| Literature DB >> 21249521 |
Abstract
The paper presents the process of translation and cultural adaptation of the Religious Coping Questionnaire (the RCOPE) by Pargament et al. (2000) for Polish adolescents. The work was driven by the necessity to obtain a structural and measurement equivalence between the American and Polish versions of the instrument. The Polish version was created at the Department of Clinical Psychology of Children and Adolescents at The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, Poland. The exploratory factor analysis with the Oblimin oblique rotation was carried out. The principal components method was used as an extraction method of common factors. The results provided input for constructing the scales. The Adolescent Religious Coping Questionnaire consists of 105 items, grouped in 16 scales, which reflects positive and negative religious coping strategies.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 21249521 PMCID: PMC3560960 DOI: 10.1007/s10943-011-9464-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Relig Health ISSN: 0022-4197
Eigenvalues of items and total variance explained
| Total variance explained | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | Eigenvalues | ||
| General | % of variance | % cumulative | |
| 1 | 7.13 | 44.59 | 44.59 |
| 2 | 2.33 | 14.55 | 59.14 |
Eigenvalues of items and total variance explained of positive factors
| Total variance explained | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | Eigenvalues | ||
| General | % of variance | % cumulative | |
| 1 | 18.27 | 38.07 | 38.07 |
| 2 | 2.30 | 6.24 | 44.31 |
| 3 | 1.88 | 3.91 | 48.22 |
| 4 | 1.66 | 3.45 | 51.67 |
| 5 | 1.58 | 3.30 | 54.97 |
| 6 | 1.41 | 2.93 | 57.91 |
| 7 | 1.25 | 2.59 | 60.50 |
| 8 | 1.18 | 2.47 | 62.96 |
| 9 | 1.07 | 2.23 | 65.19 |
Eigenvalues of items and total variance explained of negative factors
| Total variance explained | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | Eigenvalues | ||
| General | % of variance | % cumulative | |
| 1 | 8.33 | 26.02 | 26.02 |
| 2 | 4.08 | 12.75 | 38.77 |
| 3 | 2.26 | 7.05 | 45.82 |
| 4 | 1.83 | 5.72 | 51.54 |
| 5 | 1.47 | 4.59 | 56.13 |
| 6 | 1.30 | 4.05 | 60.19 |
| 7 | 1.03 | 3.20 | 63.39 |
Descriptive statistic in the Polish version of the RCOPE
| No | Scale | Items | Min | Max |
| Stand. Error | SD | Variance | Skewness | Kurtosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LT | 7 | 0 | 3 | 1.15 | 0.04 | 0.75 | 0.56 | 0.41 | −0.42 |
| 2 | ARS | 5 | 0 | 3 | 1.31 | 0.04 | 0.74 | 0.54 | 0.21 | −0.28 |
| 3 | SSM | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0.77 | 0.03 | 0.68 | 0.47 | 0.83 | 0.04 |
| 4 | RF | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0.91 | 0.03 | 0.66 | 0.44 | 0.64 | 0.01 |
| 5 | CRC | 5 | 0 | 3 | 1.24 | 0.03 | 0.67 | 0.45 | 0.20 | −0.38 |
| 6 | PDI | 4 | 0 | 3 | 1.46 | 0.03 | 0.69 | 0.48 | 0.15 | −0.40 |
| 7 | SS | 5 | 0 | 3 | 1.05 | 0.03 | 0.66 | 0.44 | 0.34 | −0.38 |
| 8 | RP | 8 | 0 | 3 | 1.47 | 0.03 | 0.64 | 0.41 | −0.04 | −0.25 |
| 9 | BRR | 4 | 0 | 3 | 1.26 | 0.04 | 0.73 | 0.53 | 0.35 | −0.37 |
| Positive strategies (PS) | 48 | 0 | 2.73 | 1.19 | 0.03 | 0.54 | 0.29 | 0.25 | −0.03 | |
| 10 | PGR | 5 | 0 | 3 | 1.13 | 0.03 | 0.69 | 0.48 | 0.43 | −0.13 |
| 11 | SRC | 5 | 0 | 3 | 1.11 | 0.03 | 0.66 | 0.43 | 0.43 | −0.07 |
| 12 | DR | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0.66 | 0.03 | 0.69 | 0.48 | 0.89 | 0.20 |
| 13 | PRD | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0.60 | 0.03 | 0.61 | 0.37 | 1.06 | 0.70 |
| 14 | SD | 7 | 0 | 3 | 0.76 | 0.03 | 0.57 | 0.33 | 0.80 | 0.48 |
| 15 | RGP | 4 | 0 | 2.5 | 0.87 | 0.03 | 0.61 | 0.37 | 0.47 | −0.52 |
