The Stress Appraisal Measure (SAM) captures six different types of cognitive appraisals in anticipation of an upcoming stressful situation. The goal of this article was to examine the factorial structure and the validity of the scale in the French language while accounting for existing limitations in the literature. These include factorial structure instability and low internal consistency for specific subscales across multiple validation studies in other languages. In the first study (N = 425), the results from an exploratory factor analysis reliably suggested the removal of five items, the bridging of the threat and challenge subscales as one, and a new general five-factor structure. The new structure and its construct, convergent, and discriminant validity were confirmed in a second study (N = 308). We discuss the relevance of this five-factor scale for the studies focused on individual differences in stress and appraisals.
ArafatS. Y.ChowdhuryH. R.QusarM.HafezM. A. (2016). Cross cultural adaptation & psychometric validation of research instruments: A methodological review. Journal of Behavioral Health, 5(3), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.5455/jbh.20160615121755
2.
BandalosD. L.FinneyS. J. (2018). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In HancockG. R.StapletonL. M.MuellerR .O. (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 98–122). Routledge.
3.
BellinghausenL.CollangeJ.BotellaM.EmeryJ.-L.AlbertÉ. (2009). Validation factorielle de l’échelle française de stress perçu en milieu professionnel [Factor validation of the French scale of perceived stress in the workplace]. Santé Publique, 21(4), 365–373. https://doi.org/10.3917/spub.094.0365
4.
BerjotS.Girault-LidvanN. (2009). Validation d’une version française de l’échelle d’évaluation cognitive primaire de Brewer et Skinner [Validation of a French version of the Cognitive Appraisal Scale (Trait) by Brewer and Skinner.]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement, 41(4), 252–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014842
5.
BlascovichJ. (2008). Challenge, threat, and health. In ShahJ. Y.GardnerW. L. (Eds.) Handbook of motivation science (pp. 481–493). The Guilford Press.
6.
BlascovichJ. (2013). The biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat: Reflections, theoretical ubiquity, and new directions. In DerksB.ScheepersD.EllemersN. (Eds.), Neuroscience of prejudice and intergroup relations. Psychology Press.
7.
BoatengG. O.NeilandsT. B.FrongilloE. A.Melgar-QuiñonezH. R.YoungS. L. (2018). Best Practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
CarpenterR. (2016). A review of instruments on cognitive appraisal of stress. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 30(2), 271–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2015.07.002
10.
CarverC. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’ too long: Consider the brief cope. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6
DelahayeM.StieglitzR. D.GrafM.KepplerC.MaesJ.PfluegerM. (2015). Deutsche Übersetzung und Validierung des stress appraisal measure (SAM) [German translation and validation of the stress appraisal measure (SAM)]. Fortschritte der Neurologie-Psychiatrie, 83(5), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1399727
15.
DurakM.Senol-DurakE. (2013). The development and psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the stress appraisal measure. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29(1), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000079
16.
FergusonE.MatthewsG.CoxT. (1999). The appraisal of life events (ALE)scale: Reliability and validity. British Journal of Health Psychology, 4(2), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1348/135910799168506
17.
FieldA. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. Sage.
18.
FolkmanS. (1984). Personal control and stress and coping processes: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(4), 839–852. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.839
19.
FolkmanS.LazarusR. S.GruenR. J.DeLongisA. (1986). Appraisal, coping, health status, and psychological symptoms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 571–579. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.50.3.571
20.
FuhrerR.RouillonF. (1989). La version française de l’échelle CES-D (Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale). Description et traduction de l’échelle d’autoévaluation. Psychiatry and Psychobiology, 4(3), 163–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0767399X00001590
21.
GaabJ.RohlederN.NaterU. M.EhlertU. (2005). Psychological determinants of the cortisol stress response: The role of anticipatory cognitive appraisal. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 30(6), 599–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.02.001
22.
GomesA. R.FariaS.GonçalvesA. M. (2013). Cognitive appraisal as a mediator in the relationship between stress and burnout. Work & Stress, 27(4), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2013.840341
23.
GoretzkoD.PhamT. T. H.BühnerM. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis: Current use, methodological developments and recommendations for good practice. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3510–3521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00300-2
24.
