• Veljko Jovanović Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Novi Sad
  • Vesna Gavrilov Jerković Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Novi Sad



social support, validity, confirmatory factor analysis, bifactor model


The aim of the present study was to evaluate construct and convergent validity of a Serbian translation of the MOS-SSS (The Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey: Sherbourne & Stewart, 1991). Construct validity of the scale was examined via confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 604 undergraduate students (74% females; Mage = 20.6 years). Convergent validity was evaluated in a sample of 200 undergraduate students (52.5% females; Mage = 21.8 years), by examining correlations with two indicators of interpersonal functioning (perceived social support and loneliness) and three indicators of well-being (life satisfaction, depression, and general well-being). The results revealed that the structure of the MOS-SSS was best represented by a bifactor model, with four specific factors of social support (Emotional/Informational, Tangible, Affectionate, and Positive Social Interaction) and one general factor of social support. A bifactor modeling showed that the general factor explained the largest portion of total (44.3%) and common variance (69.6%) in social support, while the specific factors explained small portion of total (range from 3.7% to 7.0%) and common variance (range from 5.9% to 11%). Omega-hierarchical coefficients suggested that only the total score of the MOS-SSS could be reliably interpreted. Convergent validity of the MOS-SSS was supported by high correlation with perceived social support, and moderate correlations with loneliness and indicators of well-being. The findings of the present study support the use of the MOS-SSS as a reliable and valid instrument for the assessment of general social support among young adults.


Metrics Loading ...


Adamczyk, K., & Segrin, C. (2015). Perceived social support and mental health among single vs. partnered Polish young adults. Current Psychology, 34, 82–96.

Anderson, D., Bilodeau, B., Deshaies, G., Gilbert, M., & Jobin, J. (2005). French-Canadian validation of the MOS Social Support Survey. Canadian Journal of Cardiology, 21(10), 867–873.

Bernardon, S., Babb, K. A., Hakim-Larson, J., & Gragg, M. (2011). Loneliness, attachment, and the perception and use of social support in university students. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 43(1), 40–51.

Canivez, G. L. (in press). Bifactor modeling in construct validation of multifactored tests: Implications for understanding multidimensional constructs and test interpretation. In K. Schweizer & C. DiStefano (Eds.), Principles and methods of test construction: Standards and recent advancements. Göttingen: Hogrefe Publishers.

Chen, F. F., Hayes, A., Carver, C. S., Laurenceau, J. P., & Zhang, Z. (2012). Modeling general and specific variance in multifaceted constructs: A comparison of the bifactor model to other approaches. Journal of Personality, 80, 219–251.

Chen, F. F., West, S. G., & Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and secondorder models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 189–225.

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.

Chu, P. S., Saucier, D. A., & Hafner, E. (2010). Meta-analysis of the relationships between social support and well-being in children and adolescents. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 29(6), 624–645.

Costa-Requena, G., Salamero, M., & Gil, F. (2007). Validity of the questionnaire MOS-SSS of social support in neoplastic patients. Medicina Clínica (Barcelona), 128(18), 687–691.

De Jong Gierveld, J., & Kamphuis, F. H. (1985). The development of a Rasch-type loneliness scale. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9(3), 289–299.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.

Dunkel Schetter, C., & Dolbier, C. (2011). Resilience in the context of chronic stress and health in adults. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 634–652.

Giangrasso, B., & Casale, S. (2014). Psychometric properties of the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey with a general population sample of undergraduate students. Social Indicator Research, 116, 185–197.

Gignac, G. (2008). Higher-order models versus direct hierarchical models: G as superordinate or breadth factor? Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 21–43.

Gjesfjeld, C. D., Greeno, C. G., & Kim, K. H. (2008). A confirmatory factor analysis of an abbreviated social support instrument: The MOS-SSS. Research on Social Work Practice, 18, 231–237.

Gottlieb, B. H., & Bergen, A. E. (2010). Social support concepts and measures. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 69, 511–520.

Gottlieb, B. H. (2000). Selecting and planning support interventions. In S. Cohen, L. G. Underwood, & B. H. Gottlieb (Eds.), (2000). Social support measurement and intervention: A guide for health and social scientists (pp. 195–220). New York: Oxford University Press.

Grav, S., Hellzèn, O., Romild, U., & Stordal, E. (2012). Association between social support and depression in the general population: The HUNT study, a crosssectional survey. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21, 111–120.

Griep, R. H., Chor, D., Faerstein, E., Werneck, G. L., & Lopes, C. S. (2005). Construct validity of the Medical Outcomes Study's social support scale adapted to Portuguese in the Pro-Saude Study. Cadernos de Saúde Publica, 21, 703–714.

Holmstrom, A. J., & Burleson, B. R. (2011). An initial test of cognitive-emotional theory of esteem support messages. Communication Research, 38, 326–355.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

Hupcey, J. E. (1998). Clarifying the social support theory-research linkage. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27, 1231–1241.

Jovanović, V. (2015). Structural validity of the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form: The bifactor model of emotional, social and psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 75, 154–159.

