ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 28 June 2019 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01410 Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-32) María Llistosella 1,2 , Teresa Gutiérrez-Rosado 2* , Rocío Rodríguez-Rey 3 , Linda Liebenberg 4 , Ángela Bejarano 5 , Juana Gómez-Benito 6 and Joaquín T. Limonero 7 1 Center of Primary Health Care Terrassa Nord, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa (CST), Barcelona, Spain, 2 Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, 3 Faculty of Health and Biomedical Sciences, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain, 4 Faculty of Graduate Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada, 5 Secretariat for Social Integration, Sub-Directorate for Matters LGBT, Bogotá, Colombia, 6 Department of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, 7 Stress and Health Research Group (GIES), Faculty of Psychology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Edited by: Resilience is defined as a dynamic process that entails a positive adaptation to contexts Gudberg K. Jonsson, of adversity. According to the ecological model, resilient behavior emerges as a result University of Iceland, Iceland of the interaction between individual, relational, community and cultural variables. The Reviewed by: Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-28), developed in Canada and based on Atsushi Oshio, Waseda University, Japan the ecological model, has been validated in several countries. The objective of this Hugo Carretero-Dios, article is to present the cultural adaptation (studies I and II) and validation (study III) University of Granada, Spain in Spanish at risk youth. A three-study mixed-method design was selected. Study I *Correspondence: Teresa Gutiérrez-Rosado includes translations and a confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis of a sample of Teresa.Gutierrez@uab.cat 270 Spanish young persons (56.9% boys) aged between 12 and 18 years (M = 14.65; SD = 1.27) from an urban public elementary school. Study II uses semi-structured Specialty section: This article was submitted to interviews with adolescents identified as resilient and presents a content analysis and a Quantitative Psychology reformulation of items with experts. Study III includes the confirmatory factor analysis, and Measurement, internal consistency, test–retest, convergent and discriminant validity, and multivariate a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology analysis of variance to explore group differences of the resulting scale CYRM-32. The Received: 01 March 2019 sample consisted of 432 at-risk young persons (54.9% boys) aged between 12 and Accepted: 31 May 2019 19 years old (M = 14.99; SD = 2.23). The results confirm the adequate psychometric Published: 28 June 2019 properties of the CYRM-32 scale. From the original scale, 4 items were eliminated, 5 Citation: Llistosella M, Gutiérrez-Rosado T, were reformulated presenting very low saturations. Meanwhile, 6 items were added to Rodríguez-Rey R, Liebenberg L, the cultural adaptation phase, resulting in a 32-item scale. The confirmatory analysis Bejarano Á, Gómez-Benito J and confirms the 3 factors expected in the CYRM-32 scale with good reliability indexes Limonero JT (2019) Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of the (Cronbach’s α total scale 0.88, family interaction 0.79, interaction with others 0.72 and Spanish Version of Child and Youth individual skills 0.78). The scale has convergent and discriminant validity in relation to the Resilience Measure (CYRM-32). Front. Psychol. 10:1410. Brief Resilient Coping Scale, Coping Scale for Adolescents and Self-Concept. Significant doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01410 differences were found in the scores of the CYRM-32 scale for the ethnic variable Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure [F(71. 358) = 1.714, p < 0.001], while no differences appear according to age and gender. This finding confirms the importance of culture in the resiliency processes. The CYRM-32 scale has good psychometric properties and is a new alternative for measuring resilience in Spanish at-risk youth. Keywords: resilience, at-risk young, social exclusion, reliability, validity, mixed-methods, cultural adaptation INTRODUCTION programs that empower youth to manage the resources that sustain their wellbeing (Ungar, 2004, 2008). Resilience is a construct used to explain the processes that For this reason, it is necessary to have evaluation tools result in good outcomes despite high-risk situations that pose based on an overall theoretical framework of resilience. Several a threat to positive adaptation and self-development (Masten resilience measures have been developed and validated for the use and Coatsworth, 1998; Masten, 1999, 2007; Masten et al., 1999). of children and young people. These include Youth Resiliency: Definitions of what constitutes appropriate adaptation however, Assessing Developmental Strengths (YR:ADS), validated in varies in relation to the cultural, historical and/or social context Canada (Donnon and Hammond, 2007); The Resilience Scale for (Masten and Coatsworth, 1998). Thus, currently there is no a Adolescents (READ), validated in Norway, Ireland, Mexico, and universal definition of resilience (Aburn et al., 2016), but the Italy (Hjemdal et al., 2006; Von Soest et al., 2010; Stratta et al., literature show the influence of the contextual factors in the 2012; Ruvalcaba-Romero et al., 2015; Kelly et al., 2016), and the development of resilience and coping among youth (Clauss- Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-28), validated in Ehlers, 2008). Moreover, sociocultural aspects of support can Canada, New Zealand, and Iran (Ungar and Liebenberg, 2011; promote and contribute to resilience. Liebenberg et al., 2012; Daigneault et al., 2013; Sanders et al., For this reason, transcultural research is needed for studying 2015; Kazerooni et al., 2016). resilience and to determine what can be considered as positive Additionally, measures that assess resilience-related development in different socio-cultural contexts. Masten (1999) constructs have been adapted for use with Spanish children has proposed the following questions: “Should successful and adolescents. For example, the Adolescent Coping Scale development be defined only within cultural context? What (Frydenberg and Lewis, 1996), the Coping Response Inventory happens when subcultural norms differ from the majority for Youth (Forns et al., 2005) and The Adolescent Resilience culture?” (p. 283). Questionnaire (Guilera et al., 2015). From a contextual and ecological perspective, resilience has Given the need for resilience measures to be adapted to been defined by Ungar (2008) as “in the context of exposure the different cultures, in addition to validation of psychometric to significant adversity, whether psychological, environmental, properties, in this article we continue with the validation and or both, resilience is both the capacity of the individuals to adaptation of the CYRM-28. We focus on the CYRM-28, navigate their way to health-sustaining resources, including reflecting Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model (Bronfenbrenner, opportunities to experience feelings of wellbeing, and a condition 1979). Additionally, the CYRM-28 was specifically developed to of the individual’s family, community and culture to provide assess resilience in vulnerable adolescents across cultures and these health resources in culturally meaningful ways” (p. 225). contexts (Ungar and Liebenberg, 2011). In their assessment of From this point of view, the resilience process of the child resilience measures, Windle et al. (2011) found the CYRM-28 to should be understood in relation to the context; it relates to the have high content validity and they presented this test as one of threats that people have to face and the interactions between risk the few resilience measures that assesses multiple dimensions of exposure and the available resources that permit adaptation to resilience (culture, community, relationship and individual) and the environmental and personal challenges (Ungar et al., 2008). shows conceptual adequacy. Initially the CYRM-28 included 14 Boyden and Mann (2005) as well as Ungar (2004) have argued sites around the world. Later, following this work, the measure that the way we understand resilience is negotiated discursively has been validated for use in other countries, as we have indicated and influenced by the culture and social context in which it previously, but not yet in Spain. is located. Consequently, it is necessary to continue studying This work presents the cultural adaptation and validation the underlying mechanisms and processes of resilience across of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-32) to different cultures (Boyden and Mann, 2005). a Spanish sample of risk youth. It includes three studies: Despite the importance of culture in the development of (1) the exploration of the psychometric properties of the resilience, many instruments used to measure resilience have original scale (CYRM-28) after being translated to the Spanish neglected these cultural factors (Clauss-Ehlers, 2008). language, (2) the development of new items for the CYRM In this line, according to Ungar (2011), in the measurement adapted to the local context and the reformulation of conflicting of resilience the effects of cultural immersion in dominant items, and (3) the validation of the final CYRM-32 adapted cultures and heterogeneity in ethno-racial minorities have been scale (Figure 1). overlooked. This is important because the identification of We decided to use a mixed methods design was in order resilience factors that contribute to the process of adaptation to adapt the CYRM-28 scale (Ungar and Liebenberg, 2011; to adversity contribute to the improvement of intervention Liebenberg et al., 2012). The relevance of mixed methods Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure FIGURE 1 | Procedure flow. to enable the understanding of common and unique aspects to compare the results of our quantitative findings with the of resilience across cultural has been discussed during the experiences of young people at risk and the individual and development of the original scale (Ungar and Liebenberg, cultural resources that intervened in their resilient processes 2011). The mixed methods used here in our study allowed us (Ungar and Liebenberg, 2011). Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure The study was approved by the Ethics Committee Institutional to explore whether the original factor structure proposed by Review Board of the Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa (Spain). For Liebenberg et al. (2012) fitted our sample. In order to assess model all the studies, informed consent was obtained prior to data fit, absolute fit indexes (χ2 , χ2 /df ), relative fit indexes (IFI) and collection, from the high schools’ headmasters and participants. non-centrality fit indexes (CFI, RMSEA, SRMR) were used, as well as criteria for acceptable fit based on the degree of adjustment described by Hair (2010) (ratio χ2 /df < 5; SRMR < 0.08; STUDY I RMSEA < 0.08; GFI, CFI and IFI > 0.90). As the previously tested model failed to fit our data, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) The purpose of this study was the translation of the CYRM-28 was conducted to ascertain the factor structure of the CRYM-28 scale and a review of its factor structure using exploratory and with a confirmatory approach (Pett et al., 2003; Cumming et al., confirmatory factor analyses. 2005). A confirmation of the adequacy of the data by means of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test and the Bartlett’s test of sphericity Participants was carried out (Costello and Osborne, 2005). The selection of An evaluation committee of five professionals with knowledge factors was based on psychometric guidelines and Screen Plot about children at risk of social exclusion was formed. Specifically, or Screen Test of Cattell (Kline, 1994); coefficients greater than the focus was on youth experiencing increased disconnection 0.40 and based on Kaiser’s criterion of eigenvalue equal or greater from their communities together with a loss of personal than 1.0, were considered (Kline, 1994; Nunnally and Bernstein, and social ties, and their families. This disconnection hinders 1994). Internal consistency was obtained through Cronbach’s α access to opportunities and resources made available to support (Cronbach, 1951). individuals living in low socioeconomic contexts and or who have recently experienced immigration. Results A total of 270 young people in a high risk of social exclusion Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) were randomly selected from two schools situated in a vulnerable Results of the CFA show that the three-factor model tested did neighborhood. Each year group consisted of four different classes not provide an acceptable fit to our data. The chi-square statistic or subgroups (30–35 students each) and two classes per school was significant, probably due to the sample size (Hair, 2010), the year (60–70 students) were randomly selected. The average age ratio (χ2 /df = 2.89 < 5) was well within the limits that allowed the of the participants was 14.5 years (SD = 1.27, range 12.35 to model to be accepted, RMSEA and SRMR values were acceptable 18.08); 56.9% were boys and 43.1% girls; 76% lived with both (<0.08), but the CFI (0.61), IFI (0.62) and GFI (0.80) were below parents, 19% with a single mother and 2% with other people; the level of acceptance (all of them < 0.90). 75.8% were European, 10.7% Latin American and 8.3% belonged to different ethnic groups. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy was Instruments 0.73 middling but sufficient (Hair et al., 2014) and the Bartlett’s In the first study, the original version of the Child and Youth test of sphericity was appropriate (X 2 (378) = 1446,563; p = 0.000). Resilience Measure-28 (CYRM-28) (Ungar and Liebenberg, Following the process of Ungar and Liebenberg (2011), EFA was 2011) was used. It was designed as a screening tool to explore carried out using Oblimin with Kaiser Rotation with three factors. the resources (individual, relational, communal and cultural) Three components were identified that explained 30.8% of the available to youth aged 12 to 23 years, that may bolster their total variance. Factor 1 “Family interaction,” explained 17.7% of resilience processes (Ungar and Liebenberg, 2011; Liebenberg the variance; factor 2 “Interaction with others” explained 7.17%; et al., 2012). The CYRM-28 has 28 items scored on a 5-point and, factor 3 “Individual skills,” 6% (see Table 1). Likert scale (1 = not at all to 5 = a lot), and was designed Four of the 28 initial items (items 2, 5, 10, and 28) failed to as a self-reported measure which takes approximately 20 min load on any of the three factors, and two were identified (19, 23) to complete (Ungar and Liebenberg, 2011; Liebenberg et al., as conflicting items. As such these items were removed from the 2012). The Cronbach’s α of the three components of the scale scale. A further six more items were removed due to inadequate showed the following values for each dimension: individual loadings [items 1 (0.395), 3 (0.380), 9 (0.366) and 22 (0.369)], (α = 0.80); relational (α = 0.83); and contextual (α = 0.79) and conflicting loadings (loadings > 0.3 in more than one factor; (Liebenberg et al., 2012). items 19, 23). Cronbach’s α were: Family interaction (0.720), Interaction with others (0.506), Individual skills (0.622) and for Data Analysis and Procedure the totality of scale (0.783). Following the guidelines provided by the original authors and the International Test Commission in construction and adaptation areas the back translation method was used to translate the STUDY II CYRM-28 into Spanish (Beaton et al., 2000; Hambleton and John, 2003). Cycles of corrections and revisions were carried out until The second study describes the cultural adaptation of a definitive version was obtained for each item. the CRYM into the Spanish context, using qualitative A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS version 22 interviews with adolescents identified as resilient which was conducted on data gathered from the first youth sample, were carried out by experts. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure TABLE 1 | Summary of factor loadings for principal component analysis for Oblimin three factor solution of the CYRM-28 (Spanish version). Items components 1 2 3 Liebenberg Daigneault Family Interaction with Individual et al., 2012 et al., 2013 interaction others skills 17. My family stands by me during difficult times. (Mi familia me apoya 0.731 Caregiver Familial en los momentos difíciles) 24. I feel safe when I am with my family/caregiver(s). (Me siento a salvo 0.721 Caregiver Familial junto a mis padres o tutores) 6. Mis padres o tutores lo saben todo sobre mí. (My 0.610 Caregiver Familial parent(s)/caregiver(s) know a lot about me) 26. I enjoy my family’s/caregiver’s cultural and family traditions. (Disfruto 0.547 Caregiver Familial de las tradiciones familiares con mis padres o tutores) 12. I talk to my family/caregiver(s) about how I feel. (Hablo sobre cómo 0.486 Caregiver Familial me siento con mi familia o tutores legales) 27. I enjoy my community’s traditions. (Disfruto de las tradiciones de mi 0.448 Context Community comunidad) 15. I know where to go in my community to get help. (Sé dónde acudir 0.431 Individual Individual dentro de mi comunidad, cuando tengo algún problema) 23. I think it is important to help out in my community. (Creo que 0.401 0.314 Context Community es importante ayudar en mi comunidad) 28. I am proud to be Spanish? (Estoy orgulloso de ser ciudadano de Context - España?) 14. I feel supported by my friends. (Mis amigos me apoyan) –0.774 Individual Individual 18. My friends stand by me during difficult times. (Mis amigos me –0.665 Individual Individual apoyan en los momentos difíciles) 11. People think that I am fun to be with. (La gente piensa que soy una –0.562 Individual Individual persona divertida) 7. If I am hungry, there is enough to eat. (Si tengo hambre, siempre hay –0.480 Caregiver Familial suficiente comida para alimentarme) 19. I am treated fairly in my community. (Soy tratado con igualdad 0.316 –0.458 Context Individual dentro de mi comunidad) 16. I feel I belong at my school. (Siento que formo parte de mi escuela) –0.403 Context Individual 22. I participate in organized religious activities. (Participo en diversas 0.369 Context Community actividades religiosas) 2. I cooperate with people around me. (Coopero con las personas de Individual Individual mi alrededor) 10. I am proud of my ethnic background. (Me siento orgulloso de mi Context Community origen étnico) 5. Do you feel that your parent (s) watch you closely. (Me siento vigilado Caregiver - por mis padres o tutores) 21. I am aware of my own strengths. (Soy consciente de mis puntos 0.717 Individual Individual fuertes) 20. I have opportunities to show others that I am becoming an adult 0.557 Individual Individual and can act responsibly. (Puedo demostrar a los demás que soy una persona adulta y responsable) 4. I know how to behave in different social situations. (Sé comportarme 0.529 Individual Individual teniendo en cuenta las normas sociales) 25. I have opportunities to develop skills that will be useful later in life 0.506 Individual Community (like job skills and skills to care for others. (Tengo la oportunidad de desarrollar habilidades que me serán útiles en el futuro (Habilidades relacionadas con un oficio y habilidades sociales) 8. I try to finish what I start. (Intento finalizar todo lo que empiezo) 0.487 Individual Individual 13. I am able to solve problems without harming myself or others (for 0.442 Individual Familial example by using drugs and/or being violent. (Puedo solucionar mis problemas sin hacerme daño ni hacer daño a terceras personas (por ejemplo sin caer en adicciones como la droga y sin usar la violencia) 1. I have people I look up to. (Conozco personas a las que admiro) 0.395 Context – 3. Getting an education is important to me. (Tener una educación es 0.380 Context – importante para mí) 9. Spiritual beliefs are a source of strength for me. (Mi fe me da fuerzas) 0.366 Context Community Cronbach’s α 0.783 0.720 0.506 0.622 Bold items indicate factor loadings on more than one factor. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure Participants themes are presented according to the conceptual framework of The second study included youth and resilience expert’s adults. the first Spanish version of the CYRM-28. For the three factors, Six young people (2 girls and 4 boys, aged 17–19) were 12 new items were generated and nine of them were included purposively selected to participate. The participants were chosen (see Table 2). by two experts from institutions that work with vulnerable Interviews from the second study highlighted the importance populations, children, youth and families in high risk situations of self-awareness and the capacity to recognize and regulate (i.e., experiencing poverty, low socioeconomic status, social one’s own emotions when managing difficult situations. The exclusion, exposure to violence and social dislocation for adult experts in particular noted that recognizing one’s own example through immigration). The participants were identified feelings and emotions caused by adversities is an important as resilient (i.e., young people that despite having gone through factor to cope with adversity. It enables the person to reflect adverse situations have a healthy lifestyle, positive social over more effective alternatives and, thus, leading to problem relationships and positive individual skills). Five professional solving. This finding reflects previous research by Troy and (psychology, philology, social work and education; 1 male and 4 Mauss (2011), who found that emotional regulation is connected females), resilience experts participated. They were invited given with resilience through two strategies: attention control and their expertise in the conceptualization of the resilience in Spain cognitive reappraisal. These findings also point to the need for and to explore and formulation the items. further research on the benefits and the process of emotion Additionally, four randomly selected participants (2 girls and regulation strategies that may help us to better understand 2 boys, age 14–17 years old) from the first phase who had resilience (Kay, 2016). previously completed the CYRM-28 scale were also invited to Another theme emerging from the qualitative data was the study 2 to review the translated items that showed low loadings importance of having a good sense of humor. Humor was in the first phase of the study. described as a resource to cope with problems and to relate with other people within one’s immediate environment (Cann and Collette, 2014). A good sense of humor has the function Procedure of creating positive emotions, which facilitates communication The second study included two phases (see Figure 1). In the first and releases tensions, while enabling social support (Fredrickson, phase, two semi-structured individual interviews were conducted 2000; Martin and Lefcourt, 2004). The adult experts also with the 6 young people and the 5 experts. These interviews mentioned the importance of a sense of humor and laughter were intended to generate new culturally and contextually as a resource that enables overcoming problems with optimism relevant items for inclusion in the validated Spanish version (Hughes, 2008). of the CYRM-28. Accordingly, the interview guide used in Likewise, having goals can be related with motivation to the original development of the measure (Resilience Research achieve one’s purpose in life. Zolkoski and Bullock (2012), Centre, 2009), was used in these interviews. All interviews were for example, found that it is important to have goals and recorded and transcribed. Content analysis, conducted by two a positive perspective for the future despite going through peer researchers, was used to identify themes reflecting culturally moments of adversity. Similarly, the young people interviewed and contextually relevant resilience mechanisms and processes, also expressed the importance of following through with the aim for peer researchers. Identification of themes was guided by the they want to achieve. original CYRM-28 factors (individual, caregivers and context). Another relevant theme for the young participants was Emerging themes were used to create new items relevant to the adaptation: the capacity to adapt to conflicting situations (Masten local context on the basis of experts’ consensus. and Tellegen, 2012). One participant stated that she tried to adapt The second phase of study two was intended to ensure the to changing situations, that she reflected on these situations to rigor of the new items fort this, data was triangulated. First, the learn from the experience. This is a relevant issue, not only for five experts reviewed each of the reformulated and new items. immigrants that live in cultural contexts, very different from their Each item was assessed for relevance and comprehension using own, but to reveal the capacity young people have to adapt to a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all relevant or comprehensive changes or situations that are perceived as difficult. to 5 = extremely relevant or comprehensive). Additionally, a Interaction with others is another subcategory contained in semi-structured interview was conducted with the small group the CYRM-28. The establishment of significant relationships that of four youth from the original youth sample, to explore the work as a source of practical and emotional support and offer comprehension and possible ambiguous aspects of the items with strength to solve problems, feeling loved and valued, are of low loadings. The interviews were transcribed and a discourse great importance. Family attachment is the aspect that appeared analysis was undertaken in order to ensure that the perspectives most frequently. In addition, having a role model in the family each participant gave to issues related with the reviewed items was helps young participants to learn how to solve problems. In this adequately captured. sense, a supporting family environment promotes adaptation and positive outcomes in children (Marici, 2015). Results Regarding the capacity of looking for support, the participants New Items revealed their ability to ask for help to external people, The results were based on the narratives of the participants either institutions, other sources of help or people from their and the categories established in the CYRM-28. The emergent close environment. This is the ability to negotiate with their Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure TABLE 2 | Generation of new items. Dimension Coding theme New item Quotations Individual Self-awareness ∗ When I face a problem, I’m aware of my “Sometimes I stay calm, think about what is going on with myself and Factor emotions and act according to how I feel in that think about how to solve the situation.” (Participant B) “Recognizing her moment. Ante algún problema soy consciente hatred was a protective factor, because during a time she defended de mis emociones y actúo según como me herself from the pain that she was feeling, and accepting that her father siento en el momento. was an abuser. All those years she had a yearning of having a father by her side. . .but she start accepting that she didn’t love him and she felt hurt. The acceptance of this situation let her protect herself.” (Expert 1) Sense of humor ∗ Despite difficulties, I usually smile. I think that I “Even if I’m sad I have to laugh. Laugh about me and everything, have good sense of humor. A pesar de las because if not I would be crying the whole day and that is not good at dificultades suelo sonreír. Me considero una all.” (Participant B) “She has developed the good sense of humor by persona con buen sentido del humor. learning; as a positive reinforcement. She has a brother that doesn’t smile, and then she started to discover that smiling, people pay more attention to her than to her brother.” (Expert 5) Vision of the ∗ Mystrength helps me to go on and achieve “I think that going on with my life and not get desperate is good. Have future my goals Mi fortaleza me ayuda a seguir the strength to keep going. . .” (Participant A) “If they talk with their adelante y alcanzar Mis objetivos. family and agree, they can keep going as champions. It has to do with motivation and remember their purpose of life. . .Especially a tremendous will to move forward.” (Expert 4) ∗I have aspirations and a clear and realistic “I belief and I want to finish high school and study in a university. . .I vision of the future Tengo aspiraciones y una think that going on with my life and not get desperate is good. Have the visión de futuro clara y realista. strength to keep going. . .” (Participant A) “Having a realistic optimism. I mean, they can think that everything can have a good result, they have a positive vision of the future and think that they can control the course of their lives, but is important to have a good sense of reality and don’t let go over fantasies.” (Expert 2) Adaptation ∗ I’m able to adapt to changes. Soy capaz de “Now that I’m here. . . I want to adapt where my family has brought me. adaptarme a los cambios. I try to adapt to everything; to people, neighbors, everyone, to the school. . . I try to adapt little by little to everything.” (Participant A) “Maybe during a time I get myself isolated. . . and then I think that maybe that change can be good for me o for another person. . . and I try to adapt to the situation.” (Participant C) Autonomy ∗Iusually make my own decisions and don’t let “A person can move on by itself, I mean without relying on anyone, that myself be influenced by others Tiendo a tomar one’s objectives can be achieved by oneself no matter what.” mis propias decisiones y no me dejo llevar por (Participant C) “When I say that they have to have their head well set, I los demás. mean that they have to be responsible; basic competencies, a kid that worries about himself; an autonomous kid.” (Expert 4) Interaction Support to ∗Isupport my peers. Doy apoyo a mis “More than anything is giving your own experience to a person who with others others compañeros. suffers.” (Participant B) “I feel like my friends’ counselor and people’s counselor, they always trust in me and I help them.” (Participant C) Significant ∗Ihave role models that serve me as guidance “Someone that helps you if you have a problem and you think you can’t relationships and support Tengo personas de referencia que solve it; someone that helps you to solve the problem and gives you me sirven de guía y apoyo. motivation believing in yourself, and that’s why you have the strength to keep going until you solve it.” (Participant A) “Having an adult role model as mom and dad is essential for their development.” (Expert 4) Educative ∗ My values allow me a