dc.contributor.author
Lotzin, Annett
dc.contributor.author
Ketelsen, Ronja
dc.contributor.author
Krause, Linda
dc.contributor.author
Ozga, Ann-Kathrin
dc.contributor.author
Böttche, Maria
dc.contributor.author
Schäfer, Ingo
dc.date.accessioned
2022-09-16T13:17:21Z
dc.date.available
2022-09-16T13:17:21Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/36347
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-36063
dc.description.abstract
This study assessed the validity and reliability of the Pandemic Coping Scale (PCS), a new brief measure of coping with pandemic-related stressors.
Methods
The PCS was administered to N = 2316 German participants during the COVID-19 pandemic. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was applied among random splits of the sample. Global goodness of fit (χ2, RMSEA, SRMR, CFI, TLI), local goodness of fit (factor loadings, communalities, factor reliability, discriminant validity) and additional test quality criteria (internal consistency, item discrimination and difficulty) were evaluated for a four-factor model vs. a four-factor model combined with a second-order general factor. Convergent and divergent validity were examined by Pearson correlations of the PCS subscales with the Brief-COPE subscales; criterion validity was evaluated by correlations with wellbeing (WHO-5), depressive (PHQ-9) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-2).
Results
Exploratory factor analysis suggested a four-factor solution (‘Healthy Lifestyle’, ‘Joyful Activities’, ‘Daily Structure’, ‘Prevention Adherence’). Confirmatory factor analysis showed a sufficient global fit for both specified models which did not differ in their fit to the data. Local goodness of fit indices showed moderate to large factor loadings and good factor reliabilities except for the subscale ‘Prevention Adherence’. Internal consistencies were good for the PCS total scale (α = .83), the ‘Healthy Lifestyle’ (α = .79) and the ‘Daily Structure’ (α = .86) subscales, acceptable for ‘Joyful Activities’ (α = .60), and low for ‘Prevention Adherence’ (α = .52). The four subscales evidenced convergent and divergent validity with the Brief-COPE subscales. The subscales ‘Healthy lifestyle’, ‘Joyful activities’ and ‘Daily structure’ showed criterion validity with wellbeing, depressive and anxiety symptoms.
Conclusions
The PCS is a reliable and valid measure to assess pandemic-specific coping behavior in the domains of ‘Healthy Lifestyle’, ‘Joyful Activities’, and ‘Daily Structure’. The PCS subscale ‘Prevention Adherence’ might be improved by adding items with varying item difficulties.
en
dc.format.extent
24 Seiten
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.subject
psychometrics
en
dc.subject.ddc
100 Philosophie und Psychologie::150 Psychologie::150 Psychologie
dc.title
The pandemic coping scale – validity and reliability of a brief measure of coping during a pandemic
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1080/21642850.2022.2112198
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
1
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart
762
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend
785
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
10
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.url
https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2022.2112198
refubium.affiliation
Erziehungswissenschaft und Psychologie
refubium.affiliation.other
Arbeitsbereich Klinisch-Psychologische Intervention
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
2164-2850
refubium.resourceType.provider
WoS-Alert