Skip to Main Content

Social Psychology and Society
2025. Vol. 16, no. 3, 219–238
doi:10.17759/sps.2025160312
ISSN: 2221-1527 / 2311-7052 (online)

Ideal partner rating scale (IPRS): translation, adaptation and validation for Russian culture

 
Audio is AI-generated
120

, ,

PDF (RUS)
Online translation in english
GS
Information
in Google Scholar
Metrics

Abstract

Context and relevance. Current demographic changes and people’s growing awareness of the complexities of living together make choosing a partner a more conscious and demanding process. In the context of cultural differences and the need for cross-cultural comparisons, it is important to adapt instruments such as the IPRS to study preferences in romantic relationships in the Russian context.
Objective. The objective of this study is to adapt the Russian-language version of the Ideal Partner and Relationship Rating Scale (IPRS) developed by J. Fletcher and colleagues, with subsequent verification of its psychometric properties (reliability and validity) in the Russian cultural context.
Hypothesis. It is assumed that the Russian-language adaptation of the IPRS scale will demonstrate structural compliance with the original English-language version of the questionnaire.
Materials and methods. The study involved 709 people aged 16 to 63 years, mainly students and university graduates, 60% of whom were women. The analysis of the questionnaire structure was carried out through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The reliability of the questionnaire was tested using Cronbach’s and McDonald’s α indicators. Data processing and analysis were performed in the statistical environment RStudio (R v1.1.456) and JASP 0.19.3.
Results. The results of the study demonstrated that the Russian-language adaptation of the modified version of the ideal partner assessment scale corresponds to the empirical data of the Latvian and Colombian samples. However, despite the high psychometric indicators of the original model, adjustments were made: the scale "Good sense of humor" was excluded due to low factor loading and substantive error covariances between the items were taken into account.
Conclusions. The study showed that, although the basic parameters of the ideal partner demonstrate cross-cultural similarity, modification of the diagnostic tools is required taking into account cultural characteristics. In further studies, it is advisable to focus on a detailed analysis of the impact of socio-demographic variables on the formation of the ideal partner, as well as on the creation of methodological recommendations for the application of this approach in counseling work.

General Information

Keywords: partner choice, partner evaluation, marriage, cohabitation, family, ideal characteristics, youth, adaptation of methods

Journal rubric: Methodological Tools

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2025160312

Funding. The study was carried out within the framework of the HSE University Basic Research Program.

Acknowledgements. The authors express their gratitude to the experts who provided assistance at the stage of adaptation of the research instrument: Alexander Berezkin, Nina Semushina and Roman Sosnin, and also to Vladimir Pustovik for advisory assistance.

Supplemental data. Datasets available from https://ruspsydata.mgppu.ru/items/8ac1a991-07c4-4fa5-82c1-0857c12702f4.

Received 17.01.2025

Revised 21.05.2025

Accepted

Published

For citation: Provorova, A.A., Semenova, D.V., Manokin, M.A. (2025). Ideal partner rating scale (IPRS): translation, adaptation and validation for Russian culture. Social Psychology and Society, 16(3), 219–238. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2025160312

