scholarly journals Unravelling the Complex Nature of Resilience Factors and their Changes between Early and Later Adolescence

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Fritz ◽  
Jan Stochl ◽  
Eiko I Fried ◽  
Ian Goodyer ◽  
Claudia D. van Borkulo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Resilience Factors

THIS IS A PRE-PRINT OF AN ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN “BMC MEDICINE (17: 203)”. THE FINAL AUTHENTICATED VERSION IS AVAILABLE ONLINE AT: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1430-6 Resilience factors (RFs) reduce mental health problems following childhood adversity (CA). We investigated 10 RFs in adolescents with (CA+; n=638) and without CA (CA-; n=501), using network-psychometrics. Specifically, we examined RF mean levels, RF-interrelations, RF-distress pathways, and their changes between age 14 and 17. Mean level changes were similar in both groups. CA+ had lower RFs and higher distress at both ages. Thus, CA does not inhibit RF changes but increases the risk of persistently lower RFs. At age 14, but not 17, the RFs of the CA+ group were less positively interrelated, suggesting that RFs enhance each other less than in the CA- group. The CA+ group had stronger negative RF-distress pathways, particularly at age 14, but those did not reduce distress to a similar mean level as in the CA- group. Most RF-interrelations and RF-distress pathways were stable, which may help explain why exposure to CA often has a lasting impact.

scholarly journals Unravelling the complex nature of resilience factors and their changes between early and later adolescence

BMC Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Fritz ◽  
J. Stochl ◽  
E. I. Fried ◽  
I. M. Goodyer ◽  
C. D. van Borkulo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Distress Tolerance ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Early Age ◽  
Empirically Supported ◽  
Resilience Factors ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract Background Childhood adversity (CA) is strongly associated with mental health problems. Resilience factors (RFs) reduce mental health problems following CA. Yet, knowledge on the nature of RFs is scarce. Therefore, we examined RF mean levels, RF interrelations, RF-distress pathways, and their changes between early (age 14) and later adolescence (age 17). Methods We studied 10 empirically supported RFs in adolescents with (CA+; n = 631) and without CA (CA−; n = 499), using network psychometrics. Results All inter-personal RFs (e.g. friendships) showed stable mean levels between age 14 and 17, and three of seven intra-personal RFs (e.g. distress tolerance) changed in a similar manner in the two groups. The CA+ group had lower RFs and higher distress at both ages. Thus, CA does not seem to inhibit RF changes, but to increase the risk of persistently lower RFs. At age 14, but not 17, the RF network of the CA+ group was less positively connected, suggesting that RFs are less likely to enhance each other than in the CA− group. Those findings underpin the notion that CA has a predominantly strong proximal effect. RF-distress pathways did not differ in strength between the CA+ and the CA− group, which suggests that RFs have a similarly protective strength in the two groups. Yet, as RFs are lower and distress is higher, RF-distress pathways may overall be less advantageous in the CA+ group. Most RF interrelations and RF-distress pathways were stable between age 14 and 17, which may help explain why exposure to CA is frequently found to have a lasting impact on mental health. Conclusions Our findings not only shed light on the nature and changes of RFs between early and later adolescence, but also offer some accounts for why exposure to CA has stronger proximal effects and is often found to have a lasting impact on mental health.

scholarly journals An Empirical Examination of How Resilience Factors Mitigate the Effect of Childhood Adversity on Adolescent Mental Health

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Fritz ◽  
Jan Stochl ◽  
Ian Goodyer ◽  
Anne-Laura Van Harmelen ◽  
Paul O. Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Mental Distress ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Adolescent Mental Health ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Resilience Factors ◽  
The Relationship

