Defining Resilience Following a Potentially Traumatic Event in Psychological Research: A Delphi Study

IF 2.1
Rian Delaney, Martin Robinson, Donncha Hanna, Cherie Armour
{"title":"Defining Resilience Following a Potentially Traumatic Event in Psychological Research: A Delphi Study","authors":"Rian Delaney,&nbsp;Martin Robinson,&nbsp;Donncha Hanna,&nbsp;Cherie Armour","doi":"10.1007/s42844-026-00195-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The concept of psychological resilience following a potentially traumatic event remains a contested construct, which is limited by the absence of a clear and widely accepted definition. Indeed, debates and contradictions within the psychological resilience literature threaten the utility of the term. A total of 22 experts from academia, healthcare, and charitable organisations representing 11 unique countries consented to join this study. All included experts had published within the field of resilience research. This e-Delphi aimed to reach a consensus on items that could help define resilience in adults following a potentially traumatic event. The items were generated for this Delphi study in two ways; firstly, from existing definitions in the literature (<i>n</i> = 84) and secondly, suggested by participants in the study (<i>n</i> = 8). In total, 92 items were rated based on their essentiality to defining resilience with 13 reaching the pre-set requirements. Of these 13 items, 4 were deemed essential to defining resilience and 9 were deemed non-essential. Referring to resilience as a trait was largely rejected. The consensus view was that resilience is a dynamic and multifactorial concept. The definition synthesised during this study was as follows: “Resilience is a dynamic process that enables adaptation to adversity through a complex interplay of multiple internal and external factors. These risk and protective elements aid in the ability of an individual to “bounce back” following a potentially traumatic event.” This study provides a discussion of these items in relation to the wider literature and potential direction for future research and debates on this topic.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72113,"journal":{"name":"Adversity and resilience science","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s42844-026-00195-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adversity and resilience science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42844-026-00195-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The concept of psychological resilience following a potentially traumatic event remains a contested construct, which is limited by the absence of a clear and widely accepted definition. Indeed, debates and contradictions within the psychological resilience literature threaten the utility of the term. A total of 22 experts from academia, healthcare, and charitable organisations representing 11 unique countries consented to join this study. All included experts had published within the field of resilience research. This e-Delphi aimed to reach a consensus on items that could help define resilience in adults following a potentially traumatic event. The items were generated for this Delphi study in two ways; firstly, from existing definitions in the literature (n = 84) and secondly, suggested by participants in the study (n = 8). In total, 92 items were rated based on their essentiality to defining resilience with 13 reaching the pre-set requirements. Of these 13 items, 4 were deemed essential to defining resilience and 9 were deemed non-essential. Referring to resilience as a trait was largely rejected. The consensus view was that resilience is a dynamic and multifactorial concept. The definition synthesised during this study was as follows: “Resilience is a dynamic process that enables adaptation to adversity through a complex interplay of multiple internal and external factors. These risk and protective elements aid in the ability of an individual to “bounce back” following a potentially traumatic event.” This study provides a discussion of these items in relation to the wider literature and potential direction for future research and debates on this topic.

定义心理研究中潜在创伤事件后的复原力:德尔菲研究
潜在创伤事件后的心理恢复力的概念仍然是一个有争议的概念,它受到缺乏明确和广泛接受的定义的限制。事实上,心理弹性文献中的争论和矛盾威胁到这个术语的实用性。共有22位来自11个不同国家的学术界、医疗保健和慈善组织的专家同意加入这项研究。所有入选的专家都在复原力研究领域发表过文章。这个e-Delphi的目的是在一些项目上达成共识,这些项目可以帮助定义成年人在潜在创伤事件后的恢复力。本德尔菲研究的项目以两种方式生成;首先,来自文献中已有的定义(n = 84),其次,来自研究参与者的建议(n = 8)。总共有92个项目根据其对定义弹性的重要性进行了评级,其中13个达到了预先设定的要求。在这13个项目中,4个被认为是定义弹性的必要条件,9个被认为是非必要条件。将韧性作为一种特质在很大程度上被拒绝了。普遍的观点是,弹性是一个动态的、多因素的概念。在这项研究中综合的定义如下:“弹性是一个动态的过程,通过多种内部和外部因素的复杂相互作用,使人们能够适应逆境。这些风险和保护因素有助于个人在潜在的创伤事件后“反弹”的能力。本研究提供了这些项目的讨论与更广泛的文献和潜在的方向,为未来的研究和辩论这一主题。
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
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书