Purpose of review: Understanding variability in developmental outcomes following exposure to early life adversity (ELA) has been an area of increasing interest in psychiatry, as resilient outcomes are just as prevalent as negative ones. However, resilient individuals are understudied in most cohorts and even when studied, resilience is typically defined as an absence of psychopathology. This review examines current approaches to resilience and proposes more comprehensive and objective ways of defining resilience.
Recent findings: Of the 36 studies reviewed, the most commonly used measure was the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (n = 6), followed by the Child Behavior Checklist (n = 5), the Resilience Scale for Chinese Adolescents (n = 5), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (n = 4), and the Child and Youth Resilience Scale (n = 3).
Summary: This review reveals that studies tend to rely on self-report methods to capture resilience which poses some challenges. We propose a complementary measure of child resilience that relies on more proactive behavioral and observational indicators; some of our preliminary findings are presented. Additionally, concerns about the way ELA is characterized as well as the influence of genetics on resilient outcomes prompts further considerations about how to proceed with resiliency research.