Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale

📜
Abstract

The Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale (OSSS-CS) is a newly adapted psychometric instrument designed to evaluate the supportive digital interactions experienced by youth. As social media becomes an increasingly dominant arena for interpersonal connection, understanding how young people derive emotional and practical backing from these platforms is crucial. This scale specifically addresses the unique digital ecosystem of China, where global platforms are replaced by localized networks like WeChat and Weibo, necessitating culturally and contextually tailored measurement tools.

By condensing the original 40-item assessment into a highly efficient 20-item format, the OSSS-CS provides researchers and school psychologists with a practical tool that minimizes respondent fatigue. The instrument captures four distinct dimensions of digital support, offering a nuanced view of how online relationships contribute to adolescent well-being. Its robust validation process ensures that it accurately reflects the complex realities of modern digital socialization.

🏷
Keywords
Online Social Support
adolescents
social media
psychometrics
Chinese
short form
Measurement invariance

📊 Psychometric Scorecard

Items Count
20
Structure
Multidimensional
Validation Country
📍 China

Translation Method: Multiple forward and backward translation

Authors

👤 Ziyao Zhou
🏛 Department of Social Work, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong 999077, China

👤 Qijin Cheng
✉ [email protected]
🏛 Department of Social Work, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong 999077, China

Purpose

Historically, researchers attempting to quantify Online Social Support have relied on ad-hoc questionnaires or simply repurposed traditional face-to-face scales by adding the word 'online' to the prompts. This approach often lacks theoretical rigor and fails to capture the unique affordances of digital communication, such as asynchronous interaction or network-wide broadcasting. The OSSS-CS fills a critical methodological gap by providing a theoretically grounded, psychometrically validated instrument specifically engineered for the digital realm.

Furthermore, the original 40-item Online Social Support Scale, while comprehensive, is often too lengthy for integration into broad epidemiological surveys or busy educational settings. By validating a 20-item short form specifically for Chinese adolescents, the authors have created a highly accessible tool. This enables more streamlined research into how digital ecosystems impact youth mental health, a particularly pressing issue given the ubiquitous nature of smartphone usage among modern teens.

Construct

Online Social Support refers to the provision and receipt of psychological and material resources through internet-facilitated communication. Unlike traditional support, which relies heavily on physical proximity, digital support transcends geographic boundaries and operates through mechanisms like direct messaging, public comments, and digital resource sharing. The OSSS-CS conceptualizes this construct as a multidimensional phenomenon, moving beyond a simple binary of 'supported' versus 'unsupported.'

The scale operationalizes this construct through four distinct functional domains. Esteem/emotional support captures expressions of care and acceptance, while social companionship reflects the sense of belonging derived from shared digital activities. Informational support involves the exchange of advice and knowledge, and instrumental support covers tangible assistance, such as help with schoolwork provided via digital channels. Together, these dimensions provide a comprehensive map of an adolescent's digital safety net.

Validity

The validation framework for the OSSS-CS employed a rigorous cross-validation approach utilizing independent samples. By conducting multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, the researchers established Measurement invariance across different groups of adolescents. This means the scale measures the underlying constructs in a consistent manner, ensuring that the factor structure, factor loadings, and variance-covariance matrices remain stable and replicable across distinct cohorts.

In addition to structural integrity, the instrument demonstrated strong criterion validity by examining its nomological network. The researchers mapped the scale's relationship with key psychological indicators, specifically depressive symptoms and overall life satisfaction. By proving that the OSSS-CS scores correlate meaningfully with these established mental health metrics, as well as with the actual time spent on social media platforms, the instrument proves its utility in predicting real-world psychological outcomes.

Convergent & Discriminant Validation Correlations

Reference Instrument Correlation Coefficient (r)
Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D)
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS)

Reliability

Internal consistency is a cornerstone of psychometric evaluation, ensuring that the items within a specific subscale are highly correlated and reliably measure the same underlying concept. The OSSS-CS demonstrated robust internal consistency across its dimensions, indicating that the reduction from 40 to 20 items did not compromise the instrument's precision.

While the original full-length scale boasted alpha coefficients ranging from 0.94 to 0.95, maintaining high reliability in a shortened version is a significant psychometric achievement. This reliability ensures that researchers can confidently use the OSSS-CS to capture stable estimates of an adolescent's online support network without the measurement error often associated with abbreviated scales.

Factor Analysis

To rigorously evaluate the internal structure of the OSSS-CS, the researchers utilized a split-sample methodology, dividing their participant pool into distinct calibration (N = 262) and cross-validation (N = 267) groups. The calibration phase allowed for the empirical selection of the most robust items from the original pool, ensuring that only those with the strongest psychometric properties were retained for the short form.

Subsequently, multigroup confirmatory factor analysis was applied to the cross-validation sample to test the replicability of the four-factor model. This advanced analytical technique confirmed that the theoretical dimensions—emotional, companionship, informational, and instrumental support—held up empirically. The successful demonstration of partial cross-validity and Measurement invariance confirms that the scale's architecture is structurally sound and culturally appropriate for Chinese youth.

Subscales

Subscale Items Description
Esteem/emotional support (EE) Measures expressions of acceptance, intimacy, care, and respect received through verbal and nonverbal digital cues.
Social companionship (SC) Assesses the sense of belonging fostered through digital inclusivity and spending time together online.
Informational support (INF) Evaluates the receipt of advice, feedback, shared perspectives, and knowledge via social media.
Instrumental support (INS) Captures tangible assistance provided online, such as help with schoolwork or other tasks.

Instrument

Test Type Self-report questionnaire
Format 20 items, 5-point Likert scale
Scoring Higher scores indicate greater levels of Online Social Support
Language Chinese
Population adolescents, Students
Age Group 12-16 years
Administration Paper-based questionnaire

Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale Items

📋 Items are currently not available

The individual items of this scale are not publicly available. Researchers interested in using this instrument should contact the original authors directly to request the scale materials.

Sample

The study included a total of 529 junior high school Students from Foshan, Guangdong Province, China. The participants were split into a calibration sample (N = 262, mean age = 13, 47.7% female) and a cross-validation sample (N = 267, mean age = 13, 48.7% female).

📄
Cite This Paper

Ziyao Zhou, Qijin Cheng (2022). Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale. International journal of environmental research and public health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114058

📄 Download Full-Text PDF

📚
References
51 references
  1. Liu (2018). Social support through online social networking sites and addiction among college Students: The mediating roles of fear of missing out and problematic smartphone use. Curr. Psychol., 39 1892. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0075-5
  2. Statista (2022, July 07). Number of Social Network Users in Selected Countries in 2021 and 2025. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/278341/number-of-social-network-users-in-selected%20countries/.
  3. CNNIC (2021, December 11). Research Report on the Internet Usage of National Minors in 2020. Available online: http://www.cnnic.net.cn/hlwfzyj/hlwxzbg/qsnbg/202107/P020210720571098696248.pdf.
  4. Ji, W., and Shen, J. (2021, December 11). Annual Report on the Internet Use of Chinese Minors. Available online: https://www.pishu.com.cn/skwx_ps/bookdetail?SiteID=14&ID=11860761#.
  5. Statista (2022, August 08). Social Networks in China—Statistics & Facts. Available online: https://www.statista.com/topics/1170/social-networks-in-china/#topicHeader__wrapper.
  6. Lin (2018). Association between online and offline social support and internet addiction in a representative sample of senior high school Students in Taiwan: The mediating role of self-esteem. Comput. Hum. Behav., 84 1. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.007
  7. Mazzoni (2016). Is internet the cherry on top or a crutch? Offline social support as moderator of the outcomes of Online Social Support on Problematic Internet Use. Comput. Hum. Behav., 56 369. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.032
  8. Wang (2021). Understanding the effects of personal factors and situational factors for adolescent cyberbullying perpetration: The roles of internal states and parental mediation. J. Adolesc., 89 28. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2021.03.006
  9. Nick (2018). The Online Social Support Scale: Measure development and validation. Psychol. Assess., 30 1127. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000558
  10. Cole (2017). Online Social Support for young people: Does it recapitulate in-person social support; can it help?. Comput. Hum. Behav., 68 456. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.058
  11. Bayer (2020). social media Elements, Ecologies, and Effects. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 71 471. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050944
  12. Shensa (2020). Emotional support from social media and face-to-face relationships: Associations with depression risk among young adults. J. Affect. Disord., 260 38. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.08.092
  13. Ban, J. (2018). Meijie Shidai de Xuesheng Gongmin Suyang Jiqi Peiyu [Cultivating the Students’ Civic Literacy in Media Age], Social Sciences Academic Press.
  14. Rueger (2016). A meta-analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence. Psychol. Bull., 142 1017. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000058
  15. Cohen, S., Underwood, L.G., and Gottlieb, B.H. (2000). Social Support Measurement and Intervention: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists, Oxford University Press. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780195126709.001.0001
  16. Wu (2015). A Systematic Review of Recent Research on Adolescent Social Connectedness and Mental Health with Internet Technology Use. Adolesc. Res. Rev., 1 153. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-015-0013-9
  17. Zhao (2021). Effects of Online Social Support and Perceived Social Support on the Relationship Between Perceived Stress and Problematic Smartphone Usage Among Chinese Undergraduates. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag., 14 529. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S302551
  18. House, J.S. (1981). Work Stress and Social Support, Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
  19. Goncalves, B., Perra, N., and Vespignani, A. (2011). Modeling Users’ Activity on Twitter Networks: Validation of Dunbar’s Number. PLoS ONE, 6. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022656
  20. Gilmour (2020). Facebook-based social support and health: A systematic review. Psychol. Popul. Media, 9 328. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000246
  21. McCloskey (2015). Are Facebook “Friends” Helpful? Development of a Facebook-Based Measure of Social Support and Examination of Relationships Among Depression, Quality of Life, and Social Support. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw., 18 499. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0538
  22. Zhou (2022). Relationship between Online Social Support and adolescents’ mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adolesc., 94 281. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12031
  23. Cohen (1983). Positive events and social supports as buffers of life change stress. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 13 99. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1983.tb02325.x
  24. Indian (2014). When Facebook is easier than face-to-face: Social support derived from Facebook in socially anxious individuals. Pers. Individ. Differ., 59 102. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.11.016
  25. Zimet (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J. Personal. Assess., 52 30. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2
  26. Frison (2015). The impact of daily stress on adolescents’ depressed mood: The role of social support seeking through Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav., 44 315. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.070
  27. Barrera (1981). Preliminary development of a scale of social support: Studies on college Students. Am. J. Community Psychol., 9 435. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00918174
  28. Kim (2014). Enacted social support on social media and subjective well-being. Int. J. Commun., 8 21.
  29. Valkenburg (2006). Friend Networking Sites and Their Relationship to adolescents’ Well-Being and Social Self-Esteem. Cyber. Psychol. Behav., 9 584. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.584
  30. Yeh (2008). Gender Differences in Relationships of Actual and Virtual Social Support to Internet Addiction Mediated through Depressive Symptoms among College Students in Taiwan. Cyber. Psychol. Behav., 11 485. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0134
  31. Liang (2010). Qingshaonian wangluo shehui zhichi de jiegouxing tansuo [Exploration of the structure of youth Online Social Support]. Jiaoyu Yanjiu Yu Shiyan, 2 5.
  32. Rabasco, A., Corcoran, V., and Andover, M. (2021). Alone but not lonely: The relationship between COVID-19 social factors, loneliness, depression, and suicidal ideation. PLoS ONE, 16. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261867
  33. Liu (2013). Can Facebook Use Induce Well-Being?. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw., 16 674. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0301
  34. Andresen (1994). Screening for Depression in Well Older Adults: Evaluation of a short form of the CES-D. Am. J. Prev. Med., 10 77. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(18)30622-6
  35. Bradley (2010). Factorial Validity of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression 10 in adolescents. Issues Ment. Health Nurs., 31 408. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3109/01612840903484105
  36. Yang (2018). Factor structure and criterion validity across the full scale and ten short forms of the CES-D among Chinese adolescents. Psychol. Assess., 30 1186. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000559
  37. Diener (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. J. Pers. Assess., 49 71. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
  38. Michalos, A.C. (2014). Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), an Overview. Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research, Springer. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5
  39. Liu (2016). The Effect of Honest Self-Presentation in Online Social Network Sites on Life Satisfaction: The Chain Mediating Role of Online Positive Feedback and General Self-Concept. J. Psychol. Sci., 39 406.
  40. Marsh (2005). A Short Version of the Self Description Questionnaire II: Operationalizing Criteria for Short-Form Evaluation With New Applications of Confirmatory Factor Analyses. Psychol. Assess., 17 81. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.17.1.81
  41. Hu (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J., 6 1. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  42. Browne (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol. Methods Res., 21 230. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005
  43. MacCallum (1994). Alternative Strategies for Cross-Validation of Covariance Structure Models. Multivar. Behav. Res., 29 1. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2901_1
  44. Bentler (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol. Bull., 88 588. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
  45. Kim (2017). Measurement invariance Testing with Many Groups: A Comparison of Five Approaches. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J., 24 524. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1304822
  46. Cheung (2002). Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J., 9 233. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
  47. Chen (2007). Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J., 14 464. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
  48. Bollen (1992). Bootstrapping Goodness-of-Fit Measures in Structural Equation Models. Sociol. Methods Res., 21 205. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002004
  49. Zait (2011). Methods for testing discriminant validity. Manag. Mark. J., 9 217.
  50. Wang (2019). Mobile social media use and self-identity among Chinese adolescents: The mediating effect of friendship quality and the moderating role of gender. Curr. Psychol., 40 4479. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00397-5
  51. Cohen (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol. Bull., 98 310. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310

Cite this article

Mohammed looti (2026). Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Retrieved from https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-short-version-of-the-online-social-support-scale/

Mohammed looti. "Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 14 Aug. 2026, https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-short-version-of-the-online-social-support-scale/.

Mohammed looti. "Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 2026. https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-short-version-of-the-online-social-support-scale/.

Mohammed looti (2026) 'Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale', PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Available at: https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-short-version-of-the-online-social-support-scale/.

[1] Mohammed looti, "Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale," PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, vol. X, no. Y, ص Z-Z, August, 2026.

Mohammed looti. Chinese short version of the Online Social Support Scale. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. 2026;vol(issue):pages.

Related terms:

  1. Social Support Questionnaire – Short Form (SSQSR)
  2. Depression Scale for Online Assessment
  3. Chinese version of a Social Frailty Scale
  4. Short-Form Workplace Social Capital Questionnaire – Persian Version
  5. Social Trust Scale for Chinese Adolescents
  6. Smartphone Addiction Scale – Short Version
  7. Agentic Engagement in Massive Open Online Courses Scale
  8. Coping Online With Racism Scale (CORS)
  9. Alcohol‚ Drugs and the Family Social Support Scale (ADF SSS)
  10. Scale of Perceived Social Support-Family
× Figure
PDF
Scroll to Top