Talk:Social Support Questionnaire

Draft 2 Comments

I think your article is very well-written and thorough. I did not find a single spelling/grammar mistake and everything flows well.

Just a few things:

• Your opening sentence could go without the “psychometrically sound” part. To, me that statement makes it sound bias. On a related note, the “borderline” comment on the internal reliability of the SSQ3 might also come off that way. • If you are using the same source in your citations, just hit “re-use” when citing the sources so that the same source does not come up multiple times in your reference list. • Maybe you are planning on doing this later on, but make sure that you are linking out to pages for terms you think may be beneficial to have background on. • I don’t think you need a colon after the “with” when listing the correlates with the SSQ6.

·Brianbizub1 (talk) 03:12, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Draft 1 General Comments

• The outline looks to be in good shape. I would encourage you to focus on filling out the main sections then returning to the opening paragraph.

Draft 1 Specific Comments

• The opening sentence is too long. Consider shortening it and focusing on the pieces: the SSQ is an X (type of instrument) that measures Y.
• Instead of discussing the survey design in the opening paragraph, consider reporting on how the SSQ has been used, who developed it, and its overall reliability and validity.
• I like that you are going to include the scoring.
• You might want to have a section on how the survey is administered. You indicated there is a two-part process? That's interesting. Is it often done in person or over the phone?
• Consider examining the literature to see if the SSQ has been used by researchers or clinicians.

Eva.dugoff (talk) 22:49, 3 March 2017 (UTC)