Development of a Shortened Form of the Coping Responses Inventory-Youth with an Australian Sample

Development of a Shortened Form of the Coping Responses Inventory-Youth with an Australian Sample Deborah J. Eyles & Glen W. Bates Swinburne University of Technology, Australia The 48-item Coping Responses Inventory-Youth (CRI-Youth; Moos, 1993) measures coping strategies used by adolescents in response to stressful life circumstances. This study tested the underlying structure of the CRI-Youth in an Australian adolescent sample to examine the crosscultural relevance of the scale. Results of the principal component analysis were also used to develop a shortened version of the CRI-Youth. The data came from 303 children aged between 11 to 16 years. Exploratory principal component analyses revealed that a four component model was the best fit for the data with components labeled as: Cognitive Avoidance and Emotional Expression; Logical Analysis and Problem Solving; Seeking Support and Guidance; Seeking Alternative Rewards. Through an iterative process, the resulting solution included 21 items that corresponded to the breakdown of approach and avoidance factors of the original scale. The total shortened CRI-Youth and four components had sound internal consistencies, which compared favorably to Moos (1993) subscales and total scale reliability coefficients. Gender differences were evident on the shortened scale, with girls showing higher overall usage of coping responses than boys, and on all components except Seeking Alternative Rewards. Adolescence has been identified as a challenging time of life, characterized by many rapid and significant physical, cognitive, social and emotional changes (Frydenberg et al., 2004; Herman-Stahl, Seiffge- Krenke, 2000; Stemmler & Petersen, 1995). The number and quality of these changes produce varying amounts of stress that can impact on the health of the adolescent and contribute to emotional and behavioral problems (Seiffge-Krenke, 2000). As the majority of youth proceed through the adolescent years without developing significant emotional problems, it is likely that adaptive coping strategies are developed which protect against negative emotional outcomes such as depression. Herman-Stahl and Petersen (1996) posited that for adolescents, poor coping skills are more closely linked to depressive symptoms than stress. Author info: Correspondence should be sent to: Associate Professor Glen Bates, Faculty of Life and Social Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, PO Box 218, Hawthorn 3122, Australia Email: gbates@swin.edu.au North American Journal of Psychology, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 2, 161-170. NAJP

162 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY Two main conceptual approaches have been used to classify coping resources (Moos, 1993). One approach emphasises the focus of coping (problem-focused or emotional-focused) and the other approach emphasizes the method of coping (cognitive or behavioural) (Compas, Maclarne & Fondacaro, 1988; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Moos, 1993; Roth & Cohen, 1986). Coping strategies directed at problem solving incorporate strategies aimed at doing something to change the stressful situation such as seeking information or advice and an appraisal of the situation (Dumont & Provost, 1999; Seiffge-Krenke, 1993). In contrast, emotion-focused coping strategies are strategies aimed at reducing psychological discomfort by avoiding or withdrawing from the noxious stimulus without trying to modify the situation (Dumont & Provost, 1999). Although various systems have been used to classify methods of coping, two distinct modes of dealing with stress are often identified: approach and avoidant strategies (Herman-Stahl et al., 1995; Moos, 1993, Phelps & Jarvis, 1994). These two orientations represent both cognitive and emotional attempts orientated either toward or away from threats (Herman-Stahl et al., 1995). Therefore, approach coping is problem-focused as it covers both cognitive and behavioral efforts made to master or resolve stress (Moos, 1993). Whereas, avoidance coping is emotion-focused, as it covers cognitive and behavioral attempts to avoid thinking about a stressor and its implications, or to try to manage the affect associated with it (Moos, 1993). The Coping Responses Inventory-Youth (CRI-Youth; Moos, 1993) has a number of strengths. It incorporates both the focus and strategies used, and utilizes multiple subscales to measure and identify the form of coping an adolescent may employ in response to stressful life circumstances. The CRI-Youth measures the focus and assigns the responses as either approach or avoidance (Moos, 1993). The first four of these subscales determine approach coping (Logical Analysis, Positive Reappraisal, Seeking Guidance and Support and Problem Solving) and the second set of four subscales measures avoidance coping (Cognitive Avoidance, Acceptance or Resignation, Seeking Alternative Rewards and Emotional Discharge). Cognitive coping strategies are measured by the first two scales in each set and behavioral coping strategies are measured by the third and fourth scales in each set. For the CRI-Youth approach coping measures, Logical Analysis refers to the cognitive attempts to understand and prepare mentally for a stressor and its consequences. Positive Reappraisal involves cognitive attempts to construe and restructure a problem in a positive way while still accepting the reality of the situation. Seeking Guidance and Support denotes behavioral attempts to seek information, guidance, or support. Problem Solving represents behavioral attempts to take action to deal

Eyles & Bates COPING RESPONSES INVENTORY 163 directly with the problem. For the CRI-Youth avoidance coping measures, Cognitive Avoidance, as the name implies, measures cognitive attempts to avoid thinking realistically about a problem. Acceptance or Resignation represents cognitive attempts to react to the problem by accepting it. Seeking Alternative Rewards denotes the behavioral attempts to get involved in substitute activities and create new sources of satisfaction and Emotional Discharge is the behavioral attempts to reduce tension by expressing negative feelings. Items making up the CRI-Youth scale were chosen according to their conceptual similarity and high item intercorrelations (Moos, 1993). Griffith, Dubow and Ippolito (2000) using an American adolescent sample, factor analyzed the CRI-Youth in order to assess the factor structure of the scale. They found a 2-factor solution best supported the approach-avoidance framework Moos (1993) had used, although no evidence was found to support the eight subscales. All items in their analysis corresponded identically to Moos conceptual breakdown of approach and avoidance subscales, with one exception. The Seeking Alternative Rewards subscale items loaded on the approach factor and not the avoidance factor as Moos theoretically proposed. Authors of the present study were interested in analyzing the underlying structure of the CRI-Youth in an Australian sample using a principal components analysis (PCA) to examine the cross-cultural relevance of the scale. A second aim was to use the results of the PCA to develop a shortened version of the CRI-Youth. A shortened form has advantages because it addresses problems associated with attrition and respondent cooperation (Moore, Halle, Vandivere & Mariner, 2002). Children have limited attention spans; the level of boredom associated with completing a lengthy measure, which is typically only one in a larger battery of measures (Thompson, Kaslow, Nolen-Hoeksma & Weiss, 1998), encourages the development of shortened measures which provide the same information but utilize fewer items. The final aim of the present study is to determine whether a shortened version of the CRI- Youth is an effective measure of coping for both boys and girls. METHOD Participants and Procedure Informed consent was obtained from parents of 303 school children from a total of 350 enrolled students at a coeducational independent school in Melbourne. The participating sample included 178 (59%) boys and 125 (41%) girls, who were administered a questionnaire measuring adolescent well being that contained the CRI-Youth. The average age of the sample was 13.3 years (SD = 0.98), ranging from 11-16 years.

164 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY Questionnaires were administered at the school during a 50 minute school assembly period. Materials Coping Responses Inventory Youth Form. The Coping Responses Inventory-Youth (CRI-Youth; Moos, 1993) is a 48-item scale which assesses coping responses to stressful life experiences in adolescents 12 to 18 years old. The measure is applicable to youth with a reading level over year four. Respondents describe a recent stressful episode and then respond to each item on a four-point Likert scale which ranged from 1 = not at all to 4 = fairly often. Each of the eight subscales includes six items. Responses are summed to produce a total CRI-Youth score. There is both moderate internal consistency for the eight subscales for both boys and girls (alpha =.55-.79) and for short term stability (over 12 to 15 months) for both genders (average rs =.29 and.34) with boys showing slightly less stability than girls (Erickson, Feldman & Steiner, 1997). The alpha reliabilities for the current study were.92 for the whole scale and ranged between.60-.75 for the eight subscales. RESULTS Data were analysed using SPSS 12.0.1 for Windows SPSS (2003). Initially alpha reliability analyses were performed on the summed scores for the entire instrument (48 items). Six items receiving a corrected itemtotal correlation below.3 were excluded from further analyses. A form of exploratory factor analysis using principal components analysis and varimax rotation was employed to determine the underlying structure of the 42 items, and to direct item analysis and reduction. Initially an eight component solution was conducted using principal components analysis and varimax rotation to establish whether the eight subscales corresponded to separate components. This analysis did not yield interpretable components and an examination of the scree plot suggested that there were 2 to 4 components in the data. Both the twocomponent and four-component solutions were interpretable. However, the two-component solution explained only 30% of variance whereas the four-component solution explained 50%. In addition, the four-component solution provided a richer description of coping styles as items corresponded identically to Moos (1993) theoretical breakdown of approach or avoidance factors and included a greater number of items from Moos (1993) eight subscales. Therefore, the four-component solution using principal component analysis and varimax rotation was chosen. Through an iterative process, items that did not load substantively (below.4) or discriminately (difference in substantive item loadings

