Top

Gepubliceerd in:

02-04-2022

Psychometric validity and reliability of the 10- and 2-item Connor–Davidson resilience scales among a national sample of Americans responding to the Covid-19 pandemic: an item response theory analysis

Auteurs: Anthony C. Waddimba, Bailey M. Baker, Jamie R. Pogue, Madison P. McAuliffe, Monica M. Bennett, Ronald D. Baxter, David C. Mohr, Ann Marie Warren

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 9/2022

Abstract

Purpose

Psychometric validity/reliability of 10-item and 2-item abbreviations of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10; CD-RISC-2) was investigated via item response theory and classic approaches.

Methods

We sampled 5023 adult American participants in a June/July 2020 survey on the COVID-19 pandemic’s psychological effects. Our questionnaire incorporated the CD-RISC-10 with other validated measures. CD-RISC-10 items were ranked on item-to-scale correlations, loadings on a one-factor confirmatory factor analysis model, and item slope/threshold parameters plus information curves from a unidimensional graded response model. Concurrent validity of the highest ranked item pair was evaluated vis-à-vis the CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC−2. Internal consistency, based on average variance extracted (AVE) and multiple reliability coefficients, was also compared. Convergent/divergent validity was tested by correlating anxiety, depression, fear of COVID-19, anxiety sensitivity, coping, and personality measures with both scales and the highest ranked item pair. Binary agreement/classification indexes assessed inter-rater reliability.

Results

Items 2 and 9 from CD-RISC-10 ranked the highest. Reliability coefficients were > 0.93, > 0.72, and > 0.82 for the CD-RISC-10, CD-RISC-2, vs summation of items 2 and 9. AVEs were 0.66, 0.67, and 0.77. CD-RISC abbreviations and the summation of items 2 and 9 correlated negatively with anxiety (> − 0.43), depression (> − 0.42), and fear of COVID-19 (> − 0.34); positively with emotional stability (> 0.53) and conscientiousness (> 0.40). Compared to the CD-RISC-2, summative scores of items 2 and 9 more efficiently classified/discriminated high resilience on the CD-RISC-10.

Conclusion

We confirmed construct validity/reliability of copyrighted CD-RISC abbreviations. The CD-RISC-10’s items 2 and 9 were psychometrically more salient than the CD-RISC−2.

vorige artikel Establishing content validity of LIMB-Q Kids: a new patient-reported outcome measure for lower limb deformities

volgende artikel A comparison of methods to address item non-response when testing for differential item functioning in multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

For detailed reviews of the advantages of IRT, refer to Hambleton et al. [38], de Ayala [40], and Millsap [41].

Coutu, D. L. (2002). How resilience works. Harvard Business Review, 80(5), 46–50.PubMed

Luthans, F., Vogelgesang, G. R., & Lester, P. B. (2006). Developing the psychological capital of resiliency. Human Resource Development Review, 5(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305285335CrossRef

Fletcher, D., & Sarkar, M. (2013). Psychological resilience: A review and critique of definitions, concepts and theory. European Psychologist, 18(1), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000124CrossRef

Neenan, M. (2018). Developing resilience: A cognitive-behavioural approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00164CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 320–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.320CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Waddimba, A. C., Scribani, M., Hasbrouck, M. A., Krupa, N., Jenkins, P., & May, J. J. (2016). Resilience among employed physicians and mid-level practitioners in upstate New York. Health Services Research, 51(5), 1706–1734. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12499CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Waddimba, A. C., Bennett, M. M., Fresnedo, M., Ledbetter, T. G., & Warren, A. M. (2021). Resilience, well-being, and empathy among private practice physicians and advanced practice providers in Texas: A structural equation model study. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovation, Quality and Outcomes, 5(5), 928–945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2021.08.009CrossRef

Kermott, C. A., Johnson, R. E., Sood, R., Jenkins, S. M., & Sood, A. (2019). Is higher resilience predictive of lower stress and better mental health among corporate executives? PLoS ONE, 14(6), e0218092. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218092CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Dragonetti, J. D., Gifford, T. W., & Yang, M. S. (2020). The process of developing a unit-based army resilience program. Current Psychiatry Reports, 22(9), 48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-020-01169-wCrossRefPubMed

11.

