Viele Wege führen zur Resilienz
Zum Nutzen des Resilienzbegriffs in der Klinischen Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie
Abstract
Zusammenfassung. Die Popularität des Resilienzbegriffes in der Forschung und Praxis begünstigt, dass dieser Begriff uneinheitlich verwendet wird. Dabei wird in der Regel das Ergebnis einer gesunden Entwicklung trotz widriger Umstände mit den zugrunde liegenden Mechanismen und Prozessen der Gesunderhaltung konfundiert. Ausgehend von einem Verständnis von Resilienz als einem Label für eine gesunde Entwicklung trotz widriger Umstände werden drei mögliche Entwicklungsverläufe von Resilienz vorgestellt: (1) Resilienz durch Resistenz, (2) Resilienz durch Kompensation und (3) Resilienz durch Restrukturieren. Die Bedeutung der unterschiedlichen Verläufe für die Gestaltung von Resilienzförderprogrammen wird für unterschiedliche Zielgruppen diskutiert.
Abstract. The resilience concept is used inconsistently in psychological research and practice. Although in the beginning resilience was thought of as a label for children doing well in the context of adversity, newer concepts defined resilience as a dynamic process, a personality trait, or an acquired resource. However, these newer concepts confound the outcome of a healthy development in the context of adversity with its underlying mechanisms and processes. Therefore, a return to the conceptualization of resilience as a label for a healthy development in the context of adversity is proposed. Based on this notion, three pathways to resilience can be distinguished: resilience through resistance, resilience through compensation, and resilience through restructuring. According to the differential susceptibility theory, resilience through resistance can be understood as a reduced biological sensitivity to context. Resilient children are neither harmed by adverse environments nor do they benefit from promoting environments. By contrast, non-resilient children are affected by the environment for better and for worse, thus benefiting from promoting environments and being harmed by adverse environments. Evidence for this theory has been revealed in several experiments and meta-analyses over the last couple of years. Resilience through compensation builds on the theoretical framework of psychological compensation. A child can be regarded as resilient if it compensates for a mismatch of its skillset and environmental demands either through the acquisition of a new skill or through the utilization of a latent skill. For instance, through emotion-regulation trainings, children may learn new regulatory strategies or how to use latent but unused strategies. Resilience through restructuring draws on the developmental model of resilience. According to this model, resilience is acquired over time throughout the mastery of adverse events similar to posttraumatic growth. For instance, mastery of adverse life events leads to restructuring of cognitive representations, a sense of self-efficacy, or an incremental implicit theory of personality. The three pathways to resilience possess different developmental trajectories with different implications for resilience training programs. For instance, resilience through resistance cannot be trained in itself and would be present in any situation and at any time. However, as non-resilient children benefit from promoting environments, training programs might especially focus on these children and on changing the environment instead of trying to change personal characteristics. By contrast, resilience through compensation is situation specific and varies over situations and time. Training could focus both on the acquisition of new skills and the utilization of latent skills. In addition, specific programs should be more effective than general training programs. Finally, resilience through restructuring itself cannot be trained. Children need to experience adverse events in order to develop resilience over time. Therefore, training programs should build an environment that allows adverse events to happen and fosters mastery. Taking into account these three pathways to resilience and their different trajectories and mechanisms, resilience programs should be clear on which pathway they want to promote. Specific training programs for selected children that focus both on changing the environment and changing the children’s skillsets might be especially promising.
Literatur
(1992). Psychological compensation: A theoretical framework. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 259 – 283.
(2011). Differential susceptibility to rearing environment depending on dopamine-related genes: New evidence and a meta-analysis. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 39 – 52.
(2015). The hidden efficacy of interventions : gene × environment experiments from a differential susceptibility perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 381 – 409.
(2008). Experimental evidence for differential susceptibility: Dopamine D4 receptor polymorphism (DRD4 VNTR) moderates intervention effects on toddlers’ externalizing behavior in a randomized controlled trial. Developmental Psychology, 44, 293 – 300.
(2006).
Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales . In T. UrdanF. PajaresEd., Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307 – 337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.(2014). Prävention und Gesundheitsförderung bei Kindern und Jugendlichen. Zeitschrift für Gesundheitspsychologie, 22, 1 – 14.
(2015). What works for whom ? Genetic moderation of intervention efficacy. Development and Psychopathology, 27, 1 – 6.
(2009). Beyond diathesis stress: Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 885 – 908.
(2013). Beyond risk, resilience, and dysregulation: Phenotypic plasticity and human development. Development and Psychopathology, 25, 1243 – 1261.
(2004). Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: The role of perceived self-efficacy. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 1129 – 1148.
(2002). Coping self-efficacy perceptions as a mediator between acute stress response and long-term distress following natural disasters. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 15, 177 – 186.
(2012). Elaboration on the association between trauma, PTSD and posttraumatic growth: The role of trait resilience. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 782 – 787.
(2012). Uses and abuses of the resilience construct: Loss, trauma, and health-related adversities. Social Science and Medicine, 74, 753 – 756.
(2005). Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary-developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 271 – 301.
(2006).
The bioecological model of human development . In R. M. LernerW. DamonEds., Handbook of Child Psychology: Theoretical Models of Human Development (6th ed., pp. 793 – 828). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.(2015). Gene by environment research to prevent externalizing problem behavior: Ethical questions raised from a public healthcare perspective. Public Health Ethics, 8, 295 – 304.
(2012). Gene by environment interaction and resilience: Effects of child maltreatment and serotonin, corticotropin releasing hormone, dopamine, and oxytocin genes. Developmental Psychopathology, 24, 411 – 427.
