SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar / 2026 / Cilt: 18 Sayı: Supplement 1 Özel Sayı

Turkish Adaptation of the Rugged Resilience Measure: A Validity and Reliability Study

İçsel Psikolojik Dayanıklılık Ölçeği’nin Türkçe Uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Hümeyra Dervişoğlu Akpınar(KARADENİZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EDEBİYAT FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-5524-5633
Ahu Öztürk(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0000-0003-0349-7342
Pages
240–256
Publication Date
2026-10-18
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that the scale consistently measures the internal component of resilience in culturally diverse contexts.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study was to adapt the Rugged Resilience Measure (RRM), developed to assess resilience through internal psychological resources in line with contemporary socio-ecological approaches, into Turkish and to examine its validity and reliability.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results: Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported the original one-factor structure of the Turkish version of the RRM and indicated an acceptable model fit (χ²/df = 2.554, CFI = .944, RMSEA = .063, SRMR = .043).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that the scale consistently measures the internal component of resilience in culturally diverse contexts.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:dayanıklılık · içsel psikolojik kaynaklar · ölçek uyarlama

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to adapt the Rugged Resilience Measure (RRM), developed to assess resilience through internal psychological resources in line with contemporary socio-ecological approaches, into Turkish and to examine its validity and reliability. Method: The study was conducted with an adult sample within an acculturation context. Construct validity was examined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. Criterion-related validity was evaluated by examining the associations between RRM scores and measures of life satisfaction and psychological well-being. Results: Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported the original one-factor structure of the Turkish version of the RRM and indicated an acceptable model fit (χ²/df = 2.554, CFI = .944, RMSEA = .063, SRMR = .043). Measurement invariance was supported across gender and cultural background groups. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .88). In addition, RRM scores were positively and moderately associated with life satisfaction (r = .34, p < .001) and psychological well-being (r = .60, p < .001). Conclusion: The Turkish version of the Rugged Resilience Measure (RRM) is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing individual resilience based on internal psychological resources. The findings indicate that the scale consistently measures the internal component of resilience in culturally diverse contexts.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, bireysel dayanıklılığı güncel sosyo-ekolojik yaklaşımlarla uyumlu biçimde, içsel psikolojik kaynaklar temelinde değerlendirmeyi hedefleyen İçsel Psikolojik Dayanıklılık Ölçeği’nin (İPDÖ) Türkçeye uyarlanması ve ölçeğin geçerlik ve güvenirlik özelliklerinin incelenmesidir. Yöntem: Araştırma, kültürleşme bağlamında yer alan yetişkin bireylerden oluşan bir örneklemle yürütülmüştür. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliği Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi ile değerlendirilmiş; güvenirlik analizleri kapsamında Cronbach alfa iç tutarlık katsayıları hesaplanmıştır. Ölçüt bağıntılı geçerlik, İPDÖ puanları ile yaşam doyumu ve psikolojik iyi oluş arasındaki ilişkiler üzerinden incelenmiştir. Bulgular: Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi sonuçları, İPDÖ’nün tek boyutlu orijinal yapısının Türkçe formda doğrulandığını ve modelin kabul edilebilir düzeyde uyum gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur (χ²/sd = 2,554, CFI = ,944, RMSEA = ,063, SRMR = ,043). Cinsiyet ve kültürel geçmiş grupları arasında ölçüm değişmezliğinin sağlandığı belirlenmiştir. Ölçeğin iç tutarlığı iyi düzeyde bulunmuş (Cronbach alfa = ,88) ve İPDÖ puanlarının yaşam doyumu (r = ,34, p < ,001) ile psikolojik iyi oluş (r = ,60, p < ,001) arasında pozitif yönlü, orta düzeyde ve anlamlı ilişkiler gösterdiği saptanmıştır. Sonuç: İPDÖ Türkçe formu, bireysel dayanıklılığı içsel psikolojik kaynaklar temelinde değerlendiren geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracıdır. Bulgular, ölçeğin kültürel çeşitliliğin söz konusu olduğu bağlamlarda içsel dayanıklılık bileşenini tutarlı biçimde ölçebildiğini göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akpınar, H. D., Öztürk, A. (2026). Turkish Adaptation of the Rugged Resilience Measure: A Validity and Reliability Study. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, Cilt: 18 Sayı: Supplement 1 Özel Sayı, 240–256. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1911749

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (65)

  1. Akyol ZS, Şirvanlı Özen D (2025) Turkish Validity and Reliability Study of Resilience Scale for Older Adults. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 17(Suppl 1):14-25.
  2. Arslan G (2015a) Çocuk ve Genç Psikolojik Sağlamlık Ölçeği’nin (ÇGPSÖ-12) psikometrik özellikleri: geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 16:1-12.
  3. Arslan G (2015b) Yetişkin Psikolojik Sağlamlık Ölçeği’nin (YPSÖ) psikometrik özellikleri: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 16:344-357.
  4. Aslan B, Önal Ö (2026) Turkish validation of the Multidimensional Individual and Interpersonal Resilience Measure: unveiling connections to psychological resilience, social support, and quality of life. Journal of Clinical Psychology Research, 10:1-12.
  5. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 25:3186-3191.
  6. Bonanno GA, Galea S, Bucciarelli A, Vlahov D (2007) What predicts psychological resilience after disaster? The role of demographics, resources, and life stress. J Consult Clin Psychol, 75:671-682.
  7. Bonanno GA, Westphal M, Mancini AD (2011) Resilience to loss and potential trauma. Annu Rev Clin Psychol, 7:511-535.
  8. Castro FG, Murray KE (2010) Cultural adaptation and resilience: controversies, issues, and emerging models. In Handbook of Adult Resilience, (Eds JW Reich, AJ Zautra, JS Hall):375–403. New York, The Guilford Press.
  9. Chen FF (2007) Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct Equ Modeling, 14:464-504.
  10. Connor KM, Davidson JRT (2003) Development of a new resilience scale: the Connor‐Davidson Resilience Scale (CD‐RISC). Depress Anxiety, 18:76-82.
  11. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S (1985) The Satisfaction With Life Scale. J Pers Assess, 49:71-75.
  12. Diener E, Wirtz D, Tov W, Kim-Prieto C, Choi DW, Oishi S et al. (2010) New well-being measures: short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Soc Indic Res, 97:143-156.
  13. Flora DB, Flake JK (2017) The purpose and practice of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in psychological research: decisions for scale development and validation. Can J Behav Sci, 49:78–88.
  14. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res, 18:39-50.
  15. Friborg O, Hjemdal O, Rosenvinge JH, Martinussen M (2003) A new rating scale for adult resilience: what are the central protective resources behind healthy adjustment? Int J Methods Psychiatr Res, 12:65-76.
  16. Hirano M (2011) A study of the classification of resilience factors: development of the Bidimensional Resilience Scale (BRS). Pasonariti Kenkyu, 19:94-106.
  17. Jackson DL (2003) Revisiting sample size and number of parameter estimates: some support for the N:q hypothesis. Struct Equ Modeling, 10:128–141.
  18. Jefferies P, Höltge J, Fritz J, Ungar M (2023) A cross-country network analysis of resilience systems in young adults. Emerg Adulthood, 11:415-430.
  19. Jefferies P, Vanstone R, Ungar M (2022) The Rugged Resilience Measure: development and preliminary validation of a brief measure of personal resilience. Appl Res Qual Life, 17:985-1000.
  20. Karaırmak Ö (2010) Establishing the psychometric qualities of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in a trauma survivor sample. Psychiatry Res, 179:350-356.
  21. Karaırmak Ö, Figley C (2017) Resiliency in the face of adversity: a short longitudinal test of the trait hypothesis. J Gen Psychol 144:89-109.
  22. Keles S, Friborg O, Idsøe T, Sirin S, Oppedal B (2018) Resilience and acculturation among unaccompanied refugee minors. Int J Behav Dev, 42:52-63.
  23. Kitayama S, Park H (2007) Cultural shaping of self, emotion, and well‐being: how does it work? Soc Personal Psychol Compass, 1:202-222.
  24. Klein ND, Bravo AJ, Conway CC, Keough MT, Pilatti A, Mezquita L et al. (2024) Individualism, collectivism, and emotion regulation: a cross-cultural examination among young adults from seven countries. Curr Psychol, 43: 26007–26018.
  25. Kline RB (2023) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 5th ed. New York, Guilford Press.
  26. Kobasa SC (1979) Stressful life events, personality, and health: an inquiry into hardiness. J Pers Soc Psychol, 37:1-11.
  27. Leadbeater B, Dodgen D, Solarz A (2005) The resilience revolution. In Resilience in Children, Families, and Communities, (Eds RD Peters, B Leadbeater, RJ McMahon):47-61. Boston, Springer.
  28. Li CH (2016) Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behav Res Methods, 48:936-949.
  29. Liebenberg L, Moore JC (2018) A social ecological measure of resilience for adults: the RRC-ARM. Soc Indic Res, 136:1-19.
  30. Liebenberg L, Ungar M, Vijver FVD (2012) Validation of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure-28 (CYRM-28) among Canadian youth. Res Soc Work Pract, 22:219-226.
  31. Luthar SS, Cicchetti D, Becker B (2000) The construct of resilience: a critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Dev, 71:543-562.
  32. Masten AS (2001) Ordinary magic: resilience processes in development. Am Psychol, 56:227-238.
  33. Masten AS, Hubbard JJ, Gest SD, Tellegen A, Garmezy N, Ramirez M (1999) Competence in the context of adversity: pathways to resilience and maladaptation from childhood to late adolescence. Dev Psychopathol, 11:143-169.
  34. Masten AS, Lucke CM, Nelson KM, Stallworthy IC (2021) Resilience in development and psychopathology: multisystem perspectives. Annu Rev Clin Psychol, 17:521-549.
