- Scoring description for the DBT-Ways of Coping Checklist (DBT-WCCL): The scoring is the average of relevant items for each subscale. The score for the skills use scale is the.
- The Ways of Coping Checklist: Revision and Psychometric Properties. Four psychometric properties were examined including the reproducibility of the factor structure of the original scales, the internal consistency reliabilities and intercorrelations of the original and the revised scales, the construct and concurrent validity of the scales.
License to Reproduce. Susan Folkman, PhD, is known for her contributions to the field of psychological stress and coping. She is currently Professor Emeritus at the University of California, San Francisco. Lazarus, Richard S. Lazarus, PhD, (1922-2002) was a professor emeritus of psychology at the University of California. Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ) Description. The version of. Ways of Coping (WCQ) used in this study consists of 66 items, which contains a wide range of thoughts and acts that people use to deal with the internal and/or external demands of specific stressful encounters. Folkman 1985 This data set includes eight WCQ subscale scores. SID: MM DD YY. Please think about your life over the past month (30 days), and look at the statements below. Each statement has five possible responses. In their ‘ Ways of Coping Questionnaire ’ (WOCQ; cf. Folkman and Lazarus 1988, Lazarus 1991), Lazarus and co-workers distinguish eight groups of coping strategies: confrontative coping, distancing, self-controlling, seeking social support, accepting responsibility, escape-avoidance, planful problem-solving, and positive reappraisal. The problem with this conception and, as a consequence, the measurement. The Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ) was developed in 1983 by Rosenstiel and Keefe using a pool of items reflecting coping strategies frequently reported by patients and deemed to be important by researchers and clinicians involved in the management of pain.
3 KritaKrita is a totally free digital drawing, painting and illustrating software program which can be used for creating drawings, designing patterns, editing pictures and adding effects to existing art work. Real estate pro software.
- About this Journal ·
- Abstracting and Indexing ·
- Aims and Scope ·
- Article Processing Charges ·
- Bibliographic Information ·
- Editorial Board ·
- Editorial Workflow ·
- Publication Ethics ·
- Reviewer Resources ·
- Submit a Manuscript ·
- Subscription Information ·
Ways Of Coping Questionnaire Pdf Download
- Open Special Issues ·
- Published Special Issues ·
Assessing the Structure of the Ways of Coping Questionnaire in Fibromyalgia Patients Using Common Factor Analytic Approaches
1Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA
2Department of Psychology, Grand Canyon University, Phoenix, AZ, USA
3University of California, San Diego/San Diego State University, Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, CA, USA
Received 18 March 2016; Revised 30 September 2016; Accepted 25 October 2016
Academic Editor: Anna Maria Aloisi
Copyright © 2016 Charles Van Liew et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ) is a widely used measure of coping processes. Despite its use in a variety of populations, there has been concern about the stability and structure of the WCQ across different populations. This study examines the factor structure of the WCQ in a large sample of individuals diagnosed with fibromyalgia. The participants were 501 adults (478 women) who were part of a larger intervention study. Participants completed the WCQ at their 6-month assessment. Foundational factoring approaches were performed on the data (i.e., maximum likelihood factoring [MLF], iterative principal factoring [IPF], principal axis factoring (PAF), and principal components factoring [PCF]) with oblique oblimin rotation. Various criteria were evaluated to determine the number of factors to be extracted, including Kaiser’s rule, Scree plot visual analysis, 5 and 10% unique variance explained, 70 and 80% communal variance explained, and Horn’s parallel analysis (PA). It was concluded that the 4-factor PAF solution was the preferable solution, based on PA extraction and the fact that this solution minimizes nonvocality and multivocality. The present study highlights the need for more research focused on defining the limits of the WCQ and the degree to which population-specific and context-specific subscale adjustments are needed.
1. Factor Structure of the Ways of Coping Questionnaire in a Large, Clinical Sample of Fibromyalgia Patients
The Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ) has been a widely used measure of coping processes for the last three decades [1, 2]. The questionnaire was designed to identify the thoughts and actions that individuals use to cope with stress and to discern patterns of coping within specific contexts [3–5]. It has been used to assess coping in response to unique situational stressors, as well as to examine coping within different cultural, occupational, and clinical populations. Despite its use in a variety of populations, including populations with chronic health concerns [3, 6–8], there is no examination of its structure in a sample of individuals with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS).
Ways Of Coping Questionnaire Scale
1.1. The WCQ and Coping
The WCQ is based on the original 68-item Ways of Coping Checklist (WCC), which has a “yes” or “no” response format [9, 10]. The addition of a 4-point Likert response format and the revision of a few of the items to improve clarity were the primary adjustments made in creating the final 66-item version of the WCQ. The use of the WCQ within different populations and across multifarious situational stressors has made evident the complexity and dynamism of the process of coping and attempts to measure this process rigorously [2, 7, 8]. Perhaps the quintessential modern-day approach for assessing the structure of a measure at present is factor analysis [11, 12]. However, factor analyses of the WCQ within and across particular sample types have identified disparate solutions—both in structure and in content—compared to the original 8-factor solution derived by Folkman and Lazarus [10]. These findings may reveal what the genuinely unique coping strategies and structures within different populations and situations are, which may imply that the WCQ should be revised and made population-specific [8].
1.2. Original Factor Solution of WCQ
The sample used to obtain the “original” 8-factor solution for the WCQ was comprised of students undergoing examination stress [10]. They used common factor analyses with oblique rotation and found six factors in a sample of undergraduates. Stress and coping were measured at three different time points across the examination process. One of the emotion-focused factors loaded was “rationally” divided into three groups “to provide greater theoretical clarity” ([10], p. 157). After this rational division, eight factors were extracted, and this 8-factor solution was “replicated” in the community sample of 150 married adults [4, 5]. Importantly, Folkman and Lazarus noted neither which specific factor analytic strategies were used nor which factor was divided after solution.
1.3. Attempts to Replicate Original Study in Student Samples
In a derivative study that measured coping in undergraduate students who were presented vignettes of stressful encounters, only five of the eight factors were replicated [7]. It is noteworthy that although this solution yielded fewer factors than the authors’ studies [4, 5], the eigenvalue > 1 rule has been reported to consistently extract too many factors ([13–17]; for a summary, see [11]). The five factors were similar in content to the originally identified domains (see Table 1 for a synopsis of study characteristics). Scherer et al. [7] also did not divide a mathematically extracted factor into three, distinct, “rationally derived” factors. In addition, the stressors presented in the study were hypothetical as opposed to the real stressors measured in the Folkman and Lazarus [10], Folkman et al. [5], and Folkman et al. [4] studies, although these methodological differences may account for the variability in the factors extracted between these studies. Parker et al. [6] measured coping in undergraduate students two days prior to taking their midterm exam (corresponding to Folkman and Lazarus [10]) and failed to find support for the six- and eight-factor oblique and orthogonal models suggested by the student sample [10] and the community sample [4, 5]. These studies started a long history of inconsistency in the structural composition of the WCQ identified via factoring or other dimension reduction techniques (e.g., principal components analysis [PCA]).