A study first published by the Royal College of Psychiatrists “to develop a scale to measure social satisfaction in people with substance use disorders and to test its psychometric properties. The rationale is that social satisfaction is more universal and relevant to treatment planning than assessing social problems. The new Social Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ) was derived from an existing social problems questionnaire and validation was undertaken on two large clinic populations. An eight-item SSQ was tested and found to have good psychometric properties in terms of test–retest reliability, internal consistency, distribution of responses and concurrent validity.”
A linguist with high-functioning Autism (Aspergers), Synaesthesia, and Eideiticism defines social satisfaction.
“For as long as I can remember, I’ve had an overarching rule for my professional activities: harm none. This is usually pretty simple when working in IT and software – code and file servers don’t generally harm people. Technology is inert (and arguably not defined) until a person uses it causally. Recently, however, a friend of mine asked if I could ever work in national defense with this perspective, which seeded a lively discussion. I determined that I probably could. This article examines that reasoning…”
A 2000 report from Tilburg University that attempts to “demonstrate the critical need to recognize the presence of two different types of satisfaction for effective channel governance—economic satisfaction, that is, a channel member’s evaluation of the economic outcomes that flow from the relationship with its partner, and social satisfaction, a channel member’s evaluation of the personal contacts and interactions with its exchange partner. Measurement instruments permitting channel researchers to make the distinction between economic and social satisfaction are developed and tested. We provide evidence on the relevance of this distinction by showing that the two types of satisfaction occupy unique positions in a nomological network, as determined by differential relations with partner’s use of power and responses to channel relationship problems. The implications of these differences in effects are discussed and indicate that channel managers should be aware of the kind of satisfaction they are fostering in their channel counterparts.”