Development and Psychopathology, 12 (2000), 857–885

Copyright  2000 Cambridge University Press

Printed in the United States of America

The construct of resilience: Implications for

interventions and social policies

SUNIYA S. LUTHARa AND DANTE CICCHETTIb

a
Teachers College, Columbia University; and bMt. Hope Family Center,
University of Rochester

Abstract
The focus of this article is on the interface between research on resilience—a construct representing positive
adaptation despite adversity —and the applications of this work to the development of interventions and social
policies. Salient defining features of research on resilience are delineated, as are various advantages, limitations, and
precautions linked with the application of the resilience framework to developing interventions. For future applied
efforts within this tradition, a series of guiding principles are presented along with exemplars of existing programs
based on the resilience paradigm. The article concludes with discussions of directions for future work in this area,
with emphases on an enhanced interface between science and practice, and a broadened scope of resilience-based
interventions in terms of the types of populations, and the types of adjustment domains, that are encompassed.

As we confront the substantial health care far more prudent to promote the development
challenges posed in the new millennium, utili- of resilient functioning as early as possible in
zation of the growing knowledge base on re- the course of development than to implement
silience can be vital in guiding social policies treatment strategies designed to repair exist-
to promote the well-being of disadvantaged, ing disorders among high-risk individuals
high-risk individuals in our society. The pro- (Cowen, 1991, 1994, 1999; Knitzer, 2000a,
vision of treatment to children, adolescents, 2000b; Luthar, 2000; Luthar, Cicchetti, &
and adults with mental disorders poses a great Becker, 2000; Rutter, 2000; Werner, 2000).
economic burden for society (Institute of Additionally, as our society is increasingly
Medicine, 1985, 1989, 1994). Moreover, men- becoming multicultural, it has become essen-
tal disorder, maladaptive functioning, and tial to discover the processes contributing to
misery entail the waste and vast erosion of resilient adaptation in individuals from di-
human potential. Recognizing these issues, a verse cultural, ethnic, and racial backgrounds
number of scholars have contended that it is (Garcı́a Coll, Lamberty, Jenkins, McAdoo,
Crnic, Wasik, & Vásquez Garcı́a, 1996).
Knowledge of these divergent developmental
Our work on this paper was supported, in part, by grants pathways can enable scientists to implement
from the National Institutes of Health (RO1-DA10726, more culturally sensitive preventive interven-
RO1-DA11498) and the William T. Grant Foundation to
Suniya Luthar, and by grants from the National Institute tion strategies to foster the development of re-
of Mental Health (MH 45027), the National Institute of silient adaptation within diverse exosystemic
Mental Health and the Administration for Children, contexts.
Youth, and Families (MH 54643), and the Spunk Fund, In this article, we discuss the interface be-
Inc., to Dante Cicchetti. tween research on resilience and the develop-
Address correspondence and reprint requests to:
Suniya S. Luthar, Department of Human Development, ment of interventions and social policies.We
Teachers College Box 133, Columbia University, 525 begin by providing an operational definition
West 120th Street, New York, NY 10027-6696. of the term “resilience” and describe briefly

857
858 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

the critical features of research on this con- attachment with primary caregivers, and,
struct. Next, we examine the advantages, limi- among older children, appropriate indices in-
tations, and precautions associated with the clude aspects of school-based functioning,
application of the resilience framework to the such as good academic performance and posi-
development of preventive and health-pro- tive relationships with classmates and
moting interventions. Third, we delineate teachers.
guiding principles for the effective application High social competence is not, however,
of empirical findings on resilience to design- the only or even necessarily the preferred
ing interventions. We conclude the paper by index used to define successful adaptation in
highlighting several issues that we believe are resilience research; sometimes, the mere ab-
crucial in enhancing the interface between re- sence of emotional or behavioral maladjust-
search on resilience and the implementation ment is appropriate (Luthar et al., 2000; Rutter,
of effective social policy. 1999). The optimal outcome indicators are
those that are conceptually most relevant to the
risk encountered, so that when there are serious
Research on Resilience: Central Features
life adversities such as exposure to war, the ab-
sence of psychiatric distress can be a more log-
Definition of the construct
ical outcome than excellence in functioning at
Resilience is a dynamic process wherein indi- school (Luthar & Cushing, 1999).
viduals display positive adaptation despite ex-
periences of significant adversity or trauma.
Resilience research: Central objectives
This term does not represent a personality
trait or an attribute of the individual (Luthar et The resilience researcher is typically invested
al., 2000; Masten, 1999; Rutter, 1999, 2000). in identifying vulnerability and protective fac-
Rather, it is a two-dimensional construct that tors that might modify the negative effects of
implies exposure to adversity and the mani- adverse life circumstances and, having ac-
festation of positive adjustment outcomes. complished this, in identifying mechanisms or
The two pivotal constructs subsumed processes that might underlie associations
within the term “resilience” each have spe- found (Luthar, 2000). Each of the pivotal
cific operational definitions in contemporary terms subsumed within this broad statement
research. Adversity, also referred to as risk, of objectives is explained in turn.
typically encompasses negative life circum- Vulnerability factors or markers encom-
stances that are known to be statistically asso- pass those indices that exacerbate the negative
ciated with adjustment difficulties. Chronic effects of the risk condition. Among youth
exposure to community violence, for exam- living in the ecology of urban poverty, for ex-
ple, constitutes high risk given that children ample, male gender can be a vulnerability
experiencing this life condition reflect signifi- marker (see Kraemer, Kazdin, Offord, Vess-
cantly greater maladjustment than those who ler, Jensen, & Kupfer, 1997), for boys are typ-
do not (Garbarino, 1995; Lynch & Cicchetti, ically more reactive than girls to negative in-
1998; Osofsky, 1995; Richters & Martinez, fluences within the community (see Luthar,
1993). 1999; Moffitt & Caspi, in press; Spencer,
Positive adaptation, the second construct, Cole, DuPree, Glymph, & Pierre, 1993). For
is usually defined in terms of behaviorally children experiencing severe and chronic life
manifested social competence, or success at adversities, those with low intelligence are
meeting stage-salient developmental tasks more vulnerable to adjustment difficulties
(Luthar & Zigler, 1991; Masten, Best, & Gar- over time than are others (Masten, Hubbard,
mezy, 1990; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Gest, Tellegen, Garmezy, & Raminez, 1999;
Waters & Sroufe, 1983). Among young chil- Rutter, 2000).
dren, competence may be operationally de- Protective factors are those that modify the
fined in terms of the development of a secure effects of risk in a positive direction. Exam-
Construct of resilience 859

ples include an internal locus of control or Vulnerability and protective factors may
having a positive relationship with at least one operate in simple additive ways, or in interac-
adult. Within groups of youngsters exposed to tive models. In additive or “main effect” mod-
significant adversities, those with such attri- els, the construct in question is found to
butes frequently fare better than youth who display significant links with adjustment indi-
lack them (see Beeghly & Cicchetti, 1994; cators, with these associations going beyond
Cohler, Stott, & Musick, 1995; Luthar & those between the risk condition and the out-
Zigler, 1991; Masten et al., 1990, 1999; Rut- come variable. Interactive models, on the
ter, 1999; Toth & Cicchetti, 1996; Werner & other hand, presuppose associations between
Smith, 1992). the vulnerability–protective factor and the
Vulnerability and protective factors can outcome that differ in strength, depending on
each derive from multiple levels of influence: the presence versus absence of the risk condi-
the community, family, and the individual tion. To illustrate, protective–stabilizing ef-
(Cicchetti & Aber, 1986; Cicchetti & Lynch, fects are indicated if individuals with the attri-
1993; Luthar & Zigler, 1991; Masten et al., bute show positive adjustment at low and
1990; Werner & Smith, 1992). Examples of high levels of risk, whereas those without the
community-level influences include exposure attribute show poorer adjustment at high than
to violence in the neighborhood (vulnerabil- at low risk levels. Detailed descriptions of
ity) and supportive relationships with adults main effect and interactive models, along with
in the school (protective). At the level of the associated terminology, have been provided
family, relevant examples include inconsistent by Luthar and colleagues (2000).
or harsh parental discipline, as opposed to Finally, resilience research involves a pro-
emotionally responsive caregiving. Individual gression from an empirical identification of
attributes that can exacerbate vulnerability to vulnerability or protective factors to an explo-
stressors include poor impulse control or low ration of processes underlying their effects.
intelligence, whereas protective attributes in- As an initial step, the resilience researcher
clude a high sense of self-efficacy or an easy- simply attempts to identify constructs linked
going temperament. with relatively positive or negative outcomes
Whether a particular construct is labeled a among particular at-risk groups. Having done
vulnerability factor, protective factor, or both this, the next phase—an essential one for this
depends on where central effects lie. It would generation of researchers (Luthar et al., 2000;
be appropriate to refer to low IQ as a vulnera- Masten, 1999; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998;
bility factor, for example, if children with low Rutter, 1999, 2000; Werner & Johnson, 1999;
intelligence displayed significantly compro- Wyman, Cowen, Work, Hoyt–Meyers, Mag-
mised adjustment (e.g., as indicated by out- nus, & Fagen, 1999)—entails efforts to un-
come scores falling substantially below aver- derstand the mechanisms that might explain
age group scores). On the other hand, if the effects of salient vulnerability or protec-
highly intelligent youth reflected substantial tive factors. Parental mental illness can confer
advantages compared to those with average or vulnerability, for example, due to distur-
low intelligence (e.g., competence outcome bances in specific parenting behaviors such as
scores of +1 SD or more), then high IQ would those relating to discipline or the expression
represent a protective factor. If both negative of affection (Cicchetti & Toth, 1995; Dow-
and positive consequences are apparent (e.g., ney & Coyne, 1990; Luthar & Suchman,
at polar ends of the continuum of IQ scores), 2000).1 Social support might protect against
then the terms “vulnerability” and “protec- stress by enhancing children’s self-esteem, in-
tive” can be used interchangeably (see Rutter,
1990, and Stouthamer–Loeber, Loeber, Far-
1. See Rende and Plomin (1993), Rutter (2000), and Rut-
rington, Zhang, van Kammen, & Maguin, ter, Silberg, O’Connor, and Simonoff (1999) for dis-
1993, for additional elaboration on issues of cussions of genetic factors that might underlie links be-
terminology). tween adjustment status of parents and their children.
860 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

creasing their perceptions of control, or Conversely, some forces can have substan-
strengthening their sense of security (Bar- tive effects in the absence of salient environ-
rera & Prelow, in press; Sandler, Miller, mental risks but have relatively weak effects
Short, & Wolchik, 1989; Wyman, Sandler, in their presence. Luthar and colleagues
Wolchik, & Nelson, in press). (2000) illustrate this with data on mother–
child interactions. Among most mothers, per-
Applying the Resilience Paradigm to ceptions of their children tend to shape how
Social Policy: Advantages, Limitations, they behave with their children, so that dis-
and Precautions ruptive child behaviors, for example, elicit
negative maternal reactions. On the other
Given its central focus on factors that modify
hand, for mothers living in poverty the power-
the effects of high-risk conditions, research on
ful stressors these women face on an ongoing
resilience possesses obvious potential for
basis often detract from the salience of partic-
guiding interventions and social policies. We
ular child behaviors (Dumas & Wekerle,
discuss here the broad advantages of applica-
1995). What is usually a significant vulnera-
tions of this framework, followed by associ-
bility factor (i.e., child disruptive behavior)
ated limitations, caveats, and precautions.
may do little to explain variations in the type
of parenting displayed by a poor mother to-
Advantages in applying the ward her children.
resilience paradigm At a microlevel as well, research evidence
The resilience framework serves to direct in- on resilience has important functions in that
terventionists to empirical knowledge regard- it demarcates areas of heightened significance
ing the salience of particular vulnerability among groups facing particular types of ad-
and protective processes within the context of versities. To illustrate, strictness of parental
specific adversities. This framework helps to monitoring is linked with positive adjustment
organize the scientific evidence concerning outcomes among adolescents in poverty, yet it
factors that may differentially alter the effects is not necessarily protective for middle-class
of various high-risk conditions and adversi- children who contend with familial risks such
ties, thus yielding specific directions for inter- as parental depression. Similarly, assuming
vention efforts. the blame for the parents’ mental illness is a
At a macrolevel, this function is useful in serious vulnerability factor for offspring of
demarcating factors that exert substantial ef- depressed mothers yet may be far less salient
fects in the presence of adverse life circum- for children exposed to exosystemic risks
stances but are less potent in the absence of such as chronic community violence or war.
risk. An example is positive experiences at The importance of careful attention to em-
school. Researchers have demonstrated that pirical evidence on context-specific vulnera-
extracurricular activities and supportive rela- bility and protective effects is underscored by
tionships with teachers tend to be more bene- findings that forces that appear to be unequiv-
ficial for youngsters raised in institutions ocally beneficial can have negative ramifica-
(Rutter, 2000) and in urban poverty (Dubois, tions in some circumstances, as well as the
Felner, Meares, & Krier, 1994; Dubois, converse (Luthar, 1999; Rutter, 2000). For ex-
Felner, Brand, Adan, & Evans, 1992) than for ample, high peer status is typically beneficial
“low-risk” youth from more mainstream com- for children’s overall adaptation. Among in-
munity families. Ostensibly, children in such ner-city youth, however, it has been found to
stress-laden environments encounter rela- be linked with repudiation of conventionally
tively few experiences in their everyday lives conforming behaviors, such as academic ef-
that engender a positive sense of well-being, fort (Luthar, 1995). Whereas intelligence is
so that when such experiences do occur they generally beneficial, in the presence of ad-
can have a marked effect on children’s adjust- verse psychosocial forces such as limited op-
ment (Luthar, 1999; Rutter, 1999, 2000). portunities to apply talents toward legal pur-
Construct of resilience 861

