Cited by 70Resilience and Mental HealthPsychometric Methodologies and TestingStress and Burnout Research

Propiedades psicométricas de la versión española de la escala de resiliencia de 10 ítems de Connor-Davidson (CD-RISC 10) en una muestra multiocupacional

Open access
Soler Sánchez, M. Isabel, Meseguer de Pedro, Mariano, García Izquierdo, Mariano·2016·Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología

Abstract

El objetivo del estudio es analizar las propiedades psicométricas de la adaptación española de la escala de resiliencia CD-RISC de Connor y Davidson (2003) en su versión de 10 ítems en una muestra multiocupacional. Se utilizaron dos muestras. En la primera completaron esta escala un total de 386 trabajadores y se realizó un análisis factorial exploratorio que arrojó un único factor que explica el 55.8% de la varianza total. La consistencia interna de la escala fue adecuada (alfa de Cronbach de 0.87) y la eliminación de ningún ítem mejoraba la fiabilidad de la escala. Con el fin de ratificar el modelo obtenido en el AFE, se llevó a cabo un análisis factorial confirmatorio con los datos de la segunda muestra de 238 participantes que corroboró el modelo unifactorial. Para analizar la validez divergente se utilizó los datos de las dos muestras ( N = 624); así, las correlaciones con las puntuaciones de las variables burnout , bienestar psicológico y satisfacción laboral fueron estadísticamente significativas y siguieron la dirección teórica esperada. Se concluye que la versión española de 10 ítems de la CD-RISC de Connor y Davidson presenta adecuadas propiedades psicométricas para estimar la resiliencia en trabajadores. The aim of the study is to analyze the psychometric properties of the Spanish adaptation of the scale of resilience CD-RISC of Connor and Davidson (2003) in the 10-item version in a sample of workers. Two samples were used. In the first sample a total of 386 workers completed this scale. We carry out EFA to observe the factor structure of the scale which resulted in one main factor responsible for 55.8% of the total variance and containing the 10 items. The internal consistency was appropriate (Cronbach's alpha of 0.87). In order to ratify the model obtained in the AFE, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted with data from sample 2 (N = 238) which corroborated the univariate model. As for the divergent validity, correlations with scores on the variable burnout, psychological health and job satisfaction were statistically significant and followed the theoretical direction (total sample= 624). It is concluded that the Spanish 10-item version of the CD-RISC by Connor and Davidson (2003) presents adequate psychometric properties to estimate resilience in workers.

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 · 10.1016/j.rlp.2015.09.002

Cites

60 of 60 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?

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. Riolli, L. & Savicki, V. (2003). Information system organisational resilience. Omega The International Journal of Management Science, (31), 227---233.
  2. Serrano-Parra, M. D., Garrido-Abejar, M., Notario-Pacheco, B., Bartolomé-Gutiérrez, R., Solera-Martínez, M. & Martínez- Vizcaíno, V. (2012). Validez de la escala de resiliencia de Connor-Davidson (CD-RISC) en una población de mayores entre 60 y 75 años. International Journal of Psychological Research, 5(2), 49---57.
  3. Tusaie, K. & Dyer, J. (2004). Resilience: a historical review of the construct. Holistic Nursing Practices, 18, 3---8.
  4. Windle, G. (2010). The Resilience Network: What is resilience? A systematic review and concept analysis. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology, 21, 1---18.
  5. Windle, G., Bennett, K. M., & Noyes, J. (2011). A methodological review of resilience measurement scales, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9,8. Fecha de consulta: 4 de abril de 2013. Redisponible en: http://www.hqlo.com/content/9/1/8

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Soler Sánchez, M. I., Meseguer de Pedro, M., & García Izquierdo, M.
Venue
Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología
Published
2016-09
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
159-166
ISSN
0120-0534 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1793946017
Cited by
70
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4
FWCI
2.48
Type
journal article
Language
es
Open access
Locations
  • Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
Keywords
resilience, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, CD-RISC-10, Spanish adaptation, psychometric properties, workers, burnout, psychological well-being, job satisfaction, factor structure, discriminant validity, convergent validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural adaptation, occupational health psychology, occupational accidents and injuries

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