Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales (CPS)

Abstract

The Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales (CPS) is a specialized psychological scale developed by P. K. Kerig primarily for use by mental health professionals, including psychologists and counselors. Its fundamental objective is to provide a comprehensive and quantitative assessment of an individual’s capacity for managing personal and interpersonal conflict, coupled with their efficacy in utilizing problem-solving skills.

The CPS is designed to help clinicians identify specific areas of strength and weakness concerning conflict resolution, stress management, and handling significant interpersonal disagreements. By measuring both the frequency and severity of conflicts, alongside the specific behavioral strategies employed during disputes, the scale offers crucial diagnostic information necessary for developing targeted intervention and therapeutic strategies, particularly within couple and family dynamics.

Keywords

Conflict management, Problem-Solving, Interpersonal Conflict, Marital Satisfaction, Couple Dynamics, Conflict Strategies, Psychometrics, Stress Management, Interparental conflict, Relationship assessment, Family psychology, Emotional regulation, Aggression scales

Authors

P. K. Kerig

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales (CPS) is dual: to facilitate descriptive assessment and to inform clinical intervention planning. Firstly, the scale generates a detailed, quantitative measure concerning the occurrence, impact, and characteristics of conflicts within an individual’s life, focusing particularly on significant relationships such as marital or parental partnerships. Secondly, the derived results are explicitly intended to guide clinicians in developing effective strategies aimed at improving the individual’s or couple’s conflict resolution skills and overall emotional regulation capacity.

The CPS is highly valuable for evaluating complex couple dynamics. It assesses not only the sheer frequency of disagreements but also the perceived efficacy (resolution rate) of attempts made to solve those problems. This detailed profiling process allows for the systematic identification of destructive conflict patterns, such as emotional withdrawal, aggressive confrontation, or stonewalling. These identified patterns serve as essential targets for couple counseling and conflict management interventions.

Construct

The Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales (CPS) operationalizes a complex, multidimensional construct encompassing both the quantitative presence of relationship conflict and the qualitative behavioral responses employed in its management. The construct is systematically broken down into four core conceptual areas that collectively define an individual’s conflict competency: the overall degree of conflict experienced, specific skills related to problem-solving, stress management capacity related to conflict situations, and the ability to handle interpersonal disputes effectively.

In addition to these broad domains, the scale meticulously examines specific dimensions of relationship dynamics. These include the frequency and severity of minor versus major disagreements, the perceived degree of “problem” associated with 21 specific relationship issues (e.g., finances, childrearing), and the rate of mutual satisfaction achieved in conflict resolution (efficacy). Crucially, the CPS also measures 46 distinct conflict strategies—the specific overt and covert behaviors used by both the individual and their partner during disagreements, ranging from collaborative approaches to various forms of aggression and avoidance.

Validity

Although the source content does not provide explicit traditional validity measures, such as reported construct, convergent, or discriminant validity coefficients, the structure of the CPS demonstrates strong evidence of face and content validity. This is particularly evident in the domain of interparental conflict research, as highlighted in the primary reference by Kerig (1996). The instrument’s comprehensive design, covering 21 specific relationship issues and 46 distinct behavioral strategies, ensures that the scale addresses a broad and representative spectrum of relevant conflict dimensions.

Subsequent academic research and doctoral theses utilizing the CPS have provided empirical evidence supporting its practical utility in clinical and research settings focused on family dynamics and marital adjustment. The scale’s confirmed ability to differentiate reliably between various conflict strategies (e.g., constructive collaboration versus destructive physical aggression) further supports its internal structural validity and relevance to the measured constructs.

Reliability

The reliability of the Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales, specifically its internal consistency, is reported using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients across the primary domains. These coefficients generally demonstrate strong to excellent reliability for the various subscales, confirming that the items within each measured domain consistently assess the underlying construct, which is fundamental to sound psychometrics.

