Perceived Stress: Meaning, Measurement, and the PSS Scale
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 10, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Stress, Burnout & Recovery · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Perceived stress describes the extent to which a person experiences the demands of life as unpredictable, difficult to control, or greater than the resources available to manage them. It is a psychological construct about appraisal: how demanding circumstances are experienced and evaluated. The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), developed by Sheldon Cohen and colleagues, is a widely used self-report measure of this experience. A PSS score summarizes responses about the past month; it does not diagnose a mental disorder, determine the biological severity of stress, or establish how much adversity a person has objectively faced. Cohen, Kamarck, and Mermelstein's original study and the developers' official scale guidance establish those foundations.
The practical value of the PSS is to ask a question that event counts and symptom checklists cannot answer on their own: how manageable has life felt recently? Understanding the answer requires attention to a person's context, access to resources, exposure to demands, and functioning. This guide explains the construct, the PSS-10 questionnaire and its scoring, the research on its reliability and validity, its limitations, and the difference between measurement and clinical assessment.
What Is Perceived Stress?
Perceived stress is the degree to which people appraise the circumstances of their lives as stressful. In psychological research, appraisal concerns the significance a person assigns to demands, threats, uncertainty, and their perceived capacity to respond. The same schedule, caregiving responsibility, examination, or job loss may produce different appraisals across people and across periods in the same person's life. Differences in resources, previous experiences, health, competing responsibilities, social support, and the surrounding environment all contribute to that process. The transactional tradition of psychological stress places appraisal and coping within the ongoing relationship between a person and their circumstances. A peer-reviewed discussion of transactional stress theory provides this conceptual background.
The word perceived identifies the variable that researchers are measuring, rather than casting doubt on the reality of someone's circumstances. Workloads, discrimination, insecurity, illness, financial hardship, and insufficient support can be concrete sources of strain. A perceived-stress measure registers the person's appraisal of those conditions. Low perceived stress can coexist with substantial exposure to demands, and high perceived stress can occur when the most important stressor is not obvious to an outside observer. A single score cannot explain why the appraisal arose.
Appraisal, demands, control, and resources
Appraisal includes judgments about what a situation means and what can be done about it. Someone may see an upcoming transition as manageable when they have time, information, autonomy, money, and support, then experience the same transition as overwhelming after sleep disruption or competing responsibilities accumulate. The PSS therefore concerns general experiences of unpredictability, uncontrollability, and overload, together with perceived ability to handle difficulties. The National Cancer Institute's measure description identifies these features as central to the instrument.
These judgments are dynamic, but patterns of appraising demanding situations may also show some stability. A longitudinal analysis of repeated PSS assessments found substantial differences between people as well as change within people. This matters for interpreting an individual's repeat score: a PSS total cannot be assumed to be a pure snapshot of the immediate environment or a fixed personality characteristic. A longitudinal variance analysis in behavioral medicine explores the distinction.
Perceived stress and stress response
The stress response includes biological, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes that occur when a person encounters or anticipates demands. Perceived stress refers more specifically to how stressful recent life has felt. Heart rate, cortisol, sleep patterns, muscle tension, and self-reported appraisal are different observations. Each has its own timing, measurement limitations, and meaning. A PSS score therefore should not be described as a cortisol test, an allostatic-load index, or a direct measure of autonomic nervous-system activity. A peer-reviewed review of psychosocial stress measures distinguishes questionnaires of perceived stress from measures of exposure and physiological stress.
What Is the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)?
The Perceived Stress Scale is a standardized set of questions about the frequency of certain thoughts and feelings during the preceding month. Its purpose is to estimate how stressful a person has found recent life in a general sense. The questions do not require an identifiable single event, diagnosis, employment status, or particular stressor. The original PSS was introduced as a 14-item instrument in 1983 by Sheldon Cohen, Tom Kamarck, and Robin Mermelstein, and subsequent research developed shorter versions. The original peer-reviewed study describes the measure's development and early validity evidence.
The most commonly discussed version in contemporary research is the 10-item PSS-10. A shorter four-item PSS-4 is available, while the original PSS-14 remains part of the instrument's history and evidence base. These versions differ in length, score range, and measurement precision. They should be identified by name in research reports rather than treated as interchangeable. The American Physical Therapy Association's measure review summarizes why the 10-item version is often preferred.
