Psychological Assessment Copyright 1993 bv the American Psychological Association, Inc.

1993. Vol.5, No. 2,145-153 I040-3590/93/$3.00

Psychometric Evaluation of Antonovsky's Sense of Coherence Scale

Arthur W Frenz, Michael P. Carey, and Randall S. Jorgensen

The psychometric properties of Antonovsky's Sense of Coherence (SOC) Scale were examined.
Subjects (N = 374) completed the SOC scale and a battery of theoretically relevant questionnaires.
Principal-components analysis with a Varimax-Promax rotation produced a solution with 5 fac-
tors, which were further reduced to 1 factor, suggesting that the SOC scale is a unidimensional
instrument. Additional analyses indicated satisfactory internal consistency as well as test-retest
reliability at 1 and 2 weeks. Evidence for the validity of the SOC scale was obtained in that nonclini-
cal subjects obtained higher SOC scores than did clinical subjects. Additional validity evidence was
provided by negative correlations between SOC scores and self-reports of (a) perceived stress, (b)
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

trait anxiety, and (c) current depression. Discriminant evidence for the validity of the SOC scale was
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

mixed.

Efforts to understand the stress-health association have of-
ten focused on person variables that may be associated with
adaptive appraisal styles and coping strategies (cf. Lazarus,
1991). Examples of well-studied personality styles include the
Type-A personality (Friedman & Rosenman, 1974) and the
hardy personality (Kobasa, 1979). Recently, Antonovsky (1979,
1988) has proposed that individuals differ in what he calls their
"sense of coherence," and he has argued that this person vari-
able is intimately related to adaptive functioning in stressful
encounters.
Formally, Antonovsky (1988) defined the Sense of Coherence
(SOC) as
a global orientation that expresses the extent to which one has a
pervasive, enduring though dynamic feeling of confidence that (a)
the stimuli deriving from one's internal and external environ-
ments in the course of living are structured, predictable and expli-
cable; (b) the resources are available to one to meet the demands
posed by these stimuli; and (c) these demands are challenges,
worthy of investment and engagement (p. 19).
The three components of his definition correspond to (a) com-
prehensibility, (b) manageability, and (c) meaningfulness of
one's life. Antonovsky proposed that a "strong" SOC is asso-
ciated with effective coping, reduced stress, fewer health-dam-
aging behaviors, and ultimately, improved morale, somatic
health, and social adjustment.
The SOC construct has been welcomed with considerable
interest and been applied widely in research. Antonovsky (per-
Arthur W Frenz, Michael P. Carey, and Randall S. Jorgensen, Depart-
ment of Psychology and Center for Health and Behavior, Syracuse Uni-
versity.
Preparation of this article was facilitated by Grant DA07635-02
from the National Institute of Drug Abuse. We thank C. Steven
Richards for his support of this research, as well as Kate B. Carey, liana
P. Spector, and an anonymous reviewer for their comments on an ear-
lier draft of this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mi-
chael P. Carey, Department of Psychology and Center for Health and
Behavior, 430 Huntington Hall, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New
York 13244-2340.
145
sonal communication, February 1992) has reported that there
are more than 100 investigators in more than 20 countries
currently using the SOC construct and scale as a primary focus
of their research; moreover, he has reported that there have
been more than 20 doctoral dissertations and master's theses
already completed on the SOC. These data document the wide-
spread influence this new construct and measure has had in
just the past few years.
Although the construct was been widely adopted, its mea-
surement has received much less attention. Antonovsky (1988)
developed the English version of the SOC scale, which has sub-
sequently been translated into at least 12 languages (A. Anto-
novsky, personal communication, February 1992), but few data
have been published regarding the factor structure, reliability,
and validity of the SOC. In one of the three factor-analytic
investigations that we have been able to locate, Dana, Hoff-
man, Armstrong, and Wilson (1985; cited in Antonovsky, 1988)
indicated that the three theoretical components of the scale
were not separable in their sample of 179 psychology under-
graduates. The intercorrelations among the Comprehensibility,
Manageability, and Meaningfulness components ranged from
.52 to .72. Similarly, Antonovsky (1983) reported intercorrela-
tions ranging from .45 to .62 from unpublished data with an
Israeli national sample. Finally, Holm, Ehde, Lamberty, Dix,
and Thompson (1988) factor analyzed data from 545 American
undergraduates and reported that the best solution consisted of
one global factor. Unfortunately, these three studies have not
been published in peer-reviewed journals, and few details are
available regarding the methodologies used; thus, their results
need to be considered tentative.
Evidence for the reliability of the SOC has also been scant.
With regard to internal consistency, coefficients alpha for the
entire scale have ranged from .84 to .93 (Antonovsky, 1988;
Holm et al., 1988; Margalit, 1985). Holm et al. (1988) reported
separate coefficients alpha for the three subscales as well: Com-
prehensibility (a = .80), Meaningfulness (a = .82), and Manage-
ability (a = .80). With regard to test-retest reliability, Holm et
al. (1988) indicated that the SOC had satisfactory test-retest
reliability (r = .85) at 1 month.
Evidence for the validity of the SOC has been somewhat mod-
 146 A. FRENZ, M. CAREY, AND R. JORGENSEN
est. Antonovsky has proposed that a "strong" SOC facilitates
psychological adjustment and somatic health. The latter associ-
ation may be mediated by increased adoption of adaptive
health behaviors among individuals with a strong SOC. Specifi-
cally, he expects among those with a strong SOC less smoking,
less alcohol consumption, more realistic alertness to symp-
toms, and greater adherence to medical regimens.
To examine the validity of the SOC, investigators have exam-
ined the relationship between SOC scores and psychological
adjustment, notably, trait and state anxiety. Bernstein and Car-
mel (1987) administered Hebrew versions of Antonovsky's SOC
and Spielberger's State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger,
Gorsuch, & Lushene, 1970) to 46 medical students in Israel.
Consistent with Antonovsky's formulations, they found a signif-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
icant negative correlation between SOC and trait anxiety (r =
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
-.77). Similarly, in a study of 418 Israeli adolescents, Anto-
novsky and Sagy (1986) reported a significant inverse relation-
ship (r = —.61) between the SOC scale and trait anxiety, and
weaker and less consistent relationships between SOC and state
anxiety. Rumbaut et al. (1983; cited in Antonovsky, 1988) re-
ported a significant negative correlation (r = — .21) between the
SOC scale and the Sarason Test Anxiety Scale (Sarason, 1980).
In an effort to provide additional concurrent evidence for the
validity of the SOC, Antonovsky, Hankin, and Stone (1987)
interviewed 276 Israeli adults regarding their drinking patterns
and asked them to complete the SOC. Of the 17 men classified
as daily drinkers, 62% obtained "low" scores on the SOC scale
(the definition of low was not provided in the report). Although
a direct linear relationship was not suggested, Antonovsky et al.
proposed that having a "weak" SOC may contribute to heavy
drinking as a way of coping with stress.
Although no discriminant evidence for the validity of the
SOC scale has been provided in the literature, Antonovsky
(1988) has tried to provide known-groups evidence for the valid-
ity of the SOC scale by examining data from 11 administrations
of the SOC scale between 1982 and 1985. He noted that mean
SOC scores were higher in samples of Israeli army officer train-
ees than in other populations and argues that this is in the
"expected direction." He does not, however, provide a convinc-
ing argument explaining why this should be the case. In addi-
tion, he failed to perform tests for significant differences
among the groups. Similarly, Margalit (1985) examined the
SOC in a group of normal and hyperactive children (N = 84);
compared with that of the control group (M= 5.3), the hyperac-
tive group was found to have a significantly weaker SOC (M =
4.7). However, Margalit used a brief, child version of the SOC;
consequently, the full SOC has not been evaluated adequately
with the known-groups procedure.
In summary, three studies have factor analyzed data on the
SOC. Results from these studies have indicated that the three
components of the scale are not separable; in a conference pre-
sentation, Holm et al. (1988) suggested that a single global fac-
tor represents the best solution for the factor structure of the
SOC, but details regarding this solution have not yet been pub-
lished. Four studies have reported on the internal consistency
of the SOC scale, yielding alpha levels ranging from .84 to .93;
only one unpublished study has assessed the test-retest reliabil-
ity of the scale. Evidence for the validity of the scale has been
modest. A small collection of studies has examined correla-
tions between the SOC scale and various measures of state,
trait, and test anxiety. Many of these studies were summarized
briefly in Antonovsky's 1988 book and have not been pub-
lished; the few studies that have been published have had meth-
odological limitations that limit the confidence that can be
placed in the results.
The purpose of the present study was to conduct the first
comprehensive psychometric evaluation of the SOC scale. We
improve on previous research by (a) using a large, heteroge-
neous sample that includes both clinical and nonclinical sub-
jects; (b) evaluating the stability as well as the internal consis-
tency of the SOC scale; and (c) providing known-groups, dis-
criminant, convergent, and factorial evidence for the validity of
the SOC scale. On the basis of prior theoretical and empirical
work, the following predictions were made:
1. Internal consistency for the SOC scale would be demon-
strated by a Cronbach's coefficient alpha of .80 or above.
2. Test-retest reliability would be demonstrated by a signifi-
cant positive correlation between the two administrations of
the scale.
3. Because of the paucity of published factor-analytic studies,
the factor-analytic procedures would be exploratory rather than
confirmatory. As a result, no a priori predictions were made
regarding the resultant factor structure of the SOC scale.
4. Known-groups evidence would be reflected in higher SOC
scores among the nonclinical compared with the clinical sub-
jects.
5. Convergent evidence for the validity of the SOC scale
would be provided by significant negative associations between
the SOC scale and each of the following constructs: perceived
stress, trait anxiety, and depression. Additional evidence would
be assembled by a negative relationship between SOC scores
and levels of alcohol use.
6. Discriminant evidence for the validity of the SOC scale
would come from the absence of a significant correlation be-
tween the SOC scale and measures of intelligence and social
desirability.
Method
Measures
In addition to the SOC scale, six other measures were used to de-
scribe the sample and to provide evidence for the validity of the SOC
scale.
Sense ofCoherence Scale (SOC). The 29-item English version of the
SOC scale (Antonovsky, 1988) yields a total score ranging from 29 to
203, with higher scores reflecting a stronger SOC. Eleven items contrib-
ute to "comprehensibility," 10 to "manageability," and 8 to "meaning-
fulness." The items are scaled along a 7-point semantic differential
with two anchoring phrases. Thirteen of the items are reverse scored to
avoid a response set bias.
Demographic Information Questionnaire (DIQ). The DIQ is a self-
report questionnaire, designed for this study, which yields demo-
graphic information (e.g., age, gender).
Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). The PSS (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mer-
melstein, 1983) is a 14-item instrument designed to assess the extent to
which situations in an individual's life are appraised as stressful. Specif-
ically, the PSS is designed to tap the degree to which individuals find
their lives unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overloading; these di-
mensions have repeatedly been found to be central to the experience of
 SENSE OF COHERENCE
stress (Cohen & Lichtenstein, 1990) and are constructs very similar to
(although the valence is reversed) those dimensions identified by An-
tonovsky (1988) as central to a SOC. Extensive norms for the PSS are
available from a probability sample of the United States (N= 2,387); on
the basis of factor analysis, Cohen and Williamson (1988) have recom-
mended scoring the PSS by summing responses to all 14 items. Alpha
reliability coefficients have ranged from .75 to .86. Test-retest reliabil-
ity correlations have ranged from .55 to .85. Cohen and Williamson
(1988) also present ample evidence for the construct validity of the
PSS.
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait (STAI-T). The STAI-T (Spiel-
berger et al., 1970) is a 20-item questionnaire designed to assess trait
anxiety. Dreger (1978) reported the following psychometric properties:
test-retest reliabilities at 1 -hr interval, .84 (men) and .76 (women); at 20
days, .86 and .76; and at 104 days, .73 and .77. Alpha reliability coeffi-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
cients ranged from .86 to .92. Validities were estimated by correlating
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
the scores of 126 college women with the IPAT Anxiety Scale (Cattell &
Scheier, 1963), the Manifest Anxiety Scale (Taylor, 1953), and the Af-
fect Adjective Checklist. The coefficients were .75, .80, and .52, respec-
tively.
Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). The revised version of the BDI
(Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979), a 21-item, self-report measure of
depression, was used. Beck, Steer, and Garbin (1988) reviewed studies
using the BDI between 1961 and 1986, and conducted a meta-analysis
of the scale's psychometric properties. They reported satisfactory
mean internal consistency coefficients alpha of .86 for psychiatric pa-
tients and .81 for nonpsychiatric populations. Test-retest reliability
was stronger for nonpsychiatric subjects (Pearson correlation coeffi-
cients ranged from .60 to .89) than for psychiatric patients (coefficients
ranged from .48 to .86). Satisfactory concurrent validity was demon-
strated by comparisons of BDI scores with other measures of depres-
sion. The BDI correlated with the following measures in psychiatric
and nonpsychiatric populations, respectively: clinical ratings of de-
pression (mean r = .72 and .60); Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression
(Hamilton, 1960; mean r = .73 and .76); Zung Depression Scale (Zung,
1965; mean r = .76 and .71); Multiple Affect Adjective Checklist De-
pression Scale (Zuckerman & Lubin, 1965; mean r = .62 and .63); and
MMPI Depression scale (Hathaway & McKinley, 1940; mean r = .76
and .60). Evidence for the known-groups validity of the BDI is pro-
vided by studies that used the scale to distinguish between psychiatric
and nonpsychiatric patients, as well as between subtypes of depression.
Significant relationships between the BDI and other established mea-
sures of depression provide evidence for the construct validity of the
scale.
Quantity-Frequency-Variability Questionnaire (QFV). The QFV
(Calahan, Cisin, & Crossley, 1969), developed for a national survey of
drinking practices, is a self-report measure developed to assess alcohol
consumption. The QFV combines information about both modal
quantity consumed (the amount drunk more than half the time or
nearly every time) and maximum quantity consumed with the fre-
quency of drinking. Scoring permits subjects to be classified into one
of five groups: (a) heavy drinkers, (b) moderate drinkers, (c) light
drinkers, (d) infrequent drinkers, and (e) abstainers. National survey
data are based on adults ages 21 years and older, and yield the follow-
ing distribution of classifications: heavy drinkers (12%), moderate
drinkers (13%), light drinkers (28%), infrequent drinkers (15%), and
abstainers (32%). Evidence for the validity of the QFV's distinction
among drinking classifications is presented in Cahalan et al. (1969).
Social Desirability Scale (SDS). The SDS (Crowne & Marlowe,
1964) is a 33-item, self-report measure designed to assess the extent to
which the respondent tends to present him- or herself in a favorable
light. The necessity of evaluating social desirability as a response ten-
dency has been well-documented and continues to be a methodologi-
cal and construct validation consideration in personality research
147
(Maher, 1978). In current research involving the measurement of per-
sonality traits or styles, the SDS is the most widely used measure
(Reynolds, 1982). In their original research, Crowne and Marlowe
(1964) reported a Ruder-Richardson internal consistency coefficient
of .88 and a test-retest correlation (1-month interval) of .88. More re-
cently, Reynolds (1982) factor analyzed the SDS and reported that there
was a single significant factor, with a Ruder-Richardson formula 20
reliability index of .82 and a mean item-to-total scale correlation of .32.
Shipley Institute of Living Scale (SILS). The SILS (Zachary, 1986) is
a brief, self-administered measure used to assess intellectual function-
ing in adults and adolescents. Psychometric properties of the scale are
summarized in the revised manual (Zachary, 1986). On the basis of
scores for 322 army recruits, split-half reliability coefficients were .87
for Vocabulary, .89 for Abstraction, and .92 for the Total score. On the
basis of scores for 29 psychiatric inpatients, the odd-even reliability
coefficient was .84 for the estimated IQ scores. Eight studies have exam-
ined the test-retest reliability of the SILS over a range of 2 to 16
weeks. The median reliability coefficient was .60 for Vocabulary and
.78 for the Total score. These data suggest that the SILS has good
temporal stability and internal consistency. Adequate construct valid-
ity of the SILS in its use as an estimate of IQ has been demonstrated by
correlations of the scale with more extensive measures of intellectual
functioning. Correlations between the SILS Total score and the Full
Scale IQ of the Wechsler-Bellevue (Wechsler, 1939) ranged from .68 to
.79. Correlations between the SILS and the Wechsler Adult Intelli-
gence Scale (Wechsler, 1955) ranged from .73 to .90. A correlation of
.74 has been reported between the SILS Total score and the Wechsler
Adult Intelligence Scale—Revised (Wechsler, 1981). SILS Total scores
have been correlated with eight other measures of intelligence and
academic achievement, and correlations ranged from .49 for the Slos-
son Intelligence Test (Jensen & Armstrong, 1985) to .78 for the Army
General Classification Test (Sines, 1958).
Subjects and Procedures
Subjects (N= 374) included 217 women and 156 men (1 subject did
not identify his or her gender); ages ranged from 17 to 60 years (M =
23.6, SD = 8.4). They were recruited from three nonclinical and three
clinical groups. To minimize the demands placed on subjects, no one
group of subjects was asked to complete all of the measures.
Nonpatients. The nonpatient group (n = 276; 160 female, 115 male,
1 unidentified; M = 23.2 years of age, SD = 8.3) comprised three sub-
groups: undergraduate students, graduate students, and social service
employees. The undergraduate group consisted of 183 students (98
female, 84 male, 1 unidentified; M = 18.5 years of age, SD = 1.0)
enrolled in introductory psychology classes at a large university; they
participated in the research project in order to fulfill a class require-
ment. Subjects were tested at baseline and then returned for the retest 1
week later. At baseline, subjects were given the SOC, SDS, and DIQ. At
retest, subjects were given the SOC, SILS, and DIQ. The graduate
group included 50 students (32 female, 18 male; M= 27.3 years of age,
SD = 4.6) in various doctoral programs at a large university. These
subjects completed the SOC, PSS, and DIQ. The social service group
consisted of 43 staff members (30 female, 13 male; M = 38.3 years of
age, SD = 8.1) at a mental health agency for developmentally disabled
persons. These employees included psychologists, social workers, vo-
cational counselors, nurses, and clerical and administrative personnel.
These subjects completed the SOC, SDS, and DIQ at baseline and the
SOC 2 weeks later.
Patients. The patient group (n = 98; 57 female, 41 male; M = 25.1
years of age, SD = 8.6) also included three subgroups: shorter term
psychotherapy patients, longer term psychotherapy patients, and
chronic psychiatric patients. The shorter term group consisted of 52
patients (37 female, 15 male; M = 21.1 years old, SD = 3.6) from a
 148 A. FRENZ, M. CAREY, AND R. JORGENSEN

