Short Version RS-14

When shopping for a helpful and you will valid appliance, not merely required for some other populations plus where the recommended grounds structure is confirmed, a few major requires had been for the attract. “The latest RS-14 shows the brevity, readability, and you may easy scoring that happen to be identified as extremely important properties when selecting devices to be used with teenagers” (Pritzker and you will Minter, 2014, p. 332). The latest RS-14 “may also offer specifics of the pattern and you can character of strength making use of an acquireable measure of resilience which often tend to allow comparisons having earlier and upcoming lookup,” which “can give supporting proof that it’s a psychometrically voice size to assess private resilience when you look at the age range away from adolescents and you will teenagers” (Wagnild, 2009a; Pritzker and you may Minter, 2014).

Moreover, Yang ainsi que al

Trying to find much more monetary version of Resilience Measure, coming down achievement go out, and you can making more especially for play with with young people, Wagnild (2009a) altered the latest RS-twenty five to14 items. The brand new short term “RS-fourteen measure includes fourteen care about-report situations counted collectively good seven-point score measure between ‘1-firmly disagree’ to ‘7-strongly agree.’ High ratings are a sign off resilience height. According to writers, results is calculated from the a conclusion away from reaction opinions per items, for this reason permitting results to help you may include 14 so you’re able to 98.” Scores below 65 mean reasonable resilience; between 65 and 81 tell you moderate resilience; significantly more than 81 will be translated since the large quantities of strength (Wagnild and you can Young, 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 ? = 0.79 (Heilemann et al. gleeden ücretli mi, 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).