The DOI matches its Crossref record; 90 of the 92 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 58 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Whatever does not kill us: cumulative lifetime adversity, vulnerability, and resilience
Open accessAbstract
Exposure to adverse life events typically predicts subsequent negative effects on mental health and well-being, such that more adversity predicts worse outcomes. However, adverse experiences may also foster subsequent resilience, with resulting advantages for mental health and well-being. In a multiyear longitudinal study of a national sample, people with a history of some lifetime adversity reported better mental health and well-being outcomes than not only people with a high history of adversity but also than people with no history of adversity. Specifically, U-shaped quadratic relationships indicated that a history of some but nonzero lifetime adversity predicted relatively lower global distress, lower self-rated functional impairment, fewer posttraumatic stress symptoms, and higher life satisfaction over time. Furthermore, people with some prior lifetime adversity were the least affected by recent adverse events. These results suggest that, in moderation, whatever does not kill us may indeed make us stronger.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In a multiyear national longitudinal study, people with a history of some lifetime adversity reported better mental health and well-being than people with either no adversity or high adversity. The findings support a quadratic, U-shaped pattern in which moderate cumulative adversity predicts resilience and buffers against recent adverse events.
Key findings
- Greater cumulative lifetime adversity showed the usual linear association with worse outcomes: higher global distress (B = 0.174, p < .001), functional impairment (B = 0.136, p < .001), and PTS symptoms (B = 0.090, p < .001), and lower life satisfaction (B = -0.059, p = .007).
- Quadratic lifetime adversity terms were significant for all four outcomes (ps < .001): low but nonzero adversity predicted lower global distress, lower functional impairment, fewer PTS symptoms, and higher life satisfaction than no adversity or high adversity. Simple slopes at zero adversity and at high adversity (M + 1 SD) were significant and in opposite directions (ps < .001).
- Recent adversity also linearly predicted worse outcomes: higher global distress (B = 0.110, p < .001), functional impairment (B = 0.087, p < .001), PTS symptoms (B = 0.090, p < .001), and lower life satisfaction (B = -0.051, p = .003). Lifetime adversity quadratically moderated these relationships (ps < .016), such that people with some prior adversity were least affected by recent adverse events.
- Supplementary analyses with covariates and untransformed variables yielded substantively unchanged results. Respondents with no adversity endorsed lower conscientiousness and emotional stability than those with 2–4 events; no significant differences emerged for age, marital status, household size, employment, extraversion, agreeableness, or openness.
Methods
- Longitudinal national sample drawn from Knowledge Networks, N = 2,398 U.S. adults, assessed before September 2001 and at Wave 1 (~September 2002), Wave 2 (~March 2003), Wave 3 (~September 2003), and Wave 4 (~September 2004); 83.2% provided longitudinal data over Waves 2–4.
- Lifetime adversity at Wave 1 was assessed with 37 negative events across seven categories, tallying up to four instances per event; recent adversity at Wave 2 covered the previous 6 months. Outcomes at Waves 1–4 included global distress (Brief Symptom Inventory), functional impairment (SF-36 items), life satisfaction, and PTS symptoms (PTSD Checklist, referenced to the 9/11 attacks).
- Analyses used generalized estimating equations (GEE) for repeated measures. Hypothesis 1 used outcomes from Waves 2–4; Hypothesis 2 used Wave 2 recent adversity to predict Wave 3–4 outcomes while controlling for Wave 1 outcomes. Skewed variables were inverse- or log-transformed; adversity counts were divided by their SD and outcomes converted to z scores.
Limitations
- The paper states the data are correlational and cannot establish causation; it also notes that lifetime adversity was reported retrospectively, though the longitudinal design and analyses were intended to minimize recall/reporting bias.
- The paper states the adversity measure counted events rather than detailed characteristics such as event type, severity, timing, or coping success, and that mechanisms/mediators were not directly assessed. It also notes attrition was predicted by age and linear lifetime adversity, but quadratic lifetime adversity and Wave 1 outcomes did not significantly predict attrition.
