Resilience can be defined as a crucial factor in handling and adapting well in the context of significant adversity (Oshio, Kaneko, Nagamine, & Nakaya, 2003). Being faced with difficult situations, resilient people benefit from internal sources as personal qualities and also external factors to thrive (Wong & Wong, 2012). In literature, the conceptualization of resilience may differ greatly but despite these variations in resilience definition, three common conditions are found to be key as risk factors, protective factors and positive outcomes.  Risk factors include any genetic, biological, psychological, environmental or socio-economical factors making people vulnerable to the significant threats (Luthar, Cicchetti & Becker, 2000). Protective factors act as a buffer between risk factors and positive outcomes by eliminating destructive effects of these risky conditions (Masten, 1994; Masten, Best & Garmezy, 1990). Lastly, positive outcomes represent individual’s achievement of positive adaptation to the adversity with the help of protective factors (Rutter, 1999).


“Resilience Scale” was developed by Wagnild and Young in 1993 and considered as one of the most preferred inventories of resilience in relevant literature because of its pioneering quality in the field. As another important reason why the survey has became so popular is about its construct structure in which both negative and positive situations are equally represented and also scale can be applied to a broad range of population, which makes it very practical in research (Abiola & Udofia, 2011; Oladipo & Idemudia, 2015).

Study Group

This study aims at developing a short form of Resilience Scale-Turkish version and testing the validity and reliability of this form in adult population. The convenience sampling was used in the data collection process and the sample includes totally 557 adults (396 women and 151 men).

The Scale Revision Process

The study was carried out in two sections. Because the scale revision processes are considered as important as the scale development studies and these studies should be conducted in two separate sections, one of which includes the exploratory factor analysis and the other one includes the confirmatory factor analysis. That’s why, in the first step of this study, data collected from 211 participants was analyzed based on exploratory factor analysis, item analysis, and internal consistency and criterion related validity. The second step of the study was carried out with 346 participants and the data gained from this group analyzed to test the confirmation of the construct structure found in the exploratory factor analysis of the scale in the first study.

First section of the study included exploratory factor analysis and in the results of the factor analysis it was found that Short Version of Resilience Scale consisted of 10 items and the factor loadings of these items changed from .65 to .85 and the short form was accounted for 58,38 of total variance.

For criterion related validity of the short form of Resilience Scale, the relevant literature was evaluated and resilience was found related with the constructs as positive and negative emotions and also depression level of individuals (Burns & Anstey, 2010; Min et al., 2014). For this reason in this study, Positive and Negative Affect Scale and Beck Depression Inventory were used to test the criterion related validity of the scale and in the results, there was a positive significant relation between scores gained from Resilience Scale Short form and from Positive Emotion Scale and negative significant relation between scores from short form and from Negative Emotion Scale and Beck Depression Inventory. As another evidence to ensure the validity of the short form, discriminant validity was adequately demonstrated by comparing the upper (27%) and lower groups (27%) for the validation of test items. And the results showed that all the items of the scale had the adequate discriminant validity.

In the second section of the study, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted and the construct structure found in exploratory factor analysis was confirmed. In the examination of the fit indexes, the scale was found to have a good fit index. Having one factor structure, the scale has .91 internal consistency and test-retest reliability was found as .83.


To sum up, based on the findings of the study, the short form of Resilience Scale was found to be a valid and reliable scale in determining people’s resilience levels. The short form of the scale consists of 10 items and it has one factor structure.  The response type of the scale is Likert type (from 1-Absolutely Agree to 7-Absolutely Disagree). The scores from the scale may change from 10 to 70 and a high score from the scale shows a high level of resilience in the individual. Therefore the short form of Resilience Scale is suggested to be used by researchers in the field of resilience as a valid, reliable and practical scale.

Keywords: The Resilience Scale (RS),Validity and Reliability, Adult.