The scale has good predictive validity, as well as internal consistency and test–retest reliability (Schmitt & Allik, 2005; Torrey, Mueser, McHugo, & Drake, 2000). Cronbach coefficient has been shown to be high (M = 0.81) supporting the internal coherence of the scale. Sinclair et al. (2010) suggest that self-esteem scores are highly dependent on temporal affect, and therefore the scale may not capture trait based self-esteem adequately. Despite this, test-retest reliability over a period of 2 weeks reveals correlations of .85 and .88, indicating excellent stability. The RSES demonstrates a Guttman scale coefficient of reproducibility of .92, indicating excellent internal consistency.
The minimum total score is 0 and the maximum is 30, with higher scores representing higher self-esteem. Results consist of four raw scores and four percentiles: Total self-esteem, self- competence (sum of first five items), self-liking (sum of second five items) and self- competence minus self liking (SC-SL). Percentiles indicate how the client’s self-esteem compares to Sinclair’s adult sample.
Sinclair et al. (2010) found that among a sample of 503 adults (M = 44.7 years, SD = 16.3) the average self-esteem score was 22.62 (SD = 5.8). The self-competence subscale had a mean of 12.01 (SD=2.82). The mean for self-liking was 10.62 (SD = 3.35). Additionally, when the raw self-liking score was taken away from the raw self-competence score (SC-SL), the average difference was 1.39 (SD=2.15).
Despite higher self-esteem not always being more adaptive, evidence shows that self-esteem is negatively and linearly related to disorders of mood and anxiety (Greenberg et al., 1992; Lightsey et al., 2006; Neustadt et al., 2006; Torrey et al., 2000), so higher self-esteem has been shown to be protective against some mental disorders.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Measures Package, 61.