  35. Masten AS, Reed MGJ (2002) Resilience in development. In Handbook of Positive Psychology, (Eds CR Snyder, SJ Lopez):74–88. New York, Oxford University Press.
  36. Nguyen AMD, Benet-Martínez V (2010) Multicultural identity: what it is and why it matters. In The Psychology of Social and Cultural Diversity (Ed RJ Crisp):87–114. Chichester, Wiley Blackwell.
  37. Padmanabhanunni A, Pretorius TB (2023) Promoting well-being in the face of a pandemic: the role of sense of coherence and ego-resilience in the relationship between psychological distress and life satisfaction. S Afr J Psychol, 53:124-133.
  38. Palanbek Yavaş SP, Baysan C (2025) Turkish validation of a resilience scale from older people’s perspectives: Resilience Scale for Older Adults. PeerJ, 13, e18837.
  39. Resilience Research Centre (2022) RRM User Manual V1.1. Halifax, NS: Resilience Research Centre, Dalhousie University. http://www.resilienceresearch.org (Accessed 26.06.2023)
  40. Rokvić NM, Karataş S, Crocetti E (2022) Validation of the Serbian version of the Utrecht-Management of Identity Commitments Scale (U-MICS) in an adult population. Identity, 22: 326-336.
  41. Rönkkö M, Cho E (2022) An updated guideline for assessing discriminant validity. Organ Res Methods, 25:6-14.
  42. Rutter M (2012) Resilience as a dynamic concept. Dev Psychopathol, 24:335–344.
  43. Satorra A, Bentler PM (2001) A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66:507-514.
  44. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H (2003) Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8: 23-74.
  45. Shalev AY, Freedman S, Peri T, Brandes D, Sahar T, Orr SP et al. (1998) Prospective study of posttraumatic stress disorder and depression following trauma. Am J Psychiatry, 155:630–637.
  46. Singh R, Chua KC, Pant SB, Paudel R, Gautam K, Luitel, NP et al. (2025) Translation and adaptation of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure-Revised and Rugged Resilience Measure: a mixed-method study among adolescents in Nepal. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev,1-16.
  47. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W (2011) Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross‐cultural health care research: a clear and user‐friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract, 17:268-274.
  48. Şenocak SÜ, Demirkıran F, Totan T (2021) Turkish adaptation of the resilience scale for nurses: a validity and reliability study. Nurse Educ Today, 107:105108.
  49. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2013) Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th ed. London, Pearson.
  50. Taber KS (2018) The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Res Sci Educ, 48:1273-1296.
  51. Tanko Ç, Ekşi F, Hatun O, Ekşi H (2021) Psikolojik Sağlamlık için Koruyucu Faktörler Ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 22:16-29.
  52. Telef BB (2013) Psikolojik İyi Oluş Ölçeği: Türkçeye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28:374-384.
  53. Tümlü GÜ, Recepoğlu E (2013) Üniversite akademik personelinin psikolojik dayanıklılık ve yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişki. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 3:205-213.
  54. Ungar M (2008) Resilience across cultures. Br J Soc Work, 38:218-235.
  55. Ungar M (2021) Modeling multisystemic resilience: connecting biological, psychological, social, and ecological adaptation in contexts of adversity. In Multisystemic Resilience: Adaptation and Transformation in Contexts of Change (Ed M Ungar):6–31. New York, Oxford University Press.
  56. Ungar M, Jefferies P (2021) Becoming more rugged and better resourced: the R2 Resilience Program’s© psychosocial approach to thriving. Front Psychol, 12:253-262.
  57. Ungar M, Liebenberg L (2011) Assessing resilience across cultures using mixed methods: construction of the child and youth resilience measure. J Mix Methods Res, 5:126-149.
  58. Utsey SO, Hook JN, Fischer N, Belvet B (2008) Cultural orientation, ego resilience, and optimism as predictors of subjective well-being in African Americans. J Posit Psychol, 3:202-210.
  59. Üzar Özçetin YS, Sarıoğlu G, Dursun Sİ (2019) Onkoloji hemşirelerinin psikolojik sağlamlık, tükenmişlik ve psikolojik iyi oluş düzeyleri. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 11:147-164.
  60. Virlia S, Kusuma CT (2026) Development of a resilience measurement tool: adaptation of the Resilience Scale for Adolescents. G-Couns: Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling, 10:2230-2241.
  61. Wedyaswari M, Jefferies P, Cahyadi S, Hinduan ZR (2024) Measuring psycho-social-ecological resilience: validation in an Indonesian population. TPM Test Psychom Methodol Appl Psychol, 31:59–80.
  62. Werner EE (1993) Risk, resilience, and recovery: perspectives from the Kauai Longitudinal Study. Dev Psychopathol, 5:503-515.
  63. Windle G, Bennett KM, Noyes J (2011) A methodological review of resilience measurement scales. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 9:8.
  64. Yang Y, Liang X (2013) Confirmatory factor analysis under violations of distributional and structural assumptions. Int J Quant Res Educ, 1:61-84.
  65. Yetim Ü (1991) Kişisel projelerin organizasyonu ve örüntüsü açısından yaşam doyumu (Doktora tezi). İzmir, Ege Üniversitesi.