This the multi-page printable view of this section. Click here to print.

Return to the regular view of this page.

Výzkumné nástroje používané na OUSHI

Shiny aplikace

V současné sobě probíhá na OUSHI vývoj tzv. shiny aplikací, které umožnují vytvářet webové aplikace analyzující data či vytvářející interaktivní tabulky a grafy.

Seznam Shiny aplikací

V současné době jsou k dispozici následující aplikace:

Lasy logistic regression

Tato shiny aplikace využívá funkci lasy_log_reg obsaženou v R balíčku psychtoolbox, která dokáže spočítat logistickou regresi a vytvořit publication ready tabulku. Integrální součástí této funkce je automatická korekce p hodnoty pro mnohonásobné testování. Tato korekce dosud není sočástí konvenčních statistických programů (např. SPSS) a při opakovaném testování více závislých proměnných tak nutně dochází ke zkreslení výsledků analýz. Proti tomuto zkreslní byly v lasy_log_reg funkci a potažmo v Lasy logistic regression Shiny aplikaci vyvinuty postupy, které toto zkreslení ošetřují.

Odkaz na aplikaci je možné nalézt zde. Pokud si odkaz na aplikaci uložíte a stalo by se Vám, že by za nějaký čas odkaz nefungoval, je třeba si odkaz na aplikaci aktualizovat. Nejaktuálnější odkaz vždy naleznete v této sekci pod výše uvdedeným odkazem: zde.

Instruktážní video k používání aplikace je možné nalézt zde.

1 -

The Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS) is a six-item brief self-rating scale designed to assess at-risk social media addiction. The BSMAS is an adaptation of the Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale with the simple substitution of the term “Facebook” for “Social Media”. The items reflect the core elements of addiction:

Meaning - activity dominates thinking and behavior,
Mood modification - activity modifies mood
Tolerance - increasing amounts of activity are required to achieve the previous effects,
Withdrawal symptoms - the occurrence of unpleasant sensations when activity is interrupted or suddenly reduced,
Conflict - activity causes conflict in relationships, work/education and other activities,
Relapse - tendency to return to earlier patterns of activity after abstinence or control.

The BSMAS assesses problematic social media use behaviors over a twelve-month period.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 3 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By completing the scale, the proband determines if social media addiction is a concern.

Keywords

Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale, BSMAS, addiction, social networking, social media

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is obtained by summing the scores of all items, and thus ranges from 6-30, with higher scores indicating higher levels of problematic social media use and dependence.

Response Scale

Respondents answer each item on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “very rarely” (1) to “very often” (5).

References

Andreassen, C., Billieux, J., Griffiths, M., Kuss, D., Demetrovics, Z., Mazzoni, E., & Pallesen, S. (2016). The Relationship Between Addictive Use of Social Media and VideoGames and Symptoms of Psychiatric Disorders: A Large-ScaleCross-Sectional Study. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 30(2), 252-262. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/adb0000160252

Andreassen, C., Torsheim, T., Brunborg, G., & Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychological Reports, 110(2), 501-517. https://doi.org/10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2.501-517

Duradoni, M., Innocenti, F., & Guazzini, A. (2020). Well-Being and Social Media: A Systematic Review of Bergen Addiction Scales. Future Internet, 12(24). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/fi12020024

Zarate, D., Hobson, B., March, E., Griffiths, M., & Stavropoulos, V. Psychometric properties of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale: An analysis using item response theory. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 17(100473). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2022.100473

2 -

Big Five Inventory

The Big Five Inventory (BFI) is a valid and reliable psychodiagnostic instrument designed to measure five dimensions of human personality. It is relatively brief for a multidimensional personality inventory (44 items in total) and consists of short sentences with a relatively accessible vocabulary. Specifically, it measures the following dimensions of human personality:

Neuroticism
Agreeableness
Extraversion
Conscientiousness
Openness

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire will take approximately 10 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the questionnaire, the respondent will learn about themselves and how they stand on each personality dimension.

Keywords

Big Five, personality, extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness

Scoring and interpretation

Extraversion: 1, 6R, 11, 16, 21R, 26, 31R, 36. Agreeableness: 2R, 7, 12R, 17, 22, 27R, 32, 37R, 42. Conscientiousness: 3, 8R, 13, 18R, 23R, 28, 33, 38, 43R. Neuroticism: 4, 9R, 14, 19, 24R, 29, 34R, 39. Openness: 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35R, 40, 41R, 44. Before beginning the assessment, it is necessary to convert the scores for the reverse items (denoted by R after the item number) that measure the opposite poles of the traits. Summing the scores yields a total score for each dimension. A higher score indicates a higher trait measure.

Response Scale

The BFI method uses a Likert-type scale for responses, where the proband expresses their agreement on a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = rather disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = rather agree, 5 = strongly agree).

References

Benet-Martínez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 729–750. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.729

Hřebíčková, M., Jelínek, M., Blatný, M., Brom, C., Burešová, I., Graf, S., Mejzlíková, T., Vazsonyi, A., & Zábrodská, K. (2016). Big Five Inventory: Základní psychometrické charakteristiky české verze BFI-44 a BFI-10. Československá psychologie, 60(6), 567-583. https://dostal.vyzkum-psychologie.cz/soubory/BFI2.pdf

John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (102–138). http://jenni.uchicago.edu/econ-psych-traits/John_Srivastava_1995_big5.pdf

John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm Shift to the Integrative Big-Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Conceptual Issues. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (114-158). https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/bigfive.htm

3 -

Big Three Perfectionism Scale - Short Form (BTPS-SF)

The Big Three Perfectionism Scale - Short Form is a short version of the BTPS that contains 16 items. It is a self-assessment questionnaire assessing three dimensions of perfectionism: rigid perfectionism (demanding one’s own flawless performance), self-critical perfectionism (worrying about imperfect performance and strong self-criticism), and narcissistic perfectionism (critically demanding excessive perfection from others). Perfectionism is thus a multidimensional personality trait that involves high personal standards and critical evaluation of self and others.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the questionnaire, the respondent will learn about themselves on how they stand on each dimension of perfectionism.

Keywords

Big Three Perfectionism Scale - Short Form, BTPS-SF, perfectionism, regidian perfectionism, self-critical perfectionism, narcissistic perfectionism

Scoring and interpretation

For each dimension, the total score is calculated by summing the individual items. A higher score indicates a higher level of the trait (rigid/self-critical/narcissistic perfectionism).

Response Scale

Respondents express their level of agreement with the statements on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5).

References

Feher, A., Smith, M., Saklofske, D., & Plouffe, R. (2020). The big three perfectionism scale–short form (BTPS-SF): Development of a brief self-report measure of multidimensional perfectionism. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38(1), 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282919878553

Smith, M. M., Saklofske, D. H., Stoeber, J., & Sherry, S. B. (2016). The big three perfectionism scale: A new measure of perfectionism. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment.

Svicher, A., Gori, A., & Di Fabio, A. (2022). The Big Three Perfectionism Scale–Short Form: An item response theory analysis of Italian workers. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.971226

4 -

Brief Sensation Seeking Scale (BSSS)

The Brief Sensation Seeking Scale (BSSS) was created by adapting and shortening the number of items of the Sensation Seeking Scale-V (SSS-V). It contains 8 short statements to which the respondent expresses his/her level of agreement. The BSSS maintains the four dimensions of the SSS-V: Experience seeking, Boredom susceptibility, Thrill and adventure seeking, and Disinhibition. Sensation seeking is a predictor of a wide range of problem behaviors. Individuals with high levels of sensation seeking tend to engage in risky activities such as risky sexual behaviour, reckless driving, smoking, alcohol and illicit drug use.

Length of completion

The BSSS takes approximately 3 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback to the respondent

After completing the questionnaire, the respondent will learn how they score on sensation seeking and therefore if they are prone to risky behaviors.

Keywords

Brief Sensation Seeking Scale, BSSS, SSS-V, sensation seeking, risky behavior, experience seeking, arousal

Scoring and interpretation

In the BSSS, the total score is obtained by summing the scores for all items, and a higher score refers to a higher level of sensation seeking in the respondent.

Response Scale

Responses are presented on a five-point scale labeled “strongly disagree,” “disagree,” “neither agree nor disagree,” “agree,” and “strongly agree.”

