Psychological Resilience A Review and Critique of Definitions, Concepts, and Theory
Psychological Resilience A Review and Critique of Definitions, Concepts, and Theory
复制标题
DOI：
10.1027/1016-9040/a000124
复制
发表时间：
2013-01-01
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
Sarkar, Mustafa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fletcher, David;Sarkar, Mustafa
本文的目的是回顾和批评的各种定义，概念和心理弹性的理论。为此，叙述分为三个主要部分。第一个考虑心理学研究文献中如何定义弹性。尽管这一概念以各种方式运作，但大多数定义都基于两个核心概念：逆境和积极适应。大量的证据表明，弹性是需要在应对不同的逆境，从持续的日常麻烦，以重大的生活事件，积极的适应必须在概念上适当的逆境检查领域的评估和严格的标准。第二部分考察了弹性作为一种特质或过程的概念化，并探讨了它与一些相关术语的区别。心理弹性被概念化为压力过程背景下心理特征的交互影响。最后一节回顾了弹性理论，并特别批判性地研究了弹性文献中经常引用的一种理论。在这一领域的未来理论应考虑到个人遇到的多种需求，元认知和情绪的过程，影响的服从压力的关系，和弹性和应对之间的概念区别。审查的结论与政策，实践和研究的影响，包括需要仔细管理个人的直接环境，并制定保护和促进因素，个人可以主动使用，以建立弹性。
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.