AIM: Although scales specific to resilience are available and widely used, qualities of resilience could be culturally sensitive. This study aimed to develop a concise scale of resilience for Japanese populations, and compare its validity to that of the Resilience Scale 14-item version (RS-14), one of the most widely used scales for measuring resilience. METHODS: The Tachikawa Resilience Scale (TRS) was developed on the basis of data obtained from unstructured interviews with Japanese motor vehicle accident survivors without psychiatric disorder. The reliability and validity of the TRS and RS-14 were then examined in cross-sectional studies performed with 523 company workers and 140 psychiatric outpatients. RESULTS: The TRS and RS-14 were negatively correlated with depressive symptoms in company workers and psychiatric outpatients and with anxiety in psychiatric outpatients, and were positively correlated with social support in company workers. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the TRS were high. Construct validity of the TRS was equivalent to that of the RS-14 in company workers, and higher than that of the RS-14 in psychiatric outpatients. CONCLUSION: The reliability and validity of the TRS and RS-14 in Japanese company workers and patients with psychiatric disorders were acceptable. The validity of the TRS was equivalent to or better than that of the RS-14. Although the TRS cannot be regarded as an established scale due to a lack of theoretical rationale, the results of this study suggest that scales measuring resilience that cover cultural aspects might be more relevant in given populations.
AIM: Although scales specific to resilience are available and widely used, qualities of resilience could be culturally sensitive. This study aimed to develop a concise scale of resilience for Japanese populations, and compare its validity to that of the Resilience Scale 14-item version (RS-14), one of the most widely used scales for measuring resilience. METHODS: The Tachikawa Resilience Scale (TRS) was developed on the basis of data obtained from unstructured interviews with Japanese motor vehicle accident survivors without psychiatric disorder. The reliability and validity of the TRS and RS-14 were then examined in cross-sectional studies performed with 523 company workers and 140 psychiatric outpatients. RESULTS: The TRS and RS-14 were negatively correlated with depressive symptoms in company workers and psychiatric outpatients and with anxiety in psychiatric outpatients, and were positively correlated with social support in company workers. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the TRS were high. Construct validity of the TRS was equivalent to that of the RS-14 in company workers, and higher than that of the RS-14 in psychiatric outpatients. CONCLUSION: The reliability and validity of the TRS and RS-14 in Japanese company workers and patients with psychiatric disorders were acceptable. The validity of the TRS was equivalent to or better than that of the RS-14. Although the TRS cannot be regarded as an established scale due to a lack of theoretical rationale, the results of this study suggest that scales measuring resilience that cover cultural aspects might be more relevant in given populations.