Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations

PURPOSE: There is a need for valid and reliable short scales that can be used to assess social networks and social supports and to screen for social isolation in older persons. DESIGN AND METHODS: The present study is a cross-national and cross-cultural evaluation of the performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS-6), which was used to screen for social isolation among community-dwelling older adult populations in three European countries. Based on the concept of lack of redundancy of social ties we defined clinical cut-points of the LSNS-6 for identifying persons deemed at risk for social isolation. RESULTS: Among all three samples, the LSNS-6 and two subscales (Family and Friends) demonstrated high levels of internal consistency, stable factor structures, and high correlations with criterion variables. The proposed clinical cut-points showed good convergent validity, and classified 20% of the respondents in Hamburg, 11% of those in Solothurn (Switzerland), and 15% of those in London as at risk for social isolation. IMPLICATIONS: We conclude that abbreviated scales such as the LSNS-6 should be considered for inclusion in practice protocols of gerontological practitioners. Screening older persons based on the LSNS-6 provides quantitative information on their family and friendship ties, and identifies persons at increased risk for social isolation who might benefit from in-depth assessment and targeted interventions.

Psychoendocrine validation of a short measure for assessment of perceived stress management skills in different non-clinical populations

BACKGROUND: We investigated the psychometric properties of a short questionnaire for combined assessment of different perceived stress management skills in the general population and tested whether scores relate to physiological stress reactivity. METHODS: For psychometric evaluation, we determined the factor structure of the questionnaire and investigated its measurement invariance in the participant groups and over time in three different independent samples representing the general population (total N=332). Reliability was tested by estimating test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and item reliabilities. We examined convergent and criterion validity using selected criterion variables. For endocrine validation, 35 healthy non-smoking and medication-free men in a laboratory study and 35 male and female employees in a workplace study underwent an acute standardized psychosocial stress task. We assessed stress management skills and measured salivary cortisol before and several times up to 60 min (workplace study) and 120 min (laboratory study) after stress. Potential confounders were controlled. RESULTS: The factor structure of the questionnaire consists of five scales reflecting acceptably distinct stress management skills such as cognitive strategies, use of social support, relaxation strategies, anger regulation, and perception of bodily tension. This factor structure was stable across participant groups and over time. Internal consistencies, item reliabilities, and test-retest reliabilities met established statistical requirements. Convergent and criterion validity were also established. In both endocrine validation studies, higher stress management skills were independently associated with lower cortisol stress reactivity (p's<.029). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the questionnaire has good psychometric properties and that it relates to subjective psychological and objective physiological stress indicators. Therefore, the instrument seems a suitable measure for differential assessment of stress management skills in the general population.