The unpredictability in the early life environment significantly impacts an individual's physical and psychological development. According to life history theory, individuals assess the harshness (danger or poverty) and unpredictability of their early environments to forecast future survival or reproductive conditions, and adjust their psychological and behavioral strategies accordingly to enhance fitness (Belsky et al., 2012; Doom et al., 2016; Ellis et al., 2009; Maner et al., 2023). Family unpredictability represents a critical aspect of early environmental unpredictability. It is defined as inconsistent family behavioral patterns and regulatory systems, in which parents are unable or unwilling to consistently fulfill caregiving responsibilities (e.g., providing emotional support and comfort) or maintain predictable disciplinary practices (e.g., punishment without misbehavior) (Ross and Hill, 2000). Disparities in family unpredictability can lead to differences in cognitive and behavioral patterns. Individuals exposed to high family unpredictability often develop the belief that the world is chaotic and unreliable, leading them to allocate resources to the present rather than the future, resulting in increased risk-taking behaviors (Griskevicius et al., 2013). Such behavioral adaptations, while potentially functional in unstable environments, are also associated with negative physical and mental health outcomes (Qi et al., 2024; Ross et al., 2016). Therefore, accurately assessing family unpredictability is essential for understanding individual psychological functioning, behavioral tendencies, and health risks.

Existing research primarily measures early life environmental unpredictability using retrospective self-report questionnaires (Mittal et al., 2015; Young et al., 2018). For example, Mittal et al. developed three items to assess the level of chaos in early life environments. These brief scales have been widely applied and have shown good reliability (Chen and Kruger, 2017; Feng et al., 2023), yet they have not undergone systematic validation. Moreover, they primarily assess general environmental chaos, rather than the specific and multifaceted nature of family unpredictability. Ross and Hill (2000) developed the Family Unpredictability Scale (FUS) to assess the degree of inconsistency in family behavioral patterns and regulatory systems. It consists of 22 items and comprises four factors: discipline, nurturance, meals, and money. The discipline factor (7 items) reflects inconsistency in establishing and maintaining rules; the nurturance factor (7 items) reflects parental inconsistency in offering comfort, protection, care, and emotional support during stressful situations; the meals factor (5 items) reflects uncertain meal times and companions; the money factor (3 items) reflects economic instability. The scale demonstrated good reliability and validity, and has been well validated in North American populations (Ross and Hill, 2004).

The FUS is a parent self-report scale that measures parents' perceptions of family unpredictability and is commonly used to examine its effects on child development. To more accurately assess the impact of early family unpredictability on adult outcomes, it is essential for adults to report their childhood experiences retrospectively. To this end, Ross and McDuff (2008) developed the Retrospective Family Unpredictability Scale (Retro-FUS), which asks participants to recall their perceptions of family unpredictability before age 18. Initial validation of the scale was conducted with a sample of 416 college students (aged 18–39, M = 19.86, SD = 2.39). Confirmatory factor analysis supported a six-factor model comprising 28 items, including meals (5 items), money (3 items), mom discipline (4 items), dad discipline (4 items), mom nurturance (6 items), and dad nurturance (6 items), with correlated errors specified for similar mom and dad items related to nurturance and discipline. The internal consistency of the subscales ranges from 0.71 to 0.84. Retro-FUS is a widely used and well-validated measure of family unpredictability in Western contexts, with strong evidence supporting its reliability and validity (Kolak et al., 2018; Luo et al., 2022; Ross et al., 2016; Ross and Wynne, 2010).

Due to potential cultural differences, the concept of family unpredictability may not generalize across cultures. Alarcão and Gaspar (2007) examined the FUS in a Portuguese sample of 514 mothers of children and adolescents aged 2 to 18. Although the revised structure was consistent with the original FUS, the internal consistency of the meal dimension was low (α = 0.55), raising concerns about cross-cultural applicability. To our knowledge, no studies have revised the retrospective version of the scale (Retro-FUS). However, Howat-Rodrigues et al. (2012) developed a Brazilian instrument based on the Retro-FUS and other local measures, titled Imprevisibilidade Familiar na Infância (EIFI), a 27-item scale rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Exploratory factor analysis yielded four factors: care/support, money, meals, and discipline, though discipline items cross-loaded onto the care dimension. In 2014, further validation supported a three-factor model comprising nurturance, money, and meals, which explained 53.37% of the variance (Howat-Rodrigues and Tokumaru, 2014). These findings underscore the importance of considering cultural context when measuring family unpredictability, regardless of whether it is assessed retrospectively or in the present, and suggest that directly applying Western-developed scales in China may pose risks in terms of item relevance and structural validity.

