Open AccessTESTING IN MENTAL HEALTH RESEARCH: PROFESSIONAL HARDINESS QUESTIONNAIRE (ENGLISH-LANGUAGE VERSION)
Author(s) -
Олег Матвійович Кокун
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
wiadomości lekarskie
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.133
H-Index - 14
eISSN - 2719-342X
pISSN - 0043-5147
DOI - 10.36740/wlek202111121
Subject(s) - hardiness (plants) , mental health , psychology , normative , professional development , test (biology) , consistency (knowledge bases) , clinical psychology , internal consistency , applied psychology , social psychology , psychometrics , pedagogy , psychiatry , computer science , political science , paleontology , artificial intelligence , law , horticulture , cultivar , biology
The aim: To develop and validate the English-language version of the Professional Hardiness Questionnaire (PHQ).Materials and methods: A total of 425 skilled English-speaking respondents (188 men, 237 women; aged 19–75 years, M = 34.12 ± 13.18 years) from different countries of various professions participated in a remote online survey. The results were used to validate the English-language version of the PHQ. English-language versions of six other measures were also used to check the PHQ’s competitive validity.Results: The 24-item PHQ determines eight indicators of professional hardiness: general level of professional hardiness; professional commitment; professional control; professional challenge; and the emotional, motivational, social and namely professional aspects of professional hardiness. We calculated means and standard deviations for each indicator and determined normative data (in points) for general level of professional hardiness, sorted into five levels: low, below average, average, higher than average and high. The PHQ had sufficiently high internal consistency (α = 0.76–0.90) and competitive validity. General level of professional hardiness was significantly correlated (r = 0.17–0.45; р < 0.001) with the scales of all of the additional six measures used.Conclusions: The professional hardiness of specialists in different professions should be examined, both to strengthen specialists’ hardiness and to prevent negative consequences of occupational stress on their mental health. It is also necessary to test the PHQ in various professional fields to clarify the quantitative indicators of professional hardiness for skilled people in various professions.