suits, it can exacerbate adaptational problems paradigm implies attention to assets among
(Freitas & Downey, 1998; Luthar, 1999). these women: strengths such as high concern
for their children’s welfare (often a driving
Distinguishing features of the construct force for addicted mothers to seek treatment)
of resilience and tendencies to regret past parenting “mis-
In considering the points raised in the preced- takes” (which can be harnessed in motivating
ing section, one might argue that the construct positive change; see Luthar & Suchman,
of resilience does not have to be invoked in 2000). From an intervention standpoint, there-
demarcating relevant empirical evidence: fore, applying the resilience perspective im-
from a taxonomic perspective, one might sim- plies efforts to harness notable strengths of
ply rely on the broad category of knowledge “vulnerable populations” to derive significant
on vulnerability and protective factors that impetus for positive change.
modify the effects of risk. Without question, A third critical feature is that work on re-
the term “resilience” is not indispensable. silience connotes a commitment to under-
There have been scores of scientifically pro- standing processes that underlie the effects of
ductive research studies that have illuminated vulnerability and protective factors. As we
processes operating among particular at-risk have noted earlier, for researchers in this area
groups that have never mentioned resilience. the identification of forces that show signifi-
The construct of resilience does, however, cant links with adjustment outcomes consti-
connote some features, both in basic science tutes only the initial step in their work. The
as well as in applied intervention science, that ultimate goal is to illuminate which of various
distinguish it as unique in conducting research potential mechanisms are implicated in the ef-
with groups of individuals experiencing adver- fects of these vulnerability or protective fac-
sity. First, the resilience framework implies a tors, such that appropriate directions for inter-
focus on positive outcomes and not just nega- vention can be derived.
tive ones (Luthar et al., 2000). Of central inter- In summary, the term “resilience” repre-
est are not only adaptational failures (tradition- sents a parsimonious label for a scientific ap-
ally focused on in research with groups at high proach that has multiple distinguishing fea-
risk; Cicchetti, 1993) but also, and more impor- tures. Applying the resilience framework
tantly, positive adaptational outcomes and their implies attention (a) to positive outcomes in
antecedents (Garmezy, Masten, & Tellegen, the presence of adversity rather than positive
1984; Luthar & Zigler, 1991; Masten, et al., adaptation in general and, more specifically,
1990). From an intervention—policy perspec- (b) to empirically derived knowledge about
tive, therefore, applying this framework im- vulnerability and protective mechanisms that
plies an implicit shift of emphasis to encom- are salient within, and possibly unique to, par-
pass primary prevention, rather than simply ticular risk conditions. From an intervention
attempting to ameliorate serious maladjustment perspective, the implication is (c) a shift away
after it has already crystallized (Cowen, High- from maladjustment to consider competence
tower, Pedro–Carroll, Work, Wyman, & Haf- as well (thus implicitly emphasizing preven-
fey, 1996; Rolf & Johnson, 1999; Sroufe & tion), (d) attention to at-risk individuals’
Rutter, 1984; Windle, 1999). strengths in addition to their “deficits”, and
Second, even in instances where problems (e) systematic exploration of processes that
have already crystallized, the resilience might explain or underlie links involving em-
framework entails an emphasis not only on pirically identified vulnerability and protec-
deficits but also on areas of strength (Luthar, tive factors.
2000). This is illustrated in work with sub-
stance-abusing mothers, a group typically Problems and precautions in applying the
characterized by various parenting deficits resilience framework
and personal psychopathology. Without min- As with any construct, the overall yield of
imizing their problems, applying a resilience work on resilience can be significantly com-
862 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

promised if efforts in the area do not conform Alger pathway through risk and toward suc-
to stringent scientific standards, and in recent cess” (Doll & Lyon, 1998, p. 360).
years various conceptual and methodological To help avert such potentially damaging
problems have been identified in research on misunderstandings, Luthar (2000) delineated
this topic. These include variations in use of several precautions relating to scientific pre-
terminology by different investigators; diver- sentation of work on resilience. First, every
sity in methods used to operationalize risk, research report should include a clear opera-
competence, and the association between tional definition of the construct, specifying at
these constructs; and insufficient attention to the outset that resilience is a process or phe-
theory in empirical efforts (see Luthar, 1993; nomenon (of positive adaptation despite ad-
Luthar et al., 2000; Luthar & Cushing, 1999; versity), and explicitly clarifying that it is not
Masten, 1999; Rutter, 1990, 2000). Identifica- a personal characteristic of the individual
tion of these problems have led to delineation (e.g., Egeland, Carlson, & Sroufe, 1993; Lu-
of specific precautions that must be observed thar et al., 2000; Masten, 1994; Pianta &
by researchers and theorists in future work on Walsh, 1998; Rutter, 1999). Relatedly, it is
this construct (e.g., Luthar et al., 2000). useful to avoid using the term “resiliency” in
In this paper, we do not reiterate concerns presenting findings on competence despite ad-
generally relevant to the scientific study of re- versity, because this term carries the connota-
silience but address only those that pertain tion of a personality characteristic even more
specifically to applications of this work to- so than does the term “resilience” (Luthar et
ward informing interventions and social poli- al., 2000; Masten, 1994).
cies.We consider, in turn, issues related to re- Second, scientists would do well to avoid
silience researchers’ presentation of their using the term “resilient” as an adjective to
findings, practitioners’ attempts to apply what characterize children in their reports, and
this research has revealed, and fiscal consider- apply it, instead, to profiles or trajectories of
ations related to the use of multipronged pre- adaptation. Admittedly, some researchers
ventive interventions to foster resilient adap- (e.g., Luthar et al., 2000) have clarified that
tation. used thus, the term does not imply a trait, as
would, say, the phrase “an intelligent child.”
Presentation of scientific work on resilience. Rather, it implies dual references to a life con-
From the standpoint of interventions and poli- dition (as might the phrase “at-risk youth”)
cies, perhaps the most prodigious problem in and conjointly, evidence of positive adapta-
applying the resilience framework is that this tion. While such clarifications may be noted
construct can be misinterpreted as represent- by the readership of particular scientific jour-
ing a personal attribute of the individual (Lu- nals, they are likely to go unnoticed by the
thar, 2000; Luthar et al., 2000). Several scien- large numbers of nonacademic stakeholders
tists have warned that invoking the term interested in resilience. Thus, there remains a
“resilience” may be perceived as suggesting danger that many policymakers, media repre-
that if only children had a particular trait, or if sentatives, and members of the lay public will
only they displayed particular behaviors, then (quite reasonably) rely on the vernacular con-
they could withstand adversities. Such per- notations of the term “resilient,” viewing it as
spectives can inadvertently pave the way for exceptional sturdiness of some youth.
blaming the individual for not possessing In view of such concerns, Luthar (2000)
characteristics needed to function well (Mas- suggested that it is most prudent for scientists
ten, 1994; Pianta & Walsh, 1998; Reynolds, to stay away from phrases which focus on the
1998; Tarter & Vanyukov, 1999) and can lead child—such as “resilient youth” or “fostering
some political leaders to justify limited pro- resilience in children”—and refer, instead, to
tection to children from conditions of poverty, resilient adaptation, profiles, or trajectories. In
maltreatment, and distress (Pianta & Walsh, situations that necessitate reference to individ-
1998), with the rationale that children should uals or to groups of children (e.g., in reports
“be responsible for forging their own Horatio involving person-based statistical analyses),
Construct of resilience 863

somewhat qualified descriptors might be used lished, continued onslaughts from the envi-
such as “apparently or manifestly resilient” ronment can disable the strongest. In all in-
youth or, still more simply, “behaviorally stances where individuals’ strengths are
competent” or “emotionally health” young- identified as serving protective functions,
sters. therefore, researchers must note that many
Finally, in discussing findings that particu- personal characteristics that may seem to re-
lar personal attributes serve protective func- side in the child are in fact continually shaped
tions (e.g., sense of optimism, or internal lo- by interactions between the child and aspects
cus of control), it is important that researchers of his or her environment (Pianta & Walsh,
include, as appropriate, precautionary state- 1998; Resnick, 1994).
ments that these attributes are not indelibly In addition to observing such precautions
implanted in children; rather, they are sub- in presenting scientific data, we believe that
stantially shaped by life circumstances. This resilience researchers also must make con-
point is illustrated with findings on attribu- certed efforts toward proactive and responsi-
tional biases among disadvantaged, minority ble dissemination of their findings outside of
youth. Sandra Graham and her colleagues the scientific literature. Citing various poten-
have established that these youngsters display tial misinterpretations of work in this area
high levels of aggressive behaviors when they (e.g., that resilience is a personal trait), some
have negative attributional biases (i.e., when scholars have argued for revocation of resil-
these high-risk youth erroneously infer that ience as a distinct field of scientific inquiry
intentional aggression underlies the actions of (see Luthar et al., 2000). Whether individual
their peers; Graham & Hoehn, 1995; Gra- scientists elect to endorse the study of resil-
ham & Hudley, 1994). These findings might ience or not, however, it is quite clear that this
tempt one to conclude that if only children is a construct with inherent appeal for many
were able to make “appropriate” attributions people, due to its optimistic overtones, and is
they would then display resilient adaptation. a notion that is already widely discussed in
The investigators explicitly note, however, the popular press as well as among prac-
that these biases themselves often arise from titioners across various domains of service de-
ongoing life experiences, for a child’s readi- livery (see Benard, 1999; Doll & Lyon, 1998;
ness to assume intentionality for others’ ag- Kumpfer, 1999; Pianta & Walsh, 1998). As
gression often represents a genuine strategy legislators and agency directors, as well as the
for coping with daily life in poverty. With fre- lay public, tend to be highly influenced by
quent use, such strategies become part of how media reports (McCall & Groark, 2000;
youngsters generally interpret their social Zigler, 1998), we believe that it is critical that
worlds, extending even to situations when scientists responsibly convey the extent of
they are unnecessary (Graham & Hudley, their knowledge about resilience, warding off
1994). incorrect views such as “resilience implies in-
When resilience researchers discuss the vincibility” or “if only children tried hard
relevance of their findings to interventions enough, then they could be resilient.”
and policies, therefore, it is critical to explic- It also is critical that scientists present their
itly note that children cannot “make them- findings in ways that policymakers as well as
selves” enduringly resilient (Luthar, 2000). lay people find easily comprehensible (Lu-
Without doubt, the resilience paradigm en- thar, 1999; Scott, Mason, & Chapman, 1999;
compasses views of children as active agents Zervigon–Hakes, 1998; Zigler, 1998). There
who can substantively affect their own life is a need to distill in simple terms the substan-
circumstances (e.g., via the effective use of tive message in the results (i.e., what they re-
internal or external resources; Cicchetti & Ro- veal), and also to anticipate and ward off po-
gosch, 1997; Egeland et al., 1993; Rutter, tential misinterpretations of the data (i.e.,
1999; Werner, 2000; Wyman et al., 1999). On what they do not indicate). In the interest of
the other hand, as Seligman’s (1975) classic such goals, McCartney and Rosenthal (2000)
experiments on learned helplessness estab- have urged scientists to comment not only on
864 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

the statistical significance of findings but also a personality trait); and (c) apply the adjective
their practical significance, based on overall “resilient” to characterize trajectories or pro-
effect sizes as well as design features that may files of adaptation, rather than groups of chil-
have artificially attenuated these (e.g., mea- dren. Furthermore, (d) when particular per-
surement error or restricted variance). These sonal attributes are found to serve protective
authors presented a strategy called the Bino- functions, it should be clarified as appropriate
mial Effect Size Display, which can help re- that many of these attributes themselves are
searchers to translate statistical effect sizes shaped by environmental forces. Finally, (e)
into pithy terms that are readily understand- scientists must be proactive in disseminating
able by policymakers and the public (e.g., in relevant knowledge, communicating in bal-
terms of overall “success rates” among inter- anced, responsible, and clear terms both what
vention groups vs. comparison groups). is known about resilience and the limitations
Finally, presentations of data should be de- of the empirical findings.
signed to maximize interest of, and receptivity
by, different nonscientific audiences. Para- Fragmented approaches in applying the resil-
phrasing the words of Edward Zigler, pioneer ience framework. Responsibility for the effec-
in the arena of social policy, McCall and tive application of evidence on resilience rests
Groark (2000) noted that policymakers want not only with scientists; equally, it rests with
succinct summaries of findings, with conclu- practitioners seeking to apply it (Luthar,
sions presented first, very few details, and a 2000). In an editorial article introducing a
single illustrative example. The general pub- miniseries in the School Psychology Review
lic, on the other hand, wants information that entitled “Resilience Applied: The Promise
relates to their own experiences and is pre- and Pitfalls of School-Based Resilience Pro-
sented in a manner that piques their personal grams,” Doll and Lyon (1998) indicate that
interest. Other scholars have argued for en- there has been a surge of interest in resilience
hanced efforts to present empirical evidence research among educators. The authors cau-
in jargon-free language, with the life circum- tion, however, that this burgeoning attention
stances of vulnerable populations captured in “contains all the hallmarks of educational fad-
three-dimensional, humanized terms rather dism—interest in the topic is sudden, many
than simply with diagnostic labels and abs- tend to see resilience programs as a panacea,
truse technical terms (Cicchetti & Toth, 1993; and the proliferation of resilience programs in
Huston, 1994; Knitzer, 1996; Luthar, 1999). schools has emerged independently of the
In future years, the achievement of such im- methodologically rigorous research that gave
portant goals, related to both clarity of presen- birth to the construct” (p. 349).
tations and their capacity to captivate various Illustrating such problems, Pianta and
audiences, can be facilitated if scientists were Walsh (1998) point to attempts to improve
to collaborate with policy advocates in prepar- isolated skills in children with little consider-
ing reports specifically intended for nonscien- ation of the child’s ecology. The authors note
tific groups such as politicians and members that attempts to apply research-based evi-
of the news media. dence on protective factors frequently tend to
In sum, to the extent that researchers are be oversimplified, targeting individual skills
aware of how findings on resilience could be or competencies. There is insufficient atten-
misinterpreted, it is incumbent upon them to tion to the functional utility of the skills
preempt such misinterpretations so that they targeted, that is, their ramifications within an
do not result in an inappropriate allocation of ecological system that typically does not en-
responsibility to at-risk individuals them- gender or reinforce them.
selves. Toward this end, investigators should Pianta and Walsh (1998) further caution
(a) provide clear operational definitions of the against piecemeal approaches to service deliv-
construct in all reports; (b) use the term “resil- ery in schools, arguing that solutions to the
ience” when referring to competence despite challenges of educating high-risk children of-
adversity and not “resiliency” (which suggests ten have involved pullout, add-on, short-term
Construct of resilience 865

programs that are conducted by someone implies an emphasis on preventively interven-

