Cited by 11Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingCOVID-19 and Mental Health

Further Validation of a Dutch Translation of the Sussex Oxford Compassion for the Self Scale in Samples of Crisis Line Volunteers, Military Personnel and Nursing Students

Open access
de Krijger, Eva, Willems, Renate, ten Klooster, Peter, Bakker, Ellen, Miedema, Harald, Drossaert, Constance, Bohlmeijer, Ernst·2022·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

Self-compassion is considered an important, transdiagnostic factor for mental health. The Sussex Oxford Compassion for the Self Scale (SOCS-S) is a recently developed comprehensive measure of self-compassion, that was found to have promising psychometric properties among health care staff and university students in the initial validation study. The aim of this study is the further psychometric evaluation of a Dutch translation of the SOCS-S in different populations and settings. The SOCS-S was administered in three different Dutch samples [crisis line volunteers (n= 560), military personnel (n= 244) and nursing students (n= 255)]. The results confirm the five-factor structure of the SOCS-S and its reliability and criterion and convergent validity across the samples. Measurement invariance was demonstrated for gender in two samples and for age in all three samples, but not across professions. Finally, the SOCS-S was found to explain additional variance in mental health in comparison to a widely used self-compassion measure (SCS-SF).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.895850

Cites

62 of 65 references verified2 citation errors · 1 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
de Krijger, E., Willems, R., ten Klooster, P., Bakker, E., Miedema, H., Drossaert, C., & Bohlmeijer, E.
Affiliations
  • Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences (NL)
  • University of Twente (NL)
Corresponding author
Bohlmeijer, Ernst
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2022-07-04
Volume
13
Pages
895850-895850
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283793926
Cited by
11
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (023.008.008)
  • Ministry of Defense
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
Keywords
self-compassion, Dutch translation, psychometric validation, military personnel, nursing students, measurement invariance, gender differences, age differences, mental health, transdiagnostic factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review