Primary Image

RehabMeasures

Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors

Last Updated

Purpose

The ISSB is designed to assess the amount of perceived social support, per self-report of specific supportive actions, received over the previous month.

Link to Instrument

Instrument Details

Acronym ISSB

Area of Assessment

Social Relationships
Social Support

Assessment Type

Patient Reported Outcomes

Administration Mode

Paper & Pencil

Cost

Free

Key Descriptions

  • The ISSB is a self-administered survey.
  • The ISSB has 40 items that reflect a range of socially supportive behaviors.
  • There are six main functions of support: material aid, behavioral assistance, intimate interaction, guidance, feedback, and positive social interaction.
  • The items are scored using a five-point scale reflecting the frequency of receipt of each supportive behavior during the previous month (1=not at all, 2=once or twice, 3=about once a week, 4=several times a week, 5=about every day).
  • ISSB scores are calculated by summing or averaging responses to individual items.
  • Research by Finch, et. al. (1997) indicates that ISSB is not a unidimensional scale. Subscales should be scored individually.

Number of Items

40

Equipment Required

  • Answer Form
  • Pencil

Time to Administer

10-15 minutes

Required Training

No Training

Instrument Reviewers

Initial instrument review completed by Ashley Gallaway, Roma Mirutenko, and Melissa Ivins-Lukse at the Illinois Institute of Technology (2015). Review and revisions completed by Kristian Nitsch, MS (3/25/2015). Update and review completed by Allison Peipert, 2017.

ICF Domain

Environment

Measurement Domain

Emotion

Nurses

back to Populations

Internal Consistency

Jordanian Nurses (Mrayyan, 2009)

Overall internal consistency was Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .93)*

  • Guidance: Adequate (Cronbach’s Alpha= .74)
  • Emotional Support: Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .80)
  • Tangible Assistance: Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .90)*

*Scores higher than .9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Non-Specific Patient Population

back to Populations

Test/Retest Reliability

Undergraduate Students (Berrera, Sandler & Ramsay, 1981; measured 2 days apart)

  • Adequate to Excellent test-retest reliability across 40 items (r=.441 to .912 ).
  • Excellent average test-retest reliability (r= .88)

Internal Consistency

Undergraduate Students (Stokes, 1985)

  • Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .93)*

(Barrera, Sandler, & Ramsay, 1981)

  • Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .93 and .94, for the first and second testing session respectively)*

(Emmons & Colby, 1995)

  • Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .94)*

(Swickert, Rosentreter, Hittner, & Mushrush, 2002)

  • Adequate (Cronbach’s Alpha= .73

Chinese University Students  (Liang & Bogat, 1995)

  • Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .94)*

*Scores higher than .9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

 

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (Keller, Feeny, & Zoellner, 2014)

  • Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .80)

 

Migrant Mothers from Mexico (de Leon Siantz, 1990)

  • Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .97)*

*Scores higher than .9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

 

Adolescents (Pretty, Conroy, Dugay, Fowler, & Williams, 1996)

  • Directive Guidance: Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .85)
  • Support: Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .86)
  • Tangible Assistance: Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .80)

 

Pregnant/Parenting & Non-pregnant/Non-Parenting Adolescents (Crase, Hockaday, & McCarville, 2007)

  • Excellent (Cronbach’s Alpha= .93)*

*Scores higher than .9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Construct Validity

Undergraduate Students (Berrera, Sandler & Ramsay, 1981)

  • Correlation with social support network size (Adequate, r= .322 to .401)
  • Correlation with Moo's Family Environment Cohesion subscale (Adequate, r = .359)
  • Item-total correlation (Poor-Excellent, r= -.82 to .69, suggesting that not all social support items are assessing the same construct

(Brock et al., 1996; Sarason et al., 1987; Pretorius, 1997; Pretorius and Diedricks, 1993)

  • Correlation with the Social Support Questionnaire-Satisfaction Short form (Poor, r= .17 to .260)

(Cohen & Hoberman, 1983)

  • Correlation with occurrence of physical symptoms (Poor, r= .22)
  • Correlation with frequency of positive life events (Poor, r= .28)
  • Correlation with frequency of negative life events (Poor, r= .28)

 

Mixed Populations

back to Populations

Construct Validity

Haber, Cohen, Lucas, and Baltes; 2007)

Study

N

r

Strength

Scale

Sample

Barrera and Baca (1990)

78

0.29

Poor

Arizona Social Suppport Interview Scale- Satisfaction Subscale (ASSIS-S)

Mental Health Outpatients

Sandler and Barrera (1984)

45

0.01

Poor

Arizona Social Suppport Interview Scale- Satisfaction Subscale (ASSIS-S)

Undergraduate Students

Cohen and Hoberman (1983)

57

0.46

Adequate

Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL)

Undergraduate Students

Cohen, McGowan, Fooskas, and Rose (1984)

92

0.46

Adequate

Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL)

Undergraduate Students

Emmons and Colby

105

0.46

Adequate

Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL)

Undergraduate Students

Lakey and Cassady (1990)

101

0.29

Poor

Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL)

Undergraduate Students

Lakey , Tardiff, and Drew (1994)

124

0.49

Adequate

Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL)

Students

Newland and Furnham (1999)

117

0.25

Poor

Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL)

Undergraduate Students

Swickert et al. (2002)

99

0.32

Adequate

Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL)

Trauma Survivors

Waggener and Galassi (1993)

43

0.34

Adequate

Social Support Inventory (SSI)

Separated Adults

Waggener and Galassi (1993)

47

0.22

Poor

Social Support Inventory (SSI)

Separated Adults

Brown, Brady, Lent, Wolfert, and Hall (1987)