Reported internal consistency (alpha coefficients) for key domains indicate high dependability:

• Frequency/Severity: 0.75 and 0.78 (Acceptable reliability).
• Degree of Problem: 0.98 and 0.98 (Excellent reliability, indicating near-perfect internal correlation).
• Resolution: 0.79 and 0.79 (Good reliability).
• Efficacy: 0.94 and 0.91 (Excellent reliability).

Factor Analysis

Factor analysis was employed in the development of the Conflict Strategies section of the CPS to group the 46 specific behavioral items into broader, theoretically meaningful dimensions. This statistical approach provides a nuanced structural understanding of how individuals engage in conflict, moving beyond simple frequency counts to specific, measurable styles of interaction. The reported Cronbach’s alpha coefficients confirm the strong internal coherence and stability of these derived factors.

Identified factors reflecting distinct conflict engagement styles (with corresponding alpha coefficients):

• Collaboration: 0.86 and 0.86 (High internal consistency for constructive problem-solving).
• Avoidance-Capitulation: 0.70 and 0.74 (Acceptable consistency for passive or withdrawing responses).
• Stonewalling/Stalemate: 0.76 and 0.78 (Good consistency for non-responsive or deadlocked conflict behavior).
• Verbal Aggression: 0.85 and 0.84 (Strong consistency for verbally abusive tactics).
• Physical Aggression: 0.83 and 0.87 (Strong consistency for physical violence or threat).
• Child Involvement: 0.81 and 0.85 (Strong consistency for inappropriately involving children in parental disputes).

Instrument

Test Type: Self-Report Questionnaire / Psychological Assessment Tool

Format: Paper-and-pencil inventory utilizing various Likert and numerical rating scales, including a 6-point frequency scale, a 0-100 severity scale, and a 4-point strategy scale.

Language Available: English (Original language of publication).

Population Group: Individuals in committed relationships or couples (marital/partnered).

Age Group: Adults (typically those involved in family or couple counseling).

Population Details: The scale was originally validated primarily in samples focusing on family function and interparental conflict, making it especially relevant when assessing the impact of parental conflict on child adjustment.

Test Methodology: The instrument requires participants to rate the frequency of conflict, the severity of 21 specific relationship problems, the efficacy of problem resolution, and the frequency with which both the respondent and their partner employ 46 distinct conflict strategies.

Keywords

Relationship assessment, Marital conflict, Conflict resolution, Problem-solving skills, Family psychology, Emotional regulation, Aggression scales

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source material.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source material.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: The primary academic publication detailing the scale is Kerig (1996).

Permissions and Fee: Information regarding current licensing fees or explicit permissions for clinical use is not detailed in the source material. Researchers often utilize such scales under fair use guidelines or by contacting the original author, P. K. Kerig. The instrument is publicly accessible via an academic repository link. The source document can be accessed here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232506616.

Reference’s

• Kerig, P. K. (1996). Assessing the links between interparental conflcit and child adjustment: The Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales. Journal of Family Psychology, 10, 454-473.
• Kielpikowski, Magdalena Maria. (2011). Family Dynamics and Children’s Outcomes: the Role of Silent Interparental Conflict. Victoria University of Wellington. Doctoral thesis.
• Hogge, Jennifer L., (2007). “Relationships Among Marital Satisfaction, Marital Conflict Dimensions, and Marital Conflict Strategies”. All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2595. The associated digital commons link is: http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/2595.

Items of the Conflicts and Problem-Solving Scales (CPS)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Frequency/ severity

All couples have conflicts from time to time‚ and there are many ways that partners can try to handle disagreements when they arise Please tell us about yours DURING THE LAST YEAR.

