Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS)

Abstract

The Berlin Social-Support Scales (BSSS) constitute a multidimensional measure designed to comprehensively assess an individual’s engagement with and experience of social support. Developed by Ralf Schwarzer and Ute Schulz in 2000, the instrument uniquely measures both the perceived availability and the actually received levels of support. The BSSS is widely utilized in health psychology and stress research to examine how social resources influence coping processes and overall well-being. It is notable for differentiating six distinct facets of support, including emotional, instrumental, and the behavior of protective buffering.

Keywords

Social support, Perceived support, Received support, Instrumental support, Emotional support, Protective buffering, Coping, Health psychology, Psychological measurement.

Authors

Ralf Schwarzer, Ute Schulz.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the BSSS is to provide a comprehensive and nuanced evaluation of social resources available to an individual. Unlike scales that focus solely on perceived availability, the BSSS captures the dynamic interplay between the need for support, the active seeking of support, and the actual support received from specific network members.

The scale was initially developed in the context of cancer patients and healthy adults to understand how different facets of social support affect adjustment to major life stressors, such as illness and surgery. Its multidimensional design allows researchers to differentiate between various functions of support, including emotional comfort, practical assistance, and the strategic behavior of protective buffering.

Construct

The BSSS measures the psychological construct of social support, which is defined as the availability of resources and assistance from others that benefits an individual’s physical and mental health. This construct is operationalized through six distinct, yet interrelated, subscales that capture three core dimensions: availability (perceived support), activation (need and seeking), and transaction (received and provided support).

Key forms of support measured include emotional support (feelings of care, acceptance, and comfort), instrumental support (practical aid like financial assistance or transportation), and informational support (advice or guidance). The inclusion of scales for Protective Buffering acknowledges the complex, sometimes protective, strategies used by support providers to shield recipients from distress.

Validity

The BSSS has demonstrated acceptable levels of validity across multiple studies and translations, affirming that it measures the intended facets of social support. Its multidimensional structure supports construct validity by successfully differentiating between perceived availability, support seeking behaviors, and actual receipt of aid, which are theoretically distinct concepts.

Validation studies, particularly those conducted in German and subsequent international adaptations, confirm its applicability in diverse research settings, especially those involving stress, health, and coping mechanisms.

Reliability

The scale is reported to be reliable, suggesting good internal consistency across its subscales, although specific psychometric data, such as Cronbach’s alpha values, are detailed in the associated academic literature (Schulz & Schwarzer, 2003). The developers focused on creating a robust instrument that consistently measures the level of social support experienced by individuals over time.

The BSSS is generally robust; however, a noted limitation is that it may not be sensitive enough to capture subtle, rapid changes in social support over short periods, which is an important consideration when designing longitudinal studies.

Factor Analysis

The BSSS is inherently structured around a multi-factor model. The scale development process utilized factor analytic techniques to establish the distinct nature of its six primary subscales. These factors separate distinct dimensions of the social support construct, ensuring that measures of perceived availability (e.g., belief in support) do not conflate with measures of behavioral activation (e.g., support seeking) or transactional outcomes (e.g., received support).

The established factor structure distinguishes clearly between the perceptual component (Perceived Support), the motivational component (Need/Seeking), and the interactional component (Received/Provided Support and Protective Buffering). This allows for targeted research into which specific dimension of support is most beneficial or detrimental in a given health or stress context.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychological inventory/Multidimensional Social Support Scale

Format: Paper-and-pencil or digital administration; utilizes a 4-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree). Negative items require reversal scoring.

Language Available: German (Original) and numerous translations.

Population Group: Clinical populations (e.g., cancer patients) and general healthy adult populations.

Age Group: Adults.

Population Details: Originally validated in a series of studies involving cancer patients and healthy adults, particularly focusing on those coping with stressful medical procedures.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their agreement with statements regarding the availability, need, seeking, and receipt of social support. Specific sections (Received and Provided Support) require respondents to focus on interactions with their closest support person during a recent, defined time frame (e.g., the past week).

Keywords

Social support measurement, Psychological scales, Stress and coping, Perceived availability, Instrumental aid, Emotional comfort, Psychometric properties, Multidimensional assessment.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not provided in source)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not provided in source)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Information not provided in source)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 2000 (Initial publication).