(2013). The developmental approach to child and adult health. Pediatrics, 131 (Supplement), S133–S141.
(2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.
(1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments and reactions: A word from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 267 – 285.
(1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256 – 273.
(1974). Children of the great depression. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
(2011). Differential susceptibility to the environment: An evolutionary-neurodevelopmental theory. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 7 – 28.
(Hrsg.). (2014). Resilienz (3. Aufl.). München: Reinhardt.
(2008). Schools, skills, and synapses. Economic Inquiry, 46, 289 – 324.
(2015). A conceptual framework for the neurobiological study of resilience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 38, e92.
(2011). Differential susceptibility in early literacy instruction through computer games : The role of the dopamine D4 receptor gene (DRD4). Mind Brain and Education, 5, 71 – 78.
(2006).
Resilience and posttraumatic growth recovery, resistance and reconfiguration . In L. G. CalhounR. G. TedeschiEds., Handbook of posttraumatic growth: Research and practice (pp. 264 – 290). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.(2004). Positive change following trauma and adversity: A review. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 17, 11 – 21.
(1993). Annotation: Methodological and conceptual issues in research on childhood resilience. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34, 441 – 453.
(2003). Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities. New York: Cambridge University Press.
(1993). Resilience is not a unidimensional construct: Insight from a prospective study of inner-city adolescents. Developmental Psychopathology, 5, 703 – 717.
(1999). Dresdener Bombennachtsopfer 50 Jahre danach: Eine Untersuchung patho- und salutogenetischer Variablen. Zeitschrift für Gerontopsychologie & -psychiatrie, 12, 157 – 167.
(2007). Resilience in developing systems: Progress and promise as the fourth wave rises. Development and Psychopathology, 19, 921 – 930.
(2014). Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child Development, 85, 6 – 20.
(2006). Competence and resilience in development. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1094, 13 – 27.
(2015). A theoretical framework of psychological compensation in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, No. 1580.
(2011). Posttraumatic growth among children and adolescents: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 31, 949 – 964.
(2008). Resilienz: Funktionale Adaptation an widrige Umgebungsbedingungen. Zeitschrift für Psychiatrie, Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 56, 255 – 263.
(2013).
Resilience processes in development: four waves of research on positive adaptation in the context of adversity . In S. GoldsteinR. B. BrooksEds., Handbook of resilience in children (pp. 15 – 37). New York: Springer.(2011). The interactive effect of marital conflict and stress reactivity on externalizing and internalizing symptoms: The role of laboratory stressors. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 101 – 114.
(1997).
Current directions in self-efficacy research . In M. MaehrP. R. PintrichEds., Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 1 – 49). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.(2006). Ressourcen – Ein Grundbegriff der Entwicklungspsychologie und Entwicklungspsychopathologie? Kindheit und Entwicklung, 15, 118 – 127.
(2002). IDL 0 – 2. Ein Explorationsbogen zur Identifizierung individueller Lernwege in der Sexualentwicklung. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, 50, 427 – 457.
(2014). Discriminating risk and resilience endophenotypes from lifetime illness effects in familial major depressive disorder. JAMA Psychiatry, 71, 136 – 148.
(2012). Preterm infants who are prone to distress: Differential effects of parenting on 36-month behavioral and cognitive outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53, 1018 – 1025.
(2005). Treating adolescent girls and women with ADHD: Gender-specific issues. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 579 – 587.
(1985). Resilience in the face of adversity: Protective factors and resistance to psychiatric disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 598 – 611.
(2012). Resilience as a dynamic concept. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 335 – 344.
(2013). Relationships between resilience, self-efficacy, and thinking styles in Italian middle adolescents. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 92 (Lumen), 838 – 845.
(2014). Overview of meta-analyses of the prevention of mental health, substance use, and conduct problems. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 243 – 73.
(2012). Epigenetik – Revolution der Etwicklungspsychopathologie? Kindheit und Entwicklung, 21, 245 – 253.
(1970). Hospitals, children and their families: The report of a pilot study. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
(2015). How to improve the health of American adolescents. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 711 – 715.
(2004). Posttraumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and empirical evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 37 – 41.
(2008). Conceptualizing and re-evaluating resilience across levels of risk, time, and domains of competence. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 11, 30 – 58.
(2015). Genetic differential susceptibility on trial: Meta-analytic support from randomized controlled experiments. Development and Psychopathology, 27, 151 – 162.
(1993). Development and psychometric evaluation of the resilience scale. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 1, 165 – 178.
(2005). Resilience and recovery: Findings from the Kauai longitudinal study. Research, Policy, and Practice in Children’s Mental Health, 19, 11 – 14.
(1971). The children of Kauai: A longitudinal study from the prenatal period. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
(2008). Evolutionary emergence of responsive and unresponsive personalities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 15825 – 15830.
(2013). Understanding resilience. Frontiers in Behavioral Neurosicnce, 7, 10.
(2010). Intervention to strengthen emotional self-regulation in children with emerging mental health problems: proximal impact on school behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 707 – 720.
(2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47, 302 – 314.
(2013). An implicit theories of personality intervention reduces adolescent aggression in response to victimization and exclusion. Child Development, 84, 970 – 988.
(2011). Adolescents’ implicit theories predict desire for vengeance after peer conflicts: Correlational and experimental evidence. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1090 – 1107.
(2014). Epigenetics and the regulation of stress vulnerability and resilience. Neuroscience, 264, 157 – 170.
(2006). Posttraumatic growth in clinical psychology — A critical review and introduction of a two component model. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 626 – 653.