- Evident from the text: PTS symptoms were assessed specifically in reference to the September 11, 2001 attacks, so generalization of that outcome to other traumas is not established; the sample was predominantly White non-Hispanic (73.7%), which may limit generalizability.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
55 Own result · 35 Not checked yet · 30 Own interpretation · 27 Own method · 2 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Next, in a logistic regression with linear lifetime adversity as the predictor, higher adversity was associated with lower likelihood of dropout (OR = 0.848, p = .002).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Supporting Hypothesis 1, our findings revealed that a history of some lifetime adversityrelative to both no and high adversity-predicted lower global distress, lower functional impairment, lower PTS symptoms, and higher life satisfaction.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, when quadratic lifetime adversity was added to this model, it did not significantly predict attrition.”
plainn = 1,994- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A substantial majority of the sample ( n = 1,994, 83.2%) provided longitudinal data over Waves 2-4.”
plainn = 1,994- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“People with low lifetime adversity reported better outcomes over time than did people who had experienced no adversity.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, analyses revealed no significant differences between the zero, 1, and 2-4 groups.”
plainn = 1,994- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, no significant differences emerged between respondents with a history of no adversity and respondents in the 1-event and 2-4 groups.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, U -shaped quadratic relationships indicated that a history of some but nonzero lifetime adversity predicted relatively lower global distress, lower self-rated functional impairment, fewer posttraumatic stress symptoms, and higher life satisfaction over time.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Greater recent adversity predicted significantly higher global distress ( B = 0.110, p < .001), functional impairment ( B = 0.087, p < .001), PTS symptoms ( B = 0.090, p < .001), and significantly lower life satisfaction ( B = -0.051, p = .003).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“such that high lifetime adversity predicted worse outcomes over time than did low adversity”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Supporting Hypothesis 1, our findings revealed that a history of some lifetime adversityrelative to both no and high adversity-predicted lower global distress, lower functional impairment, lower PTS symptoms, and higher life satisfaction.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Supporting Hypothesis 2, across these same longitudinal outcome measures, people with a history of some lifetime adversity appeared less negatively affected by recent adverse events than did other individuals.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individuals in the zero group endorsed significantly lower conscientiousness and emotional stability than those in the 2-4 group.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Supporting Hypothesis 1, our findings revealed that a history of some lifetime adversityrelative to both no and high adversity-predicted lower global distress, lower functional impairment, lower PTS symptoms, and higher life satisfaction.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For both marital status and household size, no significant differences emerged between the zero group and the 1-event and 2-4 groups.”
plainn = 1,994- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consistent with prior research on the impact of adversity, linear effects emerged in our results, such that more lifetime adversity was associated with higher global distress, functional impairment, and PTS symptoms, as well as lower life satisfaction.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consistent with prior research on the impact of adversity, linear effects emerged in our results, such that more lifetime adversity was associated with higher global distress, functional impairment, and PTS symptoms, as well as lower life satisfaction.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Supporting Hypothesis 1, our findings revealed that a history of some lifetime adversityrelative to both no and high adversity-predicted lower global distress, lower functional impairment, lower PTS symptoms, and higher life satisfaction.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consistent with predictions, results revealed significant U -shaped quadratic moderation of the effect of recent adversity on negative outcomes (i.e., a significant interaction term for Recent Adversity × Lifetime Adversity × Lifetime Adversity, predicting global distress, functional impairment, and PTS symptoms) and an inverse U shape for life satisfaction ( p s < .016).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consistent with prior research on the impact of adversity, linear effects emerged in our results, such that more lifetime adversity was associated with higher global distress, functional impairment, and PTS symptoms, as well as lower life satisfaction.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a multiyear longitudinal study of a national sample, people with a history of some lifetime adversity reported better mental health and well-being outcomes than not only people with a high history of adversity but also than people with no history of adversity.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pattern of results remained consistent when including covariates, which is summarized in the Supplementary Analyses sections.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a simultaneous logistic regression model, age was the only significant predictor, such that older respondents were less likely to drop out (odds ratio [OR] = 0.966, p < .001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“all simple interaction terms at high lifetime adversity were significant ( p s < .005)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Greater recent adversity predicted significantly higher global distress ( B = 0.110, p < .001), functional impairment ( B = 0.087, p < .001), PTS symptoms ( B = 0.090, p < .001), and significantly lower life satisfaction ( B = -0.051, p = .003).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, people with some prior lifetime adversity were the least affected by recent adverse events.