556/Mental.15.2014.3.3 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Timmers,M.,Fischer,A.H.Y.,andManstead,A.S.R.(1998).Genderdifferencesinmotivesforregulatingemotions.Pers.Soc.Psychol.Bull.24,974–985.doi:10.1177/0146167298249005 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Uhlmann,E.L.,Ebersole,C.R.,Chartier,C.R.,Errington,T.M.,Kidwell,M.C.,Lai,C.K.,etal.(2019).ScientificutopiaIII:crowdsourcingscience.Perspect.Psychol.Sci.14,711–733.doi:10.1177/1745691619850561 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Watkins,P.C.,Woodward,K.,Stone,T.Y.,andKolts,R.L.(2003).Gratitudeandhappiness:developmentofameasureofgratitude,andrelationshipswithsubjectivewell-being.Soc.Behav.Pers.31,431–451.doi:10.2224/sbp.2003.31.5.431 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Wood,A.M.,Maltby,J.,Stewart,N.,andJoseph,S.(2008).Conceptualizinggratitudeandappreciationasaunitarypersonalitytrait.Pers.Individ.Dif.44,621–632.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.028 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Zacarés,J.J.,Iborra,A.,Tomás,J.M.Y.,andSerra,E.(2009).Eldesarrollodelaidentidadenlaadolescenciayadultezemergente:unacomparacióndelaidentidadglobalfrentealaidentidadendominiosespecíficos.Anal.Psicol.25,316–329. GoogleScholar Keywords:crowdsourcingplatform,gratitudequestionnaire,psychometry,positivepsychology,reliability,validity,cross-cultural,Englishadaptation Citation:Bernabe-ValeroG,Blasco-MagranerJSandGarcía-MarchMR(2020)GratitudeQuestionnaire–20Items(G20):ACross-Cultural,PsychometricandCrowdsourcingAnalysis.Front.Psychol.11:626330.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.626330 Received:05November2020;Accepted:19November2020;Published:21December2020. Editedby: CamilaRosaDeOliveira,FaculdadeMeridional(IMED),Brazil Reviewedby: LuisHenriquePaloski,PontificalCatholicUniversityofRioGrandedoSul,Brazil SamuelToledano,UniversityofLaLaguna,Spain Copyright©2020Bernabe-Valero,Blasco-MagranerandGarcía-March.Thisisanopen-accessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense(CCBY).Theuse,distributionorreproductioninotherforumsispermitted,providedtheoriginalauthor(s)andthecopyrightowner(s)arecreditedandthattheoriginalpublicationinthisjournaliscited,inaccordancewithacceptedacademicpractice.Nouse,distributionorreproductionispermittedwhichdoesnotcomplywiththeseterms. *Correspondence:GloriaBernabe-Valero,[email protected];JoséS.Blasco-Magraner,[email protected];MarianelaR.García-March,[email protected] COMMENTARY ORIGINALARTICLE Peoplealsolookedat SuggestaResearchTopic>