Psychometric Reevaluation of the Coping Inventory for Task Stressors

Background and Purpose
The Coping Inventory for Task Stressors (CITS) is an empirical measure developed and evaluated in 1998. The CITS contains three, 7-item subscales designed to assess coping strategies: task-focused, emotion-focused, and avoidancecoping. Given the 16-year absence of a published, psychometric reevaluation of its major properties, the purpose of this study was to redress this literature gap and re-examine the properties of the CITS, namely its factor structure, reliability, and validity.

Methods
The study used a cross-sectional survey design with self-reported data from a sample of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) caregivers (N = 691), a population noted for various strategies in coping with caregiving burden. Recruitment phase one solicited caregivers via mailing list and support groups from an AD service organization in the Deep South. To ensure adequate representation of African American caregivers, phase two involved direct recruitment from community organizations and health agencies within African American communities.

The survey included demographics, the CITS, two standardized measures of caregiving burden, and a standardized measure of resilience. The sample was randomly split. Subsample 1 data (N₁ = 346) were submitted to CITS factor and reliability analyses. The factor model rotated to a varimax solution with no factor limitation. Factor identification was based on 1.0 eigenvalue threshold. Minimum item loadings on the CITS accorded to the formula: 5.152/√(N-2). Cronbach’s alpha and split-half coefficients determined internal consistency per CITS subscale. Subsample 2 data (N₂= 345) were submitted for convergent validity using zero-order correlations. Task-focused coping subscale was expected to correlate significantly with resilience (positively) and with the burden measures (negatively). In contrast, emotion-focused and avoidance coping subscales were expected to correlate unidirectionally with burden and bidirectionally with resilience. Significance was set at .05.

Results
The majority of the sample were female (80%) and married (62%). Almost 62% of the sample identified as Caucasian, while 36% were African American. Average age was 61. CITS factor analysis revealed three underlying components. Seven items loaded per component, suggesting the three subscales. Reliability coefficients per CITS subscale were as follows (Cronbach’s alpha/split-half, respectively): task-focused, .949/.924; emotion-focused, .938/.919; and avoidance, .930/.873. For CITS validity, task-focused subscale correlated significantly with the resilience measure (r = .42) but not with burden measures. Emotion-focused subscale significantly correlated with resilience (r = -.30) and with both burden measures (r = .11 and .14). Avoidance subscale significantly correlated with resilience (r= -.13) but not with burden measures. 

Conclusions and Implications
Pertaining to factor structure and reliability, the CITS appears to be a psychometrically sound measure of task-focused, emotion-focused, and avoidance coping strategies. These findings are comparable to the original CITS psychometric study. Each subscale converged, as expected, with caregiver resilience; however, validity findings were mixed regarding the subscales’ convergence with the most common risk to AD caregivers – caregiving burden. The CITS is a relatively brief, easy-to-administer measure to appraise diverse coping strategies. Social workers can utilize this appraisal to gain insight into the utility of the caregiver client’s coping strategy, at least regarding the strategy’s impact with caregiver resilience.