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“respondents with a history of 2-4 adverse events tended to report the best outcomes across the four outcome variables (see Figure 2)”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All of the highest order interaction terms were again significant ( p s < .019)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consistent with prior research on the impact of adversity, linear effects emerged in our results, such that more lifetime adversity was associated with higher global distress, functional impairment, and PTS symptoms, as well as lower life satisfaction.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, our results also yielded quadratic, U -shaped patterns, demonstrating a critical qualification to the seemingly simple relationship between lifetime adversity and outcomes.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, no significant differences emerged between the zero group and the 1-event and 2-4 groups.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“results revealed significant quadratic relationships between cumulative lifetime adversity and each outcome (i.e., a significant interaction term for Lifetime Adversity × Lifetime Adversity, p s < .001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Greater recent adversity predicted significantly higher global distress ( B = 0.110, p < .001), functional impairment ( B = 0.087, p < .001), PTS symptoms ( B = 0.090, p < .001), and significantly lower life satisfaction ( B = -0.051, p = .003).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but no significant differences emerged between respondents in the zero group and others.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Greater recent adversity predicted significantly higher global distress ( B = 0.110, p < .001), functional impairment ( B = 0.087, p < .001), PTS symptoms ( B = 0.090, p < .001), and significantly lower life satisfaction ( B = -0.051, p = .003).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But across all the outcomes, the curvilinear pattern is clearly established.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, when using untransformed variables, the results presented in Table 4 were substantively unchanged”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, when we repeated analyses with these variables included as covariates, the results were substantively unchanged.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Findings for PTS symptoms paralleled findings for other outcomes, despite the fact that PTS symptoms were assessed specifically in reference to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, whereas the other outcomes were not tied to a specific event.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Respondent attrition was predicted by age and linear lifetime adversity.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Inconsistent with a recall or reporting bias, respondents who reported no previous adversity reported worse outcomes than respondents who reported some adversity.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similarly, Fontana and Rosenheck (1998) found an inverse U -shaped quadratic relationship when degree of perceived threat from combat and degree of exposure to death of others were used to predict self-reported psychological benefits among veterans, such that moderate threat and exposure predicted the greatest benefits.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fontana & Rosenheck, 1998
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, adversities often cooccur (Dong et al., 2004; Green et al., 2010), making it difficult to isolate the impact associated with any single event, especially over a lifetime.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dong et al., 2004
- Not checked yetcites Green et al., 2010
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, in the face of work stressors in young adulthood, individuals who experienced prior work stress during adolescence did not exhibit the negative effects on self-esteem, self-efficacy, and depressed mood shown by individuals with little prior work stress (Mortimer & Staff, 2004).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mortimer & Staff, 2004
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In fact, early research in child psychiatry suggests that resilience is a common, rather than an extraordinary, phenomenon (Rutter, 1985), even in the context of substantial adversity (e.g., Masten, 2001; Werner & Smith, 1992).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Rutter, 1985
- Not checked yetcites Masten, 2001
- Not checked yetcites Werner & Smith, 1992
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, infant monkeys who had the opportunity to control aspects of their environment during development (i.e., delivery of food and water) later exhibited less fear and more exploratory behavior than did monkeys who lacked such opportunity to exert control (Mineka, Gunnar, & Champoux, 1986).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mineka et al., 1986
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Coping with some amount of stress could similarly promote perceptions of control and mastery.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In experimental studies, young monkeys exposed to an intermittent stressor during development demonstrated greater resilience to subsequent novel stressors than did monkeys without any exposure (Parker, Buckmaster, Schatzberg, & Lyons, 2004; Parker, Buckmaster, Sundlass, Schatzberg, & Lyons, 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Parker et al., 2004
- Not checked yetcites Parker et al., 2006
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The specific characteristics of given events could certainly vary across individuals on dimensions relevant for developing mastery and toughness, but on average, a low but nonzero total count should be most likely to lead to subsequent mastery and toughness.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Early life experience of low perceived control and low mastery facilitates interpreting subsequent situations as uncontrollable.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chorpita & Barlow, 1998
- Not checked yetcites Mineka & Zinbarg, 2006
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In humans, children with moderate levels of early life adversity exhibited lower cortisol activity than did others during a laboratory stressor (Gunnar, Frenn, Wewerka, & Van Ryzin, 2009), a response potentially consistent with Dienstbier's (1989, 1992) toughened physiological pattern.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gunnar et al., 2009
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is an important distinction, however, between recovering back to baseline functioning (or largely avoiding decrements entirely) after a negative event and deriving from it a greater capacity for future resilience.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is important to note that adversities that fail to meet typical definitions of 'trauma' nonetheless contribute to predicting psychiatric disorder onset (Lloyd & Turner, 2003) and symptoms (Galea et al., 2008; Silver, Holman, McIntosh, Poulin, & Gil-Rivas, 2002).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lloyd & Turner, 2003
- Not checked yetcites Galea et al., 2008
- Not checked yetcites Silver et al., 2002
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Once toughness develops, it can permeate across domains.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1989
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1992
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Furthermore, a given type of event can have general effects across domains of psychological functioning, thus overlapping with the effects of other adversity types (McMahon, Grant, Compas, Thurm, & Ey, 2003).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites McMahon et al., 2003
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Quadratic effects of lifetime adversity have rarely been tested (Schilling, Aseltine, & Gore, 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Schilling et al., 2008
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“When adversities occur, their negative effects can be long lasting.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lucas, 2007
- Not checked yetcites Lucas et al., 2004
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence also suggests that exposure to moderate levels of adversity can predict better mental health and well-being than exposure to either a high level of adversity or to no adversity.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Schnurr et al., 1993
- Not checked yetcites Fontana & Rosenheck, 1998
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Most people experience some serious adversity in their lives (Bonanno, 2004);”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bonanno, 2004
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, disability and unemployment have predicted lower life satisfaction that persisted over at least several years (Lucas, 2007; Lucas, Clark, Georgellis, & Diener, 2004).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lucas, 2007
- Not checked yetcites Lucas et al., 2004
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Specifically, among Vietnam War veterans, Schnurr, Rosenberg, and Friedman (1993) reported that peripheral exposure to combat predicted improvements in psychological functioning (i.e., Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory scores) from pre- to postmilitary service, relative to veterans with both no exposure and direct exposure to combat.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Schnurr et al., 1993
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Histories of a given adverse event (e.g., physical/sexual assault, parental loss, homelessness, natural disasters) have all been associated with poorer mental health outcomes (e.g., Edwards, Holden, Felitti, & Anda, 2003; Emery & Laumann-Billings, 1998; Golding, 1999; KendallTackett, Williams, & Finkelhor, 1993).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Edwards et al., 2003
- Not checked yetcites Emery & Laumann-Billings, 1998
- Not checked yetcites Golding, 1999
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The distribution of the KN panel closely tracks the distribution of census counts for the U.S. population on age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, geographical region, employment status, income, and education.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The simple slope at high adversity was significant for all outcomes ( p s < .001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sample was drawn from a nationally representative Webenabled research panel established by Knowledge Networks, Inc. (KN).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These analyses revealed that including personality covariates did not substantively affect the relationship between continuous lifetime adversity and mental health and well-being outcomes.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adding a term representing linear cumulative lifetime adversity to these models did not substantively change the results.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fewer adversities measured, the more likely that people with histories of no adversity and low adversity will show the same total, thereby obscuring the critical differences between them.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, across the outcome variables as a whole, people with low lifetime adversity were less negatively affected by recent adversity than people who had experienced either no or high lifetime adversity”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At high adversity, the simple interaction term was significant and in the same direction as in the primary analyses for all outcomes ( p s < .019).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At a history of no adversity, the Lifetime Adversity × Recent Adversity simple interaction term was in the same direction as in the primary analyses for all outcomes and was significant ( p s < .034) for all outcomes except PTS symptoms, which approached significance ( p = .099).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the magnitude of recent adversity's negative impact on longitudinal outcomes depended on previous lifetime adversity history.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results suggest that, in moderation, whatever does not kill us may indeed make us stronger.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“when using untransformed variables (as described above), all four quadratic terms remained significant and in the same shape as when using transformed variables ( p s < .001).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Beyond recovering to past levels of functioning in the aftermath of adversity, we found evidence consistent with people actually benefiting from the experience of some adversity.”
- Also stated in: § Fostering Resilience and Mental Health and Well-Being · p. 15 · hedged
“To modify an adage, in moderation, whatever does not kill us may indeed make us stronger.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: People recover to past levels of functioning in the aftermath of adversity.
