2013
DOI: 10.1007/s10862-013-9383-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Study of the Psychometric Properties of the Social Support Scale for Children

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…See Table 1 for sample summary statistics for this measure. This scale demonstrates good psychometric properties (Harter, 1985; Lipski, Sifers, & Jackson, 2014). Internal consistency across all timepoints was adequate with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.76 (Wave 1) to 0.83 (Wave 4) for parental support; 0.69 (Wave 1) to 0.82 (Wave 3) for teacher support; and 0.82 (Wave 1) to 0.87 (Wave 4) for peer support.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…See Table 1 for sample summary statistics for this measure. This scale demonstrates good psychometric properties (Harter, 1985; Lipski, Sifers, & Jackson, 2014). Internal consistency across all timepoints was adequate with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.76 (Wave 1) to 0.83 (Wave 4) for parental support; 0.69 (Wave 1) to 0.82 (Wave 3) for teacher support; and 0.82 (Wave 1) to 0.87 (Wave 4) for peer support.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Responses were summed with scores ranging from 6 to 24 (low to high perceived social support) for 6 items that comprise each of the four subscales (parent, teacher, peer, and close friend social support). The measure demonstrates adequate internal and test–retest reliability, and adequate internal, construct, and convergent validity (Lipski, Sifers, & Jackson, 2014). In this study, internal consistency was good, α = .83–.90.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Classmates and Close Friends subscales (each comprised of 6 items) of the Social Support Scale for Children (SSS-C; Harter, 1985; see Lipski et al, 2014 for further psychometric support) were used to assess perceived peer social support. The “Classmates” items evaluate perceived support from one’s broader peer group (“Some kids have classmates they can become friends with BUT Other kids don’t have classmates they can become friends with”); “Close Friend” items tap perceived support from a specific close friend (“Some kids have a close friend who really understands them BUT Other kids don’t have a close friend who understands them”).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%