CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,348Resilience and Mental HealthHealth, psychology, and well-beingOptimism, Hope, and Well-being

A new rating scale for adult resilience: what are the central protective resources behind healthy adjustment?

Open access
Friborg, Oddgeir, Hjemdal, Odin, Rosenvinge, Jan H., Martinussen, Monica·2003·International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
DOI 10.1002/mpr.143PMC PMC6878238
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Resources that protect against the development of psychiatric disturbances are reported to be a significant force behind healthy adjustment to life stresses, rather than the absence of risk factors. In this paper a new scale for measuring the presence of protective resources that promote adult resilience is validated. The preliminary version of the scale consisted of 45 items covering five dimensions: personal competence, social competence, family coherence, social support and personal structure. The Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA), the Sense of Coherence scale (SOC) and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) were given to 59 patients once, and to 276 normal controls twice, separated by four months. The factor structure was replicated. The respective dimensions had Cronbach's alphas of 0.90, 0.83, 0.87, 0.83 and 0.67, and four‐month test‐retest correlations of 0.79, 0.84, 0.77, 0.69 and 0.74. Construct validity was supported by positive correlations with SOC and negative correlations with HSCL. The RSA differentiated between patients and healthy control subjects. Discriminant validity was indicated by differential positive correlations between RSA subscales and SOC. The RSA‐scale might be used as a valid and reliable measurement in health and clinical psychology to assess the presence of protective factors important to regain and maintain mental health. Copyright © 2003 Whurr Publishers Ltd.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mpr.143

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The RSA subscales had satisfactory internal consistency ranging from 0.67 to 0.90 and test-retest correlations ranging from 0.69 to 0.84.

    “From a psychometric perspective, the internal consistency of the subscales of the RSA was satisfactory, ranging from 0.67 to 0.90. The test–retest correlations were all satisfactory for the subscales of RSA, ranging from 0.69 to 0.84 (p < 0.01)76.”

    From Mindfulness-based online intervention increases well-being and decreases stress after Covid-19 lockdown (2022) · cites this paper as [76]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Cross SE, Marcus HR. Gender in thought, belief, and action: A cognitiv approach. In AE Beall and RJ Sternberg (eds) The Psychology of Gender. New York: Guilford, 1993, pp. 80-1.
  2. Garmezy N, Nuechterlein K. Invulnerable children: the fact and fiction of competence and disadvantage. Am J Orthopsychiatry 1972; 42: 328-9.
  3. Hjemdal O, Friborg O, Martinussen M, Rosenvinge JH. Preliminary results from the development and validation of a Norwegian scale for measuring adult resilience. J Norw Psychol Ass 2001; 38: 310-17.
  4. Sammallahti PR, Holi MJ, Komulainen EJ, Aalberg VA. Comparing two self-report measures of coping -The Sense of Coherence scale and the Defense Style Questionnaire. J Clin Psychol 1996; 52: 517-24.
  5. Steele BF. Abuse and neglect in the earliest years: Groundwork for vulnerability. Zero to Three 1987; 4: 14-15.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Friborg, O., Hjemdal, O., Rosenvinge, J. H., & Martinussen, M.
Affiliations
UiT The Arctic University of Norway (NO)
Corresponding author
Friborg, Oddgeir
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-06
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
65-76
ISSN
  • 1049-8931 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-0657
DOI
10.1002/mpr.143
PMC
PMC6878238
OpenAlex
W2114799080
Cited by
1,348
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 79 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 109 · 2023: 112 · 2022: 131 · 2021: 116 · 2020: 99 · 2019: 88 · 2018: 75 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 69 · 2014: 61 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 33
FWCI
6.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 1027 d)
Locations
  • International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, psychology, and well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
Keywords
protective factors, Resilience Scale for Adults, scale development, personal competencies, social competence, family coherence, social support, personal structure, sense of coherence, mental health, psychiatric patients, factor structure, test-retest reliability, construct validity
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Concept, Stress, Psychological, Reproducibility of Results, Case-Control Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review