探究弹性量表的心理测量特性

Lucia Cajada, Zoe Stephenson, Darren Bishopp
{"title":"探究弹性量表的心理测量特性","authors":"Lucia Cajada,&nbsp;Zoe Stephenson,&nbsp;Darren Bishopp","doi":"10.1007/s42844-023-00102-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The aim of this paper was to critically evaluate the Resilience Scale (RS). The RS is a standardized 25-item self-report assessment tool that measures the degree of individual resilience focusing on positive psychological characteristics instead of deficits. Participants are required to rate, using a 7-point Likert item, how much they agree or disagree with the statements and how much they identify with them; higher scores reflect higher levels of resilience. The test authors suggest that five dimensions underpin the RS: <i>equanimity</i>, <i>perseverance</i>, <i>meaningfulness</i>, <i>self-reliance</i>, and <i>existential aloneness</i>, and the scale loads onto two factors described as personal competence and acceptance of self and life. However, there is little empirical support for the conceptual framework. The tool has been translated and validated in several languages as well as administered to over 3 million people around the world in 150 countries, making it the most widely used resilience measure. Nevertheless, there are questions with regards to the underlying construct and content validity, since the proposed theoretical constructs underpinning the scale are open to debate. Despite its popularity and apparent reliability, there are potential difficulties with the measure which are presented here. Finally, it is suggested that the scale would benefit from further examination of the underlying constructs which contribute to resilience.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72113,"journal":{"name":"Adversity and resilience science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s42844-023-00102-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the Psychometric Properties of the Resilience Scale\",\"authors\":\"Lucia Cajada,&nbsp;Zoe Stephenson,&nbsp;Darren Bishopp\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s42844-023-00102-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The aim of this paper was to critically evaluate the Resilience Scale (RS). The RS is a standardized 25-item self-report assessment tool that measures the degree of individual resilience focusing on positive psychological characteristics instead of deficits. Participants are required to rate, using a 7-point Likert item, how much they agree or disagree with the statements and how much they identify with them; higher scores reflect higher levels of resilience. The test authors suggest that five dimensions underpin the RS: <i>equanimity</i>, <i>perseverance</i>, <i>meaningfulness</i>, <i>self-reliance</i>, and <i>existential aloneness</i>, and the scale loads onto two factors described as personal competence and acceptance of self and life. However, there is little empirical support for the conceptual framework. The tool has been translated and validated in several languages as well as administered to over 3 million people around the world in 150 countries, making it the most widely used resilience measure. Nevertheless, there are questions with regards to the underlying construct and content validity, since the proposed theoretical constructs underpinning the scale are open to debate. Despite its popularity and apparent reliability, there are potential difficulties with the measure which are presented here. Finally, it is suggested that the scale would benefit from further examination of the underlying constructs which contribute to resilience.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72113,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Adversity and resilience science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s42844-023-00102-3.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Adversity and resilience science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42844-023-00102-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adversity and resilience science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42844-023-00102-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是对弹性量表(RS)进行批判性评估。RS是一种标准化的25项自我报告评估工具,用于衡量个人的适应力,重点关注积极的心理特征而不是缺陷。参与者被要求用一个7分的Likert项目对他们对这些陈述的同意或不同意程度以及他们对这些说法的认同程度进行评分;分数越高,反映出更高的应变能力。测试作者认为,五个维度支撑着RS:平静、毅力、有意义、自立和存在孤独,量表加载到两个因素上,即个人能力和对自我和生活的接受。然而,这一概念框架几乎没有实证支持。该工具已被翻译成多种语言并进行了验证,并在全球150个国家的300多万人中进行了管理,使其成为使用最广泛的复原力衡量标准。然而,由于所提出的支撑量表的理论结构有待商榷,因此在基本结构和内容有效性方面存在问题。尽管它很受欢迎,而且明显可靠,但这里提出的措施仍存在潜在的困难。最后,有人建议,该量表将受益于对有助于恢复力的基本结构的进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring the Psychometric Properties of the Resilience Scale

The aim of this paper was to critically evaluate the Resilience Scale (RS). The RS is a standardized 25-item self-report assessment tool that measures the degree of individual resilience focusing on positive psychological characteristics instead of deficits. Participants are required to rate, using a 7-point Likert item, how much they agree or disagree with the statements and how much they identify with them; higher scores reflect higher levels of resilience. The test authors suggest that five dimensions underpin the RS: equanimity, perseverance, meaningfulness, self-reliance, and existential aloneness, and the scale loads onto two factors described as personal competence and acceptance of self and life. However, there is little empirical support for the conceptual framework. The tool has been translated and validated in several languages as well as administered to over 3 million people around the world in 150 countries, making it the most widely used resilience measure. Nevertheless, there are questions with regards to the underlying construct and content validity, since the proposed theoretical constructs underpinning the scale are open to debate. Despite its popularity and apparent reliability, there are potential difficulties with the measure which are presented here. Finally, it is suggested that the scale would benefit from further examination of the underlying constructs which contribute to resilience.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信