More Than Psychometric Properties of The Fear of Covid-19 Scale. The Struggle of The Portuguese Police Officers

More Than Psychometric Properties of The Fear of Covid-19 Scale. The Struggle of The Portuguese Police Officers | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article More Than Psychometric Properties of The Fear of Covid-19 Scale. The Struggle of The Portuguese Police Officers Bárbara Sousa, Patrícia Corria-Santos, Erika Brooke, Patrício Costa, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2633611/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 22 Apr, 2024 Read the published version in Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology → Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Purpose: The Covid-19 pandemic conveyed consequences for people’s physical and mental health. During the worst pandemic scenarios, police officers were one of the most exposed populations. This situation brought these professionals unusual responsibilities, such as adjust work shifts and allocate police officers from operational and administrative services to the Covid-19 supervision teams and put them at an elevated risk of contracting the virus because they are also frontlineworkers too, and they often did not have personal protective equipment. Due to this, the main objective of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of a Portuguese version of the Fear of Covid-19 among police officers, as well as to know how the fear of Covid-19 relates to the mental health during the worst wave of the Covid-19 pandemic in Portugal. Methodogy: Participants were 174 police officers aged between 23 and 58 years old ( M =40.81; SD =6.83) who completed the Fear of Covid-19 Scale, the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire, and the Posttraumatic Disorder Checklist for DSM-5. Findings: Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a good adjustment fit for the two-factor model. Construct validity was supported, and the internal consistency was good for both periods of assessment. The model proved invariant for both groups (pre and during lockdown) at the measurement, scalar, and structural levels. Originality: Study findings suggest that the Portuguese Version of FCV-19S is a reliable measure to assess the fear of Covid-19 among police officers, including during the pandemic development. Psychology Fear Of Covid-19 Scale (FCV-19S) Psychometric Proprieties Police Officers Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) Measurement Invariance Figures Figure 1 Introduction The coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), or as it is commonly called Covid-19, is a respiratory illness that was discovered in December of 2019 in Wuhan, China (World Health Organization, 2020 ). As of 19th October 2021, there were almost 2.5 million people infected with this virus worldwide, and over 4.5 million deaths Covid-19 related. In Portugal, two million people were infected, and eighteen thousand died (World Health Organization, 2020 ), and the medical emergency services and morgues were filled beyond capacity. In this emereging environment, first responders (e.g., doctors, nurses, firefighters and police officers) had to deal with increased challenges and stressors. Specifically related to officers, these professionals needed to take extra precautions to ensure the safety of society and themselves to prevent the spread of the virus. Being a police officer is already commonly considered one of the most challenging and stressful jobs (Anderson et al. , 2015, Terrill et al ., 2013), and in the current Covid-19 pandemic, the number of stressors related to work assignments and personal safety increased among police officers (Jennings & Perez 2020 ; Stogner & al ., 2020). Beginning March 2020, when the first case was identified in Portugal, police officers were asked to implement a series of public safety precautions to prevent the spread of the virus. Given that Covid-19 is spread through respiratory droplets, it brought upon additional psychological distress due to its ease of transmission. (State University of New York – Institute for Disaster Mental Health (SUNY-IDMH 2020). Due to not knowing who may be infected, not only doctors and nurses but also firefighters, and police officers, who continued to work on the frontline of danger (Jiang, 2021 ) and fear, isolated themselves from their families for concern of being vehicles of virus transmission. While police officers’ training includes their exposure to threat, trauma, and stress, the pandemic evalvated the physical danger of police work for both officers and their families (Drew & Martin, 2021). The possibility of putting their families at risk for the virus became one of the greatest fears among these professionals (Frenkel et al., 2021 ). Police officers had to adapt to a series of changes in their professional duties. They had to adjust to changes in work schedules and reassignment of officers from operational and administrative services to the Covid-19 supervision teams (Observador, 2021 ). Tas well as make adjustments in their personal lives, especially for those with minor children to prevent the spread of the disease. The police officers had to control the points of entry and exit of cities and the country, control events with many people, supervise social distance, wear masks coupled with limiting negationists manifestations and confusing communication surrounding covid-19. All of whichmay have led to increased perceived stress levels (Sener et al., 2021 ). After struggling for almost one year with the Covid-19 pandemic, Portugal was hit by the third and worst wave of Covid-19 infections and deaths between January and April 2021. During this time, police officers had to deal with no days off, overtime demands, and a high number of infections among police officers (approximately 13% of police officers were infected with Covid-19), including deaths by Covid-19 (Observador, 2021 ). Despite that, almost 50% of frontline officers remained unimmunized (Observador, 2021 ), increasing the sense of vulnerability, stress, and fear among officers. As a result of all these challenges, police officers had reported experiencing psychological symptoms (Guo et al., 2020 ; Luchetti et al., 2020 ). A very marked psychological aspect of the Covid-19 pandemic is fear (Cavalheiro & Sticca 2020 ), and some people have even developed or exacerbated symptoms of burnout, stress level, and posttraumatic stress (Frenkel et al., 2021 ; Jiang, 2021 ; Sener et al., 2021 ; Stogner et al., 2020 ; Wu et al., 2021 ) related to the pandemic. Since fear is one of the main characteristics associated with Covid-19, Ahorsu and colleagues ( 2020 ), developed and validated a scale assessing the fear of coronavirus, “the Fear of Covid-19 Scale (FCV-19S)”. Its usefulness and ease of application have led several authors to translate and adapt this instrument into different languages, populations and cultures (e.g., Portugal, (Magano et al ., 2020), Brazil (Cavalheiro & Sticca 2020 ), China (Chi et al., 2021 ), Mexico (García-Reyna et al., 2020 ) Spain (Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ; Martínez-Lorca et al., 2020 ), Argentina (Caycho-Rodríguez et al., 2020 ), Italy (Soraci et al., 2020 ), Israel (Tzur Bitan et al., 2020 ) Europe (Reznik et al ., 2020), Saudi Arabia (Alyami et al ., 2020), and Japan (Masuyama, Shinkawa, & Kubo 2020 ). Despite all these versions, the literature is not clear about the factor structure of the FCV-19S. Research has focused essentially on the existence of two models – unidimensional (Ahorsu et al., 2020 ) and bidimensional (Alyami et al ., 2020; Soraci et al., 2020 ) models. While the one-factor model includes a stable general factor, the two-factor model seems to differentiate emotional concerns from the more somatic components (sweating, palpitations, insomnia) related to Covid-19. Because of the intercorrelation between psychological and somatic manifestations, the one-factor model has been assumed by some authors. Nevertheless, as reported above, some studies (Caycho-Rodríguez et al., 2020 ; Chi et al., 2021 ; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ) including the Portuguese version (Magano et al., 2021 ), seem to differentiate these two dimensions. Furthermore, several studies have also analyzed the invariance of the measure, especially in comparison groups of gender (e.g., Caycho-Rodríguez et al., 2020 ; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ), age (e.g., Chi et al., 2021 ), and occupation (e.g., Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ). However, none of these studies assessed the psychometric properties of the FCV-19S for police officers that were a particularly involved in fighting against the covid-19 pandemic. Moreover, these studies also did not assess the measurement invariance according to the pandemic evolution. As such, considering that police officers operated as first responders and faced elevated risks of contracting Covid-19, using confirmatory factor analysis, we aimed to assess the psychometric properties of FVC-19S and its validity and reliability in a sample of Portuguese police officers. Additionally, we also examined how the fear of Covid-19 relates to the symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorders and operational stressors of these professionals, during the worst wave of the covid-19 pandemic in Portugal. In regards to most psychometric studies (Chi et al., 2021 ; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ; Magano et al ., 2020), we expected to find the two-factor structure to have a better fit than the unifactorial model. Since these professionals were on-duty during different stages of the pandemic evolution, we also explored the factorial model invariance in two groups: pre-lockdown and during-lockdown. We hypothesized that fear of covid-19 would correlate positively with post-traumatic stress symptoms and operational stressors. Methods Data Collection The data for this study were collected through an online survey via Qualtrics. Prior to data collection, consent from the original authors of the FCV-19S (Ahorsu et al., 2020 ) to validate this measure in a Portuguese police officers sample was sought. Once approved, the measure was translated from English to European Portuguese by two independent bilingual translators (i.e., fluent in English and Portuguese). The assessment protocol, part of a PhD project in Portuguese police officers, was submitted and approved by the ethics committee of [removed for blind review]. The police organizations involved [removed for blind review] were also contacted to ask for authorisation. After organization approval, an e-mail with the study survey link was disseminated to the Police Commanders of the Northern Area of Portugal, with a brief description of the project and the Commanders disseminate the survey to the officers where participants were able to view the online informed consent prior to starting the survey. Finally, the participants had the opportunity to obtain their individual results. All procedures performed in this study followed the General Regulation of Data Protection, May 2018, and ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the Helsinki Declaration. Participants Data were collected between October 2020 and March 2021. We analyzed the data as a total sample and two groups: pre-lockdown (T0 – after the worst wave of covid-19 in Portugal) and during-lockdown (T1 – during worst wave of covid-19 in Portugal). The majority of the sample ( n = 174) responded during the lockdown (70.1%). The complete sample consisted of 174 participants, with 164 (94.83%) male, ranging between 24–59 years old ( M = 41.13; SD = 6.51). The total number of officers who worked in the North of Portugal is estimated at 4,400. The porportion of male versus female officers included in the sample is reflective of the composition of the total percentage of female officers in Portugal, which is 5.6%. One-hundred and thirty-nine participants (79.9%) were married or in a de facto marital status, and 139 (79.9%) had at least one child. Regarding professional variables, 137 (79%) worked in shifts and had on average 17.23 ( SD = 6.71) years of service. The majority are low officer rank ( n = 151, 86.8%) see table I. Measures Socio-demographic Questionnaire The socio-demographic questionnaire included variables such as age, gender, marital status, children, and specific questions about the profession, such as professional category, length of service, work-home distance. Information about the intake of psychiatric drugs, past/present psychological support, and the perception of periodic psychological assessments needs were also assessed. Fear of Covid-19 Scale (Ahorsu et al., 2020 ) This scale was developed to assess levels of fear as it relates to prevention and treatment (Ahorsu et al., 2020 ; Portuguese Version: Magno et al ., 2021). It is a seven-item Likert scale that measures the individuals’ fear towards Covid-19 infection. The response ranges from 1 to 5 (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). A total score is calculated by adding up each item score, ranging from 7 to 35. The higher the score, the higher level of fear of Covid-19 infection. The original version (Ahorsu et al., 2020 ) demonstrated a good internal consistency α = .82. The internal consistency values for the present study are displayed in table 3. Operational police stress questionnaire (PSQ-Op) (Mccreary et al., 2017 ; Portuguese Version: Queirós et al., 2020 ) This questionnaire was developed to assess operational job stress sources among police officers. This scale has been translated in 14 languages and was chosen because it but lack normative values (McCreary, et al., 2017 ) The PSQ-Op is a 20-item scale evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7 (1 = not at all stressful” to 7 = very stressful). Higher scores indicate higher levels of stress, with a score of 4 or higher being an indicator of high stress. The Portuguese version (Queirós et al., 2020 ) demonstrated an excellent internal consistency α = .96. This study presented the same values of internal consistency. While the authors acknowledge that the scale lacks normative values (McCreary, et al., 2017 ), it was chosen was not only because it has been widely used (e.g., translated in 14 languages) but it most examines the stressors associated with doing the job. Posttraumatic stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (Blevins et al., 2015 ; Portuguese Version: Silva et al., 2021 ) We accessed the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder using the PCL-5. This questionnaire is a 20-item self-reported measurement to assess the PTSD symptoms. The PCL-5 assesses on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all; 4 = extremely) a total score varying from 0 to 80. Higher scores indicate a more severe PTSD symptomatology. The Portuguese version (Silva et al., 2021 ) demonstrated great internal consistency: α = .94. The internal consistency for the present study was also excellent Cronbach’s α = .96. Analytical Strategy To assess the Fear of Covid-19 Scale psychometric properties, we analyzed the psychometric sensibility, the construct validity, and the concurrent validity. Additionally, we also tested the invariance of the factorial model in pre-lockdown (T0) and during-lockdown (T1) groups and the internal consistency measure. There were no missing data, as the questions on the survey were all mandatory. Since we had responses from over 10 participants per item, we considered our sample size adequate for the employment of an accurate Confirmatory FactorAnalysis (Field, 2018 ). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS and AMOS v.27 (Arbuckle, 2020 , United States, New York, IBM Corporation).The CFAs were performed using a maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors using R (Version 4.0.3) and R studio Desktop (Version 1.4.1103) with the R packages “Lavaan” (Rosseel, 2012 ), “nFactors” (Raiche & Magis, 2020 ), “Parameters” (Lüdecke et al., 2020 ) and “Psych” (Revelle, 2018 ). Descriptive statistics Descriptive statistics were calculated to characterized the participants and the study variables, for instance, fear of Covid-19, PTSD and operational stressors. Additionally, t-tests for independent samples (T0-T1) were performed to compare the participants in relation to the study variables. Psychometric Sensibility We examined the psychometric sensibility of the scale, using the skewness and kurtosis [ sk < |3| and ku < |10|] to evaluate the normal distribution of responses for each item (Kline, 2015 ). Construct validity Analysis of factorial validity, convergent, and discriminant validities were performed to assess the construct validity. Factorial validity For the CFA, items with factor loadings above 0.3 were considered good to include (Brown & Moore 2012 ). Following the recommendation from (Bentler & Bonett, 1980 ; Marôco, 2021 ) to evaluate the quality of the models’ adjustment, we used the following indexes and reference values: χ 2 / df (reason between the Chi-Square statistic and the degrees of freedom), CFI (Comparative Fit Index), RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation), the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) and AIC (Akaike Information Criterion). According to Tabachnick and Fidell ( 2012 ) a model was considered to have an acceptable fit if it presented values of: χ2/df < 2; CFI ≥ .95; RMSEA ≤ .05; SRMR ≤ .08 (Kline 2015 ; Tabachnick and Fidell 2012 ), and AIC the lower, the better (Bentler & Bonett, 1980 ; Marôco, 2021 ). To compare nested models, the scaled chi-square difference (ΔS–Bχ2) we used, following Satorra and Bentler’s recommended algorithm (Satorra & Bentler, 2001 ). Convergent and Discriminant Validities Average Variance Extracted (AVE) of the factors and the comparison between these and the square of the correlation between these factors were performed to analyze the convergent and discriminant validities. These validities are demonstrated if the values are equal or greater than 0.05 (convergent) or if the AVE of the factors is greater or equal to the square of the correlation between these factors (discriminant) (Marôco, 2021 ). Furthermore, the heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT) is a novel approach to determine discriminant validity (Henseler et al., 2015 ), so we also use the HTMT to access the discriminant validity. According to Henseler and collegues (2015) discriminant validity can be established when the HTMT value is inferior to 0.85. Criterion Validity To assess the validity of the criterion, concurrent validity was performed. Concurrent Validity The concurrent validity was analyzed through the estimation of the correlations between the results of the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire (PSQ-Op) (Queirós et al., 2020 ) and the results of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (Silva et al., 2021 ). In the exploratory analysis we verified that the requirements for the use of parametric tests were violated. Thus, we should be use nonparametric tests. However, according to (Field, 2018 ) these tests are generally considered to be less powerful and robust that parametric tests. the same author argues that if parametric and nonparametric tests present equal results on the same data, it is justifiable and preferable to use parametric tests (Field, 2018 ). In our sample, parametric (Pearson) and nonparametric (Spearman) correlation analysis presented the same significant results. Therefore, we opted to use allawys the parametric tests. Internal Consistency Finally, the internal consistency was estimated for the total scale and the subscales of the Fear of Covid-19 (Ahorsu et al., 2020 ) and the two groups. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (α), McDonald's omega (Ω) and the composite reliability (CR), a measure of reliability especially appropriate for the CFA (Marôco, 2021 ) were performed. Good internal consistency is shown when Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald's omega coefficient are higher than .70, the item–total correlation is over .30, and the mean-item correlation is higher than .15 (Field, 2018 ). Measurement Invariance A Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis was performed to assess the pre and during measurement invariance. The stepwise strategy of growth restrictions was used. For that, equality restrictions were imposed to the factorial weights of the model adjusted to the groups simultaneously. The statistics tests were the difference of the adjustment chi-square (Δ X 2 ) and the difference of the Comparative Fit Index (ΔCFI) between the model with fixed parameters and the basal model with free parameters. Some authors have been used (Δ X 2 ) since X 2 is sensitive to sample size (Marôco, 2021 ). To outline this limitation, Cheung and Rensvold (2002) suggest the use (ΔCFI) since it is not affected by the model’s specification and whose value of (CFI < 0.01) indicates the model’s invariance. Results Descriptive Statistics Fear of Covid-19 scale findings regarding the total sample and the groups pre-lockdown (T0) and during lockdown (T1) are presented in table 1. According to the cut-off point of Nikopoulou and colleagues (2020), about 35% of the total sample fulfilled the impact of fear of Covid-19 and 14% and 21% of pre-lockdown and during the lockdown, respectively. PTSD Symptoms The mean of the total PTSD symptoms was 15.79 ( SD = 15.86), ranged between 1 and 80. The resulst revealed that 13% ( n = 23) of the sample reported a total score equal to or higher than 31. If we analysed according to time of evaluation of pandemic the participants reported the 2% ( n = 3) and 12% ( n = 20) pre lockdown and during lockdown respectively. Operational stressors The results revealed that 85% ( n = 147) of the sample reported moderate to high stress (moderate stress 30%, n = 52 and high stress 55%, n = 95). In T0 (pre lockdown) the results showed that 17% ( n = 9) of the sample reported low, 37% ( n = 16) moderate, and 44% ( n = 23) high stress. In T1 (during lockdown) the results showed that 12% ( n = 15) of the sample reported low, 27% ( n = 33) moderate, and 59% ( n = 72) high stress. Difference Tests The 52 participants who belong to the pre lockdown – (T0) (M = 16.29, SD = 5.03) compared to the 122 participants in the lockdown group (T1) ( M = 14.63, SD = 5.41) reported a significant higher degree of fear of Covid-19 scores t (172) = 1.89. p = .30. There were no differences between T0 ( M = 15.58, SD = 14.62) and T1 ( M = 15.88, SD = 16.41) considering total score of PTSD t (172) = − .144. p = .46. Though, regarding the operational stressors the T0 participants ( M = 3.32, SD = 1.24) reported significantly lower degree t (172) = − .2.07. p = .020 compared to the T1 participants ( M = 3.79, SD = 1.43). --------------------------------- [table I about here] ----------------------------- Psychometric Sensitivity The distribution of FCV-19S items is shown in table II. Skewness and kurtosis were evaluated for each item, as well as their adherence to a normal distribution. The results showed non-normal distribution with Kolmogorov-Smirnov test D(174) = 0,096, p < .001. ---------------------------------------- [ table II about here] ----------------------------------------- Construct Vvalidity Factorial Validity – Confirmatory Factor Analysis Two CFA models were conducted: Model A (unifactorial) and B (bifacotiral model). Model B present best fit indices (χ2( 10 ) = 23.232; χ2/df = 2.323; p < .001), with highest CFI = .980; GFI = .963, lower RMSEA = .087; SRMR =. 032; and AIC = 73.232 for the total sample. Comparing nested models using the Satorra-Bentler chi-square difference, the results showed that the bi-factorial model (Model B) was the best fitting model with significantly better values than the unifactorial model (Model A). Table III (see supplemntal material) shows the loadings and the descriptive statistics of the items and subscale in the Portuguese version of the fear of Covid-19 scale among police officers. The Cronbach alpha was above the minimum considered satisfactory (.70) for Covid-19 total score and each subscale. The FCV-19S subscale showed high loadings on latent factors (> .30). -------------------[Table 3 about here] ---------------- Convergent and Discriminant validities of Fear of Covid-19 Scale The Average Variance Extracted (AVE) was adequate for the subscale “FCV-19S emotional scale” (0.564) as well as for the subscale “fear of Covid-19 cognitive scale” (0.824). For the total scale the Average Variance Extracted was adequate too (0.824). The Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio of Correlations (HTMT) of 0.80 provides sufficient evidence of the discriminant validity (table IV). -------------------[Table IV about here] ---------------- Criterion Validity Concurrent Validity The concurrent validity was analyzed through the estimation of the Pearson correlations. The table 5 shows Pearosn correlations coefficients among fear of Covid-19, PTSD and operationl stressors. The results showed a significant positive correlation between fear of Covid-19 and all variables studied, with fear of Covid-19 and PTSD presenting the strongest correlation, with a medium effect ( r = .26; p < .001) and fear of Covid-19 and operational stressors being the weakest correlation, with a small effect ( r = .23 p = .003). -------------------[Table V about here] ---------------- Internal Consistency The fear of Covid-19 scale showed good results of Cronbach’s alphas and McDonald's omega (Table III). The results showed that both the total scale (α = .89, Ω = .89 ) and the emotional (α = .83, Ω = .83) and cognitive (α = .86, Ω = .87) subscales have excellent internal consistency for the overall sample. The internal consistency at pre lockdown was α = .84 and α = .80 for the emotional and cognitive subscales, respectively, and at during lockdown, it was α = .82 and α = .87, respectively. Measurement Invariance The factorial model presented an acceptable adjustment (χ/gl = 1.31; RMSEA = 0.042; P(rmsea ≤ 0.05) = 0.644; CFI = .978) (table 6) by the simultaneous groups (pre lockdown and during lockdown), showing up the configural invariance of the factorial model (table VI). -------------------[Table VI about here] ---------------- Table VII shows the measurement model exhibits weak metric invariance. Thus, metric invariance is demonstrated (Δ X 2 λ (5) = 9.289; p = 0.098). Then, it was analyzed “assuming model measurements weights to be correct”, where we can conclude that the intercepts are invariant in the two moments (ΔX 2 i (7) = 9,800; p = 0.200). In this case, the model is said to have strong measurement invariance. The next step, “assuming model measurement intercept to be correct,” compares the model with fixed weights and intercepts and free covariances with the model with fixed weights, intercepts, and covariances (ΔX 2 cov (3) = 0.503; p = 0.918), thus confirming the scalar invariance. Finally, the invariance of residues was tested (ΔX 2 ε (10) = 5,020; p = 0.890), thus confirming the last level of the invariance of the measure – structural invariance. The measurement model is invariant in both groups (figure I). ------------ [figure I about here] -------------------- -----------------[Table VII about here] ---------------- Discussion This study analyzed the psychometric proprieties of Fear of Covid-19 scale among Portuguese police officers during the third and most severe wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal. Furthermore, it also explored the factorial model invariance in groups of pre-lockdown and during-lockdown. Researchers have noted the continued importance of the continued assessment of the psychological well-being in this population, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic (Stogner et al., 2020 ). In line with the original study (Ahorsu et al., 2020 ), and in subsequent research (Alyami et al ., 2020; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ; Magano et al ., 2020; Soraci et al., 2020 ; Tzur Bitan et al., 2020 ), our results provide support forthe two-factor model as the best-fitting model. These results suggest that the FCV-19S is a multidimensional construct, and it allows the usage of a general factor and specific somatic and emotional factors (Chi et al., 2021 ; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ). Compared to the univariate model, the two-factor model showed the best adjustment of CFI, TLI, RMSEA, and SRMR indices. In addition to the lower adjustment levels, one of the problems found in the one-factor model was a very high RMSEA. The same was found in the one-dimensional version as in the study by Alyami and collegues (2020). One way to overcome this problem might be to use correlated errors, but that could artificially inflate the GFIs. Even correlating the errors, the model did not reach adjustment levels as satisfactory as the two-factor model. Conversely, the emotional dimension had higher average values than the physiological dimension in the total sample. In that sense, it seems that the total sample of participants would experience more emotional symptoms associated with fear of Covid-19, such as (e.g., to feel uncomfortable; to fear dying) (Alyami et al ., 2020; Masuyama et al., 2020 ; Reznik et al ., 2020). Besides, our results also provide support that this is a good measure to assess fear of Covid-19 in professionals trained to deal with emergency and catastrophic situations such as police officers, as it presented structural invariance. Regarding measurement invariance, to our knowledge, this is the first study to allow comparisons between groups regarding the pandemic evolution timing, used the FCV-19S scale with sample of police officers. Previous research that evaluated measurement invariance by comparing groups such as gender (Caycho-Rodríguez et al., 2020 ; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ), adult/non-adult (Chi et al., 2021 ), and participants from different professions (Huarcaya-Victoria et al., 2020 ). Regarding the level of fear of Covid-19, our results indicated that the participants in time 0 (pre-lockdown) reported a higher fear of COVID-19. Nevertheless, this does not seem to undermine the measurement invariance. We argue that this result may be because although risk perception and fear of Covid-19 may appear different in distinct pandemic evolution phases, and the measure manages to capture these oscillations while maintaining sensitivity and factor structure. Another explanation may be due the fact of that during the lockdown phase, police officers may have felt safer. Since the vast majority of the population was at home, this may have resulted in a lower level of exposure perception of individuals and their families. Overall, the findings confirm that FCV19-S is a good measurement to assess the impact of Covid-19 pandemic among Portuguese police officers, even in different phases of the pandemic evolution. The results show that there are no significant differences between pre-lockdown and during lockdown considering total score of PTSD. One plausible explanation may be due to the traumatic events reported (e.g., threat to life, death or serious injury to children, death or serious injury to colleagues and/or families, and suicide death) do not seem to be directly related to the Covid-19 pandemic, since the average time to which the traumatic event reported was 7.44 years ( SD = 6.88). Additionally the results show that the operational