| 16 | RD | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0.99 | 0.04 | 0.72 | 0.51 | 0.50 | −0.27 |
| Negative strategies (NS) | 32 | 0 | 2.16 | 0.86 | 0.02 | 0.40 | 0.16 | 0.60 | −0.09 | |
Intercorrelations of scales measuring positive religious strategies (rho-Spearman coefficient)
| Scale | Intercorrelations of scales | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | (9) | (10) | |
| LT (1) | – | |||||||||
| ARS (2) | 0.58** | – | ||||||||
| SSM (3) | 0.65** | 0.48** | – | |||||||
| RF (4) | 0.73** | 0.56** | 0.61** | – | ||||||
| CRC (5) | 0.72** | 0.70** | 0.58** | 0.72** | – | |||||
| PDI (6) | 0.68** | 0.58** | 0.49** | 0.69** | 0.68** | – | ||||
| SS (7) | 0.63** | 0.43** | 0.62** | 0.55** | 0.52** | 0.49** | – | |||
| RP (8) | 0.77** | 0.59** | 0.61** | 0.66** | 0.69** | 0.63** | 0.59** | – | ||
| BRR (9) | 0.73** | 0.59** | 0.54** | 0.68** | 0.75** | 0.59** | 0.58** | 0.69** | – | |
| Positive strategies (10) | 0.89** | 0.76** | 0.73** | 0.83** | 0.86** | 0.78** | 0.72** | 0.87** | 0.83** | – |
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two tailed)
Intercorrelations of scales measuring negative religious strategies (rho-Spearman coefficient)
| Scale | Intercorrelations of scales | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | |
| PGR (1) | – | |||||||
| SRC (2) | −0.11* | – | ||||||
| DR (3) | 0.52** | −0.14** | – | |||||
| PRD (4) | 0.37** | −0.31** | 0.40** | – | ||||
| SD (5) | 0.53** | 0.12* | 0.40** | 0.27** | – | |||
| RGP (6) | 0.31** | 0.26** | 0.25** | 0.15** | 0.50** | – | ||
| RD (7) | 0.26** | 0.23** | 0.19** | 0.03 | 0.44** | 0.25** | – | |
| Negative strategies (8) | 0.68** | 0.39** | 0.55** | 0.36** | 0.78** | 0.63** | 0.54** | – |
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
** Correlation is significant at the 0. 01 level (2-tailed)
Internal consistency of the Polish version of the RCOPE
| Factor | Scale | α | Items |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LT | 0.92 | 7 |
| 2 | ARS | 0.89 | 5 |
| 3 | SSM | 0.84 | 5 |
| 4 | RF | 0.85 | 5 |
| 5 | CRC | 0.86 | 5 |
| 6 | PDI | 0.78 | 4 |
| 7 | SS | 0.82 | 5 |
| 8 | RP | 0.86 | 8 |
| 9 | BRR | 0.85 | 4 |
| Positive strategies | 0.91 | 48 | |
| 10 | PGR | 0.86 | 5 |
| 11 | SRC | 0.83 | 5 |
| 12 | DR | 0.90 | 4 |
| 13 | PRD | 0.85 | 5 |
| 14 | SD | 0.84 | 7 |
| 15 | RGP | 0.66 | 4 |
| 16 | RD | 0.62 | 2 |
| Negative strategies | 0.71 | 32 | |
Significant differences regarding religious coping strategies between adolescents with low (1) and high (3) level of the sense of controllability
| Religious coping strategies |
| df |
| Groups |
|
| SD | Stand. error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RF | −1.97 | 448 | 0.05 | 1 | 162 | 3.67 | 3.49 | 0.27 |
| 3 | 137 | 2.92 | 3.03 | 0.26 | ||||
| PRD | −2.07 | 296.634 | 0.05 | 1 | 162 | 2.20 | 2.69 | 0.21 |
| 3 | 137 | 1.61 | 2.20 | 0.19 |
Significant differences regarding religious coping strategies between adolescents with low (1) and high (3) level of the self-efficacy
| Religious coping strategies |
| df |
| Groups |
|
| SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARS | 2.79 | 448 | 0.01 | 1 | 4.85 | 4.35 | 0.52 |
| 3 | 6.53 | 4.88 | 0.34 | ||||
| CRC | 2.45 | 448 | 0.05 | 1 | 4.31 | 3.57 | 0.42 |
| 3 | 5.55 | 3.98 | 0.28 | ||||
| SS | 2.01 | 448 | 0.05 | 1 | 3.34 | 3.23 | 0.38 |
| 3 | 4.32 | 3.80 | 0.26 | ||||
| PGR | 2.49 | 275 | 0.01 | 1 | 461 | 3.64 | 0.43 |
| 3 | 3.41 | 3.44 | 0.24 | ||||
| PRD | 3.01 | 101.183 | 0.01 | 1 | 2.44 | 2.75 | 0.33 |
| 3 | 1.35 | 2.15 | 0.15 | ||||
| SD | 1.97 | 105.751 | 0.05 | 1 | 4.11 | 4.12 | 0.49 |
| 3 | 3.04 | 3.45 | 0.24 |