I hope this helps. If you need more help with data or any issue related to your research, please tell me, it would be a pleasure to help you: [email protected].
In addition to the other recommendations there is the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale, version 2 (BERS-2) which has both caregiver and youth versions. It assesses children and youth strengths in six areas.
Interpersonal Strength: Assesses a child’s/youth’s ability to control his/her emotions or behaviors in social situations.
Family Involvement: Assesses a child’s/youth’s participation in and relationship with his/her family.
Intrapersonal Strength: Examines a child’s/youth’s view of his/her competence and accomplishments.
School Functioning: Assesses a child’s/youth’s competence in school and classroom tasks.
Affective Strength: Captures a child’s/youth’s ability to accept affection from others and express feelings toward others.
Career Strength: Measures the child’s/youth’s interest and aptitude for career development.
There is also a Preschool BERS for young children.
I suggest you read the following article: Gill Windle, Kate M Bennett, Jane Noyes: A methodological review of resilience measurement scales. Health and Quality of LIfe Outcomes 2011, 9:8.
There is a test developed by Dr. Ungar and colleagues (CYRM-28). He works at Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada. Please visit website www. resilienceproject.org and find there a lot of useful information regarding resilience in youth within international resilience project.
There is the CYRM (Child and youth resilience measure). It has 28 items. Here's the reference where you can find and read about it. I am sure you can also contact the authors for permission and so on: Liebenberg, L., Ungar, M., & Van de Vijver, F. (2011). Validation of the child and youth resilience measure-28 (CYRM-28) among Canadian youth. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(2), 219-226.
By assistance of a group of great people, you already received your answer, but as you know the concept of your study will help you to use the right measure.
I will also suggest you to look at the paper attached "literature review of concepts: psychological resiliency, by Jaye Wald et al 2006".
Wow - what a lot of answers! You may also wish to check out:
Hjemdal, O., Friborg, O., Stiles, C. O., Martinussen, M., & Rosenvinge, J. H. (2006). A new rating scale for adolescent resilience: Grasping the central protective resources behind healthy development. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 39, 84-96.
Besides the problem of selecting a proper scale, you must be very careful on how you define resilience (a trait-like characteristic? a process of resistance when facing adversity? an outcome?). Under the generic umbrella of "resilience" there are many different underlying concepts and this is the first conceptual challenge you'll have to tackle.
There is some controversy in the field, and you might spend some time clarifying these options. The HQOL paper, for instance, is a good starting point,
I have no doubt that you find a suitable one. I know that two of the researchers suggested by Tumi Khumalo above, namely Prof. M. Ungar and Dr. L. Liebenberg are leading a five-country study (South Africa, Colombia, Canada, China and New Zealand) that uses another comprehensive measure that is called the Pathways to Resilience Youth Measure ( PRYM). I like it very much. It is used with adolescents
I recommend having a look at http://www.reachinginreachingout.com/documents/APPENDIXE-AnnotatedCompendiumofResilienceMeasures-Nov17-10copyright.pdf. Here, you can find a reasonable list of descriptions of resilience measures for kids. Your choice should depend on the focus of your research and your theoretical approach.
The short form of SOC scale was employed (Antonovsky, 1987). This scale,
consisting of 13 items, measures three components of SOC: meaningfulness,
manageability, and comprehensibility. Responses were indicated using a seven-point bi-polar scale. Five of the items were reverse-scored such that higher numerical
ratings indicated higher levels of SOC for all items. We have used this scale with adults as well as adolescents with good results.
I have a developed the Resilience in Illnesss Model (RIM) for adolescents/young adults (AYA) with chronic illness. It is a latent variable structural equation model and is supported using multiple measures. You can find a Part 1 article on development and exploratory model testing in Cancer Nursing. The article includes descriptions of the measures. Part 2 on the confirmatory model will be out shortly. Exploratory and confirmatory research indicates RIM well predicts resilience-related outcomes (R2 = 0.62 to 0.72) in AYA with across the cancer continuum. The RIM has also been used in multi-site randomized controlled trials of interventions; measures were sensitive enough to pick up differences in groups. A manuscript of a therapeutic music video intervention for AYA undergoing stem cell transplant is in press in CANCER. I do use one short Resilience in Illness measure as an outcome for the model, but to effectively understand factors influencing outcomes, probably best to use a set of instruments. We have the AYA complete them online. To complete them takes from 30 to 90 minutes usually. The measures were intially developed or selected based on qualitative/phenomenology work to understand AYA's experiences of illness, so they are meaningful to the AYA, which helps.
