Measuring Subjective Resilience despite Adversity due to Family, Peers and Teachers

Abstract

Esta es la versión de autor del artículo publicado en: This is an author produced version of a paper published in: El acceso a la versión del editor puede requerir la suscripción del recurso Access to the published version may require subscriptionResilience (RS) refers to positive adaptation or recovery despite experiences of significant adversity, that is, despite life situations that usually produce maladjustment (Luthar, 2006). According to this author's review (2006), that covers five decades of research on resilience, it is not unusual that children exposed to different kinds of adversities and life stressors develop positive adaptation. Confronted with this fact, researchers have recognized the importance of identifying which environmental and personal factors are responsible of such adaptation, in order to develop intervention programs aimed at promoting resilience. Three kinds of protective factors had been identified: family, community and personal factors (Luthar, 2006). However, the different conceptual perspectives and methodological strategies used in research make progress difficult, unless some problems are solved (Luthar & Brown, 2007;Masten, 2007). First, there is a conceptual problem. Resilience, competence, ego-resilience and hardiness overlap in some way, and it is necessary to decide whether they are unique or redundant scientific constructs. With the intent to clarify their similarities and differences, Luthar (2006) relied on theoretical criteria. For her, resilience implies two elements, positive adaptation and adverse situations, whereas competence implies only the first.As for ego-resilience, it is considered a trait reflecting general resourcefulness in response to varying situations, whereas resilience is a phenomenon. As for hardiness, it is a general trait including three personality dispositions: commitment (having a purpose, being active, etc.), control expectancies, and challenge (Kobasa, Maddi, & Kahn, 1982). Other authors even consider that resilience is a personality super-factor including different intermediate personality factors (Block, 2001). For us, from a conceptual point of view, most personality traits need to be explained. Their identification, in most cases, is the result of analysing self-report measures describing and summarizing behavioural tendencies resulting from the interaction between temperament and environment conditions, but not of the identification of the "personality processes" underlying such tendencies. So, it might be the case that such processes were common for resilience and the personality factors mentioned. And the same happens to resilience. In fact, resilience -as a phenomenonneeds to be explained (Leopold & Greve, 2009). So, in order to determine in précis way which kinds of factor contribute to resilience, or whether it is different or not from the characteristics referred to by the personality constructs above mentioned, the phenomenon itself needs to be measured in some way. That is, it is necessary to state the degree of positive adaptatio...

Assessment of subjective resilience: cross-cultural validity and educational implications / Evaluación de la resiliencia subjetiva: validez transcultural e implicaciones educativas del ‘Cuestionario de Resiliencia Subjetiva’ (SRQ)

“…As explained by Alonso-Tapia et al (2013), Luthar (2006) used theoretical criteria in order to clarify the similarities and differences. For her, resilience implies two elements, positive adaptation and adverse situations, whereas competence implies only the first.…”

“…How can it be done? Alonso-Tapia et al (2013) started from a review of previous research works on measurement of resilience. Two recent works made the answer to this task easier: (a) a methodological review on resilience measurement scales carried out by Windle, Bennet, and Noyes (2011); and (b) a systematic review of the methodological and conceptual problems of measuring resilience, carried out within the 'Reaching in … Reaching out ' project (2010).…”

“…Both measures would inevitably have their advantages and disadvantages, but both are necessary since they show different sides of resilience. As no measure covered the detected gap, Alonso-Tapia et al (2013) decided to develop a questionnaire of subjective resilience. Psychometric characteristics of the questionnaire developed in the cited study were good, but obtained with Spanish students.…”

“…In order to determine whether the SRQ factorial structure was similar to the structure originally found by Alonso-Tapia et al (2013), four kinds of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were carried out. First, the structure suggested by the original work of Alonso-Tapia et al (2013) was used as baseline model.…”

“…First, the structure suggested by the original work of Alonso-Tapia et al (2013) was used as baseline model. This structure assumed the existence of three intermediate factors from which later the scales RT, RP and RF were derived.…”