Adversity and resilience science最新文献

The global COVID-19 pandemic changed the life of numerous parents. The medical worry, the financial hardship, and the need to take care of children 24/7 caused an enormous burden on parenting, resulting in an elevation in parenting stress and in harsh parenting. In the current study, we were interested in assessing the role of parental emotion regulation and parental mentalization as resilience-promoting factors, by mitigating the harmful relationship between parental distress and negative and positive parenting. Seventy Israeli parents of children (aged 6–14) participated in the study. We assessed parental mentalization and emotion dysregulation before the COVID-19 pandemic. During the national lockdown in Israel in May 2020, we assessed parental distress, COVID-related financial risk, and parental practices. Results indicated elevations in parental distress compared to the population mean, alongside high rates of financial risk. The results indicated that although parental distress was significantly related to parenting practices, parental mentalization, and emotion regulation moderated these relationships in differential ways. Improved capacity for emotion regulation reduced the prevalence of negative parenting practices and higher parental mentalization increased the prevalence of positive parenting, these are despite elevation in parental distress. The results suggested that when parents are able to regulate their own negative emotions and think about a child’s mind, they can remain available to support the child’s needs despite the elevation in parental distress. Supporting parental capacity for mentalization and emotion regulation during stressful times may prevent the harmful consequences of parental distress on parenting.

Resilience can play an important role in enabling disadvantaged students to succeed academically. However, few studies in low-resource contexts have evaluated resilience as a process (including a child’s internal capabilities and external resources, like the internal capabilities of a child’s caregiver) and as an outcome (e.g., academic achievement). In the current study, we examined the associations among students’ self-reported internal capabilities, their external resources (e.g., caregivers’ internal capabilities), and their academic resilience (operationalized as performance on a math test). The study was conducted among 1609 primary and secondary school students in rural China using the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) to measure internal capabilities. Student CD-RISC scores were positively associated with external resources including caregiver CD-RISC scores, maternal education level, high levels of perceived social support, recreational reading, and involvement in group-based activities at school. A one-point increase in students’ CD-RISC scores was associated with a 0.01 SD increase in math score (p < 0.001), and the math scores of students whose CD-RISC scores were in the bottom quartile were 0.18 SD lower than those of their peers (p < 0.01). High levels of perceived social support and recreational reading were also associated with academic resilience in the adjusted equation. Directions for future research and policy implications are discussed.

Multiple disciplines in the academy have begun to understand the value in Indigenous worldviews. To date, resilience literature and constructs of resilience have been largely dominated by Western, individual worldviews. Such notions of resilience have focused on personal qualities of “resilient youth” and are misaligned with an Indigenous worldview where relational factors, such as those within culture and community, provide the foundation of resilience. While there has been some shift in understanding in mainstream resilience literature to acknowledging wider social factors, this paper offers an additional critical appraisal of resilience constructs from an Indigenous perspective. We also discuss the impacts of the current constructs of resilience for Indigenous peoples and communities, namely the dismissal of Indigenous experiences, leading to two questions: who benefits from such definitions? And, should some acts of “resilience” be better viewed as active resistance? American Indian, Alaska Native, and Māori case examples are provided to illustrate such points, while also demonstrating how culture and community provide the foundation of resilience in the face of systemic adversity. We conclude that Indigenous understandings of resilience have much to teach mainstream research, and consequently, provide principles as potential guidance for both future work in Indigenous settings and to mainstream resilience science.

Abstract

During the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, empirical efforts in the psychological sciences have been unequivocally focused on understanding the psychosocial impact on resilience and vulnerability. While current empirical work is guided by different existing theoretical models of resilience and vulnerability, the emerging datasets have also pointed to a necessity for an update of these models. Due to the unique features and developments specific to the current pandemic such as the occurrence of repeated collective stressors of varying durations, in the current position paper, we introduce the Wither or Thrive model of Resilience (With:Resilience). It integrates key aspects of prevailing psychological resilience frameworks within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and extends them by (1) moving away from single scale approaches towards a higher-order latent expression of resilience and vulnerability incorporating also non-clinical mental health markers, (2) proposing different trajectories of resilience-vulnerability emerging across repeated stressors over long periods of time, and (3) by incorporating multiple influencing factors including aspects of the socio-economic concept of social cohesion as well as separate mediating processing mechanisms. We propose that With:Resilience will enable a more nuanced approach and appropriate analytical investigation of the vast incoming data on mental health and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic, and we suggest some concrete methodological approaches. This framework will assist in the development of actionable public health guidelines for society in the present and future pandemic contexts as well as aid policy making and the interventional sciences aimed at protecting the most vulnerable amongst us.

Researchers have documented that Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), particularly in the absence of a nurturing caregiver, can negatively impact cognitive, social-emotional, and physical development. ACEs can be co-occurring, which increases the number of adversities that individuals may experience. Using data from the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project (N = 2361), this study examined the interrelatedness of ACEs for 14-month-old children. Three classes of ACEs exposures were identified: ACEs-Low (N = 1431, 60.6%), ACEs-Parent Maltreatment Risk (N = 636, 26.9%), and ACEs-Household Dysfunction (N = 294, 12.5%). Class membership was significantly associated with children’s cognitive, social-emotional, and physical development. Children in the ACEs-Parent Maltreatment Risk group had lower developmental scores across many domains than children in the ACEs-Low group, including cognitive and language development, and social-emotional measures. Children in families with greater household dysfunction (ACEs-Household Dysfunction) had fewer differences in development from the ACEs-Low group of children, primarily in domains that measure emotionality and in parent rating of health. Our study suggests that infants experience patterns of ACEs, which are differentially associated with outcomes at 14 months of age. Results highlight the need for informed early intervention efforts to mitigate the effects of ACEs.

Abstract