SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Warsaw, Poland.
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 22;17(3):e0264853. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264853. eCollection 2022.
The goal of the research was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Polish adaptation of the Stress Mindset Measure (SMM; general version, SMM-G, and specific version, SMM-S).
Study 1 was an online survey conducted among 1651 adults (81% women, aged 18-84 years). To assess the theoretical validity of the SMM, the following constructs were also measured: Big Five personality dimensions, positive orientation, self-control, perceived stress at work, depressiveness, assessment of one's own health, and ego-resiliency. Study 2 was a test-retest reliability measurement and took place 10 months later among 344 participants.
A factor validity was examined using exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factor analysis. EFA revealed a two-factor structure for the SMM-G and a one-factor structure for the SMM-S. However, these models obtained unsatisfactory goodness-of-fit indices in the CFA. Among the alternative models, the four-factor hierarchical model was best fitted to the data for both the SMM-G (RMSEA = .038, CFI = .996, TLI = .985) and the SMM-S (RMSEA = .041, CFI = .996, TLI = .990). These results were supported in the test-retest sample (SMM-G: RMSEA = .066, CFI = .990, TLI = .968; SMM-S: RMSEA = .056, CFI = .994, TLI = .983). Thus, four lower-order factors were identified: General, Health and Vitality, Performance and Productivity, Learning and Growth. The reliability of the overall general and specific indices measured with Cronbach's alpha was high and repeatable in both studies (Study 1: SMM-G α = .88; SMM-S α = .91; Study 2 (SMM-G, α = .87; SMM-S, α = .91). The stability for the SMM-G was satisfactory (r = .62; p < .001), and moderate for SMM-S (r = .46, p < .001). The theoretical validity analysis showed low (< |.40|) correlations in the expected directions with the majority of the selected tools.
The Polish adaptation of the SMM has very good psychometric properties. However, the unidimensional character of the original scale is not confirmed, which was also the case in other existing adaptations. The analyses in a sample several times larger than in previous studies revealed a greater complexity of the construct, identifying one higher-order factor and four lower-order factors.
本研究旨在评估压力心态量表（SMM；一般版本 SMM-G 和特定版本 SMM-S）的波兰语适应版本的心理测量学特性。
研究 1 是一项在线调查，共 1651 名成年人（81%为女性，年龄 18-84 岁）参加了该调查。为了评估 SMM 的理论有效性，还测量了以下结构：大五人格维度、积极取向、自我控制、工作压力、抑郁、对自身健康的评估和自我弹性。研究 2 是一项测试-重测信度测量，在 344 名参与者中 10 个月后进行。
使用探索性（EFA）和验证性（CFA）因子分析来检验因子有效性。EFA 显示 SMM-G 的两因素结构和 SMM-S 的单因素结构。然而，这些模型在 CFA 中的拟合优度指数并不理想。在替代模型中，四因素层次模型最适合 SMM-G（RMSEA =.038，CFI =.996，TLI =.985）和 SMM-S（RMSEA =.041，CFI =.996，TLI =.990）的数据。在测试-重测样本中也得到了这些结果（SMM-G：RMSEA =.066，CFI =.990，TLI =.968；SMM-S：RMSEA =.056，CFI =.994，TLI =.983）。因此，确定了四个较低阶因素：一般、健康和活力、绩效和生产力、学习和成长。在这两项研究中，使用 Cronbach's alpha 测量的整体一般和特定指数的可靠性较高且可重复（研究 1：SMM-G α =.88；SMM-S α =.91；研究 2（SMM-G，α =.87；SMM-S，α =.91）。SMM-G 的稳定性令人满意（r =.62；p <.001），而 SMM-S 的稳定性中等（r =.46，p <.001）。理论有效性分析显示，与大多数选定工具的预期方向的相关性较低（<|.40|）。
SMM 的波兰语适应版本具有非常好的心理测量学特性。然而，原始量表的单一维度特征并未得到证实，在其他现有适应量表中也是如此。在比以往研究大几倍的样本中的分析揭示了该结构的更大复杂性，确定了一个高阶因素和四个低阶因素。
