Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategies for Coping with Work Stressors and Family Stressors: Scale Development and Validation

  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Both individuals and organizations benefit when workers can effectively cope with stressors in the work and family domains. This study takes an inductive approach to the development of a work stressor coping scale and a family stressor coping scale.

Design/Methodology/Approach

In phase one, a comprehensive list of coping strategies was generated through a multi-step content analysis of qualitative interviews. In phase two, the content validity of the work stressor and family stressor coping strategy scales was established using data from three samples; and in phase three, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity evidence were obtained using data from two samples.

Findings

A multi-step content analysis of qualitative interview data was used to develop a list of 365 coping strategy statements (182 work and 183 family) representing 11 work and 14 family stressor coping strategies. Multiple samples were used to reduce the number of scale items, and establish evidence for the scales’ content, construct, and criterion-related validity. The final work stressor coping scale consisted of 36 items assessing 12 different strategies, and the final family stressor coping scale consisted of 45 items assessing 15 different strategies.

Implications

Findings from the present study suggest that individuals may use a wider variety of strategies to cope with work stressors and family stressors than previously thought, and these strategies may be differentially effective depending on the stressor domain (i.e., work or family) and outcome (e.g., work-to-family conflict vs. family-to-work conflict).

Originality/Value

The inductive nature of our study resulted in a comprehensive and domain-specific scales assessing how individuals cope with work stressors and family stressors.

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

Notes

  1. In two cases, an item with high standardized factor loadings was found to be too redundant with another retained item, and the content domain would be better represented if a different item was retained. Factor loadings for these two replacement items were still quite high (.56 and .65).

  2. The results from the larger initial CFAs can be obtained from the first author. These CFAs are identical to those from phase 2, unless a particular strategy dimension had undergone item modifications. The final list of scale items is also available from the first author by request.

