Psychometric testing of the Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale for older adults

Abstract

Background

Resourcefulness is the capacity to confront life’s obstacles by utilizing coping skills, adapting to new circumstances, and seeking assistance from the environment. Therefore, the geriatric field continues to emphasize the importance of older adults’ resourcefulness. The Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale^© (I-RS) has just been translated; it is essential to conduct this research and report the findings for its application in Indonesia.

Objective

This study intended to develop the Bahasa Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale^© and to test its reliability and validity in older adults.

Methods

The questionnaire was initially created in English and then translated by two linguistic experts. Subsequently, meaning and cultural analysis were performed by psychiatric nursing specialists. Following this, a back-translation was executed, and the Indonesian version was used for data collection. Data was collected with 331 older adults residing in 11 nursing homes from 2023 to 2024. Correlational analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) were conducted using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in LISREL 8.8 to examine the validity of the I-RS. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha and Split-half reliability.

Results

The internal consistency of the Indonesian version of the instrument is acceptable with Cronbach’s Alpha .79 and Split-half reliability .75. According to the results of SEM, Chi square = 253.13, the Root means square error of approximation (RMSEA = 0.04), the adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI = 0.90), Normed Fit Index (NFI = 0.92), Parsimony Normed Fit Index (PNFI = 0.76) and Comparative fit Index (CFI = 0.97) were all accepted. Two factors, such as personal and social resourcefulness, were identified through factor analysis using SEM. A positive and significant relationship was found between resourcefulness and spiritual health (r = 0.45, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

These results confirmed the use of the Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness scale (I-RS), indicating that it has acceptable reliability and validity. This instrument is potentially useful for measuring older adults’ resourcefulness in geriatric nursing in Indonesia, across both clinical and community settings.

Background

The rising prevalence of mental health issues among older adults has become a significant public health concern globally, including in Indonesia (Handajani et al., 2022; Juanita et al., 2022). Older adults frequently encounter challenges such as social isolation (Reynolds et al., 2022), chronic illness, and psychological distress (Swathi et al., 2023), which exacerbate mental health conditions like depression, anxiety, and cognitive decline (Pietrzak et al., 2023; World Health Organization [WHO], 2025). It is essential that innovative approaches emphasize coping and self-management skills, particularly in resource-limited settings, to address the issues. One such approach is the concept of resourcefulness, which refers to an individual’s ability to utilize personal and social resources to manage stressors and challenges (Kanungo & Mendonca, 2012; Musil et al., 2021; Zauszniewski, 2016).

Resourcefulness is not a novel idea; this concept was developed in the 20^th century. It is defined as an individual’s attempts to enhance internal abilities and seek external help from the environment to deal with life problems (Tsou & Kao, 2024). The science of resourcefulness has evolved significantly since it emerged almost 40 years ago, especially in its applications within the health and nursing disciplines. Resourcefulness has been linked to improved psychological well-being, enhanced coping mechanisms, and better health outcomes in older adults, making it a critical construct to evaluate in mental health care (Choi et al., 2013; Zauszniewski et al., 2006). There are two types of resourcefulness: personal resourcefulness and social resourcefulness (Zauszniewski & Bekhet, 2011). Personal resourcefulness is the ability of individuals to cope using internal resources, whereas social resourcefulness is the ability of individuals to deal with distress using external or social assistance from others (Zauszniewski et al., 2019).

Indonesia, home to a rapidly aging population, is witnessing an increasing burden of mental health conditions among its older adults (Handajani et al., 2022). The cultural and contextual factors in Indonesia further complicate the understanding and management of mental health in this population, underscoring the need for culturally adapted and psychometrically robust tools. Despite the growing emphasis on resourcefulness as a component of mental health interventions, there is a scarcity of validated instruments for measuring resourcefulness among older adults in Indonesia.

Psychometric testing of the Resourcefulness Scale^© is therefore essential to evaluate its reliability, validity, and cultural relevance in this context. The Resourcefulness Scale^©, originally developed by Zauszniewski et al. (2006), has been used across various populations to assess individual capacities for problem-solving and adaptive functioning (Lai, 2021; Zauszniewski, 2016). Its application to older adults with mental health problems in Indonesia could provide valuable insights into their coping strategies and inform the design of targeted nursing interventions.

