Questionnaire ways of coping behavior of Lazarus test material. Questionnaire "Methods of Coping Behavior" Lazarus

When needed: to study the coping strategy, the personal style of the employee and the candidate and to overcome difficulties in life situations.

Lazarus coping test

Instruction

You are offered 50 statements regarding behavior in a difficult life situation. Circle in the line with the statement the option that most often manifests itself in your behavior.

Test

Thanks for answers!

The key to the coping test for assessing behavior in a difficult life situation of Lazarus

Description

The Lazurus test is designed to determine coping mechanisms, ways to overcome difficulties in various fields mental activity, coping strategies. This test is considered the first standard method in the field of measuring coping. The technique was developed by R. Lazarus and S. Folkman in 1988, adapted by T.L. Kryukova, E.V. Kuftyak, M.S. Zamyshlyaeva in 2004.

coping with life's difficulties there are constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts of the individual in order to manage specific external and (or) internal requirements, which are assessed by him as putting him to the test or exceeding his resources. The task of coping with negative life circumstances is to either overcome difficulties or reduce them. negative consequences either avoid these difficulties or endure them.

Coping behavior can be defined as purposeful social behavior that allows one to cope with a difficult life situation (or stress) in ways that are adequate to personal characteristics and the situation - through conscious action strategies. This conscious behavior is aimed at actively changing, transforming a situation that is controllable, or adapting to it if the situation is not controllable. With this understanding, it is important for social adaptation. healthy people. His styles and strategies are seen as separate elements of the conscious social behavior with which a person copes with life's difficulties.

The subject is offered 50 statements regarding behavior in a difficult life situation. The subject must evaluate how often these behaviors manifest themselves in him.

Key to the test

• Confrontational coping - points: 2, 3, 13, 21, 26, 37.
• Distancing - points: 8, 9, 11, 16, 32, 35.
• Self-control - points: 6, 10, 27, 34, 44, 49, 50.
• Search social support- points: 4, 14, 17, 24, 33, 36.
• Acceptance of responsibility - points: 5, 19, 22, 42.
• Escape-avoidance - points: 7, 12, 25, 31, 38, 41, 46, 47.
• Problem solving planning - points: 1, 20, 30, 39, 40, 43.
• Positive revaluation - points: 15, 18, 23, 28, 29, 45, 48.

Results processing

1. Calculate the scores by summing up for each subscale:

• never - 0 points;
• rarely - 1 point;
• sometimes - 2 points;
• often - 3 points.

2. Calculate using the formula: X = sum of points / max score × 100.

Questionnaire numbers (in order, but different) work on different scales, for example, in the “confrontational coping” scale, questions are 2, 3, 13, 21, 26, 37, etc. Maximum value on the question that the subject can score - 3, and on all questions of the subscale - a maximum of 18 points, the subject scored 8 points:

- this is the level of tension of confrontational coping.

3. It can be determined more simply, by the total score:

• 0–6 – low level tension, speaks of an adaptive variant of coping;
• 7-12 - average, adaptive potential of a person in a borderline state;
• 13–18 – high intensity of coping, indicates a pronounced disadaptation.

Result interpretation

Confrontational coping. Aggressive efforts to change the situation. Assumes a certain degree of hostility and willingness to take risks.

distancing. Cognitive efforts to separate from the situation and reduce its significance.

Self control. Efforts to regulate your feelings and actions.

Seeking social support. Efforts to seek informational, actionable and emotional support.

Acceptance of responsibility. Recognition of one's role in the problem with the accompanying theme of trying to solve it.

Escape-avoidance. Mental drive and behavioral effort to escape or avoid a problem.

Problem solving planning. Arbitrary problem-focused efforts to change the situation, including an analytical approach to the problem.

Positive revaluation. Efforts to create positive value with a focus on self-growth. It also includes a religious dimension.

The methodology is designed to determine coping mechanisms, ways to overcome difficulties in various areas of mental activity, coping strategies. This questionnaire is considered the first standard method in the field of measuring coping. The technique was developed by R. Lazarus and S. Folkman in 1988, adapted by T.L. Kryukova, E.V. Kuftyak, M.S. Zamyshlyaeva in 2004.

