See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318743673

Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing

Psychometrics Properties

Article in International Journal of Indian Psychology · June 2017

DOI: 10.25215/0403.077

CITATIONS READS
17 20,514

2 authors:

Gaukaran Janghel Priyamvada Srivastava

Lakhiram Agrawal Memorial Govt. Medical College, Raigarh, India Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University
28 PUBLICATIONS 34 CITATIONS 64 PUBLICATIONS 147 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Gaukaran Janghel on 28 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The International Journal of Indian Psychology
ISSN 2348-5396 (e) | ISSN: 2349-3429 (p)
Volume 4, Issue 3, No. 100, DIP 18.01.077/20170403
ISBN: 978-1-387-00243-6
http://www.ijip.in | April-June, 2017

Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation):

Establishing Psychometrics Properties

Dr. Gaukaran Janghel 1*, Dr. Priyamvada Shrivastav 2

ABSTRACT
The stress coping behavior scale (SCBS) was designed to measure the stress coping behavior of
the Indian adult population. The brief cope scale was originally developed by Carver (1997).
This measured stress coping styles and used as a base for the development of SCBS in Indian
context. The main objective of the present study was to determine the psychometric properties of
SCBS. The SCBS has 28 items assessing stress coping behaviors among adults. The analysis
included basic items and scale description as well as concurrent validity data revealed 28 items
SCBS. The statistical analysis of content through internal consistency of alpha (α) and construct
validity as well as exploratory factor analysis, reliability provided evidence of significant,
convergent and discriminate validity is significant evidence of the scale. The result of
exploratory factor analysis revealed two important factors namely- Adaptive Coping and
Maladaptive coping behavior, which are 15 items in adaptive coping behavior and 08 items in
maladaptive coping behavior. The psychometric properties reveal that the scale is reliable and
valid in the Indian population.

Keywords: Coping Behavior, Assessment Scale, Establishing Psychometrics Properties

The Interest on the process by which people cope with stress has grown dramatically (Moos,
1986). Lazarus (1984) noted that stress consists of the three processes, primary appraisal is the
process of perceiving a threat to oneself, secondary appraisal is the process of bringing to mind a
potential response to the threat, coping is the process of executing the response. The coping
strategies refers to the specific efforts, both behavioral and psychological that people employ to
master, tolerate, reduce or minimize stressful events (John & MacArther, 2008). People use
certain strategies i.e. problem solving strategies and emotion focused strategies (Folkman &
Lazarus, 1980) to cope with stress. Adaptive and maladaptive ways of coping interact to predict

1
Ph. D Psychology, Clinical Psychologist, Lt. Lakhiram Agrawal Memorial Govt. Medical College Raigarh, C G,
India
2
Professor and HOD, School of Studies in Psychology, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur, C.G., India
*Responding Author
Received: March 22, 2017; Revision Received: May 17, 2017; Accepted: May 30, 2017
© 2017 Janghel G, Shrivastav P; licensee IJIP. This is an Open Access Research distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License (www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any Medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
 Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties

negative outcomes associated with stress, such as depression (e.g., Brown & Harris, 1989;
Monroe, Slavich, & Georgiades, 2009). Investigators differ in how they categorize various forms
of coping (e.g., emotion-focused vs. problem focused coping; approach vs. avoidance; see
Skinner, Edge, Altman, & Sherwood, 2003).

Hundreds of coping strategies have been identified (Carver & Jennifer, 2010). Weiten, & Lloyd,
(2008) identifies three broad types of coping strategies in the psychology textbook,
1. appraisal-focused: Directed towards challenging one's own assumptions, adaptive
cognitive
2. problem-focused: Directed towards reducing or eliminating a stressor, adaptive behavioral
3. emotion-focused: Directed towards changing one's own emotional reaction

Brennon & Fiest (2009) reported two basic types of the coping techniques, first is Positive
techniques (adaptive or constructive coping). Positive coping strategy, anticipating a problem,
is known as proactive coping. Second is Negative techniques (maladaptive coping or non-
coping).While adaptive coping methods improve functioning, a maladaptive coping technique
will just reduce symptoms while maintaining and strengthening the disorder. Maladaptive
techniques are more effective in the short term rather than long term coping process. The brief
cope scale was developed by Carver, 1997; it was designed to assess broad range of coping
responses among adults for all diseases (Carver, 1997; Carver, Scheier & Weintruab, 1989). It
contains 28 items and is rated by two point linkert scale. Response category is “YES” and “NO”,
for ‘YES’ response score ‘2’ and for ‘NO’ response scores ‘1’ is assigned. The scores represent
coping strategies used by respondents.

