Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess reliability and validity of the Resilience Scale 11 (RS-11) and develop a shorter scale in a population-based study. METHODS: The RS-11 scale was administered to 3942 participants (aged 64 - 94 years) of the KORA-Age study. To test reliability, factor analyses were carried out and internal consistency (Cronbach's α) was measured. Construct validity was measured by correlating scores with psychological constructs. The criterion for a shorter scale was a minimum internal consistency of .80. Shorter models were compared using confirmatory factor analysis. Sensitivity and specificity of RS-5 to RS-11 was analyzed. RESULTS: Factor analysis of the RS-11 gave a 1-factor solution. Internal consistency was α = .86. A shorter version of the scale was developed with 5 items, which also gave a 1-factor solution and showed good validity. Internal consistency of this shorter scale: Resilience Scale 5 (RS-5) was α = .80. Sensitivity and specificity of RS-5 compared with RS-11 were .79 and .91 respectively. Both scales correlated significantly in expected directions with related constructs. CONCLUSIONS: The RS-11 and the RS-5 are reliable, consistent and valid instruments to measure the ability of elderly individuals to successfully cope with change and misfortune.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rothe et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: