See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/316979253

Self-Esteem Inventory (Coopersmith)

Chapter · January 2017

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_81-1

CITATION READS

1 19,658

1 author:

Catherine Potard
University of Angers
53 PUBLICATIONS   251 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Etude des fonctions frontales chez les auteurs de violences sexuelles View project

Examining relationships between sexual risk-safety behaviors and physical self-concept by gender: A cluster-analytical approach. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Catherine Potard on 24 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

S

Self-Esteem Inventory (Coopersmith) Introduction

Catherine Potard The CSEI (Coopersmith 1981, 1987, 2002) is a

EA 4638 Psychology Laboratory of the Pays de la self-report questionnaire designed to measure atti-
Loire, University of Angers, Angers, France tudes toward the self in a variety of areas (family,
University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France peers, school, and general social activities) among
young people and adults. This questionnaire con-
stitutes one of the most commonly used assess-
Synonyms ments of self-esteem in studies and clinical
practice (Blascovich and Tomaka 1991). The
CSEI; SEI; SEI-SF; SF-CSEI CSEI was originally aimed at 8–15 years-olds
(School Form, Form A), but a revised form was
later designed for respondents over 16 years
Definition (Adult Form, Form C; Myhill and Lorr 1978;
Ryden 1978). In order to adapt the original form
The Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (CSEI or for use with adults, 17 of the 58 items were
SEI; Coopersmith 1981, 1987, 2002) is one of the rephrased (e.g., “kids” was replaced by “people,”
most commonly used self-report questionnaires “school” by “work”). The CSEI consists
designed to measure attitudes toward the self in of 50 items and yields one global score and four
a variety of areas (family, peers, school, and gen- separate scores representing more specific aspects
eral social activities) for adolescents and adults. of self-esteem: general self, social self-
The CSEI consists of 50 items and yields an peers, home parents, and school academic
overall score and four separate scores representing (or professional for adult form). Additional items
specific aspects of self-esteem, namely, general are included to constitute a lie scale (defensive
self, social self-peers, home parents, and school responses; eight items). The CSEI items require
academic (or professional for adult form). A set of the participant to report feelings about the self
additional items constitutes a lie scale (defensive directly and are typically scored using a dichoto-
responses; eight items). The CSEI comes in three mous scale (“like me” vs “unlike me”). Thus
versions: School Form (for ages 8–15 years, Form CSEI scores can range from 0 to 50, with higher
A), Adult Form (for ages 16 and above, Form C), scores reflecting higher self-esteem.
and Short Form (Form B). All the versions can be
used as a screening or/and diagnostic tool in clin-
ical and in research settings.
# Springer International Publishing AG 2017
V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_81-1
2 Self-Esteem Inventory (Coopersmith)

Psychometric Properties one dimensional (Coopersmith 1987), although

Factor analyses of 58-item CSEI responses its internal validity was not immediately tested.
showed mainly a large factor (global score) and More recently, however, some researchers (Hills
four conceptually coherent correlated factors et al. 2007, 2011; Potard et al. 2015) have identi-
(general self, 26 items; social self-peers, 8 items; fied a three-factor structure: personal self-esteem,
home parents, 8 items; and school academic, self-esteem derived from parents, and self-esteem
8 items). However, factor analyses of both ver- derived from peers. None of the studies of the
sions Forms A and C have been demonstrated to SF-CSEI’s validity have revealed a general self-
be troublesome. Three, five, or eight empirical esteem factor, contrary to what Coopersmith pos-
factors have been described in the various studies tulated (Coopersmith 1987). The current literature
exploring the CSEI’s factor structure (e.g., has indicated that the SF-CSEI reported satisfac-
Coopersmith 1987; Myhill and Lorr 1978; tory reliability and construct validity (with
Roberson and Miller 1986). The measure exposes Cronbach’s a ranged from 0.68 to 0.77). The
relatively high internal consistency and test-retest internal structure of the Short Form seems to be
reliability. The various forms of the CSEI have an emerging around these three clear subscales. The
internal consistency coefficient of between .80 SF-CSEI contributes to ease of administration,
and .92 across diverse cultural populations scoring, and interpretation.
(Coopersmith 2002; Lane et al. 2002; Turan and
Tufan 1987). The CSEI was found to have a test- Criticism
retest reliability of approximately .70 for adoles- The CSEI might be a useful tool for easy-to-use
cents (Form A) over periods of 5–156 weeks and measure of self-esteem, but not immune to criti-
.80 for adults (Form C) over periods of cism. Firstly as previously underscored, its factor
6–58 weeks. Several studies have demonstrated structure is debated. Secondly, the response for-
that these factors were significantly correlated mat (dichotomous scale) provides relevant infor-
highly with other self-esteem-related constructs mation about the attitudes toward self, but
(e.g., Rosenberg self-esteem scale, Piers-Harris respondents cannot express neutral or moderate
self-concept scale) with more than 0.55. No stud- attitudes. Responses are more likely to be affected
ies of discriminant validity were encountered. by social desirability bias. In the latter case, the lie
Mostly, validity has been also established by cor- scale score emphasizes an association between
relations with academic achievement, anxiety, high self-esteem and social conformism. Thirdly,
depression, and neuroticism or extraversion studies (e.g., Chapman and Mullis 2002)
(e.g., Lane et al. 2002). Factor structure, validity suggested a gender bias within items of the
coefficients, and correlations with some related SF-CSEI.
scales attest to the CSEI’s adequate estimation of
both subdomains and global self-esteem.
Applications
Short Form
In addition to the standard 58-item scale, a Short Numerous studies have indicated that self-esteem
Form of the scale (Form B; Coopersmith 1981) is is one of the most important risk and protective
available, which contains just 25 items (drawn factors in the development of mental disorders
from the 50-item scale) and features neither the and social problems (Mann et al. 2004). It is
lie scale nor the subscale scores (Coopersmith therefore especially appropriate to examine differ-
1987; Hills et al. 2007, 2011). Subjected are ential influences on specific domains of the self in
instructed to respond to statements using the adolescence and adulthood. The CSEI and the
same dichotomous format as the 58-item CSEI. SF-CSEI can be recommended for clinical and
Coopersmith developed this shortened version educational psychologists, to study the related
(SF-CSEI or SEI-SF) as an alternative to the consequences or antecedents of lower self-esteem
CSEI when time is limited. In theory, Form B is among adolescents and adults. Also, self-esteem
Self-Esteem Inventory (Coopersmith) 3