Eyles & Bates COPING RESPONSES INVENTORY 165 across components less than.05) on the interpretable components were dropped and further analyses conducted. Eventually it was decided that components would be interpreted using a minimum factor saliency criterion of.50. This decision was determined on the principle of allowing as many of the items as possible to be identified with at least one common component while minimising the number of doublets (King & Daniel, 1996). After 5 iterations, the resulting solution included 21 items that were identified with at least one component. Four interpretable components emerged, with eigenvalues of 5.15, 2.16, 1.56 and 1.32. Together, these four components accounted for a total of 50% of the variance in item responses (component 1= 16.32%, component 2= 12.11%, component 3= 11.52% and component 4= 9.66%). The first component, which is referred to as Cognitive Avoidance and Emotional Expression, was composed of 8 items from the cognitive avoidance, acceptance or resignation and emotional discharge scales of the CRI-Youth. Example items with factor loadings are Did you put off thinking about the situation, even though you knew you would have to at some point (.59) and Did you yell or shout to let off steam (.54). The second component, labeled as the Logical Analysis and Problem Solving, was defined by 5 items from the logical analysis and problem solving scales of the CRI-Youth. Items loading on this subscale included Did you try to step back from the problem and think about it (.60) and Did you think of different ways to deal with the problem (.57). The third component, Seeking Guidance and Support, was composed of four items from the corresponding scale of the CRI-Youth. Items loading highly on the Seeking Guidance and Support component included items such as Did you ask a friend to help you solve the problem (.82). The fourth component, Seeking Alternative Rewards was also pure in the sense that all four items came from the equivalent scale of the CRI- Youth. Example items are Did you begin to spend more time in fun activities, like sports, parties, and going shopping? (.68). The complete component matrix is presented in Table 1. No items from the Positive Reappraisal scale from the CRI-Youth were identified in any of the components and so this scale is not accounted for in the shortened version of the CRI-Youth. The resulting overall scale was entitled the Shortened Coping Responses Inventory Youth (SCRI-Y). Coefficient alphas and means and standard deviations for boys and girls on the four components are presented in Table 2. Coefficient alphas for the shortened subscales were all satisfactory (0.79, 0.72, 0.75, 0.67 and 0.85 for Factors 1-4 and total scale, respectively). These coefficients compare favorably with the alpha coefficients for the full scale scores of the current study and those reported by Moos (1993). For example, the present study with all CRI-Youth items included and Moos (1993),

166 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY reported alpha reliability coefficients for the Seeking Guidance and Support scale of.71 and from.69 -.72 (girls and boys) respectively, whereas the shortened version in the present study reported a reliability coefficient of.75 for this scale. TABLE 1 Varimax Rotation of Four Component Solution for CRI- Youth Items Item Component1 Component 2 Component 3 Component 4 Coping46.772 Coping8.701 Coping21.667 Coping29.592 Coping24.541 Coping38.534 Coping37.523 Coping32.515 Coping20.665 Coping25.653 Coping12.642 Coping9.602 Coping1.572 Coping35.824 Coping11.725 Coping27.698 Coping43.542 Coping47.754 Coping31.683 Coping15.653 Coping7.589 % variance explained 16.31% 12.11% 11.52% 9.66% Note: Only loadings above.5 are displayed A one-way between-groups MANOVA was conducted for gender to examine possible differences on the four components. The homogeneity of variance assumptions were supported (Box s M = 18.19, p>.05). There was a statistically significant difference between boys and girls on the shortened scale (F (1,266) = 7.22, p<.001, η 2 =.083), with girls (M=49.11, SD=10.54) having higher levels of coping than boys (M=42.49, SD=11.35). Univariate tests revealed that girls scored higher than boys on the Cognitive Avoidance and Emotional Expression scale (F(1,266) = 26.52, p<.01, η 2 =.09), Logical Analysis and Problem Solving

