Psychometric Properties of Multi-Dimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support in Chinese Parents of Children with Cerebral Palsy

Abstract

The Multi-dimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) is one of the most extensively used instruments to assess social support. The purpose of this research was to test the reliability, factorial validity, concurrent validity and measurement invariance across gender groups of the MSPSS in Chinese parents of children with cerebral palsy. A total of 487 participants aged 21–55 years were recruited to complete the Chinese MSPSS and Parenting Stress Index-Short Form (PSI-SF). Composite reliability was calculated as the internal consistency of the Chinese MSPSS and a (multi-group) confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to test the factorial validity and measurement invariance across gender. And Pearson correlations were calculated to test the relationships between MSPSS and PSI-SF. The Chinese MSPSS had satisfactory internal reliability with composite reliability values of more than 0.7. The CFA indicated that the original three-factor model was replicated in this specific population. Importantly, the results of the multi-group CFA demonstrated that configural, metric, and scalar invariance across gender groups was supported. In addition, all the three subscales of MSPSS were significant related with PSI-SF. These findings suggest that the Chinese MSPSS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing social support and can generally be utilized across sex in the parents of children with cerebral palsy.

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support in Indonesian adolescent disaster survivors: A psychometric evaluation

“…Regarding the reliability analysis, our statistical results supported that every construct in the scale being reliable. This was similar to results of a study of Chinese parents of children with cerebral palsy [21] and supported all three of the subscales achieving very good reliability values. The scale also demonstrated good internal consistency reliability with CR values of >0.7; therefore, the scale is considered a reliable and valid tool to measure social support as perceived by adolescent disaster survivors.…”

“…MSPSS in samples of undergraduate men and women and reported that both the configural and metric tests were fully invariant, while its metric equivalence was partially invariant. Our study also obtained similar results from a recent study conducted in Chinese parents of children with cerebral palsy in which the MSPSS held the same constructs across gender groups [21]. Our findings described how the structure of the Indonesian version of the MSPSS measures similar constructs and item contents for both male and female adolescent disaster survivors.…”

“…Social support from these groups is very meaningful for adolescents, and it gives them a sense that support is reliable and available when they need it [13,17]. It was initially developed in US undergraduate students aged 17~22 years old [13] followed by other studies which confirmed the factorial validity of a three-factor structure for US adolescents and adults [17,18], Turkish adults [19], Singaporean adults [20], and Chinese adults [21] and of a two-factor structure for Chinese adolescents [16], Hispanic adult immigrants [22], US older adults [23], and South Asian adults [24]. However, testing of the scale's validity in disaster survivors is lacking, particularly in Indonesian adolescent populations.…”

“…The literature suggests that gender differences exist in social support scales. However, there is a need to ensure the measurement invariance [21,25]. Thus, it is very important to provide a prerequisite for meaningful comparisons across groups because measurement invariance examines whether populations of different genders interpret a given measure in a conceptually similar manner over several performance dimensions [26].…”

Moderating Effects of Religiosity on the Relationship Between Trauma and Suicidal Behaviors Among College Students in Northwest China

“…The scale has acceptable reliability and validity in Chinese (Y. Wang, Wan, Huang, Huang, & Kong, 2017).…”