What does the PSS-10 ask about?
The ten questions ask how often respondents have experienced states related to upset, lack of control, nervousness, difficulty handling demands, confidence in dealing with problems, and feelings that circumstances are manageable. This mixture of negatively and positively phrased experiences is an intentional feature of the instrument. The questionnaire asks about frequency over the last month, rather than asking whether a particular event occurred or whether someone meets criteria for a condition.
The exact copyrighted or permission-governed instrument should be obtained from the developer's source rather than reconstructed from paraphrases found in online quizzes. Carnegie Mellon University's official scales page provides the instruments, scoring guidance, information about the reference period, and instructions relating to use and permissions.
PSS-10, PSS-14, and PSS-4 compared
PSS-10: Ten items, each with five frequency response options. After reverse scoring the positively worded items, total scores range from 0 to 40. It is frequently used for population research and repeated measurement.
PSS-14: Fourteen items, the original version introduced in 1983. With the same five response options and appropriate reverse scoring, totals range from 0 to 56. Its psychometric history is extensive, but findings for the PSS-10 should not automatically be applied to it.
PSS-4: Four items with a total range from 0 to 16. Its brevity can make it convenient in large surveys, while fewer items generally leave less information for evaluating an individual's response pattern.
Instrument selection depends on the purpose, participant burden, population, language version, evidence for the intended inference, and study design. A review in Arthritis Care & Research discusses the versions and their use in health research.
How the PSS-10 Is Administered
The usual PSS-10 format presents ten questions with five frequency choices: never, almost never, sometimes, fairly often, and very often. Each response is assigned a number from 0 through 4. Respondents consider the preceding month, and the ten responses are combined using the published scoring procedure. The measure can be self-administered or administered in an interview; the measurement review discusses available methods of administration.
The reference period matters. An answer given after a particularly difficult day may still concern the whole preceding month; the respondent should not be instructed to report only that day. A modified question period, a changed translation, or rewritten wording creates measurement questions that require validation. The developers' guidance specifically cautions about changing the original recall period.
How to score the PSS-10 correctly
The conventional PSS-10 procedure reverses items 4, 5, 7, and 8, counting the questionnaire items from 1 to 10. For those four items, an original response of 0 becomes 4, 1 becomes 3, 2 remains 2, 3 becomes 1, and 4 becomes 0. The remaining six items retain their original values. Add the ten resulting numbers to obtain the total, which ranges from 0 to 40. Higher totals indicate greater perceived stress in the instrument's sense. The peer-reviewed measurement review explains the general reverse-scoring method, while the official PSS-10 files and scoring instructions provide the version-specific procedure.
For an illustrative calculation, suppose the ten recorded values in item order are 3, 2, 4, 1, 2, 3, 0, 4, 3, and 2. Reversing the four positively worded items yields 3, 2, 4, 3, 2, 3, 4, 0, 3, and 2. The sum is 26. This example demonstrates arithmetic only: 26 does not represent a diagnosis or a scientifically universal severity category.
Errors in scoring usually arise when positively phrased items are added without reversing them, when different PSS versions are mixed, or when a missing answer is silently treated as zero. Researchers should specify the version, scoring algorithm, missing-data rules, and language used. An incomplete response set should be handled according to the relevant study protocol or validated scoring guidance.
What Does a PSS-10 Score Mean?
A higher PSS-10 total represents more frequent endorsement of experiences captured by the measure. It may help describe a sample, explore correlates of stress, identify groups warranting closer investigation, or follow changes in a comparable measurement context. It does not tell the reader how much illness they have, whether they need medication, whether they will develop an anxiety disorder, or whether work is the source of their difficulties.
The original developers explicitly state that the PSS is not a diagnostic instrument and that it has no established diagnostic score cutoffs. There is no official PSS-10 boundary at which a person becomes clinically stressed. Numerical labels such as low, moderate, and high are common on commercial websites, but ranges such as 0–13, 14–26, and 27–40 are not diagnostic thresholds from the developers. Treat these labels as optional descriptive conventions, not authoritative clinical classifications. See Cohen's laboratory guidance and the peer-reviewed stress-measures review.
