{"title":"Understanding How Resilience is Measured in the Organizational Sciences","authors":"Shannon K. Cheng, Danielle D. King, F. Oswald","doi":"10.1080/08959285.2020.1744151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Resilience is a topic of growing interest in the workplace; however, regarding its definition and measurement, a wide range of perspectives and idiosyncrasies persist. We take a closer look at the state of resilience through item-level analyses of 14 publicly available measures. In Study 1, relevance ratings revealed that many items from the measures were not aligned with subject matter experts’ (SMEs) conceptualizations of resilience. In Study 2, SMEs were able to sort the relevant items reliably into eight categories. In Study 3, four factors summarized participant responses to these items, and these factors aligned with the categories from Study 2. Moreover, resilience scales based on these four factors demonstrated expected patterns of convergent and discriminant validity. Implications for resilience theory and measurement are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47825,"journal":{"name":"Human Performance","volume":"33 1","pages":"130 - 163"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08959285.2020.1744151","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Performance","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2020.1744151","RegionNum":4,"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: 17
Abstract
ABSTRACT Resilience is a topic of growing interest in the workplace; however, regarding its definition and measurement, a wide range of perspectives and idiosyncrasies persist. We take a closer look at the state of resilience through item-level analyses of 14 publicly available measures. In Study 1, relevance ratings revealed that many items from the measures were not aligned with subject matter experts’ (SMEs) conceptualizations of resilience. In Study 2, SMEs were able to sort the relevant items reliably into eight categories. In Study 3, four factors summarized participant responses to these items, and these factors aligned with the categories from Study 2. Moreover, resilience scales based on these four factors demonstrated expected patterns of convergent and discriminant validity. Implications for resilience theory and measurement are discussed.
期刊介绍：
Human Performance publishes research investigating the nature and role of performance in the workplace and in organizational settings and offers a rich variety of information going beyond the study of traditional job behavior. Dedicated to presenting original research, theory, and measurement methods, the journal investigates individual, team, and firm level performance factors that influence work and organizational effectiveness. Human Performance is a respected forum for behavioral scientists interested in variables that motivate and promote high-level human performance, particularly in organizational and occupational settings. The journal seeks to identify and stimulate relevant research, communication, and theory concerning human capabilities and effectiveness. It serves as a valuable intellectual link between such disciplines as industrial-organizational psychology, individual differences, work physiology, organizational behavior, human resource management, and human factors.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