I see that the CYRM-28 has been mentioned 2x already. My team and I have used it with around 1300 South African youth in the Pathways to Resilience Study. The questions did need tweaking for local youth, so you might want to factor that in to your decision. The questions about relational and cultural resources were very helpful in our South African context. There is also a shortened version - the CYRM-12. See the 2013 article by Liebenberg, Ungar and LeBlanc in March/April 2013, Vol.104, No.2 issue of the Canadian Journal of Public Health.
-Social-Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales (there are adolescent, parent, and teacher reports, as well as a short form)
-Resiliency Scales for Children and Adolescents
The Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment also had a special issue, Assessing Resiliency in Children and Adolescents (2010), 28(4) that you might find helpful
Also, given the recommendations regarding carefully defineing and conceptualizing resilience, you might also find the Annual Research Review: Resilience in child development of The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry helpful, (2013), 54(4)
Yes I'd go with the resiliency scales for children and adolescents. They sometimes distinguish between clinical young people more accurately that the Beck Youth Inventories. jt
Look up the work of Thomas A. Wills at the University of Hawaii. He uses a scale to predict which adolescents will avoid smoking and use of more portent drugs.
To evaluate resilience levels in adolescents and young adults we used two different scales: the Resilience Scale (Wagnild & Young, 1993) in its 14-item version and the Connor and Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC, Connor and Davidson, 2003), 25 items, as they measure different aspect of the same construct. We also included a PTSD Checklist (Weathers et al, 1993), a coping flexibility scale (PACT, Bonanno, 2010; Bonanno & Mancini, 2008), and the Positive (PA) and Negative (NA) Affect scale (PANAS, Watson, Clark, and Tellegen, 1988) to fully understand the actual relationship between life events and dysfunctional outcomes in a clinical sample of substance abusers under treatment and a control group (students). Both resilience scales have been validated in many languages.
In the article: Windle,G ., Bennett, K., Noyes, J. (2011). A methodological review of resilience measurement scales. Health and Quality of LIfe Outcomes, 9:8, you can find scales for adolescents and young adults (18-23) - Block&Kremen, 1996, CD-RISC, 2007, Youth Resiliency Assessing Developmental Strenghts, 2003, 2007a. Ungar has The Child and Youth Resilience Measure, 2008 - it's a culturaly and contextually relevant measre of child and youth resilience across for domains (individual, relational, community and culture).
A colleague at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Odin Hjemdal, has spent the last 10 years developing two resilience measures, one for adults (Resilience Scale for Adults; RSA) and one for young people (Resilience Scale for Adolescents; READ). These measures draw on the large base of results from resilience research and measure both individual positive attributes like: personal competences and attribution styles, social competences, goal orientation, self-efficacy and realistic optimistic views on the future as well as adaptive family environment and positive social resources outside the family. He also explores ways of measuring levels of protection in the disadvantaged children and families. He can be contacted by [email protected]
I'd like to offer an answer that is a little bit different from most of these. I am basing my answer here on my ongoing work with Project Competence, the longitudinal study of resilience spearheaded by Ann Masten and Norm Garmezy (one of the original studies of resilience started several decades ago). As another poster mentioned, resilience is sometimes conceptualized as a trait, so the scales mentioned here primarily measure resilience in that way, as if it is an enduring characteristic of a person. Another way to conceptualize it is as an outcome that is the combination of two things: 1) an experience of significant adversity (adversity can be operationalized many different ways), and 2) a positive outcome despite the adversity (e.g., avoidance of psychological disorder, positive competence in various life tasks like education, relationships, work). One advantage to looking at it this way is that you can then investigate the factors that contribute to resilience, some of which are environmental (e.g., a support network, good families, strong schools), and some of which are intrapersonal (e.g., coping skills, personality traits). I am attaching a paper I co-authored with Ann Masten that uses this conceptualization.