Crane, M. F., Falon, S. L., Kho, M., Moss, A., & Adler, A. B. (2021). Developing resilience in first responders: strategies for enhancing psychoeducational service delivery. Psychological Services. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000439CrossRefPubMed

12.

Zadok-Gurman, T., Jakobovich, R., Dvash, E., Zafrani, K., Rolnik, B., Ganz, A. B., & Lev-Ari, S. (2021). Effect of Inquiry-Based Stress Reduction (IBSR) intervention on well-being, resilience and burnout of teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(7), 3689. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18073689CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Butler, L. D., Koopman, C., Azarow, J., Blasey, C. M., Magdalene, J. C., DiMiceli, S., Seagraves, D. A., Hastings, T. A., Chen, X.-H., Garlan, R. W., Kraemer, H. C., & Spiegel, D. (2009). Psychosocial predictors of resilience after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 197(4), 266–273. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e31819d9334CrossRefPubMed

14.

Román-Mata, S. S., Zurita-Ortega, F., Puertas-Molero, P., Badicu, G., & González-Valero, G. (2020). A predictive study of resilience and its relationship with academic and work dimensions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9(10), 3258. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9103258CrossRefPubMedCentral

15.

PeConga, E. K., Gauthier, G. M., Holloway, A., Walker, R. S. W., Rosencrans, P. L., Zoellner, L. A., & Bedard-Gilligan, M. (2020). Resilience is spreading: Mental health within the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice and Policy, 12(S1), S47–S48. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000874CrossRef

16.

Killgore, W. D. S., Taylor, E. C., Cloonan, S. A., & Dailey, N. S. (2020). Psychological resilience during the COVID-19 lockdown. Psychiatry Research, 291, 113216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113216CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Rotărescu, V. S., Matei, D. B., Mircea, I. A., Mirescu, A. M., Nedelescu, B. G., Nedelea, D. G., Raluca Neagu, A. N., Necşulescu, A. G., Oteşanu, G. A., & Tudor, L. C. (2021). How anxious did you feel during lockdown? The roles resilience, living environment, and gender play on the level of anxiety state during pandemic isolation. Research in Psychotherapy, 23(496), 231–238. https://doi.org/10.4081/ripppo.2020.496CrossRef

18.

Ahern, N. R., Kiehl, E. M., Sole, M. L., & Byers, J. (2006). A review of instruments measuring resilience. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 29(2), 103–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/01460860600677643CrossRefPubMed

19.

Windle, G., Bennett, K. M., & Noyes, J. (2011). A methodological review of resilience measurement scales. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-9-8CrossRef

20.

Pangallo, A., Zibarras, L., Lewis, R., & Flaxman, P. (2015). Resilience through the lens of interactionism: a systematic review. Psychological Assessment, 27(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000024CrossRefPubMed

21.

DeSimone, J. A., Harms, P. D., Vanhove, A. J., & Herian, M. N. (2017). Development and validation of the five-by-five resilience scale. Assessment, 24(6), 778–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115625803CrossRefPubMed

22.

Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. (2003). Development of a New Resilience Scale: The Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety, 18(2), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113CrossRefPubMed

23.

Campbell-Sills, L., & Stein, M. B. (2007). Psychometric analysis and refinement of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 20(6), 1019–1028. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.20271CrossRefPubMed

24.

Burns, R. A., & Anstey, K. J. (2010). The Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Testing the invariance of a uni-dimensional resilience measure that is independent of positive and negative affect. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(5), 527–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.11.026CrossRef

25.

Gucciardi, D. F., Jackson, B., Coulter, T. J., & Mallett, C. J. (2011). The Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Dimensionality and age-related measurement invariance with Australian Cricketers. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(4), 423–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.02.005CrossRef

26.

Green, K. T., Hayward, L. C., Williams, A. M., Dennis, P. A., Bryan, B. C., Taber, K. H., Davidson, J. R., Beckham, J. C., & Calhoun, P. S. (2014). Examining the Factor Structure of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) in a Post-9/11 U.S. Military Veteran Sample. Assessment, 21(4), 443–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191114524014CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Fernandez, A. C., Fehon, D. C., Treloar, H., Ng, R., & Sledge, W. H. (2015). Resilience in organ transplantation: An application of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) with liver transplant candidates. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97(5), 487–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1029620CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Sarkar, M., & Fletcher, D. (2013). How should we measure psychological resilience in sport performers? Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 17(4), 264–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2013.805141CrossRef

29.

Preacher, K. J., & MacCallum, R. C. (2003). Repairing Tom Swift’s electric factor analysis machine. Understanding Statistics, 2(1), 13–43. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328031US0201_02CrossRef

30.

Notario-Pacheco, B., Solera-Martínez, M., Serrano-Parra, M. D., Bartolomé-Gutiérrez, R., García-Campayo, J., & Martínez-Vizcaíno, V. (2011). Reliability and Validity of the Spanish Version of the 10-item Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (10-item CD-RISC) in Young Adults. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9(63). https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-9-63CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Kuiper, H., van Leeuwen, C. C. M., Stolwijk-Swüste, J. M., & Post, M. W. M. (2019). Measuring Resilience with the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Which version to choose? Spinal Cord, 57(5), 360–366. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-019-0240-1CrossRefPubMed

32.

Zhang, X., Mo, Y., Yan, C., Li, Y., & Li, H. (2021). Psychometric properties of two abbreviated Connor–Davidson Resilience Scales in Chinese infertile couples. Quality of Life Research, 30(8), 2405–2414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02820-6CrossRefPubMed

33.

Wollny, A. I., & Jacobs, I. (2021). Validity and reliability of the German versions of the CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01670-2CrossRefPubMed

34.

Kavčič, T., Zager Kocjan, G., & Dolenc, P. (2021). Measurement invariance of the CD-RISC-10 across gender, age, and education: A study with Slovenian adults. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01564-3CrossRefPubMed

35.

Aloba, O., Olabisi, O., & Aloba, T. (2016). The 10-item Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale: Factorial structure, reliability, validity, and correlates among student nurses in southwestern Nigeria. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 22(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078390316629971CrossRefPubMed

36.

Smith, K. J., Emerson, D. J., & Schuldt, M. A. (2018). A demographic and psychometric assessment of the Connor–Davidson resilience Scale 10 (CD-RISC 10) with a US Public Accounting Sample. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 14(4), 513–534. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-12-2016-0085CrossRef

37.

Smith, K. J., Emerson, D. J., Haight, T. D., Mauldin, S., & Wood, B. G. (2019). An examination of the psychometric properties of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale-10 (CD-RISC10) among accounting and business students. Journal of Accounting Education, 47, 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2019.01.002CrossRef

38.

Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Fundamentals of item response theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

39.

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

40.

de Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory (1st ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

41.

Millsap, R. E. (2011). Item Response Theory: Models, estimation, fit evaluation. Statistical approaches to measurement invariance (pp. 147–189). New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group.

42.

Arias González, V. B., Crespo Sierra, M. T., Arias Martínez, B., Martínez-Molina, A., & Ponce, F. P. (2015). An in-depth psychometric analysis of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale: Calibration with Rasch-Andrich Model. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 13(154). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-015-0345-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Papini, N., Kang, M., Ryu, S., Griese, E., Wingert, T., & Herrmann, S. (2020). Rasch calibration of the 25-item Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale. Journal of Health Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320904769CrossRefPubMed

44.

Ehrich, J., Mornane, A., & Powern, T. (2017). Psychometric validation of the 10-item Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale. Journal of Applied Measurement, 18(2), 122–136.PubMed

45.

Pulido-Martos, M., Fernández-Sánchez, M. D., & Lopez-Zafra, E. (2020). Measurement invariance across gender and age in the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) in a Spanish general population. Quality of Life Research, 29(5), 1373–1384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02389-1CrossRefPubMed

46.

Heritage, B., Al Asadi, A. A., & Hegney, D. G. (2021). Examination of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale 10 (CD-RISC-10) using the polytomous Rasch model. Psychological Assessment, 33(7), 672–684. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001011CrossRefPubMed

47.

Samejima, F. (2010). The general graded response model. In M. L. Nering & R. Ostini (Eds.), Handbook of polytomous item response theory models (1st ed., pp. 77–107). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

48.

Samejima, F. (2016). Graded response models. In W. J. van der Linden (Ed.), Handbook of Item Response Theory, Volume One: Models (pp. 95–108). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall.