Despite several research concerns in the mental health of older adults in nursing homes in Indonesia (Pramesona & Taneepanichskul, 2018), empirical studies focused on the investigation of older adults’ ability in facing problems remain limited. Most of the research on older adults emphasizes the prevalence, etiology, risk factors, and treatment for mental health, while relatively small numbers concern research on capacities that enable older adults to cope with psychological issues, especially for measurement.

The Indonesian population was selected due to its unique cultural and contextual characteristics, which could influence the expression of resourcefulness and its association with mental health outcomes. Validating the scale in this population ensures that it captures the nuances of their lived experiences and provides reliable data for research and practice (Salihu et al., 2024). Therefore, this article aimed to show the reliability, validity, and cultural applicability of the Resourcefulness Scale^© among older adults in Indonesia. Consequently, it was expected to contribute to the development of culturally sensitive assessments and interventions that might further promote mental health and resourcefulness in older adults.

Methods

Sample and Data Collection

Data were collected from older adults living in nursing homes in two provinces in Indonesia: the Special Region of Yogyakarta and Central Java. The included nursing homes are government-run facilities managed by the Social Ministry of Indonesia, with approximately 100 residents across three categories of care needs (total care, partial care, and healthy condition). Healthy residents are allowed to go outside as needed, with staff assistance; however, for partial or total care, they need to stay in the Nursing homes and have their activities supervised by a caregiver and a social carer. The participants were recruited with convenience sampling through direct face-to-face contact.

The following criteria applied to participant selection were (1) who were older than 65 years old; (2) who had been living in a nursing home for at least 6 months; (3) who could speak fluently in Bahasa Indonesia or the Java language. For the exclusion criteria of sampling, the participants with cognitive impairment, such as those who have been diagnosed with psychiatric illness or severe physical disorders, including advanced cancer or motor impairments, were excluded. To determine whether the participants could appropriately respond to the questionnaires, the nurses and staff in the nursing homes helped screen their cognitive function using their usual assessments.

For sample size estimation, Costello and Osborne (2005 recommended 10 participants per item. That means 280 participants were needed for psychometric tests of the resourcefulness scale, which consists of 28 items.

Measures

The Indonesian Version of the Resourcefulness Scale

The Resourcefulness Scale©, developed by Zauszniewski et al. (2006), was originally used to assess resourcefulness in older adults. The use and translation of this scale were fully permitted by the original author, who also serves as a coauthor in this article. Each item of this scale is scored on a 6-point Likert-type scale. There are two components of resourcefulness: personal resourcefulness, which refers to the ability to help oneself and consists of 16 items, and social resourcefulness, which measures the ability to seek help from others and consists of 12 items. All items are phrased positively. The scores range from 0 to 140, with higher scores indicating greater resourcefulness. The original version of the Resourcefulness Scale© showed good internal consistency (α = 0.85), and its construct validity was confirmed by two correlated factors: personal and social resourcefulness (r = 0.41) (Zauszniewski et al., 2006).

This scale was translated into Bahasa Indonesia in the current study using the back-translation approach, after obtaining permission from the original developers (Zauszniewski et al., 2006). According to the recommendations for the back-translation method of questionnaires (Ozolins et al., 2020), four steps ensure equivalency in translation as (1) Forward translation, (2) Expert panel Back translation, (3) Pre-testing and cognitive interviewing, and (4) Final version. Two linguistic experts and a psychiatric nursing professor were invited to the back-translation process. The forward translation was processed from English to Bahasa Indonesia by a bilingual expert. It produced material for back-translation by another language expert. The Indonesian Version of the Resourcefulness Scale© was then developed following back-and-forth discussion among the research team. The draft of the scale was then provided to 10 older adults who met the inclusion criteria for pre-testing and cognitive interviewing prior to finalization.

Spiritual Screening Tool for Older Adults

The Spiritual Screening Tool for Older Adults was administered to examine the correlation between resourcefulness and spiritual health, as a positive relationship was theoretically expected (Huang, 2024). The Spiritual Screening Tool for Older Adults (Stranahan, 2008) is publicly accessible through the Journal of Religion and Health and free to use for non-commercial academic purposes. This tool consists of 20 items, five measuring each of the constructs: (1) meaning and purpose, (2) hope and coping, (3) transcendence in relationships with God and others, and (4) religious practices. It offers participants options to indicate their degree of agreement for each item using a five-point Likert scale. A numerical value will be assigned to each category: strongly disagree = 1, disagree = 2, uncertain = 3, agree = 4, and strongly agree = 5. Item responses total scores that could range from 20 to 100. Higher scores indicated a greater degree of spiritual wellness. The split-half reliability coefficient between the ten items with even and odd numbers was calculated to be 0.776. In terms of validity, Stranahan (2008) found that the interrelationships among subscale items were statistically significant. This supports the supposition that the items measure the respective constructs of spirituality.

