P. Bartone, K. McDonald, B. Hansma, Jonathan Stermac-Stein, E. M. R. Escobar, S. J. Stein, Rebecca Ryznar
{"title":"Development and Validation of an Improved Hardiness Measure","authors":"P. Bartone, K. McDonald, B. Hansma, Jonathan Stermac-Stein, E. M. R. Escobar, S. J. Stein, Rebecca Ryznar","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Previous research shows that psychological hardiness is an important factor contributing to stress resilience in individuals. Of the various instruments available to measure hardiness, the most commonly used is the Dispositional Resilience Scale (DRS). Despite its demonstrated utility, the DRS-15 still has a number of serious limitations, including low subscale reliability and limited construct validity. The present work aims to create a new hardiness scale that addresses these limitations. A pool of new items plus the original DRS item set was administered to a census-matched stratified sample of N = 2,021 men and women across the United States. Items for the new scale were selected based on item distribution characteristics, item response theory plots, scale reliabilities, item-total correlations, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). CFA results showed the best fitting model reflected a hierarchical structure with three factors (commitment, control, and challenge) nested under a broad hardiness factor. This factor structure is replicated in two independent validation samples and also holds invariant across gender and age. The new scale shows much improved reliability coefficients (e.g., Cronbach’s α of .93, .85, .84, and .89 for total hardiness, challenge, control, and commitment, respectively), as well as structural equivalence across gender and age. Validity is demonstrated in multiple samples via predictive associations of hardiness scores with theoretically relevant outcome measures, including coping, life satisfaction, anxiety, and depression. The Hardiness Resilience Gauge (HRG) possesses excellent reliability and validity and appears to be a more effective tool for measuring hardiness in adult populations.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000709","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Abstract. Previous research shows that psychological hardiness is an important factor contributing to stress resilience in individuals. Of the various instruments available to measure hardiness, the most commonly used is the Dispositional Resilience Scale (DRS). Despite its demonstrated utility, the DRS-15 still has a number of serious limitations, including low subscale reliability and limited construct validity. The present work aims to create a new hardiness scale that addresses these limitations. A pool of new items plus the original DRS item set was administered to a census-matched stratified sample of N = 2,021 men and women across the United States. Items for the new scale were selected based on item distribution characteristics, item response theory plots, scale reliabilities, item-total correlations, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). CFA results showed the best fitting model reflected a hierarchical structure with three factors (commitment, control, and challenge) nested under a broad hardiness factor. This factor structure is replicated in two independent validation samples and also holds invariant across gender and age. The new scale shows much improved reliability coefficients (e.g., Cronbach’s α of .93, .85, .84, and .89 for total hardiness, challenge, control, and commitment, respectively), as well as structural equivalence across gender and age. Validity is demonstrated in multiple samples via predictive associations of hardiness scores with theoretically relevant outcome measures, including coping, life satisfaction, anxiety, and depression. The Hardiness Resilience Gauge (HRG) possesses excellent reliability and validity and appears to be a more effective tool for measuring hardiness in adult populations.
期刊介绍:
The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.