| MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES | |
| Limitations | |
| Observations | |
| 1. RELIABILITY | |
| A. Internal Consistency | Tested |
| Cronbach's (Describe) |
Internal consistency (Cronbach’s a) of CSQ was estimated between 0.45 and 0.84. For the CSQ-R 0.914 to 0.961. |
| B. Reliability intraobserver or test-retest | Tested |
| Continuous scores: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) Dichotomus: Cohen kappa (Describe) |
Intraclass correlation coefficients were good/excellent (CSQ 0.850 to 0.918) |
| C. Reliability interobserver or Measurement error | Not Tested |
| Standard error of measurement (SEM), smallest detectable change (SDC) or Limits of agreement (LoA) (Describe) |
|
| 2. VALIDITY | |
| A. Content validity: face validity | Tested |
| Expert opinion (relevance and comprehensiveness) (Describe) |
The percentage of affirmative answers was >90% and, thus, the content of the items was considered to be adequate, appropriate for the target population, comprehensive and relevant for investigating coping strategies in this population. |
| B. Construct Validity: Structural validity |
Tested |
| Hypotheses-testing | Tested |
| Cross-cultural validity | Tested |
| Brief Description |
Studies using factor analysis to investigate the underlying dimensions of the 8 CSQ subscales and 2 effectiveness items have frequently reported a three factor solution consisting of 1) cognitive coping and suppression, 2) behavioural activity, and 3) pain control/rational thinking. Riley and Robinson (1997) compared the five and six factor solutions for the CSQ using linear structural equation modelling; they recommended a revision of the coping strategy questionnaire (CSQ-R) retaining 27 items from the original CSQ. |
| C. Criterion validity | Not Tested |
| Comparison with a 'gold standard' Continuous scores: correlations, ROC curves Dichotomus: Sensitivity & Specificity (Describe) |
|