Project for the Japanese version of the COVID Stress Scales

Muta, Toshizumi; Takebayashi, Yoshitake; Sato, Hideki; Takashina, Hikari; Yokomitsu, Kengo; MitsukuniENOMOTO,; NaomiAKIYAMA,; Aoki, Shuntaro; TetsuriAbe,; TsunehikoTANAKA,

doi:10.17605/osf.io/ek9cx

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…High scores on the CSS indicate greater levels of COVID-related distress. The CSS has demonstrated good-to-excellent internal consistencies ( 7 ) and excellent validity and cross-cultural stability ( 9 , 13 , 15 , 23 ). For the samples used in this current study, McDonald’s omega ranged from good to excellent in Sample 2020 for the individual scales (ω = 0.82 to ω = 0.94) and was excellent for the total score (ω = 0.96).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there evidence for factorial invariance of the COVID Stress Scales? an analysis of North American and cross-cultural populations

Boehme,

Kinsman,

Taylor

et al. 2024

Front. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the mental health of more citizens globally than any previous modern viral outbreak. In response to the psychological challenges associated with COVID-19, the COVID Stress Scales (CSS) were developed to assess the presence and severity of COVID-related distress. The initial North American validation study of the CSS identified that the scale comprised five factors: danger and contamination fears, fear of socioeconomic consequences, xenophobia, checking and reassurance seeking, and traumatic stress symptoms. The CSS have since been validated across a multitude of international populations. However, findings support a five- and six-factor model. Methodological issues make interpreting most studies supporting a five-factor model challenging. The purpose of this study was to re-evaluate the factor structure of the CSS using data from North American samples, to assess for potential factorial invariance, and compare these results to cross-cultural findings. Multiple confirmatory factor analyses (mCFA) were conducted across 28 different groups (e.g., age, ethnicity/race, sex) from two large independent North American samples from 2020 (n = 6827) and 2021 (n = 5787), assessing the fit indices of the five-, six-, and alternative-factor model of the CSS. The current results provide evidence for factorial invariance of the six-factor model of the CSS across different North American demographics and highlight potential challenges in interpreting the results of studies that have supported a five-factor model of the CSS.

show abstract