1. Introduction

oping with stress is one of the most important areas of research in health psychology. Carver, Skier, and Winthrop have distinguished a wide range of coping strategies and raised the need to design a comprehensive and transparent tool in the form of a theoretical framework [18]. They first developed the long form of the Countermeasures Preference Questionnaire [18, 19]. 

However, Carver presented 28 questions and 14 factors due to the shortened form’s length [13, 20]. The 14-factor structure has not been confirmed in a significant number of researches and cultural contexts, and using exploratory factor analysis, other models of this tool including 11-factor model [27], 9-factor [quoted], 7-factor [24], 8 factors [25], and 4 factors [17] are presented in the research background. This questionnaire has not yet been localized in Iran; therefore, this study aimed to present a version with psychometrically powerful features in the Iranian student population for the first time by examining the factor structure and psychometric properties of the abbreviated version of the preference of coping practices.

2. Materials and Methods

This research was a cross-sectional and testing type methodological study. The statistical population was all students of Birjand University in 2018-2019. The sampling method was available. The condition for entering the study was to experience stress for at least the last 6 months. After earning an average or high score on perceived stress, 629 students completed the 28-item form. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 15 and LISREL software version 8.8. Since the 14-factor structure was not run, exploratory factor analysis was performed to determine the questionnaire’s functional design. The tools included historical information, two long forms, and a shortened form of the Brief-COPE Questionnaire.

 Confirmatory factor analysis was used to confirm the factors. AGFI, RMSEA, PNFI, GFI, IFI, CFI indexes were evaluated. Reliability was performed by internal consistency coefficients and retesting by 129 people two weeks apart. Assessing the convergent validity, the correlation coefficients between the six factors of the abbreviated form questionnaire and the five factors of the Iranian version of the long form of confrontational preference were calculated by 47 students who answered two questionnaires simultaneously.

3. Results

Formal validity was confirmed based on the Wilde method and the principles of reverse translation and content validity by calculating the two indexes of content validity ratio and content validity index [31]. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the construct validity. Due to the non-implementation of the model, exploratory factor analysis was used to determine this questionnaire’s factor structure. As shown in Table 1, the Kaiser-Meier-Alkin sampling index (KMO) was equal to 0.745, and the Bartlett sphericity test with a rate of 3584.130 and a degree of freedom of 378 was significant at the level of 0.0001.


 

As shown in Table 2, the exploratory factor analysis results after varimax rotation showed that the first 8 factors explained 55.139% of the total variance with a specific value higher than one.




As shown in Table 3, GFI, IFI, CFI, AGFI indexes had values less than 0.90, which indicates the unacceptability of the indexes and the incompatibility of the 8-factor model with the data (Table 3).



To modify the model, factor load values and t-statistic were investigated. In the first-order factor structure, the t-values in the four markers of factor 7 were less than 1.96, which was omitted. In the second-order factor structure, the value of the t-statistic related to latent variable 4 with a total factor of 0.01 was less than 1.96, so factor 4 did not have enough power to explain the general factor was omitted. Finally, RMSEA, PNFI, GFI, IFI, CFI, AGFI goodness-of-fit indicators confirmed the fit of the 6-factor structure with the data. The instrument’s reliability was also confirmed by internal consistency (α=0.73) and retest (r=0.59). 

All retest correlation coefficients were significant for the factors 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8, which were: 0.68, 0.60, 0.60, 0.70, 0.60 and 0.56, respectively, at the level of 0.000. Cronbach’s alpha for the whole instrument was 0.73, which indicates the acceptable internal consistency of the test questions.

4. Discussion and Conclusion

In the present study, items related to planning factors, active coping, positive reformatting, and acceptance (in the main form of 14 factors) were loaded on factor 1. This factor was consistent with the positive coping factor in Mizaki’s 7-factor structure [24] and was called problem-focused coping. The items related to the search for instrumental support and receiving emotional support were loaded on factor 2, following the support-oriented confrontation of the latent 4-factor structure [27], which was called support-focused coping. Factors 3, 5, and 6, both of which relate to self-distraction, religion, and denial, respectively, were loaded according to the original 14-factor form [20] and therefore retained under the same names. Finally, factor 8, which is the item related to the two factors of emotional discharge and self-blame, was following the axis of escape factor in the structure of 4 latent factors [27] and was named negative emotion-focused coping. 

The highest internal consistency was related to factors 1, 2, and 6, respectively. Of course, factors 1 and 2 can show both the high internal consistency of the items and the diversity of things influenced by them. All factors had a positive and significant correlation with the total score. Religion had the highest correlation with the general factor, which in the Iranian religious community shows the highest preference for coping with stressors in the Iranian student community. Factors 5, 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 had the highest correlation coefficient, respectively.  Therefore, the most important coping skills that students prefer in the face of perceived stress were religion orientation, problem-focused coping, support-focused coping, distraction, denial, and emotion-focused coping, respectively.

Ethical Considerations

Compliance with ethical guidelines

This study has been approved by Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (Code: IR.UM.REC. 3/50099). All ethical principles are considered in this article. The participants were informed of the purpose of the research and its implementation stages.

Funding

This study is part of a PhD. dissertation of first author, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.

Authors' contributions

Conceptualization: Hamid Reza AghaMohammadian Sharbaf, Azam Hashemian Moghadam; Research and sampling method: Azam Hashemian Moghadam; Data analysis: Hossein Kareshki, and Azam Hashemian Moghadam; Drafting: Azam Hashemian Moghadam, Hamid Reza AghaMohammadian Sharbaf; Editing and finalizing: Hamid Reza AghaMohammadian Sharbaf, Mohammad Saeid AbdeKhodaei, and Hossein Kareshki.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the staff of Omid and Imam Reza hospitals, as well as the patients admitted to the hospitals for their collaboration.