stressors level were higher during the lockdown (T1). One possible explanation may be that during this time, police officers had to adapt to a series of changes in their job demands, such as no rest time, overtime demands,a high number of infections, adjustments in work shifts and reallocation police officers from operational and administrative services, control the entry and exit of cities and the country, crowd control,, social distance enforcement, wearing of masks, and ect. All of which have been linkedto an increase in operational stressors (Guo et al., 2020 ; Luchetti et al., 2020 ). This study also revealed several implications for police practitioners. First and foremost, it adds to the limited body of knowledge on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on officer wellbeing (Fleming & Brown, 2021 ; Frenkel et al., 2021 ; Stogner et al., 2020 ). Second, this research highlighted that the perception of risk varied across time period among officers, but the long term psychological effects (beyond the pandemic) are currently unknown. As such, we call for police practitioners to recognize the potential long term psychological effects of the COVID-19 which may be delayed in their manifestation as noted by Drew and Martin ( 2020 ). Therefore, law enforcement officials should take a proactive stance in educating their officers on the potential delayed effects and the proper coping mechancisms for managing the stressors, along with developing specialized mental health strategies for those at risk for greater trauma exposure (Drew & Martin, 2020 ). This study also revealed work-related stressors. As such, operationally, we offer recommendations in line with Strogner and collegues’s (2020) suggestions. We call for agencies to be logistically prepared for repeated vurus outbreaks by resourcing equipment and supplies (e.g., personal protective equipment) to keep officers, their families and the public safe. Police leaders also should continue to plan, develop, and refine strategies on how conduct police operations during a pandemic (e.g., balanced work schedules, officer education on health and safety precautions, remote work options, policing the immediate needs of the community, cross agency collaboration, and etc.) since recent research has revealed that the mental stresses of frontline officers have been exacerbated by work (Elliott-Davies, 2020; Newiss, 2022). The previous recommendation is especially important for maintaining organizational commitment among officers, as the policing profession as a whole continues to experience issues with hiring and retention (Charman & Bennett, 2022 ; Fleming & Brown, 2021 ). Limitations And Strengths Some limitations need to be mentioned, essentially as related to the methodology. First, although in the total sample we have enough participants to perform confirmatory factor analysis, when we divide the sample into pre-lockdown (T0) and during lockdown (T1). The sample size of Time 0 (pre-lockdown) does not reach the number required by the most demanding authors (Field, 2018 ). However, if we follow less strict criteria, the sample has the minimum size required (Kass & Tinsley, 1979 ). Still, these data need to be generalized with caution. Second, we cannot guarantee that participants have not filled in the questionnaires more than once. However, we checked the socio-demographic data and no repeated data were found to suggest participant repetition. Third, since this is a cross-sectional study, it was not possible to obtain the test-retest results, and it is not possible to determine the causality between fear of Covid-19, PTSD and operational stressors. Finally, this study relied on retrospective self-report measures, and we know that this can lead to reporting bias from participants. As for the strengths, in addition to it being relevant and innovation already mentioned regarding to the time of pandemic development, its important to mention that this is a population with difficult access in Portugal and that this was the first study carried out with the fear of Covid-19 scale in this population and between two different moments of the pandemic. Future Recommendations As previously mentioned, it is important to deepen the study of the long-term impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on mental health, especially of those professionals who have been on the front line of this struggle. In addition, the literature has indicated that these professionals, due to the inherent demands of their profession, are more likely to have to respond to more emergency and catastrophic situations in the future, as well as more vulnerable, due to the cumulative exposure to develop PTSD and/or other psychological and emotional disorders. It would also be important future studies to assess the invariance of this measure bytaking into consideration other comparison groups within police forces as well as in the community, such as women vs. men, having been infected vs. not having been infected, and having lost someone due to Covid-19 vs. not having lost anyone significant due to Covid-19 pandemic to name a few. Lastly, future longitudinal studies and large sample sizes are also needed to overcome some limitations of the present study. Declarations Funding: This study was conducted at the Psychology Research Centre (CIPsi/UM) School of Psychology, University of Minho, supported by the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) through the Portuguese State Budget (UIDB/01662/2020), as well as through the funding of a research grant awarded to the first author; Foundation for Science and Technology [2021.05085.BD]. Ethical approval: This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (59th Amendment) and was approved by local ethics review boards. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Bárbara Sousa,Psychology Research Centre, School of Psychology, University of Minho Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga. E-mail: [email protected] Acknowledgments [redacted for peer review] The authors express appreciation to the police forces and the Institutions from the North of Portugal. Finally, the authors are grateful to the police officers who, generously and patiently, participated in this research. Conflict of Interests The authors declare no conflict of interests. Data Availability The data supporting this study’s findings are available from the corresponding author, BS, upon reasonable request. References Ahorsu, D.K., Lin, C.Y., Imani, V., Saffari, M., Griffiths, M.D. & Pakpour, A.H. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 scale: development and initial validation, International journal of mental health and addiction , 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8 Alyami, M., Henning, M., Krägeloh, C.U. & Alyami, H. (2021). Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, International journal of mental health and addiction , 19 (6), 2219-2232 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00316-x Arbuckle, J. L. (2020). Amos (Version 26.0) (No. 26). Chicago: IBM SPSS. https://www.google.com/search?q=cite+ibm+spss+amos+apa+style&sxsrf=AOaemvLk50AtXu4npA2_mtd9sJSSLvln1A%3A1636304805864&ei=pQeIYa6SNIWulwTluqqgCA&oq =cite+ibm+spss+amos+apa+style&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsANKBAhBGABQkwhYgw5gvhFoAXACeACAAXGIAdEBkgEDMS4x Bentler, P.M. & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures, Psychological bulletin , 88 (3), 588 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 Blevins, C.A., Weathers, F.W., Davis, M.T., Witte, T.K. & Domino, J.L. (2015). The posttraumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM‐5 (PCL‐5): Development and initial psychometric evaluation, Journal of traumatic stress , 28 (6) 489-498 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22059 Brown, T. A., & Moore, M. T. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis. In Handbook of structural equation modeling , 361–379. Cavalheiro, F. R. S., & Sticca, M. G. (2020). Adaptation and Validation of the Brazilian Version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00415-9 Caycho-Rodríguez, T., Vilca, L. W., Cervigni, M., Gallegos, M., Martino, P., Portillo, N., Barés, I., Calandra, M., & Burgos Videla, C. (2020). Fear of COVID-19 scale: Validity, reliability and factorial invariance in Argentina’s general population, Death Studies , 0 (0), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2020.1836071 Charman, S. & Bennett, S. (2022). Voluntary resignations from the police service: the impact of organisational and occupational stressors on organisational commitment, Policing and Society, 32 (2), 159-178 https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2021.1891234 Chi, X., Chen, S., Chen, Y., Chen, D., Yu, Q., Guo, T., Cao, Q., Zheng, X., Huang, S., Hossain, M. M., Stubbs, B., Yeung, A., & Zou, L. (2021). Psychometric Evaluation of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale Among Chinese Population, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00441-7 Drew, J.M. & Martin, S. (2020). Mental health and well being of police and a health pandemic: Critical issues for police leaders and a post COVID-19 environment, J ournal of Community Safety and Well-Being, 5(2), 31-36 https://doi.org/10.35502/jcswb.133 Elliott-Davies, M. (2021). Demand, capacity and welfare survey 2020, Retrieved from https://www.polfed.org/media/16557/dcw_prrb-report-13-01-2021-v20.pdf.Refstyled Field, A. (2018). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS (5th ed). Sage Publications. Fleming, J. & Brown, J. (2021). Policewomens' experiences of working during lockdown: Results of a survey with officers from England and Wales, Policing 15(3), 1977-1992 doi: 10.1093/police/paab027 Frenkel, M. O., Giessing, L., Egger-Lampl, S., Hutter, V., Oudejans, R. R. D., Kleygrewe, L., Jaspaert, E., & Plessner, H. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on European police officers: Stress, demands, and coping resources, Journal of Criminal Justice , 72 , 101756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101756 García-Reyna, B., Castillo-García, G. D., Barbosa-Camacho, F. J., Cervantes-Cardona, G. A., Cervantes-Pérez, E., Torres-Mendoza, B. M., Fuentes-Orozco, C., Pintor-Belmontes, K. J., Guzmán-Ramírez, B. G., Hernández-Bernal, A., González-Ojeda, A., & Cervantes-Guevara, G. (2020). Fear of COVID-19 Scale for Hospital Staff in Regional Hospitals in Mexico: a Brief Report, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1-12 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00413-x Gordon W. Cheung & Roger B. (2002). Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance, Structural Equation Modeling, A Multidisciplinary Journal , 9 (2), 233–255 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5 Guo, H., Zhou, Y., Liu, X., & Tan, J. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on the utilization of emergency dental services, Journal of Dental Sciences , 15(4), 564–567 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2020.02.002 Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , 1(43), 115–135 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 Huarcaya-Victoria, J., Villarreal-Zegarra, D., Podestà, A., & Luna-Cuadros, M. (2020). Propiedades psicométricas de una versión en español de la escala de miedo al COVID-19 en población general de Lima, Perú, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction , 1(1), 1–14 https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11469-020-00354-5.pdf Jiang, Q. (2021). Stress response of police officers during COVID-19: A moderated mediation model, Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling , 18 (2), 116-128 https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1569 Jennings, W. & Perez, M. (2020). The immediate impact of COVID-19 on law enforcement in the United States, American Journal of Criminal Justice , 45(4), 690-701 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09536-2 Kass, A., & Tinsley, A. (1979). Factor Analysis, Journal of Leisure Research , 11 , pp. 120–138. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, (2nd ed). New Your Guilford. Kline, T. (2015). Classical Test Theory: Assumptions, Equations, Limitations, and Item Analyses, Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation , pp. 91–106. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483385693.n5 Luchetti, M., Lee, J. H., Aschwanden, D., Sesker, A., Strickhouser, J. E., Terracciano, A., & Sutin, A. R. (2020). The trajectory of loneliness in response to COVID-19, American Psychologist , 7(75), 897–908 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000690 Lüdecke, D., Ben-Shachar, M., Patil, I., & Makowski, D. (2020). Extracting, computing and exploring the parameters of statistical models using R, Journal of Open Source Software, 53, (5), 2445. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.02445 Magano J, Vidal D, Sousa H, Pimienta M, & Leite Â. (2021). Validation and Psychometric Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) and Associations with Travel, Tourism and Hospitality , International Journal of Environmental Research and Publi , 18 ( 427), 2-12 . https://bdigital.ufp.pt/bitstream/10284/9218/1/ijerph-18-00427-v2.pdf Marôco, J. (2021). Análise de Equações Estruturais - Fundamentos Teóricos, Software & Aplicações (3rd ed). ReportNumber, Lda. Martínez-Lorca, M., Martínez-Lorca, A., Criado-Álvarez, J. J., Armesilla, M. D. C., & Latorre, J. M. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 scale: Validation in spanish university students, Psychiatry Research , 293 , 113350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113350 Masuyama, A., Shinkawa, H., & Kubo, T. (2020). Validation and psychometric properties of the Japanese version of the fear of COVID-19 scale among adolescents, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction , 1–11. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00368-z Mccreary, D. R., Fong, I., & Groll, D. L. (2017). Measuring policing stress meaningfully : establishing norms and cut-off values for the Operational and Organizational Police Stress Questionnaires, Police Practice and Research , 18, (6), 612-623. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2017.1363965 Newiss, G., Charman, S, Ilett, C., Bennett, S., Ghaemmaghami, A. Smith, P. & Inkpen, R. (2022). Taking the strain? Police well-being in the COVID-19 era, The Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles, 95(1), 88–108 https://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X21104470 Observador. (2021). Cerca de 13% do efetivo da PSP já esteve infetado com covid-19. Há uma vítima mortal, https://observador.pt/2021/04/07/cerca-de-13-do-efetivo-da-psp-ja-esteve-infetado-com-covid-19-ha-uma-vitima-mortal/ Queirós, C., Passos, F., Bártolo, A., Marques, A. J., da Silva, C. F., & Pereira, A. (2020). Burnout and Stress Measurement in Police officers: Literature Review and a Study With the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire, Frontiers in Psychology , 11, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00587. Raiche, G., & Magis, D. (2020). Parallel analysis and other non graphical solutions to the cattell scree test, https://mirror.las.iastate.edu/CRAN/web/packages/nFactors/nFactors.pdf Revelle, W. (2018). Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research, The Comprehensive R Archive Network. https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/37948493/package-psych-the-personality-project Reznik, A., Gritsenko, V., Konstantinov, V., Khamenka, N., & Isralowitz, R. (2021). COVID-19 Fear in Eastern Europe: Validation of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction , 5(19), 1903–1908 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00283-3 Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-15, Journal of Statistical Software , 2(48), 1–36. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis , 4(66), .507–514 https://doi.org/sci-hub.st/10.1007/bf02296192 Sener, H., Arikan, I., Gündüz, N., & Gülekci, Y. (2021). Detecting the Relationship between the Stress Levels and Perceived Burnout in Law-enforcement Officers during the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Cross-sectional Study, Social Work in Public Health , 36(4), 486–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/19371918.2021.1915910 Silva, J., Teixeira, F., Santos, R., Sousa, B., Pinto., R. & Maia, A. (2021). Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5): Validity and measurement invariance in a Portuguese Volunteer Firefighters’ sample, Journal of Traumatic Stress . Soraci, P., Ferrari, A., Abbiati, F. A., Del Fante, E., De Pace, R., Urso, A., & Griffiths, M. D. (2020). Validation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Italian Version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction , 1–10 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00277-1 State University of New York – Institute for Disaster Mental Health (SUNY-IDMH). (2020). COVID-19: managing stress in this anxious time, Institute for Disaster Mental Health . https://newpaltz.edu/media/idmh/covid-19/IDMH COVID19 Community Stress Management Tip Sheet 2020 Final.pdf Stogner, J., Miller, B. L., and McLean, K. (2020). Police Stress, Mental Health, and Resiliency during the COVID-19 Pandemic, American Journal of Criminal Justice , 45(4), 718–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09548-y Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Using multivariate statistics 6th ed. Tzur Bitan, D., Grossman-Giron, A., Bloch, Y., Mayer, Y., Shiffman, N. & Mendlovic, S. (2020). Fear of COVID-19 scale: Psychometric characteristics, reliability and validity in the Israeli population, Psychiatry Research , 289 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113100 World Health Organization. (2020). World Health Organization, World Health Statistics 2020. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200314-%0Asitrep-54-covid-19.pdf?sfvrsn=dcd46351_2%0A Wu, Y., Sun, I. Y., Ivkovich, S. K., Maskaly, J., Shen, S., & Neyroud, P. (2021). Explaining Stress during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Chinese Police officers, Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice , 00(0), 1–14 https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paab053 Tables Tables 1 to 7 are available in the Supplementary Files section Supplementary Files Tables.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 22 Apr, 2024 Read the published version in Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology → Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-2633611","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":179254180,"identity":"304a26ca-3752-4f95-b3c8-1f30189c0b75","order_by":0,"name":"Bárbara Sousa","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3450-4744","institution":"University of Minho","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Bárbara","middleName":"","lastName":"Sousa","suffix":""},{"id":179254181,"identity":"79f412cf-736a-4070-90fd-ad5d7815e88d","order_by":1,"name":"Patrícia Corria-Santos","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2144-8299","institution":"University of Minho","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Patrícia","middleName":"","lastName":"Corria-Santos","suffix":""},{"id":179254182,"identity":"9e72b943-7f7f-4089-aaac-28e2afd521f7","order_by":2,"name":"Erika Brooke","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0019-3434","institution":"Department of Sociology and Criminology \u0026 Law","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Erika","middleName":"","lastName":"Brooke","suffix":""},{"id":179254183,"identity":"8109300a-60ad-48f6-a75a-1b55b20920cc","order_by":3,"name":"Patrício Costa","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1201-9177","institution":"Life and Health Sciences Research Institute","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Patrício","middleName":"","lastName":"Costa","suffix":""},{"id":179254184,"identity":"1297bc9c-d418-4ce6-9e75-571181676d81","order_by":4,"name":"Ângela Maia","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1343-9699","institution":"University of Minho","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ângela","middleName":"","lastName":"Maia","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2023-02-27 11:04:16","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":true,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"coiExplicitlySet":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2633611/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2633611/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-024-09673-y","type":"published","date":"2024-04-22T21:56:30+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":33585080,"identity":"311c0ed0-7d49-4b7c-aaf8-83ffa3e85e92","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2023-02-28 22:29:29","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":115420,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eConfirmatory Factor Analysis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2633611/v1/3ddf402cfd2e0f62ee80ab57.png"},{"id":55689371,"identity":"98f3b7b5-05e8-4cd0-80d1-c749a2ae6cf7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-01 21:56:34","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":749976,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2633611/v1/b4ad8678-0f46-416d-8dca-6699713143ab.pdf"},{"id":33585079,"identity":"d499b03e-468a-494b-a7d5-75f7bfeb2424","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2023-02-28 22:29:29","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":33427,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Tables.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2633611/v1/2a95b26c03add08eaddd7ab2.docx"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMore Than Psychometric Properties of The Fear of Covid-19 Scale. The Struggle of The Portuguese Police Officers\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), or as it is commonly called Covid-19, is a respiratory illness that was discovered in December of 2019 in Wuhan, China (World Health Organization, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). As of 19th October 2021, there were almost 2.5\u0026nbsp;million people infected with this virus worldwide, and over 4.5\u0026nbsp;million deaths Covid-19 related. In Portugal, two million people were infected, and eighteen thousand died (World Health Organization, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), and the medical emergency services and morgues were filled beyond capacity. In this emereging environment, first responders (e.g., doctors, nurses, firefighters and police officers) had to deal with increased challenges and stressors. Specifically related to officers, these professionals needed to take extra precautions to ensure the safety of society and themselves to prevent the spread of the virus. Being a police officer is already commonly considered one of the most challenging and stressful jobs (Anderson \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015, Terrill \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2013), and in the current Covid-19 pandemic, the number of stressors related to work assignments and personal safety increased among police officers (Jennings \u0026amp; Perez \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Stogner \u003cem\u003e\u0026amp; al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeginning March 2020, when the first case was identified in Portugal, police officers were asked to implement a series of public safety precautions to prevent the spread of the virus. Given that Covid-19 is spread through respiratory droplets, it brought upon additional psychological distress due to its ease of transmission. (State University of New York \u0026ndash; Institute for Disaster Mental Health (SUNY-IDMH 2020). Due to not knowing who may be infected, not only doctors and nurses but also firefighters, and police officers, who continued to work on the frontline of danger (Jiang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and fear, isolated themselves from their families for concern of being vehicles of virus transmission. While police officers\u0026rsquo; training includes their exposure to threat, trauma, and stress, the pandemic evalvated the physical danger of police work for both officers and their families (Drew \u0026amp; Martin, 2021). The possibility of putting their families at risk for the virus became one of the greatest fears among these professionals (Frenkel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Police officers had to adapt to a series of changes in their professional duties. They had to adjust to changes in work schedules and reassignment of officers from operational and administrative services to the Covid-19 supervision teams (Observador, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Tas well as make adjustments in their personal lives, especially for those with minor children to prevent the spread of the disease. The police officers had to control the points of entry and exit of cities and the country, control events with many people, supervise social distance, wear masks coupled with limiting negationists manifestations and confusing communication surrounding covid-19. All of whichmay have led to increased perceived stress levels (Sener et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter struggling for almost one year with the Covid-19 pandemic, Portugal was hit by the third and worst wave of Covid-19 infections and deaths between January and April 2021. During this time, police officers had to deal with no days off, overtime demands, and a high number of infections among police officers (approximately 13% of police officers were infected with Covid-19), including deaths by Covid-19 (Observador, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Despite that, almost 50% of frontline officers remained unimmunized (Observador, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), increasing the sense of vulnerability, stress, and fear among officers. As a result of all these challenges, police officers had reported experiencing psychological symptoms (Guo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Luchetti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). A very marked psychological aspect of the Covid-19 pandemic is fear (Cavalheiro \u0026amp; Sticca \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), and some people have even developed or exacerbated symptoms of burnout, stress level, and posttraumatic stress (Frenkel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Jiang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Sener et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Stogner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Wu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) related to the pandemic. Since fear is one of the main characteristics associated with Covid-19, Ahorsu and colleagues (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), developed and validated a scale assessing the fear of coronavirus, \u0026ldquo;the Fear of Covid-19 Scale (FCV-19S)\u0026rdquo;. Its usefulness and ease of application have led several authors to translate and adapt this instrument into different languages, populations and cultures (e.g., Portugal, (Magano \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020), Brazil (Cavalheiro \u0026amp; Sticca \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), China (Chi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), Mexico (Garc\u0026iacute;a-Reyna et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) Spain (Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Mart\u0026iacute;nez-Lorca et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), Argentina (Caycho-Rodr\u0026iacute;guez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), Italy (Soraci et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), Israel (Tzur Bitan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) Europe (Reznik \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020), Saudi Arabia (Alyami \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020), and Japan (Masuyama, Shinkawa, \u0026amp; Kubo \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Despite all these versions, the literature is not clear about the factor structure of the FCV-19S. Research has focused essentially on the existence of two models \u0026ndash; unidimensional (Ahorsu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and bidimensional (Alyami \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020; Soraci et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) models. While the one-factor model includes a stable general factor, the two-factor model seems to differentiate emotional concerns from the more somatic components (sweating, palpitations, insomnia) related to Covid-19. Because of the intercorrelation between psychological and somatic manifestations, the one-factor model has been assumed by some authors. Nevertheless, as reported above, some studies (Caycho-Rodr\u0026iacute;guez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Chi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) including the Portuguese version (Magano et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), seem to differentiate these two dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, several studies have also analyzed the invariance of the measure, especially in comparison groups of gender (e.g., Caycho-Rodr\u0026iacute;guez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), age (e.g., Chi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), and occupation (e.g., Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). However, none of these studies assessed the psychometric properties of the FCV-19S for police officers that were a particularly involved in fighting against the covid-19 pandemic. Moreover, these studies also did not assess the measurement invariance according to the pandemic evolution. As such, considering that police officers operated as first responders and faced elevated risks of contracting Covid-19, using confirmatory factor analysis, we aimed to assess the psychometric properties of FVC-19S and its validity and reliability in a sample of Portuguese police officers. Additionally, we also examined how the fear of Covid-19 relates to the symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorders and operational stressors of these professionals, during the worst wave of the covid-19 pandemic in Portugal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn regards to most psychometric studies (Chi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Magano \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020), we expected to find the two-factor structure to have a better fit than the unifactorial model. Since these professionals were on-duty during different stages of the pandemic evolution, we also explored the factorial model invariance in two groups: pre-lockdown and during-lockdown. We hypothesized that fear of covid-19 would correlate positively with post-traumatic stress symptoms and operational stressors.