© Provorova A.A., Semenova D.V., Manokin M.A., 2025

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

References

  1. Агадуллина, Е.Р. (2018). Сексизм по отношению к женщинам: Адаптация шкалы амбивалентного сексизма (П. Глика и С. Фиск) на русский язык . Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики, 15(3), 447–463. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-3-447-463
    Agadullina, E.R. (2018). Sexism towards women: Adaptation of the ambivalent sexism indicator (P. Glick and S. Fisk) in Russian. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 15(3), 447–463. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-3-447-463
  2. Калугин, А.Ю., Щебетенко, С.А., Мишкевич, А.М., Сото, К.Дж., Джон, О.П. (2021). Психометрика русскоязычной версии Big Five Inventory–2. Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики, 18(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2021-1-7-33
    Kalugin, A.Yu., Shchebetenko, S.A., Mishkevich, A.M., Soto, K.J., John, O.P. (2021). Psychometrics of the Russian-language version of the Big Five Inventory–2. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 18(1), Article 1. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2021-1-7-33
  3. Плешакова, Е.В. (2021). Проблема особенности смыслового выбора супруга женщиной на этапе создания семьи. Инновационная наука: Психология, Педагогика, Дефектология, 4(5), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.23947/2658-7165-2021-4-5-79-86
    Pleshakova, E.V. (2021). The problem of the peculiarity of the semantic choice of a spouse by a woman at the stage of creating a family. Innovative science: Psychology, Pedagogy, Defectology, 4(5), Article 5. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.23947/2658-7165-2021-4-5-79-86
  4. Boxer, C.F., Noonan, M.C., Whelan, C.B. (2015). Measuring mate preferences: A replication and extension. Journal of Family Issues, 36(2), 163–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X13490404
  5. Brown, T.A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research, 2nd ed (сс. xvii, 462). The Guilford Press.
  6. Bruch, E.E., Newman, M.E.J. (2019). Structure of Online Dating Markets in U.S. Cities. Sociological science, 6, 219–234. https://doi.org/10.15195/v6.a9
  7. Cahill, V.A., Malouff, J.M., Little, C.W., Schutte, N.S. (2020). Trait perspective taking and romantic relationship satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology: JFP: Journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 34(8), 1025–1035. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000661
  8. Campbell, L., Chin, K., Stanton, S.C.E. (2016). Initial Evidence that Individuals Form New Relationships with Partners that More Closely Match their Ideal Preferences. Collabra, 2(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.24
  9. Carol, S. (2016). Like Will to Like? Partner Choice among Muslim Migrants and Natives in Western Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(2), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2014.963037
  10. Chen, F.F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
  11. Christensen, H.T. (1947). Student views on mate selection. Marriage & Family Living, 9, 85–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/347505
  12. Dunn, T.J., Baguley, T., Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology (London, England: 1953), 105(3), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046
  13. Dziuban, C.D., Shirkey, E.C. (1974). When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychological Bulletin, 81(6), 358–361. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036316
  14. Eastwick, P.W., Finkel, E.J., Eagly, A.H. (2011). When and why do ideal partner preferences affect the process of initiating and maintaining romantic relationships? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(5), 1012–1032. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024062
  15. Eastwick, P.W., Luchies, L.B., Finkel, E.J., Hunt, L.L. (2014). The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(3), 623–665. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032432
  16. Fletcher, G.J.O., Kerr, P.S.G., Li, N.P., Valentine, K.A. (2014). Predicting romantic interest and decisions in the very early stages of mate selection: Standards, accuracy, and sex differences. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(4), 540–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213519481
  17. Fletcher, G.J., Simpson, J.A., Thomas, G., Giles, L. (1999). Ideals in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.76.1.72
  18. Flora, D.B., Curran, P.J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
  19. Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  20. George, D., Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics 23 Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference (14-е изд.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315545899
  21. Hill, R. (1945). Campus values in mate selection. Journal of Home economics, 37(554), 269.
  22. Hudson, J.W., Henze, L.F. (1969). Campus Values in Mate Selection: A Replication. Journal of Marriage and Family, 31(4), 772–775. https://doi.org/10.2307/349321
  23. Iliescu, D., Bartram, D., Zeinoun, P., Ziegler, M., Elosua, P., Sireci, S., Geisinger, K.F., Odendaal, A., Oliveri, M.E., Twing, J., Camara, W. (2024). The Test Adaptation Reporting Standards (TARES): Reporting test adaptations. International Journal of Testing, 24(1), 80–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2023.2294266
  24. Katsena, L., Dimdins, G. (2015). An improved method for evaluating ideal standards in self-perception and mate preferences. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(2), 228–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12186
  25. Li, N.P., Yong, J.C., Tsai, M., Lai, M.H.C., Lim, A.J.Y., Ackerman, J.M. (2020). Confidence is sexy and it can be trained: Examining male social confidence in initial, opposite‐sex interactions. Journal of Personality, 88(6), 1235–1251. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12568
  26. Matsunaga, M. (2010). How to factor-analyze your data right: Do’s, don’ts, and how-to’s. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.854
  27. McGinnis, R. (1958). Campus Values in Mate Selection: A Repeat Study. Social Forces, 36(4), 368–373. https://doi.org/10.2307/2573978
  28. Moreno Naranjo, L., Gutiérrez, G. (2023). Adaptación al español del Ideal Partner and Relationship Scale (IPRS): Evidencias sobre propiedades psicométricas. [Spanish adaptation of the Ideal Partner and Relationship Scale (IPRS): Evidence of psychometric properties]. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 55, 183–193. https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.2023.v55.20
  29. Nosrati, S., Sabzali, M., Arsalani, A., Darvishi, M., Aris, S. (2023). Partner choices in the age of social media: Are there significant relationships between following influencers on Instagram and partner choice criteria? Revista de Gestão e Secretariado, 14(10), 19191–19210. https://doi.org/10.7769/gesec.v14i10.3022
  30. Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
  31. Ong, D., Yang, Y. (Alan), Zhang, J. (2020). Hard to get: The scarcity of women and the competition for high-income men in urban China. Journal of Development Economics, 144, 102434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2019.102434
  32. Revelle, W., Rocklin, T. (1979). Very Simple Structure: An Alternative Procedure For Estimating The Optimal Number Of Interpretable Factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14(4), 403–414. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1404_2
  33. Tu, E., Maxwell, J.A., Kim, J.J., Peragine, D., Impett, E.A., Muise, A. (2022). Is my attachment style showing? Perceptions of a date’s attachment anxiety and avoidance and dating interest during a speed-dating event. Journal of Research in Personality, 100, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2022.104269

 

Information About the Authors

Anna A. Provorova, Junior Researcher, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience Lecturer, Faculty of Social Sciences and Computer Science Department of Information Technology in Business, Higher School of Economics (National Research University (HSE University in Perm), Perm, Russian Federation, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1847-9498, e-mail: aaprovorova@hse.ru

Daria V. Semenova, Junior Research Fellow, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Perm, Russian Federation, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7589-6321, e-mail: DVTeterina@hse.ru

Mikhail A. Manokin, Candidate of Science (Culture), Senior Lecturer, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, Perm State University, Russian Federation, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3648-3185, e-mail: manokin.misha@gmail.com

Contribution of the authors

Anna A. Provorova — ideas; annotation, writing and design of the manuscript; planning of the research; control over the research; application of statistical, mathematical or other methods for data analysis; data collection and analysis; visualization of research results.
Daria V. Semenova — annotation, writing and design of the manuscript; data collection and analysis; application of statistical, mathematical or other methods for data analysis; visualization of research results; data interpretation.
Mikhail A. Manokin — research design; scale adaptation and preliminary work; data collection and analysis; literature review; data interpretation.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethics statement

The study complies with Federal Law No. 152 (on personal data protection). Participation in the study was voluntary, and participants could withdraw at any time.

Metrics

 Web Views

Whole time: 286
Previous month: 93
Current month: 17

 PDF Downloads

Whole time: 120
Previous month: 47
Current month: 9

 Total

Whole time: 406
Previous month: 140
Current month: 26