When is an agreement between two methods for assessing coping styles "good"? A reply to Mendolia

Personality and Individual Differences

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 1021-1023

  Egloff, Boris ^a   Hock, Michael ^a  

^a JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Anxiety; Cognitive avoidance; Interrater agreement; Repression; Social desirability; Vigilance

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033228596     PISSN: 01918869     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00030-6     Document Type: Note

References (4)

1. Egloff, B., & Hock, M. (1997). A comparison of two approaches to the assessment of coping styles. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 913-916.
2. Krohne H.W., Egloff B., Varner L.J., Burns L.R., Weidner G., Ellis H.C. The assessment of dispositional vigilance and cognitive avoidance: Factorial structure, psychometric properties, and validity of the Mainz Coping Inventory (MCI). Cognitive Therapy and Research (in press).
3. Mendolia, M. (1999). Agreement between two methods for identifying dispositional repressors: A comment on egloff and hock (1997). Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 1015-1020.
4. Weinberger, D. A., Schwartz, G. E., & Davidson, R. J. (1979). Low-anxious, high-anxious, and repressive coping styles: Psychometric patterns and behavioral and physiological responses to stress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88, 369-380.