Psychometric validity and reliability of the 10- and 2-item Connor-Davidson resilience scales among a national sample of Americans responding to the Covid-19 pandemic: an item response theory analysis.

Waddimba AC, Baker BM, Pogue JR, McAuliffe MP, Bennett MM, Baxter RD, Mohr DC, Warren AM. Psychometric validity and reliability of the 10- and 2-item Connor-Davidson resilience scales among a national sample of Americans responding to the Covid-19 pandemic: an item response theory analysis. Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2022 Sep 1; 31(9):2819-2836.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

PURPOSE: Psychometric validity/reliability of 10-item and 2-item abbreviations of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10; CD-RISC-2) was investigated via item response theory and classic approaches. METHODS: We sampled 5023 adult American participants in a June/July 2020 survey on the COVID-19 pandemic''s psychological effects. Our questionnaire incorporated the CD-RISC-10 with other validated measures. CD-RISC-10 items were ranked on item-to-scale correlations, loadings on a one-factor confirmatory factor analysis model, and item slope/threshold parameters plus information curves from a unidimensional graded response model. Concurrent validity of the highest ranked item pair was evaluated vis-à-vis the CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2. Internal consistency, based on average variance extracted (AVE) and multiple reliability coefficients, was also compared. Convergent/divergent validity was tested by correlating anxiety, depression, fear of COVID-19, anxiety sensitivity, coping, and personality measures with both scales and the highest ranked item pair. Binary agreement/classification indexes assessed inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: Items 2 and 9 from CD-RISC-10 ranked the highest. Reliability coefficients were? > 0.93,? > 0.72, and? > 0.82 for the CD-RISC-10, CD-RISC-2, vs summation of items 2 and 9. AVEs were 0.66, 0.67, and 0.77. CD-RISC abbreviations and the summation of items 2 and 9 correlated negatively with anxiety ( > - 0.43), depression ( > - 0.42), and fear of COVID-19 ( > - 0.34); positively with emotional stability ( > 0.53) and conscientiousness ( > 0.40). Compared to the CD-RISC-2, summative scores of items 2 and 9 more efficiently classified/discriminated high resilience on the CD-RISC-10. CONCLUSION: We confirmed construct validity/reliability of copyrighted CD-RISC abbreviations. The CD-RISC-10''s items 2 and 9 were psychometrically more salient than the CD-RISC-2.