Psychological Closeness to Suicide Methods Scale (PCSMS)

Description

The Psychological Closeness to Suicide Methods Scale (PCSMS; Rogers, Murley, & Clary, 2025) is designed as a multidimensional self-report tool to evaluate an individual’s psychological closeness to their preferred methods of suicide. The scale aims to measure a risk factor that influences the shift from suicidal thoughts to actions. The content of the 15-item PCSMS was informed by qualitative interviews with suicide researchers, clinicians specializing in suicide prevention, and individuals with lived experience of suicide (Clary et al., 2024), and was developed by the authors in consultation with experts in the field. The scale’s psychometric properties were assessed using samples of students (sample 1) and community-based adults (sample 2), all of whom had current suicidal ideation and/or a history of suicide attempts. The study reported factor analysis, item response theory, reliability, and validity results.

Purpose

The scale is designed to be a multidimensional self-report measure for assessing psychological closeness to preferred suicide methods, with the goal of better understanding and predicting suicide risk.

Instrument

Test Type: Original Instrument.
Format: Participants rate each of the 15 items on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all true for me) to 4 (very true for me).
Language Available: English.
Population Group: Human; Male; Female.
Age Group: Adulthood (18 years & older).
Population Details: The scale was evaluated on university students and community adults in the United States.
Test Methodology: Test Validity; Convergent Validity; Discriminant Validity; Test Reliability; Internal Consistency; Factor Analysis; Confirmatory Factor Analysis; Item Response Theory; Measurement Invariance.

Validity

Item Response Theory: The items were highly discriminant and of varying levels of difficulty.
Convergent and Discriminant Validity: Correlations were generally in expected directions, with small positive associations between facets of psychological closeness to suicide methods and symptoms of psychopathology, slightly larger associations between these facets and suicide-specific rumination/capability for suicide, and nonsignificant associations between sleep disturbances and impulsivity.
Incremental Validity: Linear regressions predicting suicidal ideation accounted for 45.3% (Step 1: covariates), 47.7% (Step 2: total), and 50.6% (Step 2: subscales) of the variance in suicidal ideation prior to and after the inclusion of the PCSMS. The PCSMS total score was positively associated with suicidal ideation, above and beyond all covariates.

Reliability

Internal Consistency: Internal consistency of the total score was high in both samples (αs = .90 and .93), and there was good internal consistency for Subscales 1 (αs = .89 and .85), 2 (αs = .84 and .75), 3 (αs = .83 and .87), and 4 (αs = .84 and .82).

Factor Analysis

Confirmatory Factor Analysis: After item removal, the final version of the PCSMS exhibited strong model fit in both Sample 1, χ2(84) = 208.63, p < .001, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 0.99, RMSEA = .06, standardized root mean residual = .06, and Sample 2, χ2(84) = 114.38, p = .015, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 1.00, RMSEA = .04, standardized root mean residual = .05. The higher ordermodel exhibited poorermodel fit than the four-factor model, Δχ2(2) = 7.11, p = .029; however, the bifactor model exhibited superior fit, Δχ2(8) = 101.15, p < .001.
Measurement Invariance: Measurement invariance was established across suicide attempt history, gender, and race/ethnicity.

Keywords

Familiarity; Fixation; Incremental Validity; Psychological Closeness; Regulation; Risk Factors; Sentiment; Suicide Methods; Psychodynamics; Risk Factors; Suicidal Ideation; Suicidality; Incremental Validity; Suicide Risk Assessment.

Authors

Rogers, Megan L. (Author Orcid Identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4969-7035)
Affiliation: Texas State University, Department of Psychology

Murley, William D.
Affiliation: Texas State University, Department of Psychology

Clary, Kelly L.
Affiliation: Texas State University, School of Social Work

Email:
Rogers, Megan L.: [email protected]

Files:
No data is Available

Correspondence Address:
Rogers, Megan L.
Texas State University, Department of Psychology
601 University Drive
San Marcos, Texas, United States, 78666
[email protected]

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: May use for Research/Teaching
Fee: No
Test Year: 2025

References

Rogers, M. L., Murley, W. D., & Clary, K. L. (2025). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Psychological Closeness to Suicide Methods Scale. Psychological Assessment, 37(3), 71–84. doi.org/10.1037/pas0001360

Items of the Psychological Closeness to Suicide Methods Scale (PCSMS)

Note. Items are rated from 0 (not at all true for me) to 4 (very true for me).

1. I think about this method a lot.

2. I am fixated on this method.

3. I do not want to associate with this method. (R)

4. I am anxious when I am far away from this method.

5. I am obsessed with this method.

6. This method is scary to me. (R)

7. I am attached to this method.

8. I often engage with this method in a non-suicidal manner.

9. I feel a special connection with this method.

10. I experience calmness when I think about this method.

11. This method reduces my feelings of emotional pain.

12. I feel better when I have access to this method.

13. If I don’t have access to this method, my heart begins to race.

14. I am dependent on this method for emotional stability.

15. If I don’t have access to this method, I feel unsafe.

16. This method is socially accepted within my culture/community.

17. I am emotionally invested in this method.

18. My community/culture views this method as dishonorable. (R)

19. I understand how to properly administer this method (whether for suicide or another purpose).

20. I try to mentally separate myself from this method. (R)

21. This method is significant to me.

22. I have a strong bond with this method.

23. I do not want to be close to this method. (R)

24. I do not know how to use this method (whether for suicide or another purpose). (R)

25. I have a lot of history with this method.

26. This method is a safety blanket.

27. This method makes me feel secure.

28. I am psychologically close to this method.

29. I have a hard time not thinking about this method.

30. I have positive memories of this method.

31. I am confident in my ability to correctly use this method (whether for suicide or another purpose).

32. I have special memories that are connected to this method.

33. I am emotionally close to this method.

34. If I don’t have access to this method, I feel anxious.

35. I am anxious when I am close to this method. (R)

36. I am intensely connected to this method.

37. I feel comfort when I have access to this method.

38. I am relaxed or at ease when I think about this method.

39. I feel disgusted when I think about this method. (R)

40. I am disconnected from this method. (R)

41. I have a negative reaction when I think about this method. (R)

42. I experience relief when I think about this method.

43. I am comfortable with being near this method.

44. This method has sentimental value to me.

45. This method is meaningful to me.

46. I avoid thinking about this method. (R)

47. I feel safer when I am close to this method.

48. My identity is strongly connected with this method.

49. I have built a mental barrier between myself and this method. (R)

50. This method is always on my mind.

51. If I don’t have access to this method, I feel hopeless.

52. I am very familiar with this method.

53. I feel better when I think about this method.

Note. Items that were retained in the final version of the Psychological Closeness to Suicide Methods Scale are indicated in bold.