Brief Type RS-14
While looking for a helpful and you can good device, not simply you’ll need for different populations in addition to where the recommended factor structure is going to be verified, several significant wants was in fact in appeal. “The RS-14 shows the fresh brevity, readability, and you will easier scoring that have been defined as important qualities when selecting tool for use which have teens” (Pritzker and you will Minter, 2014, p. 332). Brand new RS-fourteen “will also bring information on the brand new pattern and you can profile regarding resilience using an available everywhere measure of strength which will enable reviews having earlier and you can coming look,” and therefore “deliver supporting facts it is an effective psychometrically voice scale to evaluate personal resilience inside the age groups regarding teenagers and you can young adults” (Wagnild, 2009a; Pritzker and you will Minter, 2014).
Additionally, Yang et al
Searching for a whole lot more financial variation of your own Strength Measure, coming down achievement date, and you will developing way more specifically for play with with teenagers, Wagnild (2009a) modified the fresh RS-twenty five to14 affairs. Brand new short term “RS-fourteen size include 14 mind-declaration facts measured with each other a eight-section score level ranging from ‘1-highly disagree’ to ‘7-firmly concur.’ Higher results was an indicator off strength level. According to the people, ratings was determined because of the a summary out-of response beliefs for each item, hence providing scores in order to are priced between 14 in order to 98.” Score below 65 imply low resilience; anywhere between 65 and you may 81 show reasonable strength; above 81 might be interpreted because the higher quantities of resilience (Wagnild and More youthful, 1993; Wagnild, 2009b, 2014).
Using principal components analyses supported a single-factor solution; remaining in the RS-14 scale were those items with all item factor loadings >0.40. Reported psychometric properties of the RS-14 have demonstrated sound psychometric properties comparable to those of the RS-25: evidence of a one-factor structure was found and high reliability (coefficient Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90 and greater 0.96) and a strong correlation with the full version (r = 0.97, p = 0.001) were obtained (Wagnild, 2014). The overall factorability of the RS-14 demonstrated a robust one-factor measure of resilience, which has been replicated and has been confirmed in different studies and in the adaptations of this version for different countries (Wagnild, 2014). For instance: German ? = 0.91 (Schumacher et al., 2005); Portugal ? = 0.82 (Oliveira et al., 2015); Finland ? = 0.87 (Losoi et al., 2013); Japan ? = 0.88 (Nishi et al., 2010); China ? = 0.92 (Tian and Hong, 2013); Korean ? = 0.90 (Kwon and Kwon, 2014); Spain ? = https://datingranking.net/tr/cybermen-inceleme 0.79 (Heilemann et al., 2003); Italian ? = 0.88 (Callegari et al., 2016); and Greek ? = 0.89 (Ntountoulaki et al., 2017). (2012) “examined the measurement invariance of the RS?14 in samples of U.S., Chinese, and Taiwanese college students and supported a one-factor model that demonstrated scalar invariance across cultures” (Yang et al., 2012). The short version RS-14 has been tested regarding its structure and it was found that results are not always totally consistent. Some discrepancies exist between findings of different studies; for instance the Brazilian version with 13 items (Damasio et al., 2011) or 12 items in the Portuguese adaptation for adolescents (Oliveira et al., 2015), and in the German Version 11 items (Schumacher et al., 2005). These discrepancies can eventually result from sampling issues: some studies used participants from very different developmental phases (Damasio et al., 2011), and others used participants <13 years old, an option that is not appropriate given that the authors of the RS advise against the use of the scale with participants from earlier ages (Wagnild, 2009b; Pritzker and Minter, 2014).