This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. This systematic review presents findings from a conceptual and methodological review of resilience measures using an interactionist theoretical framework. The review is also intended to update findings from previous systematic reviews. Two databases (EBSCOHost and Scopus) were searched to retrieve empirical studies published up until 2013, with no lower time limit. All articles had to meet specific inclusion criteria, which resulted in 17 resilience measures selected for full review. Measures were conceptually evaluated against an interactionist framework and methodologically reviewed using Skinner's (1981) validity evidence framework. We conclude that inconsistencies associated with the definition and operationalization of resilience warrant further conceptual development to explain resilience as a dynamic and interactive phenomenon. In particular, measures of resilience may benefit from a greater focus on within-person variance typically associated with behavioral consistency across situations. The use of alternative measurement modalities to self-report scales, such as situational judgment tests, is proposed as a way of advancing knowledge in this area. Permanent repository link

The study findings suggest that the SJT is a valid assessment of resilience in at-risk workers and can be used in either summative or formative assessment under the right set of conditions. More research is needed to test the hypothesis that the SJT might be used as a formative tool to develop workplace resilience.