Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFA-R) in Peruvian University Students

Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFA-R) in Peruvian University Students Item Type info:eu-repo/semantics/article Authors Cabrera-Orosco, Isabel; Carbajal-León, Carlos; CaychoRodríguez, Tomás; Reyes-Bossio, Mario; Sánchez-Villena, Andy Rick; Vilca, Lindsey W.; Delgado-Campusano, Mariel DOI 10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Publisher South-West University "Neofit Rilski" Journal Psychological Thought Rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess; Attribution 4.0 International Download date 04/11/2025 11:51:32 Item License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10757/686709 Psychological Thought psyct.swu.bg | 2193-7281 South-West University “Neofit Rilski” Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Research Article Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFA-R) in Peruvian University Students Isabel Cabrera-Oroscoa, Carlos Carbajal-Leónb, Tomás Caycho-Rodríguezc, Mario Reyes-Bossiod, Andy Rick SánchezVillenae, Lindsey W. Vilcaf, Mariel Delgado-Campusanod [a] Facultad de Humanidades, Universidad Continental, Huancayo, Peru. [b] Escuela de Psicología, Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Turismo y Psicología, Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Lima, Peru. [c] Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru. [d] Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas, Lima, Peru. [e] Universidad Tecnológica del Perú, Lima, Peru. [f] Universidad Señor de Sipán, Chiclayo, Peru. Abstract This research aims to analyze the validity, reliability and invariance of the AFA-R in university students. A total of 442 university students participated, ranging in age from 18 to 57 years (M = 23,9, SD = 6,29); 280 women (63,3%) y 162 men (36,7%), who responded to the Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFA-R) and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), factorial invariance according to the sex and the validity based on the relationship with other variables were conducted, along with a Structural Equation Model (SEM). The results indicated that the original two-factor model of the AFA-R demonstrated adequate fit indices (χ2 = 211.97; gl = 74; CFI = .96; TLI = .95; RMSEA = .074 [IC90% .063 - .086]; SRMR = .039). Futhermore, the scale’s dimensions showed adequate reliability indices. Additionally, the factorial structure of the scale provided evidence of strict invariance according to participants’ sex. Similarly, the AFA-R scale demosntrated validity evidence based on its relationship with other constructs through its association with the MSPSS. In conclusion, the findings revealed an adequate internal structure of the AFA-R in the student population, which is invariant when considering two factors, with good internal consistency. Therefore, the AFA-R scale is a promising instrument for measuring family and peer support in the Peruvian context. Keywords: Social Support; University Students; Structural Equation Model. Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale 256 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Table of Contents Method Results Discussion References Psychological Thought, 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274, https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Received: 2024-12-23. Accepted: 2025-04-14. Published (VoR): 2025-05-02. Handling Editor: Natasha Angelova, South-West University "Neofit Rilski", Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria. *Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru. E-mail: [email protected] This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Common Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Social support is conceptualized as the perception of support, appreciation, acceptance and integration that an individual has in a group or social network where interactions between its members exists (Gutiérrez et al., 2021). This support comes from significant people, mainly from the circle of friends or family, from whom the availability of resources (e.g. help, companionship, solidarity, etc.) is searched. This resources can satisfy certain needs, such as help to solve problems, or to have someone listen and provide feedback (González & Landero, 2014), which is relevant since it is a factor involved in people's well-being by functioning as a protector against various psychological issues (Guzmán & Galaz, 2020; Otzen et al., 2020). In the university context, data reported by various studies indicate that students report a low level of perceived social support, as around 35.6% have felt moderately or very lonely (Diehl et al., 2018). Other reports indicated that about 25% of students feel a lack of company and support very frequently (Hysing et al., 2020; Zahedi et al., 2022). A meta-analysis carried out in 113 countries indicated that between 5.9% and 9.4% of student-age people showed relevant levels of loneliness (Surkalim et al., 2022), which denotes lack of social support (Wang et al., 2018). In this context, social support from family and friends has a significant value in overcoming obstacles typical of this stage (Guzmán & Galaz, 2020). In fact, multiple studies have indicated that social support is linked to a lower dropout rate (López-Angulo et al., 