- Also stated in: § Fostering Resilience and Mental Health and Well-Being · p. 15 · hedged
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In part for these reasons, it is likely impossible to identify a precise 'ideal' number of prior adverse events that are protective of future mental health difficulties”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Relying on individuals to judge severity for themselves potentially confounds severity with individuals' response to adversity, which is the outcome of interest (Kessler, 1997).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kessler, 1997
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At least in the relative short term (i.e., within the 2 years we followed our sample), the experience of new adversity served no obvious benefit for people with a history of no prior adversity.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, data collection was longitudinal rather than crosssectional, decreasing the probability of confounding predictors and outcomes.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our adversity measure represented the number of events experienced rather than detailed characteristics of events, so meaningful variability in adversity may not have been captured.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In sum, given these elements of our design and analyses, it seems difficult to attribute our findings to biases in recall or reporting.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Furthermore, some types of adverse events may be particularly likely to cluster together (e.g., Green et al., 2010).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Green et al., 2010
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, isolating effects of single adversities is difficult, given that events are not experienced in a vacuum but, rather, in the context of individuals' adversity history (Dong et al., 2004; Green et al., 2010).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dong et al., 2004
- Not checked yetcites Green et al., 2010
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This leaves little reason to believe that differential attrition can account for our results.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, analyses testing quadratic moderation of recent events (Hypothesis 2) controlled for outcomes experienced at Wave 1, before the recent events had occurred.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our results suggest that previous research does not paint a complete picture of adversity's role in building resilience and, more broadly, mental health and well-being.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead, they highlight that people are not doomed to be damaged by adversity.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although these data cannot establish causation, the evidence for both hypotheses is consistent with the proposition that in moderation, experiencing lifetime adversity can contribute to the development of resilience.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This likely contributed to revealing quadratic relationships between adversity history and mental health and well-being outcomes, as opposed to only the typical linear relationships identified in both prior research and our own data.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 30
- Probably not a substantial claim. 36
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also important to note that the observed U -shaped patterns are not completely symmetrical. In many cases, outcomes at the high end of adversity appear more negative than those at zero adversity, and some curves could be described as more J -shaped than U -shaped”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neither Wave 1 outcomes themselves nor their interactions with linear or quadratic lifetime adversity significantly predicted attrition.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At a history of no adversity, the Lifetime Adversity × Recent Adversity simple interaction term was in the predicted direction for all outcomes and was significant ( p s < .05) for all outcomes except PTS symptoms, which approached significance ( p = .103).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pattern of results remained consistent using untransformed variables; these findings are summarized in the Supplementary Analyses sections.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This simple slope was significant and in the opposite direction of the no-adversity slope for all outcomes ( p s < .001)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At high adversity, the simple interaction term was significant and in the predicted direction for all outcomes ( p s < .004).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As predicted, this simple slope was negative and significant for negative outcomes and positive and significant for life satisfaction ( p s < .001)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A total of 2,398 respondents reported their lifetime exposure to negative events and some outcome measures.”