university clinic that provides short-term psychotherapy (6 weeks or Table 1

less) for students. Therapists invited their patients to participate in the Rotated Factor Pattern (Standard Regression Coefficients)
study. Patients completed the SOC, PSS, STAI-T, BDI, and DIQ. The
longer term group consisted of 20 patients (16 female, 4 male; M = 23.8 Factor
years of age, SD = 4.2) at a university clinic providing longer term SOC
psychotherapy to student and community clients. Therapists invited item 1 2 3 4 5
patients to complete the SOC, PSS, STAI-T, BDI, and DIQ. The
1(R) .17 .20 -.01 .38 .11
chronic group included 26 patients (4 female, 16 male; M= 34.0 years 2 .19 .08 .04 .45 -.08
of age, SD = 11.7) from the Mentally III Chemical Abuser (MICA) unit 3 -.11 .61 -.13 .19 .23
at a state psychiatric center; these patients were invited by their thera- 4(R) .38 .53 -.42 .06 .09
pists to participate in the study and completed only the DIQ and SOC. 5(R) .14 -.13 -.07 .75 -.18
6(R) .05 .05 .10 .78 -.08
7(R) .27 .53 .20 -.03 -.23
Results 8 .62 .27 -.06 -.28 .14
9 .36 .26 -.09 .40 -.07
All data were double-entered and checked for accuracy with 10 .17 .08 -.12 .74
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

-.06
a customized computer program prior to data analysis. All anal- 11 (R) .01 -.23
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

.61 .31 -.20

yses were performed on an IBM 4341 mainframe computer 12 .47 .13 .07 .13 .16
using SAS (SAS Institute, 1985). 13(R) -.07 .20 .75 -.06 -.00
14 (R) .16 .50 .33 .08 .03
15 .22 -.02 .50 .02 .23
Factor Structure 16 (R) .53 .40 -.01 -.06 -.15
17 .05 .05 .05 -.12 .84
A principal-components analysis was conducted on the SOC 18 .01 -.10 .76 .09 .03
responses for the full sample (N= 373). Two criteria were used 19 .68 -.03 .08 .14 .10
20 (R) .10 .36 .28 .20 -.03
to determine the number of factors to be retained: (a) Kaiser's 21 .64 -.08 .14 .25 -.04
criterion (i.e., factors with an eigenvalue of 1.0 or more) and (b) 22 .12 .57 .25 -.02 .04
examination of the scree plot. Five factors met Kaiser's crite- 23 (R) -.31 .55 .08 .51 .14
rion. In agreement with Kaiser's criterion, examination of the 24 .54 -.04 .08 .08 .30
25 (R) .34 .06 .33 .22 -.01
scree plot revealed a leveling off after the fifth factor. Thus, five 26 .20 -.13 .36 .29 .11
factors were retained and rotated with a Varimax-Promax rota- 27 (R) .08 .31 .57 -.06 .05
tion sequence; this sequence first produces an orthogonal vari- 28 .48 .41 .05 .07 -.02
max prerotation followed by an oblique rotation (SAS Institute, 29 .45 -.01 .23 .19 .01
1985). Perusal of the standard regression coefficients from the Note. SOC = Sense of Coherence Scale; (R) = reverse-scored items.
rotated factor pattern matrix (Table 1) revealed that regression Values in boldface type indicate loading > |.55|.
coefficients > |.55| yielded minimal cross-loading across the
five factors.1 Therefore, |.55| was designated as the inclusion
criterion, and items with regression coefficients > |.55| were
selected for interpretation of the five factors. pooled covariance matrix, with patient status as the grouping
On the basis of a content analysis of the items composing variable (Finn, 1974). Using this method, the single-factor solu-
each factor, Factors 1 through 5 were assigned the following tion was replicated when the factor-analytic procedures de-
labels: 1. Comprehensibility (Items 8,19, and 21); 2. Life Inter- scribed above were applied to this partial correlation matrix.
est (Items 3,11, and 22); 3. Self-Efficacy (Items 13,18, and 27);
4. Interpersonal Trust (Items 5 and 6); and 5. Predictability Reliability
(Items 10 and 17; see Table 2).
Internal consistency. Internal consistency was assessed by
Examination of the interfactor correlations (see Table 3) re-
Cronbach's (1951) alpha, which was calculated on the SOC
vealed substantial correlations among the five factors. Thus, to
scores of 370 subjects. This analysis yielded a coefficient of .93,
test whether these five factors might be reduced further to three
which reflects a high level of internal consistency.
(as predicted by Antonovsky's [1988] theory), a secondary prin-
Test-retest stability. A Pearson product-moment correla-
cipal-components analysis was performed on the factor scores
tion coefficient was conducted on the SOC scores of the under-
of the initial analysis. After application of Kaiser's criterion to
graduate group (n = 171) with a 1-week retest interval. The
the eigenvalues of the correlation matrix (i.e., 2.23, .97, .67, .64,
results indicated high test-retest reliability (r= .92, p < .0001).
and .48) and examination of the scree plot of eigenvalues, it
A Pearson correlation also was conducted on the SOC scores of
became evident that one core factor emerged. The factor pat- the social service employees group (n = 36). The retest interval
tern revealed substantial loadings, ranging from .47 to .78, for
for this group ranged from 7 to 30 days (M = 14.1, SD = 3.6).
each of the five initial factors. This core factor was labeled
This analysis also indicated high test-retest reliability (r=.93,p
Sense of Coherence.
Exploratory analyses were conducted to determine whether <.0001).
the factor structure was influenced by the inclusion of the two
1
subgroups (i.e., patients and nonpatients). Specifically, to elimi- Examination of the semipartial correlation coefficients from the
nate the variation of subgroup means from the correlation ma- reference structure matrix was consistent with the rotated factor pat-
trix of SOC items, a correlation matrix was computed from the tern.
 SENSE OF COHERENCE 149

Table 2
Sense of Coherence (SOC) Scale Factors and Corresponding Items

Factor
SOC item loading

Factor 1. Comprehensibility
Until now your life has had . . .
1 2 3 4 5
no clear goals or very clear goals
purpose at all and purpose .62
19. Do you have very mixed-up feelings and ideas?
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

1 2 3 4 5 6
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

very often very seldom

or never .68
21. Does it happen that you have feelings inside you would rather
not feel?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
very often very seldom
or never .64

Factor 2. Life interest

Think of the people with whom you come into contact daily,
aside from the ones to whom you feel closest. How well do
you know most of them?
1 2
you feel that you know them
they're strangers very well .61
Most of the things you will do in the future will probably be. . .
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
completely deadly
fascinating boring .61
22. You anticipate that your personal life in the future will be ...
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
totally without full of meaning
meaning or purpose and purpose .57

Factor3. Self-Efficacy
What best describes how you see life:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
one can always there is no
find a solution to solution to painful
painful things in life things in life .75
18. When something unpleasant happened in the past your
tendency was . . .
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

"to eat yourself to say "ok, that's that,

up about it" I have to live with it,"
and go on .76

(table continues)
 150 A. FRENZ, M. CAREY, AND R. JORGENSEN

Table 2 (continued)

Factor
SOC item loading

Factor 3. Self-Efficacy (continued)

27 (R). When you think of difficulties you are likely to face in
important aspects of your life, do you have the feeling that:
1 2 3 5 6 7

you will always you won't succeed

succeed in overcoming in overcoming
the difficulties the difficulties .57
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Factor 4. Interpersonal Trust

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

5(R). Has it happened in the past that you were surprised by the
behavior of people whom you thought you knew well?

never always
happened happened .75
Has it happened that people whom you counted on
disappointed you?

never always
happened happened .78

Factor 5. Predictability
10. In the past 10 years your life has been . . .
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

full of changes completely

without you knowing consistent
what will happen next and clear .74

17. Your life in the future will probably be ...

1 2 3 4 5
full of changes completely
without your knowing consistent
what will happen next and clear .84

Note. (R) indicates reverse-scored items.

Validity years of age, SD = 8.3; /[369] = 1.86, p = .06). Because of this

Three types of evidence (viz., known-groups, convergent, and
discriminant) were assembled to evaluate the construct validity
of the SOC scale.
Known-groups evidence. The primary analysis was designed
to compare SOC scores between the patient and nonpatient
groups. Before this analysis could be conducted, however, two
preliminary sets of analyses were necessary. First, preliminary
analyses revealed that the two groups did not differ with re-
spect to gender (both groups were 58% female); however, there
was a trend toward group differences with respect to age (pa-
tients: M = 25.1 years of age, SD = 8.6; nonpatients: M = 23.2
potential confound, especially given that age was associated
with SOC scores, r(368) = .17, p < .001, age was used as a
covariate in all subsequent analyses. A second set of prelimi-
nary analyses involved two separate analyses of covariance
(ANCOVAs), with age as the covariate, calculated to determine
whether there were any differences on SOC among (a) the three
nonpatient subgroups and (b) the three patient subgroups, prior
to combining these subgroups for the primary analysis. Results
of these analyses revealed that no significant differences exist
among these two sets of subgroups (both ps > .1) and allow
these subjects to be combined into "nonpatient" and "patient"
groups for subsequent analysis.
 SENSE OF COHERENCE
Table 3
Interfactor Correlations for the Sense of Coherence Scale
Factor 1 2 3 4
1. Comprehensibility _ undergraduate group and the social service employees group (n
2. Life Interest .37
3. Self-Efficacy .50 —
.37 — SOC and the social desirability scores for these two groups
4. Interpersonal Trust .34 .24 .36 — yielded a significant positive relationship (r = .39, p < .0001).
5. Predictability .26 .09 .15 .30 —
The primary analysis was designed to determine whether
SOC scores differed among groups known to vary with respect
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
to psychological adjustment; consequently, a one-way (patient
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
status: nonpatients versus patients) ANCOVA (with age as the
covariate) was conducted. This analysis revealed a significant
effect for patient status, F(\, 365) = 109.15, p < .0001. As ex-
pected, the three patient groups obtained significantly lower
SOC scores (raw M = 115.87, SD = 25.0; age adjusted M =
115.04) than did the three nonpatient groups (raw M = 142.42,
SD = 21.9; age adjusted M= 142.73).
Convergent evidence. Convergent evidence for the validity
of the SOC was obtained by examining the relationship be-
tween SOC total score and (a) alcohol consumption, (b) per-
ceived stress, (c) trait anxiety, and (d) depression.
First, to examine the SOC-alcohol relationship, QFV classifi-
cations were developed according to standard scoring proce-
dures (Cahalan et al, 1969). Subjects were classified as follows:
heavy (n = 102; mean SOC score = 138.6, SD = 23.0); moderate
(n = 31; mean SOC score = 139.5, SD = 17.3); light (n = 23;
mean SOC score = 135.2, SD = 26.6); and infrequent or ab-
stainer (n = 18; mean SOC score = 138.8, SD = 19.6). Next, a
one-way ANOVA with QFV classification serving as the categor-
ical variable and SOC scores as the response variable was con-
ducted. This analysis failed to yield a significant main effect for
QFV classification on SOC, F(3,169) = 0.14, p > .10, indicat-
ing that SOC was not related to alcohol consumption in the
undergraduate sample.
Second, to determine the relationship between SOC and per-
ceived stress, a Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated
between the SOC and perceived stress scores for the graduate
student group, the shorter term psychotherapy group, and the
longer term psychotherapy group (n = 122). This analysis
yielded a significant negative correlation (r = -.73, p < .0001),
indicating an inverse relationship between SOC and perceived
stress in these three groups.2
Third, to evaluate the association between SOC and trait
anxiety, a Pearson correlation coefficient was conducted on the
SOC and the STAI-T scores for the shorter term psychotherapy
group and the longer term psychotherapy group (n=12). These
results showed a significant negative correlation (r = —.85, p <
.0001), indicating that SOC and trait anxiety were inversely
related in these two groups.
Finally, to assess the relationship between SOC and depres-
sion, a Pearson correlation coefficient was performed on the
SOC and the BDI scores for the shorter term psychotherapy
group and the longer term psychotherapy group (n = 72).
Again, a significant negative correlation (r = -.60, p < .0001)
151
appeared, indicating an inverse association between SOC and
depression in these two patient groups.
Discriminant evidence. Two sources of evidence were avail-
able. First, the Social Desirability Scale was administered to the
= 220). The Pearson correlation coefficient conducted on the
This analysis indicated that SOC is associated with social desir-
ability in these two groups. Second, a Pearson correlation coef-
ficient was conducted on the SOC scores and the conceptual
quotient scores of the SILS for the undergraduate group (n =
174). These results produced a nonsignificant correlation coeffi-
cient (r =. 11), suggesting that SOC is not associated with intelli-
gence in the undergraduate sample.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric
properties of Antonovsky's Sense of Coherence Scale. Three
findings were obtained. First, with regard to the structure of
the SOC, our results suggest that the SOC is best understood as
having a single core factor. The three components of the scale,
as proposed by Antonovsky, did not emerge as three separate
factors. Instead, the initial analysis identified five factors,
which were moderately correlated with each other. Subsequent
analysis of the factor scores suggested the scale has one core
factor; this single factor also emerged in exploratory analyses
designed to partial out the influence of patient versus nonpa-
tient status. Thus, the scale appears to be a unidimensional
instrument measuring SOC. This is consistent with studies by
Dana et al. (1985) and Antonovsky (1983) that found the three
components to be intercorrelated and empirically inseparable.
The one-factor solution is also consistent with the Holm et al.
(1988) study, which suggested that the SOC scale consists of one
global factor. This finding suggests that Antonovsky's theoreti-
cal discussion of the composition of the SOC construct requires
amendment.
Second, with regard to the reliability of the SOC scale, the
present findings indicate that it is internally consistent and
stable over (at least) brief intervals. The high Cronbach's coeffi-
cient alpha reported in this study corroborates the results of
previous investigations of the scale (Antonovsky, 1988; Holm et