positive relation with my “Having a good education. Education comes from home, if your parents context environment. Mis valores me permiten una educate you well on the street you will know how to behave, but if your relación positiva con Mi entorno. parents don’t pay attention to you, probably other people will take you to the wrong path.” (Participant E) “It is convenient to raise the person in an integrate manner, as one that is immersed in the society, foment the holistic education. This means, more than a disciplinary development, a self-development and its environment.” (Expert 2) Cultural I feel integrated into the local culture and “There is some people that makes me feel bad. Some of the kids in my Integration context. Me siento integrado/a dentro de la school. . .they always talking about my color. They say – you are cultura local. chocolate color and we are white. . .what do you do in our country? – And that makes me feel bad, because not only in my country there are black people.” (Participant A) “There is a stigmatization because there’s a conjunction between the immigration and the youth. Prejudices are in both ways and it’s about to reconstruct and think . . . culture makes us different but the characteristic is that all of us are human beings . . . when the young people interact with others form different cultures, when they get to know each other they realize about their prejudices and reconstruct all those believes.” (Expert 1) (Continued) Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure TABLE 2 | Continued Dimension Coding theme New item Quotations Perception of In my context, there are services that represent “I think that the most difficult thing in life is not having a job. . .because available a source of support for me. En mi contexto without a job you don’t have money, and people without money can’t resources existen servicios que son fuente de apoyo para buy food, clothes, pay the rent, etc. . . . ” (Participant A) “I think some mi resilience strategies are necessary, but with the crisis it’s limited. It’s clear that the psychosocial attention is necessary for parent and kids. The problem is that there are few professionals that work in public institutions as the CSMIJ and other organisms. And because of that there’s no efficiency in the service.” (Expert 3) Family Basic needs I have good conditions of living that meet my “Having a good place to live. . .hygienic and having food.” (Participant D) Interaction needs. Tengo una vivienda digna que cumple “To grow healthy it’s important a good nutrition at home” (Participant A) con mis necesidades. ∗ Items included in CYRM. communities and others to find health-sustaining resources the local context. From the results, we could see that the (Ungar, 2008). concept of community is not well established within the local One of the experts stated that some children tend to context and may be related to item 22 “I participate in make agreements with their parents in order to take adequate organized religious activities.” Accordingly, item 23 was erased. actions. Young people consider it important to receive the Relevance and comprehension was assessed by the advisory approval from their parents about the actions they are taking. committee, together with reformulation of items included in Another expert explained his personal experience with his the final version. daughters to strengthen their self-esteem as a protective factor associated with good psychosocial functioning (Kidd and Shahar, 2008), to enable them to cope in situations where STUDY III they can be discriminated because of their physical and/or ethnic condition. The aim of the third study was to explore the psychometric properties of the CYRM-32 adapted to Spanish scale. Three Reformulated Items hypotheses were proposed to assess the validity: The experts considered most of the items as understandable. However, both the adult experts and the results of the interviews Hypothesis 1: Data will confirm the factor structure of the with youth, highlighted the need to reformulate items 1, CYRM-32 adapted scale (3 factors). 3, 9, 19, and 22. The reformulated items were: (1): “I have people I look up Hypothesis 2: The CYRM-32 scale and its subscales to.” (Conozco personas a las que admiro), item reformulated will exhibit adequate psychometric properties (internal (IR): “I know people who are an example to follow” (Conozco consistency Cronbach’s α, test–retest reliability and personas que son un ejemplo a seguir); (3): “Getting an education convergent and discriminant validity). is important to me” (Tener una educación es importante para mí), IR: “Getting an academic education is important to me” Hypothesis 3: There will be significant differences in youth (Tener una educación académica es importante para mí); (9): scores on the CYRM-32 adapted depending on the gender, “Spiritual beliefs are a source of strength for me” (Mi fe me da ethnicity and age of participants. fuerzas), IR: “I have faith and trust in me to achieve my goals” (Tengo fe y confianza en mí para conseguir mis objetivos); (19): “I Participants am treated fairly in my community” (Soy tratado con igualdad A total of 432 young people participated in the study. All dentro de mi comunidad), IR: “I feel that I am being treated of them presented one of the following risk factors: having equally by people around me despite differences in ethnicity, experienced a traumatic event, immigration, poverty, exposure to gender, religion, culture or beliefs” (Siento que soy tratado con violence, substances abuse and risk of social exclusion. They were igualdad por las personas que me rodean a pesar de que haya randomly selected from four schools situated in a vulnerable and diferencias de etnia, género, religión, cultura o creencias); (22): “I economically deprived neighborhood, and concurrent users of participate in organized religious activities” (Participo en diversas especial educational supports, community programs and mental actividades religiosas), IR: “I participate in activities outside the health services. school” (sports, religious, artistic, volunteering etc.). (Participo The average age of participants was 14.99 years (SD = 2.23), en actividades fuera de la escuela (deportivas, religiosas, artísticas, range 12–19; 45.1% were girls and 54.9% were boys; 61.5% were voluntariado etc.). European, 15.6% Moroccan, 10% Latin American, 7.9% Asian Item 23, “I think it is important to help out in my and 4.8% belonged to different ethnic groups. All participants community” was understood by almost all the participants, had been in Spain for more than 2 years and understood the but, at the same time, was perceived as being irrelevant to language correctly. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure Instruments and physical self-concept (0.74) and Cronbach’s α for the totality CYRM-32 Spanish Version of scale was 0.810 (Study 3: range α 0.70 at 0.82; total 0.75). It includes 32 items designed to assess resilience features in children and youth. It was adapted from the original scale CYRM- Data Analysis and Procedure 28, which was designed to explore the individual, relational Using the International Test Commission in context, community and cultural resources, available to youth 12 to construction and adaptation areas (Carretero-Dios and Pérez, 23 years. In Spanish adaptation, only three factors were found and 2007). Instruments with more than 15% of the data missing were their Cronbach’s α were: Family interaction (0.720), Interaction excluded (Davey and Savla, 2010). with others (0.506), Individual skills (0.622) and for the totality Regarding factorial validity, the sample was randomly divided of scale (0.783). It is a self-reported measured where for each into two subgroups, one for the initial analyses (n = 226) question participants use a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at and the other for cross-validation (n = 206). Then, two CFAs all to 5 = a lot). were performed with the first subsample to determine which model explained the factorial structure better (Model 1-CFA Item “Are You Depressed or Sad?” and Model 2-CFA). Item “Are you depressed or sad?” was used to assess the In each of the two models, it was expected that each observable depression mood of the participants. This item was adapted variable would load only on the factor it was intended to measure; from the “Are you depressed?” Screening for depression in the that measurement error associated with these variables would terminally ill (Chochinov et al., 1997) and it was evaluated be uncorrelated. Model 1-CFA was a hierarchical and thus it through numeric scale of 0–10 (0-not depressed, 10-worst considered that all covariance between each of the first order possible depression). A high sensitivity (1.00) and specificity factors would be explained by a higher-order factor. Model 2-CFA (1.00) to identify depressed mood, and absence of false positive was a bi-factor model and thus it considered that all covariance and negative rate (0.00) were presented. between each of the first order factors would be explained by a general dimension which load on all items at the same as the Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS) factors as suggested by Konkolÿ et al. (2014). This scale was composed by four items to assess strategies to Estimates indices were obtained using the maximum cope with the stress in a highly adaptive manner (Limonero likelihood method. So as to assess model fit, absolute fit indexes et al., 2014). Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS) is a self-reported (χ2 , χ2 /df ), relative fit indexes (IFI) and non-centrality fit measured where for each question participants use a 5-point indexes (CFI, RMSEA, SRMR) were used, as well as criteria for Likert scale where 1 “does not describe you at all” and 5 means acceptable fit based on the degree of adjustment described by “it describes you very well.” Higher scores means grater resilient Hair et al. (2010) (ratio χ2 /df < 5; SRMR < 0.08; RMSEA < 0.08; coping. Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.71 (Study 3: α = 0.72) and GFI, CFI and IFI > 0.90). Finally, we conducted cross-validation a Pearson correlation was used to assess the temporal stability analyses (CVA) with the model, which showed the best fit in (test–retest reliability) and it was 0.69 (6 weeks). order to explore the sample invariance of the model. Reliability assessment was conducted using Cronbach’s Coping Strategies for Adolescents (ACS) α (Cronbach, 1951) for internal consistency and for the This scale was used to assess youth coping strategies and was reproducibility the test–retest was carried on in two time points developed by Frydenberg and Lewis (1996) and Frydenberg (n = 162) separated by approximately 2 months. Paired samples (1997). This scale is an 80-item checklist and has 18 subscales t-test were used to test differences in scores between these two each contain between 3 and 5 items. Respondents indicate the administrations of the CYRM-32 adapted. The Pearson product extent to which the coping activity described was used (1 – moment correlation was used to establish construct validity “doesn’t apply or don’t do it,” 2 – “used very little,” 3 – “used and confirm hypothesis 2, describing the relationship between sometimes,” 4 – “used often” and 5 – “used a great deal”). In terms CYRM-32 scores and BRCS; Coping strategies for adolescents of consistency the mean score across the 18 scales is 0.70, while (ACS); Self-concept form 5 (AF5), and the item “Are you the mean reliability across all scales is 0.68 (Frydenberg, 1997). depressed or sad?” The floor or celling effect problems were also (Study 3: α = 0.71). identified (Terwee et al., 2007). In order to explore the functioning of resilience among Self-Concept Form 5 (AF5) different groups of participants (hypothesis 3) a multivariate Self-concept and self-esteem were related with resilience in the analysis of variance (MANOVA) was carried on the study literature (Buckner et al., 2003; Kidd and Shahar, 2008; Wille group sample, with gender, age and ethnicity (European, Gitano, et al., 2008; Hopkins et al., 2014). This scale was designed by Asiatic, African, Caribbean, Latin America, Nord America García and Musitu (1999) and is based on the theoretical model and Canada or others). The data were analyzed using SPSS of Shavelson et al. (1976). It is made up of 30 items that are v.20. and AMOS v.22. rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always) (Shavelson et al., 1976; García and Musitu, 1999). The Results scale was compost by 5 dimensions and their Cronbach’s α were Confirmatory Factor Analysis for each one: social self-concept (0.69), academic self-concept We first tested the hierarchical model (Model 1-CFA) with the (0.88), emotional self-concept (0.73), family self-concept (0.76) first subsample. Figure 2 shows the standardized estimates, as Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure z1 e6 ITEM6 e12 ITEM12 ,59 ,52 ,49 e15 ITEM15 ,63 e17 ITEM17 ,71 ,67 e24 ITEM24 ,65 Family interaction ,55 e26 ITEM26 e27 ITEM27 e2 ITEM2 ,70 e7 ITEM7 z2 e11 ITEM11 ,32 e14 ITEM14 ,40 ,85 e16 ITEM16 ,62 ,60 ,64 e18 ITEM18 ,51 Interaction ,92 ,13 with others Resilience e19 ITEM19 ,49 ,56 e22 ITEM22 e31 ITEM31 e32 ITEM32 e1 ITEM1 e3 ITEM3 ,79 e4 ITEM4 z3 ,40 e5 ITEM5 ,33 ,44 e8 ITEM8 ,23 ,63 ,42 e9 ITEM9 ,59 ,50 e10 ITEM10 Individual ,35 ,46 skills e13 ITEM13 ,52 e20 ITEM20 ,61 ,45 e21 ITEM21 ,43 ,49 e23 ITEM23 ,32 e25 ITEM25 e28 ITEM28 e29 ITEM29 e30 ITEM30 FIGURE 2 | Standardized estimates, as well as the squared multiple correlations for Model 1-CFA. well as the squared multiple correlations (located at the top of the validity of the model, a CVA of Model 2 was carried- each item). Table 3 shows Chi-square statistic was significant, out (Model 2-CVA). probably due to the sample size (Hair et al., 2010). The ratio The fit statistics for Model 2-CVA (see Table 3) were similar χ2 /df = 1.83 < 5, the RMSEA < 0.08 and the SRMR < 0.08 to those of Model 1-CFA. However, the model comparison were well inside the limits that allowed the model to be accepted. statistics carried out against the unrestricted model, establishing However, the rest of the fit indices fell short of the standard equality restrictions between groups for measurement weights limits of acceptance and thus indicate that the model does not (1χ2 = 12.23, p = 0.42), structural covariance (1χ2 = 31.44, represent the data well. p = 0.43), structural residuals (1χ2 = 33.30, p = 0.39) and We then tested the bi-factor model with the same first measurement residuals (1χ2 = 53.62, p = 0.60), show that fit subsample. Figure 3 shows the standardized estimates, as well is not significantly reduced in relation to the model without as the squared multiple correlations (located at the top of each restrictions, which means that the tested model works similarly item). Regarding fit statistics, Chi-square statistic was significant, in both samples. again probably due to the sample size (Hair et al., 2010), the ratio χ2 /df = 1.71 < 5 was well inside the limits that Reliability Assessment and Floor and Ceiling Effects allowed the model to be accepted. The RMSEA < 0.08 and Internal consistency reliability was estimated by Cronbach’s α for the SRMR < 0.08 were well inside the limits that allowed each of components and for the totality of the scale. The α’s were the model to be accepted. The remaining adjustment indexes 0.792 (Family interaction), 0.715 (Interaction with others), 0.778 were slightly better than for Model 1-CFA but fell slightly (Individual skills) and for the totality of the scale was 0.877, which short of the standard limits of acceptance. So, in order to test demonstrated a consistent scale (see Table 4). Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure TABLE 3 | Goodness of fit statistics for the hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis (Model 1-CFA), the bi-factor confirmatory factor analysis (Model 2-CFA) and the bi-factor cross-validation analysis (Model 2-CVA). χ2 df p χ2 /df GFI IFI CFI RMSEA SRMR Model 1-CFA N = 226 841.65 461 0.000 1.83 0.819 0.772 0.768 0.061 0.068 Model 2-CFA N = 226 741.63 433 0.000 1.71 0.838 0.819 0.812 0.056 0.060 Model 2-CVA (N = 226/206) 1502.58 866 0.000 1.73 0.826 0.815 0.808 0.041 0.060 GFI = goodness of fit index; IFI = incremental fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual. ,44 e6 ITEM6 ,32 z1 e12 ITEM12 ,59 ,41 ,46 ,00 e15 ITEM15,50 ,30 e17 ITEM17 ,51 ,30 ,46 ,52 ,33 e24 ITEM24,41 Family interaction ,47 e26 ITEM26 ,28 ,57 ,29 ,48 e27 ITEM27 ,18 ,44 e2 ITEM2 ,11 ,43 e7 ITEM7 ,06 ,46 ,15 z2 ,42 e11 ITEM11 ,15 ,99 ,30 ,04 ,00 e14 ITEM14 ,87 ,38 ,40 -,02 ,48 e16 ITEM16 ,44 ,63 ,38 Interaction e18 ITEM18 ,15 with others ,54 ,21 -,01 ,43 e19 ITEM19 ,03 ,16 ,13 Resilience e22 ITEM22 ,09 ,45 ,22 ,56 e31 ITEM31 ,44 ,33 ,36 e32 ITEM32 ,20 ,41 e1 ITEM1 ,13 ,24 ,30 e3 ITEM3 ,18 ,38 ,00 e4 ITEM4 ,48 ,06 ,03 ,30 e5 ITEM5 ,10 z3 ,19 ,41 ,08 e8 ITEM8 ,00 ,46 ,51 ,32 ,45 e9 ITEM9 ,60 ,26 ,39 ,16 e10 ITEM10 Individual ,30 ,11 ,13 skills e13 ITEM13,19 ,13 ,33 ,26 ,22 e20 ITEM20 ,28 ,48 e21 ITEM21 ,19 ,43 ,34 e23 ITEM23 ,40 ,19 ,22 e25 ITEM25,20 e28 ITEM28 ,27 e29 ITEM29 ,10 e30 ITEM30 FIGURE 3 | Standardized estimates, as well as the squared multiple correlations for Model 2-CFA. In a sample of 162 youth, a Pearson correlation was Convergent and Discriminant Validity used to assess the temporal stability of the CYRM-32 over Correlations between total score of the CYRM-32 and its three 2 months, yielded a value of 0.695 (p < 0.01) for the total dimensions with four measures of mood, resilience, coping score of the scale; and for each of the three factors (family strategies, and self-concept were represented in Table 5. The interaction, interaction with others and individual skills) this CYRM-32 scale and all of its dimensions were positively correlation was: 0.784 (p < 0.01), 0.781 (p < 0.01), 0.787 correlated with resilience measure, self-concept (except the (p < 0.01), respectively. dimension emotional self-concept) and with thirteen of the The highest (157) and lowest (72) score were obtained only eighteen coping strategies (the positive strategies), and negatively once. In addition, none of the participants obtained the lowest correlated with mood depressed or sad and four negative coping and highest CYRM-32 total scores, focusing the absence of floor strategies: lack of coping, reduction of tension (using drugs), or ceiling effects problems. self-incriminating and reserve it for yourself. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure TABLE 4 | CYRM-32 item’s scale and its three dimensions. Dimensions and items Cronbach’s α Family interaction 0.792 6. Mis padres o tutores lo saben todo sobre mí. (My parent(s)/caregiver(s) know a lot about me 12. I talk to my family/caregiver(s) about how I feel. (Hablo sobre cómo me siento con mi familia o tutores legales 15. I know where to go in my community to get help. (Sé dónde acudir dentro de mi comunidad, cuando tengo algún problema 17. My family stands by me during difficult times. (Mi familia me apoya en los momentos difíciles) 24. I feel safe when I am with my family/caregiver(s). (Me siento a salvo junto a mis padres o tutores) 26. I enjoy my family’s/caregiver’s cultural and family traditions. (Disfruto de las tradiciones familiares con mis padres o tutores 27. I enjoy my community’s traditions. (Disfruto de las tradiciones de mi comunidad) Interaction with others 0.715 2. My values allow me a positive relation with my environment. (Mis valores me permiten una relación positiva con mi entorno) 7. If I am hungry, there is enough to eat. (Si tengo hambre, siempre hay suficiente comida para alimentarme) 11. People think that I am fun to be with. (La gente piensa que soy una persona divertida) 14. I feel supported by my friends. (Mis amigos me apoyan) 16. I feel I belong at my school. (Siento que formo parte de mi escuela) 18. My friends stand by me during difficult times. (Mis amigos me apoyan en los momentos difíciles) 19. I feel that I am being treated equally by people around me despite differences in ethnicity, gender, religion, culture or beliefs. (Siento que soy tratado con igualdad por las personas que me rodean a pesar de que hayan diferencias de etnia, género, religión, cultura o creencias) 22. I participate in activities outside the school (sports, religious, artistic, volunteering etc.). (Participo en actividades fuera de la escuela (deportivas, religiosas, artísticas, voluntariado etc.) 31. I support my peers. (Doy apoyo a mis compañeros) 32. I have role models that serve me as guidance and support. (Tengo personas de referencia que me sirven de guía y apoyo) Individual skills 0.778 1. I know people who are an example to follow. (Conozco personas que son un ejemplo a seguir) 0.877∗ 3. Getting an academic education is important to me. (Tener una educación académica es importante para mí) 4. I know how to behave in different social situations. (Sé comportarme teniendo en cuenta las normas sociales) 5. When I face a problem, I’m aware of my emotions and act according to how I feel in that moment. (Ante algún problema soy consciente de mis emociones y actúo según como me siento en el momento) 8. I try to finish what I start. (Intento finalizar todo lo que empiezo) 9. I have faith and trust in me to achieve my goals. (Tengo fe y confianza en mí para conseguir mis objetivos) 10. Despite difficulties, I usually smile. I think that I have good sense of humor. (A pesar de las dificultades suelo sonreír. Me considero una persona con buen sentido del humor) 13. I am able to solve problems without harming myself or others (for example by using drugs and/or being violent. (Puedo solucionar mis problemas sin hacerme daño ni hacer daño a terceras personas (por ejemplo sin caer en adicciones como la droga y sin usar la violencia) 20. I have opportunities to show others that I am becoming an adult and can act responsibly. (Puedo demostrar a los demás que soy una persona adulta y responsable) 21. I am aware of my own strengths. (Soy consciente de mis puntos fuertes) 23. My strength helps me to go on and achieve my goals. (Mi fortaleza me ayuda a seguir adelante y alcanzar mis objetivos) 25. I have opportunities to develop skills that will be useful later in life (like job skills and skills to care for others. (Tengo la oportunidad de desarrollar habilidades que me serán útiles en el futuro (Habilidades relacionadas con un oficio y habilidades sociales) 28. I have aspirations and a clear and realistic vision of the future. (Tengo aspiraciones y una visión de futuro clara y realista) 29. I usually make my own decisions and don’t let myself be influenced by others. (Tiendo a tomar mis propias decisiones y no me dejo llevar por los demás) 30. I’m able to adapt to changes (Soy capaz de adaptarme a los cambios) ∗ Cronbach’s α for totally of the scale. Finally, a MANOVA was conducted to test our 3 hypothesis items that were found in the original scale and to deepen the that significant differences exist between different ethnic, gender interpretation of the resilient processes by developing new items and age. No significant multivariate main effects were found for specific to our culture. age F(71, 352) = 1,437, p < 0.05 or gender, F(72, 359) = 1,062, The results obtained in the first and third study, showed p > 0.05, but there was a significant main effect for ethnicity that the initially Spanish version CYRM-28 and the last F(71, 358) = 1,714, p < 0.01. That suggest only partial support CYRM-32 have good psychometric properties. Despite these for our hypothesis, but shows that the different cultural aspect of findings, qualitative assessment of cultural and contextual the participants were connected with resilience process. relevance, highlighted several items that required adaptation to the local context. These findings regarding variation in instrument items reflect the notion that culture and context DISCUSSION shape the environment and consequently influence the resilience process of people living there. For this reason, including This article includes three studies that reflect the complexity cultural diversity allows for a better understanding of the of the development of a culturally adapted scale. The used of construct from a heterogeneous and socio-ecological perspective mixed methods allowed us to better understand the conflicting (Ungar, 2011). Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure TABLE 5 | Correlations between dimensions of CYRM-32 and others measures. Measure Family interaction Interaction with others Individual skills CYRM-32 Are you depress or sad? − 0.347∗∗ − 0.328∗∗ − 0.314∗∗ − 0.391∗∗ Brief Resilient Coping Scale 0.270∗∗ 0.317∗∗ 0.389∗∗ 0.424∗∗ Coping strategies for adolescent Search for social support 0.394∗∗ 0.353∗∗ 0.328∗∗ 0.425∗∗ Concentrate in solving the problem 0.302∗∗ 0.380∗∗ 0.475∗∗ 0.473∗∗ Strive and have success 0.352∗∗ 0.357∗∗ 0.463∗∗ 0.477∗∗ To worry 0.215∗∗ 0.213∗∗ 0.313∗∗ 0.305∗∗ To invest in intimate friends 0.171∗∗ 0.314∗∗ 0.240∗∗ 0.291∗∗ Search release 0.244∗∗ 0.285∗∗ 0.264∗∗ 0.318∗∗ Make illusions 0.024∗∗ 0.107∗∗ 0.098∗ 0.094 Lack of coping − 0.163∗∗ − 0.252∗∗ − 0.231∗∗ − 0.260∗∗ Reduction of tension − 0.144∗∗ − 0.179∗∗ −146∗∗ − 0.185∗∗ Social action 0.197∗∗ 0.069 0.099∗ 0.140∗∗ Ignore the problem − 0.067 − 0.064 − 0.073 − 0.083 Self-incriminating − 0.105∗ −127∗ − 0.095 − 0.128∗∗ Reserve it for yourself − 0.227∗∗ −142∗∗ − 0.86 − 0.174∗∗ Search spiritual support 0.222∗∗ 0.101∗ 0.082 0.154∗∗ Focus on the positive 0.357∗∗ 0.362∗∗ 0.431∗∗ 0.464∗∗ Search for professional help 0.357∗∗ 0.215∗∗ 0.233∗∗ 0.316∗∗ Search relaxing amusements 0.190∗∗ 0.282∗∗ 0.265∗∗ 0.296∗∗ Physical distraction 0.240∗∗ 0.356∗∗ 0.290∗∗ 0.350∗∗ Self-concept form 5 Social self-concept 0.209∗∗ 0.470∗∗ 0.364∗∗ 0.418∗∗ Academic self-concept 0.305∗∗ 0.344∗∗ 0.346∗∗ 0.420∗∗ Emotional self-concept − 0.014 0.098∗ 0.076 0.066 Family self-concept 0.486∗∗ 0.366∗∗ 0.314∗∗ 0.455∗∗ Physical self-concept 0.161∗∗ 0.349∗∗ 0.339∗∗ 0.345∗∗ ∗∗ Correlation is significant at the p < 0.01 level (2-tailed). ∗ Correlation is significant at the p < 0.05 level (2-tailed). The present work includes three studies (Figure 1). In The divergence of the structure of the scale with the original the first study, the translated CYRM-28 was assessed for version further emphasizes the cultural and contextual factors validity of its psychometric properties. The distribution of items that differentiate populations, and how each culture understands was different and the factors did not correspond to all the the phenomenon of resilience (Ungar, 2004, 2008). These three theoretical factors of the original scale. Additionally, the differences are probably due to the fact that the scale validation emerging factors were provided alternate names, as identified by was conducted with youth in Canada (Liebenberg et al., 2012); an expert review panel. a place where there was a difference in the risk context of The first factor, “Family interaction” explained 17.7% of participants: in Canada the sample included high-risk youth the variance, and related to a broad concept of family. It (users of services such as care of children, mental health, includes eight items that have high loadings and strong justice), whereas in our study, the participants were young people internal consistency. The second factor, “Interaction with others” belonging to a neighborhood with high risk and vulnerability explained 7.17% of the variance and reflects social interaction indicators. It is however, more probable that the variability is across various contexts (such as peer group, school, and religious due to cultural and contextual differences. For example, the settings). All seven items had significant loadings but less internal factor structure identified in New Zealand (Sanders et al., 2015) consistency. The final factor, “Skills or individual resources,” is also different from that of the factor structure identified in explained 6% of variance, and included nine items, six of Canada (Liebenberg et al., 2012), while the sample in both them with adequate saturation and loadings with medium sites was the same. internal consistency. From qualitative data, nine items were developed and were As observed in other studies that obtained similar results included in the final version of CYRM. (Liebenberg et al., 2012; Daigneault et al., 2013), some items The themes related with the Individual factor were self- presented problematic factor loading. In our study, items 1, 3, 9 awareness (“When I face a problem, I’m aware of my emotions and 22 failed to exhibit strong factor loading on any of the three and act according to how I feel in that moment”); Sense of humor final components. Also, four items (2, 5, 10 and 28) were excluded (“Despite difficulties, I usually smile. I think that I have good due to inadequate factor loadings. sense of humor”); Vision of the future (“My strength helps me to Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 13 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure go on and achieve my goals” and “I have aspirations and a clear CYRM-32’s total scale and its three dimensions, confirming thus and realistic vision of the future”); Adaptation (“I’m able to adapt the second hypothesis. to changes”); Autonomy (“I usually make my own decisions and As hypothesized, the results also confirm that CYRM-32 and don’t let myself be influenced by others”). its three factors, were positively and significantly correlated with Three of the new themes related to items identified during measures of resilience (BRCS), Self-Concept form 5 (except the original development of the CYRM (Ungar and Liebenberg, emotional self-concept) and thirteen positive coping strategies for 2011): Support for others (“I support my peers”); Significant adolescent: search for social support, concentrate in solving the relationships (“I have role models that serve me as guidance and problem, strive and have success, to worry, to invest in intimate support”); Education context (“My values allow me a positive friends, search release, make illusions, social action search relation with my environment”). spiritual support, focus on the positive, search for professional Only one new item related to basic needs, stemming from help, search relaxing amusements and physical distraction; while Family interaction (“I have good conditions of living that meet showing a negative and significant correlation with four negative my needs”). This item was not included in the final version as it coping strategies: lack of coping, reduction of tension (using strongly reflected the original CYRM item “I have enough to eat.” drugs), self-incriminating and reserve it for yourself; also with the To increase their comprehension and relevance five items were item “Are you depressed or sad” in concordance with the authors reformulated (items 1, 3, 9, 19, 22). who defined resilience how “good mental health” (Klasen et al., Drawing on the qualitative data, two items were reformulated 2010; Williams and Nelson-Gardell, 2012; Collishaw et al., 2016). to better align with youth identified resilience factors. Because Despite some research show the relationship between emotion participants felt it was more important to