other than the classroom teacher. This high ing with children at high statistical risk for
degree of differentiation and specialization in maladjustment, before the onset of adjustment
services can be extremely counterproductive difficulties. Moreover, resilience researchers
for at-risk children whose everyday social ex- typically argue, based on extant evidence, for
periences tend to be fragmented and unpre- multifaceted programs targeting multiple sa-
dictable. Having identified problems such as lient vulnerability and protective forces rather
these, the authors argue for comprehensive than those considering just one or two of these
services that are not only strongly anchored in in relative isolation (see Beardslee, Versage,
theory and scientific evidence on resilience Salt, & Wright, 1999; Cowen et al., 1996; Lu-
but also involve concerted efforts to use exist- thar, 1999; Luthar & Suchman, 2000; Masten,
ing resources and personnel within given 1999; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Rutter,
classrooms, schools, or communities (cf. 1999; Werner, 2000).
Zigler, Finn–Stevenson, & Stern, 1997). Fur- Recommendations such as these may well
thermore, there must be constant attention to raise concerns about fiscal resources. Skeptics
the degree to which intervention components might question the value of multipronged in-
are integrated into the child’s educational pro- terventions implemented in the absence of
gram, cultural context, and personal behav- maladjustment, viewing this as an unwise al-
ioral repertoire (Pianta & Walsh, 1998). location of limited federal dollars. Objections
Finally, confusion regarding terminology such as these, however, can be countered on
is a problem that practitioners, like scientists, the basis of accumulated evidence on various
must guard against. Increasingly, there are ef- issues pertaining to coexisting vulnerability–
forts to develop programs, ostensibly an- protective factors and cost-effective interven-
chored in resilience research, that seek to tions (Luthar, 1999).
“foster resiliency in children.” Although well With regard to co-occurring risks, studies
intentioned, such intervention efforts, once have established that in the absence of inter-
again, implicitly foster views that if only chil- vention, many children facing multiple adver-
dren were helped to develop “resiliency” they sities have a high probability of developing
might then withstand all manner of adversit- serious difficulties as they move along their
ies. Like their colleagues in science, prac- developmental trajectories. Among youth liv-
titioners would do well to reframe their foci ing in poverty conditions, for example, the
as fostering resilient trajectories or outcomes likelihood of serious maladjustment increases
rather than resilient children (Luthar, 2000). exponentially with increasing numbers of soc-
In summary, from the standpoint of those iodemographic risks, such as low maternal ed-
in service delivery, applications of resilience ucation, large family size, minority status, and
research must entail (a) attention to theory parental mental illness—risks which typically
and research evidence on the group served; co-occur in real life (Coie, Watt, West, Hawk-
(b) consideration of the interface between in- ins, Asarnow, Markman, Ramey, Shure, &
tervention goals and the child’s own back- Long, 1993; Jessor, 1993; Luthar, 1999; Mas-
ground; (c) provision of integrated services ten, 1999; Sameroff, Seifer, Barocas, Zax, &
rather than fragmented ones; and (d) clarity Greenspan, 1987). Any one of these factors is
regarding resilience as a phenomenon, not a linked with minimal escalations in maladjust-
personal trait. ment. Children facing two coexisting risk fac-
tors, however, demonstrate a 4-fold increase
Fiscal concerns. In addition to problems that in adjustment problems, and when four or
can stem from scientists’ presentation of their more risk factors exist the risk can become
research and practitioners’ attempts to apply 10-fold (Rutter, 1979; see also Furstenberg,
these findings, application of the resilience Cook, Eccles, Elder, & Sameroff, 1999; Sam-
perspective might also be contested on the eroff, Seifer, & Bartko, 1997; Sameroff et al.,
grounds of fiscal extravagance. As noted in 1987). From an intervention perspective, the
preceding discussions, the resilience paradigm obvious message is that without appropriate
866 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

intervention youngsters exposed to multiple existing services scattered across their com-
sociodemographic risk factors—a potentially munities, such as those offering counseling,
large proportion of the over 13 million chil- physical health care, or night care for chil-
dren and youth living in poverty in America dren. Increasingly, preventionists and social
(U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999)—are policy scholars are advocating the creative use
highly vulnerable to serious long-term prob- of existing community resources in mobiliz-
lems. ing protective influences to benefit different
As a corollary to the preceding point, sev- at-risk groups (see Barrera & Prelow, in press;
eral studies have established cumulative bene- Luthar, 1999; Knitzer, 2000a, 2000b; Pian-
fits that accrue when at-risk children are ex- ta & Walsh, 1998).
posed to multiple coexisting protective factors Finally, there are ample data on the long-
(Luthar, 1999). For example, Jessor and col- term cost effectiveness of carefully designed
leagues found that whereas children with a and implemented preventive interventions
single protective factor show high vulnerabil- (Yoshikawa, 1994). Among the most widely
ity to problem behaviors in the face of adver- cited early childhood intervention programs is
sities, those with multiple protection indices the Perry Preschool project (Schweinhart,
are relatively unaffected (Jessor, Van Den Barnes, Weikart, Barnett, & Epstein, 1993;
Bos, Vanderryn, Costa, & Turbin, 1995; see Schweinhart & Weikart, 1988). Cost–benefit
also Jessor, Turbin, & Costa, 1998a, 1998b). analyses of this program (Barnett, 1985,
Similarly, in their studies of at-risk youth, 1993) indicate that this intervention was
Fergusson and Lynskey (1996) demonstrated linked with lower costs associated with re-
that among children with multiple protective duced special education, reduced incarcera-
factors (i.e., those in the top quintile), an im- tion, increased wages, and lower use of wel-
pressive 85% demonstrated resilience to de- fare dollars. Net benefits (minus costs) were
veloping behavior problems (Fergusson & estimated at approximately $90,000 per par-
Lynskey, 1996). Recent data from the Phila- ticipant, and, even when effects of crime and
delphia study of urban youth have shown that delinquency were omitted, benefits were esti-
adolescents with multiple protective influ- mated to approximate as much as $30,000 per
ences—effective families and relatively be- participant. In future years, such cost–benefit
nign life circumstances—were 14 times as analyses from carefully conceived efficacy
likely to display competent adaptation than studies will be critical to convince insurers
those with the worst life conditions (Fursten- and policymakers of the value inherent in pre-
berg et al., 1999). ventive approaches.
Prior efforts have also established that pre- In summary, application of the resilience
ventive interventions do not have to be inordi- paradigm toward multipronged preventive in-
nately expensive; costs can be substantially terventions may be questioned on the grounds
curtailed with creative and careful use of ex- of fiscal extravagance. Countering such objec-
isting resources. A range of possibilities in tions, however, is ample evidence that (a)
this regard is evident within Zigler’s “School without interventions children facing multiple
of the 21st Century,” a comprehensive, model risks are at high risk for serious maladjust-
program that is built into existing school sys- ment, (b) increasing the number of protective
tems (Zigler et al., 1997). In this program, influences can be linked with exponentially
public school buildings, which remain unoc- greater likelihood of positive outcomes, (c)
cupied for large portions of the day and the there exists much unrealized potential to har-
calendar year, are used not only to house ness existing resources within health-promot-
child-care programs for children 3 years and ing interventions, and (d) carefully conceived
older but also to host regular support group preventive interventions can be vastly more
meetings for parents. Information and referral cost effective than are attempts to reduce mal-
networks also are developed in schools to adjustment after it has become well en-
help families make better use of the various trenched.
Construct of resilience 867

Guiding Principles in Applying the on the particular group being targeted. This
Resilience Perspective Toward Developing implies that empirical evidence, both quantita-
Interventions and Policies tive and qualitative in nature, must be system-
atically collected on “modifiable modifiers”
Having considered broad advantages, poten- that are known to affect adjustment outcomes
tial problems, and possible objections in in the presence of the particular adversity un-
applying the resilience framework toward de- der consideration.
signing interventions and policies, we turn to 3: Efforts should be directed not only to-
specific guidelines on how the resilience per- ward the reduction of negative outcomes or
spective should be brought to bear within maladjustment among targeted groups but
such efforts. We begin by delineating specific also toward the promotion of dimensions of
principles and then move on to presenting ex- positive adaptation or competence. In work-
emplars of interventions based on the resil- ing with psychiatrically disturbed parents, for
ience paradigm. example, intervention should strive to reduce
negative behaviors such as inconsistent or
Guiding principles harsh discipline while promoting positive
ones, such as the expression of warmth and
As resilience research has evolved, several affection.
scholars have appraised appropriate direc- 4: Relatedly, interventions must be de-
tions, based on this body of work, for inter- signed not only to reduce negative influences
ventions targeting different at-risk groups (see (vulnerability factors) but also to capitalize
Beardslee et al., 1999; Cowen, 1999; Knitzer, on specific resources within particular popu-
2000a; Luthar, 1999; Luthar & Suchman, lations. Building upon strengths of people in
2000; Rutter, 1999; Werner, 2000; Werner & the community can promote their own feel-
Johnson, 1999). Many of the recommenda- ings of efficaciousness and competence, and
tions offered are strongly resonant with those can also foster their investment in ensuring
emphasized by scientists in the broader fields that positive changes endure within their com-
of prevention research, developmental psy- munities.
chopathology, community psychology, and 5: As noted earlier, to the degree possible,
social policy (see Cicchetti, Rappaport, San- interventions should target salient vulnerabil-
dler, & Weissberg, in press; Cicchetti & Toth, ity and protective processes that operate
1998, 1999; Coie et al., 1993; Hogue & Lid- across multiple levels of influence. These
dle, 1999; Institute of Medicine, 1994; include influences stemming from the com-
Knitzer 2000a, 2000b; National Institute of munity and the family, as well as from the
Mental Health, 1993, 1998; Weissberg & individual (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, 1977; Cic-
Greenberg, 1998; Yoshikawa & Knitzer, chetti & Lynch, 1993; Sameroff & Chandler,
1997). For future interventions that are devel- 1975).
oped specifically within the resilience para- 6: Interventions must have a strong devel-
digm, Luthar (2000) summarized a series of opmental focus, reflecting attention, for exam-
10 guiding principles, listed below. ple, to the specific cognitive, social, and
1: Interventions must have a strong base emotional capacities associated with the indi-
in theory. The design of all interventions must viduals being targeted, as well as the limits to
be anchored in a sound theoretical framework these. Knowledge of developmental domains
that specifically recognizes the mutual, trans- such as causal reasoning, emotion understand-
actional influences between children and dif- ing, and language ability all must be attended
ferent aspects of their contextual surrounds. to when designing interventions for children
Piecemeal attempts to improve isolated “pro- and adolescents (see Noam, 1992; Shirk,
tective factors” are likely to be ineffective. 1988; Toth & Cicchetti, 1999).
2: More specifically, interventions must 7: Similarly, the contextual relevance of
have a strong basis in theory and research the overall intervention aims, as well as of the
868 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

specific intervention strategies, must be en- efficacy, and for ongoing refinements of the-
sured. This is often effectively achieved via ory about normative developmental processes.
collaborative participation of local community
members—leaders in the community, con-
Applications of resilience research:
cerned parents, teachers, clinicians, as well
Randomized clinical trials
children who receive interventions. Input
from these individuals can help not only to In recent years, developmental psychopathol-
ensure that identified intervention goals will ogists have increasingly begun to harness
be viewed as personally meaningful by in- findings from resilience research in designing
tended recipients but also to guide staff to- multifaceted interventions that consider the
ward therapeutic techniques likely to be most diverse transactions between children and
effective within particular subcultures (see their environmental contexts. Summarized
Brody, Stoneman, Flor, McCrary, Hastings, & here are three such interventions, all designed
Conyers, 1994; Cowen et al., 1996; Fantuzzo, for families affected by parental mental ill-
Coolahan, & Weiss, 1997; Hawkins & Cata- ness: depressive disorders in the first two in-
lano, 1992, Jensen, Hoagwood, & Trickett, stances and substance abuse in the third.
1999; Lerner, Fisher, & Weinberg, 2000; The first of these interventions is that de-
Seitz & Apfel, 1999). signed by Beardslee (see Beardslee, 1989;
8: Intervention efforts should aim at foster- Beardslee & Podorefsky, 1988; Beardslee et
ing services that eventually can become self- al., 1999) to help families in which a parent
sustaining. This once again implies creativity was affected by depressive illness. Develop-
in harnessing existing resources in local com- ment of this intervention was based in a clear-
munities. A relevant example is Comer and cut rationale: it was spurred by evidence that
colleagues’ School Development Project, (a) depression is a widespread problem, with
wherein interventionists work with parents, 10–20% of individuals experiencing at least
community members, and school personnel one depressive episode in their lifetimes (Kes-
to set in place services for healthy child de- sler, McGonagle, Zhao, Nelson, Hughes,
velopment that can become self-sustaining Eshleman, Wittchen, & Kendler, 1994; Rob-
in schools over time (see Comer, 1988; ins & Regier, 1991); and (b) children of de-
Haynes & Comer, 1996). pressed parents are at high risk for various
9: Wherever possible, data from interven- problems, and almost 50% receive a diagnosis
tion groups should be compared with those of of depression themselves by the end of ado-
appropriate comparison groups, to ascertain lescence (Beardslee, 1989; Downey & Coyne,
effects that are potentially unique to the inter- 1990). The second characteristic of this inter-
vention. For example, in order to demonstrate vention is that its design was anchored in a
the effectiveness of a particular intervention systematic review of accumulated evidence
for offspring of parents with a major mental on potent vulnerability and protective pro-
illness, a similar risk group receiving a differ- cesses that tend to modify the effects of
ent type of intervention should be recruited parental depression. Identified mediator (vul-
and followed longitudinally. nerability) effects, for example, included dis-
10: There must be careful documentation turbances in specific parenting behaviors (e.g.,
and evaluation—of the critical components of decreased attention and lowered intensity of in-
the intervention via manualization, and of the teraction), as well as in the marital relationship
gains (as well as unanticipated problems) it and family cohesion. A critical protective fac-
may engender. Outcome domains assessed tor was high self-understanding among chil-
must be those centrally targeted in the inter- dren. This encompassed accurate appraisals of
vention, which in turn are those likely to be the parent’s affective disorder and of children’s
strongly affected by the risk in question. Care- own capacity to act (e.g., not assuming respon-
ful documentation and assessments are help- sibility for the parents’ symptoms). The third
ful for guiding the design of future interven- intervention characteristic was developed to
tions, for disseminating those of established ameliorate maladaptive patterns as well as to
Construct of resilience 869