2021), higher achievement and academic self-efficacy (Al-Tameemi et al., 2023; González-Cantero et al., 2020), and better academic achievement (Mishra, 2020). It has also been shown that students have less fatigue with studies when they perceive support from their friends and peers, as well as greater self-regulation skills (Räisänen et al., Cabrera-Orosco et al. 257 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 2021). Also, there is evidence of the relationship between social support and better psychological well-being and reduced levels of depression, anxiety, and life satisfaction (Cobo-Rendón et al., 2020; Sheldon et al., 2021; Shi, 2021; Ye et al., 2020; Yıldırım & Tanrıverdi, 2021). Given the importance of social support from family and friends, measurement instruments have been developed. One of the most widely used instruments is the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (Zimet et al., 1990), whose validity and reliability were demonstrated through exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency, and test-retest. The results indicate that it is a three-dimensional instrument consisting of 12 items. The MOS survey of social support is also another of the most frequent instruments to measure this variable. Its original version has 20 items grouped into 4 factors, with adequate reliability (Sherbourne & Stewart, 1991). Also, the scale of social support (Palomar et al., 2013), with its 21 items, also form three factors whose internal structure and consistency were determined with exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha. Likewise, the EPAS social support perception scale has 23 items that make up 3 factors with good reliability (Vaux et al., 1986). Among these instruments, the Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFA-R) stands out, because it specifies the most relevant sources of social support, is shorter than the previous ones and, therefore, is easier to administer (González & Landero, 2014). The initial psychometric studies of the AFA-R demonstrated, through exploratory factor analysis, that it is an instrument with two dimensions called family and friends. This structure was examined with 15 and 14 items, the latter version being the one that showed the best explained variance (González & Landero, 2014). Subsequent research has replicated these results through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in samples from pregnant women (Reyna-Martínez et al., 2020). Finally, a study found a three-dimensional structure in postpartum women (Torres-Lagunas et al., 2015). However, aside from the original report, no studies have been found in the university student population that analyze the psychometric properties of the AFA-R, highlighting a lack of instruments measuring social support within this group. In this sense, this research aims to analyze the validity, reliability and invariance of the AFAR in university students. This study is justified because it allows us to have an appropriate tool for university environments that guarantee a more accurate measurement of social support, which is crucial for adequate emotional well-being (Cobo-Rendón et al., 2020; Sheldon et al., 2021; Shi, 2021; Ye et al., 2020; Yıldırım & Tanrıverdi, 2021), even more so when the figures indicate a low level of social support in this group (Surkalim et al., 2022; Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale 258 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Wang et al., 2018). This will allow researchers, educators and mental health professionals to have a valid and reliable instrument to study this variable so that it can be better understood. Also, explanatory models can be created to benefit the university community through the creation of interventions aimed at improving effectiveness, autonomy and academic achievement (Al-Tameemi et al., 2023; González-Cantero et al., 2020; Mishra, 2020) Method Participants The present instrumental study (Ato et al., 2013) was conducted between May 06 and July 30, 2024. An online survey was conducted. Participants were constructed and invited to respond via social networks (e.g., Facebook, Instagram) and email. Snowball sampling was used (Hernández-Ávila & Escobar, 2019) where participants were encouraged to send the online survey to family, friends, or other contacts that met the characteristics indicated. Online snowball sampling allows collecting information from participants in different locations and achieving higher response rates compared to other sampling techniques (Baltar & Brunet, 2012). The target population was Peruvian university students over 18 years of age who suffered the death of a family member. The final sample consisted of 442 university students aged between 18 and 57 years (M = 23.9, SD = 6.29); 280 women (63.3%) and 162 men (36.7%). The marital status of the participants in greater proportion were single 407 (92.1%), married 16 (3.6%), divorced 3 (0.7%) and cohabitant 15 (3.4%). In relation to the area where they residence, the participants said they are in rural area 49 (11.1%) and urban area 393 (88.9.%) (Table 1). Table 1. Sociodemographic variables. Variable N % M ± SD Age 23.9 ± 6.29 Gender Female 280 63.3% Male 162 36.7 % Marital Status Single 407 92.1% Married 16 3,6% Divorced 3 0.7% Cohabitant 15 3.4% Place of Residence Urban 393 88.9% Rural 49 11.1% Cabrera-Orosco et al. 259 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Instruments Sociodemographic variables An ad hoc survey was created to collect information on age, sex, place of residence, marital status, academic level, employment, among others. Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFA-R) The family and friends social support scale (AFA-R), developed by González and Landero (2014), will be used to assess perceived social support. This scale uses a Likert-type format with 5 response options, ranging from “never” to “always”, giving values from 1 to 5 respectively. The scale consists of two dimensions: one aimed at measuring family support, composed of 8 items (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 14), and the other focused on support from friends, composed of 7 items (2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 15). In the final version of the instrument, item 9 was eliminated and in item 12: Someone of your friends supports you when you have problems at school, the word school was changed to university. The total score is obtained by adding the values of all the items, with a possible range of 14 to 70 points. A higher score indicates a higher level of perceived social support, and specific scores can also be calculated for each dimension. As for the internal consistency analysis they used Cronbach's alpha coefficient (full scale α=.918; family support dimension α= .923; support friends dimension = .895), the factor structure of the AFA-R confirms a bifactor structure that explains 66.09% of the variance; and as criterion validity the relationship between social support and stress was evaluated, the correlation between stress and social support was negative and significant (rs =-.337, p = .001) (González & Landero, 2014). Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) This scale was initially developed by Zimet et al. (1988) with 24 items. However, in an adaptation made by Nicho-Almonacid, et al. (2023), it was reduced to 12 items distributed in three factors: family (3,4,8,11), friends (6,7,9,12) and significant others (1,2,5,10). This adapted version was also translated into several languages, including Spanish, by Arechabala Mantuliz and Miranda Castillo (2002). The scale is self-administered and the items present four response levels on an ordinal scale: almost never (1), sometimes (2), frequently (3) and almost always or always (4). Regarding reliability, the results of the adapted version show acceptable values: α = .88 for the total scale (12 ítems) and α = .87 (4 ítems), α = .85 (4 ítems) and α = .88 (4 ítems) for the family, friends and significant others factors, respectively. Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale 260 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Ethics The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (FCS-SCEI/ 211-5-24). Participants received information on the purpose and procedure of the study. In addition, they were informed that the study guaranteed their anonymity and confidentiality of the information provided. After this, the participants gave their informed consent. Finally, they were informed of their right to withdraw from the study and to withdraw their data at any time. Data analysis First, a descriptive analysis of the items was performed, for which the mean, standard deviation, Skewness (g1) and Kurtosis (g2) of the items were estimated. Specifically, skewness and kurtosis were used to verify that the data did not deviate too far from a normal distribution, for which the following indices were used: g1 < ±2 and g2 < ±7 (Finney & DiStefano, 2006). A correlation matrix was also estimated to verify the relationship between the items. First, a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed using the Robust Maximum Likelihood (MLR; Yuan & Bentler, 2000) estimator, since the items had five response categories (Rhemtulla et al., 2012). The fit criteria used to assess model fit were as follows: RMSEA (< .08), SRMR (< .08), CFI (> .95), and TLI (> .95) (Kline, 2016; Schumacker & Lomax, 2015). The internal consistency of the scale was assessed through Cronbach's alpha coefficient (Cronbach, 1951) and omega coefficient (McDonald, 1999). A value greater than .70 was considered adequate (Viladrich et al., 2017). Third, we studied the factorial invariance of the scale according to the sex of the participants. For this purpose, a sequence of hierarchical variance models was estimated: configural invariance, metric invariance, scalar invariance and strict invariance. To compare differences in the sequence of models, the chi-square difference (Δχ2) was employed where nonsignificant values (p>.05) suggest invariance between groups. Differences in RMSEA (ΔRMSEA) and CFI (ΔCFI) were also taken into account, where differences greater than ≥ .015 and ≥ -.010, respectively, show lack of model invariance (Chen, 2007). Finally, the validity based on the relationship with other variables, a Structural Equation Model (SEM) was proposed and the same estimator and adjustment indexes used in the CFA. For the statistical analysis, the RStudio environment (RStudio Team, 2018) for R (R Core Team, 2019) was used. Specifically, the package “lavaan” (Rosseel, 2012) was used to Cabrera-Orosco et al. 261 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 perform CFA and the package “semTools” (Jorgensen et al., 2018) was used to perform factorial invariance. Results Descriptive analysis of items Table 2 shows that item 5 presents the highest mean score in the sample (M = 3.73). This means that most of the participants indicated that sometimes their parents show affection and affection. In contrast, item 10 presents the lowest mean score (M = 2.78). This result suggests that most of the participants have very rarely received help from their friends to perform academic tasks at the university. It is also observed that all items present scores that depart moderately from a normal distribution (g1 < ±2; g2 < ±7). On the other hand, Figure 1 shows that the items present moderate and low relationships with each other. Table 2. Descriptive analysis of the items of the BRUMS scale Items M SD g1 g2 Min Max 1. You have someone in your family to talk to when you need to. 3.24 1.2 -.06 -.83 1 5 2. You have a friend you can talk to when you need to. 3.37 1.2 -.19 -.85 1 5 3. You have someone in your family to help you solve a personal problem. 3.25 1.2 -.13 -1.02 1 5 4. You have a friend who can help you solve a personal problem. 3.17 1.1 -.08 -.79 1 5 5. Your parents show you love and/or affection. 3.73 1.1 -.54 -.70 1 5 6. You have a friend who shows you affection. 3.42 1.1 -.25 -.71 1 5 7. You trust your family to talk about things that concern you. 3.21 1.2 -.05 -.98 1 5 8. You confide in a friend to talk about your worries. 3.31 1.1 -.27 -.66 1 5 9. Someone in your family supports you when you have problems at school. 3.31 1.2 -.22 -.99 1 5 10. Someone among your friends helps you with school or work assignments. 2.78 1.2 .23 -.77 1 5 11. Someone among your friends supports you when you have problems in college. 2.97 1.2 .01 -.91 1 5 12. In my family we talk about everyone's problems and we all support each other (parents, children and siblings). 3.19 1.2 -.12 -1.00 1 5 13. You are satisfied with the support you receive from your family. 3.72 1.1 -.57 -.53 1 5 14. You are satisfied with the support you receive from your friends. 3.48 1.1 -.37 -.62 1 5 Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale 262 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Figure 1. Correlation matrix of the BRUMS scale ítems Validity based on internal structure In the study, it was evident that the original model of two related dimensions evidenced adequate fit indices (χ2 = 211.97; df = 74; CFI = .96; TLI = .95; RMSEA = .074 [CI90% .063 - .086]; SRMR = .039). In Figure 2, it is observed that the factor weights of the items in each of the factors were moderate and high (λ = .62 - .86). Also, it can be seen that the relationship between the dimensions was moderate (.62). On the other hand, the relevance of the modification indexes (MI) was evaluated following the method of Saris, Satorra and van der Veld (2009) and together with the analysis of the content of the items, it was decided to add a correlation between the errors of items 1 and 3 and items 10 and 11. Cabrera-Orosco et al. 269 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Diehl, K., Jansen, C., Ishchanova, K., & Hilger-Kolb, J. (2018). Loneliness at Universities: Determinants of Emotional and Social Loneliness among Students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15091865 Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2013). Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 439–492). IAP Information Age Publishing. González, M. T., & Landero, R. L. (2014). Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFA-R) in a Sample of Students. Psychological Research Act, 4(2), 14691480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2007-4719(14)70387-4 González-Cantero, J. O., Morón-Vera, J. Á., González-Becerra, V. H., Abundis-Gutiérrez, A., MacíasEspinoza, F., González-Cantero, J. O., Morón-Vera, J. Á., González-Becerra, V. H., Abundis-Gutiérrez, A., & Macías-Espinoza, F. (2020). Academic self-efficacy, academic social support, school well-being and its relationship with academic performance in university students. Psicumex, 10(2), 95-113. https://doi.org/10.36793/psicumex.v10i2.353 Gutiérrez, M., Tomás, J. M., Pastor, A. M., Gutiérrez, M., Tomás, J. M., & Pastor, A. M. (2021). Social support from family, teachers and friends, school adjustment and subjective well-being in Peruvian adolescents. Psychological Sum, 28(1), 17-24. https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n1.3 Guzmán, M. L. B., & Galaz, M. M. F. (2020). Perceived social support and positive mental health in university men and women. Voices and Silences. Latin American Journal of Education, 11(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.18175/VyS11.2.2020.4 Hair, J. F. Black, W. Babin, B. & Anderson, R. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis (8a ed.). London: Cengage Learning. Hernández-Ávila, C. E., & Escobar, N. A. C. (2019). Introducción a los tipos de muestreo [Introduction to sampling types]. Alerta, Revista científica del Instituto Nacional de Salud, 2(1), 75-79. : https://doi.org/10.5377/alerta.v2i1.7535 Holt-Lunstad, J. Smith, T. & Layton, J. (2010). Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review. PLOS Medicine, 7(7), 400-420. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316 Hysing, M., Petrie, K. J., Bøe, T., Lønning, K. J., & Sivertsen, B. (2020). Only the Lonely: A Study of Loneliness Among University Students in Norway. Clinical Psychology in Europe, 2(1), e2781. https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.v2i1.2781 Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale 270 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2018). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-1. https://cran.rproject.org/package=semTools Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed). The Guilford Press. López-Angulo, Y., Cobo-Rendón, R. C., Pérez-Villalobos, M. V., Díaz-Mujica, A. E., López-Angulo, Y., Cobo-Rendón, R. C., Pérez-Villalobos, M. V., & Díaz-Mujica, A. E. (2021). Social support, autonomy, academic commitment and intention to drop out in first-year university students. University Education, 14(3), 139-148. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-50062021000300139 McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Taylor & Francis. Mishra, S. (2020). Social networks, social capital, social support and academic success in higher education: A systematic review with a special focus on 'underrepresented' students. Educational Research Review, 29, 100307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100307 Morrison, R. & O’Connor, R. (2004). Predicting psychological distress in college students: The role of rumination and stress. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61(4), 447-460. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15468342/ Nicho Almonacid , T. L. ., Melendrez Ugarte , D. S. ., Palacios-Mizare , M. G. ., Arias-Gutierrez , M. ., & Olivas Ugarte, L. O. (2023). Escala Multidimensional de Apoyo Social Percibido (MSPSS): propiedades psicométricas en universitarios peruanos [Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS): Psychometric Properties in Peruvian Universities]. Propósitos y Representaciones, 11(3), e1874. https://doi.org/10.20511/pyr2023.v11n3.1874 Otzen, T., Fuentes, N., Wetzel, G., Henríquez, C., Antúnez, Z., Melnik, T., Otzen, T., Fuentes, N., Wetzel, G., Henríquez, C., Antúnez, Z., & Melnik, T. (2020). Suicidality and perceived social support in university students with chronic non-communicable diseases. Psychological Therapy, 38(1), 119-129. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48082020000100119 Palomar, J., Matus, G. L., & Victorio, A. (2013). Development of a Social Support Scale (SAS) for adults. Universitas Psychologica, 12(1), 129-137. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: Vol. 2. A third decade of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Räisänen, M., Postareff, L., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2021). Students' experiences of study-related exhaustion, regulation of learning, peer learning and peer support during university studies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36(4), 1135-1157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00512-2 Cabrera-Orosco et al. 271 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Ramírez, L. (2009). Experiencia, significación y conducta en la vía de la realización humana: algunas consideraciones [Experience, meaning and conduct on the path to human fulfillment: some considerations]. Temática Psicológica, 5(1), 75-84. http://revistas.unife.edu.pe/index.php/tematicapsicologica/article/view/877 Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. E., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315 Reyna-Martínez, M., Ramírez, M. T. G., & Farfano, M. T. V. (2020). Adaptación de la escala de apoyo social familiar y de amigos (AFA-R) como medida del apoyo social de pareja en mujeres mexicanas embarazadas [Adaptation of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale (AFAR) as a measure of partner social support in pregnant Mexican women]. Ansiedad y Estrés, 26(2-3), 129-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anyes.2020.06.004 R Core Team. (2019). A language and environment for statistical computing (R version 3.6.1). R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org/ RStudio Team. (2018). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. RStudio, Inc. http://www.rstudio.com/ Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan : An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02 Saris, W. E., Satorra, A., & van der Veld, W. M. (2009). Testing Structural Equation Models or Detection of Misspecifications? Structural Equation Modeling, 16(4), 561–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903203433 Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2015). A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). New York, Routledge. Sheldon, E., Simmonds-Buckley, M., Bone, C., Mascarenhas, T., Chan, N., Wincott, M., Gleeson, H., Sow, K., Hind, D., & Barkham, M. (2021). Prevalence and risk factors for mental health problems in university undergraduate students: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 287, 282-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.03.054 Sherbourne, C. D., & Stewart, A. L. (1991). The MOS social support survey. Social Science & Medicine, 32(6), 705-714. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(91)90150-B Shi, B. (2021). Perceived social support as a moderator of depression and stress in college students. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 49(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.9893 Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale 272 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Surkalim, D. L., Luo, M., Eres, R., Gebel, K., Van Buskirk, J., Bauman, A., & Ding, D. (2022). The prevalence of loneliness across 113 countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, e067068. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-067068 Torres-Lagunas, M. A., Vega-Morales, E. G., Vinalay-Carrillo, I., Arenas-Montaño, G., & RodríguezAlonzo, E. (2015). Psychometric validation of PSS-14, AFA-R, HDRS, CES-D, EV scales in Mexican puerperal women with and without preeclampsia. University Nursing, 12(3), 122133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reu.2015.08.001 Sosu, E. y Pheunpha, P. (2019). The influence of perceived family support, psychological capital, and engagement on university students' academic outcomes: A moderated mediation analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2078. Tracy, D. (2006). How College Affects Students (Vol. 2): A Third Decade of Research (review). Journal of College Student Development 47(5), 589-592. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236788652_How_College_Affects_Students_Vol_2 _A_Third_Decade_of_Research_review Vaux, A., Phillips, J., Holly, L., Thomson, B., Williams, D., & Stewart, D. (1986). The social support appraisals (SS‐A) scale: Studies of reliability and validity. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14(2), 195-218. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00911821 Viladrich, C., Angulo-Brunet, A., & Doval, E. (2017). A journey around alpha and omega to estimate internal consistency reliability. Anales de Psicología, 33(3), 755–782. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.33.3.268401 Wang, J., Mann, F., Lloyd-Evans, B., Ma, R., & Johnson, S. (2018). Associations between loneliness and perceived social support and outcomes of mental health problems: A systematic review. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 156. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1736-5 Ye, Z., Yang, X., Zeng, C., Wang, Y., Shen, Z., Li, X., & Lin, D. (2020). Resilience, Social Support, and Coping as Mediators between COVID-19-related Stressful Experiences and Acute Stress Disorder among College Students in China. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 12(4), 1074-1094. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12211 Yıldırım, M., & Tanrıverdi, F. Ç. (2021). Social support, resilience and subjective well-being in college students. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 5(2), 127-135. Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Three likelihoodbased methods for mean and Covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30(1), 165–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/0081-1750.00078 Cabrera-Orosco et al. 273 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Zahedi, H., Sahebihagh, M. H., & Sarbakhsh, P. (2022). The Magnitude of Loneliness and Associated Risk Factors among University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry, 17(4), 411-417. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijps.v17i4.10690 Zimet, D. Dahlem, W. Zimet,G. and Farley, K. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52 (1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2 Zimet, G. D., Powell, S. S., Farley, G. K., Werkman, S., & Berkoff, K. A. (1990). Psychometric characteristics of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55(3-4), 610-617. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.1990.9674095 About the Аuthors Isabel Cabrera-Orosco, Educational psychologist with experience in university teaching and research. Master's degree in education. Qualified researcher in RENACYT (Concytec) Level V. Coordinator of University Well-being at Continental University. Carlos Carbajal-León, Ph.D. in psychology and Master in Educational Psychology. Research professor at the Peruvian University of Applied Sciences. Tomás Caycho-Rodríguez, Ph.D. in Psychology. Senior Researcher at the Universidad Científica del Sur, Research Renacyt Distinguished category. His research interests are psychometrics, psychogerontology, cross-cultural research. Mario Reyes-Bossio, Master in Psychology, University of San Martín de Porres. Researcher at the Peruvian University of Applied Sciences. Andy Rick Sánchez-Villena, Graduate in Psychology. Master of Science with a specialization in Teaching and Educational Research from the National University of Cajamarca. He is a PhD candidate at the University of Lleida (Spain). His current research interests include psychometrics, racism, and discrimination Lindsey W. Vilca, Master in Psychology. Professor and researcher at the Norbert Wiener University in Lima, Peru. His research interests are psychometrics and clinical and health Psychology. Mariel Delgado-Campusano, Master in Psychology, Researcher at the Peruvian University of Applied Sciences. Psychometric Properties of the Family and Friends Social Support Scale 274 Psychological Thought South-West University “Neofit Rilski” 2025, Vol. 18(1), 255-274 https://doi.org/10.37708/psyct.v18i1.1080 Corresponding Author's Contact Address[TOP] Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Científica del Sur, Campus Villa II, Ctra. Panamericana S 19, Villa EL Salvador, Lima, Peru. Email: [email protected]