plainn = 2,398- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Effects of this nature emerged for all four longitudinal outcome variables: greater cumulative lifetime adversity predicted significantly higher global distress ( B = 0.174, p < .001), functional impairment ( B = 0.136, p < .001), and PTS symptoms ( B = 0.090, p < .001), and significantly lower life satisfaction ( B = -0.059, p = .007).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both points are within the sample's range.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results did reveal that respondents with low adversity endorsed greater emotional stability (i.e., lower neuroticism) and conscientiousness than respondents with no adversity.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“None of these alternatives were supported by our supplementary analyses.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to note, however, that quadratic lifetime adversity, outcome measures reported at Wave 1 (before any dropout), and interactions between Wave 1 outcomes and linear and quadratic lifetime adversity all failed to predict attrition significantly.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, this pattern appears using both modeled data (see Figures 1 and 3) and averaged raw data (see Figure 2).”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In terms of cumulative lifetime adversity, a low level of adversity should equate to a low but nonzero number of total lifetime adverse events.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Toughness leaves individuals more likely to appraise situations positively (i.e., perceiving them as more manageable), more emotionally stable, and better able to cope psychologically and physiologically with difficult stressors and minor challenges, relative to nontoughened individuals.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1989
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1992
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is important to note that Dienstbier (1989, 1992) further argued that both sheltering from all stressors and continuous exposure to stressors leads to lack of toughness.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1989
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1992
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, in addition to the aforementioned adage, theoretical and empirical work does suggest that under the proper conditions, experiencing life adversity may foster subsequent resilience.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, mastery and toughness should substantially overlap; across both perspectives, coping with stressors may promote subsequent benefits.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but mitigated negative consequences in the near term do not necessarily contribute to building future resilience to adversity.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Gilbert et al. (1998) suggested that a psychological immune system works to actively dispel negative affect when people experience it.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gilbert et al., 1998
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As described above, experiencing low levels of adversity should be most likely to foster mastery and toughness, thereby leading to subsequent resilience.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This should yield a quadratic, curvilinear relationship between continuous cumulative adversity count and outcome measures.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In contrast, the experience of high control and high mastery has the opposite effect, facilitating future perceptions of control, which in turn can enhance coping capabilities.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chorpita & Barlow, 1998
- Not checked yetcites Mineka & Zinbarg, 2006
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Dienstbier argued that exposure to stressors has a positive toughening effect when the exposure is limited, with an opportunity for recovery.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1989
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier, 1992
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although sheltering from stressors may temporarily protect against distress, it should not result in long-term advantages.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Consistent with prior evidence for linear relationships in which greater cumulative adversity predicts worse outcomes, an overall linear trend in this direction could still emerge, but with a reversal of this relationship between no adversity and low adversity (cf. May & Bigelow, 2005).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites May & Bigelow, 2005
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Panel members were randomly selected to participate in our research (Holman et al., 2008; Silver et al., 2002; Silver et al., 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Holman et al., 2008
- Not checked yetcites Silver et al., 2002
- Not checked yetcites Silver et al., 2006
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The simple slope at no adversity was significant for functional impairment, PTS symptoms, and life satisfaction ( p s < .007) but did not reach significance for global distress ( p = .16).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To create prospective tests, our models included outcome variables measured in waves subsequent to those in which predictors were assessed. This helped to rule out the possibility that observed relationships could be explained by contemporaneous reporting of predictors and outcomes.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Global distress was assessed using the Brief Symptom Inventory ( 𝛂 = .92 to .93; 0-4 response scale), a well-validated standardized scale that measures prior-week symptoms of psychological distress (depression, anxiety, and somatization; Derogatis, 2001).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Derogatis, 2001
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, findings fail to support the idea that background characteristics and personality dimensions meaningfully contribute to differentiating respondents with a history of no versus low adversity and further fail to support alternative explanations based on age, social isolation, and seeking life opportunities.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Starting in September, 2001, our research team collected longitudinal data from a national sample of the adult U.S. population randomly selected from the KN panel (Holman et al., 2008; Silver et al., 2002, 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Holman et al., 2008
- Not checked yetcites Silver et al., 2002
- Not checked yetcites Silver et al., 2006
plainn = 2,398- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Unlike our other measures of mental health and well-being, PTS symptoms were assessed specifically in reference to a recent collective traumathe terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11)-that generated psychological responses nationwide, including among people who were not directly exposed (Silver et al., 2002, 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Silver et al., 2002
- Not checked yetcites Silver et al., 2006
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Analyses were conducted with generalized estimating equations (GEE), a populationaveraged analysis appropriate for repeated-measures longitudinal data that accommodates missing assessments and provides necessary adjustments of standard errors.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we also tested models with quadratic age terms, thereby paralleling quadratic lifetime adversity; doing so yielded essentially identical results.”