Why there is no universal cutoff
A diagnostic cutoff requires evidence that a particular score accurately identifies a specified clinical condition in a defined population, with known consequences of false positives and false negatives. The PSS was developed to quantify a perceived-stress construct, not to identify a disorder with formal diagnostic criteria. Different populations can have different score distributions, and variations across languages or life contexts can affect responses. Moreover, an individual with a relatively low PSS score may still have clinically important depressive symptoms, trauma-related symptoms, suicidal thoughts, or serious physical illness. Those concerns require an appropriate assessment regardless of the PSS total.
Population averages and normative comparisons
Published norms can be useful when the reference population, period, sampling method, and instrument version are identified. Cohen and Janicki-Deverts analyzed stress distributions in US probability samples collected in 1983, 2006, and 2009, finding demographic patterns associated with age, education, income, employment, and gender. Their data are informative for population research, while demographic averages and past survey distributions should not be mistaken for a person's clinical normality in 2026. The published national-sample paper documents those comparisons.
Cross-study comparisons also require attention to sampling. A survey of university students during examinations cannot be interpreted as if it represented all US adults; a group recruited from a clinic may differ from a community sample for reasons unrelated to questionnaire accuracy. Differences between groups are descriptive associations unless stronger research designs justify causal claims.
Can you repeat the test to track changes?
Repeated administrations can describe how responses vary across occasions when the same validated version, language, scoring method, and comparable instructions are used. Changes in employment, health, family responsibilities, financial security, sleep, or access to support may alter perceived stress. Some variation can also reflect measurement error and stable differences in appraisal. A longitudinal analysis of PSS variance underscores that both between-person and within-person components matter.
A change in total score is therefore a prompt for contextual interpretation, not proof that a particular coping technique worked. In an individual progress review, the most useful questions are what changed in the person's life, whether functioning improved, and what other assessments are needed. In intervention research, stronger causal conclusions require suitable comparison groups, prespecified outcomes, and attention to bias.
How Reliable and Valid Is the PSS?
Reliability concerns the consistency and precision of scores under specified circumstances. Validity concerns whether the evidence supports the interpretation and intended use of those scores. These properties belong to a particular instrument, sample, language, and purpose; they are not permanent guarantees attached to the questionnaire's name. The 2024 systematic review and meta-analytic confirmatory factor analysis is an important synthesis of the PSS evidence.
Internal consistency and factor structure
A systematic review and meta-analytic confirmatory factor analysis incorporated 76 samples from 57 studies, including evidence from more than 46,000 participants for PSS-10 and more than 28,000 for PSS-14. The investigators found support for a correlated two-factor model and reported high internal consistency using omega estimates. The two factors are commonly related to negatively worded perceptions of distress and positively worded perceptions of coping or self-efficacy. These findings help characterize the questionnaire's structure but do not establish two clinical diagnoses or justify separate cutoffs for the factors. Koğar and Koğar, 2024.
The factor structure also creates an interpretive question: some separation of positively and negatively phrased responses can be influenced by wording and response styles, alongside substantive differences in experiences. A two-factor statistical solution does not by itself prove that the questionnaire measures two independent diseases, mechanisms, or forms of stress. Authors reporting subscales should explain why their chosen scoring interpretation is supported in their sample rather than assuming universal equivalence.
Cross-cultural use and measurement invariance
Researchers have translated the PSS into many languages. Translation alone is insufficient to demonstrate equivalent measurement. Wording, cultural expectations of control, response styles, stressor contexts, literacy, and administration can shape how people interpret an item. A 2025 systematic review of non-English PSS-10 adaptations reported that reliability and construct-validity findings varied with study populations, languages, and methods, and called for more standardized psychometric evaluation. The published review supports careful use across populations.
Measurement invariance testing asks whether items function comparably across groups or over time. The 2024 meta-analysis reported important evidence for some forms of invariance, but that result should not be treated as certification of every translation or subgroup. A 2026 longitudinal study among teachers in Flanders examined the Dutch PSS-10 over repeated waves, illustrating the population-specific analysis needed before comparing changes over time. The longitudinal investigation is informative, while its particular sample should not be generalized automatically.
