What makes us strong: Conceptual and functional comparisons of psychological flexibility and resilience

IF 3.4 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Duckhyun Jo , Sohwi Pyo , Yoobin Hwang , Yumi Seung , Eunjoo Yang
{"title":"What makes us strong: Conceptual and functional comparisons of psychological flexibility and resilience","authors":"Duckhyun Jo ,&nbsp;Sohwi Pyo ,&nbsp;Yoobin Hwang ,&nbsp;Yumi Seung ,&nbsp;Eunjoo Yang","doi":"10.1016/j.jcbs.2024.100798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Psychological flexibility and resilience represent adaptive functioning and the pursuit of values in the presence of adversity such as during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the conceptual and functional differences between these constructs is essential given their overlapping roles as key protective factors. This study involved 1059 participants from a Korean community sample who completed self-reported surveys measuring psychological flexibility, resilience, and mental health outcomes. Network analysis was used to create a sparse network comprising six nodes for psychological flexibility and ten nodes for resilience. Bridge strength centrality was estimated to identify the nodes connecting the two constructs. In addition, we employed a relative weights analysis to evaluate the relative significance of each psychological flexibility process on mental health outcomes while accounting for the composite resilience score. Within the psychological flexibility cluster, “Leaving thoughts be,” “Steady self,” “Awareness of value,” and “Being engaged” emerged as bridge elements, with “Steady self” exhibiting the highest bridge strength. Additionally, different patterns were observed in the unique contribution of each psychological flexibility process to positive and negative mental health outcomes. These findings suggest the potential role of “Steady self” as a catalyst for the transfer of skills and coping mechanisms between the different dimensions of psychological flexibility and resilience. The influential processes identified in this study had predictive value in their association with mental health outcomes. Future directions and implications are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","volume":"33 ","pages":"Article 100798"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144724000784","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Psychological flexibility and resilience represent adaptive functioning and the pursuit of values in the presence of adversity such as during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the conceptual and functional differences between these constructs is essential given their overlapping roles as key protective factors. This study involved 1059 participants from a Korean community sample who completed self-reported surveys measuring psychological flexibility, resilience, and mental health outcomes. Network analysis was used to create a sparse network comprising six nodes for psychological flexibility and ten nodes for resilience. Bridge strength centrality was estimated to identify the nodes connecting the two constructs. In addition, we employed a relative weights analysis to evaluate the relative significance of each psychological flexibility process on mental health outcomes while accounting for the composite resilience score. Within the psychological flexibility cluster, “Leaving thoughts be,” “Steady self,” “Awareness of value,” and “Being engaged” emerged as bridge elements, with “Steady self” exhibiting the highest bridge strength. Additionally, different patterns were observed in the unique contribution of each psychological flexibility process to positive and negative mental health outcomes. These findings suggest the potential role of “Steady self” as a catalyst for the transfer of skills and coping mechanisms between the different dimensions of psychological flexibility and resilience. The influential processes identified in this study had predictive value in their association with mental health outcomes. Future directions and implications are discussed.

是什么让我们变得强大?心理灵活性和复原力的概念和功能比较
心理灵活性和复原力代表着在逆境中(如 COVID-19 大流行期间)的适应功能和价值追求。鉴于这两个概念作为关键保护因素的重叠作用,了解它们在概念和功能上的差异至关重要。本研究涉及来自韩国社区样本的 1059 名参与者,他们完成了测量心理灵活性、复原力和心理健康结果的自我报告调查。研究采用网络分析方法创建了一个稀疏网络,其中包括六个心理灵活性节点和十个复原力节点。我们估算了桥强度中心性,以确定连接这两个建构的节点。此外,我们还采用了相对权重分析法来评估每个心理灵活性过程对心理健康结果的相对重要性,同时考虑到综合抗逆力得分。在心理灵活性群组中,"抛开杂念"、"稳定自我"、"价值意识 "和 "参与 "成为桥梁元素,其中 "稳定自我 "的桥梁强度最高。此外,每种心理灵活性过程对积极和消极心理健康结果的独特贡献也呈现出不同的模式。这些研究结果表明,"稳定的自我 "在心理灵活性和复原力的不同维度之间的技能和应对机制的转移中发挥着潜在的催化剂作用。本研究确定的影响过程与心理健康结果之间的关联具有预测价值。本研究还讨论了未来的方向和影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
18.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science is the official journal of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS). Contextual Behavioral Science is a systematic and pragmatic approach to the understanding of behavior, the solution of human problems, and the promotion of human growth and development. Contextual Behavioral Science uses functional principles and theories to analyze and modify action embedded in its historical and situational context. The goal is to predict and influence behavior, with precision, scope, and depth, across all behavioral domains and all levels of analysis, so as to help create a behavioral science that is more adequate to the challenge of the human condition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信