This assessment aims to evaluate the current stress situation from two dimensions: the environment that causes stress (stressors) and the individual's physical and psychological response to that environment (stress state). It is designed to help users understand their own stress factors and response patterns, and to serve as a starting point for considering appropriate coping strategies.

There are many established scales for measuring stress. Representative examples include the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare's Stress Check Scale [1] and the Psychological Stress Response Scale (SRS-18) developed by Suzuki et al. [2]. These scales are particularly strong in their ability to assess individual stress symptoms and psychological and physical responses in detail.

This assessment takes a differentiated approach from these existing scales by addressing both the objective life events that cause stress (the stress environment) and the individual's subjective adaptation to those events (the stress state). In particular, we focused on the Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS) proposed by Holmes et al. [3], and conducted an in-depth analysis of the relationship between major life events and the stress load they place on individuals.

Holmes's SRRS includes items that reflect Western cultural contexts and the social conditions of its time (e.g., Christmas, debt of $10,000 or more, changes in church activities). In developing this scale, drawing on the findings of Yahiro et al. [4] and Arai et al. [5] regarding the SRRS, we focused on identifying and reorganizing stress factors that align with globally applicable lifestyle norms, cultural contexts, and Japanese ways of living — rather than limiting ourselves to a Western framework. The goal is a diagnostic tool capable of evaluating universal stress factors and their impact on individual physical and mental health.

To develop concrete measurement items, a team of specialists — including certified psychologists, clinical psychologists, and graduates of psychology master's programs — took a central role in reviewing and refining the question items through the following process.

Multiple brainstorming sessions were conducted to extract a wide range of candidates related to stress-inducing events and psychological states. These candidates were then grouped by content using the KJ method, and the conceptual coherence of each group was confirmed. Throughout this process, each item was rigorously evaluated in terms of its alignment with the assessment's purpose, the absence of overlap between items, and the comprehensiveness of coverage of the relevant stress factors and states — leading to the final set of question items.

① Stress Environment Items

These items evaluate the stress load placed on an individual by objective life events and circumstances. A specialist team (one certified psychologist, one clinical psychologist, and three graduates of psychology master's programs) independently rated the degree of stress each item would typically cause, on a scale of 0 to 100. Ratings were based on each specialist's clinical experience and on knowledge from prior research regarding the stress load associated with each life event. The average of each specialist's ratings was then calculated and adopted as the weighted score. This process quantifies the relative impact of individual stress factors.

【Question Items and Weighted Scores】

1. Death of a spouse or partner　　　　　　100
2. Death of a close family member　　　　　95
3. Experience of a natural disaster　　　　92
4. Unexpected job loss or dismissal　　　　90
5. Serious illness or accident of a family member　　90
6. Serious personal illness or accident　　88
7. Divorce or separation　　　　　　　　　85
8. Financial hardship or economic difficulty　　82
9. Litigation or serious social dispute　　80
10. Serious harassment　　　　　　　　　　78
11. Prolonged mental health condition　　　70
12. Extended social isolation　　　　　　　70
13. Ongoing fertility treatment　　　　　　68
14. Large loan or rental payments　　　　　65
15. High-responsibility work assignment　　60
16. Caring for an elderly family member　　60
17. Deteriorating workplace relationships　55
18. Unstable employment or contract　　　　55
19. Chronic long working hours　　　　　　56
20. Conflict with spouse or partner　　　　58
21. Burden of childbirth or childcare　　　54
22. Long-term interpersonal conflict　　　52
23. Job loss or anxiety about the future　　50
24. Job change or reassignment　　　　　　45
25. Childcare or educational burden　　　　46
26. Trouble on social media or online　　　44
27. Ongoing chronic physical symptoms　　42
28. Excessive investment or gambling　　　40
29. Social or economic instability　　　　38
30. Concerns about health or appearance　　36
31. Persistent disruption to lifestyle habits　34
32. Lack of rest or leisure time　　　　　32
33. Housing or neighborhood problems　　　30
34. Long commute or travel time　　　　　28
35. Excessive use of digital devices　　　26
36. Work changes due to AI or digitalization　25
37. Concerns about surveillance or data leaks　24
38. Major change in educational path　　　22
39. Impact of climate change or social issues　20
40. Decrease in face-to-face interaction and connection　20

【Response Format and Score Calculation】

Applies: Weighted score of selected item × 100%
Somewhat applies: Weighted score of selected item × 50%
Does not apply: Weighted score of selected item × 0%

【Stress Environment Level Criteria】

High Stress Environment: Total score 401 or above
Moderate Stress Environment: Total score 271–400
Low Stress Environment: Total score 270 or below

② Stress State Items

These items evaluate the individual's current physical and mental condition, their self-awareness of stress, and the availability of coping resources. Drawing on a thorough review of prior research on stress responses and coping mechanisms, the following 10 questions were developed from a psychological perspective. The questions are structured to measure the individual's adaptive state from a positive angle.

41. I feel that things are going well.
42. I am living a calm and settled life.
43. I feel that I am in an environment where effort pays off.
44. I feel capable of solving problems on my own.
45. I am able to keep my frustration under control.
46. I am able to regulate my emotions.
47. I have friends who will help me.
48. My personal relationships are fulfilling.
49. I am sleeping well.
50. I feel physically well and energized.

【Response Format and Score Distribution】

Applies: 3 points
Neutral: 6 points
Does not apply: 10 points
(Note: Each question describes a positive state. Selecting "Does not apply" indicates that the positive state is not being experienced — and therefore reflects a higher stress level. The scoring is designed accordingly.)

High Stress State: Total score 71 or above
Moderate Stress State: Total score 40–70
Low Stress State: Total score 39 or below

Nine stress types were defined based on the combination of the Stress Environment rating and the Stress State rating. The name of each type was determined through multiple rounds of discussion among the specialist team, with the aim of capturing the stress situation and adaptive pattern represented by each type as concisely as possible.

High Stress Environment × High Stress State　→　Overextended Type
High Stress Environment × Moderate Stress State　→　Resilient Performer Type
High Stress Environment × Low Stress State　→　Stress-Resistant Type
Moderate Stress Environment × High Stress State　→　Bottling-Up Type
Moderate Stress Environment × Moderate Stress State　→　Balanced Type
Moderate Stress Environment × Low Stress State　→　Coping Expert Type
Low Stress Environment × High Stress State　→　Crisis Mode Type
Low Stress Environment × Moderate Stress State　→　At-Risk Type
Low Stress Environment × Low Stress State　→　Free & Relaxed Type

For each type, the assessment results include a detailed description of key characteristics, points to be aware of, and specific advice — written in approximately 1,000 characters. The content is based on the clinical expertise of the authors, who have extensive experience in practice, as well as the latest findings from prior research in the field of psychology.

By exploring the characteristics of each type in depth, the assessment aims to help users develop an objective understanding of their own stress patterns. It also addresses thought and behavioral patterns that each type is prone to, as well as potential physical and mental health risks, in order to encourage early awareness. In addition, type-specific coping strategies and self-care tips for reducing stress are provided, giving users practical information they can apply in daily life. Where relevant, information is also included that may prompt users to consider consulting a specialist.

This assessment was developed through rigorous review by a specialist team and is grounded in findings from prior research. However, it has not undergone statistical verification of factor structure, reliability, or validity. This is because the assessment was not developed as an academically rigorous psychometric instrument — it is intended as a simple self-check tool to help members of the general public understand their stress situation and use that awareness as a starting point for self-care or for seeking professional support.

The results of this assessment should therefore be used as one reference point for understanding your personal stress situation. Given the limited statistical grounding, it is not suitable for research purposes.

[1] Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. A 15-Minute Workplace Stress Check. Kokoro no Mimi.

[2] Suzuki, S., Shimada, H., Miura, M., Katayanagi, K., Umano, R., & Sakano, Y. (1997). Development of a new psychological stress response scale (SRS-18) and examination of its reliability and validity.

[3] Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 11, 213–218.

[4] Yahiro, K., Inoue, M., & Nozawa, Y. (1993). A study of the Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS) by Holmes et al. among Japanese populations. Japanese Journal of Health Psychology, 6(1), 18–32.

[5] Arai, Y., Furiya, H., Asano, T., Kawahara, R., & Kasai, H. (1991). A study on the Social Readjustment Rating Scale among the general Japanese population. Psychosomatic Medicine, 31(2), 115–124.