Research Article

Assessing the Structure of the Ways of Coping Questionnaire in Fibromyalgia Patients Using Common Factor Analytic Approaches

Table 1

Summary of previous factor analytic studies of the WOC.

AuthorsYearPopulationStressornApproachRotationExtraction ruleFactorsNames of factors

Folkman & Lazarus1985Californian undergraduate studentsIn situ: exams324 (108 independent)“Common factor analyses” (NOS)ObliqueInterpretability6 Confrontive coping
Distancing
Self-controlling
Seeking social support
Accepting responsibility
Escape-avoidance
Planful problem-solving
Positive reappraisal

Vitaliano et al.1985Psychiatric outpatients; Alzheimer’s disease spousal caregivers; medical In situ: anger; caregiving; occupation-education83;
62;
425
PCAOrthogonal (varimax)Eigenvalue > 1
Interpretability
Problem-focused coping
Blamed self
Wishful thinking
Seeking social support
Avoidance

Folkman et al.1986White, Southern Californian married adults (women aged 35–45 years)In situ: child-rearing150Alpha factoring; PAF (8 factors preselected)ObliqueInterpretability8Confrontive coping
Distancing
Self-controlling
Seeking social support
Accepting responsibility
Escape-avoidance
Planful problem-solving
Positive reappraisal

Aldwin & Revenson1987Southern Californian adultsIn situ: recalling any recent stressor291PAFOrthogonal (varimax)
Oblique
Interpretability
“Clearest and most interpretable results on both conceptual and empirical grounds” (p. 340)
8Escapism
Cautiousness
Instrumental action
Minimization
Support mobilization
Self-blame
Negotiation
Seeking meaning

Scherer et al.1988Southern U.S. undergraduate studentsErsatz: stressful events vignettes491Adopted Folkman and Lazarus [10] approach (NOS)ObliqueEigenvalue > 15Problem-focused
detachment
Wishful thinking
Seeking social support
Focusing on the positive

Parker et al.1993Ontarian undergraduate studentsIn situ: examsStudy 1 (Derivation): 530
Study 2 (Replication): 392
PAFOblique
Orthogonal
Eigenvalue > 1
Scree plot visual analysis
4Confrontive/seeking social support
Problem-focused
Denial
Distancing/avoiding
Not replicated

Mishel & Sorenson1993Female gynecological cancer patientsIn situ: newly diagnosed, undergoing treatment231PCAOrthogonal (varimax)Not specified7Bargaining
Focusing on the positive
Social support
Concentrated efforts
Wishful thinking
Detachment
Acceptance

Chan1994Chinese students and teachersIn situ: Events of daily living657MLFOrthogonal (varimax)Scree plot visual analysis
TLI
Interpretability
5% unique variance
4Rational problem-solving
Resigned distancing
Seeking support and ventilation
Passive wishful thinking

Wineman et al.1994Adults with spinal cord injury or multiple sclerosisIn situ: disease-related655EFAOrthogonal (quartimax)Eigenvalue > 1
Scree plot visual analysis
3Cognitive reframing
Emotional respite
Direct assistance

Smyth & Yarandi1996Working African-American womenIn situ: work stressors656PFAObliqueScree plot visual analysis3Active coping
Avoidant coping
Minimizing the situation

Ax1999Adults with chronic fatigue syndrome, myalgic encephalomyelitis, or postviral fatigue; adult caregiversIn situ: disease-related; caregiving155;
95
PCAOrthogonal (varimax) and convergenceScree plot visual analysis8Confrontive coping
Distancing
Self-controlling
Seeking social support
Accepting responsibility
Escape-avoidance
Planful problem-solving
Positive reappraisal

Sørlie & Sexton2001Adult surgery patients; adult surgery patientsIn situ: surgery555;
482
PAFOrthogonal (varimax)Eigenvalue > 1
Scree plot visual analysis
5Wishful thinking
Goal-oriented
Seeking support
Thinking it over
Avoidance

Rosberger et al.2002Female breast cancer patientsIn situ: newly diagnosed156FA (NOS)ObliqueScree plot visual analysis3Positive problem-solving
Escape/avoidance
Seeking social support

Hwang et al.2002U.S. healthcare workers; Chinese healthcare workers; Chinese teachers; Taiwanese teachersIn situ: work stressors682;
396;
372;
364
PCAOrthogonal (varimax)Eigenvalue > 1Planning
Positive reappraisal
Distancing

Lundqvist & Ahlström2006Swedish adults with neurological diseases; Swedish next-of-kin; Swedish studentsIn situ: disease-related; caregiving; education219;
77;
214
Confirmatory MLFObliqueRMSEA
GFI
AGFI
CFI
IFI
8Confrontive coping
Distancing
Self-controlling
Seeking social support
Accepting responsibility
Escape-avoidance
Planful problem-solving
Positive reappraisal

Senol-Durak et al.2011Turkish undergraduate students;
Turkish adults
Not specified: administered in classroom, work, and home environmentsStudy 1: 472
Study 2: 485
Study 3: 416
PCAObliqueEigenvalue > 1
PA
MAP
20
8
Planful problem-solving
Keep to self
Seeking social support
Accept responsibility
Escape-avoidance
Refuge in supernatural forces
Refuge in fate

Padyab et al.2012Iranian adultsIn situ: most recent stressful event739PCAObliquePA7Confrontive coping
Distancing
Self-control
Seeking social support
Escape-avoidance
Planful problem-solving
Positive reappraisal

Note. PCA = principal components analysis; PAF = principal axis factoring; MLF = maximum likelihood factoring; PA = parallel analysis; MAP = minimum average partial; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index; RMSEA = root mean squared error of approximation; GFI = Good of Fit Index; AGFI = Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; IFI = Incremental Fit Index; NOS = not otherwise specified. factors were extracted mathematically, but one factor was divided (based on rationale) into three unique factors. medical student sample was used as sample for the primary analysis to determine the number of factors. factors were extracted mathematically, but two factors were combined (based on rationale and the low numbers of items that loaded onto the factors). factors were chosen, because these were the only ones that replicated across each of the four samples. 5-point Likert-type scale supplanted the original 4-point scale in this study. was the apparently preferred solution to the authors.