Psychometric Validation of the <i>Brief Resilience Scale</i> in a Sample of Vocational Rehabilitation Consumers

Tansey, Timothy N.; Kaya, Cahit; Moser, Erin; Eagle, Daniel; Dutta, Ankita; Chan, Fong

doi:10.1177/0034355215573539

Cited by 29 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, the sampling method and sample size for this study were the same as those in the original study. The results of this study also replicated the results of previous BRS studies (e.g., the structure with two latent factors and Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.71 to 0.85), including those with samples from clinical settings [17][18][19][20][21][22]24].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…The scale was developed solely based on the results of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) from four samples [1]. However, many subsequent BRS studies have used CFA to verify the underlying factor structure of the scale, suggesting that it comprises two latent factors, namely the positive items (1, 3 and 5) related to resilience and the negative valence items (2, 4 and 6) related to succumbing [17,20,24]. This phenomenon has been highlighted and justified in the BRS literature based on the effects of the use of reversed items on workers or samples from developing countries [21,22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The BRS and BRCS literature has adopted various scales to analyse the criterion validity of these scales, namely the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale [1,20], the Brief COP [1,19], the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [1,20] and the Optimism/Pessimism Scale [18,19]. To avoid using a long questionnaire in a validated Chinese version, this study used the following renowned resilience-related constructs, also used in the BRS and BRCS literature: the SWLS [3,24], the WHO-5 [19], the LOT-R [1,3], the GSE [3,18], the PANAS [1,3] and the GHQ-12 [19,21]. The results show that the BRS and the BRCS have good criterion validity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, BRS validation studies have been carried out in Brazil on middle-class young adults (α = 0.76) [17], the general adult population in Germany (α = 0.85) [18,19], Spanish adults with various medical conditions (α = 0.83) [20], blue-and white-collar workers in the Netherlands (α = 0.78) [21] and Mexican and Chilean university students (α = 0.71 to 0.77) [22]. The BRS has been used in research populations such as cancer patients [23] and vocational rehabilitation service recipients [24]. Similarly, BRCS validation studies have been performed in different languages and with different groups, such as Spanish university students (α = 0.67) [25] and a household survey sample in Germany (α = 0.78) [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Validity of the Brief Resilience Scale and Brief Resilient Coping Scale in a Chinese Sample

Fung

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study presents a cross-cultural examination of the psychometric properties of two commonly used brief self-report resilience scales, the 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) and the 4-item Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS). Five hundred and eleven Chinese university undergraduate students were recruited for this cross-sectional research. Various psychometric evaluation tools were used to evaluate the internal consistency, criterion validity, factorial validity and construct validity of these resilience scales. The results showed that both scales had good criterion validity, with well-established measures of well-being, optimism, self-esteem, self-efficacy and mental health, as suggested in the resilience literature. The BRS (a = 0.71) showed better internal consistency than the BRCS (a = 0.59). The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results also indicated that the BRS, with a two-factor structure, had better construct validity than the BRCS. The CFA results for the BRS met all of the criteria for a good model fit. The BRS was found to have better psychometric properties than the BRCS in the Chinese context. The findings will help researchers to select an appropriate resilience measure when conducting epistemological surveys of Chinese university students or the Chinese diaspora in other contexts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Validity of the Brief Resilience Scale and Brief Resilient Coping Scale in a Chinese Sample

Fung

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The internal consistency measures for the constructs of resilience, psychological distress, and life satisfaction were similar to those reported in a variety of settings. [15][16][17] Although a relationship between resilience and well-being has been previously explored, our evaluation of resilience's impact on four measures of self-perceived well-being in a cohort of older adults with chronic illness is a notable addition to the field. 18 Perhaps the greatest advantage of our decision to utilize four well-being measures is the ability to examine positive and negative dimensions of mental health.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between psychological resilience and subjective well-being in older adults living with chronic illness

Tecson

Wilkinson

Smith

et al. 2019

Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aimed to determine the impact of resilience on well-being in chronically ill adults, hypothesizing that resilient participants would have higher quality of life, life satisfaction, and happiness and less psychological distress than those with low resilience. Patients who received treatment for a chronic illness at Baylor Scott & White Health and self-identified an informal caregiver (nonpaid friend/family member who provides regular care) were eligible. After the Center for Community Research and Development administered a phone survey from March to June 2017, we built linear and ordinal logistic regression models to assess the effect of resilience on well-being while adjusting for health, finances, marital status, and gender. Forty-one participants completed the study. The average age was 67 ± 10 years; the most common illness was heart failure (39%). Participants had high resilience (median 4 [quartile 1 ¼ 3, quartile 3 ¼ 5], scale: 1-5), low psychological distress (4 [2, 7], scale: 0-24), high quality of life (8 [5, 9], scale: 0-10) and life satisfaction (5 ± 2, scale: 1-7), and 81% were pretty/very happy. The effect of resilience was significant in the expected directions in unadjusted analyses. After accounting for demographic, social, and clinical factors, resilience remained highly significant for psychological distress and happiness (b ¼-1.91, P ¼ 0.002; odds ratio ¼ 4.71, P ¼ 0.003, respectively). Psychological resilience may be a resource to preserve well-being for chronically ill individuals.

show abstract

Symptom cluster profiles following traumatic orthopedic injuries: A protocol

Breazeale

Dorsey

Kearney

et al. 2020

Research in Nursing & Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traumatic injuries affect millions of Americans annually, resulting in $671 billion in healthcare costs and lost productivity. Postinjury symptoms, like pain, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, and stressor‐related disorders are highly prevalent following traumatic orthopedic injuries (TOI) and may contribute to negative long‐term outcomes. Symptoms rarely present in isolation, but in clusters of two or more symptoms that co‐occur to affect health in aggregate. Identifying symptom cluster profiles following TOI may identify those at highest risk for negative outcomes. Dysregulation of brain‐derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is a potential biological mechanism responsible for symptom cluster profile membership after TOI and may be targeted in future precision‐health applications. The purpose of this paper is to present the protocol of a cross‐sectional study designed to identify symptom cluster profiles and measure the extent to which the BDNF val66met mutation and serum concentration of BDNF are associated with membership in symptom cluster profiles. We plan to recruit 150 TOI survivors within the first 72 h of injury. The study aims are to (1) describe TOI survivors’ membership in symptom cluster profiles, indicated by pain, sleep disturbance, and symptoms of anxiety, depression, and stressor‐related disorders, immediately following a TOI; (2) examine associations between demographic and clinical factors and symptom cluster profile membership among TOI survivors; (3) test the hypothesis that low serum concentrations of BDNF are associated with membership among symptom cluster profiles following TOI; and (4) test the hypothesis that the presence of the val66met mutation on one or both alleles of the BDNF gene is associated with membership among symptom cluster profiles following TOI.

show abstract

Psychometric Validation of the Brief Resilience Scale in a Sample of Vocational Rehabilitation Consumers

Cited by 29 publications

References 16 publications

Validity of the Brief Resilience Scale and Brief Resilient Coping Scale in a Chinese Sample

Validity of the Brief Resilience Scale and Brief Resilient Coping Scale in a Chinese Sample

Association between psychological resilience and subjective well-being in older adults living with chronic illness

Symptom cluster profiles following traumatic orthopedic injuries: A protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About