“…It has been tested on different age groups and across different cultural backgrounds and found to be a reliable and valid measure of perceived social support (Canty-Mitchell & Zimet, 2000; Clara et al., 2003; Ramaswamy et al., 2009). MSPSS strengths include: (a) brevity – with only 12 items, four for each source of social support (MSPSS is not time-consuming and can be used in conjunction with other instruments when a study is designed to capture a broader range of variables); (b) readability – according to Canty-Mitchell and Zimet (2000), MSPSS items are easy to understand requiring only a fourth-grade reading level; (c) freedom from a social desirability response bias in that two studies (Dahlem et al., 1991; Kazarian & McCabe, 1991) reported negligible correlations between MSPSS and scores from the well-known Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale; and (d) well-established psychometric properties with community samples of adolescents (Canty-Mitchell & Zimet, 2000; Laksmita et al., 2020; Ramaswamy et al., 2009; Zimet et al., 1990), college students (Dahlem et al., 1991; Duru, 2007; Zimet et al., 1988), healthy participants (Rizwan & Aftab, 2009), unhealthy participants (Bugajski et al., 2019; Wittenborn et al., 2020) and adults, and older people (Wongpakaran et al., 2018). However, it should also be underscored that some studies indicated the need to correlate three (Wongpakaran et al., 2018) or four (Trejos-Herrera et al., 2018) pairs of errors among items in order to obtain a good fit of the MSPSS.…”