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eData Collection\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe data for this study were collected through an online survey via Qualtrics. Prior to data collection, consent from the original authors of the FCV-19S (Ahorsu et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) to validate this measure in a Portuguese police officers sample was sought. Once approved, the measure was translated from English to European Portuguese by two independent bilingual translators (i.e., fluent in English and Portuguese). The assessment protocol, part of a PhD project in Portuguese police officers, was submitted and approved by the ethics committee of [removed for blind review]. The police organizations involved [removed for blind review] were also contacted to ask for authorisation.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAfter organization approval, an e-mail with the study survey link was disseminated to the Police Commanders of the Northern Area of Portugal, with a brief description of the project and the Commanders disseminate the survey to the officers where participants were able to view the online informed consent prior to starting the survey. Finally, the participants had the opportunity to obtain their individual results.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll procedures performed in this study followed the General Regulation of Data Protection, May 2018, and ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the Helsinki Declaration.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec4\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eData were collected between October 2020 and March 2021. We analyzed the data as a total sample and two groups: pre-lockdown (T0 \u0026ndash; after the worst wave of covid-19 in Portugal) and during-lockdown (T1 \u0026ndash; during worst wave of covid-19 in Portugal). The majority of the sample (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;174) responded during the lockdown (70.1%). The complete sample consisted of 174 participants, with 164 (94.83%) male, ranging between 24\u0026ndash;59 years old (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41.13; \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.51). The total number of officers who worked in the North of Portugal is estimated at 4,400. The porportion of male versus female officers included in the sample is reflective of the composition of the total percentage of female officers in Portugal, which is 5.6%. One-hundred and thirty-nine participants (79.9%) were married or in a \u003cem\u003ede facto\u003c/em\u003e marital status, and 139 (79.9%) had at least one child. Regarding professional variables, 137 (79%) worked in shifts and had on average 17.23 (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.71) years of service. The majority are low officer rank (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;151, 86.8%) see table I.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec5\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eMeasures\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section4\" id=\"Sec6\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eSocio-demographic Questionnaire\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe socio-demographic questionnaire included variables such as age, gender, marital status, children, and specific questions about the profession, such as professional category, length of service, work-home distance. Information about the intake of psychiatric drugs, past/present psychological support, and the perception of periodic psychological assessments needs were also assessed.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFear of Covid-19 Scale\u003c/em\u003e (Ahorsu et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis scale was developed to assess levels of fear as it relates to prevention and treatment (Ahorsu et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Portuguese Version: Magno \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). It is a seven-item Likert scale that measures the individuals\u0026rsquo; fear towards Covid-19 infection. The response ranges from 1 to 5 (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;strongly disagree; 5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;strongly agree). A total score is calculated by adding up each item score, ranging from 7 to 35. The higher the score, the higher level of fear of Covid-19 infection. The original version (Ahorsu et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated a good internal consistency \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.82. The internal consistency values for the present study are displayed in table 3.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOperational police stress questionnaire (PSQ-Op)\u003c/em\u003e (Mccreary et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Portuguese Version: Queir\u0026oacute;s et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis questionnaire was developed to assess operational job stress sources among police officers. This scale has been translated in 14 languages and was chosen because it but lack normative values (McCreary, et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) The PSQ-Op is a 20-item scale evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7 (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;not at all stressful\u0026rdquo; to 7\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;very stressful). Higher scores indicate higher levels of stress, with a score of 4 or higher being an indicator of high stress. The Portuguese version (Queir\u0026oacute;s et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated an excellent internal consistency \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.96. This study presented the same values of internal consistency. While the authors acknowledge that the scale lacks normative values (McCreary, et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), it was chosen was not only because it has been widely used (e.g., translated in 14 languages) but it most examines the stressors associated with doing the job.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePosttraumatic stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5\u003c/em\u003e (Blevins et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Portuguese Version: Silva et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWe accessed the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder using the PCL-5. This questionnaire is a 20-item self-reported measurement to assess the PTSD symptoms. The PCL-5 assesses on a 5-point Likert scale (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;not at all; 4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;extremely) a total score varying from 0 to 80. Higher scores indicate a more severe PTSD symptomatology. The Portuguese version (Silva et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated great internal consistency: \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.94. The internal consistency for the present study was also excellent Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.96.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec7\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eAnalytical Strategy\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo assess the Fear of Covid-19 Scale psychometric properties, we analyzed the psychometric sensibility, the construct validity, and the concurrent validity. Additionally, we also tested the invariance of the factorial model in pre-lockdown (T0) and during-lockdown (T1) groups and the internal consistency measure. There were no missing data, as the questions on the survey were all mandatory. Since we had responses from over 10 participants per item, we considered our sample size adequate for the employment of an accurate Confirmatory FactorAnalysis (Field, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStatistical analyses were performed using SPSS and AMOS v.27 (Arbuckle, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e, United States, New York, IBM Corporation).The CFAs were performed using a maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors using R (Version 4.0.3) and R studio Desktop (Version 1.4.1103) with the R packages \u0026ldquo;Lavaan\u0026rdquo; (Rosseel, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e), \u0026ldquo;nFactors\u0026rdquo; (Raiche \u0026amp; Magis, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), \u0026ldquo;Parameters\u0026rdquo; (L\u0026uuml;decke et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and \u0026ldquo;Psych\u0026rdquo; (Revelle, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec8\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eDescriptive statistics\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics were calculated to characterized the participants and the study variables, for instance, fear of Covid-19, PTSD and operational stressors. Additionally, t-tests for independent samples (T0-T1) were performed to compare the participants in relation to the study variables.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec9\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003ePsychometric Sensibility\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWe examined the psychometric sensibility of the scale, using the skewness and kurtosis [\u003cem\u003esk\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; |3| and \u003cem\u003eku\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; |10|] to evaluate the normal distribution of responses for each item (Kline, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec10\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eConstruct validity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of factorial validity, convergent, and discriminant validities were performed to assess the construct validity.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec11\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eFactorial validity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor the CFA, items with factor loadings above 0.3 were considered good to include (Brown \u0026amp; Moore \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Following the recommendation from (Bentler \u0026amp; Bonett, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1980\u003c/span\u003e; Mar\u0026ocirc;co, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) to evaluate the quality of the models\u0026rsquo; adjustment, we used the following indexes and reference values: \u0026chi;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e/\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e (reason between the Chi-Square statistic and the degrees of freedom), CFI (Comparative Fit Index), RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation), the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) and AIC (Akaike Information Criterion). According to Tabachnick and Fidell (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) a model was considered to have an acceptable fit if it presented values of: \u0026chi;2/df\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;2; CFI\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;.95; RMSEA\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.05; SRMR\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;.08 (Kline \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Tabachnick and Fidell \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e), and AIC the lower, the better (Bentler \u0026amp; Bonett, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1980\u003c/span\u003e; Mar\u0026ocirc;co, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). To compare nested models, the scaled chi-square difference (\u0026Delta;S\u0026ndash;B\u0026chi;2) we used, following Satorra and Bentler\u0026rsquo;s recommended algorithm (Satorra \u0026amp; Bentler, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec12\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eConvergent and Discriminant Validities\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAverage Variance Extracted (AVE) of the factors and the comparison between these and the square of the correlation between these factors were performed to analyze the convergent and discriminant validities. These validities are demonstrated if the values are equal or greater than 0.05 (convergent) or if the AVE of the factors is greater or equal to the square of the correlation between these factors (discriminant) (Mar\u0026ocirc;co, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT) is a novel approach to determine discriminant validity (Henseler et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), so we also use the HTMT to access the discriminant validity. According to Henseler and collegues (2015)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ediscriminant validity can be established when the HTMT value is inferior to 0.85.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec13\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eCriterion Validity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo assess the validity of the criterion, concurrent validity was performed.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cspan class=\"BoldItalic\" name=\"Emphasis\" type=\"BoldItalic\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConcurrent Validity\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe concurrent validity was analyzed through the estimation of the correlations between the results of the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire (PSQ-Op) (Queir\u0026oacute;s et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and the results of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (Silva et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In the exploratory analysis we verified that the requirements for the use of parametric tests were violated. Thus, we should be use nonparametric tests. However, according to (Field, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) these tests are generally considered to be less powerful and robust that parametric tests. the same author argues that if parametric and nonparametric tests present equal results on the same data, it is justifiable and preferable to use parametric tests (Field, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). In our sample, parametric (Pearson) and nonparametric (Spearman) correlation analysis presented the same significant results. Therefore, we opted to use allawys the parametric tests.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec14\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eInternal Consistency\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinally, the internal consistency was estimated for the total scale and the subscales of the Fear of Covid-19 (Ahorsu et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and the two groups. The Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha coefficient (\u0026alpha;), McDonald\u0026apos;s omega (Ω) and the composite reliability (CR), a measure of reliability especially appropriate for the CFA (Mar\u0026ocirc;co, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) were performed. Good internal consistency is shown when Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha and McDonald\u0026apos;s omega coefficient are higher than .70, the item\u0026ndash;total correlation is over .30, and the mean-item correlation is higher than .15 (Field, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec15\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eMeasurement Invariance\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis was performed to assess the pre and during measurement invariance. The stepwise strategy of growth restrictions was used. For that, equality restrictions were imposed to the factorial weights of the model adjusted to the groups simultaneously. The statistics tests were the difference of the adjustment chi-square (\u0026Delta;\u003cem\u003eX\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e) and the difference of the Comparative Fit Index (\u0026Delta;CFI) between the model with fixed parameters and the basal model with free parameters. Some authors have been used (\u0026Delta;\u003cem\u003eX\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e) since \u003cem\u003eX\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e is sensitive to sample size (Mar\u0026ocirc;co, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). To outline this limitation, Cheung and Rensvold (2002) suggest the use (\u0026Delta;CFI) since it is not affected by the model\u0026rsquo;s specification and whose value of (CFI\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) indicates the model\u0026rsquo;s invariance.