Resilience is a multi-dimensional construct associated with health and well-being. At present, we do not yet have a valid, scientific instrument that is designed to evaluate adult resilience in Spanish-speaking countries and that accounts for family, social and individual components. This study aimed at investigating the construct and cross-cultural validity of the Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) by combining Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) and Hierarchical Regression models in a Hispanic Latin-American group. A community sample of 805 adults answered the RSA, Spanish Language Stressful Life-Events checklist (SL-SLE), and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25). First-order CFA verified the six factors structure for the RSA (RMSEA = .037, SRMR = .047, CFI = .91, TLI = .90). Five RSA scales and total score have good internal consistency (scales α > .70; total score α = .90). Two second-order CFA verified the intrapersonal and interpersonal dimensions of the protector factors of resilience, as well as their commonality and uniqueness with affective symptoms (anxiety and depression). An exploratory MDS reproduced the relations of RSA items and factors at first and second-order levels against random simulated data, thereby providing initial evidence of its cross-cultural validity in a Spanish-speaking group. The Four-steps hierarchical model showed that the RSA scales are the strongest predictors of anxiety and depression–greater than gender, age, education and stressful life-events. Three RSA scales are significant unique predictors of affective symptoms. In addition, similar to findings in diverse cultural settings, resilience is positively associated with age but not with education. Women report higher scores of Social Resources and Social Competence and lower scores of Perception of the Self. In conclusion, this study demonstrates the construct and criterion-related validity of the RSA in broad, diverse and Spanish speaking sample.

BackgroundAdolescence is crucial period for laying the foundations for healthy development and mental well-being. The increasing prevalence of mental disorders amongst adolescents makes promotion of mental well-being and prevention interventions at schools important. UPRIGHT (Universal Preventive Resilience Intervention Globally implemented in schools to improve and promote mental Health for Teenagers) is designed as a whole school approach (school community, students and families) to promote a culture of mental well-being and prevent mental disorders by enhancing resilience capacities. The present article aims at describing the rationale, conceptual framework, as well as methodology of implementation and evaluation of the UPRIGHT intervention.MethodsUPRIGHT project is a research and innovation project funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme under grant agreement No. 754919 (Duration: 48 months). The theoretical framework has been developed by an innovative and multidisciplinary approach using a co-creation process inside the UPRIGHT Consortium (involving seven institutions from Spain, Italy, Poland, Norway, Denmark, and Iceland). Resulted is the UPRIGHT programme with 18 skills related to 4 components: Mindfulness, Coping, Efficacy and Social and Emotional Learning.Among the five Pan-European regions, 34 schools have been currently involved (17 control; 17 intervention) and around 6000 adolescents and their families are foreseen to participate along a 3-year period of evaluation. Effectiveness of the intervention will be evaluated as a randomized controlled trial including quantitative and qualitative analysis in the five Pan-European regions representative of the cultural and socioeconomic diversity. The cost-effectiveness assessment will be performed by simulation modelling methods.DiscussionWe expect a short- to medium-term improvement of mental well-being in adolescents by enhancing resilience capacities. The study may provide robust evidence on intrapersonal, familiar and social environmental resilience factors promoting positive mental well-being.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03951376. Registered 15 May 2019.

No abstract

BackgroundHope and resilience protect against inner vulnerabilities or harsh life circumstances; they explain individual differences in physical or mental health outcomes under high stress. They have been studied in complementary or competing theoretical frameworks; therefore, the study of measures of hope and resilience should be undertaken prior to explore if they are truly value-added for research. This study investigates the convergent and incremental validity of the Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) and the Herth Hope Scale (HHS), in the prediction of anxiety and depression (HSCL-25).MethodsParticipants in this community-based sample are 762 adults from 18 to 74 years old. They answered the RSA, HHS, Spanish Language Stressful Life-Events Checklist (SL-SLE), and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25). Incremental validity analyses combined hierarchical regression and structural equation models (SEM). First, hierarchical regression models were compared based on three criteria (R 2 Diff., ΔF, and semi-partial r), then the direct effect of resilience on affective symptoms was compared with the mediated effect of resilience on affective symptoms through hope.ResultsThe hierarchical models showed that (1) hope and resilience account significantly for the variance of affective symptoms above age, sex, and life-stress; (2) Resilience Total score has greater incremental validity than positive scales of HHS Hope; and (3) RSA Total score, HHS Optimism/Spiritual support, Stressful life-events and sex are unique predictors of affective symptoms. The SEM analyses verified a stronger direct effect of resilience in the prediction of affective symptoms above the significant partial mediated effect of resilience through hope. Additionally, results show that age and better educational opportunities were associated with protection (i.e. resilience and hope) and emotional well-being (i.e. affective symptoms and hopelessness). Women showed higher scores in social competences and resources (RSA), interconnectedness and initiative to take action (HHS). However, they have poorer evaluations of own abilities and efficacy (RSA), and higher scores in all the affective symptoms assessed.ConclusionThe RSA has incremental validity above the HHS, however, both the RSA and the HHS are effective, differentiated and complementary measures of protection that are of high relevance for research on psychosocial and emotional well-being.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40359-017-0205-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.