Resilience has variously been described as a process, as a goal, and also as a characteristic within a particular individual. Generally, those people who do not develop negative outcomes and/or who adapt successfully when exposed to challenging and stressful circumstances are considered to be resilient. Research in this area has focused primarily on children’s reactions to difficult and traumatic events. A number of terms have been used to characterize those children, such as invulnerable, stress resistant, and more recently, as survivors of adversity.
Qualities Of Resilience
Developmental psychopathology research, which focuses on children exposed to a variety of stressful and high-risk family environments, has succeeded in identifying children who appear to adapt well despite the obvious challenges posed to their adjustment. The qualities of resilience have been studied for children in a variety of traumatic circumstances, including homeless children, children living in foster care, children living in poverty, and children having parents with severe psychopathology. Children exhibiting resiliency in these situations are characterized as having survived adversity, as being successful in achieving developmental expectations, and as functioning well across domains.
Resilience And Interpersonal Violence
A review of research on possible harmful effects of the impact of interpersonal violence on children covers a range of outcomes, from relationships with significant people in the family to the child’s social development, emotional adjustment, cognitive development, and school readiness, as well as potential physiological responses. Despite the great amount of diversity in the functioning of individuals exposed to interpersonal violence, there is little research on positive outcomes, such as their coping and resilience. Instead, the main outcomes are generally confined to indices of psychopathology or failures in adaptation. Approximately 50%–60% of children exposed to intimate partner violence have behavioral problems in the clinical range on measures of child adjustment. Features of the other 40%–50% who do not show evidence of psychopathology have not been fully explored.
Yet by studying the processes through which individuals overcome adversity, researchers can learn about both normal and abnormal development. Studies of individuals at risk alert researchers to a number of salient factors that contribute to the detriment or enhancement of adjustment following exposure to negative events. There are key probable risk and protective factors that have generalized influences following a substantial stressor, such as a child’s exposure to interpersonal violence. These factors are used in research studies as predictor variables, correlates, and moderators of both competence and psychopathology.
Children in high-risk families may be protected from negative outcomes by the presence of buffering circumstances. The impact of interpersonal violence may be moderated by a host of protective factors, such as family income, social support, positive peer and sibling relationships, and effective parenting style. In some instances, protective factors may be the opposite of risk or vulnerability factors, for example, having an educated mother who is not depressed, being older, or living in a family with higher income.
There may also be unique elements of protection that can be identified. Protective factors specifically associated with lower levels of psychopathology for children exposed to interpersonal violence have included elements particular to the child, the parent, and the broader environment. Individual protective factors take the form of characteristics such as older age, sociability, or physical attractiveness. Family level protective factors are family cohesion, flexibility, and connections with extended family or the presence of a helpful relative. Community level protective factors are identified as resources such as school programs that address violence or the availability of daycare. In some cases, risk and protective factors