- Also stated in: § Hypothesis 2: Moderation of Recent Adversity by Quadratic Cumulative Lifetime Adversity · p. 11 · plain
“We also tested models with quadratic age terms (paralleling quadratic lifetime adversity), which yielded essentially identical results.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Also stated in: § Hypothesis 2: Moderation of Recent Adversity by Quadratic Cumulative Lifetime Adversity · p. 11 · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In sum, these supplementary analyses suggest that neither the covariates nor statistical artifact arising from variable transformations can account for the observed pattern of findings.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike typical Internet panels, in which people who already have Internet access choose to opt in, no one can volunteer for the KN panel.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“when we added covariates (in addition to Wave 1 outcome values) to the models, all of the Recent Adversity × Lifetime Adversity × Lifetime Adversity interaction terms remained significant ( p s < .019) and in the same form as the results presented in Table 4.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In sum, these supplementary analyses suggest that neither the covariates nor statistical artifact arising from variable transformations can account for the observed pattern of findings for cumulative lifetime adversity.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To ensure representation of population segments that would not otherwise have Internet access, KN provided panel households with an Internet connection and Web TV to serve as a computer monitor.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Even though panel members complete surveys regularly, there are no significant differences over time in responses given by 'seasoned' participants from 'naı ¨ve' ones (Dennis, 2001).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dennis, 2001
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, measures of cumulative adversity commonly assess only a few types of stressors and often exclude multiple instances of the same type, thereby limiting measurement sensitivity.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sample closely resembled the national population.”
plainn = 2,398- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To confirm that transformations did not create spurious nonlinear relationships, we conducted supplementary analyses using (a) untransformed outcome variables; (b) recoded untransformed lifetime adversity, setting the most extreme cases (approximately 10% with adversity count greater than 15) to 15”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We included these covariates to rule out alternative explanations based on their expected association with adversity (e.g., health history) and subsequent mental health and well-being (e.g., 9/11 exposure).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The KN panel is developed using traditional probability methods for creating national survey samples and, at the time of our study, was recruited using stratified random-digit-dial telephone sampling.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“when we repeated the analyses with covariates (gender, ethnicity, age, income, marital status, household size, education, employment status, mental and physical health history, and degree of exposure to the 9/11 attacks), the results presented in Table 2 remained substantively unchanged.”
- Also stated in: § Hypothesis 1: Quadratic Cumulative Lifetime Adversity · p. 7 · plain
“For all four outcome variables, the quadratic term ( p s < .002), simple slope at no adversity ( p s < .017), and simple slope at high adversity ( p s < .001) were significant and in the same shape and direction as in analyses without these covariates.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Hypothesis 1: Quadratic Cumulative Lifetime Adversity · p. 7 · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This created a conservative test, in that only the unique relationships between adversity and mental health were tested for significance.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(although Figure 2 suggests that experiencing on average around three events may be a turning point)”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, there was no evidence that the pattern of attrition overlapped with the pattern of substantive findings, or that respondents with relatively high or low levels of mental health and well-being were disproportionately likely to drop out of the study.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, assessing a wide variety of events that better represents the full range to which people may be exposed (i.e., including those outside the cluster) should maximize the opportunity to reveal individuals who fall between either extreme of cluster endorsement. This should better differentiate no versus low adversity history, thereby facilitating discovery of evidence for resilience.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We assessed more types of adversity than is typical in research investigating adversity history, and we allowed respondents to endorse multiple instances of each type, which should have further helped to differentiate no versus low adversity.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that these supplementary analyses yielded the same pattern of findings as our primary analyses should increase confidence in our interpretation of the results.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We did not consider the specific type of prior adverse event and the impact of different types of experiences on outcomes over time.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Dienstbier (1989, 1992) suggested that toughness should be associated with emotional stability, which fits the difference that emerged in our data between individuals with no versus low adversity.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dienstbier (1989, 1992)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This fits with previous research in which PTS symptoms were exacerbated by other negative events (Classen et al., 2002).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Classen et al., 2002
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To test differences between a history of no cumulative lifetime adversity and low adversity effectively, it was particularly important to assess a wide range of events and facilitate maximal reporting of them.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Self-report assessments of life events are not without criticism (Dohrenwend, 2006), but sensitive topics are more likely to be acknowledged in selfreport assessments than in interviews.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dohrenwend, 2006
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Given the consistent pattern across all measures-despite their differing foci-our results may best be viewed in terms of implications for general mental health and well-being, which overlaps conceptually with each of the four specific outcomes assessed.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper relies on this without support.
People recover to past levels of functioning in the aftermath of adversity.
“Beyond recovering to past levels of functioning in the aftermath of adversity”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This distinction between threat and challenge offers a way for researchers to interpret how the same stressor might be harmful for some but not all people, and that some stressors might in fact be beneficial (Sapolsky, 2015; Seery et al., 2010).”
