This paper reviews a study by Pisanti (2008) that developed and validated the Occupational Coping Self-Efficacy for Nurses (OCSE-N) Scale, an instrument designed to measure nurses' ability to cope with workplace stressors. Grounded in Lazarus's cognitive-transactional theory of stress and Bandura's social cognitive theory, the study employed item generation through nurse interviews, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and reliability testing with a sample of 1,383 nurses across nine hospitals. The paper summarizes the instrument's two-factor structure, its correlations with burnout and coping strategies, and proposes an extended study applying the OCSE-N to nurses in major New York City hospitals.
The paper demonstrates instrument critique and methodology review — a core graduate nursing research skill. Rather than simply describing what a study found, the author walks through how each measurement tool (OCSE-N, CISS-SV, MBI) was constructed, validated, and statistically assessed, modeling how researchers evaluate whether a scale is fit for purpose.
The paper opens with a rationale for studying nurse stress, then establishes theoretical grounding before moving sequentially through item generation, sampling, instrumentation, statistical analysis, and results. It closes by linking findings to nursing theory and proposing a follow-up study. This mirrors the IMRaD logic common in health-sciences research papers and suits a graduate-level nursing research methods course.
In a hospital or any medical care setting, nurses make up the majority of the workforce and are the backbone of facilitating patient care between physicians. However, between meeting the demands of patients and carrying out doctors' orders, the roles nurses play are highly stressful, which influences their overall well-being. The purpose of this paper is to present findings from a study led by Pisanti (2008) regarding the relationship between nurses and their ability to cope with environmental demands, as measured by the Occupational Coping Self-Efficacy for Nurses (OCSE-N) Scale.
In order to gain a better understanding of the investigation, it is important to comprehend the theoretical foundation on which the study was based: the Lazarus cognitive-transactional theory of stress and Bandura's social cognitive theory. The former holds that certain cognitive appraisals of one's work provoke stress and other negative responses within the work environment. Cognitive appraisals can be primary or secondary.
Primary appraisal refers to one's motivation and "personal relevance of a stressful situation" (Pisanti, 2008) — essentially, the extent to which a person is invested in attaining a particular goal. Secondary appraisal involves the evaluation of coping methods and outcomes in terms of who is responsible for the circumstance, future expectancy or possibility of change, problem-focused coping, and emotion-focused coping — the latter being one's capacity to emotionally adjust to a situation. The consequences of primary appraisal include harm that has already occurred, threat of future damage, and challenge, which represents the potential for growth and progress. The consequences of secondary appraisal stem from the coping tactics adopted to manage internal and/or external demands.
The latter theory — Bandura's social cognitive theory — concerns the validity of self-efficacy beliefs. Coping self-efficacy (CSE) beliefs refer to "someone's self-appraisals of their ability to cope with environmental demands," which "may influence their reaction to stress and its outcomes" (Pisanti, 2008). Research has shown that the stronger one's self-efficacy, the greater the effort the individual invests in a given task or situation, though the degree varies depending on the specific venture or circumstance.
The research led by Pisanti used the OCSE-N Scale as its primary instrument. The instrument development process involved item generation followed by validity and reliability testing. For item generation, sixty-two nurses from two hospitals — who were already participating in a separate study — were interviewed about their work lives. Sampling was conducted across various departments, from emergency to surgical. Approximately 82% of participants were female, with an average age of forty years.
Open-ended interviews were administered to identify what nurses regarded as occupational stressors. Nurses were also asked to describe the central predicaments and obstacles they faced at work. After eliminating identical responses and grouping similar answers, nine occupational stressors were selected and subsequently analyzed by eleven health professionals. The stressful situations identified by nurses included: difficulties with patients; relational difficulties with supervisors; insufficiently defined procedures; relational difficulties with a patient's relatives; difficulties in deciding how to perform tasks; physical fatigue; managing multiple tasks simultaneously; relational difficulties with colleagues; and relational difficulties with other healthcare workers, such as physicians.
Validity and reliability testing was accomplished through several methods. Internal consistency was assessed by calculating Cronbach's alpha, while validity was evaluated by comparing dimensions of the OCSE-N with measures of burnout and coping strategies.
You’re 37% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 4 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.