Theoretical basis

Coping with life's difficulties, according to the authors of the methodology, is the constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts of the individual in order to manage specific external and (or) internal requirements, which are assessed by him as putting him to the test or exceeding his resources. The task of coping with negative life circumstances is to either overcome difficulties, or reduce their negative consequences, or avoid these difficulties, or endure them. Coping behavior can be defined as purposeful social behavior that allows one to cope with a difficult life situation (or stress) in ways that are adequate to personal characteristics and the situation - through conscious action strategies. This conscious behavior is aimed at actively changing, transforming the situation that is controllable, or adapting to it if the situation is not controllable. With this understanding, it is important for the social adaptation of healthy people. His styles and strategies are considered as separate elements of conscious social behavior, with the help of which a person copes with life's difficulties.

Procedure

The subject is offered 50 statements regarding behavior in a difficult life situation. The subject must evaluate how often these behaviors manifest themselves in him.

Results processing

1. calculate the scores, summing up for each subscale:

• never - 0 points;
• rarely - 1 point;
• sometimes - 2 points;
• often - 3 points

2. calculate by the formula: X = sum of points / max score * 100

Questionnaire numbers (in order, but different) work on different scales, for example, in the “confrontational coping” scale, questions are 2, 3, 13, 21, 26, 37, etc. The maximum value on the question that the subject can score is 3, and on all questions of the subscale a maximum of 18 points, the subject scored 8 points:

- this is the level of tension of confrontational coping.

3. It can be determined more simply, by the total score:

• 0-6 - low level of tension, indicates an adaptive variant of coping;
• 7-12 - average, adaptive potential of a person in a borderline state;
• 13-18 - high intensity of coping, indicates a pronounced disadaptation.

Key

• Confrontational coping - points: 2, 3, 13, 21, 26, 37.
• Distancing - points: 8, 9, 11, 16, 32, 35.
• Self-control - points: 6, 10, 27, 34, 44, 49, 50.
• Seeking social support - items: 4, 14, 17, 24, 33, 36.
• Acceptance of responsibility - points: 5, 19, 22, 42.
• Escape-avoidance - points: 7, 12, 25, 31, 38, 41, 46, 47.
• Problem solving planning - points: 1, 20, 30, 39, 40, 43.
• Positive revaluation - points: 15, 18, 23, 28, 29, 45, 48.

Interpretation of results

Description of subscales

1. Confrontation. Resolution of the problem through not always targeted behavioral activity, the implementation of specific actions. Often the strategy of confrontation is considered as non-adaptive, however, with moderate use, it provides the individual's ability to resist difficulties, energy and enterprise in resolving problem situations, the ability to defend one's own interests;
2. distancing. Overcoming negative experiences in connection with the problem due to the subjective decrease in its significance and the degree of emotional involvement in it. The use of intellectual methods of rationalization, switching attention, removal, humor, depreciation, etc. is characteristic;
3. Self control. Overcoming negative experiences in connection with the problem due to the purposeful suppression and containment of emotions, minimizing their influence on the perception of the situation and the choice of a behavior strategy, high control of behavior, the desire for self-control;
4. Seeking social support. Solving the problem by attracting external (social) resources, searching for information, emotional and effective support. Characterized by focus on interaction with other people, expectation of support, attention, advice, sympathy, specific effective help;
5. Acceptance of responsibility. Recognition by the subject of his role in the emergence of the problem and responsibility for its solution, in some cases with a distinct component of self-criticism and self-blame. The severity of this strategy in behavior can lead to unjustified self-criticism and self-flagellation, feelings of guilt and chronic dissatisfaction with oneself;
6. Escape-avoidance. Overcoming the personality of negative experiences in connection with difficulties due to reaction by the type of evasion: denial of the problem, fantasizing, unjustified expectations, distraction, etc. With a clear preference for an avoidance strategy, infantile forms of behavior can be observed in stressful situations;
7. Problem solving planning. Overcoming the problem through targeted analysis of the situation and options behavior, developing a strategy for solving the problem, planning their own actions, taking into account objective conditions, past experience and available resources;
8. Positive revaluation. Overcoming negative experiences in connection with the problem due to its positive rethinking, considering it as an incentive for personal growth. Characterized by a focus on transpersonal, philosophical understanding problem situation, its inclusion in the broader context of the work of the individual on self-development.

Coping test answer sheet

Kryukova T.L., Kuftyak E.V. Coping Questionnaire (an adaptation of the WCQ methodology) / Journal practical psychologist. M.: 2007. No. 3 S. 93-112.

The methodology is designed to determine coping mechanisms, ways to overcome difficulties in various areas of mental activity, coping strategies.

This questionnaire is considered the first standard method in the field of measuring coping.