Active coping is the process of taking active steps to attempt to get rid of the stressors or to
reorganize it (Carver, Scheier & Weintruab 1989). Planning is thinking about how to handle a
stressor. It engages with the action strategies, thinking about what steps to get hold at and how
best to cope with the problem. Seeking instrumental support is looking for advice, help or
information. Seeking emotional support is attainment of moral support, compassion or sympathy.
Behavioural disengagement is an action related to ones attempt to arrange with the stressor even
giving up the endeavour to accomplish goals with which the stressor is intrusive (Carver, scheier
& Weintruab, 1989). Behavioral and mental disengagement apparently meaning in coping as
they do in other province, such as test anxiety, social anxiety and the self-regulation of behavior
more commonly (Carver & Scheier, 1983; Carver & Scheier, 1986; Scheier & Carver, 1983).

Denial is a response that occasionally appears in principal appraisal, practical, diminishing

distress and in that way easing coping (Breznitz, 1983; Cohen & Lazarus, 1973; Wilson, 1984).
Acceptance is a functional coping reaction in that an individual who accepts the reality of a
stressful situation would employ an effort to arrange with the situation. Religion serves as a
source of emotional support (Carver, Scheier & Weintruab, 1983). The present paper examines

© The International Journal of Indian Psychology, ISSN 2348-5396 (e)| ISSN: 2349-3429 (p) | 152
 Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties

the psychometric properties of Hindi version of stress coping behavior scale (SCBS). The Brief
Cope Scale was originally developed by Carver (1997). It has 28 items with 14 dimensions
(namely self-distraction, active coping, denial, substance use, use of emotional support, use of
instrumental support, behavioral disengagement, venting, positive reframing, planning, humor,
acceptance, religion, and self-blame.,) every dimension includes two items. Carver(1989) noted
that the broad form of coping is adaptive and maladaptive coping, the adaptive coping
dimensions includes positive ways of coping from stress, they are, active coping, use of
emotional support, positive reframing, use of instrumental support, planning, humor, acceptance
and religion, the maladaptive coping includes negatives ways of coping from stress is self-
distraction, denial, venting, substance use, behavioral disengagement and self-blaming
(Bernardes, 2009; Donnally, 2002; Wong, 2002) .

METHOD AND MATERIAL

Sample
The stress coping behavior scale in Indian context (SCBS, Janghel, 2012) was administered in
200 diabetic and non-diabetic persons: 100 diabetic and 100 non-diabetics. Significant
differences were found between the diabetic and non-diabetics groups. Specifically the non-
diabetic persons had a slightly higher mean score than the diabetic persons on the overall scale. It
was suggested that the differences in mean score were due to the stress coping level was differ in
the diabetic and non-diabetic persons. Non-diabetic participants are likely to experience low
level of stress and have better stress coping strategies. The discriminant analysis was conducted
to t-test for requirement; all the items were significantly discriminated.

Reliability
Several methods exist for estimating the reliability including test-retest, equivalent forms, split-
half, and coefficient of alpha. Chose to examine reliability through split-half, using Cronbach’s
alpha as a measure of reliability. Coefficient alpha is “the expected correlation of one test with
another test of the some length then the two test purport to measure the something (Nunnally,
1978). The reliability of SCBS scale Cronbach’s Alpha is 0.82. The reliability of Stress Coping
Behavior sub-scales internal consistency of Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient is 0.62 in Adaptive
Coping and 0.69 in Maladaptive Coping. The Guttman’s split half coefficient is 0.71, and test
retest of equivalent forms is 0.76. The reliability of scale is provided evidenced that the Stress
Coping Behavior Scale is reliable.

Structure of Scale- Exploratory Factor Analysis

To conduct the exploratory stage of factor analysis, extraction methods in Principal Analysis
Factoring technique (PAF) was used. The method was chosen from the available methods
because it is good method for assessing the underlying dimension of a scale. Varimax rotation
was used for factoring methods (Kim, 1975). Eight factors were identified from the initial factor
run that exhibited eigenvalues greater than one. Because eight factors were not consistent with

© The International Journal of Indian Psychology, ISSN 2348-5396 (e)| ISSN: 2349-3429 (p) | 153
 Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties

the purpose and theory, forced on additional run to two factor loadings are interpreted. Varimax
rotation was done to clarify the loading on these factors. There were 23 items which had
significant loadings on any of the two factors. A second round principal component factor
analysis was again done taking only 23 items. Again Varimax Rotation was done. Obtained
loading of items on the two factors are presented in the table.

