Melissa Julian1, Alyssa C D Cheadle2, Kendra S Knudsen1,3, Robert M Bilder1,3,4, Christine Dunkel Schetter1,4. 1. Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. 2. Department of Psychology, Hope College, Holland, Michigan, USA. 3. Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Abstract
Objective: This paper presents a theory-based brief resilience scale, the Resilience Resources Scale (RRS), and evidence for its factor structure, reliability, and validity in two studies of undergraduate students. Participants: Study 1 sampled 295 students and Study 2 sampled 244 students. Methods: Study 1 participants completed the RRS and other measures online at one of two time points eight weeks apart (n = 193), or at both time points (n = 102). Study 2 participants completed the RRS and other measures online on a single occasion. Results: Factor analyses provided evidence for a one-factor model. Results indicated high internal consistency and strong test-retest reliability. Evidence of concurrent and predictive validity is presented. Conclusions: The RRS measures resilience resources known to be protective of physical and mental health. This brief scale has sound psychometric properties in these initial studies of undergraduate students. We offer possible directions for use of the RRS in this and other populations.
Objective: This paper presents a theory-based brief resilience scale, the Resilience Resources Scale (RRS), and evidence for its factor structure, reliability, and validity in two studies of undergraduate students. Participants: Study 1 sampled 295 students and Study 2 sampled 244 students. Methods: Study 1 participants completed the RRS and other measures online at one of two time points eight weeks apart (n = 193), or at both time points (n = 102). Study 2 participants completed the RRS and other measures online on a single occasion. Results: Factor analyses provided evidence for a one-factor model. Results indicated high internal consistency and strong test-retest reliability. Evidence of concurrent and predictive validity is presented. Conclusions: The RRS measures resilience resources known to be protective of physical and mental health. This brief scale has sound psychometric properties in these initial studies of undergraduate students. We offer possible directions for use of the RRS in this and other populations.
Entities:
Keywords:
College students; emerging adults; mental health; resilience; resilience measure