GroeneveldR. A.MeedenG. (1984). Measuring Skewness and Kurtosis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D: The Statistician, 33(4), 391–399. https://doi.org/10.2307/2987742
25.
HaseA. (2019). Challenge and threat states: An examination of variance components, interventions, and performance. [Phd dissertation, University of Essex]. https://repository.essex.ac.uk/25141/
26.
HemenoverS. H.DienstbierR. A. (1996). Prediction of stress appraisals from mastery, extraversion, neuroticism, and general appraisal tendencies. Motivation and Emotion, 20, 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02856520
27.
HiltonC. E. (2017). The importance of pretesting questionnaires: A field research example of cognitive pretesting the Exercise referral Quality of Life Scale (ER-QLS). International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1091640
28.
HoneyK. L.MorganM.BennettP. (2003). A stress-coping transactional model of low mood following childbirth. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 21(2), 129–143. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/0264683031000124082
29.
HowardM. C. (2016). A review of exploratory factor analysis decisions and overview of current practices: What we are doing and how can we improve?International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 32(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664
30.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
31.
IBM SPSS Statistics 25 (2017). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows (Version 25). IBM SPSS Corp.
32.
JacksonD. L.GillaspyJ. A.JrPurc-StephensonR. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014694
33.
JonesM.MeijenC.McCarthyP. J.SheffieldD. (2009). A theory of challenge and threat states in athletes. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2(2), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/17509840902829331
34.
KaiserH. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116
LazarusR. S.FolkmanS. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
38.
LesageF.-X.BerjotS.DeschampsF. (2012). Clinical stress assessment using a visual analogue scale. Occupational Medicine, 62(8), 600–605. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqs140
39.
LewinsohnP. M.SeeleyJ. R.RobertsR. E.AllenN. B. (1997). Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) as a screening instrument for depression among community-residing older adults. Psychology and Aging, 12(2), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.12.2.277
40.
LiuY.ZumboB. D. (2012). Impact of outliers arising from unintended and unknowingly included subpopulations on the decisions about the number of factors in exploratory factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72(3), 388–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164411429821
41.
LiuY.ZumboB. D.WuA. D. (2012). A demonstration of the impact of outliers on the decisions about the number of factors in exploratory factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72(2), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164411410878
42.
LloretS.FerreresA.HernándezA.TomásI. (2017). The exploratory factor analysis of items: Guided analysis based on empirical data and software. Anales de Psicología / Annals of Psychology, 33(2), 417–432. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.33.2.270211
43.
Lorenzo-SevaU.TimmermanM. E.KiersH. A. (2011). The hull method for selecting the number of common factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(2), 340–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.564527
44.
LoweR.VedharaK.BennettP.BrookesE.GaleL.MunnochK.Schreiber-KounineC.FowlerC.RayterZ.SammonA.FarndonJ. (2003). Emotion-related primary and secondary appraisals, adjustment and coping: Associations in women awaiting breast disease diagnosis. British Journal of Health Psychology, 8(4), 377–391. https://doi.org/10.1348/135910703770238257
45.
MarcoulidesK. M.YuanK. H. (2017). New ways to evaluate goodness of fit: A note on using equivalence testing to assess structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24(1), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2016.1225260
McNeishD. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144
48.
MeijenC.TurnerM.JonesM. V.SheffieldD.McCarthyP. (2020). A theory of challenge and threat states in athletes: A revised conceptualization. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 126. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00126
49.
MeyerB. (2001). Coping with severe mental illness: Relations of the brief COPE with symptoms, functioning, and well-being. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 23(4), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012731520781
50.
MullerL.SpitzE. (2003). Évaluation multidimensionnelle du coping: Validation du Brief COPE sur une population française [Multidimensional assessment of coping : validation of the Brief COPE among french population]. L’encéphale, 29, 507–518.
51.
NazaréB.FonsecaA. (2021). Maternal appraisals of the birth of a child: Portuguese version of the stress appraisal measure. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 39(4), 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2020.1737321
52.
NewtonA. T.McIntoshD. N. (2009). Associations of general religiousness and specific religious beliefs with coping appraisals in response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Mental Health, Religion and Culture, 12(2), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670802380400
53.
NewtonA. T.McIntoshD. N. (2010). Specific religious beliefs in a cognitive appraisal model of stress and coping. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 20(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508610903418129
54.
NunnallyJ.BernsteinD. I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
55.
PeacockE. J.WongP. T. (1990). The stress appraisal measure (SAM): A multidimensional approach to cognitive appraisal. Stress Medicine, 6(3), 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2460060308
56.
PelchatD.RicardN.LévesqueP. A.PerreaultM.PolomenoV. (1995). Validation française du stress appraisal measure (SAM). Measure and Évaluation En Éducation, 17, 95–117.
57.
PodsakoffN. P.LePineJ. A.LePineM. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.438
58.
PurgatoM.BarbuiC. (2012). Dichotomizing rating scale scores in psychiatry: A bad idea?Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences, 22(1), 17–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796012000613
59.
ReynoldsW. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38(1), 119–125. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(198201)38:1<119::AID-JCLP2270380118>3.0.CO;2-I
60.
RoeschS. C.RowleyA. A. (2005). Evaluating and developing a multidimensional, dispositional measure of appraisal. Journal of Personality Assessment, 85(2), 188–196. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8502_11
61.
RossatoC. J. L.UphillM. A.SwainJ.ColemanD. A. (2018). The development and preliminary validation of the Challenge and Threat in Sport (CAT-Sport) Scale. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16(2), 164–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2016.1182571
62.
RowleyA. A.RoeschS. C.JuricaB. J.VaughnA. A. (2005). Developing and validating a stress appraisal measure for minority adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 28(4), 547–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.10.010
63.
RuscioJ.RocheB. (2012). Determining the number of factors to retain in an exploratory factor analysis using comparison data of known factorial structure. Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 282–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025697
64.
SavaleiV.ReiseS. P.VazireS.FriedE. (2019). Don’t forget the model in your model-based reliability coefficients: A reply to McNeish (2018). Collabra: Psychology, 5(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.247
65.
SchreiberJ. B. (2021). Issues and recommendations for exploratory factor analysis and principal component analysis. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 17(5), 1004–1011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.07.027
66.
SchumackerR. E.LomaxR. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Psychology Press.
67.
Senol-DurakE.DurakM. (2012). Turkish validation of the dispositional form of stress appraisal measure. Education & Science/Egitim ve Bilim, 37(165): 48–63.
68.
ShresthaN. (2021). Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 9(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajams-9-1-2
69.
SkinnerN.BrewerN. (2002). The dynamics of threat and challenge appraisals prior to stressful achievement events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(3), 678–692. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.3.678
70.
SunJ. (2005). Assessing goodness of fit in confirmatory factor analysis. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 37(4), 240–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2005.11909764
71.
TomakaJ.PalaciosR. L.ChampionC.MonksS. (2018). Development and validation of an instrument that assesses individual differences in threat and challenge appraisal. Journal of Depression and Anxiety, 7(3), 2167–1044. https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-1044.1000313
72.
TsangS.RoyseC. F.TerkawiA. S. (2017). Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 11(Suppl 1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17
73.
UphillM. A.RossatoC. J.SwainJ.O’DriscollJ. (2019). Challenge and threat: A critical review of the literature and an alternative conceptualization. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1255. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01255
74.
VerardiS.DahourouD.Ah-KionJ.BhowonU.TseungC. N.Amoussou-YeyeD.AdjahouissoM.BouattaC.Dougoumalé CisséD.MbodjiM. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale in eight African countries and Switzerland. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41(1), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022109348918
75.
WebsterJ. R.BeehrT. A.LoveK. (2011). Extending the challenge-hindrance model of occupational stress: The role of appraisal. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(2), 505–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.02.001
76.
WilliamsB.OnsmanA.BrownT. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.3.93
77.
WongP. T. P.RekerG. T. (1983). Face validity of the coping inventory [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association on Gerontology, Moncton, NB, Canada.
78.
YokotaR.OkuharaT.OkadaH.GotoE.SakakibaraK.KiuchiT. (2022). Associations between stigma, cognitive appraisals, coping strategies and stress responses among Japanese women undergoing infertility treatment. Healthcare, 10(10), 1907. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101907
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
