A critique of coping scales

Abstract

This paper describes the issues that must be considered by researchers who wish to measure coping. The assessment of coping is discussed in terms of two major debates, namely whether coping should be conceptualised as a trait-like personality characteristic or as a statelike response to a specific stressor, and the use of general scales as opposed to situation-specific scales. The dimensionality of coping is described with the acknowledgment of the difficulties in creating discrete typologies and the disagreement over the optimal number of categories. These difficulties are partly a consequence of the conceptual overlap between coping, appraisal, and stressor outcomes, and are exacerbated by the inappropriate use of some factor analytic techniques in the development of the scales. Methodological concerns are highlighted, particularly the problems of content confounding, tapping the whole domain, behavioural and cognitive content of items, choice of response format, ceiling effects, and specification of the coping period. Recommendations for future research are made in consideration of the costs and benefits of coping, inclusion of salutogenic strategies, and the use of alternative methodologies in stress research.