Currently, no studies in China have developed or revised tools for measuring family unpredictability. Despite the growing interest in understanding how family unpredictability influences psychological and behavioral outcomes, many researchers have directly adopted Western-developed instruments without formal validation. For example, Luo et al. (2022) employed the Environmental Unpredictability Questionnaire (Mittal et al., 2015) and the Family Unpredictability Scale (FUS; Ross and Hill, 2000) to examine the relationship between early environmental unpredictability and adult overeating. However, only six FUS items were used, excluding those related to meals and money, possibly reflecting cultural differences. These practices raise concerns about cultural applicability and psychometric soundness in China.

Significant differences in dietary practices, financial behavior, and family structures make it difficult to apply Western-developed questionnaires to the Chinese context directly. In terms of dietary norms, Chinese culture places greater emphasis on dining etiquette and shared experiences. In financial behavior, Chinese families tend to prioritize saving, while Western cultures are more inclined toward anticipatory consumption. For instance, China has one of the highest household savings rates globally (Song et al., 2021), yet its credit participation remains relatively low, with only 28% to 32% of households using credit between 2007 and 2016, compared to 74% to 78% in the United States (Survey and Research Center for China Household Finance and Ant Group Research Institute, 2019). Regarding family structures, China's long-standing family planning policies have resulted in smaller household sizes. According to the recent Chinese General Social Survey (2021), 78.9% of families have only one or two children. In contrast, Western families typically have more children, which require parents to distribute their attention and resources more broadly. Such differences in family size and structure inevitably shape child-rearing practices and parental behavior. Given these cultural differences, it is necessary to revise the Chinese version of the Retro-FUS and evaluate its psychometric properties to ensure its suitability for the Chinese context.

This study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Retro-FUS-C through a two-phase design. First, the original Retro-FUS was translated into Chinese, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on a sample of Chinese adults to examine item characteristics and underlying factor structure. Second, confirmatory factor analysis and reliability testing were conducted with an independent sample to confirm the factor structure and internal consistency. We also tested the measurement invariance for gender. Based on prior research linking childhood environmental unpredictability and harshness to adult attachment styles and psychological outcomes (Ellis et al., 2009; Ross et al., 2016; Ross and McDuff, 2008), we further examined correlations between the Retro-FUS-C, childhood socioeconomic status, neighborhood danger, adult attachment dimensions, and depressive symptoms.

This study revised and validated the Chinese version of the Retrospective Family Unpredictability Scale (Retro-FUS-C) for use in the Chinese cultural context. With permission from the original author, we translated the scale and conducted item analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). EFA suggested a three-factor structure, and CFA supported the modified model with good fit indices. Measurement invariance across gender was also established, indicating that the scale functions equivalently for male and female respondents. In addition, the Retro-FUS-C demonstrated acceptable internal consistency and criterion-related validity, supporting its reliability and utility in Chinese samples.

The three-factor structure of the Retro-FUS-C includes maternal nurturance, paternal nurturance, and parental discipline, consistent with the original scale's dimensions of nurturance and discipline proposed by Ross and McDuff (2008). However, there was a minor difference: the dimensions of paternal and maternal discipline were combined. This may reflect a more uniform perception of parental discipline in the Chinese context. Unlike the more differentiated parenting styles often observed in Western cultures, Chinese parents are strongly influenced by Confucian values that emphasize obedience, harmony, and filial piety. Within this cultural framework, discipline is frequently expressed through a “training” approach (Chao, 1994), which integrates behavioral control with emotional closeness and high parental involvement. Consequently, mothers and fathers in China often adopt similar disciplinary strategies. Supporting this, Luo et al. (2021) found through cluster analysis that over two-thirds of Chinese families exhibited high consistency between maternal and paternal parenting styles. In contrast, nurturance is more closely tied to culturally gendered parenting roles. Meta-analytic findings suggest that mothers are generally viewed as the primary caregivers, providing more emotional and day-to-day support, whereas fathers are more often associated with instrumental roles such as financial provision (Dou et al., 2020). Thus, while discipline reflects a shared parental identity, nurturance tends to retain distinct maternal and paternal characteristics.

Additionally, items related to meals and money were excluded due to both cultural and psychometric considerations. In terms of dietary practices, Western cultures tend to adopt square tables or buffet-style dining, reflecting cultural traits of independence and individuality, whereas Chinese culture emphasizes communal dining and family cohesion, typically around round tables (Ma, 2015; Ye et al., 2021). Rooted in Confucian values, shared family meals are viewed as rituals of filial piety and are maintained even under unpredictable circumstances (Christensen, 2017; Tian et al., 2018). As a result, unpredictability in family meals may not be applicable in the Chinese context. Similarly, the money items primarily assessed short-term financial fluctuations (e.g., “Some months we had plenty of money to spend, other months we were quite poor”), which may not be culturally appropriate in the Chinese context. In Western societies, where pre-consumption and credit-based spending is common, temporary income instability tends to have a stronger psychological impact. In contrast, Chinese families typically emphasize saving and frugality over unplanned consumption (Xiao and Fan, 2002; Ye et al., 2021), reflecting longstanding cultural values. This is further evidenced by data from the 2016 China Household Finance Survey (CHFS), which showed that only 17% of Chinese households owned credit cards (Gan et al., 2019), suggesting limited reliance on personal credit. Therefore, items referencing uncertainty about covering monthly expenses, such as “My parents were never sure how we would pay our bills from month to month,” may not resonate with most Chinese respondents. Moreover, financial uncertainty is often mitigated by intergenerational transfers and extended family support (Meng et al., 2023; Silverstein and Zhang, 2020), as well as relatively stable employment in government and state-owned sectors (Li et al., 2024; Wang and Xie, 2015). These structural and cultural factors reduce the psychological salience of financial volatility. Psychometrically, these items showed low CITC and/or weak factor loadings, supporting their exclusion on both cultural and empirical grounds.