49.

de Ayala, R. J., Dodd, B. G., & Koch, W. R. (1992). A comparison of the partial credit and graded response models in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 5(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0501_2CrossRef

50.

Baker, J. G., Rounds, J. B., & Zevon, M. A. (2000). A comparison of graded response and Rasch partial credit models with subjective well-being. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 25(3), 253–270. https://doi.org/10.2307/1165205CrossRef

51.

Lim, K. K., Kwan, Y. H., Yeo, S. J., Yeo, W., Thumboo, J., Matchar, D., & Leung, Y. Y. (2019). AB1324 measurement properties of the 10-item Connor–Davidson resilience scale among patients with total knee replacement based on item response theory. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 78(Supplement 2), 2125–2126. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-eular.1014CrossRef

52.

Vaishnavi, S., Connor, K., & Davidson, J. R. (2007). An abbreviated version of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), the CD-RISC2: Psychometric properties and applications in psychopharmacological trials. Psychiatry Research, 152(2–3), 293–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2007.01.006CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

Warren, A. M., Zolfaghari, K., Fresnedo, M., Bennett, M. M., Pogue, J. R., Waddimba, A. C., Zvolensky, M., Carlbring, P., & Powers, M. B. (2021). Anxiety sensitivity, COVID-19 fear, and mental health: Results from a United States Population Sample. Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 50(3), 204–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2021.1874505CrossRef

54.

Gonzalez, S. P., Moore, E. W. G., Newton, M., & Galli, N. A. (2016). Validity and reliability of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) in competitive sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 23, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.10.005CrossRef

55.

Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: Consider the brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4(1), 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6CrossRefPubMed

56.

Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the big-five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1CrossRef

57.

Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092–1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092CrossRefPubMed

58.

Kroenke, K., Strine, T. W., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B., Berry, J. T., & Mokdad, A. H. (2009). The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. Journal of Affective Disorders, 114(1–3), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2008.06.026CrossRefPubMed

59.

Ahorsu, D. K., Lin, C. Y., Imani, V., Saffari, M., Griffiths, M. D., & Pakpour, A. H. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 Scale: Development and initial validation. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Taylor, S., Zvolensky, M. J., Cox, B. J., Deacon, B., Heimberg, R. G., Ledley, D. R., Abramowitz, J. S., Holaway, R. M., Sandin, B., Stewart, S. H., Coles, M., Eng, W., Daly, E. S., Arrindell, W. A., Bouvard, M., & Cardenas, S. J. (2007). Robust dimensions of anxiety sensitivity: Development and initial validation of the anxiety sensitivity index-3. Psychological Assessment, 19(2), 176–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.19.2.176CrossRefPubMed

61.

Campbell-Sills, L., Cohan, S. L., & Stein, M. B. (2006). Relationship of resilience to personality, coping, and psychiatric symptoms in young adults. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(4), 585–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.05.001CrossRefPubMed

62.

Ni, M. Y., Li, T. K., Yu, N. X., Pang, H., Chan, B. H. Y., Leung, G. M., & Stewart, S. M. (2016). Normative data and psychometric properties of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) and the abbreviated version (CD-RISC2) among the general population in Hong Kong. Quality of Life Research, 25(1), 111–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1072-xCrossRefPubMed

63.

Ruiz-Párraga, G. T., López-Martínez, A. E., Esteve, R., Ramírez-Maestre, C., & Wagnild, G. (2015). A confirmatory factor analysis of the resilience scale adapted to chronic pain (RS-18): New empirical evidence of the protective role of resilience on pain adjustment. Quality of Life Research, 24(5), 1245–1253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0852-zCrossRefPubMed

64.

Chi, X., Chen, S., Chen, Y., Chen, D., Yu, Q., Guo, T., Cao, Q., Zheng, X., Huang, S., Hossain, M. M., Stubbs, B., Yeung, A., & Zou, L. (2021). Psychometric evaluation of the fear of COVID-19 scale among Chinese population. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00441-7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Nazari, N., Zekiy, A. O., Feng, L. S., & Griffiths, M. D. (2021). Psychometric validation of the Persian version of the Covid-19-related psychological distress scale and association with Covid-19 fear, Covid-19 anxiety, optimism, and lack of resilience. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-021-00540-zCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Zumbo, B., Gadermann, A., & Zeisser, C. (2007). Ordinal versions of coefficients alpha and theta for Likert rating scales. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 6(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1177992180CrossRef

67.