Objective: More than one in three people worldwide are exposed to some form of childhood adversity (CA). CA is strongly associated with an increased risk for the development of mental health problems. Resilience factors (RFs), such as self-esteem, are known to reduce such vulnerability to mental health problems. Here we examine besides direct RF effects, whether RFs predominantly alter the relationship (i.e. moderation) or disrupt the developmental chain (i.e. mediation) between CA and mental health problems.Methods: We studied 1130 adolescents. CA exposure and 10 RFs (3 inter-individual e.g. friendships; 7 intra-individual e.g. self-esteem) were assessed at age 14. Mental health problems were assessed at age 14 and 17, and were combined into a mental distress index. We estimated direct-effect, moderation and mediation models.Results: When taking the effects of all 10 RFs into account, five of the 10 RFs had a significantly negative direct effect in the overall sample. However, of those five, only brooding revealed a significant effect in both the group of adolescents with and without CA. Of the 10 RFs, friendship support, family cohesion and distress tolerance had a significantly negative relationship with age-17 distress in the group of adolescents with CA, and no effect in the group of adolescents without CA. Yet, none of the three RFs revealed a significant moderation effect (p = 0.07-0.09). Positive self-esteem, negative self-esteem and aggression functioned as significant mediators for the relationship between CA and mental distress.Conclusions: In situations in which CA is not known, brooding seems to be the most beneficial RF, as it reduced subsequent mental distress in both adolescents with and without CA. Regarding RFs in the aftermath of CA, our findings provide predominant support for mediation rather than for moderation effects. More specifically, targeting negative self-esteem, positive self-esteem, and aggression seems most fruitful, when the aim is to disrupt the chain between CA and adolescent mental health problems.

scholarly journals A Network Model of Resilience Factors for Adolescents with and without Exposure to Childhood Adversity

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Fritz ◽  
Eiko I Fried ◽  
Ian Goodyer ◽  
Paul O. Wilkinson ◽  
Anne-Laura Van Harmelen
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Network Analysis ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Mental Distress ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
General Distress ◽  
Resilience Factors ◽  
Almost All

THIS IS A PRE-PRINT OF AN ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN “SCIENTIFIC REPORTS (8: 15774)”. THE FINAL AUTHENTICATED VERSION IS AVAILABLE ONLINE AT: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-34130-2Resilience factors (RFs) help prevent mental health problems after childhood adversity (CA). RFs are known to be related, but it is currently unknown how their interrelations facilitate mental health. Here, we used network analysis to examine the interrelations between ten RFs in 14-year-old adolescents exposed (‘CA’; n=638) and not exposed to CA (‘no-CA’; n=501). We found that the degree to which RFs are assumed to enhance each other is higher in the no-CA compared to the CA group. Upon correction for general distress levels, the global RF connectivity also differed between the two groups. More specifically, in the no-CA network almost all RFs were positively interrelated and thus may enhance each other, whereas in the CA network some RFs were negatively interrelated and thus may hamper each other. Moreover, the CA group showed more direct connections between the RFs and current distress. Therefore, CA seems to influence how RFs relate to each other and to current distress, potentially leading to a dysfunctional RF system. Translational research could explore whether intervening on negative RF interrelations so that they turn positive and RFs can enhance each other, may alter ‘RF-mental distress’ relations, resulting in a lower risk for subsequent mental health problems.

scholarly journals The Relation between Childhood Adverse Experiences and Disability Due to Mental Health Problems in a Community Sample of Women

2005 ◽  
Vol 50 (12) ◽  
pp. 778-783 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lil Tonmyr ◽  
Ellen Jamieson ◽  
Leslie S Mery ◽  
Harriet L MacMillan
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Child Abuse ◽  
Childhood Sexual Abuse ◽  
Physical Abuse ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Adverse Experiences

