Reliability and Validity of Turkish Version of the COVID-19 Pandemic-Related Perceived Stress Scale among Nursing Students

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 204 - 212, 05.04.2025

Burcu Arkan , Aylin Bostanlı , Murat Bektaş

https://doi.org/10.38108/ouhcd.1409918

Öz

Objective: This study aimed to adapt the COVID-19 Pandemic-Related Perceived Stress Scale, which is used to evaluate the prevalence of perceived stress and variables associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, into Turkish and test its validity and reliability on nursing students.
Methods: Methodological-descriptive-cross-sectional design. The data were collected using the “Sociodemographic Data Form” bearing the introductory information and the COVID-19 Pandemic-Related Perceived Stress Scale. The sample of this methodological-descriptive-cross-sectional study consisted of 412 students studying at the Nursing Department affiliated to the Faculty of Health Sciences in the spring semester of the 2021-2022 academic year and volunteered to participate in the study. Language, content, face, and construct validity were investigated in the adaptation and testing phases; internal consistency and test-retest methods were used for the reliability of the scale.
Results: The fit index of the COVID-19 Pandemic-Related Perceived Stress Scale was found to be above 0.80 in terms of both items and the scale. The results of the content validity analysis revealed that the scale confirmed the language and content validity. The scale measures the subject as adequately as the original construct for the Turkish sample.
Conclusions: The scale is confirmed to be a valid and reliable tool that can be used to evaluate the current mental state/problems.

Anahtar Kelimeler

COVID-19, perceived stress, validity, reliability, student, nurse

Etik Beyan

The Bursa Uludag University Non-Invasive Research Ethical Committee (2022-02/ Decision No: 10) approved the study protocol.

Destekleyen Kurum

-------------

Proje Numarası

------------

Teşekkür

We thank all those who participated in this study.

COVID-19 Pandemisi’nde Hemşirelik Öğrencilerinde Algılanan Stres Ölçeği’nin Türkçe Geçerlilik ve Güvenilirlik Çalışması

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı COVID-19 Pandemisinde algılanan stres yaygınlığını ve değişkenleri değerlendirmede kullanılan COVID-19 Pandemisin’de Algılanan Stres Ölçeği’ni Türkçeye uyarlamak, geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğini hemşirelik öğrencilerinde test etmektir.
Yöntem: Metodolojik-tanımlayıcı-kesitsel türdeki çalışmanın örneklemini 2021-2022 Eğitim-Öğretim yılı Bahar Yarıyılında Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Hemşirelik Bölümü’nde çalışmaya gönüllü katılan 412 öğrenci oluşturdu. Verilerin toplanmasında tanıtıcı bilgilerin yer aldığı “Sosyodemografik Veri Toplama Formu” ve “COVID-19 Pandemisi’nde Algılanan Stres Ölçeği” kullanıldı.
Bulgular: COVID-19 Pandemisi’nde Algılanan Stres Ölçeği’nin hem madde hem de ölçek bazında uyum indeksinin 0.80’in üstünde olduğu saptandı. Kapsam geçerlilik analizi sonuçları, ölçeğin Türk örneklemi için dil ve kapsam geçerliliğinin sağlandığını ve konuyu Türk örneklinde de orijinal yapı kadar yeterli olarak ölçtüğünü gösterdi.
Sonuç: Ölçek, Türk bireylerin mevcut ruhsal durumunu/sorunlarını değerlendirmede kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir araçtır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