References

Hoyle, R., Stephenson, M., Palmgreen, P., Pugzles Lorch, E., & Donohew, L. (2002). Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(3), 401-414. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00032-0

Merino-Soto, C., Salas-Blas, E., Pérez-Amezcua, B., García-Rivas, J., Peña, G., & Toledano-Toledano, F. (2022). Brief Sensations Seeking Scale (BSSS): Validity Evidence in Mexican Adolescents. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 19(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19137978

Zuckerman, M., Kolin, E. A., Price, L., & Zoob, I. (1964). Development of a sensation-seeking scale. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 28(6), 477–482. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040995

5 -

Copenhagen Burnout inventory (CBI)

The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) has been developed to measure burnout in different areas. It is a valid and reliable instrument consisting of 19 simple questions. The CBI contains three parts, each focusing on a different area of burnout: personal burnout, work burnout and client-related burnout. In the CBI, the core of burnout is fatigue and exhaustion. Personal burnout is operationalized in terms of feelings of physical, emotional, and mental fatigue and exhaustion, while work-related burnout refers to symptoms that respondents attribute to their specific work activity. Client-related burnout instead sketches burnout symptoms selectively referring to respondents' feelings towards their target clients.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes about 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By evaluating the questionnaire, the respondent will know if they are at risk of burnout personally, work related, client related or none.

Keywords

CBI, burnout, burnout syndrome, exhaustion, personal burnout, work burnout, client-related burnout

Scoring and interpretation

For each CBI subscale, the total score is calculated as the average of the scores obtained for each item. The average score ranges from 0-100, with higher scores indicating higher levels of burnout. Throughout the questionnaire, one reverse item is located in the work burnout subscale: ‘Do you have enough energy for family and friends in your spare time?’ The order of the questions is not fixed and should be alternated.

Response Scale

Respondents answer CBI items on a five-point scale, anchored verbally in the questionnaire in two ways depending on the type of item, so that the response makes sense (scored in the same way). First type: ‘Always’ (100), ‘Often’ (75), ‘Sometimes’ (50), ‘Rarely’ (25) and ‘Never/almost never’ (0). Second type: ‘To a very high degree’ (100), ‘To a high degree’ (75), ‘Partly’ (50), ‘To a low degree’ (25) and ‘To a very low degree’ (0). Can also be scored as 4 to 0.

References

Borritz, M., Rugulies, R., Bjorner, J., Villadsen, E., Mikkelsen, O., & Kristensen, T. (2006). Burnout among employees in human service work: design and baseline findings of the PUMA study. Candinavian Journal of Public Health, 34(1), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/14034940510032275

Copenhagen Burnout Inventory - CBI. (2023). Det Nationale Forskningscenter for Arbejdsmiljø. Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://nfa.dk/da/Vaerktoejer/Sporgeskemaer/Sporgeskema-til-maaling-af-udbraendthed/Copenhagen-Burnout-Inventory-CBI

Kristensen, T., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19(3), 192-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500297720

6 -

CORE-OM (Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure)

CORE-OM is a relatively brief, user-friendly questionnaire designed to measure the effect of psychotherapeutic or counselling interventions and to routinely monitor progress in treatment. It is used at the beginning of therapy to determine differences in the severity of problems people may have and at subsequent intervals to measure change. The questionnaire contains 34 statements to which the respondent answers on a scale of how often they have felt this way in the last week. The items are divided into four subscales:

Mental well-being (a person’s satisfaction with self),
Problems (symptoms common to depression, anxiety, effects of traumatic events, and physical symptoms),
Functioning (close relationships, overall functioning of the person and other social aspects),
Risk (risky behaviors in relation to other people or to oneself).

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire will take approximately 7-10 minutes to complete.

Keywords

CORE-OM, outcome measure, mental well-being, problems, functioning, risk

Scoring and interpretation

The items can be used to calculate the scores for all the above subscales, the total score for the entire questionnaire, and the total questionnaire score excluding the Risk subscale. An average score is used, which takes values from 0 to 4. A higher score means a higher level of pathology. Eight items are positively worded and reverse scored (items 3, 4, 7, 12, 19, 21, 31, 32).

Response Scale

Clients always select one option on a five-point scale ranging from “not at all” (0) to “mostly or always” (4).

References

Evans, C., Mellor-Clark, J., Margison, F., Barkham, M., Audin, K., Connell, J., & McGrath, G. (2000). CORE: Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation. Journal of Mental Health, 9(3), 247-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/jmh.9.3.247.255

Evans, C., Connell, J., Barkham, M., Margison, F., McGrath, G., Mellor-Clark, J., & Audin, K. (2002). Towards a standardised brief outcome measure: Psychometric properties and utility of the CORE–OM. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 180(1), 51-60. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.180.1.51

Information about the CORE-OM. (2022). Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (and CST). Retrieved March 12, 2023, from https://www.coresystemtrust.org.uk/home/instruments/core-om-information/

Juhová, D., Řiháček, T., Cígler, H., Dubovská, E., Saic, M., Černý, M., Dufek, J., & Evans, C. (2018). Česká adaptace dotazníku CORE-OM: Vybrané psychometrické charakteristiky. Československá psychologie, 62(1), 59-74. https://www.muni.cz/vyzkum/publikace/1415916

7 -

Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD)

The Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD) is a valid and brief 12-item personality inventory developed to capture the possible presence of three comorbid socially maladaptive traits - the dark triad:

Narcissism (items 4, 5, 6, 7): pride self-centeredness, inability to empathize with others,
Machiavellianism (3, 8, 9, 10): manipulation, cynicism, selfishness,
Psychopathy (1, 2, 11, 12): recklessness, callousness, impulsiveness.

It consists of short statements expressing tendencies characteristic of each component of the dark triad, with the respondent recording the degree of agreement with these statements.

Length of completion

The entire inventory takes approximately 3 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback to the respondent

After the DTDD has been assessed, the experimenter will learn whether the subject has any Dark Triad traits.

Keywords

Dark Triad Dirty Dozen, DTDD, dark triad, dark triad, narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy

Scoring and interpretation

It is possible to calculate a total score for each subscale separately or a total score for the whole inventory. A higher score indicates a higher feature rate.

Response Scale

Respondents answer the DTDD items on a 7-point Likert scale: “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (7).

References

Jonason, P., & Webster, G. (2010). The dirty dozen: a concise measure of the dark triad. Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 420-432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019265

Jonason, P., Webster, G., Kaufman, S., & Geher, G. (2013). What lies beneath the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen: Varied relations with the Big Five. Individual Differences Research, 11(2), 81-90. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286027132_What_lies_beneath_the_Dark_Triad_Dirty_Dozen_Varied_relations_with_the_Big_Five

Jonason, P., & Webster, G. (2013). Putting the “IRT” in “Dirty”: tem response theory analyses of the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen—An efficient measure of narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(2), 302-306. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.08.027

Rogoza, R., Żemojtel-Piotrowska, M., Jonason, P. K., Piotrowski, J., Campbell, K. W., Gebauer, J. E., Maltby, J., Sedikides, C., Adamovic, M., Adams, B. G., Ang, R. P., Ardi, R., Atitsogbe, K. A., Baltatescu, S., Bilić, S., Bodroža, B., Gruneau Brulin, J., Bundhoo Poonoosamy, H. Y., Chaleeraktrakoon, T., … Włodarczyk, A. (2021). Structure of Dark Triad Dirty Dozen Across Eight World Regions. Assessment, 28(4), 1125–1135. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191120922611

8 -

De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale (DJGLS)

The De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale (DJGLS) is a reliable and valid instrument designed to capture the severity of feelings of loneliness. It contains 11 items: 5 are worded in a positive way and 6 in a negative way. The negative items refer mainly to the respondents' perception that they miss their partner or best friend very much and represent a subscale of emotional loneliness. Positive items refer mainly to the absence of a broader category of acquaintances, colleagues and friends and represent the social loneliness subscale. The scale can also be used as a unidimensional instrument to measure overall loneliness.

Length of completion

The entire scale takes approximately 3-5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By completing the scale, the respondent receives information about the severity of their own loneliness.

Keywords

De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale, DJGLS, loneliness, emotional loneliness, social loneliness

Scoring and interpretation

The score for emotional loneliness is the sum of neutral and positive responses (“more or less”, “yes” and “yes!") for items 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10 (items phrased in a positive vein). The score for social loneliness is the sum of neutral and negative responses for items 1, 4, 7, 8, 11 (phrased in a negative vein). The total scale score is the sum of the emotional and social loneliness scores ranging from 0 (not lonely) to 11 (extremely lonely).

Response Scale

Possible responses are “yes!”, “yes”, “more or less”, and “no!”.

