Étude de validation de la version française des échelles de codage du coping et des erreurs cognitives (CE-CAP) sur une population non clinique

Abstract

This study examined the validity and reliability of the French version of two observer-rated measures developed to assess cognitive errors (cognitive errors rating system [CERS]) [6] and coping action patterns (coping action patterns rating system [CAPRS]) [22,24]. The CE measures 14 cognitive errors, broken down according to their valence positive or negative (see the definitions by A.T. Beck), and the CAP measures 12 coping categories, based on an comprehensive review literature, each broken down into three levels of action (affective, behavioural, cognitive). Thirty ( N = 30) subjects recruited in a community sample participated in the study. They were interviewed according to a standardized clinical protocol; these interviews were transcribed and analysed with both observer-rated systems. Results showed that the inter-rater reliability of the two measures is good and that their internal validity is satisfactory, due to a non-significant canonical correlation between CAP and CE. With regard to discriminant validity, we found a non-significant canonical correlation between CAPRS and CISS, one of most widely used self-report questionnaire measuring coping. The same can be said for the correlation with a self-report questionnaire measuring symptoms (SCL-90-R). These results confirm the absence of confounds in the assessment of cognitive errors and of coping as assessed by these observer-rated scales and add an argument in favour of the French validation of the CE-CAP rating scales.