Samenvatting

Objectives: The aim of this study was to study measurement properties of the DutchLanguage Version of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS-DLV) in blue and white collarworkers employed at multiple companies and to compare the validity and factorstructure to other language versions.Methods: Workers (n = 1023) were assessed during a cross-sectional health surveillance.Construct validity was tested with exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses(EFA and CFA) and hypothesis testing. Reliability was tested with Cronbach 's alpha.Results: A two-factor structure of the BRS-DLV had good model fit in both EFAand CFA, which could be explained by difficulties of workers with reversed orderitems. After excluding these inconsistent answering patterns, a one-factor structureshowed good model fit resembling the original BRS (χ2 = 16.5; CFI & TLI = 0.99;SRMR = 0.02;RMSEA = 0.04). Internal consitency is sufficient (Cronbach 'sα = 0.78). All five hypotheses were confirmed, suggesting construct validity.Conclusions: Reliability of the BRS-DLV is sufficient and there is evidence of constructvalidity. Inconsistent answering, however, caused problems in interpretationand factor structure of the BRS-DLV. This can be easily detected and handled becauseitem 2, 4 and 6 are in reversed order. Other language versions differ in factorstructure, most likely because systematic errors are not corrected for. To collect validdata, it is advised to be aware of inconsistent answering of respondents.CC BY-NC