Data Analysis

In addition to descriptive statistics, the data analysis primarily focused on assessing the scale’s reliability and validity. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha and split-half reliability to evaluate the scale’s internal consistency. The type of split-half reliability used in this study was a first-half/second-half split, which was automatically chosen by SPSS 29.0.

Structural equation modeling (SEM) was subsequently employed to evaluate the overall model fit and to test the hypothesized relationships between the two measurement constructs of the Resourcefulness Scale: personal and social resourcefulness. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using LISREL 8.8 to verify the factor structure. Factor loadings for each item were examined and interpreted to determine their adequacy in representing the constructs. In addition, a correlational analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between resourcefulness and spiritual health among older adults in Indonesia.

Ethical Consideration

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Health Research Ethics Committee of the Regional Psychiatric Hospital Dr. Arif Zainudin, Surakarta, Central Java, Indonesia (Approval No. 070/34890, dated 24 November 2023). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion in the study. Participation was voluntary, and participants could withdraw at any time without any consequences. All data were anonymized and handled confidentially to protect participants’ privacy.

Results

Demographic Characteristics of Participants

This study successfully recruited 331 participants from eleven nursing homes in 2 provinces of Indonesia. The study recruited older adults with a mean age of 70.5 years (SD = 8.003), and their ages were categorized according to the Indonesian Health Ministry’s definition. A total of 207 females participated in this study, making them the majority in the gender categories. Most of the older adults (216 people) were divorced, widowed, or widowers. In terms of education, most participants had a primary school education (34.44%), followed by no formal education (22.66%) and senior high school (20.85%). A smaller proportion had secondary education (17.22%) and education beyond senior high school (4.83%). Regarding participants’ occupations, most were engaged in business (60.7%, n = 201), while 18.7% (n = 62) reported no occupation. Additionally, 15.4% (n = 51) worked as laborers, and only 5.1% (n = 17) were civil servants. This study admitted more older adults who stayed in medium-term stay: 6 months-24 months (58%), with their maximum duration of confinement reaching 36 years.

Reliability of the Indonesian Version of the Resourcefulness Scale

In the current study, reliability was examined through Cronbach’s alpha and split-half reliability. According to the reliability classification proposed by Gottems et al. (2018), Cronbach’s alpha values can be interpreted as follows: Very low (α ≤ 0.30), Low (0.30 < α ≤ 0.60), Moderate (0.60 < α ≤ 0.75), High (0.75 < α ≤ 0.90), and Very High (α > 0.90). The Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale demonstrated a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.79, indicating high internal consistency (Gottems et al., 2018). In the meantime, the split-half reliability of the Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale was 0.75, indicating acceptable internal consistency and further supporting the instrument’s reliability.

Validity of the Indonesian Version of the Resourcefulness Scale

Schermelleh-Engel et al. (2003) define model fit evaluation as the degree to which the covariance matrix implied by the model aligns with the observed covariance matrix in the data. The researcher followed the standards presented in Table 1 to evaluate model fit using several indices: the Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), the Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), the Normed Fit Index (NFI), and the Parsimony Normed Fit Index (PNFI) for a single model (Kline, 2023).

Table 1.

Goodness-of-fit statistics of the test model

Measure	Fit Level Target	Estimated Results	Fit Level
GFI	≧ 0.90: Good fit 0.8-0.9: Acceptable	GFI = 0.93	Good fit
AGFI	≧ 0.90: Good fit 0.8-0.9: Acceptable	AGFI = 0.90	Good fit
RMSEA	0.05< RMSEA <0.08: Acceptable RMSEA < 0.05: Good fit	RMSEA = 0.04	Good fit
NFI	> 0.90: Good fit 0.8-0.9: Acceptable	NFI = 0.92	Good fit
PNFI	> 0.50: Good fit	PNFI = 0.76	Good Fit
CFI	≧ 0.95: Good fit 0.90-0.94: Acceptable	CFI = 0.97	Good Fit

The GFI and AGFI obtained in this study were 0.93 and 0.90, respectively, and both meet the commonly accepted threshold for good fit (≥ 0.90) in structural equation modeling (Schumacker & Lomax, 2020). The Comparative Fit Index (CFI) is commonly interpreted using a threshold of ≥ 0.90 for acceptable fit and ≥ 0.95 for good fit (Kline, 2023). In this study, the CFI value was 0.97, indicating a good model fit (Hair et al., 2021).