develop strengths, in work with parents as well gosch, 1999). Based on knowledge of the em-
as children. Attention to developmental issues pirical literature on the impact of maternal
is reflected in the focus on families of pre- and depression on children’s development, Tod-
early adolescent children, youth on the brink of dler–Parent Psychotherapy (TPP; Lieberman,
a developmental period of high risk for depres- 1992) was identified as a potentially impor-
sive problems. tant strategy for fostering resilience in young
Based on available evidence on salient vul- offspring of depressed mothers. Because off-
nerability and protective processes, a clini- spring of depressed mothers have been shown
cian-led intervention was developed with the to be at risk for the development of insecure
following treatment goals: development of a attachment organizations, it is possible that
therapeutic relationship; provision of accurate mothers’ insecure representations of their own
information regarding affective illness; inte- attachment figures not only influence affec-
gration of cognitive information with the tive and cognitive features of mothers’ de-
unique illness experience of the family; vali- pression but also may contribute to distortions
dation of the children’s experience of the ill- in their perceptions of their child and their
ness; and development of a future-oriented ability to form a secure relationship with their
perspective. The intervention entailed 6–10 child. To intervene in these potential relation-
sessions, and it included separate sessions ship difficulties, TPP, conceptually based in
with parents, children, and whole family and attachment theory, was utilized (Lieberman,
telephone contacts or refresher sessions at 1992). The details of the TPP intervention are
6–9 month intervals. This clinician-led inter- presented in Cicchetti, Toth, and Rogosch (in
vention was compared with a lecture-based press).
intervention that pursued goals similar to the The results of this intervention to date have
clinician-led sessions, except that children did demonstrated that TPP is effective in promot-
not attend the lectures, and there was no effort ing resilient adaptation in the face of adver-
to link contents of these sessions to individual sity, as well as in preventing the emergence of
families’ experiences. maladaptation. Mothers with major depressive
Finally, there was careful attention to doc- disorder and their toddlers were randomly as-
umentation. To ensure treatment fidelity, both signed either to TPP (Depressed Intervention
interventions were manualized, and audio- [DI] group) or to no intervention (Depressed
taped sessions were rated for adherence to Control [DC] group). A group of mothers,
stipulated procedures. Before and after treat- matched on sociodemographic factors but
ment, families completed multimethod, multi- with no history of mental disorder or current
ple informant assessment batteries that tapped psychopathology, served as the Normal Con-
constructs hypothesized to serve vulnerability trol (NC) group. Although baseline assess-
and protective factors, as well as distal out- ments prior to the implementation of TPP re-
comes in children. vealed that the toddlers in the DI and DC
Results of this study showed that families groups evidenced equivalent rates of insecure
in the clinician-led groups reported signifi- attachment and both groups had higher rates
cantly greater improvement on several hy- of insecure attachment than the NC group, at
pothesized vulnerability and protective factors postintervention assessments the DC group
(e.g., understanding of illness, marital sup- continued to have higher rates of insecure at-
port, illness-related behaviors). Major benefits tachment than the NC group. In contrast, the
of this intervention were found to be sustained DI group at postintervention follow-up was
even 8 months after the intervention (see not significantly different from the NC group
Beardslee et al., 1999). in terms of rate of secure attachment. For the
A second intervention for families affected DI group, there also had been greater mainte-
by parental depression, also developed within nance of secure attachment organization
the resilience framework, is that designed by among those who were initially secure, as
Cicchetti and colleagues (Cicchetti, Ro- well as a greater shift from insecure to secure
gosch, & Toth, 2000; Cicchetti, Toth, & Ro- attachment groups (see Cicchetti et al., 1999).
870 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

In contrast, for the DC group initially secure mothers (not mothers and fathers), with
youngsters became insecurely attached. These groups led by female therapists. The fourth
findings demonstrate the efficacy of TPP in defining feature of RPMG is discovery-based,
promoting secure attachment organization insight-oriented parenting skill facilitation.
among young offspring of depressed mothers. Rather than “instructing” the mothers about
The effects of the preventive intervention appropriate parenting, therapists encourage
also have been examined in terms of cognitive the women to explore the strengths and limi-
development (Cicchetti et al., 2000). At base- tations of their own strategies, and guide them
line, no differences were found among the toward developing optimal approaches.
groups in terms of their mental development. The RPMG intervention is designed to be
However, at postintervention significant group delivered as an “add-on” to outpatient metha-
differences emerged for cognitive abilities, done treatment in weekly group sessions over
with the DC group evidencing a relative de- a period of 6 months. Sessions are structured,
cline in IQ. Both the DI and NC groups evi- with therapeutic strategies for each detailed in
denced higher WPPSI-R (Wechsler, 1989) a therapists’ manual. The first 12 of the 24
Full Scale and Verbal Scale IQ scores as com- sessions are focused on the women’s own
pared to the DC group; a marginal treatment functioning, addressing topics such as coping
effect in the same direction also was found with anger, depression, and loneliness. The
for Performance IQ. Thus, the preventive in- remaining sessions are focused on specific
tervention appeared to be effective in main- parenting issues, such as fostering warm par-
taining normative cognitive advances in the enting styles and developing alternatives to
DI group, whereas a decline in cognitive ad- corporal punishment. All sessions are video-
vance was observed in the DC group. taped, and therapists are rated on their adher-
A third exemplar of clinical interventions ence to the RPMG manual.
based in resilience research is the Relational Based on the women’s own reports as well
Psychotherapy Mothers’ Group (RPMG), de- as those of their children, mothers who re-
signed by Luthar and colleagues (Luthar & ceived RPMG were found to demonstrate
Suchman, 2000; Luthar, Suchman, & Boltas, lower levels of risk for child maltreatment
1997). An integrative intervention, RPMG en- than did comparison mothers (who received
tails specific attention to empirically identi- treatment as usual), by the end of the 24-week
fied vulnerability and protective forces that intervention period (Luthar & Suchman,
can affect substance-abusing mothers’ parent- 2000). RPMG recipients also reported greater
ing—forces at the level of the individual (e.g., involvement with their children and more sat-
comorbid depression, capacity to acknowl- isfaction in their roles as mothers, and their
edge past mistakes), the family (troubled children reflected fewer problems in several
childhood histories, concern for their welfare areas. At 6 months posttreatment, RPMG
of their own children), and the community recipients continued to be at a relative advan-
(e.g., experiences of stigma, potential to bene- tage, although the magnitude of group differ-
fit from positive interpersonal influences). ences was often attenuated. Notably, urinaly-
The psychotherapy entails a confluence of ses indicated that RPMG mothers showed
four major therapeutic components, the first greater improvements in levels of opioid use
of which is a supportive therapists’ stance, at follow-up than did comparison mothers,
which encompasses the Rogerian constructs suggesting that working with addicted women
of acceptance, empathy, and genuineness on their psychological and parenting needs
(Braswell & Seay, 1984). The second is an can have substantial spillover effects on their
interpersonal, relational focus, a component abstinence. Based on the promise of these ini-
with roots in gender-sensitive perspectives on tial findings, RPMG is being further evaluated
women as well as in Interpersonal Psycho- in a larger clinical trials study with metha-
therapy (Klerman, Weissman, Rounsaville, & done-maintained mothers; its effectiveness is
Chevron, 1984). Third, RPMG is a group also being explored among mothers referred
treatment, involving only substance-abusing to children’s protective services, in an initia-
Construct of resilience 871

tive sponsored by the Connecticut Department resilience among children at risk by virtue of
of Children and Families. parents’ depressive illness.
Independent of these three exemplars of
randomized clinical trials that are explicitly
Community-based interventions
grounded in research on resilience, there are
several other well-known interventions that Applications of the resilience paradigm in de-
are geared at promoting positive child out- veloping interventions are by no means re-
comes, even though their initial conceptual- stricted to research-based intervention trials:
ization did not specifically entail this con- this paradigm has been applied to community-
struct. Weissberg and Greenberg (1998) based programs as well (see Gager & Elias,
review many such multipronged competence- 1997; Rolf & Johnson, 1999). Illustrations are
enhancement programs, implemented at dif- available in a volume by Burt, Resnick, and
ferent developmental phases (see also Dry- Novick (1998) that is focused on integrated,
foos, 1994; Durlak, 1997). Exemplary among comprehensive intervention programs aimed
such interventions is the Prenatal/Early In- at building supportive communities for at-risk
fancy Project, a long-standing program in- adolescents. The conceptual framework that
volving nurse visitation for poor, unmarried, undergirds this book emphasizes the notion of
pregnant women (Kitzman et al., 1997; Olds resilience, with specific emphasis on the com-
et al., 1998; Olds & Korfmacher, 1997, 1998). plexity of multiple influences—at the level of
Targeting preschoolers in economically disad- the individual, the family, and the commu-
vantaged neighborhoods, the Chicago Child nity—that transact to affect adolescent out-
Parent Center (CPC) Program, begun in the comes.
late 1960s, (see Reynolds, 1998, in press), The nine programs described in the volume
provides comprehensive child education and by Burt and colleagues (1998) reflect consid-
family support services to promote school erable diversity on several dimensions, in-
readiness as well as other positive adjustment cluding the specificity versus breadth of ado-
outcomes. Serving kindergarten children at lescent outcomes targeted, the degree to
high risk for conduct problems is Fast Track, which they involve families and communities
a multisite randomized clinical trials project in addition to the adolescents themselves, and
aimed at providing a comprehensive longitu- the extent to which their emphasis is on en-
dinal intervention (Conduct Problems Preven- richment activities and prevention as opposed
tion Research Group, 1992, 1999a, 1999b). to treatment services for alleviating problems.
From a developmental psychopathology Common across all these programs, however,
standpoint, it should be noted that carefully is the attention to vulnerability processes as
designed, multilevel intervention trials can well as protective ones, and to problems in at-
yield critical benefits not only for vulnerable risk communities, as well as areas of strength.
children and families but also for advancing Furthermore, community members and the
theories on resilience and psychopathology. adolescent recipients themselves play major
Prevention research can be conceptualized as roles in identifying major areas of need and
true experiments in altering the course of de- useful points of intervention and in ensuring
velopment, and thus can provide critical in- that intervention goals and strategies will be
sights into the etiology and course of adjust- well received by local communities.
ment in the face of known risks (Cicchetti & In a recent issue brief on children and wel-
Toth, 1992; Kellam & Rebok, 1992; Sandler, fare reform, Knitzer (2000b) has discussed ef-
Wolchik, MacKinnon, Ayers, & Roosa, forts to promote resilience among a particularly
1997). To illustrate, Beardslee’s findings that vulnerable subgroup of children in poverty:
the developmental courses of children of de- those whose parents contend with multiple dif-
pressed parents were altered as a result of ex- ficulties, including substance abuse, domestic
posure to his intervention yields confirmatory violence, and mental illness. Despite dramatic
evidence on critical processes involved in the reductions in welfare caseloads following en-
ontogenesis of maladjustment, as well as of actment of the Personal Responsibility and
872 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRW- cies. Two exceptions cited were Rainbow
ORA) in 1996, adults with serious, coexisting House in Chicago, a shelter-based therapeutic
problems such as these are unable to join the program for women affected by domestic and
work force successfully and are likely to face community violence and their children, and
time limits and various sanctions. Acknowl- Exodus, in Compton, California, a residential
edging the dearth of policy incentives and sta- program for substance-abusing mothers at risk
ble funding streams for integrated, commu- for homelessness. These programs are encour-
nity-based service delivery programs for such aging in their integration, within intensive res-
families, Knitzer delineated several strategies idential programs for at-risk mothers, critical
to promote their resilient adaptation, with rec- services for their children as well, including
ommendations pertaining to three different on-site, therapeutic child-care and access to
points of entry: (a) early childhood services; developmental and mental health services.
(b) services for substance abuse, mental Finally, Knitzer discusses four strategies
health, and domestic violence; and (c) welfare that could use welfare reform as entry points
agencies. to provide intensive intervention to the most
For interventions implemented within the vulnerable children and families. These in-
context of existing early childhood services, cluded strategies pertaining to the service
Knitzer outlined three strategies, the first of needs of children raised by foster parents; ser-
which involves an integration of behavioral vices for low-income fathers as well as moth-
service teams into primary health care, child ers affected by Temporary Assistance to
care, and Head Start settings. An existing ex- Needy Families (TANF; e.g., via support
emplar of this strategy is Starting Early Start- groups); use of welfare-related dollars to pro-
ing Smart (SESS), a public–private initiative. mote integrated developmental interventions
Objectives include linking high-risk families for the most highly stressed children (as most
to specialists and providing advocacy ser- states have flexibility to use welfare dollars in
vices, and in some instances providing thera- nontraditional ways); and the development of
peutic interventions as well as staff develop- formal partnerships between TANF staff and
ment activities. The second strategy is to personnel working in the fields of substance
build a statewide system of behavioral sup- abuse, mental health, and child care and de-
ports for young children and families, as ex- velopment.
emplified by the Children’s Upstream Project Aside from delineating these various strat-
(CUPS) in Vermont. A program aimed at de- egies to foster positive outcomes among vul-
veloping an early childhood mental health nerable children and families, Knitzer also
system of care that includes both prevention considered macrolevel policy requirements
and treatment, CUPS links together agencies for their successful implementation, providing
working with child health, substance abuse, several suggestions for states, communities,
mental health, domestic violence, and other private-sector groups, federal agencies, and
family services. The third strategy is to in- Congress. These include recommendations to
crease the competencies of staff in early provide challenge grants to promote commu-
childhood programs to meet families with nity-based partnerships among different ser-
multiple needs. Extant programs that have ef- vice agencies; to provide cross-training and
fectively implemented this strategy include consultation for staff within these agencies; to
Project Relationship in Los Angeles, which synthesize and widely disseminate research
aims at enhancing the skills of those working evidence on the cost effectiveness of preven-
directly with young children and families, tive interventions—and to “promote parity for
through a manualized set of exercises encom- behavioral health services at the same level as
passing inquiry, reflection, and respect. physical health services in federal legislation
Considering resilience-promoting programs for both adults and children” (Knitzer, 2000b,
introduced within the context of substance p. 16).
use, mental health, and domestic violence
agencies, Knitzer noted that parenting issues Integrated service delivery: Challenges linked
often receive little attention within such agen- with fragmentation of services. As noted ear-
Construct of resilience 873