Correlation, prediction, and causation
In its original validation research, PSS scores were associated with life events, self-reported symptoms, and certain behavioral or health-related outcomes. Such correlations support the instrument's relevance to psychological stress, but no association by itself proves that higher PSS scores caused a disease or that changing a PSS score will prevent illness. The original validation article and the review of psychosocial stress measures provide the appropriate evidential context.
An especially important distinction arises in studies that measure stressful conditions and a PSS score at the same time. Poor sleep, emotional symptoms, perceived stress, and workplace strain can influence one another, and common self-report methods can strengthen observed associations. Temporal ordering, confounding, measurement overlap, and study design determine how much can be inferred.
Perceived Stress Compared With Related Concepts
Perceived stress versus objective stressors
An external stressor is a demand or event, such as a high workload, relocation, unsafe conditions, bereavement, discrimination, caregiving duties, or economic uncertainty. A stressor inventory might count these exposures or record their severity, frequency, and timing. The PSS assesses how stressful general life has felt. Both kinds of information can be useful, and they answer different questions. A work-stress investigation that collects only PSS results may miss staffing shortages and organizational hazards requiring structural intervention.
Perceived stress versus acute and chronic stress
Acute stress generally refers to stress arising in connection with an immediate or short-lived demand. Chronic stress refers to recurring or prolonged exposure to demands and an ongoing pattern of strain. The PSS-10 has a one-month recall window, yet a high score does not establish how long a stressor has been present or diagnose chronic stress. It may reflect an unusually difficult month, continuing adversity, or an interaction of circumstances and appraisal. CDC guidance discusses everyday stress and the significance of sustained stress.
Perceived stress versus psychological distress
Distress broadly describes unpleasant emotional or psychological suffering. A distress scale may emphasize symptoms such as depression, anxiety, or nonspecific emotional difficulties. The PSS emphasizes appraisal, perceived demands, and control; its items are not a clinical symptom inventory. Although the constructs overlap empirically, they should be measured and interpreted for their intended purposes. Likewise, a person's ability to remain active at work does not establish that they are free of distress or that a high PSS score has medical meaning.
Perceived stress versus anxiety and depression
Worry, tension, irritability, reduced concentration, and sleep disturbance can appear with everyday stress and with mental-health conditions. Generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorders require clinical assessment against defined criteria, including duration, pattern, associated symptoms, impairment, and alternative explanations. PSS answers do not establish those criteria. For a separate comparison of anxiety and stress, see Anxiety vs Stress: How They Differ and Overlap. The distinct issue of possible links between stressful conditions and depression is addressed in Stress and Depression: Triggers, Vulnerability, and Risk.
Perceived stress versus trauma-related diagnoses
An acute stress reaction, acute stress disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder refer to distinct responses or clinical conditions in a trauma context. They cannot be determined from general PSS questionnaire responses. Traumatic exposure, symptom clusters, timing, and impairment need a trauma-informed clinical evaluation when relevant. The PSS measures neither traumatic-event exposure nor PTSD severity, and its one-month reference period is not interchangeable with the time criteria for trauma-related diagnoses.
Perceived stress versus burnout
Burnout in ICD-11 refers specifically to an occupational phenomenon associated with chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed. It is defined around exhaustion, mental distance or cynicism about work, and reduced professional efficacy; it is not classified by WHO as a medical condition. A general PSS score has no capacity to identify these three occupational dimensions or to diagnose burnout. WHO's ICD-11 clarification establishes the distinction. Research constructs such as parental or student burnout have separate theoretical and measurement traditions.
Perceived stress versus personality and coping style
People differ in average emotional reactivity, threat appraisal, coping resources, and stable patterns of responding. PSS scores may reflect some of these differences without constituting a personality test. Statistical relationships between perceived stress and a trait such as neuroticism do not establish that a person caused their own workload or that structural stressors are irrelevant. Neuroticism and Stress: Perceived Stress, Reactivity, and Recovery examines that distinct personality-related search question.
What the PSS Can and Cannot Tell a Clinician
In professional practice, a questionnaire can add a structured perspective to a conversation about demands and perceived control. A clinician may consider the patient's narrative, symptoms, functioning, duration, stressor exposure, health history, medications, sleep, safety, and social context, then choose appropriate validated assessments for specific concerns. The PSS score is one data point, and its utility depends on the clinical question.