The BSSS instrument and related documentation are often made available for academic research purposes. Information regarding permissions, fees, and updated versions can be obtained directly from the primary author, Ralf Schwarzer. The instrument can be found at: http://www.ralfschwarzer.de/

Reference’s

• Schwarzer, R., & Schulz, U. (2000). The Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS): Assessment of social support in coping with stress. In I. G. Sarason, B. R. Sarason, & G. R. Pierce (Eds.), Social support: An interactional view (pp. 43-67). New York: Wiley.
• Schwarzer, R., & Knoll, J. (2007). Measuring social support in health research: A review and critique. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 14(3), 219-236.
• Schulz, U., & Schwarzer, R. (2003). Social support in coping with illness: The Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS). Diagnostica, 49(1), 73-82.
• Schulz‚ U. & Schwarzer‚ R. (2003). Soziale Unterstützung bei der Krankheitsbewältigung. Die Berliner Social Support Skalen (BSSS) [Social support in coping with illness: The Berlin Social Support Scales (BSSS)]. Diagnostica‚ 49‚ 73-82.

Items of the Berlin Social-Support Scales (BSSS)

Originally designed for Coping with Cancer Surgery Settings

Ralf Schwarzer & Ute Schulz‚ 2000

I. Perceived Available Support

Emotional

1. There are some people who truly like me.
2. Whenever I am not feeling well‚ other people show me that they are fond of me.
3. Whenever I am sad‚ there are people who cheer me up.
4. There is always someone there for me when I need comforting.

Instrumental

5. I know some people upon whom I can always rely.
6. When I am worried‚ there is someone who helps me.
7. There are people who offer me help when I need it.
8. When everything becomes too much for me to handle‚ others are there to help me.

II. Need for Support

1. When I am down‚ I need someone who boosts my spirits.
2. It is important for me always to have someone who listens to me.
3. Before making any important decisions‚ I absolutely need a second opinion.
4. I get along best without any outside help. (-)

III. Support Seeking

1. In critical situations‚ I prefer to ask others for their advice.
2. Whenever I am down‚ I look for someone to cheer me up again.
3. When I am worried‚ I reach out to someone to talk to.
4. If I do not know how to handle a situation‚ I ask others what they would do.
5. Whenever I need help‚ I ask for it.

IV. Actually Received Support (Recipient)

Think about the person who is closest to you‚ such as your spouse‚ partner‚ child‚ friend‚ and so on. How did this person react to you during the last week?

1. This person showed me that he/she loves and accepts me. (EMO)
2. This person was there when I needed him/her. (INST)
3. This person comforted me when I was feeling bad. (EMO)
4. This person left me alone. (–) (EMO)
5. This person did not show much empathy for my situation. (–) (EMO)
6. This person complained about me. (–) (EMO)
7. This person took care of many things for me. (INST)
8. This person made me feel valued and important. (EMO)
9. This person expressed concern about my condition. (EMO)
10. This person assured me that I can rely completely on him/her. (EMO)
11. This person helped me find something positive in my situation. (INF)
12. This person suggested activities that might distract me. (INF)
13. This person encouraged me not to give up. (EMO)
14. This person took care of things I could not manage on my own. (INST)
15. In general‚ I am very satisfied with the way this person behaved. (SAT)

• EMO = emotional support
• INST = instrumental support
• INF = informational support
• SAT = satisfaction with support

V. Provided Support (Provider)

For a Male Patient

Now think about the patient. How did you interact with him during the past week?

(Note: Negative Items have been eliminated from the 2001 Cancer Surgery Study.)

1. I showed him how much I cherish and accept him. (EMO)
2. I was there when he needed me. (INST)
3. I comforted him when he was feeling bad. (EMO)
4. I left him alone. (EMO)
5. I did not have much empathy for him. (–) (EMO)
6. I criticized him. (–) (EMO)
7. I did a lot for him. (INST)
8. I made him feel valued and important. (EMO)
9. I expressed my concern about his condition. (EMO)
10. I reassured him that he can rely completely on me. (EMO)
11. I helped him find something positive in his situation. (INF)
12. I suggested an activity that might distract him. (INF)
13. I encouraged him not to give up. (EMO)
14. I took care of daily duties that he could not fulfill on his own. (INST)

• EMO = emotional support
• INST = instrumental support
• INF = informational support

VI. Protective Buffering Scale – Support Provider/Support Recipient

1. I kept all bad news from him. (him or her: we print different forms for men and women)
2. I avoided everything that could upset him.
3. I showed strength in his presence.
4. I did not let him notice how bad and depressed I really felt.
5. I avoided any criticism.
6. I pretended to be very strong‚ although I did not feel that way.

Scoring uses a 4-point Likert scale:

• strongly disagree (1)
• somewhat disagree (2)
• somewhat agree (3)
• strongly agree (4)

Negative items need to be reversed.