Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychometric Characteristics and Race-Related Measurement Invariance of Stress and Coping Measures in Adults With HIV/AIDS

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
AIDS and Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Measurement invariance is the extent to which scales have the same meaning across groups, a condition that is necessary prior to conducting between-group comparisons. As stress and coping research increasingly examines the adjustment efforts of African Americans and Caucasians living with chronic health conditions, it is first necessary to assess the equivalence of existing stress and coping measures for both racial groups. This study examined the psychometric properties and measurement invariance of four measures used frequently in stress and coping research. African Americans (n = 204) and Caucasians (n = 83) completed pre- and post-intervention surveys as part of a randomized clinical trial that tested if telephone-administered psychotherapies could reduce depressive symptoms in persons living with HIV/AIDS. Participants completed the ways of coping checklist (WOCC), the coping self-efficacy scale (CSES), the provision of social relations scale (PSRS), and the geriatric depression scale (GDS). Several WOCC subscales initially evidenced poor internal consistency (when computed using summated composites) that improved when measurement models were applied. The 12-week test–retest reliabilities of PSRS total and subscale scores were notably lower in African Americans than Caucasians. Analyses of race-related measurement invariance showed acceptable invariance for the GDS and the CSES but less certain invariance for the WOCC and PSRS. Stress and coping researchers should examine carefully the psychometric properties of study measures within and between racial groups prior to conducting tests of between-group differences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress appraisal and coping. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Remien RH, Exner T, Kertzner RM, Ehrhardt AA, Rotheram-Borus MJ, Johnson M, et al. Depressive symptomatology among HIV-positive women in the era of HAART: a stress and coping model. Am J Community Psychol. 2006;38:275–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schreurs KMG, de Ridder DTD. Integration of coping and social support perspectives: implications for the study of adaptation to chronic illnesses. Clin Psychol Rev. 1997;17:89–112.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown JL, Vanable PA. Cognitive-behavioral stress management interventions for persons living with HIV: a review and critique of the literature. Ann Behav Med. 2008;35:26–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Scott-Sheldon LA, Kaliachman SC, Carey MP, Fielder RL. Stress management interventions for HIV + adults: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, 1989 to 2006. Health Psychol. 2008;27:129–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tate DC, Van Den Berg JJ, Hansen NB, Kochman A, Sikkema KJ. Race, social support, and coping strategies among HIV-positive gay and bisexual men. Cult Health Sex. 2006;8:235–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Heckman TG, Kochman AR, Sikkema KJ, Kalichman SC, Masten J, Goodkin K. Differences in coping and psychological distress among older African American and White men living with HIV disease. J Natl Med Assoc. 2000;92:436–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Heckman BD. Psychosocial differences between whites and African Americans living with HIV/AIDS in rural areas of 13 U.S. states. J Rural Health. 2006;22:131–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yamada AM, Brekke JS. Addressing mental health disparities through clinical competence not just cultural competence: the need for assessment of sociocultural issues in the delivery of evidence-based psychosocial rehabilitation services. Clin Psychol Rev. 2008;28:1386–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gant LM, Ostrow DG. Perceptions of social support and psychological adaptation to sexually acquired HIV among white and African American men. Soc Work. 1995;40:215–24.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods. 2000;3:4–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Warnecke RB, Johnson TP, Chávez N, Sudman S, O’Rourke DP, Lacey L, Horm J. Improving question wording in surveys of culturally diverse populations. Ann Epidemiol. 1997;7:334–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Krall EA, Valadian I, Dwyer JT, Gardner J. Accuracy of recalled smoking data. Am J Public Health. 1989;79:200–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fiscella K, Holt K, Meldrum S, Franks P. Disparities in preventive procedures: comparisons of self-report and Medicare claims data. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;29:122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Matthews BA, Nattinger AB, Anderson RC. Accuracy and certainty of self-report for colorectal cancer testing among ambulatory patients. Psychol Health Med. 2005;10:1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Turner RJ, Frankel BG, Levin DM. Social support: conceptualization, measurement, and implications for mental health. Res Commun Mental Health. 1983;3:67–111.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Folkman S, Lazarus RS. The ways of coping. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chesney MA, Neilands TB, Chambers DB, Taylor JM, Folkman S. A validity and reliability study of the coping self-efficacy scale. Br J Health Psychol. 2006;11:421–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yesavage J, Brink T, Rose T, Leirer V. Development and validation of the geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiat Res. 1983;17:37–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Satorra A, Bentler PM. Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In: Clogg CC, Eye A, editors. Latent variable analysis, applications for developmental research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994. p. 399–419.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Muthen LK, Muthen BO. Mplus user’s guide, sixth edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen; 1998–2010.

  22. Hu L, Bentler PM. Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995. p. 76–99.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bollen KA. Structural equations with latent variables. Oxford: John Wiley and Sons; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hoyle RH, Panter AT. Writing about structural equation modeling. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995. p. 158–76.

    Google Scholar 

  25. MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:130–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS, editors. Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1993. p. 136–61.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Satorra A. Scaled and adjusted restricted tests in multi-sample analysis of moment structures. In: Heijmans RDH, Pollock DSG, Satorra A, editors. Innovations in multivariate statistical analysis: A Festschrift for Heinz Neudecker. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000. p. 233–47.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gregorich SE. Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Med Care. 2006;44:S78–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Reuterberg SE, Gustafsson JE. Confirmatory factor analysis and reliability: testing measurement model assumptions. Educ Psychol Measur. 1992;52:795–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nunnally JC. Introduction to psychological measurement. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Folkman S, Moskowitz JT. Coping: pitfalls and promise. Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:745–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically-based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56:267–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Moos RH. Coping responses inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Endler NS, Parker JDA. Multidimensional assessment of coping: a critical evaluation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990;58:844–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK. The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. J Pers Assess. 1988;52:30–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Vaux A, Phillips J, Holly L, Thomson B, Williams D, Stewart D. The social support appraisals (SSA) scale: studies of reliability and validity. Am J Community Psychol. 1986;14:195–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Winefield HR, Winefield AH, Tiggemann M. Social support and psychological well-being in young adults: the multidimensional support scale. J Pers Assess. 1992;58:198–210.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by Grants R01-MH067568 (National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institute on Aging) and R01MH078749 (National Institute of Mental Health and National Institute of Nursing Research) to Timothy G. Heckman, PhD.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Ohio University, Athens, OH, 45701, USA

    Bernadette Davantes Heckman & Kristoffer S. Berlin

  2. Department of Geriatric Medicine/Gerontology, Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Northfield, OH, USA

    Timothy G. Heckman

  3. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Coral Gables, FL, USA

    Daniel J. Feaster

Authors
  1. Bernadette Davantes Heckman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristoffer S. Berlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Timothy G. Heckman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel J. Feaster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernadette Davantes Heckman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heckman, B.D., Berlin, K.S., Heckman, T.G. et al. Psychometric Characteristics and Race-Related Measurement Invariance of Stress and Coping Measures in Adults With HIV/AIDS. AIDS Behav 15, 441–453 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-010-9854-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-010-9854-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation