Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Original Article

Measuring Italian Resilience

Cross-Cultural Validity and Psychometric Properties of the Essential Resilience Scale in Italian and Canadian Contexts

Published Online:May 23, 2022https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000712

Abstract

Abstract: The Essential Resilience Scale (ERS) measures global trait resilience and three factors of physical, emotional, and social resilience. This study developed an Italian adaptation of the ERS and recruited participants from Italy (N = 500) to complete the measure along with criterion validity measures of broad personality traits and related psychological concepts. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) demonstrated robust evidence for a well-fitting three-factor model of the ERS, with items strongly loading onto their respective latent factors. Utilizing Samejima’s graded response model, most item discrimination values were moderate-to-high, and category threshold parameters were well-distributed throughout the latent continuum. The ERS showed correlations in the expected directions with extraversion, emotionality, optimism, mastery, resilience, behavioral activation, behavioral inhibition, stress, and well-being. Cultural invariance was supported (at the scale- and item-level) with multigroup CFA and differential item functioning (DIF) with a sample of Canadian English speakers (N = 874). Findings evinced the internal consistency (i.e., total MacDonald’s ω), factorial validity (i.e., three-factor CFA), criterion validity (i.e., personality, temperament), and convergent validity (i.e., trait resilience and well-being) of the Italian ERS. Results suggest the Italian ERS can be applied for measuring resilience for future research studies in Italian-speaking populations.

References

  • Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(4), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890902935878 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., de Vries, R. E., Perugini, M., Gnisci, A., & Sergi, I. (2006). The HEXACO model of personality structure and indigenous lexical personality dimensions in Italian, Dutch, and English. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(6), 851–875. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.06.003 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Baker, F. B., & Kim, S. H. (2004). Item response theory: Parameter estimation techniques. CRC Press. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46(4), 443–459. https://doi.org/doi/10.1007/BF02293801 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Byrne, B. M. (2012). A primer of LISREL: Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. Springer Science & Business Media. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • 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.20271 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chen, X., Wang, Y., & Yan, Y. (2016). The Essential Resilience Scale: Instrument development and prediction of perceived health and behaviour. Stress and Health, 32(5), 533–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2659 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cheung, F. M., Fan, W., & Cheung, S. F. (2017). Indigenous measurement of personality in Asia. In A. T. ChurchEd., The Praeger handbook of personality across cultures: Trait psychology across cultures (pp. 105–135). Praeger/ABC-CLIO. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Fan, R. M., Song, W. Z., Zhang, J. X., & Zhang, J. P. (1996). Development of the Chinese personality assessment inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27(2), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022196272003 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • 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_5 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chiesi, F., Bonacchi, A., Primi, C., Toccafondi, A., & Miccinesi, G. (2018). Are three items sufficient to measure sense of coherence? Evidence from nonclinical and clinical samples. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 34(4), 229–237. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000337 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Chiesi, F., Galli, S., Primi, C., Innocenti Borgi, P., & Bonacchi, A. (2013). The Accuracy of the Life Orientation Test – Revised (LOT–R) in measuring dispositional optimism: Evidence from item response theory analyses. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(5), 523–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2013.781029 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Christensen, K. B., Makransky, G., & Horton, M. (2017). Critical values for Yen’s Q3: Identification of local dependence in the Rasch model using residual correlations. Applied Psychological Measurement, 41(3), 178–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621616677520 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Choi, S. W., Gibbons, L. E., & Crane, P. K. (2011). lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning. Journal of Statistical Software, 39, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v039.i08 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Clauser, B. E., Nungster, R. J., Mazor, K., & Ripkey, D. (1996). Improving the matching for DIF analysis by conditioning on both test score and an educational background variable. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 453–464. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385–396. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • 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.10113 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Crane, P. K., Gibbons, L. E., Ocepek-Welikson, K., Cook, K., & Cella, D. (2007). A comparison of three sets of criteria for determining the presence of differential item functioning using ordinal logistic regression. Quality of Life Research, 16, 69–84. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Di Fabio, A., & Palazzeschi, L. (2011). Proprietà psicometriche del Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire Short Form (TEIQue-SF) nel contesto italiano [Psychometric properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire Short Form (TEIQue-SF) in the Italian context]. Counseling – Giornale Italiano di Ricerca Applicata, 4, 327–336. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Foumani, G. E., Salehi, J., & Babakhani, M. (2015). The relationship between resilience and personality traits in women. Journal of Educational and Management Studies, 5(2), 116–120. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hambleton, R. K., & Lee, M. K. (2015). Methods for translating and adapting tests to increase cross-language validity. In D. H. SaklofskeC. R. ReynoldsV. L. SchweanEds., The Oxford handbook of child psychological assessment (pp. 172–181). Oxford University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Heun, R., Bonsignore, M., Barkow, K., & Jessen, F. (2001). Validity of the five-item WHO Well-Being Index (WHO-5) in an elderly population. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 251(2), 27–31. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • JASP Team. (2020). JASP (Version 0.14. 1) [Computer software]. https://jasp-stats.org First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Jarosz, A. F., & Wiley, J. (2014). What are the odds? A practical guide to computing and reporting Bayes factors. The Journal of Problem Solving, 7(1), Article 2. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Jeffreys, H. (1961). Theory of probability. Oxford University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Jodoin, M. G., & Gierl, M. J. (2001). Evaluating type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(4), 329–349. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1404_2 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lau, C., Chiesi, F., Saklofske, D. H., Yan, G., & Li, C. (2019). How essential is the Essential Resilience Scale? Differential item functioning of Chinese and English versions and criterion validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 155, Article 109666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109666 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Leone, L., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (2002). Validità della versione Italiana delle Scale BIS/BAS di Carver e White (1994): Generalizzabilità della struttura e relazioni con costrutti affini [Validity of the Italian version of the BIS/BAS Scale of Carver and White (1994): Generalizability of structure and relationships of related constructs]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 29(2), 413–434. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Ly, A., Verhagen, J., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2016). Harold Jeffreys’s default Bayes factor hypothesis tests: Explanation, extension, and application in psychology. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 72, 19–32. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294825 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Milfont, T. L., & Fischer, R. (2010). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 111–130. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Mondo, M., Sechi, C., & Cabras, C. (2021). Psychometric evaluation of three versions of the Italian Perceived Stress Scale. Current Psychology, 40, 1884–1892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-0132-8 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Oliva, A., Antolín-Suárez, L., & Rodríguez-Meirinhos, A. (2019). Uncovering the link between self-control, age, and psychological maladjustment among Spanish adolescents and young adults. Psychosocial Intervention, 28(1), 49–55. https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2019a1 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2003). Further investigation of the performance of S-X2: An item fit index for use with dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27(4), 289–298. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Panter-Brick, C. (2015). Culture and resilience: Next steps for theory and practice. In L. TheronL. LiebenbergM. UngarEds., Youth resilience and culture: Complexities and commonalities (pp. 233–244). Springer. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Pearlin, L. I., & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19(1), 2–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136319 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Petrides, K. V. (2009). Psychometric properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. In C. StoughD. H. SaklofskeJ. D. ParkerEds., Advances in the assessment of emotional intelligence (pp. 85–101). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_5 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Pidgeon, A. M., & Pickett, L. (2017). Examining the differences between university students’ levels of resilience on mindfulness, psychological distress and coping strategies. European Scientific Journal, 13(12), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2017.v13n12p%25p First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, 17(4, Pt. 2), 386–415. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Samejima, F. (1996). Graded response model. In W. J. van der LindenR. K. HambletonEds., Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 85–100). Springer. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A reevaluation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1063–1078. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.1063 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Southwick, S. M., Bonanno, G. A., Masten, A. S., Panter-Brick, C., & Yehuda, R. (2014). Resilience definitions, theory, and challenges: Interdisciplinary perspectives. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 5(1), Article 25338. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361–370. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In H. WainerH. I. BraunEds., Test validity (pp. 147–169). Erlbaum. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Topp, C. W., Østergaard, S. D., Søndergaard, S., & Bech, P. (2015). The WHO-5 Well-Being Index: A systematic review of the literature. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 84(3), 167–176. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Waugh, C. E., Thompson, R. J., & Gotlib, I. H. (2011). Flexible emotional responsiveness in trait resilience. Emotion, 11(5), 1059–1067. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021786 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Windle, G., Bennett, K. M., & Noyes, J. (2011). A methodological review of resilience measurement scales. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9(1), Article 8. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wong, D. F., & Song, H. X. (2008). The resilience of migrant workers in Shanghai China: The roles of migration stress and meaning of migration. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 54(2), 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764007083877 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Xu, W. (2011). The classical Confucian concepts of human emotion and proper humour. In J. CheyJ. M. DavisEds., Humour in Chinese life and letters (pp. 50–71). Hong Kong University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Ziegler, M., & Hagemann, D. (2015). Testing the unidimensionality of items. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 231–237. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000309 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar