Related Experiment Videos
The mismeasure of coping by checklist
1University of Michigan Medical Center, Department of Family Practice, Ann Arbor 48109-0708, USA.
Journal of Personality
|December 1, 1996
Summary
Standardized coping checklists provide an incomplete view of stress coping. Researchers should explore diverse methods like interviews and diaries for a more accurate assessment of coping strategies.
Area of Science:
- Psychology
- Behavioral Sciences
Background:
- Numerous studies utilize standardized checklists to evaluate self-reported coping mechanisms during stress.
- Concerns exist regarding the conceptual and methodological limitations of these conventional checklists.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically review the conceptual and methodological issues associated with using standardized checklists for assessing coping.
- To highlight the limitations of current checklist usage in capturing the complexity of stress and coping.
Main Methods:
- Critical review of existing literature on coping assessment using standardized checklists.
- Analysis of conceptual frameworks and methodological practices in stress and coping research.
Main Results:
- Conventional coping checklists offer a narrow and distorted representation of coping behaviors.
- Current checklist applications often deviate from transactional models of stress and coping.
- Statistical methods cannot fully account for person and situation variables influencing coping.
- Coping scale scores lack consistent interpretability.
Conclusions:
- Researchers should adopt a more comprehensive approach to coping assessment.
- Alternative methods such as semistructured interviews, tailored checklists, daily diaries, and trait measures are recommended.
- Integrating diverse methodologies will yield a more complete understanding of stress coping.