Conceptual issues in studies of resilience: Past, present, and future research

Suniya Luthar, Jeanette A. Sawyer, Pamela J. Brown

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

148 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We begin this article by considering the following critical conceptual issues in research on resilience: (1) distinctions between protective, promotive, and vulnerability factors; (2) the need to unpack underlying processes; (3) the benefits of within-group experimental designs; and (4) the advantages and potential pitfalls of an overwhelming scientific focus on biological and genetic factors (to the relative exclusion of familial and contextual ones). The next section of the article is focused on guidelines for the selection of vulnerability and protective processes in future research. From a basic science standpoint, it is useful and appropriate to investigate all types of processes that might significantly affect adjustment among at-risk individuals. If the research is fundamentally applied in nature, however, it would be most expedient to focus on risk modifiers that have high potential to alter individuals' overall life circumstances. The final section of this article considers conceptual differences between contemporary resilience research on children versus adults. Issues include differences in the types and breadth of outcomes (e.g., the tendencies to focus on others' ratings of competence among children and on self-reports of well-being among adults respectively).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Pages105-115
Number of pages11
Volume1094
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2006
Externally publishedYes

Publication series

NameAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Volume1094
ISSN (Print)00778923
ISSN (Electronic)17496632

Fingerprint

Research
Social Adjustment
Biological Factors
Design of experiments
Mental Competency
Self Report
Research Design
Guidelines

Keywords

  • Interventions
  • Protective processes
  • Resilience
  • Risk modifiers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)

Cite this

Luthar, S., Sawyer, J. A., & Brown, P. J. (2006). Conceptual issues in studies of resilience: Past, present, and future research. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Vol. 1094, pp. 105-115). (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; Vol. 1094). https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1376.009

Conceptual issues in studies of resilience : Past, present, and future research. / Luthar, Suniya; Sawyer, Jeanette A.; Brown, Pamela J.

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1094 2006. p. 105-115 (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; Vol. 1094).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Luthar, S, Sawyer, JA & Brown, PJ 2006, Conceptual issues in studies of resilience: Past, present, and future research. in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. vol. 1094, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 1094, pp. 105-115. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1376.009
Luthar S, Sawyer JA, Brown PJ. Conceptual issues in studies of resilience: Past, present, and future research. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1094. 2006. p. 105-115. (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences). https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1376.009
Luthar, Suniya ; Sawyer, Jeanette A. ; Brown, Pamela J. / Conceptual issues in studies of resilience : Past, present, and future research. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1094 2006. pp. 105-115 (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences).
@inproceedings{a6142c664a0f4928b089c3eed66cb40f,
title = "Conceptual issues in studies of resilience: Past, present, and future research",
abstract = "We begin this article by considering the following critical conceptual issues in research on resilience: (1) distinctions between protective, promotive, and vulnerability factors; (2) the need to unpack underlying processes; (3) the benefits of within-group experimental designs; and (4) the advantages and potential pitfalls of an overwhelming scientific focus on biological and genetic factors (to the relative exclusion of familial and contextual ones). The next section of the article is focused on guidelines for the selection of vulnerability and protective processes in future research. From a basic science standpoint, it is useful and appropriate to investigate all types of processes that might significantly affect adjustment among at-risk individuals. If the research is fundamentally applied in nature, however, it would be most expedient to focus on risk modifiers that have high potential to alter individuals' overall life circumstances. The final section of this article considers conceptual differences between contemporary resilience research on children versus adults. Issues include differences in the types and breadth of outcomes (e.g., the tendencies to focus on others' ratings of competence among children and on self-reports of well-being among adults respectively).",
keywords = "Interventions, Protective processes, Resilience, Risk modifiers",
author = "Suniya Luthar and Sawyer, {Jeanette A.} and Brown, {Pamela J.}",
year = "2006",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1196/annals.1376.009",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "1573316431",
volume = "1094",
series = "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences",
pages = "105--115",
booktitle = "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Conceptual issues in studies of resilience

T2 - Past, present, and future research

AU - Luthar, Suniya

AU - Sawyer, Jeanette A.

AU - Brown, Pamela J.

PY - 2006/12

Y1 - 2006/12

N2 - We begin this article by considering the following critical conceptual issues in research on resilience: (1) distinctions between protective, promotive, and vulnerability factors; (2) the need to unpack underlying processes; (3) the benefits of within-group experimental designs; and (4) the advantages and potential pitfalls of an overwhelming scientific focus on biological and genetic factors (to the relative exclusion of familial and contextual ones). The next section of the article is focused on guidelines for the selection of vulnerability and protective processes in future research. From a basic science standpoint, it is useful and appropriate to investigate all types of processes that might significantly affect adjustment among at-risk individuals. If the research is fundamentally applied in nature, however, it would be most expedient to focus on risk modifiers that have high potential to alter individuals' overall life circumstances. The final section of this article considers conceptual differences between contemporary resilience research on children versus adults. Issues include differences in the types and breadth of outcomes (e.g., the tendencies to focus on others' ratings of competence among children and on self-reports of well-being among adults respectively).

AB - We begin this article by considering the following critical conceptual issues in research on resilience: (1) distinctions between protective, promotive, and vulnerability factors; (2) the need to unpack underlying processes; (3) the benefits of within-group experimental designs; and (4) the advantages and potential pitfalls of an overwhelming scientific focus on biological and genetic factors (to the relative exclusion of familial and contextual ones). The next section of the article is focused on guidelines for the selection of vulnerability and protective processes in future research. From a basic science standpoint, it is useful and appropriate to investigate all types of processes that might significantly affect adjustment among at-risk individuals. If the research is fundamentally applied in nature, however, it would be most expedient to focus on risk modifiers that have high potential to alter individuals' overall life circumstances. The final section of this article considers conceptual differences between contemporary resilience research on children versus adults. Issues include differences in the types and breadth of outcomes (e.g., the tendencies to focus on others' ratings of competence among children and on self-reports of well-being among adults respectively).

KW - Interventions

KW - Protective processes

KW - Resilience

KW - Risk modifiers

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34247887454&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34247887454&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1196/annals.1376.009

DO - 10.1196/annals.1376.009

M3 - Conference contribution

C2 - 17347344

AN - SCOPUS:34247887454

SN - 1573316431

SN - 9781573316439

VL - 1094

T3 - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

SP - 105

EP - 115

BT - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

ER -