The RMSEA was 0.04, which falls within the threshold for a good fit. Similarly, the NFI value of 0.92 indicated a good fit of the model. The PNFI also supported the model’s adequacy, with a value of 0.76, exceeding the recommended threshold. Overall, these findings indicate that the revised model demonstrated a good fit, therefore appropriate for further analysis.

The relationship between constructs (items) and latent variables in the analysis is referred to as factor loading. Hair et al. (2019) reported that factor loading can be assessed by considering sample size. For example, the minimum factor loading could be 0.3 when the sample size exceeds 300 participants. When indicating a moderate correlation between the item and the factor, a factor loading of 0.5 is required to adequately account for the intensity of the relationship between latent variables and constructs. The results of CFA showed that fourteen items of personal resourcefulness, including RS1, RS2, RS3, RS6, RS7, RS9, RS11, RS15, RS16, RS17, RS18, RS22, RS23, and RS28, six items of social resourcefulness, such as RS4, RS5, RS10, RS14, RS24, and RS25, reached the minimum score of factor loading (Table 2).

Table 2.

Validity and reliability of the Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale (28 items)

Factor	Items	Factor Loading	CR	AVE
Personal	RS1	0.39	0.787	0.210
	RS2	0.52
	RS3	0.50
	RS6	0.39
	RS7	0.67
	RS9	0.40
	RS11	0.59
	RS13	0.08
	RS15	0.51
	RS16	0.53
	RS17	0.42
	RS18	0.41
	RS21	0.01
	RS22	0.53
	RS23	0.40
	RS28	0.49
Social	RS4	0.55	0.645	0.158
	RS5	0.62
	RS8	0.22
	RS10	0.46
	RS12	0.19
	RS14	0.62
	RS19	0.18
	RS20	0.20
	RS24	0.52
	RS25	0.52
	RS26	0.16
	RS27	0.23

Based on the factor analysis results, 8 items with factor loadings below 0.30 were excluded for insufficient contribution to the latent constructs, leaving 20 items for further analysis. After the additional analysis, the personal resourcefulness construct had factor loadings ranging from 0.39 to 0.67, indicating that the 14 items have sufficient contribution to the latent construct. The composite reliability (CR) was 0.815, exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.70 and indicating good internal consistency (Hair et al., 2019). Similarly, the items of social resourcefulness showed factor loadings ranging from 0.47 to 0.68. The CR value was 0.734, indicating acceptable reliability. However, both average variance extracted (AVE) values for personal and social resourcefulness (Table 3) were below the recommended threshold of 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), indicating that the variance explained by the construct is lower than the measurement error.

Table 3.

Validity and reliability of the Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale (20 items)

Variable	Items	Factor Loading	CR	AVE
Personal	RS1	0.39	0.815	0.245
	RS2	0.52
	RS3	0.51
	RS6	0.42
	RS7	0.67
	RS9	0.41
	RS11	0.60
	RS15	0.51
	RS16	0.50
	RS17	0.39
	RS18	0.39
	RS22	0.55
	RS23	0.49
	RS28	0.49
Social	RS4	0.58	0.734	0.319
	RS5	0.68
	RS10	0.47
	RS14	0.62
	RS24	0.51
	RS25	0.50

In addition to CFA, a positive and significant correlation was found between the two latent variables (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), which means that personal and social resourcefulness were in the same direction. The model in the standardized coefficient path (with factor loading) was represented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Standardized coefficient path

Correlation Between Resourcefulness and Spiritual Health

Based on verified significant relationships among personal resourcefulness, social resourcefulness, and spiritual practices (Zauszniewski et al., 2019), it was proposed that resourcefulness and spiritual health may be correlated. The Pearson correlation analysis in the current study revealed a significant and robust relationship between resourcefulness and spiritual health (r = 0.45, p < 0.001). This result also indicated the Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale^© as a valid scale with theoretical meaning.

