Introduction and validation of the Short Antinatalism Scale (S-ANS)
Abstract
Antinatalism is the view that procreation is morally wrong. This paper introduces and validates the Short Antinatalism Scale (S-ANS) that allows researchers to measure antinatalist views. We conducted four preregistered studies with a total of 1,088 participants. First, we ran a study on Prolific (N = 296) and conducted an exploratory factor analysis of an initial scale including 22 items drawn from the philosophical literature on antinatalism. In Study 2, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis of a reduced 12-item scale, also on Prolific (N = 396). Based on a Mokken scale analysis, we further reduced the scale to a 5-item version which we tested in a second confirmatory factor analysis, Study 3, on Prolific (N = 297), where we also aimed to provide evidence of validity. The results indicated excellent model fit (RMSEA = 0.012) and evidence for validity (with life satisfaction, affective empathy, and conservatism correlating negatively with antinatalism). Lastly, we conducted Study 4 with a sample of self-identified antinatalists on Reddit (N = 99) to provide additional evidence of validity. We find that the instrument is measurement invariant between self-described antinatalists and the general population and that antinatalists score significantly higher on the scale (d = 2.80). This provides evidence in favor of reliability and validity with respect to the final 5-item Short Antinatalism Scale (S-ANS). We hope that the S-ANS, which is freely available to all researchers, advances rigorous research into antinatalism and its determinants across a variety of fields that relate to the value of life and procreation.
Citation
Schönegger , P , Maier , M & Bastos , R V S 2023 , ' Introduction and validation of the Short Antinatalism Scale (S-ANS) ' , Psychological Test Adaption and Development , vol. 4 , no. 1 , pp. 28-40 . https://doi.org/10.1027/2698-1866/a000036
Publication
Psychological Test Adaption and Development
Status
Peer reviewed
ISSN
2698-1866Type
Journal article
Description
Funding: This research was supported by a research grant from the Forethought Foundation and the Center for Effective Altruism.Collections
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.