The technique was developed by R. Lazarus and S. Folkman in 1988, adapted by T.L. Kryukova, E.V. Kuftyak, M.S. Zamyshlyaeva in 2004, additionally standardized in NIPNI them. Bekhetereva L.I. Wasserman, B.V. Iovlev, E.R. Isaeva, E.A. Trifonova, O.Yu. Shchelkova, M.Yu. Novozhilova.

Theoretical basis

Coping with life's difficulties, according to the authors of the methodology, is the constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts of the individual in order to manage specific external and (or) internal requirements, which are assessed by him as putting him to the test or exceeding his resources. The task of coping with negative life circumstances is to either overcome difficulties, or reduce their negative consequences, or avoid these difficulties, or endure them. Coping behavior can be defined as purposeful social behavior that allows one to cope with a difficult life situation (or stress) in ways that are adequate to personal characteristics and the situation - through conscious action strategies. This conscious behavior is aimed at actively changing, transforming the situation that is controllable, or adapting to it if the situation is not controllable. With this understanding, it is important for the social adaptation of healthy people. His styles and strategies are considered as separate elements of conscious social behavior, with the help of which a person copes with life's difficulties.

The effectiveness of a particular strategy depends on the characteristics of the current situation and the available personal resources, so it is incorrect to talk about the adaptability / maladaptation of individual coping strategies. Strategies that are effective in one situation may be ineffective and even harmful in another. At the same time, a number of psychosocial factors are identified that contribute to adaptation to stressful situations relatively regardless of the characteristics of these situations. These include a complex of adaptive individual-typological (mainly cognitive-style) features (for example, coping competence, optimism, self-esteem, internal locus of control, resilience, etc.), as well as properties social network and the adequacy of social support.

History of creation and validation

The questionnaire was created on the basis of the first methodological development Folkman & Lazarus (1980) - Questionnaire " Coping Checklist» (Ways of Coping Checklist - WCC), which consisted of 68 statements formulated on the basis of conceptual developments and the results of empirical research. Subsequently, the content and structure of the questionnaire were revised and re-evaluated. In the 1998 edition, the questionnaire contains 66 statements, combined into 8 scales.

In 2004, the methodology was somewhat reduced to 50 points and validated on the Russian population.

In NIPNI them. Becheterva technique has been re-standardized. The already validated version of 50 questions was subjected to reformulation of questions, and validated on a sample of 1600 subjects - both mentally healthy and sick.

Internal structure

The questionnaire consists of 50 statements grouped into 8 scales. Questionnaire numbers (in order, but different) work on different scales, for example, in the “confrontational coping” scale, questions are 2, 3, 13, 21, 26, 37, etc.

Confrontation

The confrontation strategy involves attempts to resolve the problem through not always targeted behavioral activity, the implementation of specific actions aimed either at changing the situation or at responding to negative emotions in connection with the difficulties that have arisen. With a pronounced preference for this strategy, impulsiveness in behavior (sometimes with elements of hostility and conflict), hostility, difficulties in planning actions, predicting their results, correcting the strategy of behavior, and unjustified persistence can be observed. At the same time, coping actions lose their purposefulness and become mainly the result of emotional stress discharge. Often the strategy of confrontation is considered as maladaptive, however, with moderate use, it provides the individual's ability to resist difficulties, energy and resourcefulness in resolving problem situations, the ability to defend one's own interests, and cope with anxiety in stressful conditions.

Positive aspects: the ability to actively confront difficulties and stressful effects. Negative sides: insufficient focus and rational validity of behavior in a problem situation.

distancing

The distancing strategy involves attempts to overcome negative feelings in connection with the problem by subjectively reducing its significance and the degree of emotional involvement in it. The use of intellectual methods of rationalization, switching attention, detachment, humor, devaluation, etc. is typical.

Positive aspects: the possibility of reducing the subjective significance of intractable situations and preventing intense emotional reactions for frustration. Negative aspects: the likelihood of devaluing one's own experiences, underestimating the significance and possibilities of effectively overcoming problem situations.

self control

The self-control strategy involves attempts to overcome negative feelings in connection with the problem by purposefully suppressing and restraining emotions, minimizing their influence on the assessment of the situation and choosing a behavior strategy, high control of behavior, and the desire for self-control. With a clear preference for a strategy of self-control, a person may have a desire to hide his feelings and motivations from others in connection with a problem situation. Often such behavior indicates a fear of self-disclosure, excessive demands on oneself, leading to overcontrol of behavior.

Positive aspects: the ability to avoid emotional impulsive actions, the predominance of a rational approach to problem situations. Negative aspects: difficulties in expressing feelings, needs and motives in connection with a problem situation, overcontrol of behavior.