99

0.15

Poor

Social Support Inventory Subjective Satisfaction subscale (SSI-SS)

Undergraduate Students

Brock, Sarason, Sarason, and Pierce (1996)

197

0.26

Adequate

Social Support Questionnaire- Satisfaction short form (SSQ-S)

Undergraduate Students

Pretorius (1997)

166

0.17

Poor

Social Support Questionnaire- Satisfaction short form (SSQ-S)

Undergraduate Students

Pretorius and Diedricks (1993)

242

0.17

Poor

Social Support Questionnaire- Satisfaction short form (SSQ-S)

Undergraduate Students

Sarason et al. (1987)

217

0.24

Poor

Social Support Questionnaire- Satisfaction short form (SSQ-S)

Undergraduate Students

Furchner (1998)

111

0.64

Excellent

Social Support Questionnaire Short Record- Satisfaction short form (SSQSR-S)

Students

Cheng (1999)

57

0.3

Adequate

Appraisal Scale of Social Relations (ASSR)

University Students

Cummins (1988)

112

0.22

Poor

Social Provisions Scale- Guidance Subscale (SPS-G)

Students

Kaul and Lakey (2003)

60

0.32

Adequate

Social Provisions Scale (SPS)

Mothers of Infants with Heart Defects

Lakey et al. (2002)

100

0.53

Adequate

Quality of Relationships Inventory- Support Scale (QRI-S)

Caregivers of parents with Alzheimer's Disease

Norris and Kaniasty (1996)

404

0.32

Adequate

Combination of ISEL and SPS items

Trauma Survivors

O'Reilly (1995)

60

0.57

Adequate

Social Support Appraisal Scale (SS-A)

Psychiatric Inpatients

Oritt, Paul, and Behrman (1985)

146

0.46

Adequate

Perceived Support Network Inventory (PSNI)

Undergraduate students,
Counseling Center Clients

Bibliography

Barrera, M. Jr., & Baca, L. M. (1990). Recipient reactions to social support: Contributions of enacted support, conflicted support, and network orientation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 541–551.

Barrera Jr, M., Sandier, I. N., & Ramsay, T. B. (1981). Preliminary Development of a Scale of Social Support: Studies on College Students I. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9(4).

Brock, D. M., Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., & Pierce, G. R. (1996). Simultaneous assessment of perceived global and relationship specific support. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 13, 143–152.

Brown, S. D., Brady, T., Lent, R. W., Wolfert, J., & Hall, S. (1987). Perceived social support among college students: Three studies of the psychometric characteristics and counseling uses of the Social Support Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 337–354.

Cohen, S., & Hoberman, H. M. (1983). Positive events and social supports as buffers of life change stress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 99–125.

Cohen, L., McGowan, J., Fooskas, S., & Rose, S. (1984). Positive life events and social support and the relationship between life stress and psychological disorder. American Journal of Community Psychology, 12(5), 567-587.

Crase, S., Hockaday, C., & Mccarville, P. (2006). Brief report: Perceptions of positive and negative support: Do they differ for pregnant/parenting adolescents and nonpregnant, nonparenting adolescents? Journal of Adolescence, 30, 505-512.

Emmons, R., Colby, P. (1995). Emotional conflict and well-being: Relation to perceived availability, daily utilization, and observer reports of social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(5), 947-959.

Forbes, A., & Roger, D. (1999). Stress, social support and fear of disclosure. British Journal of Health Psychology, 4, 165-179.

Jacobson, R., & Robins, C. (1989). Social dependency and social support in bulimic and nonbulimic women. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 8(6), 665-670.

Keller, S., Zoellner, L., & Feeny, N. (2010). Understanding factors associated with early therapeutic alliance in PTSD treatment: Adherence, childhood sexual abuse history, and social support. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(6), 974-979.

Keller, S., Feeny, N., & Zoellner, L. (2013). Depression sudden gains and transient depression spikes during treatment for PTSD. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 82(1), 102-111.

Lakey, B., & Cassady, P. B. (1990). Cognitive processes in perceived social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 337–343.

Lakey, B., Tardiff, T. A., & Drew, J. B. (1994). Negative social interactions: Assessment and relation to social support, cognition, and psychological distress. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 42–62.

Leavy, R., & Adams, E. (1986). Feminism as a correlate of self-esteem, self-acceptance, and social support among lesbians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, (10), 321-326.

Mrayyan, M. (2009). Job stressors and social support behaviors: Comparing intensive care units to wards in Jordan. Contemporary Nurse, 31 (2), 163-175.

Newland, J., & Furnham, A. (1999). Perceived availability of social support. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 659–663.

Pretty, G., Conroy, C., Dugay, J., Fowler, K., & Williams, D. (1996). Sense of community and its relevance to adolescents of all ages. Journal of Community Psychology, 24(4), 365-379.

Sandler, I. N., & Barrera, M. Jr. (1984). Toward a multimethod approach to assessing the effects of social support. American Journal of Community Psychology, 12, 37–52.

Sandler, I., & Lakey, B. (1982). Locus of control as a stress moderator: The role of control perceptions and social support. American Journal of Community Psychology, 10(1), 65-80.

Siantz, M. (1990). Maternal acceptance/rejection of Mexican migrant mothers. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 245-254.

Stokes, J. (1985). The relation of social network and individual difference variables to loneliness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 981-990.

Swickert, R., Rosentreter, C., Hittner, J. & Mushrush, J. (2002) Extravertion, social support process, and stress. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 877-891.

Waggener, N. M., & Galassi, J. P. (1993). The relation of frequency, satisfaction, and type of socially supportive behaviors to psychological adjustment in marital separation. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 21, 139–159.