Skip to main content

Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0

 


Scale name:  Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0

Scale overview

The ICSG 2.0 is a 28-item scale. Participants are asked to think about their loss and respond to items to express their beliefs about their feelings.

The second version was published as ICSG 2.0 in 2019.

Authors: Laurie A. Burke and others (2014) - see reference below

For Version 2.0 See Burke et al., 2019 and Burke et al., 2021

Response Type

All items are rated on a 5-point Likert-type rating.

Subscales: The authors list items associated with three subscales:

1. Insecurity with God

2. Disruption in Religious Practice

3. Estrangement from Spiritual Community

Sample items 

 I’m confused as to why God would let this happen.
 People in my spiritual community don’t want me to express my grief much or at all.

 

Reliability and Validity



See the publications for details. Internal consistency is strong.

Experts and focus group participants provided evidence of content validity for this revised version. Convergent validity was supported by correlations with negative religious coping subscale of the Brief RCOPE and the Religious and Spiritual Struggles scale. Discriminant validity was supported by a significant inverse relationship with the positive religious coping subscale of the Brief RCOPE.

Availability

Version 1: See the Burke et al. 2014 PsycTESTS entry. The items are also in the Burke & Neimery 2016 article, Appendix

Version 2: See Burke et al. 2019


 SCOPES Domain = Self/ spirituality

Permissions -- if identified

Contact the publisher- Taylor and Francis

References

Burke, L. A., Crunk, A. E., Neimeyer, R. A., & Bai, H. (2021). Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0. PsycTESTS. https://doi.org/10.1037/t85088-000


Burke, L. A., Crunk, A.E., Neimeyer, R. A. Bai, H. (2019): Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0 (ICSG 2.0): Validation of a revised measure of spiritual distress in bereavement, Death Studies, DOI: 10.1080/07481187.2019.1627031

Burke, L. A., Neimeyer, R. A., Holland, J. M., Dennard, S., Oliver, L., & Shear, M. K. (2014). Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief. PsycTESTS. https://doi.org/10.1037/t46064-000

Burke, L. A., Neimeyer, R. A., Holland, J. M., Dennard, S., Oliver, L., & Shear, M. K. (2014). Inventory of complicated spiritual grief: Development and validation of a new measure. Death Studies, 38(4), 239-250. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2013.810098, © 2014 by Taylor & Francis

Reference for using scales in research:

Creating Surveys on AMAZON or GOOGLE

 


 

 

 


Reference for clinicians on understanding assessment

Applied Statistics Concepts for Counselors on AMAZON or GOOGLE

 


 

 



Resource Link:  A – Z Test Index

 

 Links to Connections

Checkout My Website   www.suttong.com

  

See my Books

  AMAZON      

 

  GOOGLE STORE

 

FOLLOW me on

   FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton  

  

   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

 

   PINTEREST  www.pinterest.com/GeoffWSutton

 

Read published articles:

 

  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   

 

  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Personal Self-Concept Questionnaire (PSQ)

  The Personal Self-Concept Questionnaire  ( PSQ )   Overview The Personal Self-Concept Questionnaire (PSQ) measures self-concept based on ratings of 18 items, which are grouped into four categories: Self-fulfilment, autonomy, honesty, and emotional self-concept. Subscales : The PSQ has four subscales 1. Self-fulfilment (6 items) 2. Autonomy (4 items) 3. Honesty (3 items) 4. Emotional self-concept (5 items)  👉 [ Read more about Self-Concept and Self-Identity] The PSQ is a Likert-type scale with five response options ranging from totally disagree to totally agree. Reliability and Validity In the first study, coefficient alpha = .85 and in study two, alpha = .83. Data analysis supported a four-dimensional model (see the four categories above). Positive correlations with other self-concept measures were statistically significant. Other notes The authors estimated it took about 10 minutes to complete the PSQ. Their first study included people ages 12 to 36 ( n = 506). In the second s

Student Self-Efficacy

  Assessment name:  STUDENT SELF-EFFICACY SCALE * Note. This post has been updated to provide an available measure of student self-efficacy. ———- Scale overview:  The  student self-efficacy scale i s a 10-item measure of self-efficacy. It was developed using data from university nursing students in the United States. Authors: Melodie Rowbotham and Gerdamarie Schmitz Response Type:  A four-choice rating scale as follows: 1 = not at all true 2 = hardly true 3 = moderately true 4 = exactly true   Self-efficacy is the perception that a person can act in a way to achieve a desired goal.  Scale items There are 10 items. Examples: I am confident in my ability to learn, even if I am having a bad day. If I try hard enough, I can obtain the academic goals I desire.   Psychometric properties The authors reported that their sample scores ranged from 25 to 40 with a scale mean of 34.23 ( SD  = 3.80. Internal consistency was high at alpha = .84. The authors reported the results of a principal compon

Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire (MSEAQ)

  Scale name: Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire (MSEAQ) Scale overview: The Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire (MSEAQ) is a 29-item self-report measure of both mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics anxiety. Author: Diana Kathleen May Response Type: Items are rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale following a “no response” option: 1 = Never 2 = Seldom 3 = Sometimes 4 = Often 5 = usually Sample items 1. I feel confident enough to ask questions  in my mathematics class. 6. I worry that I will not be able to get a  good grade in my mathematics course.   Subscales and basic statistics for the MSEAQ       Self-Efficacy M = 44.11, SD = 10.78, alpha = .93       Anxiety M = 46.47, SD = 12.61, alpha = .93       Total Scale M = 90.58, SD = 22.78, alpha = .96 Reliability: See the Cronbach’s alpha levels reported above. Validity: There were significant positive correlations with similar measures. The results of a Fa