It appears you are trying to access this site using an outdated browser. As a result, parts of the site may not function properly for you. We recommend updating your browser to its most recent version at your earliest convenience.
Free. Author requires proper acknowledgement/citation of source for use. Please see contact information above.
Dr. Charles S. Carver Distinguished Professor Department of Psychology University of Miami P.O. Box 248185 Coral Gables, FL 33124-0751 Phone: 1-305-284-2814 Fax: 1-305-284-3402 E-mail: ccarver@miami.edu
No copy available from the Knowledge Institute. Contact author or publisher.
Free. Author requires proper acknowledgement/citation of source for use. Please see contact information above.
1989, 1994 (A-COPE), 1997 (Brief COPE)
Original, adolescent (A-COPE), and brief versions
Primary: Coping Secondary: None identified
Coping strategies.
This measure is intended to assess an individual's coping strategies and responses to stress.
This measure may be used to assess coping methods and stress responses in adolescents and adults, to identify specific coping styles and the extent to which an individual relies on one or some more than others, or to identify potentially harmful coping strategies.
Original and A-COPE: Positive reinterpretation and growth, Mental disengagement, Focus on and venting of emotions, Use of instrumental social support, Active coping, Denial, Religious coping, Humor, Behavioral disengagement, Restraint, Use of emotional social support, Substance use, Acceptance, Suppression of competing activities, and Planning (4 items on each scale).
Brief COPE: Self-distraction, Active coping, Denial, Substance use, Use of emotional support, Use of instrumental support, Behavioral disengagement, Venting, Positive reframing, Planning, Humor, Acceptance, Religion, and Self-blame (2 items on each scale).
4-point Likert scale from 1 (I usually don't do this at all) to 4 (I usually do this a lot).
15-20 minutes for original version.
None (self-report).
Scoring is done by hand. Item values (i.e. 1 to 4) are summed for each subscale. Higher scores on a subscale indicate greater use of that coping mechanism. No specific qualifications or training are indicated as being necessary for scoring or interpretation.
The norms, reliability and validity statistics included in each measure profile are those reported by the author(s) of the measure. It is important to note that altering, adding or removing questions from a measure voids these reported statistics, possibly making the revised tool unreliable and invalid.
Original: Developed on a sample of 948 undergraduate students at the University of Miami.
Brief COPE: Developed on a sample of 168 participants from Florida. Females composed 66% of the sample. In terms of ethnic background, 40% of the sample were Caucasian, 34% were African-American, 17% were Hispanic, and 5% were of Asian descent.
A-COPE: Normed on a sample of 484 adolescents ages 14-18. The sample was approximately half female and was primarily of Caucasian ethnicity.
Original: The authors report internal consistency reliabilities (alphas) of 0.45-0.92, and test-retest reliabilities of 0.42-0.89. Further studies have reported alphas of 0.49-0.95, and test-retest reliabilities of 0.32-0.95. Brief COPE: The authors report internal consistency reliabilities (alphas) of 0.50-0.90. A-COPE: The authors report internal consistency reliabilities (alphas) of 0.51-0.87.
Original: The authors report evidence of extensive convergent and divergent validities. Further studies have also found evidence of extensive convergent and divergent validities. Brief COPE: A study reported extensive convergent and divergent validities.
No copy available from the Knowledge Institute. Contact author or publisher.
Free. Author requires proper acknowledgement/citation of source for use. Please see contact information above.
Dr. Charles S. Carver Distinguished Professor Department of Psychology University of Miami P.O. Box 248185 Coral Gables, FL 33124-0751 Phone: 1-305-284-2814 Fax: 1-305-284-3402 E-mail: ccarver@miami.edu
Agargun, M.Y., Besiroglu, L., Kiran, U.K., Ozer, O.A., & Kara, H. (2005). The psychometric properties of the COPE Inventory in Turkish sample: A preliminary research [Turkish]. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 6(4), 221-226.
Carver, C. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol's too long: Consider the Brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4(1), 92-100.
Carver, C.S., Scheier, M.F., & Weintraub, J.K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 267-283.
Hudek-Knezevic, J., Kardum, I., & Vukmirovic, Z. (1999). The structure of coping styles: A comparative study of Croatian sample. European Journal of Personality, 13(2), 149-161.
Kallasmaa, T., & Pulver, A. (2000). The structure and properties of the Estonian COPE inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 29(5), 881-894.
Litman, J.A. (2006). The COPE inventory: Dimensionality and relationships with approach- and avoidance-motives and positive and negative traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(2), 273-284.
Muller, L., & Spitz, E. (2003). Évaluation multidimensionnelle du coping: Validation du Brief COPE sur une population Française. L'Encéphale, 29(6), 507-518.
Phelps, S.B., & Jarvis, P.A. (1994). Coping in adolescence: Empirical evidence for a theoretically based approach to assessing coping. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23(3), 359-371.
Sica, C., Novara, C., Dorz, S., & Senavio, E. (1997). Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE): Italian translation and adaptation [Italian]. Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata, 223, 25-34.
Zhang, W., Huang, W., & Ye, B. (1998). The identifying analysis of the multi-dimensional analysis of coping [Chinese]. Psychological Science, 21(1), 29-39.
