Low frustration tolerance is one of the key concepts in rational emotional behavior therapy (REBT). The purpose of this study is to explore the factorial structure, reliability, and validity of the Romanian version of the Frustration Discomfort Scale (FDS), developed by Harrington (Clin Psychol Psychother 12(5):374–387, 2005b. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.465), within a non-clinical sample (N = 308) of Romanian teachers. For validation purposes, participants also completed several measures such as the Unconditional Self-Acceptance Questionnaire (USAQ) (Chamberlain and Haaga in J Ration Emot Cogn Behav Ther 19(3):163–176, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011189416600), Attitudes and Belief Scale 2 (ABS2) (DiGiuseppe et al. J Ration Emot Cogn Behav Ther 36(1):47–79, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-017-0273-3), Teacher Irrational Belief Scale (TIBS) (Bernard Teacher irrationality and teacher stress, 24th international congress of psychology, Sydney, Australia, 1988), and Pupil Control Ideology Scale (PCI) (Willower et al. The school and pupil control, The Pennsylvania State University, 1967). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) suggests that the initial four-factor solution from the scale development study received similar support to the one-factor solution found in some previous studies. Patterns of correlations linking the FDS total sum score versus the FDS 4-factor scale scores with other variables provide some support for the one-factor solution, mainly because it is a more parsimonious solution. Differentiating between several subcomponents of FDS does not bring discriminant validity in our non-clinical sample. Based on current preliminary validation, the FDS is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing frustration discomfort in a Romanian-speaking population as a single-factor construct. Our results do not exclude the possibility that future discriminant validity endeavors could support the utility of treating low frustration tolerance as a multidimensional construct since using a non-clinical sample is likely to impact the factorial structure of the FDS.

低挫折容忍度是理性情绪行为疗法（REBT）的关键概念之一。本研究的目的是探讨 Harrington 开发的罗马尼亚语版本的挫败不适量表 (FDS) 的因子结构、可靠性和有效性 (Clin Psychol Psychother 12(5):374–387, 2005b。https:/ /doi.org/10.1002/cpp.465），来自罗马尼亚教师的非临床样本（N = 308）。为了验证目的，参与者还完成了多项措施，例如无条件自我接受问卷 (USAQ)（Chamberlain 和 Haaga in J Ration Emot Cogn Behav Ther 19(3):163–176, 2001。 https://doi.org/ 10.1023/A:1011189416600)，态度和信念量表 2 (ABS2)（DiGiuseppe 等人 J Ration Emot Cogn Behav Ther 36(1):47–79, 2018。https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-017 -0273-3)、教师非理性信念量表 (TIBS)（Bernard 教师非理性与教师压力，第 24 届国际心理学大会，澳大利亚悉尼，1988 年）和学生控制意识形态量表 (PCI)（Willower 等人，学校和瞳孔控制，宾夕法尼亚州立大学，1967）。验证性因素分析 (CFA) 表明，量表开发研究中最初的四因素解决方案得到了与之前一些研究中发现的单因素解决方案类似的支持。将 FDS 总分与 FDS 4 因素量表得分与其他变量联系起来的相关模式为单因素解决方案提供了一些支持，主要是因为它是一种更为简约的解决方案。在我们的非临床样本中，区分 FDS 的几个子成分并不能带来区分有效性。根据目前的初步验证，FDS 是一种可靠且有效的工具，可以将罗马尼亚语人群的挫败感不适感作为单因素结构进行评估。我们的结果并不排除未来的判别有效性努力可以支持将低挫折容忍度视为多维结构的效用，因为使用非临床样本可能会影响 FDS 的因子结构。