Table 1: shows the Rotated factor matrix in SCBS Hindi

Items Adaptive Maladaptive
1 म� समस्या से ध्यान हटाने के िलए अन्य काय� या गितिविधय� म� शािमल हो जाता .727
2 म� समस्या से सम्बंिधत प�रवतर्न म� केिन्�त होने का �यास करता �ँ .685
3ss म� अपने आप से कहता �ँ �क यह वास्तिवकता नह� ह� .633
4 म� शराब या अन्य मादक पदाथ� का सहारा लेता �, अपने आप को बेहतर महसूस करने के िलए .358
5 म� दुसरो से भावनात्मक समथर्न �ा� करता � .525
6 म� समस्या समाधान के िलए कोई �यास नह� करता �ँ

7 म� प�रिस्थित को बेहतर बनाने के िलए आवश्यक कायर्वाही करने के िलए �े�रत होता �ँ .558

8 समस्या ह, म� ऐसा िव�ास नह� करता �ँ

9 अि�य भावनाए िन�मत न हो इसके िलए म� अपने आप म� धनात्मक िवचार रखता �ँ .648
10 म� समस्या समाधान के िलए दुसरो से सहायता/ सलाह लेता �ँ

11 म� समस्या से उबरने के िलए नशे का सहारा लेता �ँ

12 म� समस्या को एक धनात्म प�र�े�य म� देखता �ँ .648

13 म� अपने समस्या समाधान का आलोचना करता �ँ

14 समस्या के समाधान के सन्दभर् म� कुछ योजना बनाकर उस पर कायर्वाही करता .581
15 समस्या के समाधान के संदभर् म� मुझे दुसरे से समझ तथा आराम िमलता ह .726
16 म� समस्या समाधान के िलए स्वयं को असहाय पता � .496
17 म� समस्यात्मक प�रिस्थित म� भी धनात्मक तत्व� के ऊपर ध्यान केिन्�त क .493
18 म� समस्या को एक मजाक के �प म� लेता �ँ .305
19 समस्या के बारे म� कम सोचता �, और दुसरे काय� म� लग जाता �ँ, जैसे टीवी देखना, पढना आ�द .536
20 म� समस्या को स्वीकार कर लेता � .620
21म� अपने ऋणात्मक भावनाओ को �कट करता �ँ .392
22म� धमर् औरआध्याित्मकता से आराम पाता .493
23 क्या क� इस संदभर् म� दुसरो से सलाह मांगता � .604
24 म� समस्या के साथ जीना िसख िलया �ँ .434
25 म� समस्या समाधान के संदभर् म� क्या कदम उठाया ज,इस बारे म� िनरंतर सोचता �ँ .337
26 म� समस्या के िलए अपने आप को दोषी मानता �ँ .410
27 म� �ाथर्ना या ध्यान करता � .552
28 म� प�रिस्थित का मजाक उड़ाता �ँ .320

*values less than .30 are omitted (DiStefano, Zhu & Mindrila, 2009).

Considering all the items and nature of their loading on the two factors it was logical to include
16 items in factor one i.e., Adaptive Coping, 12 items in the factor two i.e., Maladaptive Coping.

© The International Journal of Indian Psychology, ISSN 2348-5396 (e)| ISSN: 2349-3429 (p) | 154
 Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties

Validity of the scale

Specially addressed construct validity, discriminant validity, convergent validity and concurrent
validity. Construct validity concerns a hypothesized relationship between measure of a construct
and a particular observable variable (Nunnaly, 1978). Peter (1981) stated that “if a construct
were hypothesized to have two dimensions a factor analysis a purported measure of the construct
which produces two meaningful factors could be interpreted as supportive evidence of construct
validity.” Our factor results support the conceptualization of SCBS as a two dimension construct.
Construct validity is established for this conceptualization (Webster, 1975; Kinner, et al, 1974)
of the latent variables. Factor analysis is determining in the construct validity of the scale (Sing,
1992).

