Date of Award

Fall 1-31-2020

Document Type


Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)



First Advisor

Dr. Kelly Kennedy

Second Advisor

Dr. Michael Hass

Third Advisor

Dr. Ryan McGill


This study examines the validity of the Vietnamese Resilience Assessment (VRA), the Vietnamese-translated version of the Resilience Youth Development Module (RYDM), which is considered to be a reliable and reasonable instrument to survey the levels of external and internal assets for American students; its appropriateness to be used with Vietnamese students has yet been determined. To assist in validating the VRA, this study carried out both an exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factor analysis using the dataset that was obtained from the results of the Healthy Student Survey-Vietnam study (HSSV; Hass et al., 2014). Specifically, the study sought out to answer the following research questions: (1) What is a worthwhile factor structure for the VRA?; (2) Is the structure that is identified by EFA able to be replicated in a different sample using CFA?; and (3) What is the internal consistency of each factor found in the VRA?

The dataset was first screened for mischievous responders (n = 62), and these students were dropped from subsequent analysis due to giving implausible responses. Children from different ethnic groups were also removed (n = 100), leaving n = 2,106 for analysis. Then, the dataset was split randomly in half to run the EFA (n = 1031) and CFA (n = 1075). Based on conceptual understanding and parsimony, the results from the EFA suggested retaining a 7-factor model solution. This 7-factor model was tested for goodness of fit via CFA. Using the weighted least square mean and variance adjusted (WLSMV) estimator, the CFA produced the following fit indices: TLI = 0.89, CFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.05, and SRMR = 0.06, suggesting that the 7-factor model identified in the EFA can be replicated using a different sample and providing preliminary support for its suitability with Vietnamese adolescents. Implications for practice, as well as strengths and limitations of the study, are discussed in detail prior to providing suggestions for future directions.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.