Robinson M E, Riley J L, Myers C D, Sadler I J, Kvaal S A, Geisser M E, Keefe F J
Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville 32610, USA.
Clin J Pain. 1997 Mar;13(1):43-9. doi: 10.1097/00002508-199703000-00007.
The Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ), a measure of coping in chronic pain patients, was subjected to item-level exploratory factor analysis.
A sample of 965 chronic pain patients were used in the analysis.
Principal components analysis using a varimax rotation procedure identified nine factors that accounted for 54.5% of the variance. Of these nine factors, the first five represent subscales of the original CSQ subscales. The catastrophizing subscale replicated with significant loadings for all six original items, and ignoring sensations replicated with five of six items. Factors representing reinterpreting pain sensations, coping self-statements, and diverting attention subscales also appeared. The items from the praying and hoping subscale split into separate praying and hoping factors (factors 6 and 8). When reliability coefficients were calculated, factors 7 through 9 had unacceptably low internal consistency and thus were not considered stable factors. Correlations between factors 1 through 6 and other measures of psychological and physical functioning were calculated in the construct validation portion of this study. Previously found relationships were replicated in that the correlations between CSQ factor scores and measures of pain, depression, and disability were in the same direction in this data set as those previously reported.
应对策略问卷(CSQ)是一种用于评估慢性疼痛患者应对方式的工具,对其进行了项目层面的探索性因素分析。
分析采用了965名慢性疼痛患者的样本。
使用方差最大化旋转程序的主成分分析确定了九个因素,这些因素解释了54.5%的方差。在这九个因素中,前五个代表了原始CSQ分量表的子量表。灾难化分量表中,所有六个原始项目的负荷都很显著,忽视感觉分量表中有五个项目负荷显著。代表重新解释疼痛感觉、应对自我陈述和转移注意力分量表的因素也出现了。祈祷和希望分量表中的项目分成了单独的祈祷和希望因素(因素6和8)。计算信度系数时,因素7至9的内部一致性低得令人无法接受,因此不被视为稳定因素。在本研究的结构效度部分,计算了因素1至6与其他心理和身体功能测量指标之间的相关性。先前发现的关系得到了重复验证,即CSQ因素得分与疼痛、抑郁和残疾测量指标之间的相关性在本数据集中与先前报告的方向相同。