Neuroception of psychological safety scale (NPSS): validation with a UK based adult community sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Psychological safety plays a vital role in rest, recovery, and fostering social connections. However, a history of trauma can predispose individuals to perceive heightened levels of threat and danger. Research suggests that a lack of psychological safety may be a defining biopsychosocial characteristic of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Persistent feelings of threat and danger are associated with a lack of psychological safety and may be predictive of PTSD. Our pioneering work reported on the development of the neuroception of psychological safety (NPSS), rooted in polyvagal theory, and consists of social engagement, compassion, and body sensations dimensions. Understanding more about the dimensionality of the NPSS and further establishing its psychometric properties was our priority.Objective: Our current research aimed to validate and test the reliability and dimensionality of the NPSS, using a large community sample (n = 2035) of adult residents in the UKMethod: We examined the internal and test-retest reliability, convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity as well as dimensionality of the NPSS.Results: The 3-factor structure of the NPSS was replicated with regard to the absolute fit indices. Internal consistencies ranged from acceptable to excellent across the NPSS’s subscales. Providing support for the validity of the NPSS, scores were predictably related to team psychological safety, wellbeing, post-traumatic stress, burnout, body awareness, and personality, with effect sizes typically in the high to medium range. Scores on the NPSS were found to show good test-retest reliability.Conclusions: This study demonstrates the validity, reliability and dimensionality of the NPSS with an adult sample. Further work is underway to support and enhance understandings of psychological safety with diverse clinical populations impacted by trauma. The NPSS has applicability across a range of health and social care contexts, such as shaping new approaches to evaluating trauma treatments and enhancing trauma informed care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".