is widely viewed as a major aspect of mental References

health and is also associated with recovery after
severe illness (Mann et al. 2004). Consequently, Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1991). Measures of self-
esteem. In J. P. Robinson & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Mea-
self-esteem should be an important focus in health
sures of personality and social psychological attitudes
promotion, especially mental health promotion. (pp. 115–160). San Diego: Academic.
One of the most popular tools is the CSEI, Chapman, P. L., & Mullis, A. K. (2002). Readdressing
which is commonly used in health promotion gender bias in the Coopersmith self-esteem inventory-
short form. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163,
and more particularly in mental health research
403–409. doi:10.1080/00221320209598692.
and promotion. The CSEI is a clear, valid, and Coopersmith, S (1981, 1987). Self-esteem inventories.
reliable self-esteem screening instruments in con- Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
texts of prevention and health practice. The Coopersmith, S. (2002). Revised Coopersmith self-esteem
inventory manual. Redwood City: Mind Garden.
SF-CSEI may be appropriate for use in situations
Hills, P. R., Francis, L. J., & Thomas, E. (2007). The
where investigators lack the time to administer the psychometric properties and factor structure of a
standard CSEI but still desire to assess three major welsh translation of the school short form of the
sources of self-esteem. In this way, the SF-CSEI Coopersmith self-esteem inventory. Research in Edu-
cation, 78, 103–109. doi:10.7227/RIE.78.9.
can provide multi-outcome perspectives on health
Hills, P. R., Francis, L. J., & Jennings, P. (2011). The
promotion (focused on social support, self- school short-form Coopersmith self-esteem inventory:
perception, or family support). Revised and improved. Canadian Journal of School
Psychology, 26, 62–71. doi:10.1177/
0829573510397127.
Lane, G. G., White, A. E., & Henson, R. K. (2002).
Conclusion Expanding reliability generalization methods with
KR-21 estimates: An RG study of the Coopersmith
self-esteem inventory. Educational and Psychological
Self-esteem is a widely used concept in psychol- Measurement, 62, 685–711. doi:10.1177/
ogy. One of the most popular tools is the CSEI, 0013164402062004010.
which is commonly used in clinical research and Mann, M. M., Hosman, C. M. H., Schaalma, H. P., & de
Vries, N. K. (2004). Self-esteem in a broad-spectrum
practice. However, the original version of this approach for mental health promotion. Health Educa-
questionnaire (58 items) takes 15–20 min to tion Research, 19, 357–372. doi:10.1093/her/cyg041.
administer, which is too long for some studies. Myhill, J., & Lorr, M. (1978). The Coopersmith self-
There was a clear need for a shortened version of esteem inventory: Analysis and partial validation of
modified adult form. Journal of Clinical Psychology,
the standard CSEI for research and practice. 34, 72–76. doi:10.1002/1097-4679.
Coopersmith (1981) therefore came up with a Potard, C., Amoura, C., Kubiszewski, V., Le Samedy, M.,
shortened version (Form B) of his questionnaire, Moltrecht, B., & Courtois, R. (2015). Psychometric
comprising just 25 items. Although the author properties of the French version of the short-form
Coopersmith self-esteem inventory among adolescents
described this version as a one-dimensional mea- and young adults. Evaluation & the Health Profes-
sure, various studies have since contradicted this sions, 38, 265–279. doi:10.1177/0163278715568990.
assumption. The SF-CSEI appears to assess three Roberson, T. G., & Miller, E. (1986). The Coopersmith
specific domains of self-esteem (personal, social, self-esteem inventory: A factor analytic study. Educa-
tional and Psychological Measurement, 46, 269–273.
and family). doi:10.1177/0013164486461033.
Ryden, M. B. (1978). An adult version of the Coopersmith
self-esteem inventory: Test-retest reliability and social
desirability. Psychological Reports, 43, 1189–1190.
Cross-References doi:10.2466/pr0.1978.43.3f.1189.
Turan N, & Tufan, B. (1987). Coopersmith Benlik Saygısı
Envanterinin Geçerlilik ve Güvenirlik Çalışmasι. 23,
▶ Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
Ulusal Psikiyatri ve Nörolojik Bilimler Kongresi
▶ Self-Concept (Congress book). İstanbul, 14–18th september,
▶ Self-Esteem pp. 816–817.

View publication stats