Discussion

This article aimed to test the psychometric properties of the Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale^© among older adults at nursing homes in Indonesia. The findings provide evidence supporting the reliability, validity, and cultural applicability of the I-RS in this population, highlighting its potential as a valuable tool for clinical and research applications in Indonesia.

Reliability

The Internal consistency of the I-RS was found to be acceptable, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.79 and a split-half reliability of 0.75, indicating fine internal consistency. Comparing reliability with the previous study (Zauszniewski et al., 2006), Cronbach’s α was slightly lower than that reported in Northeast Ohio (Cronbach’s α = 0.85) in the USA. The cultural background might be an issue to consider. The cultural characteristics of participants from Southeast Asian cultures in the current study were quite different from those of the United States. In addition, because this instrument was first translated into Indonesian, cultural and linguistic factors may have influenced how older adults interpreted words, idioms, and abstract concepts (Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003). Such variations in interpretation could affect the consistency of their responses and, consequently, the reliability of the instrument. On the other hand, a Cronbach’s α of 0.82 was obtained after retesting the reliability of the refined 20-item Indonesian version of the resourcefulness scale, which is closer to the value reported by Zauszniewski et al. (2006).

Validity

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to evaluate the relationships between observed variables and latent constructs. It was confirmed that the I-RS had acceptable construct validity through confirmatory factor analyses. The resourcefulness scale was formed by two factors, indicating personal and social resourcefulness in this study. For the subscale of personal resourcefulness, based on the SEM results, 14 items had factor loadings greater than 3, indicating acceptable factor loadings, except for two items, RS13 and RS21.

The item RS13 indicated “When it’s difficult, look for ways to settle down.” This item was translated into Bahasa Indonesia, meaning “when older adult face difficulties, they will try to find their own ways to make the condition stable”. The answer to this question showed low variance, indicating that most participants agreed with the statement. This item purposely focuses on participants’ sense in seeking ways to keep the effort within their own power or scope. This value might be closely related to participants’ culture and values in the current study. Many participants in the Javanese group preferred to try their own ways to overcome the difficulties. Furthermore, the culture’s predilection for concealing feelings is reflected in Javanese’s tendency toward indirectness (Nadar, 2007). They would try to optimize their internal capabilities as individuals to face difficulties rather than seek solutions from others.

For the item RS21, “…unavoidably late for an Important meeting… keep calm”, we found that the decrease in factor loading could be attributed to the predominance of positive responses, which consequently reduces response variation and, in turn, affects the factor loading score. This remark may also pertain to the significance of their culture. It implied that attending a meeting late is better than being absent. It is a simple cultural value to accept the condition. The well-known Javanese culture is readily accepted (Nrimo). This idea entails accepting good or bad circumstances with resignation and optimism. It encompasses not only passive acceptance but also an optimistic outlook on the present and the future (Anderson, 2019).

Concerning the social resourcefulness factor, six items need to be discussed regarding their low factor loading score, such as item RS19 “…, borrow money from others”, RS20 “…, talk with others”, RS26 “… ask someone to take me…”, and RS 27 “…other people give me more energy”. Regarding finance, most Javanese tend to save rather than take a loan, especially the relatively conservative older adults. The expression of need by others is uncommon among the Java people, since most try their best to meet others’ expectations rather than speak out about their worries and needs, nor do they ask for a ride or for energy from others. These are the authentic nature and characteristics of the Javanese in Indonesia (Anderson, 2019).

Another two of the social resourcefulness items, RS8 (“…. I go to the health professional”) and RS12 (“I do what others tell me…”), had fewer varied answers on both items due to the location where the data were collected. The current study was conducted in nursing homes where the government provides free health services and daily assistance with eating, bathing, mobility, and medication. This physical dependence naturally gives caregivers or health professionals a decisive role in older adults’ daily experiences, routines, and even their sense of dignity (Hoek et al., 2019). Consequently, the factor loading may be reduced due to minimal or nonexistent variance in older adults’ responses to these items.

Based on the rationale discussed above concerning items with factor loadings below 0.30 in both constructs, personal and social resourcefulness, the original 28-item resourcefulness scale could not be entirely regarded as unsuitable for use in the Indonesian context, although the results of this study demonstrate that the refined 20-item version, obtained after item removal and re-estimation, meets the statistical criteria required for structural equation modeling (SEM).

