ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2025
Psychometric Evaluation of the Beliefs About Stress Scale in the German General Population.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBeliefs about stress significantly influence health outcomes. Reliable, economical scales are essential for assessing these beliefs to foster understanding on mechanisms by which stress mindsets affect health outcomes. Such understanding can inform interventions promoting adaptive stress perceptions and reducing chronic stress-related health risks.
methodThis study assessed the Beliefs About Stress Scale (BASS) in a representative German sample (N = 2515). We conducted confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate factorial validity and tested measurement invariance was tested across demographics, and the BASS's associations with related constructs were analyzed for convergent and discriminant validity.
resultsThe BASS demonstrated strong factorial validity, with a bifactor model offering superior fit to the three-factor structure. Measurement invariance analyses confirmed stability across demographics, though minor age-specific adjustments may improve interpretability. Positive beliefs about stress controllability and benefits were associated with healthier psychological outcomes, whereas negative stress beliefs linked to poorer mental health, underscoring the value of a "stress-is-enhancing" mindset. Normative data enhance the BASS's applicability in both research and clinical settings.
conclusionThe BASS exhibits robust validity and reliability, making it suitable for population-level applications and comparisons between groups. By clarifying the influence of stress mindsets on stress regulation, the BASS supports the development of mindset-based interventions that promote adaptive stress perceptions and help mitigate chronic stress risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.