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the association between selected childhood adverse experiences and disability due to mental health problems in a community sample of women. Variables of interest included childhood physical and sexual abuse, parental psychiatric and substance abuse history, and sociodemographic factors. Method: Girls and women (aged 15 to 64 years) from a province-wide community sample ( n = 4239) were asked about disability and most childhood adverse experiences through interview; a self-administered questionnaire inquired about child abuse. Logistic regression (crude and adjusted odds ratios) was used to test the associations between childhood adversity and disability due to mental health problems. Results: Approximately 3% of the women had a disability due to mental health problems. Among women with a disability, about 50% had been abused while growing up. After controlling for income and age, we found that disability showed the strongest association with childhood sexual abuse, physical abuse, and parental psychiatric disorder. Conclusion: Disability due to mental health problems was experienced by women with and without exposure to abuse in childhood. However, childhood sexual abuse and physical abuse were important correlates of disability. Disability creates suffering and loss for the individual and society; this issue merits more research in relation to child abuse.

scholarly journals Mood and neural responses to social rejection do not seem to be altered in resilient adolescents with a history of adversity

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 411-423
Author(s):  
Jessica Fritz ◽  
Jason Stretton ◽  
Adrian Dahl Askelund ◽  
Susanne Schweizer ◽  
Nicholas D. Walsh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Social Rejection ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Neural Responses ◽  
Social Feedback ◽  
Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex ◽  
History Of

AbstractChildhood adversity (CA) increases the risk of subsequent mental health problems. Adolescent social support (from family and/or friends) reduces the risk of mental health problems after CA. However, the mechanisms of this effect remain unclear, and we speculate that they are manifested on neurodevelopmental levels. Therefore, we investigated whether family and/or friendship support at ages 14 and 17 function as intermediate variables for the relationship between CA before age 11 and affective or neural responses to social rejection feedback at age 18. We studied 55 adolescents with normative mental health at age 18 (26 with CA and therefore considered “resilient”), from a longitudinal cohort. Participants underwent a Social Feedback Task in the magnetic resonance imaging scanner. Social rejection feedback activated the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and the left anterior insula. CA did not predict affective or neural responses to social rejection at age 18. Yet, CA predicted better friendships at age 14 and age 18, when adolescents with and without CA had comparable mood levels. Thus, adolescents with CA and normative mood levels have more adolescent friendship support and seem to have normal mood and neural responses to social rejection.

scholarly journals Resiliensi Tahanan: Studi Literatur

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-100
Author(s):  
Khosidah Khosidah ◽  
Megah Andriany
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Family Relationships ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Review Literature ◽  
Measurement Scale ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Resilience Scale ◽  
Nursing Services ◽  
Resilience Factors

Introduction: Prevalence of mental health problems including detainees in prison are very high. Handling mental health problems is closely related to the ability of resilience in a person. Limited study review resilience, factors influencing it and instruments used in detainee. This study aims to describe the resilience of detainees, instruments to measure it, and factors influencing the resilience of detainees.Methods: The research method used was literature review. Literature search was carried out using search keywords resilience, detainee, prison. The database used is SCOPUS, EBSCOHost, Garuda, Science Direct, ProQuest. Articles inclusion criteria are full-text articles from 2010-2020, published in English and Indonesian, and discussing resilience to detainees. Articles were identified using flow diagrams. Data were analysed using synthesis matrices.Results: The results of search that has been conducted stating that the instruments used to identify resilience levels consisted of the Connor and Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), the resilience quotient compiled by Reivich and Shatte, the Resilience Measurement Scale (RMS-25), the Adolescent Resilience Attitudes Scale (ARAS), and the Norwegian adaptation of Dispositional Resilience scale (DRS-15-R). The average level of resilience of detainees is in the medium category. Resilience is influenced by age, ethnicity, family relationships, social relationships, self-acceptance, protective factors (pro-social) and (pro-future). Detainees are prone to mental health problems, because they have moderate levels of resilience.Suggestion: Nursing services need to pay attention to the level of resilience of detainees.

scholarly journals Puerto Ricans and Mexican immigrants differ in their psychological responses to patterns of lifetime adversity

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. e0258324
Author(s):  
Daniel K. Cooper ◽  
Mayra Bámaca-Colbert ◽  
Eric K. Layland ◽  
Emily G. Simpson ◽  
Benjamin L. Bayly
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Latent Profile Analysis ◽  
Mexican Immigrants ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Puerto Ricans ◽  
Profile Analysis ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Low Exposure

Background Puerto Ricans and Mexican immigrants are often exposed to multiple types of adversity across their lifetime (e.g., maltreatment, household dysfunction, discrimination) and this exposure can increase the risk for adult mental health problems. Purpose The objective of this study was to (a) identify subgroups of individuals exposed to unique combinations of childhood adversity and lifetime discrimination among Puerto Ricans and Mexican immigrants, and (b) compare the prevalence of mental health problems across different risk profiles. Method We used existing data from the HCHS/SOL Sociocultural Ancillary Study. Participants included Puerto Rican (N = 402) and Mexican adults (N = 1351) born outside but living in the continental U.S. Findings Through latent profile analysis, we selected a three-profile solution for Puerto Ricans: (a) Low Exposure (low on all adversity items; 58% of sample), (b) Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) Only (high on ACEs items, average or lower than average on discrimination items; 32%), and (c) Dual Exposure (high on all adversity items; 10%). For Mexicans, we selected a four-profile solution: (a) Low Exposure (52%), (b) ACEs Only (24%), (c) Maltreatment and Discrimination (15%), and (d) Dual Exposure (9%). For Mexicans, we found that the Dual Exposure and the Maltreatment and Discrimination profiles had the highest levels of mental health problems. For Puerto Ricans, the Dual Exposure and ACEs Only profiles had the highest levels of mental health problems, suggesting that Puerto Ricans may be more vulnerable to the effects of childhood adversities as compared to Mexican immigrants. Results from our study indicate that different patterns of adversity exposure are linked to different levels of mental health outcomes, and therefore, may require different intervention dosage. Understanding which groups of individuals are at highest and lowest risk for mental health problems is critical for developing effective, tailored interventions to prevent the negative effects of childhood adversity and discrimination for Latinxs.

scholarly journals Puerto Ricans and Mexican immigrants differ in their psychological responses to patterns of lifetime adversity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Cooper ◽  
Mayra Bámaca-Colbert ◽  
Eric Layland ◽  
Emily Simpson ◽  
Benjamin Bayly
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Latent Profile Analysis ◽  
Mexican Immigrants ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Puerto Ricans ◽  
Profile Analysis ◽  
Childhood Adversity ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Low Exposure

Background: Puerto Ricans and Mexican immigrants are often exposed to multiple types of adversity across their lifetime (e.g., maltreatment, household dysfunction, discrimination) and this exposure can increase the risk for adult mental health problems. Purpose: The objective of this study was to (a) identify subgroups of individuals exposed to unique combinations of childhood adversity and lifetime discrimination among Puerto Ricans and Mexican immigrants, and (b) compare the prevalence of mental health problems across different risk profiles. Method: We used existing data from the HCHS/SOL Sociocultural Ancillary Study. Participants included Puerto Rican (N = 402) and Mexican adults (N = 1351) born outside but living in the continental U.S. Findings: Through latent profile analysis, we selected a three-profile solution for Puerto Ricans: (a) Low Exposure (low on all adversity items; 58% of sample), (b) Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) Only (high on ACEs items, average or lower than average on discrimination items; 32%), and (c) Dual Exposure (high on all adversity items; 10%). For Mexicans, we selected a four-profile solution: (a) Low Exposure (52%), (b) ACEs Only (24%), (c) Maltreatment and Discrimination (15%), and (d) Dual Exposure (9%). For Mexicans, we found that the Dual Exposure and the Maltreatment and Discrimination profiles had the highest levels of mental health problems. For Puerto Ricans, the Dual Exposure and ACEs Only profiles had the highest levels of mental health problems, suggesting that Puerto Ricans may be more vulnerable to the effects of childhood adversities as compared to Mexican immigrants. Results from our study indicate that different patterns of adversity exposure are linked to different levels of mental health outcomes, and therefore, may require different intervention dosage. Understanding which groups of individuals are at highest and lowest risk for mental health problems is critical for developing effective, tailored interventions to prevent the negative effects of childhood adversity and discrimination for Latinxs.

scholarly journals The Frequent Stressor and Mental Health Monitoring-Paradigm: A Proposal for the Operationalization and Measurement of Resilience and the Identification of Resilience Processes in Longitudinal Observational Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffael Kalisch ◽  
Göran Köber ◽  
Harald Binder ◽  
Kira J. Ahrens ◽  
Ulrike Basten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Temporal Variability ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Monitoring Time ◽  
Resilience Process ◽  
Resilience Factors ◽  
Time Courses

Resilience has been defined as the maintenance or quick recovery of mental health during and after times of adversity. How to operationalize resilience and to determine the factors and processes that lead to good long-term mental health outcomes in stressor-exposed individuals is a matter of ongoing debate and of critical importance for the advancement of the field. One of the biggest challenges for implementing an outcome-based definition of resilience in longitudinal observational study designs lies in the fact that real-life adversity is usually unpredictable and that its substantial qualitative as well as temporal variability between subjects often precludes defining circumscribed time windows of inter-individually comparable stressor exposure relative to which the maintenance or recovery of mental health can be determined. To address this pertinent issue, we propose to frequently and regularly monitor stressor exposure (E) and mental health problems (P) throughout a study's observation period [Frequent Stressor and Mental Health Monitoring (FRESHMO)-paradigm]. On this basis, a subject's deviation at any single monitoring time point from the study sample's normative E–P relationship (the regression residual) can be used to calculate that subject's current mental health reactivity to stressor exposure (“stressor reactivity,” SR). The SR score takes into account the individual extent of experienced adversity and is comparable between and within subjects. Individual SR time courses across monitoring time points reflect intra-individual temporal variability in SR, where periods of under-reactivity (negative SR score) are associated with accumulation of fewer mental health problems than is normal for the sample. If FRESHMO is accompanied by regular measurement of potential resilience factors, temporal changes in resilience factors can be used to predict SR time courses. An increase in a resilience factor measurement explaining a lagged decrease in SR can then be considered to index a process of adaptation to stressor exposure that promotes a resilient outcome (an allostatic resilience process). This design principle allows resilience research to move beyond merely determining baseline predictors of resilience outcomes, which cannot inform about how individuals successfully adjust and adapt when confronted with adversity. Hence, FRESHMO plus regular resilience factor monitoring incorporates a dynamic-systems perspective into resilience research.

scholarly journals Embracing the positive: An examination of how well resilience factors at age 14 can predict distress at age 17

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Fritz ◽  
Jan Stochl ◽  
Ian Goodyer ◽  
Anne-Laura Van Harmelen ◽  
Paul O. Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Linear Models ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Intervention Research ◽  
Risk Detection ◽  
Resilience Factors ◽  
High Distress ◽  
High Age

THIS IS A PRE-PRINT OF AN ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN “TRANSLATIONAL PSYCHIATRY (10: 272)”. THE FINAL AUTHENTICATED VERSION IS AVAILABLE ONLINE AT: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-020-00944-wOne-in-two people suffering from mental health problems develop such distress before or during adolescence. Resilience factors (RFs) decrease mental health problems. However, little is known about which RFs are the best indicators for subsequent distress, and with what accuracy RFs predict subsequent distress. We examined ten RFs and distress in 1130 adolescents, at age 14 and 17. Low brooding, low negative and high positive self-esteem RFs were the most important indicators for age-17 distress. RFs and age-14 distress predicted age-17 distress similarly. The accuracy was acceptable for ordinal (low/moderate/high age-17 distress-classes: 62-64%), but low for linear models (37-41%). Crucially, the accuracy remained similar when only self-esteem and brooding RFs were used (ordinal=60%; linear=37%); correctly predicting for about two-in-three adolescents whether they have low, moderate or high distress three years later. As assessing brooding and self-esteem is strength-focussed and time-efficient, those RFs may be promising for risk-detection and translational intervention research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document