COVID-19, algılanan stres, geçerlilik, öğrenci, güvenilirlik, hemşire

Proje Numarası

------------

Kaynakça

• Allington D, Beaver K, Duffy B, Meyer C, Moxham-Hall V, Murkin G, Rubin J, et al. (2020). The Trusting, the Dissenting and the Frustrated: how the UK is dividing as lockdown is eased. Kings’ College London Policy Institute. Accessed March 3, 2021. Available from: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/how-the-uk-is-dividing-as-the-lockdown-is-eased.pdf
• Barlow DH, Sauer-Zavala S, Carl JR, Bullis JR, Ellard KK. (2014). The nature, diagnosis, and treatment of neuroticism: back to the future. Clinical Psychologica. Science, 2, 344–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/216770 2613505532
• Bermejo-Martins E, Luis EO, Sarrionandia A, Martínez M, Garcés MS, Oliveros EY, Cortés-Rivera C, et al. (2021). Different responses to stress, health practices and self-care during COVID-19 lockdown: A stratified analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 2253. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052253
• Brody C, Chhoun P, Tuot S, Pal K, Chhim K, Yi S. (2016). HIV risk and psychological distress among female entertainment workers in Cambodia: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health, 16, 133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-2814-6
• Campo-Arias A, Pedrozo-Cortés MJ, Pedrozo-Pupo JC. (2020). Pandemic-Related Perceived Stress Scale of COVID-19: An exploration of online psychometric performance. Escala de estrés percibido relacionado con la pandemia de COVID-19: una exploración del desempeño psicométrico en línea. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatria (English ed.), 49(4), 229–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcp.2020.05.005
• Campo-Arias A, Pedrozo-Pupo JC, Herazo E. (2021). Review of the COVID-19 Pandemic-related Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10-C). Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatria, 50 (3), 156-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcpeng.2021.02.002
• Folkman S, Lazarus RS. (1983). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer Publishing Com¬pany. Hayes SC. (2016). Acceptance and commitment therapy, relational frame theory, and the third wave of behavioral and cognitive therapies. Behav. Ther., 35, 639–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2016.11.006
• Holmes EA, O'Connor RC, Perry VH, Tracey I, Wessely S, Arseneault L, Ballard C, et al. (2020). Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science. Lancet Psychiatry, 7, 547–60 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30168-1
• Johnson RB, Christensen L. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5. Edition). USA: Sage publications.
• Karagöz Y. (2016). SPSS 23 and AMOS 23 applied statistical analysis. Ankara: Nobel Akademi Publishing, pp.878-940.
• Kartal M, Bardakçı S. (2018). Reliability and validity analysis with SPSS and AMOS applied examples. Turkey: Akademisyen Publishing, pp.1-192.
• Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, Hiripi E, Mroczek DK, Normand SL, Walters EE, et al. (2002). Short screen¬ing scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological dis¬tress. Psychological Medicine, 32, 959–976. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291702006074
• Lai J, Ma S, Wang Y, Cai Z, Hu J, Wei N, Wu J, et al. (2020). Factors associated with mental health outcomes among health care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019. JAMA Network Open, 3 (3), e203976. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetwork open.2020.3976
• Losada-Baltar A, Jiménez-Gonzalo L, Gallego-Alberto L, Pedroso-Chaparro MDS, Fernandes-Pires J, Fernandes-Pires J. (2021). We're staying at home". Association of self-perceptions of aging, personal and family resources and loneliness with psychological distress during the lock-down period of COVID-19. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, e10–e16. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa048
• Mercado-Lara MF, Campo-Arias A, Monterrosa-Castro Á. (2022). Validity and reliability of the Spanish version of fear of COVID-19 scale in Colombian physicians. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 20 (2), 1122–1129. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11469-020-00430-w
• Özdamar K. (2016). Scale and test development structural equation modeling. Ankara: Nisan Kitabevi Publishing, pp.6-286.
• Qiu J, Shen B, Zhao M, Wang Z, Xie B, Xu Y. (2020). A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epi¬demic: implications and policy recommenda¬tions. General Psychiatry, 33 (2), e100213. https://doi.org/10.1136 /gpsych-2020-100213
• Reinecke L, Aufenanger S, Beutel ME, Dreier M, Quiring O, Stark B, Wölfling K, et al. (2017). Digital stress over the life span: The effects of communication load and internet multitasking on perceived stress and psychological health impairments in a German probability sample. Media Psychology, 20 (1), 90–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1121832
• Seçer I. (2018). Psychological test development and adaptation process; Spss and Lisrel applications. 2 nd ed. Ankara: Anı Publishing, pp.10-168.
• Tavşancıl E. (2010). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• Taylor MR, Agho KE, Stevens GJ, Raphael B. (2008). Factors influencing psychological distress dur¬ing a disease epidemic: data from Australia’s first outbreak of equine influenza. BMC Public Health, 8, 347. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-347
• Wells A. (2000). Emotional disorders and metacognition: innovative cognitive therapy. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
• Wheaton MG, Abramowitz JS, Berman NC, Fabricant LE, Olatunji BO. (2012). Psychological predictors of anxiety in response to the H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic. Cognitive Therapy Research, 36, 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-011-93533
• World Health Organization. (2020). Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) technical guidance. Accessed March 3, 2021. Available from: https://www.who.int/ emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus2019/techni cal-guidance.
• Wu P, Fang Y, Guan Z, Fan B, Kong J, Yao Z, Liu X, et al. (2009). The psychological impact of the SARS epidemic on hospital employees in China: exposure, risk perception, and altruistic acceptance of risk. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 54, 301–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 070674370905400504
• Yip PSF, Cheung YT, Chau PH, Law YW. (2010). The impact of epidemic outbreak: the case of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and suicide among older adults in Hong Kong. Crisis, 31, 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000015
• Zhua S, Wu Y, Zhud C, Honga W, Yua Z, Chena Z, Chena Z, et al. (2020). The immediate mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic among people with or without quarantine managements. Brain, Behavior and Immunity, 87, 56–58. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.045