{"title":"Stress, resilience, and coping resources in the context of war, terror, and migration","authors":"Ralf Schwarzer","doi":"10.1016/j.cobeha.2024.101393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Within the transactional framework of stress, resilience may be conceptualized as a dynamic process wherein individuals, when confronted with adversity, utilize both internal and external coping resources. This article focuses on two resources, namely self-efficacy and social support, examining their roles in the context of war, terrorism, and forced migration. These resources are perceived as protective factors capable of mitigating the impact of adversity and aiding in the recovery from traumatic experiences. They facilitate individuals in reshaping their perspectives and engaging in cognitive restructuring as integral components of the coping process, ultimately leading to a rebound from adversity or even the development of higher levels of functioning post trauma.</p><p>When scrutinizing the trajectories of coping resources over time, distinct mechanisms may come to the fore. A causation model posits a positive effect of resources on recovery outcomes, while an erosion model elucidates the wear and tear that ongoing adversity may inflict upon these resources.</p><p>In exploring the interplay between self-efficacy and social support within the resilience process, diverse mechanisms may emerge. These include the enabling effect, where support enhances self-efficacy, and the cultivation effect, wherein self-efficacy contributes to the development of robust social networks.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56191,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101393"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352154624000445/pdfft?md5=ddba0e50250a2e5e2d38020ebf50e5aa&pid=1-s2.0-S2352154624000445-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352154624000445","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Within the transactional framework of stress, resilience may be conceptualized as a dynamic process wherein individuals, when confronted with adversity, utilize both internal and external coping resources. This article focuses on two resources, namely self-efficacy and social support, examining their roles in the context of war, terrorism, and forced migration. These resources are perceived as protective factors capable of mitigating the impact of adversity and aiding in the recovery from traumatic experiences. They facilitate individuals in reshaping their perspectives and engaging in cognitive restructuring as integral components of the coping process, ultimately leading to a rebound from adversity or even the development of higher levels of functioning post trauma.
When scrutinizing the trajectories of coping resources over time, distinct mechanisms may come to the fore. A causation model posits a positive effect of resources on recovery outcomes, while an erosion model elucidates the wear and tear that ongoing adversity may inflict upon these resources.
In exploring the interplay between self-efficacy and social support within the resilience process, diverse mechanisms may emerge. These include the enabling effect, where support enhances self-efficacy, and the cultivation effect, wherein self-efficacy contributes to the development of robust social networks.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences is a systematic, integrative review journal that provides a unique and educational platform for updates on the expanding volume of information published in the field of behavioral sciences.