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec17\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eDescriptive Statistics\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFear of Covid-19 scale findings regarding the total sample and the groups pre-lockdown (T0) and during lockdown (T1) are presented in table 1. According to the cut-off point of Nikopoulou and colleagues (2020), about 35% of the total sample fulfilled the impact of fear of Covid-19 and 14% and 21% of pre-lockdown and during the lockdown, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec18\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003ePTSD Symptoms\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe mean of the total PTSD symptoms was 15.79 (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.86), ranged between 1 and 80. The resulst revealed that 13% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23) of the sample reported a total score equal to or higher than 31. If we analysed according to time of evaluation of pandemic the participants reported the 2% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3) and 12% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20) pre lockdown and during lockdown respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec19\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eOperational stressors\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe results revealed that 85% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;147) of the sample reported moderate to high stress (moderate stress 30%, \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;52 and high stress 55%, \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;95). In T0 (pre lockdown) the results showed that 17% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9) of the sample reported low, 37% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16) moderate, and 44% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23) high stress. In T1 (during lockdown) the results showed that 12% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) of the sample reported low, 27% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;33) moderate, and 59% ( \u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;72) high stress.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec20\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eDifference Tests\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe 52 participants who belong to the pre lockdown \u0026ndash; (T0) (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16.29, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.03) compared to the 122 participants in the lockdown group (T1) (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.63, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.41) reported a significant higher degree of fear of Covid-19 scores \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (172)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.89. \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.30. There were no differences between T0 (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.58, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.62) and T1 (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.88, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16.41) considering total score of PTSD \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (172)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.144. \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.46. Though, regarding the operational stressors the T0 participants (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.32, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.24) reported significantly lower degree \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (172)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.2.07. \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.020 compared to the T1 participants (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.79, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.43).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e--------------------------------- [table I about here] -----------------------------\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec21\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003ePsychometric Sensitivity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe distribution of FCV-19S items is shown in table II. Skewness and kurtosis were evaluated for each item, as well as their adherence to a normal distribution. The results showed non-normal distribution with Kolmogorov-Smirnov test D(174)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0,096, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e---------------------------------------- [ table II about here] -----------------------------------------\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Section2\" id=\"Sec22\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eConstruct Vvalidity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec23\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eFactorial Validity \u0026ndash; Confirmatory Factor Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTwo CFA models were conducted: Model A (unifactorial) and B (bifacotiral model). Model B present best fit indices \u003cem\u003e(\u0026chi;2(\u003c/em\u003e10\u003cem\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23.232; \u0026chi;2/df\u0026thinsp;=\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;2.323; \u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), with highest CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;.980; \u003cem\u003eGFI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.963, lower RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.087; SRMR =. 032; and AIC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;73.232 for the total sample. Comparing nested models using the Satorra-Bentler chi-square difference, the results showed that the bi-factorial model (Model B) was the best fitting model with significantly better values than the unifactorial model (Model A). Table III (see supplemntal material) shows the loadings and the descriptive statistics of the items and subscale in the Portuguese version of the fear of Covid-19 scale among police officers. The Cronbach alpha was above the minimum considered satisfactory (.70) for Covid-19 total score and each subscale. The FCV-19S subscale showed high loadings on latent factors (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.30).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-------------------[Table\u0026nbsp;3 about here] ----------------\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec24\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eConvergent and Discriminant validities of Fear of Covid-19 Scale\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Average Variance Extracted (AVE) was adequate for the subscale \u0026ldquo;FCV-19S emotional scale\u0026rdquo; (0.564) as well as for the subscale \u0026ldquo;fear of Covid-19 cognitive scale\u0026rdquo; (0.824). For the total scale the Average Variance Extracted was adequate too (0.824).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio of Correlations (HTMT) of 0.80 provides sufficient evidence of the discriminant validity (table IV).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-------------------[Table IV about here] ----------------\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec25\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eCriterion Validity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section4\" id=\"Sec26\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eConcurrent Validity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe concurrent validity was analyzed through the estimation of the Pearson correlations. The table 5 shows Pearosn correlations coefficients among fear of Covid-19, PTSD and operationl stressors. The results showed a significant positive correlation between fear of Covid-19 and all variables studied, with fear of Covid-19 and PTSD presenting the strongest correlation, with a medium effect ( \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.26; p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) and fear of Covid-19 and operational stressors being the weakest correlation, with a small effect ( r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.23 p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.003).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-------------------[Table V about here] ----------------\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec27\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eInternal Consistency\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe fear of Covid-19 scale showed good results of Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alphas and McDonald\u0026apos;s omega (Table III). The results showed that both the total scale (\u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.89, Ω\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.89 ) and the emotional (\u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.83, Ω\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.83) and cognitive (\u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.86, Ω\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.87) subscales have excellent internal consistency for the overall sample. The internal consistency at pre lockdown was \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.84 and \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.80 for the emotional and cognitive subscales, respectively, and at during lockdown, it was \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.82 and \u0026alpha;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.87, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"Section3\" id=\"Sec28\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eMeasurement Invariance\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe factorial model presented an acceptable adjustment (\u0026chi;/gl\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.31; RMSEA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.042; P(rmsea\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.644; CFI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.978) (table 6) by the simultaneous groups (pre lockdown and during lockdown), showing up the configural invariance of the factorial model (table VI).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-------------------[Table VI about here] ----------------\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable VII shows the measurement model exhibits weak metric invariance. Thus, metric invariance is demonstrated (\u0026Delta;\u003cem\u003eX\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u0026lambda;\u003c/sub\u003e(5)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9.289; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.098). Then, it was analyzed \u0026ldquo;assuming model measurements weights to be correct\u0026rdquo;, where we can conclude that the intercepts are invariant in the two moments (\u0026Delta;X\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e (7)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9,800; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.200). In this case, the model is said to have strong measurement invariance. The next step, \u0026ldquo;assuming model measurement intercept to be correct,\u0026rdquo; compares the model with fixed weights and intercepts and free covariances with the model with fixed weights, intercepts, and covariances (\u0026Delta;X\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003csub\u003ecov\u003c/sub\u003e (3)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.503; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.918), thus confirming the scalar invariance. Finally, the invariance of residues was tested (\u0026Delta;X\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u0026epsilon;\u003c/sub\u003e (10)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5,020; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.890), thus confirming the last level of the invariance of the measure \u0026ndash; structural invariance. The measurement model is invariant in both groups (figure I).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e------------ [figure I about here] --------------------\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-----------------[Table VII about here] ----------------\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study analyzed the psychometric proprieties of Fear of Covid-19 scale among Portuguese police officers during the third and most severe wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal. Furthermore, it also explored the factorial model invariance in groups of pre-lockdown and during-lockdown. Researchers have noted the continued importance of the continued assessment of the psychological well-being in this population, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic (Stogner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In line with the original study (Ahorsu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), and in subsequent research (Alyami \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Magano \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020; Soraci et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Tzur Bitan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), our results provide support forthe two-factor model as the best-fitting model. These results suggest that the FCV-19S is a multidimensional construct, and it allows the usage of a general factor and specific somatic and emotional factors (Chi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Compared to the univariate model, the two-factor model showed the best adjustment of CFI, TLI, RMSEA, and SRMR indices. In addition to the lower adjustment levels, one of the problems found in the one-factor model was a very high RMSEA. The same was found in the one-dimensional version as in the study by Alyami and collegues (2020). One way to overcome this problem might be to use correlated errors, but that could artificially inflate the GFIs. Even correlating the errors, the model did not reach adjustment levels as satisfactory as the two-factor model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConversely, the emotional dimension had higher average values than the physiological dimension in the total sample. In that sense, it seems that the total sample of participants would experience more emotional symptoms associated with fear of Covid-19, such as (e.g., to feel uncomfortable; to fear dying) (Alyami \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020; Masuyama et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Reznik \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). Besides, our results also provide support that this is a good measure to assess fear of Covid-19 in professionals trained to deal with emergency and catastrophic situations such as police officers, as it presented structural invariance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding measurement invariance, to our knowledge, this is the first study to allow comparisons between groups regarding the pandemic evolution timing, used the FCV-19S scale with sample of police officers. Previous research that evaluated measurement invariance by comparing groups such as gender (Caycho-Rodr\u0026iacute;guez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), adult/non-adult (Chi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), and participants from different professions (Huarcaya-Victoria et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the level of fear of Covid-19, our results indicated that the participants in time 0 (pre-lockdown) reported a higher fear of COVID-19. Nevertheless, this does not seem to undermine the measurement invariance. We argue that this result may be because although risk perception and fear of Covid-19 may appear different in distinct pandemic evolution phases, and the measure manages to capture these oscillations while maintaining sensitivity and factor structure. Another explanation may be due the fact of that during the lockdown phase, police officers may have felt safer. Since the vast majority of the population was at home, this may have resulted in a lower level of exposure perception of individuals and their families. Overall, the findings confirm that FCV19-S is a good measurement to assess the impact of Covid-19 pandemic among Portuguese police officers, even in different phases of the pandemic evolution.