Although the money dimension (assessing financial fluctuations) was excluded, our analyses confirmed that lower CSES remained significantly associated with higher family unpredictability. This result aligns with life history theory's distinction between harshness (stable adversity, e.g., chronic low CSES and neighborhood risk) and unpredictability (variable conditions, e.g., unstable nurturance) as related but distinct developmental antecedents (Belsky et al., 1991, 2012; Ellis et al., 2009; Griskevicius et al., 2013; Simpson et al., 2012). This suggests that chronic economic hardship, resource scarcity, and environmental threats may undermine the stability of parenting behaviors and emotional support (Belsky et al., 1991), ultimately shaping an individual's developmental trajectories.

According to classical attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969), consistent and predictable caregiving is essential for the development of a secure attachment system. In contrast, when caregivers respond inconsistently, children may become uncertain about their availability, which fosters insecure attachment patterns such as anxiety and avoidance (Ainsworth et al., 1978). These insecure patterns can later contribute to difficulties in forming and maintaining close relationships in adulthood (Fraley and Shaver, 2000; Hazan and Shaver, 1987). Contemporary attachment theorists highlight that early relational experiences shape internal working models, which guide expectations and behaviors in adult relationships (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007). In this context, the unpredictability (such as inconsistent nurturance and discipline, measured by Retro-FUS-C) may interfere with the development of stable internal working models of relationships (Barbaro and Shackelford, 2016; Belsky et al., 1991; French et al., 2020). Our findings are consistent with this framework, as higher scores of Retro-FUS-C were associated with weaker emotional bonds in adulthood (Close and Depend) and increased abandonment anxiety. These findings underscore the utility of the revised Retro-FUS-C in retrospectively assessing early family unpredictability and identifying individuals at risk for relational difficulties, thereby informing targeted interventions in close relationships.

Although most studies using the Retro-FUS have focused on non-clinical samples, emerging evidence suggests that early-life unpredictability contributes to psychological distress, particularly depression (Kolak et al., 2018; Ross et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2024). For example, Ross et al. (2016) found that greater exposure to family unpredictability predicted higher levels of depressive symptoms in adulthood. In our study, the significant association between higher unpredictability and elevated depressive symptoms underscores the potential clinical relevance of the Retro-FUS-C. Future research should investigate whether this scale can reliably predict psychiatric conditions such as mood and anxiety disorders in clinical populations.

In summary, this study demonstrates that the Retro-FUS-C is a reliable and culturally appropriate tool for assessing retrospective family unpredictability among Chinese young adults. By supporting key predictions of life history theory and attachment theory, it contributes to the understanding of early environmental influences in Chinese contexts. The scale also shows potential value in identifying individuals at heightened risk for later psychological difficulties, which may inform future prevention and intervention efforts. However, this study has certain limitations. Although participants were recruited from university participant pools, they came from diverse geographic regions, family backgrounds, and socioeconomic levels across China. This sampling approach, consistent with that used in the development of the original scale, supports initial generalizability. Nevertheless, the revised scale is currently more applicable to Chinese young adults, and its relevance to middle-aged or older populations remains unclear. Future research should consider age-specific revisions if necessary. Second, with the increasing popularity of consumer credit tools in China, such as Ant Credit Pay and installment-based purchasing, the experience and perception of financial unpredictability among younger generations may continue to change. As a result, the financial items in the Retro-FUS may require further revision over time to maintain contextual relevance. Future studies should examine how evolving economic behaviors affect the validity of these items and adapt the scale as new cohorts enter adulthood.

This study comprehensively evaluated the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Retrospective Family Unpredictability Scale (Retro-FUS-C). The results indicate that the Retro-FUS-C demonstrates good reliability and validity and is a culturally appropriate tool for assessing family unpredictability among Chinese young adults. It offers researchers and healthcare professionals in China a scientifically sound instrument to investigate early environmental influences and their psychological consequences. Further research is encouraged to explore the scale's applicability across different age groups and populations.