Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:01:37.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Maximizing resilience through diverse levels of inquiry: Prevailing paradigms, possibilities, and priorities for the future

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2007

Suniya S. Luthar
Affiliation:
Columbia University Teachers' College
Pamela J. Brown
Affiliation:
Yale University School of Medicine

Abstract

The study of resilience has two core characteristics: it is fundamentally applied in nature, seeking to use scientific knowledge to maximize well-being among those at risk, and it draws on expertise from diverse scientific disciplines. Recent advances in biological processes have confirmed the profound deleterious effects of harsh caregiving environments, thereby underscoring the importance of early interventions. What remains to be established at this time is the degree to which insights on particular biological processes (e.g., involving specific brain regions, genes, or hormones) will be applied in the near future to achieve substantial reductions in mental health disparities. Aside from biology, resilience developmental researchers would do well to draw upon relevant evidence from other behavioral sciences as well, notably anthropology as well as family, counseling, and social psychology. Scientists working with adults and with children must remain vigilant to the advances and missteps in each others' work, always ensuring caution in conveying messages about the “innateness” of resilience or its prevalence across different subgroups. Our future research agenda must prioritize reducing abuse and neglect in close relationships; deriving the “critical ingredients” in effective interventions and going to scale with these; working collaboratively to refine theory on the construct; and responsibly, proactively disseminating what we have learned about the nature, limits, and antecedents of resilient adaptation across diverse at-risk groups.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)