References

de Jong-Gierveld, J., & Kamphuls, F. (1985). The Development of a Rasch-Type Loneliness Scale. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9(3), 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168500900307

de Jong Gierveld, J., van Tilburg, T. (1999). Living arrangements of older adults in the Netherlands and Italy: Coresidence values and behaviour and their consequences for loneliness. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology 14, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006600825693

de Jong-Gierveld, J., & van Tilburg, T. G. (1999). Manual of the Loneliness Scale. Methoden en technieken https://research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/1092113

de Jong Gierveld, J., Van Tilburg, T., & Dykstra, P. (2006). Loneliness and Social Isolation. In A. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships (Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology, 485-500). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/cambridge-handbook-of-personal-relationships/loneliness-and-social-isolation/246AFB3CA8837959725B67497331E0A8

9 -

Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21)

The Depression Anxiety Stress Scale is a self-report instrument designed to measure three related negative emotional states: depression, anxiety, and tension/stress. The DASS-21 is an abbreviated version of the original 42-item questionnaire that contains 21 items covering three subscales: depression, anxiety, and stress (7 items each). Each of these subscales also captures a more general dimension of psychological distress or negative affectivity.

Length of completion

It takes approximately 10 minutes to complete the entire scale.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After scoring the questionnaire, the subject will learn whether he or she is exhibiting any symptoms of depression, anxiety, or stress.

Keywords

DASS-21, depression, anxiety, stress, negative affectivity, negative emotional states

Scoring and interpretation

For each subscale, summary scores are calculated separately: depression (items 3+5+10+13+16+17+21), anxiety (items 2+4+7+9+15+19+20) and stress (items 1+6+8+11+12+14+18). Scores from the DASS-21 must first be multiplied by two to be compared with normative data. Higher skins indicate a higher level of trait.

Response Scale

Respondents rate the frequency with which the above statements were true for them in the past week using a four-point scale (0 = not at all, 1 = sometimes, 2 = often, and 3 = almost always).

References

Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS21). (2023). Wisconsin. Retrieved February 28, 2023, from https://arc.psych.wisc.edu/self-report/depression-anxiety-stress-scale-21-dass21/

Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS). (2022). Retrieved February 28, 2023, from http://www2.psy.unsw.edu.au/groups/dass/

Henry, J., & Crawford, J. (2005). The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44(2), 227-239. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466505X29657

Lovibond, S.H. & Lovibond, P.F. (1995). Manual for the Depression Anxiety & Stress Scales. (2nd Ed.) Sydney: Psychology Foundation.

Vilímovský, T., & Kučera, D. (2018). Vilimovský & Kučera Czech DASS21. DASS Translations. http://www2.psy.unsw.edu.au/dass/Czech/Vilimovsky%20Czech.htm

10 -

Experiences in Close Relationships - Relationship Structures (ECR-RS)

The Experiences in Close Relationships - Relationship Structures or Relationship Sctuctures Questionnaire (ECR-RS) is a 9-item self-report instrument designed to assess relational attachment to close persons. The ECR-RS clearly specifies four attachment persons - mother, father, romantic partner, and best friend. The wording of the items is consistent across the four relational contexts, allowing for meaningful assessment of attachment homogeneity or differentiation across different relational contexts. The questionnaire has two dimensions, attachment anxiety (3 items) and relational avoidance (6 items). The anxiousness dimension corresponds to the extent to which a person tends to exhibit attachment-related concerns, such as the availability and responsiveness of the attachment figure. The dimension of avoidance represents the degree of perceived discomfort in opening up to and relying on others. It can also be used as a 9-item version of the 36-item ECR-R.

Length of completion

The ECR-RS takes approximately 5-7 minutes to complete for all relational persons.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

Upon completion of the questionnaire, the respondent will learn what relational attachments he/she exhibits to the related persons.

Keywords

Relationship Structures, ECR-RS, relational attachment, attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance

Scoring and interpretation

Two scores are calculated for each relationship person separately (i.e., mother, father, romantic partner, best friend) - one for attachment avoidance and one for attachment distress. Scores for attachment avoidance can be calculated by averaging items 1 through 6, with items 1, 2, 3, and 4 reversed. Scores for attachment anxiety can be calculated by averaging items 7 to 9.

Response Scale

Respondents answered the extent to which each item matched their feelings on a seven-point scale ranging from “completely disagree” (1) to “completely agree” (7).

References

Fraley, R. C., Heffernan, M. E., Vicary, A. M., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2011). The experiences in close relationships—Relationship Structures Questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orientations across relationships. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 615–625. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022898

Siroňová, A., Cígler, H., Ježek, S., Lacinová, L. (2020). Psychometric Characteristics of the ECR-RS, Structure of the Relationship between Global and Specific Attachment – Cross-Validation of the Results Using the Czech and Original Versions of the ECR-RS. Studia Psychologica, 62(4), 291-313. 0039-3320. https://doi.org/10.31577/sp.2020.04.806

Cígler, H., Cvrčková, A., Daňsová, P., Hašto, J., Charvát, M., Ježek, S., Kaščáková, N., Lacinová, L., & Seitl, M. (2019). Experiences in Close Relationships: České verze metod pro měření vazby vycházející z dotazníku ECR. E-psychologie, 13(3), 57-74. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347272524_EXPERIENCES_IN_CLOSE_RELATIONSHIPS_CESKE_VERZE_METOD_PRO_MERENI

Cvrčková, A. (2019). Psychometrické charakteristiky metody ECR-RS, struktura globální a specifické vazby – cross-validizace výsledků české a originální (anglické) verze metody ECR-RS [Rigorózní práce, Fakulta sociálních studií Masarykovy univerzity]. https://is.muni.cz/th/br4lz/CvrckovaAneta_rigorozni_prace.pdf

Relationship Structures (ECR-RS) Questionnaire. (2014). Retrieved March 13, 2023, from http://labs.psychology.illinois.edu/~rcfraley/measures/relstructures.htm

11 -

General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES)

The General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES) is a consistent, universal, and reliable instrument designed to assess general feelings of perceived self-efficacy (or self-efficacy, self-efficacy, self-efficacy) in order to predict coping with everyday difficulties and adaptation after experiencing various stressful life events. The construct of self-efficacy represents the belief that one can handle a new or difficult task or cope with adversity. It consists of 10 short items that focus on successful coping.

Length of completion

The questionnaire takes approximately 4 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the GSES, the respondent will learn what their subjective level of perceived self-efficacy is.

Keywords

GSES, General Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, General Self-Efficacy Scale, self-efficacy, self-efficacy, self-efficacy self-efficacy, coping

Scoring and interpretation

The total GSES score is summed by adding all 10 items. It ranges from 10-40, with higher scores representing higher levels of perceived self-efficacy.

Response Scale

Respondents indicate their level of agreement for each item on a four-point Likert scale ranging from “Disagree” (1) to “Agree” (4).

References

Cuevas, C., & Penate, W. (2015). Validation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in psychiatric outpatient care. Psicothema, 27(4), 410-415. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2015.56

Hodačová, L., Cígler, H., Vachková, E., & Mareš, J. (2020). Psychometrické vlastnosti české verze Dotazníku obecné self-efficacy u populace hospitalizovaných pacientů. Československá psychologie, 64(6), 639-655. https://ceskoslovenskapsychologie.cz/index.php/csps/article/view/6/5

Luszczynska, A., Gutierrez-Dona, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General Self-Efficacy in Various Domains of Human Functioning: Evidence from Five Countries. International Journal of Psychology, 40(2), 80-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207590444000041

Schwarzer, R., Jerusalem, M. (1995): Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In: Wein-man J., Wright, S., Johnston, M. (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s port-folio. Causal and control beliefs. Windsor, UK, NFER-Nelson, 35-37. dostupné zde

12 -

Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire 7 (GAD-7)

The Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7) is a questionnaire designed to screen for and measure the severity of Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD). The GAD-7 contains 7 short items that measure the severity of various GAD symptoms according to reported response categories with associated scores. The items refer to a time horizon of the past two weeks. The GAD-7 is not intended to provide a diagnosis of GAD (it is a screening tool only).

Length of completion

The GAD-7 takes approximately 3 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By evaluating the questionnaire, the respondent will know whether or not he/she has symptoms of GAD.

Keywords

Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire, GAD-7, GAD, generalized anxiety disorder, anxiety

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is obtained by summing the scores for all items. Higher scores indicate higher levels of potential anxiety. If the score is 10 or higher, a clinical examination is recommended to establish a diagnosis of GAD.

Response Scale

Respondents rate the frequency of anxiety symptoms in the past two weeks on a Likert scale of “not at all” (0), “a few days” (1), “more than half the days” (2), and “almost every day” (3).

