Reliability and validity of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) Spanish Version.

Abstract

Resilience is defined as the ability to recover from stress. However, all resilience measures with exception of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) assess resources that make resilience possible instead of recovery. The purpose of this study was to translate the BRS to Spanish and to analyze the reliability and validity of its scores. The psychometric properties of its scores were examined in a heterogeneous sample of 620 Spanish adults. Confirmatory factor analyses were carried out to study its scores' evidence of structural validity. Besides, to study its scores' evidence of convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity in relation to other resilience questionnaires (Connor Davidson Resilience Scale 10-item version, Situated Subjective Resilience Questionnaire for Adults and Resiliency Questionnaire for Adults) and to variables such as emotions (Modified Differential Emotions Scale), coping (Person-situation Coping Questionnaire for Adults), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), posttraumatic growth (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory), perceived stress (Perceived Stress Scale) and posttraumatic stress (Davidson Trauma Scale), correlation and regression analyses were conducted. To study its sensitivity, we assessed the effect of sociodemographics and the ability of the scale to identify high-risk populations by conducting analyses of variance and Pearson correlations. The BRS scores showed adequate reliability (α = .83; intraclass coefficient = .69). Confirmatory factor analyses showed that the Spanish version of the BRS is mono-factorial (χ2/df = 2.36; standardized root mean square residual = .036; goodness-of-fit index = .980; comparative fit index = .984; incremental fit index = .984; root mean square error of approximation = .067). They also showed adequate evidence of the scores' convergent, concurrent and predictive validity. The Spanish version of the BRS is a reliable and valid means to assess resilience as the ability to bounce back. (PsycINFO Database Record

A longitudinal assessment of the road to mental readiness training among municipal police

“…Half of the items are reverse-coded. The BRS has high internal consistency (α ≥ .80) and good test-retest reliability (r ≥ .62; Leontjevas, de Beek, Lataster, & Jacobs, 2014;Rodríguez-Rey, Alonso-Tapia, & Hernansaiz-Garrido, 2016;Smith et al, 2008).…”

Morphological brain measures of cortico‐limbic inhibition related to resilience

“…The assessment of resilience was based on a validated self-report questionnaire, and could therefore be influenced by reporting bias. However, previous studies have demonstrated that the CD-RISC resilience questionnaire used in this study has acceptable psychometric properties and it has been validated against more extensive interview measures of resilience (Campbell-Sills and Stein 2007; Connor and Davidson 2003d; Gonzalez et al 2015; Rodriguez-Rey et al 2016). The current data explored common and differential brain morphology for general trait resilience and a single measure of current positive/negative affect.…”

Measurement properties and implications of the Brief Resilience Scale in healthy workers

“…Another reason may be respondent fatigue because besides the BRS, many questionnaires were administered. This may also be the case in the healthy cohorts in Brazil 15 and Spain 14 and correction for this response bias should be taken into account when interpreting the results. Compared to the Chinese and Portuguese version (using undergraduate students), explained variance and eigenvalues are not significantly different to our study (46% and 43% respectively compared to 49% in the current study).…”

“…In the validation study of the Spanish BRS two latent factors were identified as “positively formulated and negatively formulated items”. This could be due to respondents having difficulty with reversal of the even items (item 2,4,6 of the BRS) . The reversal of items was originally intended by the authors to “reduce the effects of social desirability and positive response bias”.…”

“…This could be due to respondents having difficulty with reversal of the even items (item 2,4,6 of the BRS). 14 The reversal of items was originally intended by the authors to "reduce the effects of social desirability and positive response bias 13 ". To control for these possible inconsistencies and check if reversal of items does what they intend (identify social desirability and positive response bias), it was decided to manually remove all respondents filling in patterns unlikely to reflect resilience.…”