The Mini Brief Risk-Resilience Index for Screening (BRISC) is a 15-item self-report measure of self-regulation of emotions. The BRISC measures three core domains: negativity bias (5 items; one’s hypersensitivity to stress and anticipation of negative outcomes, e.g., “I tended to overreact to situations”), emotional resilience (5 items; one’s capacity for self-efficacy, e.g., “I felt very satisfied with the way I look and act”), and social skills (5 items; one’s capacity to engage in social situations and seek support, e.g., “I enjoyed socializing and chatting to other people”). Negativity bias is concerned with risk for negative emotional states, whereas emotional resilience and social skills concern regulatory responses to negative emotional states. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale, with greater values representing higher functioning and better coping. The scale is anchored at 1, for strongly disagree, and 5, for strongly agree. The summed raw scores for all three subscales are then converted to standardized z-scores via established BRISC norms.
The BRISC assesses processes of emotion regulation, including risk for experiencing negative emotional states (negativity bias) and coping responses (emotional resilience, social skills). This measure is a validated tool that can be used to distinguish between individuals with poor emotion regulation and those with healthier coping strategies (Williams et al., 2012). Our ability to regulate feeling states impacts our consequent behavioral responses (Dolan, 2002); therefore, emotion regulation may be a possible mechanism for behavior change.
[+] PMCID, PUBMED ID, or CITATION
Text Citation: Dolan, R.J. (2002). Emotion, Cognition, and Behavior. Science, 298(5596), 1191-1194.
Text Citation: Williams, L.M., Cooper, N.J., Wisniewski, S.R., Gatt, J.M., Koslow, S.H., Kulkarni, J., DeVarney, S., Gordon, E., John Rush, A. (2012). Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive power of the “Brief Risk‐resilience Index for Screening,” a brief pan‐diagnostic web screen for emotional health. Brain and Behavior, 2(5), 576-589.
This measure has not been measured yet.
This measure has not been influenced yet.
This measure has not been validated yet.
The Science of Behavior Change (SOBC) program seeks to promote basic research on the initiation, personalization and maintenance of behavior change. By integrating work across disciplines, this effort will lead to an improved understanding of the underlying principles of behavior change. The SOBC program aims to implement a mechanisms-focused, experimental medicine approach to behavior change research and to develop the tools required to implement such an approach. The experimental medicine approach involves: identifying an intervention target, developing measures to permit verification of the target, engaging the target through experimentation or intervention, and testing the degree to which target engagement produces the desired behavior change.
Within the SOBC Measures Repository, researchers have access to measures of mechanistic targets that have been (or are in the processing of being) validated by SOBC Research Network Members and other experts in the field. The SOBC Validation Process includes three important stages of evaluation for each proposed measure: Identification, Measurement, and Influence.
The first stage of validation requires a measure to be Identified within the field; there must be theoretical support for the specific measure of the proposed mechanistic target or potential mechanism of behavior change. This evidence may include references for the proposed measure, or theoretical support for the construct that the proposed measure is intended to assess. The second stage of validation requires demonstration that the level and change in level of the chosen mechanistic target can be Measured with the proposed measure (assay). For example, if the proposed measure is a questionnaire, the score on the measure should indicate the activity of the target process, and it must have strong psychometric properties. The third stage of validation requires demonstration that the measure can be Influenced; there must be evidence that the measured target is malleable and responsive to manipulation. Evidence relating to each stage includes at least one peer-reviewed publication or original data presentation (if no peer-reviewed research is available to support the claim) and is evaluated by SOBC Research Network Members and experts in the field.
Once a measure has gone through these three stages, it will then either be Validated or Not validated according to SOBC Research Network standards. If a measure is Validated, then change in the measured target was reliably associated with Behavior Change. If a measure is Not validated, then change in the measured target was not reliably associated with Behavior Change. Why would we share measures that are not validated? The SOBC Research Network values open, rigorous, and transparent research. Our goal is to make meaningful progress and develop replicable and effective interventions in behavior change science. Therefore, the SOBC sees value in providing other researchers in the field with information regarding measures that work and measures that fall short for specific targets. Further, a measure that is not validated for one target in one population may be validated in another target or population.
Want to learn more? For any questions regarding the SOBC Validation Process or Measures Repository, please email email@example.com.
Has the mechanism been identified as a potential target for behavior change? This section summarizes theoretical support for the mechanism.
Have the psychometric properties of this measure been assessed? This section includes information such as content validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability.
Has a study manipulation led to change in the mechanism? This section addresses evidence that this measure is modifiable by experimental manipulation or clinical intervention.
Has a change in this mechanism been associated with behavior change? This section addresses empirical evidence that causing change in the measure reliably produces subsequent behavior change.