Grounded in the Systemic–Transactional Model, this study developed the Perceived Stress Scale in Romantic Relationships and evaluated its psychometric properties in adults currently involved in a romantic relationship. Using a scale development design, data were collected from two independent samples of individuals who had been in a romantic relationship. The exploratory analyses were conducted with 571 participants (age range 20–63 years), and the confirmatory analysis was conducted with 246 participants (age range 21–64 years). Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Item functioning and precision were further evaluated using a graded response model within the item response theory framework. Discriminative power was tested by comparing lower and upper score groups, and criterion-related validity was examined through correlations with couple burnout, relationship satisfaction, and relationship consensus. Results supported a unidimensional five-item short form. Confirmatory analyses indicated good model fit, and multi-group confirmatory factor analysis supported strict measurement invariance across gender. Internal consistency was high in both samples. Criterion-related validity evidence showed strong positive associations with couple burnout and negative associations with relationship satisfaction and relationship consensus. Item-level results indicated adequate discrimination and that the scale provided the most precise measurement at moderate to high levels of perceived stress. Overall, the Perceived Stress Scale in Romantic Relationships appears to be a brief, valid, and reliable measure for assessing relationship-specific perceived stress.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ayşe Cansu Bilgen
Turgut Türkdoğan
International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education
Pamukkale University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Bilgen et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69b5ff8d83145bc643d1c3fb — DOI: https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1693020
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: