Are we really studying resilience in sport? A critical review of adopted methodologies

Psychological resilience has gained considerable attention in sport. Nevertheless, the construct often remains poorly understood and multiple conceptual and methodological issues pervade the literature. The purpose of the present article is to provide a critical review of the commonly adopted methodologies to study resilience in sport. This review is divided into four sections. The first section will briefly discuss opposing conceptualizations of resilience as a static trait or a dynamic process. The second section will then discuss key methodological implications relating to the conceptualization of resilience as a dynamic process. In the third section, common methodologies to study resilience in sport are presented and critically reviewed. These methodologies are broadly divided into: (i) self-report resilience measures, (ii) qualitative research, and (iii) direct assessment of functioning in relation to observed adversity. In the final section, some avenues for future research are offered.

More positive group memberships are associated with greater resilience in Royal Air Force (RAF) personnel

In the current project, we examined how perceived group memberships (number, and characteristics, of), social and relational identification, and social identity leadership are associated with resilience in Royal Air Force (RAF) personnel. Based on social identity theorizing, we hypothesized positive associations between the number of groups, perceptions of their characteristics (e.g., positivity), and how they relate to each other (i.e., compatibility) and resilience (H1). We also hypothesized positive associations between both social identity leadership (H2) and resilience, and social and relational identification (H3) and resilience. Two hundred and forty-three personnel from 18 RAF bases completed an identity mapping exercise and measures of leadership, social and relational identification, and resilience. Our findings highlighted the importance of the association between positive group memberships and resilience, and social identification and resilience. Counter to our hypothesis, belonging to more groups was negatively associated with resilience, and there were non-significant relationships between three principles of social identity leadership and resilience, with embedding identity being significantly negatively associated with resilience. In support of social identity theorizing, the number of positive groups was positively associated with resilience, as was social identification. These findings indicate that, for RAF personnel, it is belonging to positive groups, both within and outside work, along with social identification, that is positively associated with resilience.

Resilience or hope? Incremental and convergent validity of the resilience scale for adults (RSA) and the Herth hope scale (HHS) in the prediction of anxiety and depression

BACKGROUND

Hope and resilience protect against inner vulnerabilities or harsh life circumstances; they explain individual differences in physical or mental health outcomes under high stress. They have been studied in complementary or competing theoretical frameworks; therefore, the study of measures of hope and resilience should be undertaken prior to explore if they are truly value-added for research. This study investigates the convergent and incremental validity of the Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA) and the Herth Hope Scale (HHS), in the prediction of anxiety and depression (HSCL-25).

METHODS

Participants in this community-based sample are 762 adults from 18 to 74 years old. They answered the RSA, HHS, Spanish Language Stressful Life-Events Checklist (SL-SLE), and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25). Incremental validity analyses combined hierarchical regression and structural equation models (SEM). First, hierarchical regression models were compared based on three criteria (R 2Diff., ΔF, and semi-partial r), then the direct effect of resilience on affective symptoms was compared with the mediated effect of resilience on affective symptoms through hope.

RESULTS

The hierarchical models showed that (1) hope and resilience account significantly for the variance of affective symptoms above age, sex, and life-stress; (2) Resilience Total score has greater incremental validity than positive scales of HHS Hope; and (3) RSA Total score, HHS Optimism/Spiritual support, Stressful life-events and sex are unique predictors of affective symptoms. The SEM analyses verified a stronger direct effect of resilience in the prediction of affective symptoms above the significant partial mediated effect of resilience through hope. Additionally, results show that age and better educational opportunities were associated with protection (i.e. resilience and hope) and emotional well-being (i.e. affective symptoms and hopelessness). Women showed higher scores in social competences and resources (RSA), interconnectedness and initiative to take action (HHS). However, they have poorer evaluations of own abilities and efficacy (RSA), and higher scores in all the affective symptoms assessed.

CONCLUSION

The RSA has incremental validity above the HHS, however, both the RSA and the HHS are effective, differentiated and complementary measures of protection that are of high relevance for research on psychosocial and emotional well-being.