Validation of a coping self–efficacy scale in an African context
Van Wyk, Mabet Marie
MetadataShow full item record
Various scales have previously been developed to measure coping strategies (Taylor & Stanton, 2007; Devonport & Lane, 2006; Stapelberg, 1999) or self–efficacy (Carroll et al., 2005; Chen et al., 2001; Tipton & Worthington, 1984); and some of them have been validated in a South African context, but the validation of a coping self–efficacy scale as a single measurement has not been conducted in an African context. Therefore, the aim of this study was to validate Chesney et al.’s 2006 Coping Self–Efficacy Scale (CSE) in an African context. A multicultural convenience sample of 2 214 South African adolescents and adults, including both male and female participants, participated in this study. Measuring instruments such as the Coping Self–Efficacy Scale (CSE) (Chesney, Neilands, Chambers, Taylor & Folkman, 2006), the Mental Health Continuum - Short Form for adults (MHC–SF) (Keyes et al., 2008), the New General Self–Efficacy Scale (NGSE) (Chen, Gully & Eden, 2001; 2004), the Fortitude Questionnaire (FORQ) (Pretorius, 1998), the Patient Health Questionnaire: Depression Symptoms (PHQ–9) (Kroenke, Spitzer & Williams, 2001) and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) (Goldberg & Hillier, 1979) were used in this study. Criterion–related validity of the CSE was established. Construct validity was determined by conducting confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses as well as SEM on the CSE. Results indicated a Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of 0.87 and satisfactory inter–item correlations ranging from 0.19–0.21. Criterion–related validity was satisfactory. Confirmatory analysis indicated a good fit and exploratory factor analysis confirmed the three major factors similar to Chesney et al.’s (2006) findings. Construct validity was further supported by SEM analysis, which confirmed the three–factor structure. The CSE can be viewed as reliable and valid for use in further research in the African context. Future studies should validate this scale in various population groups, with translated versions of the scale and with randomly selected groups.
- ETD@PUK