A cross‐cultural validation of the Resiliency Scale for Young Adults in Canada and China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study reports on a cross-cultural validation of the recently developed Resiliency Scale for Young Adults (RSYA) with two samples consisting of 617 Canadian university students and 651 Chinese university students. Confirmatory factor analysis, tests of cultural invariance, and correlations with relevant individual difference variables were conducted as tests of validity. In the Chinese sample, confirmatory factor analysis supported the factor structure of the RSYA and internal consistency reliabilities for the three factors and 10 facets were good-to-excellent. Cultural and gender invariance were supported. Correlations with depression, anxiety, stress, flourishing, and life satisfaction were also in the expected direction in the Chinese sample. These findings provide additional support for the RSYA as a reliable and valid measure of personal resiliency for Chinese young adults. Findings support the three-factor model of personal resiliency in both Canadian and Chinese young adults, as well as cultural and gender invariance. The robustness of this model has implications for assessing and developing resiliency cross-culturally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".