A high PSS score could prompt questions about workload, caregiving burden, living conditions, persistent worry, mood symptoms, and available support. A low score might still coexist with exhaustion, insomnia, pain, substance-related difficulties, or conditions requiring care. Physical symptoms such as new chest pain, fainting, or severe shortness of breath require medical evaluation based on their clinical characteristics, independent of any stress questionnaire result.
The PSS also cannot prescribe an intervention. There is no scientifically established PSS value at which every person should begin psychotherapy, take medication, leave a job, or receive a particular accommodation. Decisions depend on impairment, risks, informed preferences, environment, and the conditions identified during assessment. NIMH guidance on when to seek mental-health support emphasizes symptoms and functioning rather than a PSS cutoff.
How Researchers Should Use and Report the PSS
Researchers using the PSS should specify the exact version, questionnaire language, population, inclusion criteria, recall period, response scale, item-scoring method, missing-data handling, and rationale for total or factor scores. Reports should provide descriptive statistics, suitable uncertainty estimates, reliability or measurement-quality information relevant to the sample, and the boundaries of intended comparison. Studies comparing groups across languages or time points should examine whether score meanings are sufficiently comparable.
When PSS is an outcome, investigators should distinguish a difference in questionnaire totals from a difference in clinically important functioning. An effect size can be statistically significant yet modest in lived significance; improvement in perceived stress can occur without proof that a person's chronic stressor has been resolved. A study that claims a technique reduced stress needs a design capable of supporting its causal conclusion. The 2024 meta-analytic psychometric review and longitudinal PSS analysis clarify why instrument structure and score variation matter.
Frequent errors in PSS-based reporting
Calling the PSS a diagnostic test or reporting an invented clinical cutoff without validation for a specific clinical target.
Mixing PSS-4, PSS-10, and PSS-14 scores as though their numerical ranges were equivalent.
Treating a one-month recall as direct evidence of years of chronic stress or a specific recent trauma.
Assuming a PSS change demonstrates the success of an intervention without an appropriate study design.
Treating a correlation with cortisol, cardiovascular outcomes, or depressive symptoms as proof of a biological mechanism or a psychiatric diagnosis.
Comparing samples or translations without addressing measurement equivalence, selection effects, and contextual differences.
Reporting individual test results without explaining that the measure assesses perceived appraisal and does not replace professional evaluation.
What to Do When Stress Feels Unmanageable
A meaningful response begins with identifying the demands and resources underlying the experience. Consider what has changed in workload, income security, caregiving, relationships, physical health, rest, autonomy, and access to practical assistance. Distinguish problems you can change directly from circumstances that require support from other people, employers, institutions, or health services. If there is an ongoing workplace hazard, staffing or workload intervention may be more relevant than asking the individual to become better at relaxation.
Everyday strategies can include regular sleep opportunities, physical activity suited to one's health, adequate meals, social connection, predictable recovery time, and limits on sustained exposure to overwhelming information. Such practices may support coping, but their effects vary, and no single technique works for everyone. CDC guidance on managing stress and NIMH's self-care guidance describe practical starting points.
Professional support is appropriate when symptoms are persistent, severe, worsening, or interfere with work, school, relationships, self-care, or sleep. A primary care professional can assess potential medical contributors and refer to mental-health care when needed. If there are thoughts of self-harm or an immediate safety concern, seek urgent local crisis or emergency services. In the United States, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline is available by calling or texting 988. NIMH's help-seeking guidance provides further information.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does PSS stand for in psychology?
PSS stands for Perceived Stress Scale, a self-report measure developed to assess how stressful people have found their lives during a specified recent period, typically the last month. The 10-item version is called PSS-10.
Is the PSS-10 a clinically validated diagnosis of stress?
The PSS-10 is a psychometric research measure with substantial evidence about its measurement properties. It is not a psychiatric or medical diagnostic test, and the developers specify no diagnostic score cutoffs. Original developer information.
What is a normal or high PSS-10 score?