lier, socioeconomically disadvantaged fami- Additional problems derive from the recent
lies often contend with multiple “vulnerability devolution of federal programs to the state
factors,” experiencing substantive challenges and local levels. As a result of the 1996 fed-
to adaptation across diverse domains such as eral welfare reform law, there was a signifi-
physical and mental health, housing, and child cant shift of responsibility for social service
care. Recognition of the complexity of their programs from the federal to the state and lo-
service needs has led to several calls for in- cal levels (Burt et al., 1998). Frequently,
creased integration of service delivery. These states and local governments are faced with
exhortations include an emphasis not only on serious financial constraints in attempting to
providing multiple services under one roof address the burdens created as a result of
but also on the sharing of fiscal and planning these additional responsibilities. Furthermore,
responsibilities across different agencies (see the survival of the few—and generally frag-
Dryfoos, 1994; Durlak, 1997; Eber & Nelson, ile—community resources that exist in eco-
1997; Knitzer, 2000a; McMahon & Luthar, nomically disenfranchised communities (e.g.,
1998; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998; Yoshi- after-school or summer programs) can be seri-
kawa & Knitzer, 1997). ously jeopardized by the withdrawal of gov-
Interagency collaborative efforts at inte- ernment support (Furstenberg et al., 1999). In
grated service delivery inevitably pose a range the years ahead, strong alliances between gov-
of challenges, however (Adelman & Taylor, ernment at all levels and local institutions will
1997; McMahon & Luthar, 1998). These in- be critical for fostering functional communi-
clude barriers related to different professional ties (Furstenberg et al., 1999; Schorr, 1997).
training and orientation, administrative proce- There must be a concerted effort by federal,
dures, and confidentiality requirements that state, and private funding agencies to support
limit agencies’ abilities to share information collaborative community-based ventures that
about clients. Noting constraints such as can promote behavioral and emotional com-
these, Burt et al. (1998) provide several useful petence among children (Knitzer, 2000a,
steps that can be taken, including the maxi- 2000b).
mizing of open communication across collab- Yet another set of issues relates to policies
orating agencies, the need for up-front negoti- regarding research funding periods, an area
ations to ensure successful cooperative that Weissberg and Greenberg (1998) have
activities, and ensuring the commitment of discussed in terms of the failure of science to
agency directors as well as direct service pro- live up to the needs of practice. They argue
viders. that from the standpoint of kindergarten-
Aside from such problems at the level of through-12th-grade educators, for example,
agencies, there are several challenges that de- optimal competence-enhancement programs
rive from trends in contemporary national are those that are multiyear in duration and
policies (Luthar, 2000). Fragmentation and coordinate classroom, school, parent, and
categorization of financing for different social community interventions, with adequate sup-
services, for example, are considered to be the port and training for integrated, high-quality
most significant barriers to developing com- implementation. By contrast, most theory-
munity-based, prevention-oriented service driven, empirically based programs that are
systems (Burt et al., 1998). In integrated ser- designed and evaluated by scientists are lim-
vice-delivery systems, if funding is lost for ited in both scope and duration (e.g., with 5-
one component then it often must be discon- year funding periods for federally funded
tinued. Aside from loss of critical services, grants). As a result, many schools adopt pro-
this is problematic because it is often difficult grams that are well marketed but that lack
to resume the interrupted services: participat- documented effectiveness; there do not exist
ing staff find such discontinuities extremely any controlled, longitudinal field experiments
disruptive, and cooperative relationships be- to evaluate the long-term effects of school-
tween staff can be irrevocably damaged if based social competence programs. Gaps such
personnel lose faith in the stability of program as these underscore the need for increased
efforts. support from funding agencies and policy-
874 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

makers for long-term collaborations between early, intervening early, and altering the
practitioners and scientists to design and eval- course of children’s lives in a positive direc-
uate promising school- and community-based tion. It encourages planners to draw upon re-
prevention efforts (Weissberg & Elias, 1993). search evidence, not only on children who are
already showing signs of aggressive or violent
Responsiveness at the federal or national behavior but also on those who manifest evi-
level. Recent federal initiatives have con- dence of developing along resilient behavioral
tained explicit reference to the resilience para- trajectories. The CMHS initiative is intended
digm as an effective framework for develop- to fund collaborative programs that coordinate
ing and guiding interventions. Among the families, schools, and communities into a
most visible of these efforts was a collabora- partnership to promote the development of
tion involving several federal agencies includ- healthy behaviors and resilient adaptation
ing three of the National Institutes of Health among school-aged children and youth, in or-
(National Institute on Drug Abuse, National der to decrease the level of violence in
Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, schools.2
and National Institute of Mental Health), two In addition to its emphasis on the notions
divisions of the Substance Abuse and Mental of prevention, emotional and behavioral ad-
Health Services Administration (the Center on justment, resilience, and integrated services,
Substance Abuse Prevention and the Center the SS/HS initiative also is noteworthy in its
for Mental Health Services [CMHS]), as well attempt to bring together expertise from both
as the National Association for Children of science and practice. In June 1999, CMHS
Alcoholics. In 1994 these agencies jointly convened a 2-day working group involving
sponsored a conference on resilience and de- scholars engaged in the scientific study of re-
velopment, seeking to bring to national atten- silience and its applications, practitioners who
tion the relevance of resilience research to seek to enhance resilient outcomes, and repre-
substance abuse and mental health issues and sentatives from various federal funding agen-
to distill directions for future work in the area. cies. Participants were charged with collabo-
The conference represented a confluence of ratively deriving a solid base from which
diverse perspectives and engendered delinea- future studies of resilience, and its applica-
tion of several critical issues warranting con- tions to fostering children’s healthy develop-
sideration in future basic research, theory, and ment, might most optimally proceed. To
applications of the construct of resilience (see ground the participants’ discussions, CMHS
Glantz & Johnson, 1999). prepared an in-depth review of the existing
A more recent illustration of federal initia- literature on theory and research on resilience
tives is the School Violence Prevention initia- (Davis, 1999) and is supporting the develop-
tive of the CMHS, which as previously noted ment of a publication to inform the public and
is a division of the federal Substance Abuse policymakers about the value of programs and
and Mental Health Services Administration. policies that promote resilient adaptation.
In October 1998, CMHS received a Congres- A final illustration of recent initiatives in-
sional allocation of $40 million to improve volving the construct of resilience is the col-
mental health services for children at risk for laboration between Divisions 27 (Community
engaging in violent behaviors. These funds Psychology) and 37 (Children, Youth, and
enabled CMHS to join with the Department Families) of the American Psychological As-
of Education, and the Department of Justice, sociation. In 1998, these two divisions con-
in a landmark collaborative grant program vened a Task Force on Resilience and Public
known as the Safe Schools/Healthy Students
(SS/HS) initiative. SS/HS emphasizes preven-
tion as well as treatment, underscoring that 2. Details regarding this initiative may be seen at the fol-
lowing web site: http://www.mentalhealth.org/specials/
programs must not only provide services to schoolviolence/preview.htm#two. For a review of exist-
respond to violent acts already committed but ing methodologically sound and effective violence pre-
also be proactive by identifying problems vention programs, see Henrich, Brown, and Aber (1999).
Construct of resilience 875

Policy, a group that was charged with the re- parent components for divorced families (e.g.,
sponsibility of compiling recent scientific re- Stolberg & Mahler, 1994)—have not demon-
search evidence on the effects of child, fam- strated significant additive effects. Similar
ily, and community strengths among children conclusions were presented by St. Pierre and
living in stressful situations, and of exploring Layzer (1998) in their review of two-genera-
the public policy implications of these find- tion programs (i.e., those that simultaneously
ings. The goal is largely to develop stronger target parents and children) for families in
linkages between scientific information on re- poverty. There remains much potential, there-
silience among individuals, families, and fore, for developing interventions that are
communities and the public policies that af- based on empirical understanding of the pro-
fect the lives of children and families in cesses underlying the cumulative effects of
adverse situations. An edited volume, with multiple, co-occurring protective influences
chapters based on collaborations between re- (Werner & Johnson, 1999).
searchers and policy experts, is one product Second, there is a need for greater flexibil-
of the Task Force (Maton, Schellenbach, ity in approaches to evaluating promising new
Leadbeater, & Solarz, in press). In addition, a intervention approaches. Noting that all too
brief volume oriented to policymakers sum- often programs which seem conceptually
marizing themes in the first volume is under sound have been evaluated in methodologi-
preparation with support, again, from the cally weak research designs, St. Pierre and
CMHS, and the U.S. Department of Health Layzer (1998) argue strongly for the inclusion
and Human Services. of appropriate control or comparison groups
in ascertaining the effectiveness of future in-
Future Directions terventions. Proffering an opposing view,
Weissberg and Greenberg (1998) provide a
Preceding discussions establish that there are
thoughtful discussion on the relative contribu-
several promising efforts underway to apply
tions of quantitative, randomized clinical tri-
the resilience framework toward the develop-
als, as opposed to the multiyear, multicompo-
ment of interventions for at-risk individuals.
nent, community-based intervention models
There remain, however, several critical issues
called for by practitioners and policymakers.
that warrant concerted attention in the future;
The latter are widely viewed as essential to
we consider some of these in the concluding
obtain sustainable changes in both individuals
section of this paper.
and systems yet are typically evaluated via
descriptive, nonexperimental strategies, rather
Greater interface between science than via the highly controlled, experimentally
and practice rigorous approaches favored by academic re-
The interface between basic and applied sci- searchers.
ence concerning resilience warrants greater We concur with Weissberg and Green-
attention in at least four respects (Luthar, berg’s (1998) argument that in the long term,
2000). The first pertains to the development effective evaluations—those that are scientifi-
of interventions that effectively harness em- cally sound and meet the needs of stakehold-
pirically identified protective processes. As ers and policymakers—necessitate the inte-
noted earlier, there is converging evidence gration of quantitative experimental studies
from several studies indicating that multiple with more qualitative, process-oriented ap-
protective factors substantially increase the proaches. Without question, some minimal
likelihood of positive outcomes among at-risk level of experimental design is critical for
groups (e.g., Fergusson & Lynskey, 1996; evaluation efforts, lest a false sense of knowl-
Furstenberg et al., 1999; Jessor et al., 1995; edge be derived from severely flawed meth-
1998a, 1998b). Yet, Wyman and colleagues odologies. Furthermore, time-limited, ran-
(in press) have noted that several interven- domized trials can be invaluable in
tions designed to test cumulative protective illuminating the types of interventions that
effects—for example, by combining child and produce benefits within particular domains of
876 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

children’s lives. At the same time, it is clear opmental scientific literature, much can be
that enduring social, psychological, and health gained from firsthand exposure to profession-
benefits necessitate comprehensive, multifac- als from different applied settings: social
eted programs that produce substantive workers, community mental health workers,
changes at the level of environmental systems teachers, and school administrators, as well as
(Dryfoos, 1994; Hamburg, 1992; Luthar, law enforcement officials and policymakers.
1999; Shonkoff & Meisels, 2000; Zigler &
Berman, 1983), and such large-scale pro-
Temporal considerations
grams do not lend themselves to controlled
experimental evaluations. From a temporal standpoint, a critical mes-
In order to maximize lasting effects in fu- sage stemming from resilience research (Fels-
ture efforts, therefore, controlled experimental man & Vaillant, 1987; Luthar, 1999; 2000;
studies should provide the foundation for, and Rutter, 1990, 2000; Werner, 2000) is that
be integrated within, relatively comprehensive there is value in interventions at all develop-
interventions, which are evaluated by more mental transitions, and not just in the earliest
descriptive approaches. For developmental re- years. Early childhood interventions are of
searchers to be entirely dismissive of the latter obvious preventive value, yet there is great
types of evaluations is both unwarranted and fallacy in assumptions that once interventions
unwise, for as McCall and Groark (2000, p. are offered in early childhood nothing further
199) have cautioned, if our scholarly pursuits is required, or can make any difference
are limited to those issues that can be exam- (Zigler & Styfco, 1996). Children have differ-
ined in a scientifically ideal ways, “we risk ent “sensitive periods” during which they are
becoming irrelevant, anachronistic, and ex- maximally responsive to different types of in-
pendable. Instead, we must pursue also the terventions, so that educationally based pro-
best obtainable information on issues of soci- grams, for example, are more likely to benefit
etal need, which evidence may be crude but preschoolers than toddlers, and interventions
should never be sloppy.” (For additional dis- targeting attitudes toward deviant behaviors
cussions on flexible, ecologically valid evalu- are most likely to be effective with preadoles-
ative approaches, see Jensen et al., 1999, Ler- cents and adolescents (Weissberg & Green-
ner et al., 2000, and Shonkoff, 2000.) berg, 1998).
Related to these directions for applied sci- Two other critical temporal considerations,
ence are issues related to training. In a com- both commonly noted (see Weissberg &
mentary on the place of applied studies in the Greenberg, 1998; Zigler & Styfco, 1993),
field of developmental psychology, Zigler warrant reemphasis here. The first issue is
(1998) underscored the need for appropriate that longer periods of intervention generally
instruction to ensure that intervention and pol- have been found to be more effective than
icy studies are held to the same high standards shorter ones. Analyses of data from the Chi-
long honored for basic research. Noting that cago Child Parent Center program establish
work at the intersect of research and policy is that children who had more than 4 years of
generally undertaken by senior scientists— experience with quality preschool or kinder-
who have well-established credentials in basic garten programs fared far better, at the eighth-
science—Zigler argues for enhanced scien- grade level, than those with only 1 or 2 years
tific instruction of young scholars interested of participation in early intervention programs
primarily in the applications of psychological (Reynolds, 1994, 1995). Zigler and Styfco’s
theory and research in the development of ef- (1993) review of several such programs con-
fective interventions and policies. In a related firmed that the advantages of preschool pro-
vein, there have been calls for increased grams can be sustained with dovetailed,
cross-disciplinary training within research- school-age interventions. Data such as these
oriented graduate programs (e.g., Cicchetti & underscore the substantial limits to relatively
Toth, 1991, 1998; Knitzer, 1996; Luthar, brief, one-shot interventions for children fac-
1999). To illustrate, for doctoral students ing substantial life adversities (see also Pi-
whose learning is based largely in the devel- anta & Walsh, 1998).
Construct of resilience 877