1. How often do you and your partner have minor disagreements (e .g. ·’spats”‚ getting on each other’s nerves)?

1=once a year or less‚ 2=every 4 – 6 months‚ 3=every 2 – 3 months‚ 4=once or twice a month‚ 5=once or twice a week‚ 6=just about every day

2. How often do you and your partner have major disagreements (e.g. big fights‚ “blow-ups”)?

1=once a year or less‚ 2=every 4 – 6 months‚ 3=every 2 – 3 months‚ 4=once or twice a month‚ 5=once or twice a week‚ 6=just about every day

Degree of problem/ Efficacy

Left side: For each issue‚ please rate how much of a problem it is currently in your relationship on a scale ranging from: 0 (no problem at all) to 100 (a severe problem):

Right side: For each problem ‚ please rate how often you resolve disagreements to your mutual satisfaction from 0 (never) to 100%‚ (always). I fit is no problem at all‚ leave this column blank Degree %of time of resolved problem

1. Childrearing/ issues concerning child(ren)

2. Career decisions

3. Balancing demands of work and home life

4. Household tasks‚ who does what around house

5. Money‚ handling family finances

6. Recreation‚ leisure time activities

7. Relationships with in-laws

8. Relationships with friends

9. Jealousy/mistrust/extramarital affairs

10.Our sexual relationship

11.Communication between us

12.Demonstrating affect ion‚ intimacy‚ closeness

13.Amount of time spent together

14.Alcohol and/or drug use

15.Conduct (right‚ good‚ or proper behavior)

16.Aims‚ goals‚ values‚ philosophy of life

17.Religion

18.How we make decisions‚ who “calls the shots”‚ who is going to be the ” boss”

19.Personality clashes or differences (e.g. fee ling the other is moody‚ overly critical‚ or hard to get along with)

20.Differences of opinion regarding egalitarian versus traditional sex roles

21.Others: (specify)

Conflict strategies

What strategies do you and your partner use when you have disagreements with each other?

Using the four point scale below‚ show how often YOU use each strategy on the left side and how often YOUR PARTNER uses each strategy on the right side.

0= Never‚ 1=Rarely‚ 2=Sometimes‚ 3=Often

1. Talk it out with one another [partner]

2. Express thoughts and fee lings openly

3. Listen to each other’s point of view

4. Try to understand what partner is really feeling

5. Try to reason with the other [partner]

6. Seek intervention from a counselor/ therapist/ friend

7. Try to find a solution that meets both [of our] needs equally

8. Compromise‚ meet partner half way‚[ “split the difference”]

9. Try to smooth things over

10.Give in to another’s [partner’s] viewpoint to escape argument

11. Try to ignore problem‚ avoid talking about it

12.Change the subject

13.Clam up‚ hold in Feelings

14.Leave the room

15.Leave the house [Storm out of the house]

16.Accept the blame‚ apologize

17. Placate [“Put up with”]‚ humor‚ indulge the other [partner]

18.Cry

19.Sulk‚ refuse to talk‚ give the “silent treatment”

20.Complain‚ bicker without really getting anywhere

21.Enlist friends or family to support own point of view

22.Threaten to end relationship

23.Withdraw love or affection

24.Become angry with child when really angry with partner

25.Argue in front of the child(ren)

26. Involve the chid(ren) in our argument

27.Insist on own point of view

28.Try to convince the other [partner] of own way of thinking

29. Raise voice‚ yell‚ shout

30.Interrupt/don ‘t listen to the other [partner]

31.Become sarcastic

32.Make accusations

33.Name-calling‚ cursing‚ insulting

34.Say or do something to hurt other’s [partner’s] feelings

35.Throw objects‚ slam doors‚ break things

36.Throw something [at partner]

37. Threaten to hurt partner

38. Push‚ pull‚ shove‚ grab. handle partner [roughly]

39.Slap partner

40.Strike‚ kick‚ bite partner

41.Beat up partner [Beat partner severely]

42. Harm self

43. Confide in child(ren) about problems with partner

44. Confide in child(ren) about problems with partner

45. Argue when the child(ren) might be able to overhear

46. Talk with child(ren) about conflict with spouse [partner]