Scores run from 0 to 40 and increase with reported perceived stress. A normal or high score can be described relative to an appropriate study population and research objective. Universal clinical labels and diagnostic high-stress thresholds have not been established by the scale's developers.
Are 0–13, 14–26, and 27–40 official PSS levels?
No. These ranges appear in various secondary score guides, but they are not official clinical severity thresholds. They should not be presented as diagnostic bands or used to decide who needs treatment. The developer's guidance explicitly states that there are no score cutoffs.
How is a PSS-10 score calculated?
Record all ten item responses from 0 to 4, reverse the scores for items 4, 5, 7, and 8, and sum the ten values. The result is 0–40. Use the official questionnaire and published scoring instructions for practical administration.
Can PSS-10 identify chronic stress or burnout?
It cannot establish the duration or source of stress, and it does not measure the specific occupational dimensions of burnout. A high score may warrant exploring sustained demands or work conditions, but classification and clinical questions require different information.
Is perceived stress the same as anxiety?
Perceived stress measures the appraisal of recent demands and manageability. Anxiety can describe a response, symptom, or clinical condition depending on context. There can be overlap, but they are not equivalent measures or diagnoses.
Can my PSS score change over time?
Yes. Scores can change with circumstances and appraisal, while some differences between people remain relatively stable. Repeated measurement is most interpretable when instrument version, timing, language, scoring, and conditions are documented. A change alone does not prove the cause of improvement or deterioration.
Can I use an online PSS test to decide whether I need therapy?
A self-report score can help you reflect on recent experiences, but decisions about therapy should account for symptoms, impairment, personal priorities, and professional assessment. Seek help for concerning symptoms regardless of whether a website assigns your score a low or high label.
Where can I find the official Perceived Stress Scale?
Visit Sheldon Cohen's laboratory page at Carnegie Mellon University. It provides official versions and use guidance. Check the available permissions and avoid treating a modified online quiz as the original validated instrument.
Related Articles
References
American Physical Therapy Association. (2022). Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Tests & Measures. Official professional measure page
Carnegie Mellon University, Laboratory for the Study of Stress, Immunity, and Disease. Perceived Stress Scale: Instruments, scoring, and use guidance. Official instrument resource
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Managing Stress. CDC guidance
Cohen, S., & Janicki-Deverts, D. (2012). Who's stressed? Distributions of psychological stress in the United States in probability samples from 1983, 2006, and 2009. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 1320–1334. DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00900.x
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385–396. DOI: 10.2307/2136404
Harris, K. M., Gaffey, A. E., Schwartz, J. E., Krantz, D. S., & Burg, M. M. (2023). The Perceived Stress Scale as a Measure of Stress: Decomposing Score Variance in Longitudinal Behavioral Medicine Studies. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 57(10), 846–854. DOI: 10.1093/abm/kaad015
Milo, R. B., Ramira, A., Peppard, S., Ramira, M. L. B., Brown, R., Soon, K., Fontimayor, M., Milo, J. B., & Calero, P. (2025). A systematic review of the non-English versions of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)-10 psychometric analysis. SAGE Open Nursing, 11. DOI: 10.1177/23779608251377287
National Cancer Institute. Perceived Stress Scale. Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences. NIH measure record
National Institute of Mental Health. Caring for Your Mental Health. NIMH guidance
National Institute of Mental Health. My Mental Health: Do I Need Help? NIMH guidance
Patterson, S. L., Sagui-Henson, S., & Prather, A. A. (2020). Measures of psychosocial stress and stressful exposures. Arthritis Care & Research. DOI: 10.1002/acr.24228
Van de Velde, J., Weijters, B., & Levecque, K. (2026). Testing longitudinal measurement invariance of the Dutch PSS-10, MBI-ES, and PANAS in a bimonthly 6-month panel. Psychologica Belgica, 66(1), 65–80. DOI: 10.5334/pb.1528
World Health Organization. (2019). Burn-out an occupational phenomenon: International Classification of Diseases. WHO statement
Yılmaz Koğar, E., & Koğar, H. (2024). A systematic review and meta-analytic confirmatory factor analysis of the perceived stress scale (PSS-10 and PSS-14). Stress and Health, 40(1), e3285. DOI: 10.1002/smi.3285