The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is related to multiple stressors that impact the wellbeing of whole populations (Serafini et al., 2020; Usher et al., 2020). In addition to the burden of a COVID-19 infection, the national lockdowns have a drastic impact on everyday life. Social physical contacts are rare, including friends and family gatherings. Structuring the work and daily activities when working from home can be also challenging (Palumbo, 2020; Rubin et al., 2020). Physical activities like cycling to work have been restricted, leisure opportunities such as going to the sports club were often impossible. At the same time, activities like watching television and sitting in front of the computer have increased (Meyer et al., 2020; Ong et al., 2020). Being at home most of the time may promote unhealthy eating habits (Mattioli et al., 2020) and alcohol use (Koopmann et al., 2020; Ramalho, 2020). Being at home for weeks or even months with reduced social contact has increased distress, loneliness, and anxiety (Bäuerle et al., 2020). To reduce the psychological burden of a pandemic, it is important to understand how people cope with these pandemic-specific stressors, and which coping behavior promotes wellbeing.
Coping is defined as a cognitive or behavioral approach to control a situational demand that is stressful (Skinner & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2016). The term coping is often referred to adaptive coping strategies, i.e., strategies that reduce distress and promote wellbeing and health (Taylor & Stanton, 2007). For example, engaging in exercising in response to a stressful situation might be seen as adaptive coping, as it may reduce distress and may increase wellbeing. However, some coping strategies may increase distress, and in turn, may be considered maladaptive. For example, smoking in response to a stressful situation could be seen as maladaptive, as it may increase distress and can harm health.
Coping with the multiple stressors in the context of a pandemic or epidemic requires specific coping skills, such as following physical distancing measures, establishing healthy lifestyle behaviors and a daily structure, or seeking social support. Research conducted during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic found associations between adaptive coping and reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression (Fullana et al., 2020). Establishing a daily routine, following a healthy diet, and taking the opportunity to pursue hobbies were most strongly related to lower symptoms of depression (Fullana et al., 2020).
To assess coping with the specific stressors during a pandemic or epidemic, a valid and reliable measure is needed. A meta-analysis of coping questionnaires (Kato, 2015) found that the most commonly used measures outside of a pan- or epidemic context were the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE; Carver et; al., 1989), the Brief-COPE (Carver, 1997), and the Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ; Folkman & Lazarus, 1988). During the current COVID-19 pandemic, the 60-item COPE (Carver et al., 1989) has rarely been used. Questionnaires with a high number of items might be difficult to be used during a pandemic, as an online-based assessment is required. The shorter Brief-COPE was applied in the general population (Fiorillo et al., 2020; Kalaitzaki, 2020; Zacher & Rudolph, 2021) and in nursing students (Sheroun et al., 2020) during the current pandemic. For example, Zacher & Rudolph (2021) found that active coping, positive reframing, seeking emotional support, and religion were related to wellbeing during the early phase of the pandemic. Unexpectedly, the coping behaviors ‘planning’ and ‘humor’ were associated with reduced wellbeing, indicating that these coping strategies might be less adaptive during a pandemic compared to non-pandemic situations.
The 66-item Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ; Folkman & Lazarus, 1988) measures problem-focused and emotion-focused strategies. Studies investigating the psychometric properties of the WCQ revealed heterogenous internal consistencies (Lundqvist & Ahlström, 2006; Rexrode et al., 2008). Although the WCQ has been widely used in other contexts (Kato, 2015), the WCQ has been rarely applied during the current pandemic. Salopek-Žiha et al. (2020) found that physicians used more problem-focused strategies than nurses, while nurses used more emotion-focused strategies. It remains unclear whether the WCQ can cover the specific coping behaviors that are relevant to the current pandemic. This concern is supported by previous studies showing that some of the WCQ items seem to measure behavior that is irrelevant for coping with specific stressors (Ben-Porath et al., 1991; Stone et al., 1991). The unstable factor structure of the WCQ (Edwards & O’Neill, 1998; Parker et al., 1993) complicates comparisons between countries, which are particularly needed during a global pandemic.
Other less well established coping measures have been used during a pandemic, including the Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire (SCSQ; Xie, 1998), the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ; Garnefski et al., 2001), and the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS; Endler & Parker, 1990, 1999). The 20-item SCSQ (Xie, 1998) assesses coping with daily life stressors. Passive coping was associated with greater distress (Nie et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020; Yu et al., 2020), while active coping was associated with resilience (Lin et al., 2020) during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, apart from a first validation study (Xie, 1998), no study systematically examined the psychometric properties of the SCSQ.
The 36-item Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ; Garnefski et al., 2001) and its 18-item short form (CERQ-short; Garnefski & Kraaij, 2006) measure cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Both measures have shown good psychometric properties (Garnefski & Kraaij, 2006; Ireland et al., 2017). The CERQ has been used during the COVID-19 pandemic. Maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies were related to depression, anxiety, and distress (Dubey et al., 2020) and mental health problems (Riaz et al., 2021). However, Dubey et al. (2020) found several unexpected associations between adaptive coping strategies, such as acceptance, and higher levels of depression and distress. These results might indicate that coping strategies that are adaptive in non-pandemic contexts might be not adaptive during a pandemic (Dubey et al., 2020). The CERQ covers cognitive coping (Garnefski & Kraaij, 2007), but does not consider behavioral and emotional coping. However, behavioral coping seems particularly important during a pandemic or epidemic, such as following governmental recommendations of distance keeping.
The 48-item Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS; Endler & Parker, 1990, 1999) and its short 21-item version (CISS-SF; Endler & Parker, 1994; Endler & Parker, 1999) have been used in a few studies during the current pandemic. The CISS measures task-, emotion- and avoidance-oriented coping. Reliability and validity have been established (Cohan et al., 2006; McWilliams et al., 2003). Findings demonstrated associations between task-oriented coping and reduced burnout symptoms (Di Monte et al., 2020). Rogowska et al. (2020) reported an unexpected positive association between task-oriented coping and symptoms of anxiety. The authors assumed this unexpected result to be pandemic-specific since the behaviors to cope with everyday stressors might be useless in times of COVID-19 when the situation cannot be changed and might lead to frustration rather than well-being (Rogowska et al., 2020).
In sum, several coping measures exist of which some have been used to investigate coping during the current COVID-19 pandemic. The COPE and the WCQ have been rarely applied during the current pandemic, as they include many items which are difficult to be applied online. The BRIEF-COPE, SCSQ, CERQ, CISS have been used during the COVID-l9 pandemic. While the findings of these studies indicate relationships between coping and wellbeing (Dawson & Golijani-Moghaddam, 2020; Zacher & Rudolph, 2021), distress (Dawson & Golijani-Moghaddam, 2020; Yang et al., 2020), anxiety (Mariani et al., 2020; Mohammadzadeh et al., 2020), and depression (Dubey et al., 2020; Mariani et al., 2020), these measures lack to capture the full range of the coping behavior that is specific for a pandemic, as these measures have been designed to assess coping with everyday stressors. Several studies reported unexpected findings that might be explained by the specific context of a pandemic (Dubey et al., 2020; Rogowska et al., 2020; Zacher & Rudolph, 2021). Consequently, several researchers have stressed the need to cover the coping behaviors that are unique for a pandemic or an epidemic (Rahman et al., 2020), particularly coping with the stressors related to physical distancing (Cauberghe et al., 2020), which is not covered by the existing measures. To better understand how people are coping with the current pandemic and how coping affects mental health, a brief, valid and reliable measure of coping behavior during a pandemic is required. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the factorial validity and reliability of the Pandemic Coping Scale, a new brief measure of coping in response to the stressors of a pandemic.