Eyles & Bates COPING RESPONSES INVENTORY 167 scale (F(1,266)= 6.58, p<.05, η 2 =.02) and the Seeking Guidance and Support scale (F(1,266)= 10.11, p<.01, η 2 =.04). There was no gender difference for the Seeking Alternative Rewards scale (F (1,266) = 3.35, p >.05). TABLE 2 Internal Consistency Coefficients and Means and Standard Deviations for the Four-Components of the CRI-Youth. Factor n Cronbach s Number of M SD Items girls boys girls boys CAEE 257.791 8 19.25 15.77 5.44 5.54 LAPS 268.718 5 12.49 11.32 3.58 3.76 SGS 265.751 4 7.90 6.67 3.37 2.95 SAR 258.666 4 9.47 8.72 3.18 3.42 SCRI-Y 236.845 21 49.11 42.49 10.54 11.35 Note: N= 303. CAEE= Cognitive Avoidance and Emotional Expression subscale; LAPS= Logical Analysis and Problem Solving subscale; SGS= Seeking Support and Guidance subscale; SAR= Seeking Alternative Rewards subscale; SCRI-Y= Shortened Coping Responses Inventory-Youth. To assess the internal consistency, shortened component/subscale inter-correlations and correlations with the shortened total scale, coefficient alphas and item total correlations were calculated. Small to moderate inter-correlations were found between subscales, ranging from 0.25 to 0.41, and strong correlations were found between the shortened subscale scores and the shortened total scale, ranging from 0.61 to 0.80 (see Table 3). This suggests that the subscales are measuring different, but related constructs. Item total correlations for items and their particular subscale and with the shortened total scale were all in the 0.3 0.7 range. All items showed item total correlations, with both subscale and total scale, greater than.3, with the exception of one item. This item was kept in the shortened scale as it only scored an item total correlation below.3 on the subscale reliability analysis, not when it was included as a part of the total shortened scale. Altogether, these results suggest that the shortened version of the CRI-Youth has good internal consistency. Refer to Table 2 for alpha reliabilities for shortened total scale and subscales.

168 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY DISCUSSION The primary aims of this study were to investigate the underlying structure of the full scale CRI-Youth using PCA and develop a shortened version for use with an Australian sample on the basis of this analysis. The component structure of the shortened version of the CRI-Youth found in the current study is similar to the conceptual framework used by Moos (1993) in the original CRI-Youth, but has reduced the number of items from the original 48 to 21. The shortened version developed in the present study produced four distinct components, two measuring an avoidant coping style and two measuring an approach coping style. It TABLE 3 Pearson Correlations Between the Shortened CRI-Youth Scale and the Shortened CRI-Youth Subscales. Measures 1 2 3 4 (1) CAEE (2) LAPS.36 (3) SGS.36.41 (4) SAR.25.35.30 (5) SCRI-Y.80.72.68.61 Note: N = 303. CAEE= Cognitive Avoidance and Emotional Expression subscale; LAPS= Logical Analysis and Problem Solving subscale; SGS= Seeking Support and Guidance subscale; SAR= Seeking Alternative Rewards subscale; SCRI-Y= Shortened Coping Responses Inventory-Youth. All p s<.001. included items from all 8 scales of the CRI-Youth except for the Positive Reappraisal scale. It may be that adolescents in this age group tend not to construe and restructure a problem in a positive way while still accepting the reality of the situation. Instead, these adolescents are more likely to act in a way to minimize the discomfort caused by the problem and thereby rely on the other coping strategies more often. This suggests that interventions to improve the repertoire of coping skills for children in this age group may be more effective if emphasis is placed on these preferred coping methods. This possibility warrants further research. The results from the shortened (21 items) form of the CRI-Youth are encouraging. The alpha coefficients for the shortened version having alphas ranging from.79 -.67, which compares favorably with the results

Eyles & Bates COPING RESPONSES INVENTORY 169 from the original (48 items) which ranged from.75 -.60. However, further work needs to be undertaken to ensure that scores obtained using the shortened version do not compromise other aspects of measurement integrity such as concurrent or predictive validity. Initially there is a need for the component structure that emerged to be confirmed on a comparable sample of adolescents. It would also be important to establish construct validity by comparing the shortened scale to other measures of approach and avoidant coping and to also examine its testretest reliability. The possibility of gender differences was examined using the shortened version. Interestingly, boys and girls were found to differ in both the amount of coping and the focus and strategies used. Girls used more coping overall and engaged in a greater use of the two approach coping subscales and one of the avoidance subscales than boys. This concurs with past research which has found that girls are more likely to use approach coping while boys are more likely to rely on avoidant coping styles (Phelps & Jarvis, 1994; Seiffge-Krenke, 2000). The shortened version developed in the present study provides a more efficient and acceptable instrument to assess coping styles. This has an advantage in research that requires multiple assessment measures by ensuring the number of test items remain as short as possible (Moore, Halle, Vandivere & Mariner, 2002). Considerations of survey length are especially important in research on adolescent samples, where attention and interest can be easily lost when responding to long surveys. The shortened version also provides important information on the manner of coping utilized by both girls and boys in an Australian adolescent sample, with future research needing to further examine the ways coping differs between the genders in adolescents. REFERENCES Compas, B.E., Maclarne, V.L., & Fondacaro, K.M. (1988). Coping with stressful events in older children and young adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 405-411. Dumont, M., & Provost, M.A. (1999). Resilience in adolescents: protective role of social support, coping strategies, self-esteem, and social activities on the experience of stress and depression. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28, 343-363. Erickson, S., Feldman, A.S., & Steiner, H. (1997). Defense reactions and coping strategies in normal adolescents. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 28, 45-57. Frydenberg, E., Lewis, R., Bugalski, K., Cotta, A., McCarthy, C., Luscombe- Smith, N., & Poole, C. (2004). Prevention is better than cure: coping skills training for adolescents at school. Educational Psychology in Practice, 20, 117-134.

170 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY Griffith, M.A., Dubow, E.F., & Ippolito, M.F. (2000). Developmental and crosssituational differences in adolescents coping strategies. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 183-204. Herman-Stahl, M.A., Stemmler, M., & Petersen, A.C. (1995). Approach and avoidant coping: implications for adolescent mental health. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 649-665. Herman-Stahl, M.A., & Petersen, A.C. (1996). The protective role of coping and social resources for depressive symptoms among young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25, 733-753. King, D.A., & Daniel, L.G. (1996). Psychometric integrity of the Self-Esteem Index: A comparison of normative and field study results. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 537-550. Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal and Coping. New York: Springer. Moore, K.A., Halle, T.G., Vandivere, S., & Mariner, C.L. (2002). Scaling Back Survey Scales. How Short is Too Short? Sociological Methods & Research, 30(4),530-567. Moos, R.H. (1993). CRI-Youth Form Professional Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. Phelps, S.B., & Jarvis, P.A. (1994). Coping in adolescence: empirical evidence for a theoretically based approach to assessing coping. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23, 359-372. Roth, S., & Cohen, L.J. (1986). Approach, avoidance, and coping with stress. American Psychologist, 41, 813-819. Seiffge-Krenke, I. (1993). Coping behavior in normal and clinical samples: more similarities than differences. Journal of Adolescence, 16, 285-303. Seiffge-Krenke, I. (2000). Casual links between stressful events, coping style, and adolescent symptomatology. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 675-691. Thompson, M., Kaslow, N.J., Nolen-Hoeksma, S., & Weiss, B. (1998). Children s Attributional Style Questionnaire Revised: psychometric Examination. Psychological Assessment, 10, 166-170.