当前位置: X-MOL 学术Eur. J. Psychotraumatol. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The resilience paradox
European Journal of Psychotraumatology ( IF 5.783 ) Pub Date : 2021-06-30 , DOI: 10.1080/20008198.2021.1942642
George A Bonanno 1
Affiliation  

ABSTRACT

Decades of research have consistently shown that the most common outcome following potential trauma is a stable trajectory of healthy functioning, or resilience. However, attempts to predict resilience reveal a paradox: the correlates of resilient outcomes are generally so modest that it is not possible accurately identify who will be resilient to potential trauma and who not. Commonly used resilience questionnaires essentially ignore this paradox by including only a few presumably key predictors. However, these questionnaires show virtually no predictive utility. The opposite approach, capturing as many predictors as possible using multivariate modelling or machine learning, also fails to fully address the paradox. A closer examination of small effects reveals two primary reasons for these predictive failures: situational variability and the cost-benefit tradeoffs inherent in all behavioural responses. Together, these considerations indicate that behavioural adjustment to traumatic stress is an ongoing process that necessitates flexible self-regulation. To that end, recent research and theory on flexible self-regulation in the context of resilience are discussed and next steps are considered.



中文翻译:

弹性悖论

摘要

数十年的研究一致表明,潜在创伤后最常见的结果是健康功能或恢复力的稳定轨迹。然而,预测复原力的尝试揭示了一个悖论:复原力结果的相关性通常如此温和,以至于无法准确地确定谁将对潜在的创伤有复原力,而谁不能。常用的复原力问卷基本上忽略了这个悖论,只包含了几个可能的关键预测因子。然而,这些问卷几乎没有显示出预测效用。相反的方法,即使用多变量建模或机器学习捕获尽可能多的预测变量,也无法完全解决这个悖论。对小效应的仔细检查揭示了这些预测失败的两个主要原因:情境可变性和所有行为反应中固有的成本效益权衡。总之,这些考虑表明,对创伤性压力的行为调整是一个持续的过程,需要灵活的自我调节。为此,讨论了弹性背景下关于灵活自我调节的最新研究和理论,并考虑了后续步骤。

更新日期:2021-06-30
down
wechat
bug