Seeking Social Support

The strategy of seeking social support involves attempts to resolve the problem by attracting external (social) resources, seeking informational, emotional and effective support. Characterized by focus on interaction with other people, expectation of attention, advice, sympathy. The search for predominantly informational support involves seeking advice from experts and acquaintances who, from the point of view of the respondent, know necessary knowledge. The need mainly for emotional support is manifested by the desire to be listened to, to receive an empathic answer, to share one's feelings with someone. When looking for predominantly effective support, the need for assistance with concrete actions is leading.

Positive aspects: the ability to use external resources to resolve the problem situation. Negative sides: the possibility of forming a dependent position and / or excessive expectations in relation to others.

Taking responsibility

The strategy of accepting responsibility implies the recognition by the subject of his role in the emergence of the problem and responsibility for its solution, in some cases with a distinct component of self-criticism and self-accusation. With moderate use, this strategy reflects the desire of the individual to understand the relationship between their own actions and their consequences, the willingness to analyze their behavior, to look for the causes of actual difficulties in personal shortcomings and mistakes. At the same time, the manifestation of this strategy in behavior can lead to unjustified self-criticism, feelings of guilt and dissatisfaction with oneself. These features are known to be a risk factor for the development of depressive conditions.

Positive aspects: the ability to understand the personal role in the occurrence of actual difficulties. Negative sides: the possibility of unreasonable self-criticism and the assumption of excessive responsibility.

escape-avoidance

The escape-avoidance strategy involves attempts by a person to overcome negative experiences due to difficulties by reacting by the type of evasion: denying the problem, fantasizing, unjustified expectations, distraction, etc. With a clear preference for an avoidance strategy, non-constructive forms of behavior in stressful situations can be observed: denial or complete disregard of the problem, evasion of responsibility and actions to resolve difficulties that have arisen, passivity, impatience, outbursts of irritation, immersion in fantasies, overeating, drinking alcohol, etc. , in order to reduce painful emotional stress. Most researchers consider this strategy to be maladaptive, but this circumstance does not exclude its usefulness in certain situations, especially in the short term and in acute stressful situations.

Positive aspects: the ability to quickly reduce emotional stress in a stressful situation. Negative aspects: the impossibility of resolving the problem, the likelihood of accumulation of difficulties, the short-term effect of the actions taken to reduce emotional discomfort.

The problem solving planning strategy involves attempts to overcome the problem through a targeted analysis of the situation and possible behaviors, developing a strategy for solving the problem, planning one's own actions, taking into account objective conditions, past experience and available resources. The strategy is considered by most researchers as adaptive, contributing to the constructive resolution of difficulties.

Positive aspects: the possibility of purposeful and systematic resolution of the problem situation. Negative sides: the likelihood of excessive rationality, insufficient emotionality, intuitiveness and spontaneity in behavior.

Positive revaluation

The strategy of positive reassessment involves attempts to overcome negative feelings in connection with the problem due to its positive rethinking, considering it as an incentive for personal growth. Characteristic is the focus on the transpersonal, philosophical understanding of the problem situation, its inclusion in the broader context of the individual's work on self-development.

Positive aspects: the possibility of a positive rethinking of the problem situation. Negative sides: the likelihood of underestimation by the individual of the possibilities of effectively resolving the problem situation.

Procedure

The subject is offered 50 statements regarding behavior in a difficult life situation. The subject must evaluate how often these behaviors manifest themselves in him.

Processing and interpretation of results

Raw Points Key

• Confrontational coping- points: 2, 3, 13, 21, 26, 37.
• distancing- points: 8, 9, 11, 16, 32, 35.
• self control- points: 6, 10, 27, 34, 44, 49, 50.
• Seeking Social Support- points: 4, 14, 17, 24, 33, 36.
• Taking responsibility- points: 5, 19, 22, 42.
• escape-avoidance- points: 7, 12, 25, 31, 38, 41, 46, 47.
• Problem resolution planning- points: 1, 20, 30, 39, 40, 43.
• Positive revaluation- points: 15, 18, 23, 28, 29, 45, 48.

Adapted by Kryukova et al.

1. we calculate the scores, summing up for each subscale:

• never - 0 points;
• rarely - 1 point;
• sometimes - 2 points;
• often - 3 points

2. we calculate according to the formula: X = sum of points / max score*100 The maximum value for a question that the subject can score is 3, and for all questions of the subscale, a maximum of 18 points.

For example, if the subject scored 8 points:

\frac(8)(18)*100 = 44.4%

This is the tension level of confrontational coping.

3. It can be determined more simply by the total score:

• 0-6 - low level of tension, indicates an adaptive variant of coping;
• 7-12 - average, adaptive potential of a person in a borderline state;
• 13-18 - high intensity of coping, indicates a pronounced disadaptation.

Adapted by Wasserman et al.

After calculating the "raw" indicators on the scales, it is necessary to convert them into standard T-scores using the developed tables. Tables for the conversion of "raw" indicators to standard T-scores are compiled on the basis of statistical analysis results of a survey of a representative sample of 1,627 people.

The degree of preference for the subject of the strategy of coping with stress is determined on the basis of the following conditional rule:

• an indicator of less than 40 points - a rare use of the appropriate strategy;
• 40 points ≤ indicator ≤ 60 points - moderate use of the appropriate strategy;
• an indicator of more than 60 points indicates a pronounced preference for the corresponding strategy.

Table for converting raw grades to standard scores

Practical significance

The technique can be used in the study of behavioral characteristics in problematic and difficult situations for the individual, identifying characteristic ways to overcome stress in different contingents of subjects. The questionnaire can be effective in solving the tasks of professional selection (especially for work in stressful conditions), identifying risk factors for mental maladjustment in stressful conditions. The questionnaire in combination with other methods can be used to assess the effectiveness of psycho-corrective measures and psychotherapy. Indications for the use of the questionnaire are also mass screening studies within the framework of psychohygienic and psychoprophylactic programs.

Relative contraindications to the use of the SSP questionnaire include the age of the subject under 14 and over 60 years of age. Application of the technique in these age groups subjects reduces the level of validity of the obtained test results.

Results of experimental studies

Group of patients with endogenous psychoses

The technique has shown its effectiveness as a component of complex psychodiagnostics in the clinic. So, in NIPNI them. Bekhterev proposed a comprehensive psychodiagnostic technique for patients with endogenous psychoses, including a survey using questionnaires lifestyle index , TOBOL and the Lazarus coping test. The results obtained in the course of this study are presented below and on the pages of the corresponding methods.

The survey was conducted on a sample of 410 patients: schizotypal disorder (82 people), paranoid schizophrenia (93 people), schizoaffective disorder (26 people) and bipolar disorder (73 people), who were treated in the outpatient psychiatry department of the NIPNI Clinic. Bekhterev.

Bold the values ​​for which significant differences were obtained were highlighted.

A group of servicemen who survived psychotraumatic events

For the purpose of experimental psychological assessment of the strategies of coping with stress behavior of individuals whose professional activities take place in stressful conditions, 168 servicemen were examined. The first group consisted of servicemen from among the sailors of submarines (61 people in total, average age 32.96 + 0.8 years, average service life in officer positions 13.19 + 0.8 years.) The servicemen were examined at the naval base of the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy, located in the city of Severomorsk, Murmansk region. The second group - first-year students of St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia (70 people in total), who agreed to participate in the study. The average age of the surveyed was 18.78+0.13 years. The third group included servicemen with a clinically verified diagnosis of adjustment disorder (F 43.2 according to ICD-10).

The study was conducted on the basis of psychiatric clinics in the city of St. Petersburg - Military District Hospital No. 442 named after. Z.P. Solovyov, clinic of psychiatry of the Military Medical Academy. CM. Kirov. All the studied patients (a total of 37 people aged 24–51 years, mean age 32.2±1.83 years) were hospitalized at the time of the examination. Among the reasons that determined the formation of adjustment disorders, problems in interpersonal (most often family) relationships, as well as problems in the professional and labor sphere, prevailed. Data on the prevailing forms of coping with stress behavior in the subgroups are presented in the table.

Bold values ​​were identified for which significant differences were obtained between the group and the group of servicemen with adjustment disorder.

Stimulus material

test material

Literature

1. Kryukova T.L., Kuftyak E.V. Coping Methods Questionnaire (an adaptation of the WCQ methodology) / Journal of a Practical Psychologist. - M.: 2007. No. 3. - S. 93-112.
2. Methods of psychological diagnostics of patients with endogenous disorders. Advanced medical technology. SPb NIPNI im. Bekheterev, St. Petersburg, 2007
3. A technique for psychological diagnostics of ways of coping with stressful and problematic situations for the individual. Manual for doctors and medical psychologists NIPNI them. Bekhetereva, St. Petersburg, 2009