Resilience research in learning disabilities: Guiding principles from developmental psychopathology

IF 4.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Rebecca F. Slomowitz , Angela J. Narayan , Lauren M. McGrath
{"title":"Resilience research in learning disabilities: Guiding principles from developmental psychopathology","authors":"Rebecca F. Slomowitz ,&nbsp;Angela J. Narayan ,&nbsp;Lauren M. McGrath","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The learning disabilities literature has had a long-standing focus on identifying risk factors that can inform diagnostic assessment and guide intervention efforts. While many existing conceptual models of learning disabilities have acknowledged the theoretical possibility of resilience mechanisms (Bishop &amp; Snowling, 2004; Catts &amp; Petscher, 2022; McGrath, Peterson, &amp; Pennington, 2020; Pennington, 2006), few studies have empirically investigated such processes. However, more attention has been recently directed towards resilience mechanisms that may operate in the context of learning disabilities. Initial studies have found that cognitive-linguistic abilities and individual differences in task behaviors may play a role in supporting academic skills (specifically reading) despite the presence of risk factors (Eklund, Torppa, &amp; Lyytinen, 2013; van Viersen, de Bree, &amp; de Jong, 2019). However, many empirical results that signal potential for resilience processes are difficult to synthesize because methods and analyses are not consistent across studies. For example, studies may operationalize and analytically investigate resilience mechanisms in differing ways, leading to challenges in understanding the replicability and generalization of findings.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In this paper, we make recommendations for standardized practices for studying resilience mechanisms, drawing from the well-validated guidelines for resilience science that have been established within the developmental psychopathology (DP) literature (Masten, Narayan, &amp; Wright, 2023).This theoretical paper outlines the DP perspective on resilience, demonstrates the application of specific DP principles to the learning disabilities field, and provides a set of methodological recommendations for the inclusion of resilience-based methods alongside the prevailing risk-based methodology in learning disability research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 102090"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475225000131","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The learning disabilities literature has had a long-standing focus on identifying risk factors that can inform diagnostic assessment and guide intervention efforts. While many existing conceptual models of learning disabilities have acknowledged the theoretical possibility of resilience mechanisms (Bishop & Snowling, 2004; Catts & Petscher, 2022; McGrath, Peterson, & Pennington, 2020; Pennington, 2006), few studies have empirically investigated such processes. However, more attention has been recently directed towards resilience mechanisms that may operate in the context of learning disabilities. Initial studies have found that cognitive-linguistic abilities and individual differences in task behaviors may play a role in supporting academic skills (specifically reading) despite the presence of risk factors (Eklund, Torppa, & Lyytinen, 2013; van Viersen, de Bree, & de Jong, 2019). However, many empirical results that signal potential for resilience processes are difficult to synthesize because methods and analyses are not consistent across studies. For example, studies may operationalize and analytically investigate resilience mechanisms in differing ways, leading to challenges in understanding the replicability and generalization of findings.

Conclusions

In this paper, we make recommendations for standardized practices for studying resilience mechanisms, drawing from the well-validated guidelines for resilience science that have been established within the developmental psychopathology (DP) literature (Masten, Narayan, & Wright, 2023).This theoretical paper outlines the DP perspective on resilience, demonstrates the application of specific DP principles to the learning disabilities field, and provides a set of methodological recommendations for the inclusion of resilience-based methods alongside the prevailing risk-based methodology in learning disability research.
学习障碍的复原力研究:发展心理病理学的指导原则
长期以来,学习障碍文献一直关注于识别风险因素,这些因素可以为诊断评估和指导干预工作提供信息。虽然许多现有的学习障碍概念模型已经承认弹性机制在理论上的可能性(Bishop &;snowl, 2004;土,佩奇,2022;麦格拉斯,彼得森,&;彭宁顿,2020;Pennington, 2006),很少有研究对这些过程进行实证调查。然而,最近更多的关注指向了可能在学习障碍背景下运作的弹性机制。最初的研究发现,尽管存在风险因素,认知语言能力和任务行为的个体差异可能在支持学术技能(特别是阅读)方面发挥作用(Eklund, Torppa, &;Lyytinen, 2013;范·维尔森,德·布里,&;de Jong, 2019)。然而,由于研究方法和分析不一致,许多表明弹性过程潜力的实证结果难以综合。例如,研究可能会以不同的方式对恢复力机制进行操作和分析性调查,从而在理解研究结果的可重复性和泛化方面带来挑战。在本文中,我们根据发展精神病理学(DP)文献(Masten, Narayan, &;赖特,2023)。这篇理论论文概述了DP关于弹性的观点,展示了具体DP原则在学习障碍领域的应用,并提供了一套方法建议,以便将基于弹性的方法与流行的基于风险的方法一起纳入学习障碍研究中。
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
11.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.
×
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