Validity and reliability of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) in competitive sport

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.10.005Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

This study replicates and extends the work of Gucciardi, Jackson, Coulter, and Mallett (2011) in relation to the validity of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Connor & Davidson, 2003) in sport. Three primary aims were explored: 1) Examine the factor structure and fit of three versions of the CD-RISC: the original 25-item CD-RISC, both as a 25-item five factor scale and as a 25-item unidimensional scale, and the 10-item CD-RISC-10; 2) examine gender invariance of the best fitting version of the CD-RISC; and 3) examine the validity of the best fitting CD-RISC by relating it to affect and performance anxiety in a sample of competitive American distance runners (N = 409).

Design

Cross-sectional.

Methods

Multiple self-report questionnaires were delivered through an online medium.

Results

Using confirmatory factor and item level analyses, the CD-RISC-10-item scale was psychometrically superior to the unidimensional 25-item and the five factor 25-item CD-RISC versions. The CD-RISC-10-item exhibited measurement invariance for gender, with significant configural, strong, and weak analyses. Using structure equation modeling, the CD-RISC-10-item scale moderately and positively correlated with positive affect and was inversely related to negative affect and performance anxiety, establishing convergent and divergent validity.

Conclusion

The findings offer some initial psychometric evidence for the use of the CD-RISC-10 in sport performers.

Section snippets

Resilience in sport

Resilience is a highly desirable characteristic for athletes to have in sport given the stressors and challenges that they encounter (Fletcher and Sarkar, 2012, Galli and Gonzalez, 2015). Based on their findings, Fletcher and Sarkar recently defined psychological resilience as “the role of mental processes and behavior in promoting personal assets and protecting an individual from the potential negative effect of stressors” (2012, p. 675, 2013, p. 16) and conceptualized resilience as “the

Measuring resilience: The Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)

The CD-RISC was developed using constructs shown previously to be related to resilience, such as hardiness (Kobasa, 1979), which is a dispositional form of resilience and characteristics derived from the presence of protective factors found in research on resilient individuals (Lyons, 1991, Rutter, 1985). Examples of such characteristics include self-efficacy, the strengthening effect of stress, close relationships to others, and an action oriented approach to situations (see Connor & Davidson,

Measuring resilience in sport with the CD-RISC

To date, there is not a specific measure of resilience developed for the sport context, nor does a measure exist that assesses resilience as a process of positive adaptation following adversity. Although several resilience measures exist in general psychology, only the CD-RISC has received attention in sport. The CD-RISC measures “personal resources or qualities deemed appropriate for positive adaption to adversity” (p. 424; Gucciardi et al., 2011). Thus, the CD-RISC assesses personal

Participants

Participants were 405 (54.8% male and 45.2% female) competitive post-collegiate long distance runners from throughout the United States of America who were at least 18 years of age (M = 34.84, SD = 10.05). The sample was predominantly Caucasian (92.8%), with Hispanic (2.2%) and Asian (1.7%) individuals also represented in the sample. Participants had a mean of 10.53 years of running experience (SD = 8.73). In order to qualify as “competitive,” participants had to have run at least three races

Procedures

Upon receiving Institution Review Board (IRB) approval on the ethics of the study, participants were recruited primarily from running clubs, running stores, and other running organizations. Interested athletes who met the criteria provided above were given access to an online web link via Survey Monkey. All participants provided passive consent and completed the measures. Based on the work of Anderson and Gerbing (1984), the acceptable sample size was determined to be 400 participants (200

Data analysis

MPlus 6.11 (Muthen & Muthen, 2014) was used to a conduct confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the three versions of CD-RISC instrument and to model the CD-RISC to affect/emotion and performance anxiety using structural equation modeling (SEM). CFA with Maximum Likelihood estimation was used. In evaluating the fit indices for the CFAs, the following parameters were used as recommended by Hu and Bentler, 1998, Hu and Bentler, 1999, and Bentler (2007): SRMR of .05 or less, TLI of .95 or higher,

Results

The means, standard deviations, and Cronbach's alphas for all the variables and subscales in this study are displayed at the bottom of Table 1. The Cronbach's alphas for most of measures and subscales were all greater than or equal to .70, the recommended criteria when working in early stages of research (Nunnally, 1978). The only exceptions were the PANAS subscales (positive = .69; negative = .65) and the spirituality scale (.67) from the 25-item five factor CD-RISC. Thus, findings in relation

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to further assess the factor structures of various forms of the CD-RISC in a sample of competitive male and female distance runners in the United States of America, test the best fitting scale's measurement properties for gender invariance, and test hypothesized convergent and divergent validity. Overall, the CD-RISC-10 (Campbell-Sills and Stein, 2007, Gucciardi et al., 2011) emerged as the most promising instrument, in comparison to the five factor CD-RISC (Connor

Limitations

Two general limitations characterize this study. Most notably, shortcomings related to the CD-RISC scale and limitations relating to future research examining resilient qualities. Regarding limitations of the CD-RISC as a measure, the CD-RISC solely focuses on resilient qualities at the individual level, has limited evidence for the selection and inclusion of some of the items, was developed and utilized in clinical settings, and has considerable conceptual overlap with coping (see Ahern

Future research directions

As identified in the limitations, there is a need for a sport-specific measure of resilience as mentioned by several scholars (Fletcher and Sarkar, 2012, Galli and Gonzalez, 2015, Galli and Vealey, 2008, Gucciardi et al., 2011, Sarkar and Fletcher, 2013, Sarkar and Fletcher, 2014a). Specifically, developing a sport-specific measure of resilience that considers the three pivotal components-adversity, positive adaptation, and protective factors-in a tripartite fashion to realize a complete and

Conclusion

In conclusion, our findings, in combination with those of Gucciardi et al. (2011), offer some initial psychometric evidence for the use of the CD-RISC-10 in sport performers. The CD-RISC-10 exhibited a strong factor structure and gender invariance, was internally reliable, and predicted both affect and anxiety in the expected directions. The CD-RISC-10 is a shorter, less time consuming and easy to administer survey, making it appear to be advantageous to use in measuring resilient qualities of

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Brooks Sports, Trail Runner Magazine, Fleet Feet Savannah, Salt Lake Running Company, Mountain Trails Foundation, and the Sports Guide Magazine for data collection assistance.

References (42)

  • G.W. Cheung et al.

    Evaluating Goodness-of-fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance

    Structural Equation Modeling

    (2002)
  • K.M. Connor et al.

    Development of a new resilience scale: the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)

    Depression and Anxiety

    (2003)
  • J.R. Davidson et al.

    Trauma, resilience, and saliostatis: effects of treatment on posttraumatic stress disorder

    International Clinical Psychopharmacology

    (2005)
  • D. Fletcher et al.

    Psychological resilience: a review and critique of definitions, concepts and theory

    European Psychologist

    (2013)
  • N. Galli et al.

    Psychological resilience in sport: A review of the literature and implications for research and practice

    International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

    (2015)
  • N. Galli et al.

    “Bouncing back” from adversity: athletes' experiences of resilience

    The Sport Psychologist

    (2008)
  • A. Ghasemi et al.

    Normality tests for statistical analysis: a guide for non-statisticians

    International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism

    (2012)
  • Y. Hanin

    Emotions in sport

    (1999)
  • R. Hofmann

    Establishing factor validity using variable reduction in confirmatory factor analysis

    Educational and Psychological Measurement

    (1995)
  • L. Hu et al.

    Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterization model misspecification

    Psychological Methods

    (1998)
  • Hu et al.

    Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives

    Structural Equation Modeling

    (1999)
  • Cited by (78)

    • Revisiting grit: How much does it overlap with resilience?

      2023, International Journal of Educational Research
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text