Nevertheless, the low AVE values for both factors might be influenced by measurement bias; for example, sampling variability may have been insufficient, or interviewers may not have adequately explained the translated meanings of the items. Even though the AVE values for the refined 20-item version were below the recommended threshold (0.5), it may still be considered acceptable if the composite reliability (CR) values are adequate and supported by strong theoretical justification. This is consistent with Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) recommendation that convergent validity can still be considered sufficient when AVE is below 0.50 but CR exceeds 0.60. Furthermore, recent studies emphasize that the 0.50 AVE threshold should not be interpreted rigidly, as it is a heuristic rather than an absolute rule; measurement quality should also account for sampling variability, model complexity, and theoretical grounding (Hair et al., 2022).

Cultural Adaptation

This study found that culture plays a vital role in an instrument’s utility. The results of this study highlighted the cultural influence of Java ethnicity in the special regions of Yogyakarta and Central Java, which represent the heartland of Indonesian culture and contribute to people’s resourcefulness.

It was noted that culture, beliefs, and linguistics influence the design of a measurement and affect its validity and reliability (Balqis-Ali et al., 2021). Cultural conventions also influence how test-takers interpret question items’ wording and further sway the participants’ answers (Kim & Zabelina, 2015). In addition to linguistic influences, the cultural aspect should be considered when translating an instrument to maintain its reliability and validity (Balqis-Ali et al., 2021).

Application in Clinical and Research Settings

The Indonesian Version of the Resourcefulness Scale^© (I-RS) may serve as a valuable instrument for both clinicians and researchers working with older adults in Indonesia. Its capacity to measure personal and social resourcefulness has the potential to provide meaningful insights into individuals’ coping mechanisms and use of social support networks. Furthermore, the I-RS can be applied as both an assessment tool and an outcome measure to evaluate the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions aimed at enhancing resourcefulness among older adults.

Limitations and Suggestions

Despite its strengths, this study has some limitations that must be acknowledged. The sample was conveniently and primarily drawn from urban and rural areas in two major and well-developed provinces in Indonesia, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to the Indonesian general population. This condition, along with measurement errors, may have adversely affected the performance of specific statistical indices, including AVE and the factor loadings of several items. Future research is recommended to include more diverse populations and settings, such as community and hospital-based practical settings, to enhance the applicability of the Indonesian Resourcefulness Scale^© across regions and sociodemographic groups throughout Indonesia. Moreover, while the scale demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties, its predictive validity requires further exploration.

Conclusion

The Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness scale^© is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the resourcefulness of older adults. The psychometric testing results of this Indonesian version of the Resourcefulness Scale^© revealed its value and feasibility for practical applications, as well as its reliability in assessing resourcefulness among Indonesians. Future studies should focus on expanding its use in diverse populations and exploring the role of resourcefulness in improving mental health outcomes.

Funding Statement

Funding This study did not receive external funding.

Declaration of Conflicting Interest

No conflict of interest to declare.

Author Contribution

IK contributed to the study’s conception and design, data collection and acquisition, and data analysis, wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and revised the final draft. CYL contributed to the study’s data analysis during the first stage process. JAZ contributed to the study’s discussion part of the manuscript. CYL contributed to the study’s conception and design, data analysis, and manuscript revision, and provided suggestions for the manuscript. All authors gave final approval of the version to be published.

Author Biography

Irna Kartina, MSN, RN, is a PhD candidate at the School of Nursing, National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences (NTUNHS), Taiwan, and a Lecturer at the University of Kusuma Husada Surakarta, Indonesia.

Chieh-Yu Liu, PhD, is a Professor and a Director at the Institute of Community Health Care, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan.

Jaclene A. Zauszniewski, PhD, RN-BC, FAAN, is a Catherine Seibyl Professor in Nursing, Research, and Caregiving at the Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing, Case Western Reserve University.

Chien Yu Lai, RN, PhD, is an Associate Professor at the School of Nursing, National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences, Taiwan.

Data Availability

The dataset generated and analyzed during the current study is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Declaration of Use of AI in Scientific Writing

The authors used Quillbot in the writing process to improve readability and remove grammatical errors. However, they took full responsibility for the content.