Gadermann, A., Guhn, M., & Zumbo, B. (2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.7275/n560-j767CrossRef

68.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555CrossRef

69.

McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment (1st ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

70.

Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But…. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629CrossRef

71.

Eisinga, R., Grotenhuis, M. T., & Pelzer, B. (2013). The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? International Journal of Public Health, 58(4), 637–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0416-3CrossRefPubMed

72.

de Vet, H. C. W., Mokkink, L. B., Mosmuller, D. G., & Terwee, C. B. (2017). Spearman-Brown prophecy formula and Cronbach’s alpha: Different faces of reliability and opportunities for new applications. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 85, 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.013CrossRefPubMed

73.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104CrossRef

74.

Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Hampshire, UK: Cengage Learning EMEA.

75.

Picard, R. R., & Berk, K. N. (1990). Data splitting. American Statistician, 44(2), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.2307/2684155CrossRef

76.

Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various χ² approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological), 16(2), 296–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1954.tb00174.xCrossRef

77.

Cerny, B. A., & Kaiser, H. F. (1977). A study of a measure of sampling adequacy for factor-analytic correlation matrices. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 12(1), 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1201_3CrossRefPubMed

78.

Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02289447CrossRefPubMed

79.

Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3), 432–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.99.3.432CrossRef

80.

Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

81.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118CrossRef

82.

Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2017). Assessing the size of model misfit in structural equation models. Psychometrika, 82(3), 533–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-016-9552-7CrossRef

83.

Shi, D., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Rosseel, Y. (2020). Assessing fit in ordinal factor analysis models: SRMR vs RMSEA. Structural Equation Modeling, 27(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2019.1611434CrossRef

84.

Holgado-Tello, F. P., Chacón-Moscoso, S., Barbero-García, I., & Vila-Abad, E. (2010). Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity, 44(1), 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-008-9190-yCrossRef

85.

Holgado-Tello, F. P., Morata-Ramírez, M. Á., & Barbero-García, M. I. (2018). Confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables: A simulation study comparing the main estimation methods. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 36(3), 601–617. https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.4932CrossRef

86.

Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory (2nd ed.). College Park: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.

87.

Kang, T., & Chen, T. T. (2011). Performance of the generalized S-X2 item fit index for the graded response model. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(1), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9082-4CrossRef

88.

Stone, C. A., & Zhang, B. (2003). Assessing goodness of fit of item response theory models: A comparison of traditional and alternative procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40(4), 331–352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2003.tb01150.xCrossRef

89.

Chen, W.-H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22(3), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986022003265CrossRef

90.

van der Ark, L. A. (2007). Mokken scale analysis in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 20(11), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v020.i11CrossRef

91.

Mokken, R. J. (2011). A theory and procedure of scale analysis: With applications in political research (Reprint). New York: De Gruyter Mouton.

92.

Gwet, K. L. (2014). Handbook of inter-rater reliability: The definitive guide to measuring the extent of agreement among raters (4th ed.). Gaithersburg: Advanced Analytics, LLC.

93.

Kuhn, M., Johnson, K., & Modeling, A. P. (2013). Applied predictive modeling. New York: Springer.CrossRef

94.

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5CrossRef

95.

Campbell-Sills, L., Forde, D. R., & Stein, M. B. (2009). Demographic and childhood environmental predictors of resilience in a community sample. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 43(12), 1007–1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2009.01.013CrossRefPubMed

96.

Jeste, D. V., Savla, G. N., Thompson, W. K., Vahia, I. V., Glorioso, D. K., Martin, A. S., Palmer, B. W., Rock, D., Golshan, S., Kraemer, H. C., & Depp, C. A. (2013). Association between older age and more successful aging: Critical role of resilience and depression. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170(2), 188–196. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12030386CrossRefPubMed

97.

Seifer, D. B., Petok, W. D., Agrawal, A., Glenn, T. L., Bayer, A. H., Witt, B. R., Burgin, B. D., & Lieman, H. J. (2021). Psychological experience and coping strategies of patients in the Northeast U.S. delaying care for infertility during the COVID-19 pandemic. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-021-00721-4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

98.

Dale, S., Cohen, M., Weber, K., Cruise, R., Kelso, G., & Brody, L. (2014). Abuse and resilience in relation to HAART medication adherence and HIV viral load among women with HIV in the United States. AIDS Patient Care and STDS, 28(3), 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1089/apc.2013.0329CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

99.

Zager Kocjan, G., Kavčič, T., & Avsec, A. (2021). Resilience matters: Explaining the association between personality and psychological functioning during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 21(1), 100198–100198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2020.08.002CrossRefPubMed

100.

Smith, B. W., Dalen, J., Wiggins, K., Tooley, E., Christopher, P., & Bernard, J. (2008). The brief resilience scale: Assessing the ability to bounce back. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 15(3), 194–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705500802222972CrossRefPubMed

101.

Teng, Y., Brannick, M. T., & Borman, W. C. (2020). Capturing resilience in context: development and validation of a situational judgment test of resilience. Human Performance, 33(2–3), 74–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2019.1709069CrossRef

102.

Stein, M. B., Campbell-Sills, L., & Gelernter, J. (2009). Genetic variation in 5HTTLPR is associated with emotional resilience. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B - Neuropsychiatrics Genetics, 150B(7), 900–906. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.b.30916CrossRef

103.

Davidson, R. J., & McEwen, B. S. (2012). Social influences on neuroplasticity: Stress and interventions to promote well-being. Nature Neuroscience, 15(5), 689–695. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3093CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

104.

McCanlies, E. C., Mnatsakanova, A., Andrew, M. E., Burchfiel, C. M., & Violanti, J. M. (2014). Positive psychological factors are associated with lower PTSD symptoms among police officers: Post Hurricane Katrina. Stress and Health, 30(5), 405–415. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2615CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Psychometric validity and reliability of the 10- and 2-item Connor–Davidson resilience scales among a national sample of Americans responding to the Covid-19 pandemic: an item response theory analysis
Auteurs: Anthony C. Waddimba
Bailey M. Baker
Jamie R. Pogue
Madison P. McAuliffe
Monica M. Bennett
Ronald D. Baxter
David C. Mohr
Ann Marie Warren
Publicatiedatum: 02-04-2022
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 9/2022
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-022-03125-y

Andere artikelen Uitgave 9/2022

A threshold explanation for the lack of variation in negative composite time trade-off values

Open Access

Health-related quality of life of breast and colorectal cancer patients undergoing active chemotherapy treatment: Patient-reported outcomes

Identifying health-related quality of life cut-off scores that indicate the need for supportive care in young adults with cancer

Open Access

Polypharmacy and trajectories of health-related quality of life in older adults: an Australian cohort study

Open Access

Heterogeneity in preferences for outcomes of integrated care for persons with multiple chronic diseases: a latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment

Open Access

A comparison of health-related quality of life and personal, social, and environmental factors of older adults according to a residential area: a propensity score matching analysis

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Registreer

Login

Psychometric validity and reliability of the 10- and 2-item Connor–Davidson resilience scales among a national sample of Americans responding to the Covid-19 pandemic: an item response theory analysis

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Andere artikelen Uitgave 9/2022

A threshold explanation for the lack of variation in negative composite time trade-off values

Health-related quality of life of breast and colorectal cancer patients undergoing active chemotherapy treatment: Patient-reported outcomes

Identifying health-related quality of life cut-off scores that indicate the need for supportive care in young adults with cancer

Polypharmacy and trajectories of health-related quality of life in older adults: an Australian cohort study

Heterogeneity in preferences for outcomes of integrated care for persons with multiple chronic diseases: a latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment

A comparison of health-related quality of life and personal, social, and environmental factors of older adults according to a residential area: a propensity score matching analysis

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Registreer

Login

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Log in om toegang te krijgen

A threshold explanation for the lack of variation in negative composite time trade-off values

Health-related quality of life of breast and colorectal cancer patients undergoing active chemotherapy treatment: Patient-reported outcomes

Identifying health-related quality of life cut-off scores that indicate the need for supportive care in young adults with cancer

Polypharmacy and trajectories of health-related quality of life in older adults: an Australian cohort study

Heterogeneity in preferences for outcomes of integrated care for persons with multiple chronic diseases: a latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment

A comparison of health-related quality of life and personal, social, and environmental factors of older adults according to a residential area: a propensity score matching analysis