Single-item principal stress and coping measures: Concurrent and predictive validity and comparisons to teacher measures.

School psychology (Washington, D.C.) Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-12 DOI:10.1037/spq0000555
James Sebastian, David Aguayo, Wenxi Yang, Wendy M Reinke, Keith C Herman
{"title":"Single-item principal stress and coping measures: Concurrent and predictive validity and comparisons to teacher measures.","authors":"James Sebastian, David Aguayo, Wenxi Yang, Wendy M Reinke, Keith C Herman","doi":"10.1037/spq0000555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present study analyzed concurrent and predictive validity of single-item scales for assessing principal stress and coping. We examined concurrent and prospective relations among stress and coping single-items with principal job satisfaction, overall health, perceptions of school safety, and principal leadership self-efficacy. We also compared principals and teachers on their stress and coping levels using the same single-item scales. Consistent with the literature on teacher stress and coping, the correlations of principal coping with different outcomes-job satisfaction, overall health, leadership efficacy, and safety perceptions-were stronger in comparison to the correlations between principal stress and those same outcomes. In regression models with both stress and coping, only principal coping predicted concurrent and future principal job satisfaction and overall health, as well as change in those outcomes. Coping also predicted concurrent but not future perceptions of school safety. Stress and coping did not consistently predict concurrent or future measures of leadership self-efficacy. Last, we found that principals reported even higher levels of stress than the well-documented high levels reported by teachers. We discuss areas for further research and potential use of these measures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74763,"journal":{"name":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","volume":" ","pages":"336-347"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000555","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study analyzed concurrent and predictive validity of single-item scales for assessing principal stress and coping. We examined concurrent and prospective relations among stress and coping single-items with principal job satisfaction, overall health, perceptions of school safety, and principal leadership self-efficacy. We also compared principals and teachers on their stress and coping levels using the same single-item scales. Consistent with the literature on teacher stress and coping, the correlations of principal coping with different outcomes-job satisfaction, overall health, leadership efficacy, and safety perceptions-were stronger in comparison to the correlations between principal stress and those same outcomes. In regression models with both stress and coping, only principal coping predicted concurrent and future principal job satisfaction and overall health, as well as change in those outcomes. Coping also predicted concurrent but not future perceptions of school safety. Stress and coping did not consistently predict concurrent or future measures of leadership self-efficacy. Last, we found that principals reported even higher levels of stress than the well-documented high levels reported by teachers. We discuss areas for further research and potential use of these measures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

单项校长压力和应对措施:并发和预测有效性以及与教师测量方法的比较。
本研究分析了评估校长压力和应对能力的单项量表的并发效度和预测效度。我们研究了压力和应对单项量表与校长工作满意度、总体健康状况、学校安全感和校长领导自我效能感之间的并发关系和前瞻关系。我们还使用相同的单项量表对校长和教师的压力和应对水平进行了比较。与有关教师压力和应对的文献一致,校长的应对与不同结果--工作满意度、总体健康状况、领导效能感和安全感--之间的相关性要强于校长压力与这些相同结果之间的相关性。在同时包含压力和应对的回归模型中,只有校长应对可以预测当前和未来的校长工作满意度和总体健康状况,以及这些结果的变化。应对也能预测当前的学校安全感,但不能预测未来的学校安全感。压力和应对并不能预测当前和未来的领导自我效能感。最后,我们发现,校长报告的压力水平甚至高于教师报告的有据可查的高水平。我们讨论了进一步研究的领域以及这些测量方法的潜在用途。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信