The other temporal consideration has to do emotional distress can inhibit individuals’
with intervening during periods of transition, ability to maintain adequate functioning
such as entry into school, into adolescence, or across various everyday roles, including those
into the workforce. Each of these transitions in the domains of academic and job perfor-
carries normative developmental challenges mance, behavioral conformity, interpersonal
even for “low-risk” groups (see Eccles, relationships, and parenting; there also can be
Lord, & Roeser, 1996; Felner, Brand, Adan, substantial spillover effects into physical
Mulhall, Flowers, Sartain, & DuBois, 1993). health status (e.g., in terms of lowered immu-
For youngsters in high-risk life circumstances, nity to illnesses; Beckham & Leber, 1995;
threats posed by these normative challenges Brent & Moritz, 1997; Gjerde & Block, 1996;
can be substantially compounded by serious Hammen, 1997; Salovey, Rothman, Det-
stressors in their everyday lives (Luthar & weiler, & Steward, 2000; von Hecker &
Burack, 2000). Research-based understanding Sedek, 1999). Third, although at-risk children
of resilience can allow practitioners to capital- may excel in some domains (appearing “resil-
ize on periods of developmental transitions, ient” in some respects), many of these chil-
both within the child as well as in proximal dren can develop a range of serious difficul-
and distal ecologies (e.g., culture or commu- ties over time, in the absence of appropriate
nity), as unique opportunities for promoting interventions (see Apfel and Seitz, 1997; Ege-
positive adaptation in adverse situations (Cic- land et al., 1993; O’Dougherty–Wright, et al.,
chetti, 1993; Cicchetti & Toth, 1992). 1997). Fourth, Knitzer (2000a) has noted that
for many vulnerable low-income individuals,
Greater attention to mental health access to mental health services can be an im-
portant pathway to long-term productivity and
Considering domains of well-being that are
employability. In support of her thesis, she
typically targeted, current national policies re-
cites outcome data from a range of recently
flect considerable imbalance in the relative
developed interventions, each of which in-
neglect of mental health (Cowen, 1994, 1999;
volves explicit attention to the mental health
Luthar & Burack, 2000). Most existing pro-
needs of at-risk children and their parents.
grams attempt to foster academic or job skills,
In future policies for children and their
or to reduce behaviors that are disruptive to
families, therefore, there is a critical need for
others (e.g., conduct or antisocial problems).
vigilance not only with regard to the inevita-
As Knitzer (2000a) notes, there is little cogni-
bly dynamic nature of “resilient” status but
zance of the reality “that a child’s emotional
also with regard to the ongoing strains in-
state also affects his or her ability to achieve
duced when emotional distress coexists with
the level of social and cognitive competence
manifest competence. In conjunction with
necessary to learn” (p. 421).
promoting the movement of at-risk persons
The value of explicit attention to mental
from negative adjustment trajectories to more
health is evident in several bodies of empiri-
positive ones, insights on resilience also must
cal evidence (Luthar, 2000). First, studies on
be brought to bear in helping those who
resilience have shown that even when at-risk
achieve relatively resilient outcomes to retain
individuals reflect exemplary, socially con-
their positive adjustment status.
forming behavioral profiles, many struggle
with considerable inner distress (Cohler et al.,
1995; Herrenkohl, Herrenkohl, & Egolf, Need for broader perspective on
1994; Luthar, 1991; Luthar, Doernberger, & individuals “at risk”
Zigler, 1993; O’Dougherty–Wright, Masten,
A final critical consideration for future poli-
Northwood, & Hubbard, 1997; Radke–Yar-
cies is that it is essential to guard against pre-
row & Brown, 1993).3 Second, unremitting
conceived notions about which children
“need” interventions to promote well-being.
3. Instances where overtly resilient individuals were not
found to demonstrate high inner distress include Mas- The importance of this issue is perhaps most
ten et al. (1999), and Neighbors, Forehand, and McVi- starkly indicated by evidence on adjustment
car (1993). difficulties among suburban, relatively afflu-
878 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

ent youth, a group typically thought of as be- mental science. Additionally, from a temporal
ing at “low risk.” Recent research has shown standpoint, issues worthy of note are that (d)
that these youngsters display high levels of there can be value in interventions imple-
substance use—greater even than those of in- mented at all developmental phases and not
ner-city youth (Beuhring, Saewyc, Stern, & just those in early childhood; (e) brief, one-
Resnick, 1996; Luthar & D’Avanzo, 1999). shot interventions are likely to be limited in
Similarly, clinically significant depressive effectiveness; and (f) interventions at times of
symptoms have been found in one of five sub- developmental transitions can be particularly
urban teenage girls, rates 2–3 times as high beneficial for at-risk youth. Finally, in future
as those in national normative data (Luthar & efforts to promote resilience, there is benefit
D’Avanzo, 1999; see also Csikszentmihalyi, in (g) according explicit attention to at-risk in-
1999). dividuals’ mental health in addition to their
Reviewing such findings, one might argue behavioral capacity to meet societal expecta-
that these youngsters should not really be the tions, and (h) guarding against narrow, stereo-
concern of policymakers, as these children’s typical conceptions of which subgroups of
families have ample socioeconomic resources children or families should be considered “at
to seek help privately. Assertions such as risk” for various negative outcomes.
these are ill founded, however, as children
and adolescents, even the most affluent, are
Conclusions
rarely able to act as independent agents to ac-
quire help for emotional distress (Luthar & Resilience research has substantial potential
D’Avanzo, 1999). Furthermore, many parents to guide the development of effective inter-
do not actively seek help for their children, ventions for diverse at-risk populations, given
even when they are aware that their children the empirical attention to positive adjustment
are emotionally troubled (Puura, Almqvist, as well as to adaptational failures, to forces
Tamminen, Piha, Kumpulainen, Rasanen, that are protective in nature as well as to those
Moilanen, Koivisto, 1998). Finally, affluent that exacerbate vulnerability, and to the mech-
parents themselves experience several chal- anisms that underlie their effects. As Coie and
lenges to optimal adjustment, including pres- colleagues (1993) note, in many situations
sures to avoid overt displays of vulnerability where risk factors are difficult to eliminate al-
(Wolfe & Fodor, 1996). Consequently, many together (or to identify in advance), interven-
of these individuals may not seek assistance tion strategies of choice often lie in concerted
despite being in considerable distress. Find- efforts to understand and bolster protective
ings such as these collectively imply that our processes.
policies geared at fostering resilience must en- On the other hand, the benefits of applying
compass all families and children, without the resilience paradigm can be seriously jeop-
preconceived notions that some groups are in- ardized without careful attention to several
evitably at low risk or cannot benefit from ex- critical precautions. Documentation in both
ternal assistance (see also Jessor et al., 1998b; science and practice must include explicit
Takanishi, 1996). clarifications that resilience represents compe-
In summary, in future scientific efforts tent adaptation in the face of adversity, pre-
there is value in an enhanced interface be- empting misconceptions that this is a proxy
tween research on resilience and its applica- for some individuals’ innate imperviousness
tions to foster positive outcomes. Salient di- to life stresses. Interventions based on resil-
rections in this regard include (a) continued ience research must have a compelling basis
exploration of ways to harness empirically in both theory and prior empirical findings on
identified coexisting protective factors; (b) the recipient groups, should target protective
use of flexible, integrative evaluation strate- and vulnerability forces at multiple levels of
gies which combine both quantitative and influence, and must reflect careful consider-
qualitative approaches; and (c) enhanced ation of the ways in which goals and tech-
training of young scholars in applied develop- niques “fit” with the life circumstances and
Construct of resilience 879

everyday ecologies of the individuals served. tions (e.g., those with little conceptual coher-
Furthermore, integrative, community-based ence or ecological relevance). Improvident in-
approaches in service delivery are critical. terventions not only dissipate limited service
Several recent national initiatives reflect dollars in the short term but also, more seri-
explicit recognition of the potential for resil- ously, can serve to perpetuate dangerous be-
ience research to guide efficacious interven- liefs over time about the intractability of prob-
tions. The inherent promise of the construct lems among various vulnerable segments of
of resilience must, however, be continually contemporary society.
weighed against the dangers of hasty applica-

References
Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (1997). American Journal M. D. (1996). Voice of Connecticut Youth: A state-
of Orthopsychiatry, 67, 408–421. wide survey of adolescent health. Unpublished manu-
Apfel, N., & Seitz, V. (1997). The firstborn sons of Afri- script, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
can-American teenage mothers: Perspectives on risk Braswell, M., & Seay, T. (1984). Approaches to counsel-
and resilience. In S. S. Luthar, J. A. Burack, D. Cic- ing and psychotherapy (2nd ed). Prospect Heights, IL:
chetti, & J. R. Weisz (Eds.), Developmental psycho- Waveland Press.
pathology: Perspectives on adjustment, risk, and dis- Brent, D. A., & Moritz, G. (1997). Developmental path-
order (pp. 486–506). New York: Cambridge ways to adolescent suicide. In D. Cicchetti & S. L.
University Press. Toth (Eds.), Adolescence: Opportunities and chal-
Barnett, W. S. (1985). The Perry Preschool program and lenges (pp. 233–258). Rochester, NY: University of
its long-term effects: A benefit-cost analysis (High/ Rochester Press.
Scope Early Childhood Policy Paper No. 21). Ypsi- Brody, G. H., Stoneman, Z., Flor, D., McCrary, C., Has-
lanti, MI: High/Scope Educational Research Founda- tings, L., & Conyers, O. (1994). Financial resources,
tion. parent psychological functioning, parent co-care-
Barnett, W. S. (1993). Benefit–cost analysis of preschool giving, and early adolescent competence in rural two-
education: Findings from a 25-year follow-up. Ameri- parent African-American families. Child Develop-
can Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 63, 500–508. ment, 65, 590–605.
Barrera, M., & Prelow, H. M. (in press). Interventions to Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecol-
promote social support in children and adolescents. In ogy of human development. American Psychologist,
D. Cicchetti, J. Rappaport, I. Sandler, & R. Weissberg 32, 513–531.
(Eds.), The promotion of wellness in children and ad- Burt, M. R., Resnick, G., & Novick, E. R. (1998). Build-
olescents. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of ing supportive communities for at-risk adolescents: It
America Press. takes more than services. Washington, DC: American
Beardslee, W. R. (1989). The role of self-understanding Psychological Association.
in resilient individuals: The development of a per- Cicchetti, D. (1993). Developmental psychopathology:
spective. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 59, Reactions, reflections, projections. Developmental
266–278. Review, 13, 471–502.
Beardslee, W. R., & Podorefsky, D. (1988). Resilient ad- Cicchetti, D., & Aber, J. L. (1986). Early precursors to
olescents whose parents have serious affective and later depression: An organizational perspective. In L.
other psychiatric disorders: The importance of self- Lipsitt & C. Rovee–Collier (Eds.), Advances in in-
understanding and relationships. American Journal of fancy (Vol. 4, pp. 81–137). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Psychiatry, 145, 63–69. Cicchetti, D., & Lynch, M. (1993). Toward an ecological/
Beardslee, W. R., Versage, E. M., Salt, P., & Wright, transactional model of community violence and child
E. (1999). The development and evaluation of two maltreatment: Consequences for children’s develop-
preventive intervention strategies for children of de- ment. Psychiatry, 56, 96–118.
pressed parents. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Toth (Eds.), Cicchetti, D., Rappaport, J., Sandler, I., & Weissberg,
Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopath- R. P. (Eds.). (in press). The promotion of wellness
ology: Vol 9. Developmental approaches to preven- in children and adolescents. Washington, DC: Child
tion and intervention (pp. 111–151). Rochester, NY: Welfare League of America Press.
University of Rochester Press. Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (1997). The role of self-
Beckham, E. E., & Leber, W. R. (1995). Handbook of organization in the promotion of resilience in mal-
depression (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford. treated children. Development and Psychopathology,
Beeghly, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1994). Child maltreatment, 9, 799–817.
attachment, and the self system: Emergence of an in- Cicchetti, D., Rogosch, F. A., & Toth, S. L. (2000). The
ternal state lexicon in toddlers at high social risk. De- efficacy of toddler–parent psychotherapy for foster-
velopment and Psychopathology, 6, 5–30. ing cognitive development in offspring of depressed
Benard, B. (1999). Applications of resilience: Possibili- mothers. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28,
ties and promise. In M. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), 135–148.
Resilience and development: Positive life adaptations Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (1991). The making of a de-
(pp. 269–280). New York: Plenum. velopmental psychopathologist. In J. Cantor, C.
Beuhring, T., Saewyc, E. M., Stern, C. B., & Resnick, Spiker, & L. Lipsitt (Eds.), Child behavior and devel-
880 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