Karademas, E. C. (2006). Self-efficacy, social support and well-being: The mediating role of optimism. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1281–1290.

Keyes, C. L. M., Wissing, M., Potgieter, J., Temane, M., Kruger, A., & van Rooy, S. (2008). Evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF) in Setswana-speaking South Africans. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 15, 181–192.

Kim, S., & Mazza, J. (2014). Reliability, validity, and item response of the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support score among incarcerated women. Women and Criminal Justice, 24, 1–21.

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Lopez, M., & Cooper, L. (2011). Social support measure review. Los Angeles, CA: First 5 LA.

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

Martire, L. M., & Franks, M. M. (2014). The role of social networks in adult health: Introduction to the Special Issue. Health Psychology, 33, 501–504.

Masi, C. M., Chen, H. Y., Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2011). A meta-analysis of interventions to reduce loneliness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 219–266.

Moser, A., Stuck, A. E., Silliman, R. A., Ganz, P. A., & Clough-Gorr, K. M. (2012). The eight-item modified Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey: Psychometric evaluation showed excellent performance. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 65, 1107–1116.

Ng, W., & Diener, E. (2014). What matters to the rich and the poor? Subjective wellbeing, financial satisfaction, and post-materialistic needs across the world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 326–338.

Nurullah, A. S. (2012). Received and provided social support: A review of current evidence and future directions. American Journal of Health Studies, 27, 173–188.

Reevy, G. M., & Maslach, C. (2001). Use of social support: Gender and personality differences. Sex Roles, 44, 437–459.

Reise, S. P. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667–696.

Reise, S. P., Moore, T., & Haviland, M. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544–559.

Reise, S. P., Morizot, J., & Hays, R. D. (2007). The role of bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcome measures. Quality of Life Research, 16, 19–31.

Robitaille, A., Orpana, H., & McIntosh, C. N. (2011). Psychometric properties, factorial structure, and measurement invariance of the English and French versions of the Medical Outcomes Study social support scale. Health Reports, 22(2), 33–40.

Rodriguez, M., & Cohen, S. (1998). Social support. In H. Friedman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mental health (pp. 535–544). New York: Academic Press.

Schaefer, C., Coyne, J. C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). The health related functions of social support. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 381–405.

Schulz, U., & Schwarzer, R. (2003). Soziale Unterstützung bei der Krankheitsbewältigung. Die Berliner Social Support Skalen (BSSS) [Social support in coping with illness: The Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS)]. Diagnostica, 49, 73–82.

Schwarzer, R., Knoll, N., & Rieckmann, N. (2004). Social support. In A. Kaptein & J. Weinman (Eds.), Introduction to health psychology (pp. 158–182). Oxford, England: Blackwell.

Sherbourne, C. D., & Stewart, A. L. (1991). The MOS social support survey. Social Science and Medicine, 32(6), 705–714.

Shrout, P. E., & Lane, S. P. (2012). Reliability. In H. Cooper (Ed.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology: Foundations, planning, measures, and psychometrics (Vol. 1, pp. 643–660). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Shyu, Y. I., Tang, W. R., Liang, J., & Weng, L. J. (2006). Psychometric testing of the social support survey on a Taiwanese sample. Nursing Research, 55(6), 411–417.

Siedlecki, K. L., Salthouse, T. A., Oishi, S., & Jeswani, S. (2014). The relationship between social support and subjective wellbeing across age. Social Indicators Research, 117, 561–576.

Soares, A., Biasoli, I., Scheliga, A., Baptista, R. L., Brabo, E. P., Morais, J. C., ... Spector, N. (2012). Validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Medical Outcomes Study-Social Support Survey in Hodgkin's lymphoma survivors. Supportive Care in Cancer, 20(8), 1895–1900.

Tarlov, A., Ware, J., Greenfield, S., Nelson, E., Perrin, E., & Zubkoff, M. (1989). The Medical Outcomes Study: An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. JAMA, 262, 925–930.

Walen, H. E., & Lachman, M. E. (2000). Social support and strain from partner, family, and friends: Costs and benefits for men and women in adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(1), 5–30.

Wang, W., Zheng, X., He, H. G., & Thompson, D. R. (2013). Psychometric testing of the Chinese Mandarin version of the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey in patients with coronary heart disease in mainland China. Quality of Life Research, 22(8), 1965–1971.

Yu, D. S., Lee, D. T., & Woo, J. (2004). Psychometric testing of the Chinese version of the medical outcomes study social support survey (MOS-SSS-C). Research in Nursing & Health, 27(2), 135–143.

Zimet, G., Dahlem, N., Zimet, S., & Farley, G. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41.

Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005). Cronbach's α, Revelle's β, and McDonald's ωH: Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133.




How to Cite

Jovanović, V., & Gavrilov Jerković, V. (2015). VALIDITY OF A SERBIAN TRANSLATION OF THE MEDICAL OUTCOMES STUDY SOCIAL SUPPORT SURVEY (MOS-SSS). Primenjena Psihologija, 8(3), 245–264.



Regular issues