François Vigneau , Philippe Rousselle , Dalton Breno Costa
{"title":"Psychometric properties of the 10-item English-language Social Provisions Scale","authors":"François Vigneau , Philippe Rousselle , Dalton Breno Costa","doi":"10.1016/j.erap.2025.101098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>One of the most widely used self-report questionnaires to assess perceived social support is the Social Provisions Scale (SPS; <span><span>Cutrona & Russell, 1987</span></span>). This 24-item scale was designed to measure six dimensions of social support. A brief, 10-item version of the SPS was developed by Caron (SPS-10; <span><span>Caron, 2013</span></span>).</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study examined the reliability, dimensionality and criterion validity of the English-language SPS-10.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>SPS-10 data from 19,656 respondents (8,928 men and 10,728 women) of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) were subjected to exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. The external validity of the total score and the suggested dimension scores was assessed through correlations with three criterion health variables: psychological distress, positive mental health, and perceived health.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Principal component analysis of the SPS-10 revealed a single dimension of social support. Confirmatory factor analyses of various models were also consistent with a unidimensional interpretation of the SPS-10 scores. Although the reliability of the total score was satisfactory (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.93), the reliabilities of the suggested dimension scores were moderate. The dimension scores do not show evidence of differential validity with respect to the health variables examined.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In light of the results of various factor analyses and given the lack of external validity exhibited by the suggested dimensions, SPS-10 scores are best conceptualized as unidimensional. The use of SPS-10 dimension scores is not recommended.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46883,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Applied Psychology-Revue Europeenne De Psychologie Appliquee","volume":"75 6","pages":"Article 101098"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review of Applied Psychology-Revue Europeenne De Psychologie Appliquee","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1162908825000337","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
One of the most widely used self-report questionnaires to assess perceived social support is the Social Provisions Scale (SPS; Cutrona & Russell, 1987). This 24-item scale was designed to measure six dimensions of social support. A brief, 10-item version of the SPS was developed by Caron (SPS-10; Caron, 2013).
Objectives
This study examined the reliability, dimensionality and criterion validity of the English-language SPS-10.
Method
SPS-10 data from 19,656 respondents (8,928 men and 10,728 women) of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) were subjected to exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. The external validity of the total score and the suggested dimension scores was assessed through correlations with three criterion health variables: psychological distress, positive mental health, and perceived health.
Results
Principal component analysis of the SPS-10 revealed a single dimension of social support. Confirmatory factor analyses of various models were also consistent with a unidimensional interpretation of the SPS-10 scores. Although the reliability of the total score was satisfactory (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.93), the reliabilities of the suggested dimension scores were moderate. The dimension scores do not show evidence of differential validity with respect to the health variables examined.
Conclusion
In light of the results of various factor analyses and given the lack of external validity exhibited by the suggested dimensions, SPS-10 scores are best conceptualized as unidimensional. The use of SPS-10 dimension scores is not recommended.
期刊介绍:
The aim of the Revue européenne de Psychologie appliquée / European Review of Applied Psychology is to promote high-quality applications of psychology to all areas of specialization, and to foster exchange among researchers and professionals. Its policy is to attract a wide range of contributions, including empirical research, overviews of target issues, case studies, descriptions of instruments for research and diagnosis, and theoretical work related to applied psychology. In all cases, authors will refer to published and verificable facts, whether established in the study being reported or in earlier publications.