Discriminant validity reflects the extent to which the measure is unique and not a reflection of
other variables and is determined by low correlation between the measure of interest and other
measure that are not measuring the same variables or concept (Campbell & Fiske, 1959).
Discriminant validity was assessed through t-ratio, the subject were classified two groups on the
basis of their response on total items on the scale. For obtaining the discrimination power, the
difference between each group on every items of the scale was analyzed. The t-ratio was
calculated between two groups lower extreme and upper extreme group for each items on the
scale. The result indicates that all obtained t-ratio were highly significant, which significant that
all items of the scale have high discrimination power. As is evidence support for the discriminant
validity.

Convergent Validity
Convergent validity measure the degree to which attempt to measure the same concept using two
are more different measures yield the same results and is determined by high correlation between
the measure (Campbell & Fiske, 1959). Convergent validity was assessed through correlation
between with two scales Stress Coping Behavior Scale Hindi Adaptation in Indian content and
Brief Cope Scale original in English version. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) is 0.78. It is
evidenced support for convergent validity.

Concurrent validity – Inter-correlation is identified in the concurrent validity of the scale (Sing,
1992).
Table 2: shows correlation in SCBS Dimension adaptive coping and maladaptive coping

Correlation Adaptive Coping Maladaptive Coping

Adaptive coping 1.00 -.41

Maladaptive coping 1.00

© The International Journal of Indian Psychology, ISSN 2348-5396 (e)| ISSN: 2349-3429 (p) | 155
 Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties

The stress coping behavior sub-scale namely Adaptive coping and Maladaptive coping were
computed in correlation with the Pearson correlation coefficient method, the correlation between
the adaptive and maladaptive coping sub-scale, the sub-scale is negatively correlated and
correlation is significant (r= - 0.41, p<.01). It means that the sub scales of the stress coping
behavior scale Hindi version, adaptive coping and maladaptive coping are negatively significant
dimensions of the scale.

DISCUSSION
The result of factor analysis supported our attempt to adapt scale that would assess relatively
distinct and clearly focused aspects of coping, there were two factors identified as sub-
scales(Maladaptive and Adaptive coping) with high factor loading ( Adaptive coping sub-scale
Eigenvalue 9.870 and maladaptive coping sub-scale Eigenvalue 4.948). In fact two connectively
distinct items sets loaded were identified as subscales items with positive way of coping- active
coping, use of emotional support, positive reframing, use of instrumental support, planning,
humour, acceptance and religion, items with maladaptive way of coping included -self-
distraction, denial, venting, substance use, behavioral disengagement and self-blaming. The
reliability index of the overall scale and sub-scale also reveal good internal consistencies. The
discriminant validity also reveals significant discrimination among the items. Brief cope scale is
adapted in different parts of the world, Yusuf, Low and Yip, (2009) validated brief cope scale in
Malaysian women suffering from breast cancer. Brief cope scale showed fairly good reliability
and validity. Jacobson (2005) demonstrate that the brief cope scale reliability for each subscale
ranged is very high, the range of reliability of brief cope is (0.75 to 0.82), Carver (1997) was
reported and established the reliability and validity of the brief cope scale in original scale,
Cronbach’s Alpha is (0.57 to 0.90). An attempt has been made to adapt the brief cope scale in
Indian context in Hindi language for research purpose, the, scale has been adapted and
translated in Hindi for research work.

CONCLUSION
The psychometric properties of the scale confirms that the stress coping behavior scale in Hindi
version is reliable and valid instrument which could be used for the Indian adult population for
the age group of 30-60 years.

Acknowledgments
Authors are acknowledging in the present study an all participants their very important
involvement in present study.

Conflict of Interests: The author declared no conflict of interests.

© The International Journal of Indian Psychology, ISSN 2348-5396 (e)| ISSN: 2349-3429 (p) | 156
 Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties

REFERENCES
Bernardes, C. M. D. S., Ray, S. & Harkins, D. (2009). An exploratory study of resilience and
coping strategies: Among portugue-speaking immigrant’s women survivors of domestic
violence. American Journal of Psychological Research,(5), 81-96.
Brannon, L., & Feist, J. (2009). "Personal Coping Strategies". Health Psychology: An
Introduction to Behavior and Health: An Introduction to Behavior and Health (7th ed.).
Wadsworth Cengage Learning. pp. 121–3. ISBN 978-0-495-60132-6.
Breznitz, S.(ed.) (1983). The denial of stress. New York: International Universities Press.
Brown, G. Q., & Harris, T. O. (1989). Life events and illness. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. (1959). “Convergent and Discriminant validation by the
multitrait-multimethod matrix.” Psychological Bulletin, 56, 100-122.
Carver, C. S. & Scheier, M. F. (1983). A control theory model of normal behavior and
implication for problem in self management. En Kendall P.C., (ed.) advanced in
cognitive-behavioral research and therapy. New York: Academic press, 127-194.
Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long. Consider the
brief cope. International journal of Behavioral medicine,4 (1): 92-100.
Carver, C. S., & Jennifer, C. S. (2010). "Personality and Coping". Annual Review of Psychology
61: 679–704. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100352. PMID 19572784.
Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F. & Weintruab, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A
theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2): 267-
283.
Carver, C.S. & Scheier, M. F.(1986). Analyzing shyness: A specific application of broader self-
regulatory principal. In Jones W.H.; Cheek, J.M & Briggs, S.R.(eds.). Shyness:
perspective on research and treatment. New York: Plenum Press, 173-86.
Cohen, F. & Lazarus, R.S. (1973). Active coping process, coping disposition and recovery from
surgery. Psychosomatic medicine, 35: 375-89.
Distano, C., Zhu, M. & Mindrila, D. (2009). Understanding and using factor scores:
Considerations for the applied researcher. Journal of Practical Assessment, Research and
Evaluation, Vol.14, No. 20.
Donnally, T. T. (2002). Contextual analysis of coping: Implication for immigrants mental health
care. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 23(7), 715-732.
Folkman, S. & Lazarus, R. S.(1980). An analysis of coping in a middle aged community sample.
Journal of Health and Social Behaviour,2: 219-39.
John , D. & MacArther, C. T. (1998). Research network on socio-economic status and health.
Online available at:
http://www.macses.ucsf.edu/research/psychosocial/notebook/coping.html.
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). "The Application of electronic computers to factor analysis". Educational
and Psychological Measurement 20, 141–151. doi:10.1177/001316446002000116.
Kim, J. (1975). “Factor analysis” SPSS statistical package for social sciences, second edition.
New York: McGraw Hill, chapter, 24.
Monroe, S. M., Slavich, G. M., & Georgiades, K. (2009). The social environment and life stress
in depression. In I. H. Gotlib, & C. L. Hammen (Eds.), Handbook of depression (2nd
ed.). New York: Guilford Press, 340–360.
Moos, R. H.(Ed.) (1986). Coping with life crises: An integrated approach. New York: Plenum
Press.

© The International Journal of Indian Psychology, ISSN 2348-5396 (e)| ISSN: 2349-3429 (p) | 157
 Coping Behavior Assessment Scale (Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties

Multidimensional assessment of coping: validation of the Brief cope among French Population
(PMID: 15029085).
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
Peter, P. J. (1981). Construct Validity: A review of basic issues and marketing practices. Journal
of Marketing Research, 18, 133-145.
Scheier, M.F. & Carver, C. S. (1988). A model of behavioral self-regulation: translating intention
into action. In Berkowitz, L.(ed.). advance in experimental social psychology, New York:
Academic Press, 303-46.
Sing, A. K. (2010). Research methods in Psychology, sociology and education. Motilal
Banarsidas (ed.), Chennai.271-313.
Skinner, E. A., Edge, K., Altman, J., & Sherwood, H. (2003). Searching for the structure of
coping: a review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping.
Psychological Bulletin, 129, 216–269, doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.216.
Weiten, W. & Lloyd, M.A. (2008). Psychology Applied to Modern Life (9th ed.). Wadsworth
Cengage Learning.ISBN 0-495-55339-5.
Wilson, J. F. (1981). Behavioral preparation for surgery: Benefit or harm? Journal of behavioral
medicine, 4: 79-102.
Wong, D. F. K.(2002). Stage-specific and culture specific coping strategies used by Mainland
Chinese immigrants during resettlement in Hong-Kong: A qualitative analysis. Social
Work Health and Mental Health, 35(1/2), 479-499.
Yusuf, N., Low, W. Y. & Yip, C. H. (2009). Reliability and validity of the Brief cope scale
(English Version) among women with breast cancer undergoing treatment of adjuvant
chemotherapy: A Malaysian study.

How to cite this article: Janghel G, Shrivastav P (2017), Coping Behavior Assessment Scale
(Indian Adaptation): Establishing Psychometrics Properties, International Journal of Indian
Psychology, Volume 4, (3), DIP: 18.01.077/20170403

© The International Journal of Indian Psychology, ISSN 2348-5396 (e)| ISSN: 2349-3429 (p) | 158

View publication stats