References

Löwe, B., Decker, O., Müller, S., Brähler, E., Schellberg, D., Herzog, W., & Herzberg, P. (2008). Validation and Standardization of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7) in the General Population. Medical Care, 46(3), 266-274. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318160d093

Plummer, F., Manea, L., Trepel, D., & McMillan, D. (2016). Screening for anxiety disorders with the GAD-7 and GAD-2: a systematic review and diagnostic metaanalysis. General Hospital Psychiatry, 39, 24-31. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2015.11.005

Prikner, O. (2021). Vybrané psychometrické charakteristiky škály GAD-7 [Diplomová práce, Masarykova univerzita]. https://is.muni.cz/th/imwek/Diplomova-prace-finis.pdf

Spitzer, R., Kroenke, K., Williams, J., & Lowe, B. (2006). A Brief Measure for Assessing Generalized Anxiety Disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092-1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092

13 -

Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2 (GPIUS-2)

The Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale-2 (GPIUS-2) is a multidimensional psychometric instrument that contains 15 items assessing measures of generalized problematic Internet use, including cognitive, behavioral, and negative consequences experienced by individuals. The scale’s factor structure operationalizes problematic Internet use by measuring five constructs: preference for online social interactions (items 1, 6, 11), mood regulation (2, 7, 12), cognitive bias (3, 8, 13), compulsive Internet use (4, 9, 14), and negative consequences (5, 10, 15). Each construct is measured using a three-item subscale. It also includes a sixth second-order factor (i.e., lack of self-regulation) comprising the subscales of compulsive Internet use and cognitive bias.

Length of completion

The entire scale takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the questionnaire, the respondent will learn how much he/she is concerned about problematic Internet use.

Keywords

Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2, GPIUS-2, problematic internet use, online, internet

Scoring and interpretation

The total score can be calculated either by summing the 15 items (range 8-120) or by averaging the scores (range 1-8). It is also possible to calculate the total score for each subscale separately.

Response Scale

Respondents answer on an eight-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (8).

References

Caplan, S. (2002). Problematic Internet use and psychosocial well-being: development of a theory-based cognitive–behavioral measurement instrument. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(5), 553-575. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00004-3

Caplan, S. (2010). Theory and measurement of generalized problematic internet use: A two-step approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 1089–1097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.012

Caplan, S. (2019). GPIUS2 Scale Items and Instructions. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338046867_GPIUS2_Scale_Items_and_Instructions

Pontes, H., Caplan, S., & Griffiths, M. (2016). Psychometric validation of the Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2 in a Portuguese sample. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 823-833. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.015

14 -

Guilt and Shame Experience Scale (GSES)

The Guilt and Shame Experience Scale (GSES) is a short, reliable self-report measure of the experience of guilt and shame. This eight-item questionnaire is divided into two subscales of four items, each of which captures one construct (guilt and shame). The individual items are short statements to which the respondent expresses a degree of identification on a four-point scale ranging from “not at all” to “a lot”.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes no more than 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By completing the scale, the proband will find out how strongly they experience feelings of guilt and shame.

Keywords

GSES, scale, guilt, shame, embarrassment, shame

Scoring and interpretation

The GSES total score is calculated by summing the responses to all items, thus ranges from 8 to 32, with higher scores corresponding to higher experiences of guilt and shame.

Response Scale

Respondents answer each item on a four-point word-anchored Likert scale ranging from “not at all” (1) to “a lot” (4).

References

Malinakova, K., Furstova, J., Kalman, M., & Trnka, R. (2020). A Psychometric Evaluation of the Guilt and Shame Experience Scale (GSES) on a Representative Adolescent Sample: A Low Differentiation between Guilt and Shame. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(23). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17238901

Malinakova, K., Cerna, A., Furstova, J., Cermak, I., Trnka, R., & Tavel, P. (2019). Psychometric Analysis of the Guilt and Shame Experience Scale (GSES). Ceskoslovenska psychologie, 63(2), 177-192. https://www.academia.edu/42034885/Psychometric_analysis_of_the_guilt_and_shame_experience_scale_GSES_

15 -

Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMSS)

The Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMSS) is a very brief but reliable and valid instrument designed to assess relationship satisfaction in married couples. It contains three items in which respondents rate their satisfaction with their spouse as a partner, with their marriage in general, and with their relationship with their spouse.

Length of completion

It takes approximately 1-2 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

The questionnaire results in overall satisfaction with the current marriage.

Keywords

Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale, KMSS, marriage, satisfaction, relationship

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is obtained by summing the scores for all three items. The final score ranges from 3 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater marital satisfaction.

Response Scale

Respondents answer each item on a seven-point scale ranging from 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 7 (extremely satisfied).

References

Omani-Samani, R., Maroufizadeh, S., Ghaheri, A., Amini, P., & Navid, B. (2018). Reliability and validity of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMSS) in infertile people. Middle East Fertility Society Journal, 23(2), 154-157. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mefs.2017.10.005

Schumm, W. R., Paff-Bergen, L. A., Hatch, R. C., Obiorah, F. C., Copeland, J. M., Meens, L. D., & Bugaighis, M. A. (1986). Concurrent and Discriminant Validity of the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale. Journal of Marriage and Family, 48(2), 381–387. https://doi.org/10.2307/352405

Schumm, W. R., Bollman, S. R., Jurich, A. P., & Hatch, R. C. (2001). Family Strengths and the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale: A Factor Analytic Study. Psychological Reports, 88(3_suppl), 965–973. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2001.88.3c.965

Schumm, W. R., Nichols, C. W., Schectman, K. L., & Grigsby, C. C. (1983). Characteristics of responses to the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale by a sample of 84 married mothers. Psychological Reports, 53(2), 567–572. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1983.53.2.567

16 -

The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale - Short Form (MCSDS-SF) is a short 13-item version of the original MCSDS that measures the propensity for socially desirable responses. Of these 13 items, 5 are formulated as socially desirable (true) and 6 as socially undesirable (false). These are short and simple statements for which the respondent is asked to decide whether or not they are true for him/her.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 3-5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the questionnaire, the experimental subject will find out whether or not he/she is prone to socially desirable responses.

Keywords

Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale - Short Form, MCSDS-SF, social desirability

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is obtained by summing the scores of all items. Items 5, 7, 9, 10 and 13 are reversed. Higher scores indicate a greater tendency toward socially desirable responses.

Response Scale

Respondents indicate whether the statements are true (T=1) or false (L=2) for them.

References

Lavidas, K., & Gialamas, V. (2019). Adaptation and psychometric properties of the short forms Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale with a sample of Greek university students. European Journal of Education Studies, 6(8), 230-239. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3552531

Reynolds, W. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Clinical Psychology, 38(1), 119-125. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232465362_Development_of_reliable_and_valid_short_forms_of_the_Marlow-Crowne_Social_Desirability_Scale

Reynolds, W. M. (2015). Copy of cmsds Short Form and scoring instructions. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280938637_Copy_of_cmsds_Short_Form_and_scoring_instructions

17 -

Multi-Dimensional Fundamentalism Inventory (MDFI)

The Multi-Dimensional Fundamentalism Inventory (MDFI) is a 15-item questionnaire capturing the extent of religious fundamentalism. The instrument consists of three subscales of five items each: External/Internal authority, Fixed/Malleable religion, and Rejection/Affirmation of the world. The first dimension captures the belief that an individual’s actions are moral and right only if they are based on God’s authority. The second dimension represents the attitude that religious tradition is a given and exists independently of historical and cultural conditions. The third dimension captures the valuing of the sacred over secular experiences.

Length of completion

The MDFI takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Keywords

Multi-Dimensional Fundamentalism Inventory, MDFI, religious fundamentalism, religion, God

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is obtained by summing all items. Higher scores indicate higher levels of religious fundamentalism.

Response Scale

Subjects respond to the MDFI items on a five-point Likert scale: “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5).

References

Henry, R. S., Perrin, P. B., & Smith, E. R. (2022). Religiosity, Religious Fundamentalism, Heterosexism, and Support for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights: A Moderated Mediation Approach. Social Sciences, 11(4), 174. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11040174

Kosarkova, A., Malinakova, K., van Dijk, J.P., Tavel, P. (2021). Vaccine Refusal in the Czech Republic Is Associated with Being Spiritual but Not Religiously Affiliated. Vaccines, 9(10), 1157. 10.3390/vaccines9101157

Liht, J., Conway, L. G., Savage, S., White, W., & O’Neill, K. A. (2011). Religious Fundamentalism: An Empirically Derived Construct and Measurement Scale. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 33(3), 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1163/157361211X594159

Wibisono, S., Louis, W., & Jetten, J. (2019). The Role of Religious Fundamentalism in the Intersection of National and Religious Identities. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.1017/prp.2018.25

18 -

Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS)

The Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) is a valid and reliable instrument developed to assess the severity and worsening of anxiety disorders and/or symptoms. The advantage of the scale is its brevity and ease of use: it contains 5 items relating to the frequency of anxiety symptoms and their intensity, as well as interference with the person’s work or school and social life. The items ask about experiences in the last week.

Note: When administering, it is useful to provide respondents with a definition of anxiety.

Length of completion

The OASIS takes approximately 3-4 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By completing the scale, the respondent will determine the severity of his/her anxiety symptoms, and whether they have improved or worsened after repeated completion.

