You are on page 1of 2

Justification of using the Coping Response Inventory and Stress questionnaire The coping response questionnaire that will

be employed in the present study is the Coping Response Inventory developed by Rudolf. H. Moos in 1993 and updated in 2004. One of the main reasons why the questionnaire is being employed in the study is that the latter has been conducted on several prominent cross-cultural studies and numerously translated into several languages, including Western European languages, including Finnish, German, and Spanish. As cited by Moos (2004), the inventory has also been translated into Japanese and used in studies in Spain (Kirchner, in press; kirchner & Mohino, 2003; Mohino, et al., in press; Villavicencio Carrillo &Sebastian Herranz, 1999), Croatia (Rijavec & Donevski, 1994), India (Satija et al., 1997) and Japan (Fukunushki et al., 1997). A Spanish version of the Coping Response Inventory has also been employed on the Spanish speaking individuals in the US (Crean, 1995). Thus, from the cross-cultural studies, they have shown to indicate sufficient amount of reliability and validity. Furthermore, in general, according to Moos (2004), the conceptualization based in the Coping Response Inventory seems to apply to the structure of coping. Moos (2004), also stated that Magley (2002) in his study mentioned that the structure of womens coping with this stressor could be illustrated by the four clusters of coping that underlie the Coping Response Inventory specifically the cognitive and behavioural approach, cognitive and behavioural avoidance). To elaborate this, further explanation will be provided in the subsequent paragraphs.
The variables which are going to be focused in the present study are the two general categories of coping response specifically problem-focused coping and the emotion-focused coping whereby both categories will be further divided into four dimensions each. The first category is termed as problem focused coping response. This category is aimed at problem-solving or doing something to alter the source of the problem or stress. The second category is termed as emotion focused type of coping response. The latter is aimed at reducing or managing the emotional distress that is associated with (or cued by) the situation (Moos, 2004). There are four types of coping response which falls under the dimension of problem-focused coping response which are logical analysis, positive reappraisal, seeking guidance and problem solving. First, logical analysis can be described as the process of taking active steps to try to remove or circumvent the stressor or to ameliorate its effects. Second, positive reappraisal is a type of emotion which manages distress emotions rather than dealing with the stressor per se. Third, seeking guidance is a dimension of the coping response in which people seek information, social support or guidance to cope with their problems. Seeking social support for instrumental reasons includes seeking advice, assistance, or information. The latter refers to problem-focused coping. Seeking social support for emotional reasons is getting moral support, sympathy, or understanding. This is an aspect of emotion-focused coping.

The two social support functions are distinguished because conceptually, they are distinct in nature. In practice, however, they often co-occur with each other (Aldwin & Revenson, 1987). Fourth, problem solving involves coming up with action strategies, thinking about what steps to take and how best to handle the problem. This activity is identified as problem focused, but it differs conceptually from executing a problem-focused action. On the other hand, the emotion-focused coping is also divided into four dimensions which are Cognitive Avoidance, Acceptance and Resignation, Seeking Alternative Rewards and Emotional Discharge. Cognitive Avoidance refers to cognitive attempts to avoid thinking realistically about a problem. Acceptance and Resignation are cognitive attempts to react to the problem by accepting it. Seeking Alternative Rewards, however, are behavioural attempts to get involved in substitute activities and create new sources of satisfaction. Lastly, Emotional Discharge refers to behavioural attempts to reduce tension by expressing negative feelings.

Thus since Mooss (2004) Coping Response Inventory, specifically measures the variables intended to be assessed by the researcher (i.e problem-focused coping and the emotionfocused coping, in fact more precise and elaborative), hence, the researcher considers that it is the most appropriate instrument and relevant to be applied to her sample. Moreover, a number of investigators have obtained internal consistency data for the Coping response Inventory scales. Generally, the results were comparable to the internal consistencies shown in the CopingResponse Inventory Manuals . refer to table 1. Even though some of the research mentioned by Moos (2004) was done with the early versions of the CRI coping indexes, the correlations between earlier and current versions of conceptually comparable CRI scales were statistically significant. In other words, the scores for earlier indexes of cognitive coping were highly associated with the Logical Analysis and Positive Reappraisal scales; the earlier indexes of avoidance coping are highly correlated with Cogniotive Avoidance and Emotional Discharge scales. Therefore Moos (2004) asserted that consequently, results based on earlier findings are likely to generalize current versions of the Coping Response Inventory. However, the only domain that the coping response inventory does not embark is on religious coping. The religious coping that the present researcher aimed to use is the questionnaire employed by Ruhaya Hussin (2005) on religious coping.