An Assessment of the Psychometric Properties of the Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS10) with Business and Accounting Students

Abstract

Using a sample of 557 undergraduate business students from three U.S. comprehensive universities, this study examined: (a) the factor structure of the Perceived Stress Scale‐10 (PSS10; Cohen and Williamson, 1988); (b) the invariance of its factor structure; (c) the scale's reliability; and (d) its convergent and divergent validity. Confirmatory factor analyses supported a structure with two primary factors, General Distress and Ability‐to‐Cope, loading on a single second‐order factor, Perceived Stress. Furthermore, this model was confirmed for designated subpopulations including the 264 accounting majors who participated in the study. Notably absent in prior research, this study found two items, numbers 2 and 9, to load significantly on both the General Distress and Ability‐to‐Cope factors with men and the full sample, respectively. Item–total correlations, coefficient alphas, and Spearman‐Brown reliability coefficients supported the reliability of the items loading on the full scale as well as on each of the two primary factors. Combined, these findings provide compelling evidence in support of the PSS10 as a stress assessment measure for business students in general, and accounting students in particular. In fact, given its practical expediency in terms of administration and scoring, the PSS10 appears to be a tool that could be used by university administrators and potentially by human resource personnel at accounting and business organizations to assess student/employee perceived stress levels before the onset of burnout tendencies, thus facilitating more timely and cost‐effective intervention strategies.

Perceived stress in university students studying in a further education college

“…Several authors have found gender differences in perceived stress in different student samples, all reporting females to have a higher level of perceived stress when compared to males (Andreou et al 2011;Leung et al 2010;Örücü and Demir 2009;Remor et al 2006;Roberti et al 2006;Smith et al 2014). Data from the current study supports this notion, concluding that female students were significantly more susceptible to stress compared to males (19.16 vs. 15.52 respectively).…”

“…As it is difficult to generalise a normative perceived stress score due to a number of confounding variables, it may be more appropriate to compare our findings to a student only population. In this context the average score reported in this paper is comparable to scores of ~17 (Roberti et al 2006) and ~16 (Smith et al 2014) from the USA, and ~19 from Turkey (Örücü and Demir 2009).…”

“…Therefore the purpose of this research was to provide insight into the student experience of those that study higher education in a further education college by describing levels of perceived stress. The findings of the study may have pedagogical implications for college higher education teaching staff and student services personnel, as Smith et al (2014) suggest the assessment of perceived stress can be utilized as an initial screening tool for distressed students.…”

“…The PSS consisted of 10 items (PSS-10), that included a negative subscale (item 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10) and a positive subscale (4,5,7,8). This study used the PSS-10 as a unidimensional measure whereby the higher the score, the higher the level of perceived stress (Smith et al 2014). The 10 item version of the PSS has previously been widely shown to demonstrate validity and reliability (Andreou et al 2011;Cohen and Williamson 1988;Leung et al 2010, Remor et al 2006, including with similar populations i.e.…”

“…The 10 item version of the PSS has previously been widely shown to demonstrate validity and reliability (Andreou et al 2011;Cohen and Williamson 1988;Leung et al 2010, Remor et al 2006, including with similar populations i.e. students (Roberti et al 2006;Smith et al 2014), and has been recommended in comparison to the PSS-4 and PSS-14 (Leung et al 2010). Moreover as the PSS-10 has been implemented in other student groups it would facilitate comparison with the existing literature.…”