Psicothema was founded in Asturias (northern Spain) in 1989, and is published jointly by the Psychology Faculty of the University of Oviedo and the Psychological Association of the Principality of Asturias (Colegio Oficial de Psicología del Principado de Asturias).
We currently publish four issues per year, which accounts for some 100 articles annually. We admit work from both the basic and applied research fields, and from all areas of Psychology, all manuscripts being anonymously reviewed prior to publication.
Psicothema, 2011. Vol. Vol. 23 (nº 3). 464-474
Antonio Rial Boubeta1, Guadalupe de la Iglesia2, Paula Ongarato2 y Mercedes Fernández Liporace2
La evaluación del afrontamiento es objeto de controversia, no habiendo al día de hoy consenso sobre su dimensionalidad. Se presenta una versión abreviada para adolescentes y universitarios del Coping Responses Inventory-Youth Form de Moos. El estudio psicométrico realizado con 1.160 estudiantes argentinos incluyó: a) estadísticos descriptivos, b) análisis factorial confirmatorio, y c) estudio de consistencia interna. Se compararon tres modelos (unifactorial, bifactorial y tetrafactorial) en dos submuestras aleatorias y en 500 submuestras diferentes obtenidas mediante un procedimiento de Bootstrap. Además se establecieron sucesivos modelos anidados con restricciones progresivas en submuestras segmentadas por sexo y edad. Los resultados indican un mejor ajuste del modelo tetrafactorial, así como su estabilidad en distintos grupos.
Dimensionality of the Coping Inventory for adolescents and college students. Assessing coping has been a controversial subject and to this day, there is no consensus about its dimensionality. A short version for adolescents and college students of Moos’ Coping Responses Inventory-Youth Form is presented. Psychometric analyses performed with 1,160 Argentinean students included: a) descriptive statistics, b) confirmatory factor analysis, and c) internal consistency. Three models (1-factor, 2-factor and 4-factor) were compared in two randomized samples, and by a bootstrap procedure carried out in 500 different samples. Nested models with progressive restrictions were also established successively in samples split by sex and age. Results indicated a better fit of the 4-factor model as well as its stability across different groups.