Validation of the Calgary Symptoms of Stress Inventory (C-SOSI) for Predicting Adherence to a Stress Reduction Technique
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Stress is a ubiquitous aspect of modern life that has serious effects on mental and physical health. Many stress reduction techniques are currently available to help combat these effects but non-adherence to them is a significant barrier to their overall effectiveness. The aims of the current study were to: 1) validate the Calgary Symptoms of Stress Inventory (C-SOSI), an instrument that classifies one's stress response profile, using traditional psychometric procedures as well as for predicting responses to a laboratory stress situation, and 2) explore the utility of this instrument for predicting adherence following training in a single stress reduction session using guided breathing. Seventy undergraduates (55 women, 15 men) participated in a laboratory study in which they reported their typical stress responses using the C-SOSI, and their actual cognitive, affective, and cardiovascular responses to two stressful tasks were assessed. Next, all participants were trained in and practiced a diaphragmatic breathing relaxation strategy. Adherence, efficacy, and enjoyment of daily practice of the relaxation strategy were measured during a two-week follow-up phase using a web-based recording system. Although internal consistency reliabilities were generally acceptable for the C-SOSI subscales (Cronbach alphas ranging from .78 to .94), the validity of the C-SOSI subscales for explaining variance in actual stress responses to laboratory stressors was not as expected. The C-SOSI Affect subscale explained a significant amount of variance in the cognitive response to stress in the laboratory (R2 = .21, p < .01), and the C-SOSI Physiology subscale explained a significant amount of variance in both the affective and physiological responses to stress in the laboratory (R2 = .28, p < .01, and R2 = .22, p < .01, respectively). None of the C-SOSI subscales explained adherence to daily practice, efficacy, or enjoyment of the breathing relaxation strategy. Participants with both greater active coping and aggregated physiological responses to laboratory stress rated their practice of the relaxation strategy as being more enjoyable than participants with lower responses in both of these domains. In summary, although the C-SOSI Physiology subscale was shown to be associated with actual physiological and affective responses to laboratory stressors, the other subscales of the C-SOSI fared less well, and no C-SOSI subscale was associated with any measure of adherence to daily practice, efficacy, or enjoyment of the breathing relaxation strategy used in this study. Because this study was the first to attempt to demonstrate the validity of the C-SOSI, the instrument
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».