A Test of Resilience Theory in the Context of a Global Crisis
Major stressors often challenge emotional well-being—increasing negative emotions and decreasing positive emotions. But how long do these emotional hits last? Prior theory and research contain conflicting views. Some research suggests that most individuals’ emotional well-being will return to, or even surpass, baseline levels relatively quickly. Others have challenged this view, arguing that this type of resilient response is uncommon. The present research provides a strong test of resilience theory by examining emotional trajectories over the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic. In two pre-registered longitudinal studies conducted in diverse U.S. samples (total N =1,147), we examined overall emotional trajectories and predictors of individual differences in emotional trajectories across 13 waves of data from February through September 2020. The pandemic had immediate detrimental effects on emotional well-being. Negative emotions decreased across six months, with the greatest improvements occurring almost immediately. Yet, positive emotions remained depleted relative to baseline levels, illustrating the limits of resilience. Individuals also differed substantially around these normative emotional trajectories and these individual differences were predicted by socio-demographic characteristics and stress exposure. We discuss three theoretical implications of the present investigation: (1) The extent to which resilience is normative depends on the outcome and the context. (2) Individual differences in resilience are large and complex, suggesting that broad claims that resilience is “ubiquitous” or “rare” may not be useful. (3) Resilience is multiply-determined and embedded within societal contexts that influence who experiences stress as well as who has access to resources to respond to stress.