Conference Agenda

This study presents the development and further validation of the Dialogical Flexibility Scale (DFS), introduced the first time at the previous ICDS in Tallin. Dialogical flexibility (DF) is the ability to engage in adaptive internal dialogues across different I-positions, encompassing: (1) transforming dialogue content, (2) maintaining dialogues across scenarios, (3) conducting hypothetical dialogues with imagined figures, and (4) flexibly shifting I-positions. The 8-item DFS has a 5-point Likert scale from 1=never, to 5=very often. Internal consistency is high, α=.84. DFS has two subscales DF-Functions (cognitive processes) and DF-Manifestations (observable behaviors). Convergent validity analyses revealed positive correlations with self-reflection but negative associations with insight and self-concept clarity. Another research showed relationships between DF and internal dialogical activity, private speech and functions of self-talk, as well as a significant, albeit low, relationship between DF and emotional intelligence. The studies resulted in a more precise definition: DF is the use of the available repertoire of I-positions in such a way that it enables one to change one’s previous pattern/way of thinking that emphasizes adaptive role of this variable.

The present study examined associations between internal dialogical activity and indicators of mental health and affective experience while validating the Greek version of the Internal Dialogical Activity Scale–Revised (IDAS-R; Oleś, 2009). The IDAS-R is a 40-item self-report measure (5-point Likert) assessing the intensity and diversity of internal dialogues across eight subscales, capturing both constructive and conflictual forms of inner communication within the dialogical self. The adaptation followed established translation and validation procedures to ensure linguistic and conceptual equivalence. The Greek IDAS-R was administered to a convenience sample of 649 Greek-speaking adults varying in age, gender, and educational level. Psychometric evaluation assessed internal consistency and factorial validity using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, testing structural correspondence with the original model and potential culture-specific modifications. The study further examined the placement of internal dialogical activity within self-regulatory and affective processes by relating IDAS-R dimensions to (a) self-talk frequency and functions (Self-Talk Scale; Brinthaupt et al., 2009), (b) psychological distress (PHQ-4; Kroenke et al., 2009) and psychological well-being (WHO-5; Bech et al., 2003), and (c) affective experience (PANAS–Short Form; Watson et al., 1988). Maladaptive dialogical forms (e.g., ruminative, confronting) were expected to correlate positively with distress and negative affect and negatively with well-being, whereas adaptive forms (e.g., supportive) were expected to show the opposite pattern. Overall, findings support the Greek IDAS-R as a reliable and valid instrument for studying internal dialogical activity in Greek-speaking populations and clarify its links to mental health and affective indicators.

Dialogicity—the capacity to engage multiple perspectives, respond to internal and external voices, and co-construct meaning—is theorized to support well-being and adaptive interpersonal functioning. Existing instruments capture internal dialogic processes; a key next step is a psychometrically grounded measure that also links these capacities to their overt interpersonal manifestations. This presentation introduces the Dialogicity Scale (DS), a measure intended to integrate internal manifestations, dispositional attitudes, and habitual communicative behaviors into a holistic, multidimensional construct. Grounded in a synthesis of Bakhtinian and contemporary dialogic theory, the DS conceptualizes dialogicity as a value-laden, developable readiness to hold plurality, remain receptive to otherness, and sustain meaning-making under conflict. The scale blueprint specifies six subdomains: (1) internal polyphony, (2) dialogic engagement, (3) contextual sensitivity, (4) carnivalization, (5) meta-dialogical reflectivity, and (6) an answerability ethos. Scale construction is organized as a multi-stage pipeline. The project begins with a broad item pool (~60 items) to maximize domain coverage and is intended to be refined to ~20–35 items. Items are designed for accessibility (Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level ≤ 8) and will use a six-point Likert format and a general time frame to capture habitual orientation; items will be kept positively keyed to minimize polarity-related method effects. Content validity will be examined via expert review using a pre-defined item-level CVI threshold (≥ .80), followed by reparative cognitive interviews to detect comprehension and response-mapping problems. Psychometric evaluation is planned as a two-sample online design (N≈600), using EFA in Sample 1 and CFA in Sample 2 to cross-validate structure and assess reliability and validity indicators. The DS framework and preliminary outcomes will be presented, alongside next-step revisions that move the DS toward a practical instrument for studying dialogical capacity in everyday interpersonal contexts.