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results show that there are no significant differences between pre-lockdown and during lockdown considering total score of PTSD. One plausible explanation may be due to the traumatic events reported (e.g., threat to life, death or serious injury to children, death or serious injury to colleagues and/or families, and suicide death) do not seem to be directly related to the Covid-19 pandemic, since the average time to which the traumatic event reported was 7.44 years (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.88). Additionally the results show that the operational stressors level were higher during the lockdown (T1). One possible explanation may be that during this time, police officers had to adapt to a series of changes in their job demands, such as no rest time, overtime demands,a high number of infections, adjustments in work shifts and reallocation police officers from operational and administrative services, control the entry and exit of cities and the country, crowd control,, social distance enforcement, wearing of masks, and ect. All of which have been linkedto an increase in operational stressors (Guo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Luchetti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study also revealed several implications for police practitioners. First and foremost, it adds to the limited body of knowledge on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on officer wellbeing (Fleming \u0026amp; Brown, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Frenkel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Stogner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Second, this research highlighted that the perception of risk varied across time period among officers, but the long term psychological effects (beyond the pandemic) are currently unknown. As such, we call for police practitioners to recognize the potential long term psychological effects of the COVID-19 which may be delayed in their manifestation as noted by Drew and Martin (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, law enforcement officials should take a proactive stance in educating their officers on the potential delayed effects and the proper coping mechancisms for managing the stressors, along with developing specialized mental health strategies for those at risk for greater trauma exposure (Drew \u0026amp; Martin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study also revealed work-related stressors. As such, operationally, we offer recommendations in line with Strogner and collegues\u0026rsquo;s (2020) suggestions. We call for agencies to be logistically prepared for repeated vurus outbreaks by resourcing equipment and supplies (e.g., personal protective equipment) to keep officers, their families and the public safe. Police leaders also should continue to plan, develop, and refine strategies on how conduct police operations during a pandemic (e.g., balanced work schedules, officer education on health and safety precautions, remote work options, policing the immediate needs of the community, cross agency collaboration, and etc.) since recent research has revealed that the mental stresses of frontline officers have been exacerbated by work (Elliott-Davies, 2020; Newiss, 2022). The previous recommendation is especially important for maintaining organizational commitment among officers, as the policing profession as a whole continues to experience issues with hiring and retention (Charman \u0026amp; Bennett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Fleming \u0026amp; Brown, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLimitations And Strengths\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSome limitations need to be mentioned, essentially as related to the methodology.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, although in the total sample we have enough participants to perform confirmatory factor analysis, when we divide the sample into pre-lockdown (T0) and during lockdown (T1). The sample size of Time 0 (pre-lockdown) does not reach the number required by the most demanding authors (Field, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). However, if we follow less strict criteria, the sample has the minimum size required (Kass \u0026amp; Tinsley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1979\u003c/span\u003e). Still, these data need to be generalized with caution. Second, we cannot guarantee that participants have not filled in the questionnaires more than once. However, we checked the socio-demographic data and no repeated data were found to suggest participant repetition. Third, since this is a cross-sectional study, it was not possible to obtain the test-retest results, and it is not possible to determine the causality between fear of Covid-19, PTSD and operational stressors. Finally, this study relied on retrospective self-report measures, and we know that this can lead to reporting bias from participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs for the strengths, in addition to it being relevant and innovation already mentioned regarding to the time of pandemic development, its important to mention that this is a population with difficult access in Portugal and that this was the first study carried out with the fear of Covid-19 scale in this population and between two different moments of the pandemic.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eFuture Recommendations\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs previously mentioned, it is important to deepen the study of the long-term impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on mental health, especially of those professionals who have been on the front line of this struggle. In addition, the literature has indicated that these professionals, due to the inherent demands of their profession, are more likely to have to respond to more emergency and catastrophic situations in the future, as well as more vulnerable, due to the cumulative exposure to develop PTSD and/or other psychological and emotional disorders. It would also be important future studies to assess the invariance of this measure bytaking into consideration other comparison groups within police forces as well as in the community, such as women vs. men, having been infected vs. not having been infected, and having lost someone due to Covid-19 vs. not having lost anyone significant due to Covid-19 pandemic to name a few. Lastly, future longitudinal studies and large sample sizes are also needed to overcome some limitations of the present study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e This study was conducted at the Psychology Research Centre (CIPsi/UM) School of Psychology, University of Minho, supported by the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) through the Portuguese State Budget (UIDB/01662/2020), as well as through the funding of a research grant awarded to the first author; Foundation for Science and Technology [2021.05085.BD].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (59th Amendment) and was approved by local ethics review boards.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCorrespondence\u003c/strong\u003e concerning this article should be addressed to B\u0026aacute;rbara Sousa,Psychology Research Centre, School of Psychology, University of Minho Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga. E-mail: [email protected]\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[redacted for peer review] The authors express appreciation to the police forces and the Institutions from the North of Portugal. Finally, the authors are grateful to the police officers who, generously and patiently, participated in this research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of Interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no conflict of interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data supporting this study\u0026rsquo;s findings are available from the corresponding author, BS, upon reasonable request.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAhorsu, D.K., Lin, C.Y., Imani, V., Saffari, M., Griffiths, M.D. \u0026amp; Pakpour, A.H. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 scale: development and initial validation, \u003cem\u003eInternational journal of mental health and addiction\u003c/em\u003e, 1-9.\u0026nbsp;https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlyami, M., Henning, M., Kr\u0026auml;geloh, C.U. \u0026amp; Alyami, H. (2021). Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, \u003cem\u003eInternational journal of mental health and addiction\u003c/em\u003e, 19 (6), 2219-2232\u0026nbsp;https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00316-x\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eArbuckle, J. L. (2020).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAmos (Version 26.0)\u003c/em\u003e (No. 26). Chicago: IBM SPSS. https://www.google.com/search?q=cite+ibm+spss+amos+apa+style\u0026amp;sxsrf=AOaemvLk50AtXu4npA2_mtd9sJSSLvln1A%3A1636304805864\u0026amp;ei=pQeIYa6SNIWulwTluqqgCA\u0026amp;oq\u003cbr\u003e=cite+ibm+spss+amos+apa+style\u0026amp;gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsANKBAhBGABQkwhYgw5gvhFoAXACeACAAXGIAdEBkgEDMS4x\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBentler, P.M. \u0026amp; Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures, \u003cem\u003ePsychological bulletin\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026nbsp;88 (3), 588\u0026nbsp;https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBlevins, C.A., Weathers, F.W., Davis, M.T., Witte, T.K. \u0026amp; Domino, J.L. (2015). The posttraumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM‐5 (PCL‐5): Development and initial psychometric evaluation, \u003cem\u003eJournal of traumatic stress\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e (6) 489-498 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22059\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBrown, T. A., \u0026amp; Moore, M. T. (2012). \u003cem\u003eConfirmatory factor analysis.\u003c/em\u003e In \u003cem\u003eHandbook of structural equation modeling\u003c/em\u003e, 361\u0026ndash;379.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCavalheiro, F. R. S., \u0026amp; Sticca, M. G. (2020). Adaptation and Validation of the Brazilian Version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction\u003c/em\u003e https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00415-9\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCaycho-Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, T., Vilca, L. W., Cervigni, M., Gallegos, M., Martino, P., Portillo, N., Bar\u0026eacute;s, I., Calandra, M., \u0026amp; Burgos Videla, C. (2020). Fear of COVID-19 scale: Validity, reliability and factorial invariance in Argentina\u0026rsquo;s general population, \u003cem\u003eDeath Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e (0), 1\u0026ndash;10. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2020.1836071\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCharman, S. \u0026amp; Bennett, S. (2022). Voluntary resignations from the police service: the impact of organisational and occupational stressors on organisational commitment, \u003cem\u003ePolicing and Society, 32\u003c/em\u003e (2), 159-178 https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2021.1891234\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChi, X., Chen, S., Chen, Y., Chen, D., Yu, Q., Guo, T., Cao, Q., Zheng, X., Huang, S., Hossain, M. M., Stubbs, B., Yeung, A., \u0026amp; Zou, L. (2021). Psychometric Evaluation of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale Among Chinese Population, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction\u003c/em\u003e https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00441-7\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDrew, J.M. \u0026amp; Martin, S. (2020).\u0026nbsp;Mental health and well being of police and a health pandemic: Critical issues for police leaders and a post COVID-19 environment, J\u003cem\u003eournal of Community Safety and Well-Being,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e5(2), 31-36 https://doi.org/10.35502/jcswb.133\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eElliott-Davies, M. (2021). Demand, capacity and welfare survey 2020, \u003cem\u003eRetrieved from\u003c/em\u003e https://www.polfed.org/media/16557/dcw_prrb-report-13-01-2021-v20.pdf.Refstyled\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eField, A. (2018). \u003cem\u003eDiscovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS\u003c/em\u003e (5th ed). Sage Publications.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFleming, J. \u0026amp; Brown, J. (2021). Policewomens\u0026apos; experiences of working during lockdown: Results of a survey with officers from England and Wales, \u003cem\u003ePolicing\u003c/em\u003e 15(3), 1977-1992 doi: 10.1093/police/paab027\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFrenkel, M. O., Giessing, L., Egger-Lampl, S., Hutter, V., Oudejans, R. R. D., Kleygrewe, L., Jaspaert, E., \u0026amp; Plessner, H. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on European police officers: Stress, demands, and coping resources, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Criminal Justice\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e72\u003c/em\u003e, 101756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101756\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGarc\u0026iacute;a-Reyna, B., Castillo-Garc\u0026iacute;a, G. D., Barbosa-Camacho, F. J., Cervantes-Cardona, G. A., Cervantes-P\u0026eacute;rez, E., Torres-Mendoza, B. M., Fuentes-Orozco, C., Pintor-Belmontes, K. J., Guzm\u0026aacute;n-Ram\u0026iacute;rez, B. G., Hern\u0026aacute;ndez-Bernal, A., Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Ojeda, A., \u0026amp; Cervantes-Guevara, G. (2020). Fear of COVID-19 Scale for Hospital Staff in Regional Hospitals in Mexico: a Brief Report, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e1-12 \u0026nbsp;https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00413-x\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGordon W. Cheung \u0026amp; Roger B. (2002). Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance, \u003cem\u003eStructural Equation Modeling, A Multidisciplinary Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(2), 233\u0026ndash;255 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGuo, H., Zhou, Y., Liu, X., \u0026amp; Tan, J. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on the utilization of emergency dental services, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Dental Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, 15(4), 564\u0026ndash;567 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2020.02.002\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHenseler, J., Ringle, C. M., \u0026amp; Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling, \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science\u003c/em\u003e, 1(43), 115\u0026ndash;135 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHuarcaya-Victoria, J., Villarreal-Zegarra, D., Podest\u0026agrave;, A., \u0026amp; Luna-Cuadros, M. (2020). Propiedades psicom\u0026eacute;tricas de una versi\u0026oacute;n en espa\u0026ntilde;ol de la escala de miedo al COVID-19 en poblaci\u0026oacute;n general de Lima, Per\u0026uacute;, \u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction\u003c/em\u003e, 1(1), 1\u0026ndash;14 https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11469-020-00354-5.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJiang, Q. (2021). Stress response of police officers during COVID-19: A moderated mediation model, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling\u003c/em\u003e, 18 (2), 116-128 https://doi.org/10.1002/jip.1569\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJennings, W. \u0026amp; Perez, M. (2020). The immediate impact of COVID-19 on law enforcement in the United States, \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Criminal Justice\u003c/em\u003e, 45(4), \u0026nbsp;690-701 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09536-2\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKass, A., \u0026amp; Tinsley, A. (1979). Factor Analysis, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Leisure Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e, pp. 120\u0026ndash;138.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKline, R. B. (2015). \u003cem\u003ePrinciples and practice of structural equation modeling,\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed). New Your Guilford.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKline, T. (2015). Classical Test Theory: Assumptions, Equations, Limitations, and Item Analyses, \u003cem\u003ePsychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation\u003c/em\u003e, pp. 91\u0026ndash;106. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483385693.n5\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLuchetti, M., Lee, J. H., Aschwanden, D., Sesker, A., Strickhouser, J. E., Terracciano, A., \u0026amp; Sutin, A. R. (2020). The trajectory of loneliness in response to COVID-19, \u003cem\u003eAmerican Psychologist\u003c/em\u003e, 7(75), 897\u0026ndash;908 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000690\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eL\u0026uuml;decke, D., Ben-Shachar, M., Patil, I., \u0026amp; Makowski, D. (2020). Extracting, computing and exploring the parameters of statistical models using R, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Open Source Software,\u003c/em\u003e 53, (5), 2445. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.02445\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMagano J, Vidal D, Sousa H, Pimienta M, \u0026amp; Leite \u0026Acirc;. (2021).\u0026nbsp;Validation and Psychometric Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) and Associations with Travel, Tourism and Hospitality\u003cem\u003e, International Journal of Environmental Research and Publi ,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e18\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;(\u003c/em\u003e427), \u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2-12\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e https://bdigital.ufp.pt/bitstream/10284/9218/1/ijerph-18-00427-v2.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMar\u0026ocirc;co, J. (2021). \u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAn\u0026aacute;lise de Equa\u0026ccedil;\u0026otilde;es Estruturais - Fundamentos Te\u0026oacute;ricos, Software \u0026amp; Aplica\u0026ccedil;\u0026otilde;es\u003c/em\u003e (3rd ed). ReportNumber, Lda.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMart\u0026iacute;nez-Lorca, M., Mart\u0026iacute;nez-Lorca, A., Criado-\u0026Aacute;lvarez, J. J., Armesilla, M. D. C., \u0026amp; Latorre, J. M. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 scale: Validation in spanish university students, \u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePsychiatry Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e293\u003c/em\u003e, 113350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113350\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMasuyama, A., Shinkawa, H., \u0026amp; Kubo, T. (2020). Validation and psychometric properties of the Japanese version of the fear of COVID-19 scale among adolescents, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;11. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00368-z\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMccreary, D. R., Fong, I., \u0026amp; Groll, D. L. (2017). Measuring policing stress meaningfully : establishing norms and cut-off values for the Operational and Organizational Police Stress Questionnaires, \u003cem\u003ePolice Practice and Research\u003c/em\u003e, 18, (6), \u0026nbsp;612-623. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2017.1363965\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNewiss, G., Charman, S, Ilett, C., Bennett, S., Ghaemmaghami, A. Smith, P. \u0026amp; Inkpen, R. (2022). Taking the strain? Police well-being in the COVID-19 era, \u003cem\u003eThe Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e95(1), 88\u0026ndash;108 https://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X21104470\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eObservador. (2021). \u003cem\u003eCerca de 13% do efetivo da PSP j\u0026aacute; esteve infetado com covid-19. H\u0026aacute; uma v\u0026iacute;tima mortal,\u003c/em\u003e https://observador.pt/2021/04/07/cerca-de-13-do-efetivo-da-psp-ja-esteve-infetado-com-covid-19-ha-uma-vitima-mortal/\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eQueir\u0026oacute;s, C., Passos, F., B\u0026aacute;rtolo, A., Marques, A. J., da Silva, C. F., \u0026amp; Pereira, A. (2020). Burnout and Stress Measurement in Police officers: Literature Review and a Study With the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire, \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 11, 1\u0026ndash;23. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00587.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRaiche, G., \u0026amp; Magis, D. (2020). \u003cem\u003eParallel analysis and other non graphical solutions to the cattell scree test,\u003c/em\u003e https://mirror.las.iastate.edu/CRAN/web/packages/nFactors/nFactors.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRevelle, W. (2018). Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research, \u003cem\u003eThe Comprehensive R Archive Network.\u003c/em\u003e https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/37948493/package-psych-the-personality-project\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eReznik, A., Gritsenko, V., Konstantinov, V., Khamenka, N., \u0026amp; Isralowitz, R. (2021). COVID-19 Fear in Eastern Europe: Validation of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction\u003c/em\u003e, 5(19), 1903\u0026ndash;1908 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00283-3\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-15, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Statistical Software\u003c/em\u003e, 2(48), 1\u0026ndash;36.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSatorra, A., \u0026amp; Bentler, P. M. (2001).\u0026nbsp;A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis\u003cem\u003e,\u003c/em\u003e 4(66), .507\u0026ndash;514 https://doi.org/sci-hub.st/10.1007/bf02296192\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSener, H., Arikan, I., G\u0026uuml;nd\u0026uuml;z, N., \u0026amp; G\u0026uuml;lekci, Y. (2021). Detecting the Relationship between the Stress Levels and Perceived Burnout in Law-enforcement Officers during the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Cross-sectional Study, \u003cem\u003eSocial Work in Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, 36(4), 486\u0026ndash;495. https://doi.org/10.1080/19371918.2021.1915910\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSilva, J., Teixeira, F., Santos, R., Sousa, B., Pinto., R. \u0026amp; Maia, A. (2021). Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5): Validity and measurement invariance in a Portuguese Volunteer Firefighters\u0026rsquo; sample, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Traumatic Stress\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSoraci, P., Ferrari, A., Abbiati, F. A., Del Fante, E., De Pace, R., Urso, A., \u0026amp; Griffiths, M. D. (2020). Validation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Italian Version of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;10 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00277-1\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eState University of New York \u0026ndash; Institute for Disaster Mental Health (SUNY-IDMH). (2020). COVID-19: managing stress in this anxious time, \u003cem\u003eInstitute for Disaster Mental Health\u003c/em\u003e. https://newpaltz.edu/media/idmh/covid-19/IDMH COVID19 Community Stress Management Tip Sheet 2020 Final.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStogner, J., Miller, B. L., and McLean, K. (2020). Police Stress, Mental Health, and Resiliency during the COVID-19 Pandemic, \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Criminal Justice\u003c/em\u003e, 45(4), 718\u0026ndash;730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09548-y\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTabachnick, B. G., \u0026amp; Fidell, L. S. (2012). \u003cem\u003eUsing multivariate statistics\u003c/em\u003e 6th ed.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTzur Bitan, D., Grossman-Giron, A., Bloch, Y., Mayer, Y., Shiffman, N. \u0026amp; Mendlovic, S. (2020). Fear of COVID-19 scale: Psychometric characteristics, reliability and validity in the Israeli population, \u003cem\u003ePsychiatry Research\u003c/em\u003e, 289 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113100\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWorld Health Organization. (2020). \u003cem\u003eWorld Health Organization,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eWorld Health Statistics 2020. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200314-%0Asitrep-54-covid-19.pdf?sfvrsn=dcd46351_2%0A\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWu, Y., Sun, I. Y., Ivkovich, S. K., Maskaly, J., Shen, S., \u0026amp; Neyroud, P. (2021). Explaining Stress during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Chinese Police officers, \u003cem\u003ePolicing: A Journal of Policy and Practice\u003c/em\u003e, 00(0), 1\u0026ndash;14 https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paab053\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003eTables 1 to 7 are available in the Supplementary Files section\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[{"identity":"c04c9bc8-3ed6-46dd-a891-ee323f7d3cb0","identifier":"10.13039/501100001871","name":"Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia","awardNumber":"2021.05085.BD","order_by":0}],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Fear Of Covid-19 Scale (FCV-19S), Psychometric Proprieties, Police Officers, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Measurement Invariance","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2633611/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2633611/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePurpose:\u003c/strong\u003e The Covid-19 pandemic conveyed consequences for people’s physical and mental health. During the worst pandemic scenarios, police officers were one of the most exposed populations. This situation brought these professionals unusual responsibilities, such as adjust work shifts and allocate police officers from operational and administrative services to the Covid-19 supervision teams and put them at an elevated risk of contracting the virus because they are also frontlineworkers too, and they often did not have personal protective equipment. Due to this, the main objective of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of a Portuguese version of the Fear of Covid-19 among police officers, as well as to know how the fear of Covid-19 relates to the mental health during the worst wave of the Covid-19 pandemic in Portugal.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethodogy:\u003c/strong\u003e Participants were 174 police officers aged between 23 and 58 years old (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e=40.81; \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e=6.83) who completed the Fear of Covid-19 Scale, the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire, and the Posttraumatic Disorder Checklist for DSM-5.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFindings:\u003c/strong\u003e Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a good adjustment fit for the two-factor model. Construct validity was supported, and the internal consistency was good for both periods of assessment. The model proved invariant for both groups (pre and during lockdown) at the measurement, scalar, and structural levels.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOriginality: \u003c/strong\u003eStudy findings suggest that the Portuguese Version of FCV-19S is a reliable measure to assess the fear of Covid-19 among police officers, including during the pandemic development.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"More Than Psychometric Properties of The Fear of Covid-19 Scale. The Struggle of The Portuguese Police Officers","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2023-02-28 22:29:24","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2633611/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"d8d64532-72e6-4724-b29b-653c498164a8","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 28th, 2023","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":19511933,"name":"Psychology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-05-01T21:56:30+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-2633611","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-024-09673-y","journal":{"identity":"journal-of-police-and-criminal-psychology","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology"},"publishedOn":"2024-04-22 21:56:30","publishedOnDateReadable":"April 22nd, 2024"},"versionCreatedAt":"2023-02-28 22:29:24","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s11896-024-09673-y","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-024-09673-y","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-2633611","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-2633611","identity":"rs-2633611","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"J0_U0BvcaRcwD8yVFaRlm","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}