Abstract
This rejoinder is presented in response to an analysis by De Bruin and Lew of the 1998 publication by Fourie and Van Vuuren on the career resilience construct. Comments and recommendations made by De Bruin and Lew in respect of the construct validity of the CRQare responded to in terms of the theoretical foundation of the CRQ, the methodology used, the CRQ’s content validity, sample-related issues, the instrument’s construct validity, as well as a perspective on the future of the instrument. Opsomming Hierdie repliekword voorgehou na aanleiding van’n ontleding deur De Bruin en Lewwat op die 1998-publikasie van Fourie enVanVuuren aangaande die konstruk loopbaangehardheid, gebaseer is.Respons op die kommentaar en aanbevelings deur De Bruin en Lew aangaande die konstrukgeldigheid van die Loopbaan-gehardheidsvraelys (LGV) word voorgehou in terme van die teoretiese basis van die LGV, die metodologie wat gebruik is, die inhoudsgeldigheid van die LGV, die instrument se konstrukgeldigheid, steekproefverwante vraagstukke, asook ’n perspektief op die toekoms van die instrument.
Highlights
This rejoinder is presented in response to an analysis by De Bruin and Lew of the 1998 publication by Fourie and VanVuuren on the career resilience construct
The importance of peer review type systems that make provision for reminding researchers of the importance of scienti¢c and academic integrity, and that allow for objective questioning and scrutiny of research results previously published, is once again underscored by the commendable e¡ort made by De Bruin and Lew to challenge the construct validity of the Career Resilience Questionnaire (CRQ)
It is through e¡orts like these that the ¢eld of industrial psychology can grow through continued theorisation and measurement of new constructs, in this case career resilience
Summary
At the time of the Fourie and Van Vuuren (1998) study, the earlier research on resilience as a construct that may have application in the ¢eld of career management, was limited. The intention with the 1998 study by Fourie and Van Vuuren was not to develop such a model, but to explore the concept that was originally coined by London (1983) as a dimension of his multidimensional theory of career motivation. In line with this aim it was decided to de¢ne and describe career resilience within the new career paradigm, and to develop a measuring instrument that may enable the researchers to shed more light on the concept than initial London (1983, 1993) and Noe, et al (1990) ¢ndings allowed for. It should be noted that a research project aimed at an in-depth exploration of career resilience, the e¡ort of which may result in exactly such a ‘‘multi-dimensional model of career resilience’’ that De Bruin and Lew recommends, was initiated by the present authors in April 2001
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
