Does the Brief Resilience Scale actually measure resilience and succumbing? Comparing artefactual and substantive models

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective: The Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) is a relatively new and increasingly used measure of resilience. Despite its popularity, evidence regarding its unitary factor structure has been equivocal. The aim of this study was to examine whether the BRS should be operationalised as a single or dual factor model and further test the validity of the scale. Method: A sample of 288 adults (mean age = 34 years) completed an online survey measuring resilience, the Big-Five personality traits, positive and negative affect, perceived stress, and life satisfaction. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that a single-factor model that accounted for method effects within the negatively worded items had the best fit to the data. Additionally, no evidence of a dual factor structure was found using discriminant, construct and criterion validity markers of the Big-Five, life satisfaction, perceived stress or positive and negative affect. Results also demonstrated moderate to strong positive relationships between the BRS and measures of psychological wellbeing. Finally, the BRS was positively related to all Big-Five personality factors with the exception of a strong negative relationship with neuroticism. Discussion: The current findings support the conceptualisation of the BRS as a unidimensional measure of resilience. Moreover, the study lends further support to validity of the BRS as a brief measure of resilience through demonstrating expected relationships with markers of wellbeing and the Big-Five personality factors.