opment: Training for diversity (pp. 34–72). Norwood, to prevention and intervention (pp. 1–24). Rochester,
NJ: Ablex. NY: University of Rochester Press.
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (1992). The role of develop- Cowen, E. L., Hightower, A. D., Pedro-Carroll, J. L.,
mental theory in prevention and intervention. Devel- Work, W. C., Wyman, P. A., & Haffey, W. G. (1996).
opment and Psychopathology, 4, 489–493. School based prevention for children at risk: The Pri-
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (Eds.). (1993). Child abuse, mary Mental Health Project. Washington, DC: Amer-
child development, and social policy. Norwood, NJ: ican Psychological Association.
Ablex. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). If we are so rich, why
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (1995). Developmental psy- aren’t we happy? American Psychologist, 54, 821–
chopathology and disorders of affect. In D. Cic- 827.
chetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psycho- Davis, N. J. (1999). Resilience: Status of research and
pathology: Vol. 2. Risk, disorder, and adaptation (pp. research-based programs. Working paper, Center for
369–420). New York: Wiley. Mental Health Services, Substance Abuse and Mental
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (1998). Perspectives on re- Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of
search and practice in developmental psychopathol- Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD.
ogy. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), Handbook of child Doll, B., & Lyon, M. A. (1998). Risk and resilience: Im-
psychology (5th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 479–583). New York: plications for the delivery of educational and mental
Wiley. health services in schools. School Psychology Review,
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (Eds.). (1999). Rochester 27, 348–363.
Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology: Vol. Downey, G., & Coyne, J. C. (1990). Children of de-
9. Developmental approaches to prevention and inter- pressed parents: An integrative review. Psychological
vention. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Bulletin, 108, 50–76.
Press. Dryfoos, J. (1994). Full service schools: A revolution in
Cicchetti, D., Toth, S. L., & Rogosch, F. A. (1999). The health and social services for children, youth, and
efficacy of toddler–parent psychotherapy to increase families. San Francisco: Jossey–Bass.
attachment security in offspring of depressed mothers. DuBois, D. L., Felner, R. D., Brand, S., Adan, A. M., &
Attachment and Human Development, 1, 34–66. Evans, E. G. (1992). A prospective study of life
Cicchetti, D., Toth, S. L., & Rogosch, F. A. (in press). stress, social support, and adaptation in early adoles-
Toddler–parent psychotherapy for depressed mothers cence. Child Development, 63, 542–557.
and their offspring: Implications for attachment the- DuBois, D. L., Felner, R. D., Meares, G., & Krier, M.
ory. In L. Atkinson (Ed.), Clinical applications of at- (1994). Prospective investigation of the effects of so-
tachment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. cioeconomic disadvantage, life stress, and social sup-
Cohler, B. J., Stott, F. M., & Musick, J. S. (1995). Adver- port on early adolescent adjustment. Journal of Ab-
sity, vulnerability, and resilience. Cultural and devel- normal Psychology, 103, 511–522.
opmental perspectives. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen Dumas, J. E., & Wekerle, C. (1995). Maternal reports
(Eds.), Developmental Psychopathology: Vol. 2. Risk, and child behavior problems and personal distress as
disorder and adaptation (pp. 753–800). New York: predictors of dysfunctional parenting. Development
Wiley. and Psychopathology, 7, 465–479.
Coie, J. D., Watt, N. F., West, S. G., Hawkins, J. D., Durlak, J. A. (1997). Primary prevention programs in
Asarnow, J. R., Markman, H. J., Ramey, S. L., Shure, schools. In T. H. Ollendick & R. H. Prinz (Eds.) Ad-
M. B., & Long, B. (1993). The science of prevention: vances in clinical child psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 283–
318). New York: Plenum Press.
A conceptual framework and some directions for a
Eber, L., & Nelson, C. M. (1997) School-based wrap-
national research program. American Psychologist,
around planning: Integrating services for students
48, 1013–1022.
with emotional and behavioral needs. American Jour-
Comer, J. P. (1988). Educating poor minority children.
nal of Orthopsychiatry, 67, 385–395.
Scientific American, 259, 42–48.
Eccles, J. S., Lord, S. E., & Roeser, R. W. (1996). Round
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1992). A
holes, square pegs, rocky roads, and sore feet: A dis-
developmental and clinical model for the prevention cussion of stage–environment fit theory applied to
of conduct disorder: The Fast Track Program. Devel- families and schools. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Toth
opment and Psychopathology, 4, 509–527. (Eds.), Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psy-
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999a). chopathology: Vol. VII. Adolescence: Opportunities
Initial impact of the Fast Track Prevention Trial for and challenges (pp. 47–92). Rochester, NY: Univer-
Conduct Problems: I. The high-risk sample. Journal sity of Rochester Press.
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 631–647. Egeland, B., Carlson, E., & Sroufe, L. A. (1993). Resil-
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999b). ience as process. Development and Psychopathology,
Initial impact of the Fast Track Prevention Trial for 5, 517–528.
Conduct Problems: II. Classroom effects. Journal of Fantuzzo, J., Coolahan, K. C., & Weiss, A. D. (1997).
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 648–657. Resiliency partnership–directed intervention: Enhanc-
Cowen, E. L. (1991). In pursuit of wellness. American ing the social competencies of preschool victims of
Psychologist, 46, 404–408. physical abuse by developing peer resources and
Cowen, E. L. (1994). The enhancement of psychological community strengths. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Toth
wellness: Challenges and opportunities. American (Eds.), Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psy-
Journal of Community Psychology, 22, 149–179. chopathology: Vol. 8. Developmental perspectives on
Cowen, E. L. (1999). In sickness and in health: Primary trauma (pp. 463–489). Rochester, NY: University of
prevention’s vows revisited. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Rochester Press.
Toth (Eds.), Rochester Symposium on Developmental Felner, R. D., Brand, S., Adan, A. M., Mulhall, P. F.,
Psychopathology: Vol 9. Developmental approaches Flowers, N., Sartain, B., & DuBois, D. L. (1993). Re-
Construct of resilience 881

structuring the ecology of the school as an approach Research in Child Development Social Policy Report,
to prevention during school transitions: Longitudinal Volume XIII, Number 3.
follow-ups and extensions of the School Transitional Herrenkohl, E. C., Herrenkohl, R. C., & Egolf, B. (1994).
Environment Project (STEP). Prevention in Human Resilient early school-age children from maltreating
Services, 10, 103–136. homes: Outcomes in adolescence. American Journal
Felsman, J. K., & Vaillant, G. E. (1987). Resilient chil- of Orthopsychiatry, 64, 301–309.
dren as adults: A 40-year study. In E. J. Anthony & Hogue, A., & Liddle, H. A. (1999). Family-based preven-
B. J. Cohler (Eds.), The invulnerable child (pp. 289– tive intervention: An approach to preventing sub-
314). New York: Guilford Press. stance use and antisocial behavior. American Journal
Fergusson, D. M., & Lynskey, M. T. (1996). Adolescent of Orthopsychiatry, 69, 278–293.
resiliency to family adversity. Journal of Child Psy- Huston, A. C. (1994b). Children in poverty: Designing
chology and Psychiatry, 37, 281–292. research to affect policy. Social Policy Report, 8,
Freitas, A. L., & Downey, G. (1998). Resilience: A dy- 1–12.
namic perspective. International Journal of Behav- Institute of Medicine. (1985). Research on mental illness
ioral Development, 22, 263–285. and addictive disorders: Progress and prospects. The
Furstenberg, F. F., Cook, T. D., Eccles, J., Elder, G. H., & American Journal of Psychiatry, 1142, (Suppl.) 1–41.
Sameroff, A. (1999). Managing to make it: Urban Institute of Medicine. (1989). Research on children and
families and adolescent success. Chicago: University adolescents with mental, behavioral, and develop-
of Chicago Press. mental disorders. Washington, DC: National Acad-
Gager, P. J., & Elias, M. J. (1997). Implementing preven- emy Press.
tion programs in high-risk environments: Application Institute of Medicine. (1994). Reducing risks for mental
of the resiliency paradigm. American Journal of Or- disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention re-
thopsychiatry, 67, 363–373. search. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Garbarino, J. (1995). The American war zone: What chil- Jensen, P., Hoagwood, K., & Trickett, E. (1999). Ivory
dren can tell us about living with violence. Develop- towers or earthen trenches? Community collabora-
mental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 16, 431–434. tions to foster “real world” research. Applied Devel-
Garcı́a Coll, C. T., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, opmental Science, 3, 206–212.
H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., & Vázquez Garcı́a, H. Jessor, R. (1993). Successful adolescent development
(1996). An integrative model for the study of devel- among youth in high-risk settings. American Psychol-
opmental competencies in minority children. Child ogist, 48, 117–126.
Development, 67, 1891–1914. Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., & Costa, F. M. (1998a). Risk
Garmezy, N., Masten, A. S., & Tellegen, A. (1984). The and protection in successful outcomes among disad-
study of stress and competence in children: A build- vantaged adolescents. Applied Developmental Sci-
ing block for developmental psychopathology. Child ence, 2,194–208.
Development, 55, 97–111. Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., & Costa, F. M. (1998b). Protec-
Gjerde, P. F., & Block, J. (1996). A developmental per- tive factors in adolescent health behavior. Journal of
spective on depressive symptoms in adolescence: Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 788–800.
Gender differences in autocentric–allocentric modes Jessor, R., Van Den Bos, J., Vanderryn, J., Costa, F. M., &
of impulse regulation. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Toth Turbin, M. S. (1995). Protective factors in adolescent
(Eds.), Adolescence: Opportunities and challenges problem behavior: Moderator effects and develop-
(pp. 167–198). Rochester, NY: University of Roches- mental change. Developmental Psychology, 31, 923–
ter Press.
933.
Glantz, M., & Johnson, J. (Eds.). (1999). Resilience and
Kellam, S. G., & Rebok, G. W. (1992). Building develop-
development: Positive life adaptations. New York:
mental and etiological theory through epidemiologi-
Plenum.
cally based preventive intervention trials. In J. Mc-
Graham, S., & Hoehn, S. (1995). Children’s understand-
Cord & R. E. Tremblay (Eds.), Preventing antisocial
ing of aggression and withdrawal as social stigmas:
behavior: Interventions from birth through adoles-
An attributional analysis. Child Development, 66,
1143–1161. cence (pp. 162–195). New York: Guilford Press.
Graham, S., & Hudley, C. (1994). Attributions of aggres- Kessler, R. C., McGonagle, K. A., Zhao, S., Nelson,
sive and nonaggressive African-American male early C. B., Hughes, M., Eshleman, S., Wittchen, H., &
adolescents: A study of construct accessibility. Devel- Kendler, K.S. (1994). Lifetime and 12-month preva-
opmental Psychology, 30, 365–373. lence of DSM-IIIR psychiatric disorders in the United
Hamburg, D. A. (1992). Today’s children: Creating a fu- States. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51, 8–19.
ture for a generation in crisis. New York: Times Kitzman, H., Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R., Hanks, C.,
Books. Cole, R., Tatelbaum, R., McConnochie, K. M., Si-
Hammen, C. (1997). Depression. Hove, England: Psy- dora, K., Luckey, D. W., Shaver, D., Engelhardt, K.,
chology Press/Erlbaum. James, D., & Barnard, K. (1997). Randomized trial
Hawkins, J. D., & Catalano, R. F. (1992). Communitites of prenatal and infancy home visitation by nurses on
that care: Action for drug abuse prevention. San pregnancy outcomes, childhood injuries, and repeated
Francisco: Jossey–Bass. childbearing. Journal of American Medical Associa-
Haynes, N. M., & Comer, J. P. (1996). Integrating tion, 278, 644–652.
schools, families, and communities through success- Klerman, G. L., Weissman, M. M., Rounsaville, B. J., &
ful school reform: The School Development program. Chevron, E. (1984). Interpersonal psychotherapy of
School Psychology Review, 25, 501–506. depression. New York: Basic Books.
Henrich, C. C., Brown, J. L., & Aber, J. L. (1999). Evalu- Knitzer, J. (1996). Children’s mental health: Changing
ating the effectiveness of school-based violence pre- programs and policies. In E. F. Zigler, S. L. Kagan, &
vention: Developmental approaches. In Society for N. W. Hall (Eds.), Children, families, and govern-
882 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

ment: Preparing for the 21st century (pp. 207–232). chotherapy Mother’s Group: A developmentally in-
New York: Cambridge University Press. formed intervention for at-risk mothers. Development
Knitzer, J. (2000a). Early childhood mental health ser- and Psychopathology, 12, 235–253.
vices: A policy and systems development perspective. Luthar, S. S., Suchman, N. E., & Boltas, D. (1997). Rela-
In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels (Eds.), Handbook tional Parenting Mothers’ Group: A therapist’s man-
of early childhood intervention (2nd ed., pp. 416– ual. Unpublished manuscript, Yale University, New
438). New York: Cambridge University Press. Haven, CT.
Knitzer, J. (2000b). Promoting resilience: Helping young Luthar, S. S., & Zigler, E. (1991). Vulnerability and com-
children and families affected by substance abuse, do- petence: A review of research on resilience in child-
mestic violence, and depression in the context of wel- hood. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61,
fare reform (Children and Welfare Reform Issue Brief 6–22.
No. 8). New York: National Center for Children in Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1998). An ecological–trans-
Poverty. actional analysis of children and contexts: The longi-
Kraemer, H. C., Kazdin, A. E., Offord, D. R., Vessler, tudinal interplay among child maltreatment, com-
R. C., Jensen, P. S., & Kupfer, D. J. (1997). Coming munity violence, and children’s symptomatology.
to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of General Development and Psychopathology, 10, 235–257.
Psychiatry, 54, 337–343. Masten, A. S. (1994). Resilience in individual develop-
Kumpfer, K. L. (1999). Factors and processes contribut- ment: Successful adaptation despite risk and adver-
ing to resilience: The resilience framework. In M. sity. In M. C. Wang & E. W. Gordon (Eds.), Educa-
Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and devel- tional resilience in inner-city America: Challenges
opment: Positive life adaptations (pp. 179–224). New and prospects (pp. 3–25). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
York: Plenum Press. Masten, A. (1999). Commentary: The promise and perils
Lerner, R. M., Fisher, C. B., & Weinberg, R. A. (2000). of resilience research as a guide to preventive inter-
Toward a science for and of the people: Promoting ventions. In M. D. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Re-
civil society through the application of developmental silience and development: Positive life adaptations
science. Child Development, 71, 11–20. (pp. 251–257). New York: Plenum Press.
Lieberman, A. F. (1992). Infant–parent psychotherapy Masten, A., Best, K., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience
with toddlers. Development and Psychopathology, 4, and development: Contributions from the study of
559–574. children who overcome adversity. Development and
Luthar, S. S. (1991). Vulnerability and resilience: A study Psychopathology, 2, 425–444.
of high-risk adolescents. Child Development, 62, Masten, A., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1998). The develop-
600–616. ment of competence in favorable and unfavorable en-
Luthar, S. S. (1993). Annotation: Methodological and vironments: Lessons from research on successful chil-
conceptual issues in the study of resilience. Journal dren. American Psychologist, 53, 205–220.
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34, 441–453. Masten, A. S., Hubbard, J. J., Gest, S. D., Tellegen, A.,
Luthar, S. S. (1995). Social competence in the school set- Garmezy, N., & Ramirez, M. (1999). Competence in
ting: Prospective cross-domain associations among the context of adversity: Pathways to resilience and
inner-city teens. Child Development, 66, 416–429. maladaptation from childhood to late adolescence.
Luthar, S. S. (1999). Poverty and children’s adjustment. Development and Psychopathology, 11, 143–169.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Maton, K., Schellenbach, C., Leadbeater, B. & Solarz, A.
Luthar, S. S. (2000, March). The construct of resilience: (in press). Investing in children, youth, families and
Applications in interventions. Keynote address, XX- communities: Strengths-based research and policy.
XII Banff International Conference on Behavioral Washington, DC: American Psychological Associa-
Sciences, Banff, AB, Canada. tion.
Luthar, S. S., & Burack, J. A. (2000). Adolescent well- McCall, R. B., & Groark, C. J. (2000). The future of ap-
ness: In the eye of the beholder? In D. Cicchetti, J. plied child development research and public policy.
Rappaport, I. Sandler, & R. Weissberg (Eds.), The Child Development, 71, 197–204.
promotion of wellness in children and adolescents McCartney, K., & Rosenthal, R. (2000). Effect size, prac-
(pp. 29–57). Washington, DC: Child Welfare League tical importance, and social policy for children. Child
of America Press. Development, 71, 173–180.
Luthar, S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The con- McMahon, T. J., & Luthar, S. S. (1998). Bridging the
struct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guide- gap for children as their parents enter substance abuse
lines for future work. Child Development, 71, 543– treatment. In R. L. Hampton, V. Senatore, & T. P.
562. Gullota (Eds.), Bridging the fields of substance abuse
Luthar S. S., & Cushing, G. (1999). Measurement issues and child welfare: Vol. 7. Issues in children’s and
in the empirical study of resilience: An overview. In families’ lives (pp. 143–187). Thousand Oaks, CA:
M. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and de- Sage.
velopment: Positive life adaptations (pp. 129–160). Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (in press). Childhood predic-
New York: Plenum. tions differentiate life-course-persistent and adoles-
Luthar, S. S., & D’Avanzo, K. (1999). Contextual factors cence-limited antisocial pathways among males and
in substance use: A study of suburban and inner-city females. Development and Psychopathology.
adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 11, National Institute of Mental Health. (1993). The preven-
845–867. tion of mental disorders: A national research agenda.
Luthar, S. S., Doernberger, C. H., & Zigler, E. (1993). Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Mental Health.
Resilience is not a unidimensional construct: Insights National Institute of Mental Health. (1998). Priorities for
from a prospective study of inner-city adolescents. prevention research at NIMH. Bethesda, MD: Na-
Development and Psychopathology, 5, 703–717. tional Institute of Mental Health.
Luthar, S. S., & Suchman, N. E. (2000). Relational Psy- Neighbors, B., Forehand, R., & McVicar, D. (1993). Re-
Construct of resilience 883

silient adolescents and interparental conflict. Ameri- Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children’s re-
can Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 63, 462–471. sponses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W. Kent &
Noam, G. (1992). Development as the aim of clinical in- J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention in psychopathol-
tervention. Development and Psychopathology, 4, ogy: Vol. 8. Social competence in children (pp. 49–
679–696. 74). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
O’Dougherty-Wright, M., Masten, A. S., Northwood, Rutter, M. (1990). Psychosocial resilience and protective
A., & Hubbard, J. J. (1997). Long-term effects of mechanisms. In J. Rolf, A. S. Masten, D. Cicchetti,
massive trauma: Developmental and psychobiological K. H. Nuechterlein, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and
perspectives. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Toth (Eds.), protective factors in the development of psychopath-
Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopath- ology (pp. 181–214). New York: Cambridge Univer-
ology: Vol. 8. Developmental perspectives on trauma sity Press.
(pp. 181–225). Rochester, NY: University of Roches- Rutter, M. (1999). Resilience concepts and findings: Im-
ter Press. plications for family therapy. Journal of Family Ther-
Olds, D. L., & Korfmacher, J. (Eds.). (1997). Home visi- apy, 21, 119–144.
tation I [Special issue]. Journal of Community Psy- Rutter, M. (2000). Resilience reconsidered: Conceptual
chology, 25(1). considerations, empirical findings, and policy impli-
Olds, D. L., & Korfmacher, J. (Eds.). (1998). Home visi- cations. In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels (Eds.),
tation II [Special issue]. Journal of Community Psy- Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed.,
chology, 26(1). pp. 651–682). New York: Cambridge University
Osofsky, J. D. (1995). The effects of exposure to violence Press.
on young children. American Psychologist, 50, 782– Rutter, M., Silberg, J., O’Connor, T., & Simonoff, E.
788. (1999). Genetics and child psychiatry: II. Empirical
Pianta, R. C., & Walsh, D. J. (1998). High-risk children research findings. Journal of Child Psychology &
in schools: Constructing sustaining relationships. Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 40, 19–55.
New York: Routledge. Salovey, P., Rothman, A. J., Detweiler, J. B., & Steward,
Puura, K., Almqvist, F., Tamminen, T., Piha, J., Kumpu- W. T. (2000). Emotional states and physical health.
lainen, K., Rasanen, E., Moilanen, I., & Koivisto, A. American Psychologist, 55, 110–121.
(1998). Children with symptoms of depression— Sameroff, A. J., & Chandler, M. J. (1975). Reproductive
What do the adults see? Journal of Child Psychology risk and the continuum of caretaking casualty. In
and Psychiatry, 39, 577–585. F. D. Horowitz, M. Hetherington, S. Scarr–Salapa-
Radke–Yarrow, M., & Brown, E. (1993). Resilience and tek, & G. Siegel (Eds.), Review of child development
vulnerability in children of multiple-risk families. De- research (pp.187–243). Chicago: University of Chi-
velopment and Psychopathology, 5, 581–592. cago Press.
Rende, R., & Plomin, R. (1993). Families at risk for psy- Sameroff, A. J., Seifer, R., Barocas, R., Zax, M., &
chopathology: Who becomes affected and why? De- Greenspan, S. (1987). Intelligence quotient scores of
velopment and Psychopathology, 5, 529–540. 4 year children: Social–environmental risk factors.
Resnick, L. B. (1994). Situated rationalism: Biological Pediatrics, 79, 343–350.
and social preparation for learning. In L. Hirsch- Sameroff, A. J., Seifer, R., & Bartko, W. T. (1997). Envi-
field & S. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain ronmental perspectives on adaptation during child-
specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 474–493). hood and adolescence. In S. S. Luthar, J. A. Burack,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. D. Cicchetti, & J. R. Weisz (Eds.), Developmental
Reynolds, A. J. (1994). Effects of a preschool plus fol-
psychopathology: Perspectives on adjustment, risk,
low-up intervention for children at risk. Develop-
and disorder (pp. 507–526). New York: Cambridge
mental Psychology, 30, 787–804.
University Press.
Reynolds, A. J. (1995). One year of preschool interven-
Sandler, I. N., Miller, P., Short, J., & Wolchik, S. A.
tion or two: Does it matter? Early Childhood Quar-
(1989). Social support as a protective factor for chil-
terly, 10, 1–31.
dren in stress. In D. Belle (Ed.), Children’s social net-
Reynolds, A. J. (1998). Resilience among black urban
youth: Prevalence, intervention effects, and mecha- works and social supports. Wiley series on personal-
nisms of influence. American Journal of Orthopsychi- ity processes (pp. 277–307). New York: Wiley.
atry, 68, 84–100. Sandler, I. N., Wolchik, S. A., MacKinnon, D., Ayers,
Reynolds, A. J. (in press). Success in early intervention: T. S., & Roosa, M. W. (1997). Developing linkages
The Chicago Child–Parent Center Program and between theory and intervention in stress and coping
youth through age 15. Lincoln, NE: University of Ne- processes. In S. A. Wolchik & I. N. Sandler (Eds.),
braska Press. Handbook of children’s coping: Linking theory and
Richters, J. E., & Martinez, P. E. (1993). The National intervention (pp. 3–40). New York: Plenum Press.
Institute of Mental Health Community Volence Proj- Schorr, L. B. (1997). Common purpose: Strengthening
ect: I. Children as victims of and witnesses to vio- families and neighborhoods to rebuild America. New
lence. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Bilogical Pro- York: Anchor Books, Doubleday.
cesses, 56, 7–21. Schweinhart, L. J., Barnes, H. V., Weikart, D. P., Barnett,
Robins, L., & Regier, D. A. (Eds.). (1991). Psychiatric W. S., & Epstein, A. S. (1993). Significant benefits:
disorders in America: The Epidemiologic Catchment The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through age
Area Study. New York: Free Press. twenty-seven. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Educational
Rolf, J. E., & Johnson, J. L. (1999). Opening doors to Research Foundation.
resilience intervention for prevention research. In Schweinhart, L. J., & Weikart, D. P. (1988). The High/
M. D. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and Scope Perry Preschool Program. In R. H. Price, E. L.
development: Positive life adaptations (pp. 225–249). Cowen, R. P. Lorion, & J. Ramos–McKay (Eds.), 14
New York: Plenum Press. ounces of prevention: A casebook for practitioners
884 S. S. Luthar and D. Cicchetti

(pp. 53–65). Washington, DC: American Psychologi- Waters, E., & Sroufe, L. A. (1983). Competence as a de-
cal Association. velopmental construct. Developmental Review, 3,
Scott, K. G., Mason, C. A., & Chapman, D. A. (1999). 79–97.
The use of epidemiological methodology as a means Wechsler, D. (1989). Wechsler Preschool and Primary
of influencing public policy. Child Development, 70, Scale of Intelligence—Revised Manual. San Fran-
1263–1272. cisco: Psychological Corporation.
Seitz, V., & Apfel, N. H. (1999). Effective interventions Weissberg, R. P., & Elias, M. J. (1993). Enhancing young
for adolescent mothers. Clinical Psychology—Sci- people’s social competence and health behavior: An
ence & Practice, 6, 50–66. important challenge for educators, scientists, policy
Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, makers, and funders. Applied and Preventive Psychol-
development, and death. San Francisco: Freeman. ogy: Current Scientific Perspectives, 3, 179–190.
Shirk, S. (1988). Causal reasoning and children’s com- Weissberg, R. P., & Greenberg, M. T. (1998). School and
prehension of therapeutic interpretations. In S. Shirk community competence-enhancement and prevention
(Ed.), Cognitive development and child psychother- programs. In I. E. Siegel & K. A. Renninger (Eds.),
apy (pp. 53–90). New York: Plenum Press. Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Child psychol-
Shonkoff, J. P. (2000) Science, policy, and practice: ogy in practice (5th ed., pp. 877–954). New York:
Three cultures in search of a shared misson. Child Wiley.
Development, 71, 181–187. Werner, E. E. (2000). Protective factors and individual
Shonkoff, J. P., & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook resilience. In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels (Eds.),
of early childhood intervention (2nd ed.). New York: Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed.,
Cambridge University Press. pp. 115–132). New York: Cambridge.
Spencer, M. B., Cole, S. P., DuPree, D., Glymph, A., & Werner, E. E., & Johnson, J. L. (1999). Can we apply
Pierre, P. (1993). Self-efficacy among urban African resilience? In M. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resil-
American early adolescents: Exploring issues of risk, ience and development: Positive life adaptations (pp.
vulnerability, and resilience. Development and Psy- 259–268). New York: Plenum Press.
chopathology, 5, 719–739. Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the
Sroufe, L. A., & Rutter, M. (1984). The domain of devel- odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ith-
opmental psychopathology. Child Development, 55, aca, NY: Cornell University Press.
17–29. Windle, M. (1999). Critical conceptual and measurement
St. Pierre, R. G., & Layzer, J. I. (1998). Improving the issues in the study of resilience. In M. D. Glantz & J.
life chances of children in poverty: Assumptions and L. Johnson (Eds.) Resilience and development: Posi-
what we have learned. In Society of Research in Child tive life adaptations (pp. 161–176). New York: Ple-
Development Social Policy Report, Volume XII. num Press.
Stolberg, A. L., & Mahler, J. (1994). Enhancing treatment Wolfe, J. L., & Fodor, I. G. (1996). The poverty of privi-
gains in a school-based intervention for children of lege: Therapy with women of the “upper classes.”
divorce through skills training, parental involvement, Women & Therapy, 18, 73–89.
and transfer procedures. Journal of Consulting and Wyman, P. A., Cowen, E. L., Work, W. C., Hoyt–Mey-
Clinical Psychology, 62, 147–156. ers, L., Magnus, K. B., & Fagen, D. B. (1999). Care-
Stouthamer–Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., giving and developmental factors differentiating
Zhang, Q., van Kammen, W., & Maguin, E. (1993). young at-risk urban children showing resilient versus
The double edge of protective and risk factors for de- stress-affected outcomes: A replication and extension.
linquency: Interrelations and developmental patterns. Child Development, 70, 645–659.
Development and Psychopathology, 5, 683–701. Wyman, P. A., Sandler, I., Wolchik, S., & Nelson, K. (in
Takanishi, R. (1996). Changing images of adolescents: press). Resilience as cumulative competence promo-
Rethinking our policies. In E. F. Zigler, S. L. Ka- tion and stress protection: Theory and intervention. In
gan, & N. W. Hall (Eds.), Children, families, and D. Cicchetti, J. Rappaport, I. Sandler, & R. Weissberg
government: Preparing for the 21st century (pp. 256– (Eds.), The promotion of wellness in children and ad-
267). New York: Cambridge University Press. olescents. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of
Tarter, R. E., & Vanyukov, M. (1999). Re-visiting the America Press.
validity of the construct of resilience. In M. Glantz & Yoshikawa, H. (1994). Prevention as cumulative protec-
J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resiliency and development: tion: Effects of early family support and education on
Positive life adaptations (pp. 85–100). New York: chronic delinquency and its risks. Psychological Bul-
Plenum Press. letin, 115, 28–54.
Toth, S. L., & Cicchetti, D. (1996). Patterns of related- Yoshikawa, H., & Knitzer, J. (1997). Lessons from the
ness and depressive symptomatology in maltreated field: Head Start mental health strategies to meet
children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychol- changing needs. New York: National Center for Chil-
ogy, 64, 32–41. dren in Poverty.
Toth, S. L., & Cicchetti, D. (1999).Developmental psy- Zervigon–Hakes, A. (1998). Culture clash: Translating
chopathology and child psychotherapy. In S. Russ & research findings into public policy. In W. S. Bar-
T. Ollendick (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapies nett & S. S. Boocock (Eds.), Early care and educa-
with children and families (pp. 15–44). New York: tion for children in poverty: Promises, programs, and
Plenum Press. long-term results (pp. 245–271). New York: State
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1999). Historical poverty University of New York Press.
tables. Available on-line: www.census.gov/hhes/ Zigler, E. (1998). A place of value for applied and policy
poverty/histpov/hstpov8.html studies. Child Development, 69, 532–542.
von Hecker, U., & Sedek, G. (1999). Uncontrollability, de- Zigler, E., & Berman, W. (1983). Discerning the future
pression, and the construction of mental models. Jour- of early childhood intervention. American Psycholo-
nal of Personality & Social Psychology, 77, 833–850. gist, 38, 894–906.
Construct of resilience 885

Zigler, E. F., Finn–Stevenson, M., & Stern, B. M. (1997). intervention (pp. 111–145). New Haven, CT: Yale
Supporting children and families in the schools: The University Press.
school of the 21st Century. American Journal of Or- Zigler, E. F., & Styfco, S. (1996). Head Start and early
thopsychiatry, 67, 374–384. childhood intervention: The changing course of social
Zigler, E., & Styfco, S. J. (1993). Strength in unity: Con- science and social policy. In E. F. Zigler, S. L. Ka-
solidating federal education programs for young chil- gan, & N. W. Hall (Eds.), Children, families, and
dren. In E. Zigler & S. J. Styfco (Eds.), Head Start government: Preparing for the 21st century (pp. 132–
and beyond: A national plan for extended childhood 155). New York: Cambridge University Press.