Population-based validation of a German version of the Brief Resilience Scale

Smith and colleagues developed the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) to assess the individual ability to recover from stress despite significant adversity. This study aimed to validate the German version of the BRS. We used data from a population-based (sample 1: n = 1.481) and a representative (sample 2: n = 1.128) sample of participants from the German general population (age >= 18) to assess reliability and validity. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were conducted to compare one-and two-factorial models from previous studies with a method-factor model which especially accounts for the wording of the items. Reliability was analyzed. Convergent validity was measured by correlating BRS scores with mental health measures, coping, social support, and optimism. Reliability was good (alpha = .85, omega = .85 for both samples). The method-factor model showed excellent model fit (sample 1: chi 2/df = 7.544; RMSEA = .07; CFI = .99; SRMR = .02; sample 2: chi 2/df = 1.166; RMSEA = .01; CFI = 1.00; SRMR = .01) which was significantly better than the one-factor model (Delta chi(2) (4) = 172.71, p < .001) or the two-factor model (Delta chi(2) (3) = 31.16, p < .001). The BRS was positively correlated with well-being, social support, optimism, and the coping strategies active coping, positive reframing, acceptance, and humor. It was negatively correlated with somatic symptoms, anxiety and insomnia, social dysfunction, depression, and the coping strategies religion, denial, venting, substance use, and self-blame. To conclude, our results provide evidence for the reliability and validity of the German adaptation of the BRS as well as the unidimensional structure of the scale once method effects are accounted for.