Keywords

Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale, OASIS, anxiety, anxiety disorder, anxiety symptoms

Scoring and interpretation

Responses to items are coded from 0 to 4 and can be summed to obtain a total score ranging from 0 to 20. Higher scores indicate greater severity and functional impairment due to anxiety symptoms.

Response Scale

The responses to the items in this Czech adaptation correspond to the original version. For each item, there are always four possible responses scored according to severity on a scale of 0 to 4. An example of a response might be. I have not had any anxiety in the past week." (0) or “Constant anxiety. I felt anxious all the time and was never able to relax.” (4).

References

Norman, S.B., Campbell-Sills, L., Hitchcock, C.A., Sullivan, S., Rochlin, A.A., Wilkins, K.C., & Stein, M.B. (2011). Psychometrics of a brief measure of anxiety to detect severity and impairment: the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS). Journal of psychiatric research, 45(2), 262-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2008.03.014

Norman, S.B., Hami Cissell, S., Means-Christensen, A.J. and Stein, M.B. (2006). Development and validation of an Overall Anxiety Severity And Impairment Scale (OASIS). Depression and Anxiety, 23(4), 245-249. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20182

Mikoska, P., Novak, L., Pilarik, L., & Bok, T. (2022). A Czech version of the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS): standardization and psychometric properties. BMC Psychiatry, 22(822). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-04365-5

Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS). (2023). Greenspace. Retrieved March 18, 2023, from https://greenspacehealth.com/en-ca/anxiety-oasis/

19 -

Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS)

Note: When administering, it is useful to provide respondents with a definition of anxiety.

Length of completion

The OASIS takes approximately 3-4 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By completing the scale, the respondent will determine the severity of his/her anxiety symptoms, and whether they have improved or worsened after repeated completion.

Keywords

Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale, OASIS, anxiety, anxiety disorder, anxiety symptoms

Scoring and interpretation

Responses to items are coded from 0 to 4 and can be summed to obtain a total score ranging from 0 to 20. Higher scores indicate greater severity and functional impairment due to anxiety symptoms.

Response Scale

The responses to the items in this Czech adaptation are abbreviated from the original version to more closely resemble a typical Likert scale: 0=Never, 1=Rarely, 2=Sometimes, 3=Frequently, and 4=Always.

References

Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS). (2023). Greenspace. Retrieved March 18, 2023, from https://greenspacehealth.com/en-ca/anxiety-oasis/

Sandora, J., Novak, L., Brnka, R., van Dijk, J. P., Tavel, P., & Malinakova, K. (2021). The Abbreviated Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) and the Abbreviated Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale (ODSIS): Psychometric Properties and Evaluation of the Czech Versions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(19), 10337. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph181910337

20 -

Overall Depression and Impairment Scale (ODSIS)

The Overall Depression and Impairment Scale (ODSIS) is a five-item questionnaire that captures the severity and worsening of depressive symptomatology. The questionnaire assesses the most important areas of depression and subsyndromal depressive symptoms, while remaining independent of specific subtypes of mood disorders as defined by the DSM-5. Items relate to the frequency of symptoms, their intensity, and their interference with work or school and social life. Items ask about experiences in the last week.

Note: When administering, it is helpful to provide respondents with a definition of depression.

Length of completion

The ODSIS will take approximately 3-4 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By completing the scale, the respondent will determine the severity of his/her depressive symptoms, and whether they have improved or worsened after repeated completion.

Keywords

Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale, ODSIS, depression, depressive disorder, depressive symptoms

Scoring and interpretation

Responses to items are coded from 0 to 4 and can be summed to obtain a total score ranging from 0 to 20. Higher scores indicate greater severity and functional impairment due to symptoms of depression.

Response Scale

The responses to the items in this English adaptation correspond to the original version. For each item, there are always four possible responses scored according to severity on a scale of 0 to 4. An example of a response might be. I have not felt any depression in the past week." (0) or “Constant depression. I felt depressed all the time.” (4).

References

Bentley, K. H., Gallagher, M. W., Carl, J. R., & Barlow, D. H. (2014). Development and validation of the Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale. Psychological Assessment, 26(3), 815–830. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036216

Ito M., Bentley K. H., Oe Y., Nakajima S., Fujisato H., Kato N., et al. (2015) Assessing Depression Related Severity and Functional Impairment: The Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale (ODSIS). PLoS ONE 10(4): e0122969. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0122969

Osma, J., Quilez-Orden, A., Suso-Ribera, C., Peris-Baquero, O., Norman, S. B., Bentley, K. H., & Sauer-Zavala, S. (2019). Psychometric properties and validation of the Spanish versions of the overall anxiety and depression severity and impairment scales. Journal of affective disorders, 252, 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.03.063

21 -

Overall Depression and Impairment Scale (ODSIS)

Note: When administering, it is helpful to provide respondents with a definition of depression.

Length of completion

The ODSIS will take approximately 3-4 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By completing the scale, the respondent will determine the severity of his/her depressive symptoms, and whether they have improved or worsened after repeated completion.

Keywords

Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale, ODSIS, depression, depressive disorder, depressive symptoms

Scoring and interpretation

Response Scale

References

22 -

Patient Health Questionnaire - 15 (PHQ-15)

The Patient Health Questionnaire - 15 (PHQ-15) is a short 15-item self-assessment questionnaire designed to screen for somatization and severity of somatic symptoms. The PHQ-15 is a subscale of somatic symptoms derived from the full PHQ. The thirteen somatic symptoms of the PHQ-15 are included in the somatic symptom module of the PHQ, in which subjects are asked to rate the severity of each symptom. Two additional physical symptoms - feeling tired or lacking energy and having trouble sleeping - are included in the Depression module of the PHQ.

Length of completion

The PHQ-15 takes approximately 3-5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After scoring the questionnaire, the subject will determine the severity of their somatic symptoms.

Keywords

Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-15, somatization, somatic symptoms, physical symptoms

Scoring and interpretation

In determining the PHQ-15 score, each individual symptom is coded as 0, 1, or 2, and the total score obtained by summing ranges from 0 to 30. Higher scores indicate more severe somatic symptoms.

Response Scale

Respondents rate the severity of somatic symptoms on a three-point scale: 0 (Not bothered), 1 (Somewhat bothered), or 2 (A lot bothered).

References

Dadfar, M., Asgharnejadfarid, A. A., Hosseini, A. F., Esfahani, M. N., Lester, D., & Kalibatseva, Z. (2020). Measuring somatic symptoms with the PHQ-15: A comparative study of three Iranian samples. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 23(3-4), 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2020.1718069

Hinz, A., Ernst, J., Glaesmer, H., Brähler, E., Rauscher, F. G., Petrowski, K., & Kocalevent, R. D. (2017). Frequency of somatic symptoms in the general population: Normative values for the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15). Journal of psychosomatic research, 96, 27–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.12.017

Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. (2002). The PHQ-15: validity of a new measure for evaluating the severity of somatic symptoms. Psychosomatic medicine, 64(2), 258–266. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-200203000-00008

Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B., & Löwe, B. (2010). The Patient Health Questionnaire Somatic, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptom Scales: a systematic review. General hospital psychiatry, 32(4), 345–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.03.006

23 -

Patient Health Questionnaire - 9 (PHQ-9)

The Patient Health Questionnaire - 9 (PHQ-9) is a short self-assessment questionnaire with 9 items that correspond to the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for depressive disorder. It is a depression module extracted from the full PHQ to determine the severity of depression and depressive symptoms. Items ask about frequency of experience in the past two weeks.

Length of completion

The PHQ-9 takes approximately 3 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback to the respondent

After scoring the questionnaire, the experimenter will determine the severity of depression or depressive symptoms.

Keywords

Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9, depression, depressive disorder, depressive symptoms

Scoring and interpretation

In determining the PHQ-9 score, each individual symptom is coded as 0, 1, 2, or 3, and the total score obtained by summing the scores ranges from 0 to 27. Higher scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms.

Response Scale

Respondents rate items on a scale of 0 to 3 based on the frequency of their experience in the previous two-week period (0=Not at all, 1=Several days, 2=More than half the days, 3=Almost every day).

References

Daňsová, P., Masopustová, Z., Hanáčková, V., Kicková, K., & Korábová, I. (2016). Metoda Patient Health Questionnaire-9: Česká verze. Československá psychologie, 60(5), 468-481. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313602110_The_patient_health_questionnaire-9_The_Czech_version

Haddad, M., Walters, P., Phillips, R., Tsakok, J., Williams, P., Mann, A., & Tylee, A. (2013). Detecting depression in patients with coronary heart disease: a diagnostic evaluation of the PHQ-9 and HADS-D in primary care, findings from the UPBEAT-UK study. PloS one, 8(10), e78493. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078493

Kroenke, K., & Spitzer, R. L. (2002). The PHQ-9: A new depression diagnostic and severity measure. Psychiatric Annals, 32(9), 509–515. https://doi.org/10.3928/0048-5713-20020901-06

Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (2001). The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16(9), 606–613. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x

24 -

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10)

The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) is a widely used tool to measure perceived psychological distress. It is a valid and reliable self-assessment questionnaire that measures the extent to which respondents perceive their lives to be unpredictable, uncontrollable and overloaded. The PSS contains 10 questions that ask about the respondent’s feelings and thoughts over the past month. Because stress levels are affected by daily hassles, significant events, and changes in coping, the predictive validity of the PSS declines rapidly after four to eight weeks.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback to the respondent

By completing the questionnaire, the respondent will find out the level of stress experienced and how it compares to the population.

Keywords

PSS-10, perceived stress scale, stress, psychological stress, stress level

Scoring and interpretation

Before calculating the total score, it is necessary to convert the positively worded items of the questionnaire into reverse scores (these are items 4, 5, 7 and 8). Summing the scores for all items yields a score from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating higher levels of subjectively perceived stress.

Response Scale

Subjects respond on a five-point Likert-type scale, with 0 = never, 1 = almost never, 2 = sometimes, 3 = quite often, and 4 = very often.

References

Buršíková Brabcová, D., & Kohout, J. (2018). Psychometrické ověření české verze Škály vnímaného stresu. E-psychologie, 12(1), 37-52. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.29364/epsy.311

Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A Global Measure of Perceived Stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10). (2021). NovoPsych. Retrieved February 27, 2023, from https://novopsych.com.au/assessments/well-being/perceived-stress-scale-pss-10/

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10). (2021). CORC. Retrieved February 27, 2023, from https://novopsych.com.au/assessments/well-being/perceived-stress-scale-pss-10/

25 -

Pictorial Empathy Test (PET)

The Pictorial Empathy Test (PET) is a brief instrument capturing the respondent’s situational affective empathy. It consists of 7 photographs depicting individuals (men, women and children) in distress. Respondents answer on a scale how emotionally moving they find the photograph. The use of photographs is a valid way to examine affective empathy because facial expressions of emotion are central to empathic responses and create a mechanism of emotional resonance in the observer.

Length of completion

The PET takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

The subject will find out about themselves in terms of empathy.

Keywords

Pictorial Empathy Test, PET, empathy, affective empathy, photography

Scoring and interpretation

To obtain a total score, the average score of the responses needs to be calculated. A higher score indicates a higher level of affective empathy.

Response Scale

Respondents answer on a five-point scale: 1=not at all, 2=slightly, 3=arouses some feelings, 4=somewhat, 5=very much

References

Alcorta-Garza, A., San-Martín, M., Delgado-Bolton, R., Soler-González, J., Roig, H., & Vivanco, L. (2016). Cross-validation of the Spanish HP-version of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy confirmed with some cross-cultural differences. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1002. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01002

Koirikivi, I. (2014). Measurement of affective empathy with Pictorial Empathy Test (PET) [Master’s thesis, University of Helsinki]. https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/135570/measurem.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Lindeman, M., Koirikivi, I., & Lipsanen, J. (2018). Pictorial Empathy Test (PET): An easy-to-use method for assessing affective empathic reactions. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 34(6), 421–431. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000353

26 -

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is a brief and widely used instrument to measure global self-esteem by assessing both positive and negative feelings about the self. The scale was designed as a unidimensional scale, yet factor analysis was used to recognize the factors of self-esteem and self-regard that were positively or negatively related to the statements formulated. The method includes 10 items: 5 formulated positively and 5 negatively.

Length of completion

The entire scale takes approximately 2-3 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After scoring the questionnaire, the respondent is given information about the level of his/her self-assessment.

Keywords

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, RSES, self-esteem, self-esteem, self-reduction

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is calculated by summing all item scores, with items 3, 5, 8, 9, 10 being reversed. Items can be scored either from 0 to 3 (total score 0-30) or from 1 to 4 (total score 10-40). Either way, higher scores indicate higher levels of self-esteem.

Response Scale

Respondents indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with each item on a four-point Likert-type scale: ‘Strongly agree’ (3 or 4), ‘Agree’ (2 or 3), ‘Disagree’ (1 or 2) and ‘Strongly disagree’ (0 or 1).

References

Blatný, M., Urbánek, T., & Osecká, L. (2006). Structure of Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale: Three-factor solution. Studia Psychologica, 48(4), 371-378. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287594381_Structure_of_Rosenberg's_Self-Esteem_Scale_Three-factor_solution

Čerešník, M., Dolejš, M., Čerešníková, M., & Tomšik, R. (2022). Psychometric Analysis of Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale. A Specific Application of the Scale on Adolescents Aged 11-19. TEM Journal, 11(4), 1732-1741. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM114-39

Gnambs, T., Scharl, A., & Schroeders, U. (2018). The structure of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: A cross-cultural meta-analysis. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 226(1), 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000317

Halama, P., & Biescad, M. (2006). Psychometrická analýza rosenbergovej skály sebahodnotenia s pouzitím metód klasickej teórie testov (CTT) a teórie odpovede na polozku (IRT)1. Ceskoslovenska Psychologie, 50(6), 569-583. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/psychometrická-analýza-rosenbergovej-skály/docview/235722430/se-2

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781400876136

27 -

Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS)

The Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) is a very brief five-item self-assessment questionnaire designed to measure global life satisfaction, which is understood as a cognitive component of subjective well-being. The respondent expresses a level of agreement with five brief statements about his or her own life.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 1 minute to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

The respondent will be given information about their level of overall life satisfaction.

Keywords

Satisfaction With Life Scale, SWLS, life satisfaction, subjective well-being, global satisfaction

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is obtained by summing the scores of the individual items. It ranges from 5-35 and higher scores indicate higher levels of overall satisfaction with life.

Response Scale

Subjects respond on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” (1) to “Strongly Agree” (7).

References

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

Hanzlová, R. (2022). An Item Response Theory Analysis and Psychometric Properties of the Czech Version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Survey Research Methods, 16(3), 371–385. https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2022.v16i3.7940

Lewis, C. A., Shevlin, M. E., Smékal, V., & Dorahy, M. J. (1999). Factor structure and reliability of a Czech translation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale among Czech university students. Studia Psychologica, 41(3), 239–244. dostupné zde

Navrátil, M., & Lewis, C. A. (2006). Temporal Stability of the Czech Translation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale: Test-Retest Data over One Week. Psychological Reports, 98(3), 918–920. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.98.3.918-920

Pavot, W. G., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(1), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5701_17

Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5(2), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.5.2.164

28 -

Screen for Early Eating Disorder Signs (SEEDS)

The Screen for Early Eating Disorder Signs (SEEDS) is a brief self-assessment screening tool designed for use in clinical practice or research to identify or confirm suspected eating disorder risk. In the original version it has 20 items, in the Czech adaptation it contains 19 items (item 20 was excluded because it did not match the identified factors). The 19 items are divided into three factors: Body Image, which includes seven items focusing on subjective assessment of one’s own physical appearance and body weight; Feelings, which focuses on one’s perception of one’s own mood and stress management in seven items; and Quality of Life, which looks at satisfaction with life and one’s relationship with one’s immediate social environment (five items).

Length of completion

The whole questionnaire takes 2-5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

Once the questionnaire has been assessed, the respondent will know if he/she is at risk for an eating disorder so that early intervention can be initiated to prevent or alleviate it, if necessary.

Keywords

Screen for Early Eating Disorder Signs, SEEDS, eating disorder, physical appearance, feelings, quality of life

Scoring and interpretation

Total and subscale scores are obtained by summing the scores for each item (1-7). Higher scores indicate a higher risk of an eating disorder.

Response Scale

Respondents answer on a seven-point Likert scale that is anchored verbally by what the item asks (e.g., “Very sad” (7) to “Very happy” (1)).

References

Powers, M. A., Richter, S., Ackard, D., & Craft, C. (2016). Development and validation of the Screen for Early Eating Disorder Signs (SEEDS) in persons with type 1 diabetes. Eating disorders, 24(3), 271–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2015.1090866

Screen for Early Eating Disorder Signs (SEEDS). (2019). Health Partner Institute. https://www.healthpartners.com/institute/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/SEEDS_Background_Info.pdf

Sikorová, L., & Valiašková, T. (2020). Psychometric properties of the Czech version of the tool – screening for early eating disorder signs (SEEDS-CZ). Cent Eur J Nurs Midw, 11(3), 105-112. 10.15452/cejnm.2020.11.0016

29 -

Self-Compassion Scale (SCS)

The Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) is a reliable and valid 26-item questionnaire that assesses self-compassion, or how we treat ourselves during difficult times. For each item, respondents use a five-point Likert scale to rate how often they behave in a given way. The SCS contains 6 correlated subscales that are in opposition to each other as follows: Self-Kindness versus Self-Depression, Human Belonging versus Isolation, Mindfulness versus Over-Identification. The correlations between the factors can be explained by the presence of a common higher order factor - self-compassion.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By evaluating the questionnaire, the respondent will find out how sensitive he/she is to himself/herself and how high or low his/her level of self-compassion is.

Keywords

Self-Compassion Scale, SCS, compassion, self-compassion, self-compassion, kindness to self, self-judgment, human belonging, isolation, mindfulness, over-identification

Scoring and interpretation

The overall measure of self-compassion is expressed as the sum of the mean scores on each subscale. First, however, the coding must be reversed for the items in the negative subscales (i.e., the self-judgment, isolation, and overidentification subscales). Thus, higher mean scores indicate higher levels of self-compassion. Self-kindness - items 5, 12, 19, 23, 26 Self-judgement - items: 1, 8, 11, 16, 21 Human belonging - items: 3, 7, 10, 15 Isolation - items 4, 13, 18, 25 Mindfulness - items: 9, 14, 17, 22 Over-identification - items: 2, 6, 20, 24

Response Scale

Subjects respond on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “Almost never” (1) to “Almost always” (5).

References

Benda, J. (2018). Alternative models of the Czech version of the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS-26- CZ). [online]. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325908787_Alternative_models_of_the_Czech_version_of_the_Self-Compassion_Scale_SCS-26-CZ

Benda, J., & Reichová, A. (2016). Psychometrické charakteristiky české verze Self-Compassion Scale (SCS-CZ). Československá psychologie, 60(2), 120-136. https://www.jan-benda.com/downloads/benda_reichova2016.pdf

Instruments for Researchers. (2023). SELF-COMPASSION, Kristin Neff. Retrieved March 22, 2023, from https://self-compassion.org/self-compassion-scales-for-researchers/

Neff, K. D. (2003). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2(3), 223–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860309027

Neff, K. D. (in press). Self-Compassion: Theory, Method, Research, and Intervention. Annual Review of Psychology. 74, 193-218. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-032420-031047

Neff, K. D., Tóth-Király, I., Yarnell, L. M., Arimitsu, K., Castilho, P., Ghorbani, N., Guo, H. X., Hirsch, J. K., Hupfeld, J., Hutz, C. S., Kotsou, I., Lee, W. K., Montero-Marin, J., Sirois, F. M., de Souza, L. K., Svendsen, J. L., Wilkinson, R. B., & Mantzios, M. (2019). Examining the factor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale in 20 diverse samples: Support for use of a total score and six subscale scores. Psychological assessment, 31(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000629

30 -

Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire (SPSQ)

The Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire (SPSQ) is a short 16-item questionnaire capturing the overall level of sensitivity/sensitivity. Items assess two areas of high sensitivity and is therefore divided into two subscales: the Sensory Sensitivity subscale, which assesses sensory processing sensitivity, and the Other Sensitivity subscale, which captures sensitivity to emotions and various life experiences. The items are not formulated as statements, but mostly as single words covering key areas of high sensitivity. The questionnaire can be used as a whole or just the Sensory Sensitivity subscale.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 2 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the entire questionnaire, the subject will know the extent of his/her sensitivity.

Keywords

Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire, SPSQ, sensitivity, sensory sensitivity, other sensitivity

Scoring and interpretation

The total score is the average of the scores of all items. Thus, it ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating higher levels of sensitivity.

Response Scale

Subjects responded on a scale of 0-10 with the following main clues: ‘0 = not at all sensitive compared to others’; ‘5 = about as sensitive as people around me’; and ‘10 = much more sensitive than people around me’.

References

Malinakova, K., Novak, L., Trnka, R., & Tavel, P. (2021). Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire: A Psychometric Evaluation and Associations with Experiencing the COVID-19 Pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(24), 12962. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182412962

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SER9H

31 -

Spiritual Well-being Scale (SWBS)

The Spiritual Well-being Scale (SWBS) is a 20-item self-assessment questionnaire used to measure overall spiritual well-being. The questionnaire captures both religious and social psychological dimensions and is therefore divided into two subscales: the vertical subscale, Religious Well-Being, represents God-related well-being; and the horizontal subscale, Existential Well-being, focuses on meaning and life satisfaction. Each scale contains 10 short statements to which the respondent expresses a level of agreement.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes 10-15 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

The respondent receives information about the level of his/her overall spiritual well-being, or well-being in a religious sense, or existential well-being.

Keywords

Spiritual Well-being Scale, SWBS, spiritual well-being, religious well-being, existential well-being, well-being

Scoring and interpretation

A total score is obtained by summing the scores for each item. In the English version, positively worded items (3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 19 and 20) are reverse scored. Thus, a higher total score corresponds to a lower level of spiritual well-being and ranges from 20-120. It is also possible to obtain separate scores for the Religious Well-Being subscale by summing the odd-numbered items and scores for the Existential Well-Being subscale by summing the even-numbered items.

Response Scale

Subjects respond on a six-point Likert scale ranging from “Strongly Agree” (1) to “Strongly Disagree” (6).

References

Bufford, R. K., Paloutzian, R. F., & Ellison, C. W. (1991). Norms for the Spiritual Weil-Being Scale. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 19(1), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164719101900106

Ellison, C. W. (1983). Spiritual Well-Being: Conceptualization and Measurement. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 11(4), 330–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164718301100406

Paloutzian, R.F. et al. (2021). The Spiritual Well-Being Scale (SWBS): Cross-Cultural Assessment Across 5 Continents, 10 Languages, and 300 Studies. In: Ai, A.L., Wink, P., Paloutzian, R.F., Harris, K.A. (eds) Assessing Spirituality in a Diverse World. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52140-0_17

Spiritual Well-being Scale. (2023). WESTMONT. Retrieved March 27, 2023, from https://www.westmont.edu/psychology/raymond-paloutzian-spiritual-wellbeing-scale

Tavel, P., Sandora, J., Furstova, J., Lacev, A., Husek, V., Puzova, Z., Polackova Solcova, I., & Malinakova, K. (2021). Czech Version of the Spiritual Well-Being Scale: Evaluation and Psychometric Properties. Psychological Reports, 124(1), 366–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294119898117

32 -

Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test

The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is a simple screening method developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) for the rapid and early detection of people at risk of alcohol use. It consists of a total of 10 items, the first three of which focus on the level of alcohol consumption, the next three items relate to the presence of possible symptoms of dependence and the last four focus on the consequences of alcohol abuse and the problems that excessive drinking can cause. The questionnaire has a version for administration by a professional as a structured interview as well as for self-completion. More information can be found here.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the questionnaire, the respondent will find out if their alcohol consumption is normal, risky, harmful or already an addiction.

Keywords

AUDIT, alcohol, risky consumption, addiction, alcohol use, identification of impairment

Scoring and interpretation

Possible answers to questions are scored 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 points, with the exception of questions 9 and 10, which can only be scored 0, 2, or 4 points. A sum score is used for interpretation, which ranges from 0 to 40. Whereby a score of 0 indicates a teetotaler who has never had any problems with alcohol, a score of 1-7 indicates a low-risk drinker, a score of 8-14 indicates hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption, and a score of 15 or more indicates the likelihood of alcohol dependence (moderate to severe alcohol use disorder).

References

Babor, T.F., Higgins-Biddle, J.C., Saunders, J.B., Monteiro, M.G. (2001). AUDIT: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Guidelines for Use in Primary Care. Second Edition. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/67205/WHO_MSD_MSB_01.6a.pdf?sequence=1

Saunders, J., Aasland, O., Babor, T., de la Fuente, J., & Grant, M. (1993). Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on Early Detection of Persons with Harmful Alcohol Consumption–II. Addiction, 88(6), 791-804. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x

Sovinová, H., & Csémy, L. (2010). The Czech audit: internal consistency, latent structure and identification of risky alcohol consumption. Central European Journal of Public Health, 18(3), 127-131. https://doi.org/10.21101/cejph.a3599

33 -

Three-Item Loneliness Scale (TILS)

The Three-Item Loneliness Scale (TILS) is a very brief method that assesses feelings of loneliness and social isolation. This questionnaire was created from the original 20-item Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale. The items indirectly ask the respondent about their emotions related to loneliness without explicitly mentioning the word.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 1 minute to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

After completing the questionnaire, the respondent will gain an understanding of the amount of perceived loneliness.

Keywords

Three-Item Loneliness Scale, TILS, loneliness, social isolation, solitude

Scoring and interpretation

Simply summing the scores for the three items yields a total score ranging from 3-9, with higher scores indicating higher levels of loneliness.

Response Scale

The respondent answers the questions on a three-point Likert scale: “Almost never” (1), “Sometimes” (2), and “Often” (3).

References

Garg, N., Sharma, N., & Burgess, J. (2023). Three-item loneliness scale: Exploring the psychometric properties in the Indian context. Asian journal of psychiatry, 80, 103323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2022.103323

Hughes, M. E., Waite, L. J., Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2004). A Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness in Large Surveys: Results From Two Population-Based Studies. Research on aging, 26(6), 655–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027504268574

Russell D. W. (1996). UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of personality assessment, 66(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2

Trucharte, A., Calderón, L., Cerezo, E., Contreras, A., Peinado, V., & Valiente, C. (2021). Three-item loneliness scale: psychometric properties and normative data of the Spanish version. Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 1–9. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02110-x

34 -

Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ)

The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) is a relatively brief self-assessment questionnaire measuring a person’s emotional ability to understand and respond to others. Thus, it was developed to assess the general factor of empathy, conceptualizing it as primarily an emotional process. It contains 16 statements whose frequency is rated by the respondent on a Likert scale.

Length of completion

The questionnaire takes approximately 5-7 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

The respondent will know his/her level of empathy after the questionnaire has been scored.

Keywords

Toronto Empathy Queastionnaire, TEQ, empathy, emotional process, empathy

Scoring and interpretation

To obtain a total score, the scores for each item must be summed. Items 2, 4, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15 are reverse scored. The total score ranges from 0-64 and higher scores indicate higher levels of empathy.

Response Scale

Respondents record their answers on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “Never” (0) to “Always” (1).

References

Novak, L., Malinakova, K., Mikoska, P., van Dijk, J. P., Dechterenko, F., Ptacek, R., & Tavel, P. (2021). Psychometric Analysis of the Czech Version of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), 5343. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105343

Spreng, R. N., McKinnon, M. C., Mar, R. A., & Levine, B. (2009). The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. Journal of personality assessment, 91(1), 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890802484381

Ursoniu, S., Serban, C. L., Giurgi-Oncu, C., Rivis, I. A., Bucur, A., Bredicean, A. C., & Papava, I. (2021). Validation of the Romanian Version of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) among Undergraduate Medical Students. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(24), 12871. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182412871

Xu, R. H., Wong, E. L., Lu, S. Y., Zhou, L. M., Chang, J. H., & Wang, D. (2020). Validation of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) Among Medical Students in China: Analyses Using Three Psychometric Methods. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 810. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00810

35 -

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)

The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) is a nine-item questionnaire that assesses energy levels and psychological resilience at work, as well as feelings of importance, inspiration, pride, challenge and focus at work. These are aligned with three dimensions of work engagement: vigour (items 1, 2, 5), dedication (items 3, 4, 7) and absorption (items 6, 8, 9).

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 5 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

The respondent will learn about themselves and the extent to which they are engaged in their work.

Keywords

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, UWES, Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, commitment, energy, dedication, absorption, work

Scoring and interpretation

It is possible to calculate a total score for each dimension separately by summing the items for that dimension and dividing by the number of those items, or a total score for the whole scale using a similar procedure. It therefore ranges from 0-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels of work engagement.

Response Scale

The respondent rates each statement on a Likert scale that reflects how often the person experiences these feelings at work: 0=never; 1=sometimes never/several times a year or less; 2=rarely/once a month or less; 3=sometimes/several times a month; 4=often/once a week; 5=very often/several times a week; 6=always/every day.

References

Domínguez-Salas, S., Rodríguez-Domínguez, C., Arcos-Romero, A. I., Allande-Cussó, R., García-Iglesias, J. J., & Gómez-Salgado, J. (2022). Psychometric Properties of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) in a Sample of Active Health Care Professionals in Spain. Psychology research and behavior management, 15, 3461–3472. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S387242

Mills, M. J., Culbertson, S. S., & Fullagar, C. J. (2012). Conceptualizing and measuring engagement: An analysis of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being, 13(3), 519–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9277-3

Schaufeli, W. and Bakker, A. (2004) UWES Utrecht Work Engagement Scale Preliminary Manual. Occupational Health Psychology Unit Utrecht University, Utrecht. https://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/Schaufeli/Test%20Manuals/Test_manual_UWES_English.pdf

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The Measurement of Work Engagement With a Short Questionnaire: A Cross-National Study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471

36 -

Vicarious Trauma Scale (VTS)

The Vicarious Trauma Scale (VTS) is a short questionnaire assessing the level of subjective stress associated with working with traumatized clients. Thus, it assesses vicarious (secondary) trauma in individuals who have secondary exposure to traumatic material in their work. It consists of 8 statements with which respondents express a level of agreement. The VTS has potential as a screening tool for use in practice.

Length of completion

The entire questionnaire takes approximately 3 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

By evaluating the questionnaire, the proband will know if he/she is at risk for vicarious trauma.

Keywords

Vicarious Trauma Scale, VTS, trauma, vicarious trauma, stress

Scoring and interpretation

A total score is obtained by summing the scores of all items. It ranges from 8-56 and higher scores are associated with a higher risk of vicarious trauma.

Response Scale

Statements are rated for level of agreement on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” (1) to “Strongly Agree” (7).

References

Aparicio, E., Michalopoulos, L. M., & Unick, G. J. (2013). An examination of the psychometric properties of the Vicarious Trauma Scale in a sample of licensed social workers. Health & social work, 38(4), 199–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hlt017

Benuto, L., Singer, J., Cummings, C., & Ahrendt, A. (2018). The Vicarious Trauma Scale: Confirmatory factor analysis and psychometric properties with a sample of victim advocates. Health & social care in the community, 26(4), 564–571. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12554

Jimenez, R., Andersen, S., Song, H., & Townsend, C. (2021). Vicarious trauma in mental health care providers. Journal of Interprofessional Education & Practice, 24(100451). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xjep.2021.100451

Vrklevski, L. P., & Franklin, J. (2008). Vicarious trauma: The impact on solicitors of exposure to traumatic material. Traumatology, 14(1), 106–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534765607309961

37 -

Daily Spiritual Experience Scale (DSES)

The Daily Spiritual Experience Scale (DSES) is a widely used tool that quantifies the subjective experience of the transcendent. The concept of spirituality is defined here at the level of experience, and is therefore not tied to a particular religious orientation, and is therefore universally applicable for measuring subjective spiritual experience. In the original version, the questionnaire consists of 16 short sentences that are rated on a six-point modified Likert scale (except for the last item, which has a four-point scale).

Length of completion

The DSES takes approximately 5-10 minutes to complete.

Individualized feedback for the respondent

The respondent will gain awareness and intensity of their spiritual experience by completing the scale.

Keywords

DSES, spirituality, spiritual experience, spiritual experience, transcendence

Scoring and interpretation

At the outset, it should be noted that the last item 16 is reverse scoring and is the only one with a four-point scale. The author lists several scoring methods. The first way is to sum the scores of all items, including the reverse score of item 16 (total score between 16-94). Another option is to use an average score, where the author recommends spreading the 4 scores of item 16 over a six-point scale. A third option is to dichotomize the questions. High scores on the DSES counterintuitively correspond to low intensity of spiritual experience, so the overall result can be reversed.

Response Scale

Respondents answer items 1-15 on a six-point modified Likert scale (1 = many times a day, 2 = every day, 3 = most days, 4 = some days, 5 = sometimes, 6 = never). Last item 16 “Overall, how close to God do you feel?” has only 4 options on the scale (1 = not at all, 2 = quite close, 3 = very close, 4 = as close as possible).

References

Daily Spiritual Experience Scale. (2023). Retrieved February 22, 2023, from https://www.dsescale.org/

Maliňáková, K., Trnka, R., Šarníková, G., Smékal, V., Fürstová, J., & Tavel, P. (2018). Psychometrická analýza škály každodenní spirituální zkušenosti (DSES) v českém prostředí. Československá psychologie, 62(Supplement 1), 100-113. https://www.academia.edu/42034876/Psychometrick%C3%A1_anal%C3%BDza_%C5%A1k%C3%A1ly_ka%C5%BEdodenn%C3%AD_spiritu%C3%A1ln%C3%AD_zku%C5%A1enosti_DSES_v_%C4%8Desk%C3%A9m_prost%C5%99ed%C3%AD

Underwood, L. (2006). Ordinary Spiritual Experience: Qualitative Research, Interpretive Guidelines, and Population Distribution for the Daily Spiritual Experience Scale. Psychology of Religion, 28(1), 181-218. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1163/008467206777832562

Underwood, L., & Teresi, J. (2002). The daily spiritual experience scale: development, theoretical description, reliability, exploratory factor analysis, and preliminary construct validity using health-related data. Ann Behav Med, 24(1), 22-33. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324796ABM2401_04