Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bernard, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by MacLaren, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bernard, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by MacLaren, J. E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Pediatric Psychology 29(2) pp. 131-141, 2004
Journal of Pediatric Psychology vol. 29 no. 2 © Society of Pediatric Psychology 2004; all rights reserved

Pediatric Procedural Approach-Avoidance Coping and Distress: A Multitrait-Multimethod Analysis

Rebecca S. Bernard, M.A., Lindsey L. Cohen, Ph.D., Catherine B. McClellan, M.A. and Jill E. MacLaren, M.A.

West Virginia University

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Lindsey L. Cohen, Department of Psychology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506-6040. Electronic mail may be sent to lindsey.cohen{at}mail.wvu.edu.

Objective To evaluate the construct validity of children's approach-avoidance coping and distress during immunizations, and to examine the instruments used to assess these domains. Methods We used a multitrait-multimethod matrix to examine the validity of the approach-avoidance coping and distress constructs for 62 4- to 6-year-old children receiving immunization injections. Assessment instruments of both constructs consisted of child, parent, and nurse ratings, and three behavior observation scales. Results Pediatric procedural distress demonstrated adequate convergent and discriminant validity, and it can be assessed in a valid manner. Whereas most approach-avoidance measures demonstrated good convergent validity, several measures did not adequately distinguish between avoidance and distress. Conclusions It is possible that children's approach-avoidance coping may be qualitatively different than adult's approach-avoidance. Researchers should be cognizant of these differences when designing treatments for child procedural distress.

Key words: approach-avoidance; children; coping style; distress; multitrait-multimethod.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Pediatr PsycholHome page
R. L. Blount, L. E. Simons, K. A. Devine, T. Jaaniste, M. Psychol, L. L. Cohen, C. T. Chambers, and L. G. Hayutin
Evidence-based Assessment of Coping and Stress in Pediatric Psychology
J. Pediatr. Psychol., October 15, 2007; (2007) jsm071v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.