al, 1988; Margalit, 1985), which also report strong internal con-
sistency. Taken together, previous data and the present findings
2
We first calculated these correlations separately for each of the
three subgroups (i.e., graduate students, r = -.65; shorter term pa-
tients, r = -.65; and longer term psychotherapy patients, r = -.60).
Then, to determine whether there were any differences in the magni-
tude of the correlation as a function of group membership, these indi-
vidual correlations were transformed to Fisher z coefficients (weighted
by sample size) and compared (Edwards, 1976); there were no signifi-
cant differences among the groups. Therefore, for this and the follow-
ing correlational analyses (i.e., in which more than one group contrib-
uted data and where there were no differences in the magnitude of the
correlation as a function of group membership), we collapsed across
groups and present the composite correlation with the aim of simplify-
ing the presentation.
 152 A. FRENZ, M. CAREY, AND R. JORGENSEN
demonstrate that the SOC scale is an internally consistent mea-
sure. With regard to the stability of the SOC, the present study
demonstrates high test-retest reliability at 1 and 2 weeks. These
findings are consistent with those obtained by Holm et al.
(1988), who reported satisfactory test-retest reliability at 1
month. They are not inconsistent with Antonovsky's view that
although minor changes along the SOC continuum may occur
over time, such changes are either (a) temporary fluctuations in
reaction to major stressors or (b) slow, gradual shifts that take
place in response to significant modifications in the environ-
ment within which we live. Replication of the test-retest corre-
lations, especially with intertest intervals of more than 1 month,
would contribute to our understanding of the long-term stabil-
ity of SOC scores.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Third, with regard to the validity of the SOC, the overall
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
pattern of findings was mixed. Evidence supportive of the con-
struct validity of the SOC scale includes the following. The
finding of an inverse relationship between SOC and perceived
stress supports Antonovsky's view that individuals with a high
SOC are less likely to appraise stimuli as stressors than are
those with a weak SOC. Similarly, the finding that SOC was
inversely related to both the STAI-T and the BDI supports the
view that individuals with a weak SOC are more likely to experi-
ence negative emotions, such as anxiety and depression. More-
over, as expected, SOC scores were found to be significantly
higher in nonpatients than in patients. This finding is consis-
tent with the view that persons participating in psychological
therapies are seeking guidance on how to develop a greater
sense of meaning in their lives. Finally, the absence of a signifi-
cant correlation between SOC and intelligence suggests that
the SOC is not simply a measure of intellectual ability. This
finding also suggests that one's SOC need not be limited by
one's intellectual ability, nor does high intelligence predict
SOC.
On the other hand, there was also evidence that does not
support the validity of the SOC construct and measure. For
example, the absence of a significant inverse relationship be-
tween SOC and reported alcohol consumption fails to support
Antonovsky's claim that "persons with a strong SOC will en-
gage in adaptive health behaviors more often than those with a
weak SOC, all other things being equal" (Antonovsky, 1988, p.
153). One potential explanation is that alcohol consumption
among our undergraduate subjects was uncharacteristically
high, creating a ceiling effect that could overshadow an under-
lying relationship between SOC and alcohol intake. In fact, 58%
of the undergraduate subjects were classified as heavy drinkers.
It is possible that a relationship would emerge using a more
heterogeneous sample.
Of more concern was the significant positive correlation be-
tween the SOC and social desirability; this finding suggests
that the SOC items may be somewhat "transparent" and there-
fore vulnerable to a social desirability response bias. Thus, sub-
jects' responses may be altered by their tendency to want to
"put up a good front." Of course, the SOC scale is not alone in
this regard, as other widely used personality measures also cor-
relate as high or higher with social desirability measures (cf.
Watson & Clark, 1984). Nevertheless, users of the scale need to
exercise caution when interpreting the SOC scores of subject
groups that are likely to be motivated to present themselves in a
favorable light.
Perhaps the most intriguing interpretation precipitated by
these findings involves the strong association (r = -.85) be-
tween SOC and trait anxiety. This correlation, which is similar
in magnitude to that reported by other investigators (e.g., Bern-
stein & Carmel, 1987), was nearly as strong as the internal con-
sistency and test-retest correlations reported here and else-
where (e.g., Holm et al., 1988). We had not anticipated such a
strong association, which raises the interesting question: Are
SOC and trait anxiety different constructs? One might con-
clude that the SOC construct is not sufficiently distinct from
trait anxiety, or that the SOC scale actually measures trait anxi-
ety.3 An alternative explanation for the strong association ob-
tained emerges from the work of Watson and Clark (1984).
These authors have reviewed a large number of personality
scales, including measures of trait anxiety, neuroticism, and
social desirability, and concluded that they reflect the same
stable and pervasive trait of negative affectivity, that is, the pre-
disposition to experience cross-situational distress and discom-
fort even when environmental stressors are absent. Interest-
ingly, persons low in negative affectivity are characterized by
the need for social approval and low levels of reported trait
anxiety (Watson & Clark, 1984). Taken collectively, our find-
ings that SOC scores correlated positively with social desirabil-
ity and negatively with trait anxiety are consonant with the
notion that individuals scoring high on the SOC scale are low in
negative affectivity. Clearly, the present study was not designed
to address this interesting perspective, but we raise it to stimu-
late further research regarding the relationships among SOC,
anxiety, depression, and negative affectivity.
Before closing, two limitations of our methodology need to
be acknowledged. First, the full sample was predominantly
White (89%), thereby making it difficult to generalize to minor-
ity groups. Second, the interval between tests for the test-retest
procedure was relatively short, particularly for assessment of
the stability of a trait measure. As a result, the long-term stabil-
ity of the measure is yet to be demonstrated.
3
We are grateful to an anonymous reviewer for stimulating this line
of thinking.
References
Antonovsky, A. (1979). Health, stress and coping: New perspectives on
mental and physical well-being. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Antonovsky, A. (1983). The sense of coherence: Development of a re-
search instrument. W S. Schwartz Research Center for Behavioral
Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Newsletter and Research Reports, 1,
1-11.
Antonovsky, A. (1988). Unraveling the mystery of health: How people
manage stress and stay well. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Antonovsky, H., Hankin, Y., & Stone, D. (1987). Patterns of drinking in
a small development town in Israel. British Journal of Addiction, 82,
293-303.
Antonovsky, H., & Sagy, S. (1986). The development of a sense of coher-
ence and its impact on responses to stress situations. Journal of So-
cial Psychology, 126, 213-225.
Beck, A. T, Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. E, & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive
therapy of depression. New York: Guilford Press.
 SENSE OF COHERENCE
Beck, A. X, Steer, R. A., & Garbin, M. G. (1988). Psychometric proper-
ties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evalua-
tion. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 77-100.
Bernstein, J., & Carmel, S. (1987). Trait anxiety and the sense of coher-
ence. Psychological Reports, 60, 1000.
Calahan, D., Cisin, I., & Crossley, H. (1969). American drinking prac-
tices: A national study of drinking behavior and patterns. New Bruns-
wick: Rutgers Center of Alcohol Studies.
Cattell, R. B., & Scheier, I. H. (1963). Handbook for the IPAT Anxiety
Scale(2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability
Testing.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, X, & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of
perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24,385-396.
Cohen, S., & Lichtenstein, E. (1990). Perceived stress, quitting smok-
ing, and smoking relapse. Health Psychology, 9, 466-478.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Cohen, S., & Williamson, G.M. (1988). Perceived stress in a probability
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
sample of the United States. In S. Spacapan & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The
social psychology of health (pp. 31-67). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of
tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1964). The approval motive: Studies in
evaluative dependence. New York: Wiley.
Dana, R. H., Hoffman, X, Armstrong, B., & Wilson, J. (1985, April).
Sense of coherence: Examination of the construct. Poster presented at
the Annual Meeting of the Southwestern Psychological Association,
Austin, TX.
Dreger, R. M. (1978). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. In O. K. Buros
(Ed.), The eighth mental measurements yearbook (Vol. 1, pp. 1094-
1095). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon.
Edwards, A. L. (1976). An introduction to linear regression and correla-
tion. San Francisco: Freeman.
Eysenck, H. J. (1953). The structure of human personality. New York:
Wiley.
Finn, J. D. (1974). A general model for multivariate analysis. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Friedman, M., & Rosenman, R. H. (1974). Type A behavior and your
heart. New "Vbrk: Knopf.
Hamilton, M. (1960). A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurol-
ogy, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 23, 56-62.
Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. (1940). A multiphasic personality
schedule (Minnesota): I. Construction of the schedule. Journal of
Psychology, 10, 249-254.
Holm, J. E., Ehde, D, Lamberty, K. J., Dix, A., & Thompson, J. (1988).
The development of a salutogenic model of stress and health: Psycho-
metric properties of the sense of coherence construct. Poster presented
at the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Advancement of
Behavior Therapy, New York.
Jensen, J. A., & Armstrong, R. J. (1985). Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT)
for children and adults: Expanded norms, tables, application, and
development. East Aurora: Slosson.
153
Kobasa, S. C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality and health. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3 7,1 -11.
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford Uni-
versity.
Maher, B. A. (1978). A reader's, writer's, and reviewer's guide to assess-
ing research reports in clinical psychology. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 46, 835-838.
Margalit, M. (1985). Perception of parent's behavior, familial satisfac-
tion, and sense of coherence in hyperactive children. Journal of
School Psychology, 23, 355-364.
Reynolds, W M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms
of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, JS, 119-125.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus exter-
nal control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General
and Applied, 80 (Whole No. 609).
Sarason, I. G. (1980). Test anxiety: Theory, research and applications.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
SAS Institute. (1985). SAS user's guide: Statistics. Gary, NC: Author.
Sines, L. K. (1985). Intelligence tests correlates of Shipley-Hartford
performance. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 14, 399-404.
Spielberger, C. D, Gorsuch, R. L., & Lushene, R. E. (1970). Manual for
the State-Trail Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychol-
ogists.
Taylor, J. A. (1953). A personality scale of manifest anxiety. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48, 285-290.
Watson, D, & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition
to experience aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96,
465-490.
Wechsler, D. (1939). Measurement of adult intelligence. Baltimore: Wil-
liams & Wilkins.
Wechsler, D. (1955). Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale
(WAIS). New York: Psychological Corporation.
Wechsler, D. (1981). Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—
Revised (WAIS-R). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Zachary, R. A. (1986). Shipley Institute of Living Scale (revised manual).
Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Zuckerman, M. (1960). The development of an affect adjective check
list for the measurement of anxiety. Journal ofConsulting Psychology,
24, 457-462.
Zuckerman, M., & Lubin, B. (1965). Manual for the Multiple Affect
Adjective Checklist. San Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing
Service.
Zung, W W K. (1965). A self-rating depression scale. Archives of Gen-
eral Psychiatry, 12, 63-73.
Received June 15,1992
Revision received September 20,1992
Accepted September 20,1992 •