believe in themselves and resilience (Troy and Mauss, 2011; Kay, 2016) the emotional that to have spiritual beliefs, item 9 “Spiritual beliefs are self-concept was not significant correlated with CYRM-32. In source of strength for me” was changed to “I have faith spite of this, all other correlations provide evidence of the and trust I can achieve my goals.” Similarly, item 22 “I criterion-related validity of CYRM-32. participate in organized religious activities” was reformulated In regard to the hypothesis tree, where we were expected to include other activities “I participate in activities outside to find significant differences in youth scores depending on the school (sports, religious, artistic, volunteering.” Here the gender, ethnicity and age of participants, we only found youth noted that young people often interact with their significant differences with ethnicity in concordance with community by participating in extracurricular activities, other validation of CYRM-28 such as the one undertaken in especially sport, rather than religious activities (see also New Zealand (Sanders et al., 2015) and in Canada with French Moreno et al., 2016). speaking youth (Daigneault et al., 2013). Despite the significant Our findings show that the Spanish CYRM-32 has good main effect that was found for gender in the Canadian validation, psychometric properties and highlight the importance of the the key differences were observed in ethnicity between visible process of prior cultural adaptation of the scale. Two of three minority youth and visible majority youth (Liebenberg et al., hypotheses of the study were confirmed except for the hypotheses 2012). These findings support the idea that the developed three, where only differences in the CYRM-32 scores were of resilience is influenced by culture and context as others found in ethnicity. researches (Masten and Coatsworth, 1998; Ungar, 2004, 2011; With respect to the first hypothesis, the three-factor structure Clauss-Ehlers, 2008). was confirmed, which is consistent with the original CYRM The adaptation and validation of this scale using mixed- scale (Ungar, 2008; Ungar and Liebenberg, 2009) and with its methods could be used in Spain to evaluate the effectiveness adaptation among French Canadian youth (Daigneault et al., of future interventions projects to promote resilience among 2013). The fact that a bi-factor model as the one proposed by children and youth at risk (Liebenberg et al., 2012). Konkolÿ et al. (2014) fitted our data better than a hierarchical This finding has implications for the assessment practices model implies that people showing high resilience in an and interventions for all professionals who work with youth in individual dimension, tends to show also high resilience in the context of risk. dimensions family interaction and interaction with others and also supports the idea of calculating a single overall resilience score in addition to subscales for each of its dimensions STUDY LIMITATIONS AND STRENGTHS (Konkolÿ et al., 2014). The scale CYRM 32 and its three components: family The Spanish version of the CYRM-32 is an adequate and validity interaction, interaction with others and individual skills, tool to measure resilience, which will permit to assess the presented strong internal consistencies, as reveled by high effectiveness of future interventions to promote resilience among values of Cronbach’s α, consistent with other’s CYRM-28 scales children and youth at risk (Liebenberg et al., 2012) and it covers a validation (Liebenberg et al., 2012; Daigneault et al., 2013; gap regarding the existence of validated instruments to measure Sanders et al., 2015) and with higher values than those obtained resilience in this population. in the cultural adaptation process. Furthermore, no participant Different samples of at risk youth were represented in scored the highest and lowest score of 32, so no floor or the groups of participants. They were randomly selected. ceiling effects were detected (Terwee et al., 2007). Temporal Furthermore, persons from different ethnic groups were included stability of scores over 2 months was also observed in the in the final sample. Concerning limitations of the study, the Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 14 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure items of the scale were all phrased positively and that might have prior to data collection, from all adult participants and from the decreased the reliability of the CYRM-32. However, the results parents/legal guardians of all non-adult participants, as well as the show a high internal consistency. directors of secondary schools who collaborated in the research. In future research, the predictive validity of the CYRM-32 (Terwee et al., 2007), and the scale’s sensitivity to change over the course of intervention would need to be established. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS Despite these limitations, the Spanish version of the CYRM-32 presents good psychometric properties and could ML, TGR, and JTL contributed in the conceptualization, design, be an alternative tool to measure resilience in Spanish- methodology, results and discussion. ML led the Study I and speaking at risk youth. Study III and wrote the first draft of the article. TGR supervised and integrated all revisions and formal aspects, and performed the submission. RRR performed part of the statistical analyses of DATA AVAILABILITY Study III. LL provided important guidance as the author of the original scale and supervised the mixed methodology. ÁB carried All relevant data is contained within the manuscript. All datasets out the empirical part of Study II. JGB supervised and reviewed generated/analyzed for this study are included in the manuscript the statistical analyses of Study III. All the authors revised and and the supplementary files. approved the final version of the manuscript. ETHICS STATEMENT FUNDING The Ethics Committee Institutional Review Board of the This study was partly funded by a grant from the Strategic Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa (Spain) was approved the study. Plan for Research and Innovation in Health from the Catalonia In all three studies, the written informed consent was obtained Government (Spain), and by the Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa. REFERENCES Cumming, G. S., Barnes, G., Perz, S., Schmink, M., Sieving, K. E., Southworth, J., et al. (2005). An exploratory framework for the empirical measurement of Aburn, G., Gott, M., and Hoare, K. (2016). What is resilience? An integrative review resilience. Ecosystems 8, 975–987. doi: 10.1037/a0037867 of the empirical literature. J. Adv. Nurs. 72, 980–1000. doi: 10.1111/jan.12888 Daigneault, I., Dion, J., Hébert, M., McDuff, P., and Collin-Vézina, D. (2013). Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., and Bosi, F. M. (2000). Guidelines Psychometric properties of the child and youth resilience measure (CYRM- for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25, 28) among samples of French Canadian youth. Child Abuse Negl. 37, 160–171. 3186–3191. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014 doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2012.06.004 Boyden, J., and Mann, G. (2005). “Children’s risk, resilience, and coping in extreme Davey, A., and Savla, J. (2010). Statistical Power Analysis with Missing Data: A situations,” in Handbook for Working with Children and Youth: Pathways to Structural Equation Modelling Approach, Vol. 13. New York, NY: Routledge. Resilience Across Cultures and Contexts, ed. M. Ungar (Thousand Oaks CA: Donnon, T., and Hammond, W. (2007). A psychometric assessment of the self- SAGE Publications), 3–26. doi: 10.4135/9781412976312.n1 reported youth resiliency: assessing developmental strengths questionnaire. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Psychol. Rep. 100, 963–978. doi: 10.2466/PRO.100.3.963-978 Nature and Design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Forns, M., Amador, J. A., Kirchner, T., Gómez, J., Muro, P., and Martorell, B. Buckner, J. C., Mezzacappa, E., and Beardslee, W. R. (2003). Characteristics of (2005). Psychometric properties of the spanish version of the moos coping resilient youths living in poverty: the role of self-regulatory processes. Dev. response inventory for youth. Psychol. Rep. 97, 777–789. doi: 10.2466/pr0.97. Psychopathol. 15, 139–162. doi: 10.1017/S0954579403000087 3.777-789 Cann, A., and Collette, C. (2014). Sense of humor, stable affect, and psychological Fredrickson, B. L. (2000). Cultivating positive emotions to optimize health and well-being. Eur. J. Psychol. 10, 464–479. doi: 10.1622/1059-8405200 well-being. Prevent. Treat. 3, 1–25. doi: 10.1037/1522-3736.3.1.31a 8024 Frydenberg, E. (1997). Manual de Escalas de Afrontamiento para Adolescentes Carretero-Dios, H., and Pérez, C. (2007). Standards for the development (ACS). Madrid: TEA. and review of instrumental studies: considerations about test selection in Frydenberg, E., and Lewis, R. (1996). A replication study of the structure of psychological research. Int. J. Clin. Health. Psychol. 7, 863–882. the adolescent coping scale: multiple forms and applications of a self-report Chochinov, H. M., Wilson, K. G., Enns, M., and Lander, S. (1997). ‘Are you inventory in a counselling and research context. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 12, depressed?’ Screening for depression in the terminally ill. Am. J. Psychiatry 154, 224–235. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.12.3.224 674–676. doi: 10.1176/ajp.154.5.674 García, F., and Musitu, G. (1999). Autoconcepto Forma 5. Madrid: TEA. Clauss-Ehlers, C. S. (2008). Sociocultural factors, resilience, and coping: support for Guilera, G., Pereda, N., Paños, A., and Abad, J. (2015). Assessing resilience in a culturally sensitive measure of resilience. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 29, 197–212. adolescence: the spanish adaptation of the adolescent resilience questionnaire. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2008.02.004 Health Qual. Life Outcomes 13:100. doi: 10.1186/s12955-015-0259-8 Collishaw, S., Hammerton, G., Mahedy, L., Sellers, R., Owen, M. J., Craddock, N., Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., and Babin, B. J. (2010). RE Anderson Multivariate Data et al. (2016). Mental health resilience in the adolescent off spring of parents Analysis: A Global Perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. with depression: a prospective longitudinal study. Lancet Psychiatry 3, 49–57. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., and Seventh, R. A. (2014). Multivariate Data doi: 10.1016/s2215-0366(15)00358-2 Analysis, 7th Edn. Edinburgh: Pearson Education. Costello, A., and Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Hair, J. F. (ed.) (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th Edn. Upper Saddle River, four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract. Assess. NJ: Prentice Hall. Res. Eval. 10, 1–9. Hambleton, K. R., and John, H. A. L. (2003). Advances in translating and adapting Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. educational and psychological tests. Lang. Test. 20, 127–134. doi: 10.7334/ Psychometrika 16, 297–334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555 psicothema2013.24 Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 15 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410 Llistosella et al. Child and Youth Resilience Measure Hjemdal, O., Friborg, O., Stiles, T. C., Martinussen, M., and Rosenvinge, J. H. Ruvalcaba-Romero, N. A., Gallegos-Guajardo, J., and Villegas-Guinea, D. (2015). (2006). A new scale for adolescent resilience: grasping the central protective Validation of the resilience scale for adolescents (READ) in Mexico. J. Behav. resources behind healthy development. Meas. Eval. Couns. Dev. 39, 84–96. Health Soc. Issues 6, 21–34. doi: 10.1002/mpr.1506 doi: 10.1080/07481756.2006.11909791 Sanders, J., Munford, R., Thimasarn-Anwar, T., and Liebenberg, L. (2015). Hopkins, K. D., Zubrick, S. R., and Taylor, C. L. (2014). Resilience amongst Validation of the child and youth resilience measure (CYRM-28) on a sample australian aboriginal youth: an ecological analysis of factors associated with of at-risk new zealand youth. Res. Soc. Work. Pract. 22, 827–840. doi: 10.1177/ psychosocial functioning in high and low family risk contexts. PLoS One 1049731515614102 9:e102820. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102820 Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., and Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: validation Hughes, L. (2008). A correlational study of the relationship between sense of humor of construct interpretations. Rev. Educ. Res. 46, 407–441. doi: 10.3102/ and positive psychological capacities. Econ. Bus. J. 1, 45–55. 00346543046003407 Kay, S. A. (2016). Emotion regulation and resilience: overlooked connections. Ind. Stratta, P., Riccardi, I., Di Cosimo, A., Cavicchio, A., Struglia, F., Daneluzzo, E., Organ. Psychol. 9, 411–415. doi: 10.1017/iop.2016.31 et al. (2012). A validation study of the italian version of the resilience scale for Kazerooni, Z. B., Liebenberg, L., and Sepehri, S. Z. (2016). Validation of the factorial adolescents (READ). J. Community Psychol. 40, 479–485. doi: 10.1002/jcop structure of the child and youth resilience measure for use with iranian youth. Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., Van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, Child Ind. Res. 10, 797–809. doi: 10.1007/s12187-016-9412-0 J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties Kelly, Y., Fitzgerald, A., and Dooley, B. (2016). Validation of the resilience scale for of health status questionnaires. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 60, 34–42. doi: 10.1016/j. adolescents (read) in ireland: a multi- group analysis. Int. J. Methods Psychiatr. jclinepi.2006.03.012 Res. 26:e1506. doi: 10.1002/mpr.1506 Troy, A. S., and Mauss, I. B. (2011). “Resilience in the face of stress: emotion Kidd, S., and Shahar, G. (2008). Resilience in homeless youth: the key role of self- regulation as a protective factor,” in Resilience and Mental Health, eds S. M. esteem. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 78, 163–172. doi: 10.1037/0002-9432.78.2.163 Southwick, B. Litz, D. Charney, and M. J. Friedman (Cambridge: Cambridge Klasen, F., Oettingen, G., Daniels, J., Post, M., Hoyer, C., and Adam, H. (2010). University Press), 30–44. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511994791.004 Posttraumatic resilience in former ugandan child soldiers: posttraumatic Ungar, M. (2004). A constructionist discourse on resilience: multiple contexts, resilience. Child Dev. 81, 1096–1113. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01456.x multiple realities among at-risk children and youth. Youth Soc. 35, 341–365. Kline, P. (1994). An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. New York, NY: Routledge. doi: 10.1177/0044118X03257030 Konkolÿ, T. B., Kovács, E., and Balog, P. (2014). A bifactor model of the Ungar, M. (2008). Resilience across cultures. Br. J. Soc. Work 38, 218–235. doi: posttraumatic growth inventory. Health Psychol. Behav. Med. 2, 529–540. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcl343 10.1080/21642850.2014.905208 Ungar, M. (2011). The social ecology of resilience: addressing contextual and Liebenberg, L., Ungar, M., and Van de Vijver, F. (2012). Validation of the child cultural ambiguity of a nascent construct. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 81, 1–17. and youth resilience measure-28 (CYRM-28) among Canadian youth. Res. Soc. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01067.x Work. Pract. 22, 219–226. doi: 10.1177/1049731511428619 Ungar, M., and Liebenberg, L. (2009). Cross-cultural consultation leading to the Limonero, J. T., Tomás-Sábado, J., Gómez-Romero, M. J., Maté-Méndez, J., development of a valid measure of youth resilience: the international resilience Sinclair, V. G., Wallston, K. A., et al. (2014). Evidence for validity of the brief project. Stud. Psychol. 51, 259–268. resilient coping scale in a young spanish sample. Span. J. Psychol. 17:E34. Ungar, M., and Liebenberg, L. (2011). Assessing resilience across cultures using doi: 10.1017/sjp.2014.35 mixed methods: construction of the child and youth resilience measure. J. Mix. Marici, M. (2015). Some psychometric properties of the family domain in the Methods Res. 5, 126–149. doi: 10.1177/1558689811400607 “Adolescent Resilience Questionnaire”. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 187, 289–294. Ungar, M., Liebenberg, L., Boothroyd, R., Kwong, W. M., Lee, T. Y., Leblanc, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.054 J., et al. (2008). The study of youth resilience across cultures: lessons from a Martin, R. A., and Lefcourt, H. M. (2004). Sense of humor and physical health: pilot study of measurement development. Res. Hum. Dev. 5, 166–180. doi: theoretical issues, recent findings, and future directions. Humor 17, 1–20. 10.1080/15427600802274019 Masten, A. S. (1999). “Resilience comes of age: reflections On the past and outlook Von Soest, T., Mossige, S., Stefansen, K., and Hjemdal, O. (2010). A validation study for the next generation of research,” in Resilience and Development: Positive of the resilience scale for adolescents (READ). J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 32, Life Adaptations, Longitudinal Research in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 215–225. doi: 10.1007/s10862-009-9149-x eds M. D. Glantz and J. L. Johnson (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), Wille, N., Bettge, S., Ravens-Sieberer, U., and Bella study group (2008). Risk and 281–296. doi: 10.1007/0-306-47167-1_15 protective factors for children’s and adolescents’ mental health: results of the Masten, A. S. (2007). Resilience in developing systems: progress and promise BELLA study. Eur. Child. Adolesc. Psychiatry 17, 133–147. doi: 10.1007/s00787- as the fourth wave rises. Dev. Psychopathol. 19, 921–930. doi: 10.1017/ 008-1015-y S0954579407000442 Williams, J., and Nelson-Gardell, D. (2012). Predicting resilience in sexually abused Masten, A. S., and Coatsworth, J. D. (1998). The development of competence in adolescents. Child Abuse Negl. 36, 53–63. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2011.07.004 favorable and unfavourable environments: lessons from research on successful Windle, G., Bennett, K. M., and Noyes, J. (2011). A methodological review of children. Am. Psychol. 53, 205–220. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.2.205 resilience measurement scales. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 9:8. doi: 10.1186/ Masten, A. S., Hubbard, J. J., Gest, S. D., Tellegen, A., Garmezy, N., and Ramirez, 1477-7525-9-8 M. (1999). Competence in the context of adversity: pathways to resilience Zolkoski, S. M., and Bullock, L. M. (2012). Resilience in children and youth: a and maladaptation from childhood to late adolescence. Dev. Psychopathol. 11, review. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 34, 2295–2303. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2012. 143–169. doi: 10.1017/s0954579499001996 08.009 Masten, A. S., and Tellegen, A. (2012). Resilience in developmental psychopathology: contributions of the project competence longitudinal Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was study. Dev. Psychopathol. 24, 345–361. doi: 10.1017/S095457941200003X conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could Moreno, C., Garcia-Moya, I., Rivera, F., and Ramos, P. (2016). Characterization be construed as a potential conflict of interest. of vulnerable and resilient spanish adolescents in their developmental contexts. Front. Psychol. 7:983. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00983 Copyright © 2019 Llistosella, Gutiérrez-Rosado, Rodríguez-Rey, Liebenberg, Nunnally, J. C., and Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill Bejarano, Gómez-Benito and Limonero. This is an open-access article distributed Series in Psychology, 3rd Edn. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The Pett, M. A., Lackey, N. R., and Sullivan, J. J. (2003). Making Sense of Factor Analysis: use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the The use of Factor Analysis for instrument Development in Health Care Research. original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. Resilience Research Centre (2009). The Child and Youth Resilience Measure-28: No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with User Manual. Halifax: Resilience Research Center, Dalhousie University. these terms. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 16 June 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1410