References

  • Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E. L., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278–308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, T. D., Poteet, M. L., & Burroughs, S. M. (1997). The mentor’s perspective: A qualitative inquiry and future research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 70–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aryee, S., Luk, V., Leung, A., & Lo, S. (1999). Role stressors, interrole conflict, and well-being: The moderating influence of spousal support and coping behaviors among employed parents in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 259–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., & Fugate, M. (2000). All in a day’s work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. The Academy of Management Review, 25, 472–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltes, P. B., Baltes, M. M., Freund, A. M., & Lang, F. R. (1999). The measurement of selection, optimization, and compensation (SOC) by self-report: Technical report 1999. Berlin: Max Planck Institute for Human Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltes, B. B., & Heydens-Gahir, H. A. (2003). Reduction of work–family conflict through the use of selection, optimization, and compensation behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1005–1018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barger, T., Behrend, T. S., Sharek, D. J., & Sinar, E. F. (2011). I-O and the crowd: Frequently asked questions about using mechanical Turk for research. The Industrial Organizational Psychologist, 49, 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes-Farrell, J. L., & Piotrowski, M. J. (1991). Discrepancies between chronological age and personal age as a reflection of unrelieved worker stress. Work and Stress, 5, 177–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behrend, T. S., Sharek, D. J., Meade, A. W., & Wiebe, E. N. (2011). The viability of crowdsourcing for survey research. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behson, S. J. (2002). Coping with family-to-work conflict: The role of informal work accommodations to family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 324–341.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bolger, N., DeLongis, A., Kessler, R. C., & Wethington, E. (1989). The contagion of stress across multiple roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 175–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, J. T., Galinsky, E., & Swanberg, J. E. (1998). The 1997 national study of the changing workforce. New York: Families and Work Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work–family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 169–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., & Fiske, D. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, D. S. (1999). Personality and role variables as predictors of three forms of work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 236–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 249–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267–283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connor-Smith, J. K., & Flachsbart, C. S. (2007). Relations between personality and coping: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 1080–1107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darlington, R. B. (1968). Multiple regression in psychological research and practice. Psychological Bulletin, 69, 161–182.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeLongis, A., & Holtzman, S. (2005). Coping in context: The role of stress, social support, and personality in coping. Journal of Personality, 73, 1633–1656.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeLongis, A., & Preece, M. (2002). Emotional and relational consequences of coping in step- families. Marriage and Family Review, 34, 115–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eby, L. T., Casper, W. J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980–2002). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 124–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eby, L. T., Durley, J. R., Evans, S. C., & Ragins, B. R. (2008). Mentors’ perceptions of negative mentoring experiences: Scale development and nomological validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 358–373.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Endler, N., & Parker, J. (1990). Multidimensional assessment of coping: Critical evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 844–854.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Erera-Weatherley, P. L. (1996). Coping with stress: Public welfare supervisors doing their best. Human Relations, 49, 157–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 150–170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2004). Coping: Pitfalls and promise. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 745–774.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work–family conflict: Testing a model of the work–family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 65–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Galinsky, E., Aumann, K., & Bond, J. T. (2009). Times are changing: Gender and generation at work and at home. New York: Families and Work Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. The Academy of Management Review, 10, 76–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, D. (1972). A model of coping with role conflict: The role behavior of college educated women. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 471–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21, 967–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R., & Tracey, J. B. (1999). An analysis of variance approach to content validation. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 175–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equations Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, J., Scholarios, D., & Baldry, C. (2005). Getting on or getting by? Employee flexibility and coping strategies for home and work. Work Employment and Society, 19, 705–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. W. (2000). A heuristic method for estimating the relative weight of predictor variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1999). Bridging the work–family policy and productivity gap: A literature review. Community Work and Family, 2, 7–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kossek, E. E., Ruderman, M. N., Braddy, P. W., & Hannum, K. M. (2012). Work-nonwork boundary management profiles: A person-centered approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 112–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lance, C. E., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2002). Confirmatory factor analysis. In F. Drasgow & N. Schmitt (Eds.), Measuring and analyzing behavior in organizations: Advances in measurement and data analysis (pp. 221–254). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapierre, L. M., & Allen, T. D. (2006). Work-supportive family, family-supportive supervision, use of organizational benefits, and problem-focused coping: Implications for work–family conflict and employee well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 169–181.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, R. S. (1990). Theory-based stress measurement. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, B. C. (1990). Relation between coping strategies, sex-typed traits, and environmental characteristics: A comparison of male and female managers. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 185–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Major, V. S., Klein, K. J., & Ehrhart, M. G. (2002). Work time, work interference with family, and psychological distress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 427–436.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Major, D. A., & Morganson, V. J. (2011). Coping with work–family conflict: A leader-member exchange perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16, 126–138.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17, 437–455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Bonaccio, S. (2009). A meta-analytic investigation into the moderating effects of situational strength on the conscientiousness–performance relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 1077–1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel, J. S., & Hargis, M. B. (2008). Linking mechanisms of work–family conflict and segmentation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 509–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel, J. S., Kotrba, L. M., Mitchelson, J. K., Clark, M. A., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Antecedents of work–family conflict: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 689–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, J. M., & Cummings, L. L. (1999). Situational strength: A framework for understanding the role of individuals in initiating proactive strategic change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12, 462–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newth, S., & DeLongis, A. (2004). Individual differences, mood and coping with chronic pain in rheumatoid arthritis: A daily process analysis. Psychology and Health, 19, 283–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakland, S., & Ostell, A. (1996). Measuring coping: A review and critique. Human Relations, 49, 133–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 411–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearlin, L. I., & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 2–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rantanen, M., Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., & Rantanen, J. (2011). Do individual coping strategies help or harm in the work–family conflict situation? Examining coping as a moderator between work–family conflict and well-being. International Journal of Stress Management, 18, 24–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotondo, D. M., Carlson, D. S., & Kincaid, J. F. (2003). Coping with multiple dimensions of work–family conflict. Personnel Review, 32, 275–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotondo, D. M., & Kincaid, J. F. (2008). Conflict, facilitation, and individual coping styles across the work and family domains. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 484–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheck, C. L., & Kinicki, A. J. (2000). Identifying the antecedents of coping with an organizational acquisition: A structural assessment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 627–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheck, C. L., Kinicki, A. J., & Davy, J. A. (1997). Testing the mediating process between work stressors and subjective well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 96–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheier, M., Weintraub, J., & Carver, C. (1986). Coping with stress: Divergent strategies of optimists and pessimists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1257–1264.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schriesheim, C. A., Powers, K. J., Scandura, T. A., Gardiner, C. C., & Lankau, M. J. (1993). Improving construct measurement in management research: Comments and a quantitative approach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and-pencil survey-type instruments. Journal of Management, 19, 385–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shockley, K. M., & Singla, N. (2011). Reconsidering work–family interactions and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37, 861–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, P. A., Post, C., Brockner, J., Fishman, A. Y., & Garden, C. (2005). The moderating influence of procedural fairness on the relationship between work-life conflict and organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 13–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, E. A., Edge, K., Altman, J., & Sherwood, H. (2003). Searching for the structure of coping: A review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 216–269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2007). Strategies for coping with work–family conflict: The distinctive relationships of gender role ideology. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 1–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2012). Coping with work–family conflict: The reciprocal and addictive contributions of personal coping and organizational family-friendly support. Work and Stress, 26, 68–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnentag, S., & Braun, I. (2013). Not always a sweet home: Family and job responsibilities constrain recovery processes. In J. G. Grzywacz & E. Demerouti (Eds.), New frontiers in work and family research (pp. 71–92). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonnentag, S., Mojza, E. J., Binnewies, C., & Scholl, A. (2008). Being engaged at work and detached at home: A week-level study on work engagement, psychological detachment, and affect. Work and Stress, 22, 257–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C. A., Poelmans, S. A. Y., Allen, T. D., & Andreassi, J. K. (2007). On the importance of coping: A model and new directions for research on work and family. Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, 6, 73–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonidandel, S., & LeBreton, J. M. (2011). Relative importance analysis: A useful supplement to regression analyses. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonidandel, S., LeBreton, J. M., & Johnson, J. W. (2009). Statistical significance tests for relative weights. Psychological Methods, 14, 387–399.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Klink, J. J. L., Blonk, R. W. B., Schene, A. H., & van Dijk, F. J. H. (2001). The benefits of interventions for work-related stress. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 270–276.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Voydanoff, P. (2004). The effects of work demands and resources on work-to-family conflict and facilitation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 398–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, H. M., & Adler, S. (1984). Personality and organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 1–50.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Ludmila Zhdanova and Lindsay Kotrba for their assistance conducting interviews, and Annie Ball for her assistance with content analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Psychology Building, Athens, GA, 30602-3013, USA

    Malissa A. Clark

  2. Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA

    Jesse S. Michel

  3. Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA

    Rebecca J. Early & Boris B. Baltes

Authors
  1. Malissa A. Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jesse S. Michel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebecca J. Early
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Boris B. Baltes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Malissa A. Clark.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clark, M.A., Michel, J.S., Early, R.J. et al. Strategies for Coping with Work Stressors and Family Stressors: Scale Development and Validation. J Bus Psychol 29, 617–638 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9356-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9356-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation