PofoliaShared via Pofolia

European Psychologist· 2013Q1· Review

Psychological Resilience

David Fletcher, Mustafa Sarkar

Short summary

Psychological resilience is defined by adversity and positive adaptation, requiring context-appropriate measures and conceptualized as an interactive process rather than a fixed trait.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Resilience definitions center on adversity and positive adaptation.
  • Measurement of resilience must be appropriate to the specific adversity.
  • Resilience is an interactive process, not a fixed trait.
  • Future theories should consider multiple demands and metacognitive processes.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to review and critique the variety of definitions, concepts, and theories of psychological resilience. To this end, the narrative is divided into three main sections. The first considers how resilience has been defined in the psychology research literature. Despite the construct being operationalized in a variety of ways, most definitions are based around two core concepts: adversity and positive adaptation. A substantial body of evidence suggests that resilience is required in response to different adversities, ranging from ongoing daily hassles to major life events, and that positive adaptation must be conceptually appropriate to the adversity examined in terms of the domains assessed and the stringency of criteria used. The second section examines the conceptualization of resilience as either a trait or a process, and explores how it is distinct from a number of related terms. Resilience is conceptualized as the interactive influence of psychological characteristics within the context of the stress process. The final section reviews the theories of resilience and critically examines one theory in particular that is commonly cited in the resilience literature. Future theories in this area should take into account the multiple demands individuals encounter, the meta-cognitive and -emotive processes that affect the resilience-stress relationship, and the conceptual distinction between resilience and coping. The review concludes with implications for policy, practice, and research including the need to carefully manage individuals’ immediate environment, and to develop the protective and promotive factors that individuals can proactively use to build resilience.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. European Psychologist, 2013 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Clinical Psychology

Clinical PsychologyPsychology