From More than a feeling: A unified view of stress measurement for population science (2018) · cites this paper as Seery et al., 2010
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Additionally, those with a moderate experience of adversity not only reported having better mental health, but they were also less likely to be affected by a recent adverse event (Seery et al., 2010).”
From A Systematic Review of “Helicopter Parenting” and Its Relationship With Anxiety and Depression (2022) · cites this paper as Seery et al., 2010
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Seery et al. (2010) found that that individuals whom had experienced a moderate amount of adversity had better mental health as opposed to those whom had no such experience, or too much experience with hardship.”
From A Systematic Review of “Helicopter Parenting” and Its Relationship With Anxiety and Depression (2022) · cites this paper as Seery et al., 2010
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We postulate that children who are able to manage the challenges well can gain toughness and mastery to cope with future stressors”
From Childhood adversities and adolescent depression: A matter of both risk and resilience (2014) · cites this paper as Seery et al., 2010
Citations
Cites
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,882
(1992) · PubMed · Cited by 33,716
The satisfaction with life scale
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 · Cited by 31,768
Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., Koss, M. P., & Marks, J. S. (1998) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(98)00017-8 · Cited by 18,943
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.56.3.218 · Cited by 18,025
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey
Kessler, R. C. (1995) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1995.03950240066012 · Cited by 10,379
Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development.
Masten, A. S. (2001) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.56.3.227 · Cited by 8,497
A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(03)00046-1 · Cited by 8,307
Bonanno, G. A. (2004) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.59.1.20 · Cited by 6,851 · cited 1×
“Most people experience some serious adversity in their lives (Bonanno, 2004); in the absence of resilience or reparative mechanisms, this could seemingly lead people to experience ongoing psychological distress, yet most people do not live in such a chronic state.”
BackgroundRobins, L. N. (1981) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1981.01780290015001 · Cited by 5,219
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [1]1. Publication Tile Psychology Monthly Journal of Personality and Social POSTAL SERVICE (All Periodicals Publications Except Requester Publications) UNITEDSTATES
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Psychological Resilience: A Review and Critique of Definitions, Concepts, and Theory
Fletcher, D., & Sarkar, M. (2013) · European Psychologist · doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000124 · Cited by 2,547
A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships
Feeney, B. C., & Collins, N. L. (2015) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868314544222 · Cited by 1,521
More than a feeling: A unified view of stress measurement for population science
Epel, E. S., Crosswell, A. D., Mayer, S. E., Prather, A. A., Slavich, G. M., Puterman, E., & Mendes, W. B. (2018) · Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2018.03.001 · Cited by 1,077
“challenge offers a way for researchers to interpret how the same stressor might be harmful for some but not all people, and that some stressors might in fact be beneficial (Sapolsky, 2015; Seery et al., 2010).”
BackgroundChild Development in the Context of Disaster, War, and Terrorism: Pathways of Risk and Resilience
Masten, A. S., & Narayan, A. J. (2011) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100356 · Cited by 1,173
“These two possibilities can be integrated in nonlinear models, where moderate degrees of challenge met successfully have beneficial effects, preparing an organism for future challenges better than either no exposure or too much exposure (Rutter 2006, Seery et al. 2010).”
The resilience framework as a strategy to combat stress-related disorders
Kalisch, R., Baker, D. G., Basten, U., Boks, M. P., Bonanno, G. A., Brummelman, E., Chmitorz, A., Fernàndez, G., Fiebach, C. J., Galatzer-Levy, I., et al. (2017) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0200-8 · Cited by 782
“…cope with stressors— whether this manifests at the level of altered perspectives on life 17–19 , as emergence of new strengths or competences 16 , as partial immunization against the effects of future stressors 20,21 , or even as epigenetic alterations and modified gene expression patterns 22,23 .”
Metadata
- Authors
- Seery, M. D., Holman, E. A., & Silver, R. C.
- Affiliations
- University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 2010-12
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1025-1041
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2088042310
- Semantic Scholar
- 0eb531acd39a00ab684907c81f4ef10b35b2e940
- Cited by
- 954
- References
- 92
- Citations by year
- 2026: 64 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 78 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 73 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 66 · 2017: 54 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 58 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 32
- FWCI
- 30.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- escholarship.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (BCS-9910223; BCS-0211039; BCS-0215937)
- National Institute of Mental Health (T32 MH19958)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
- Keywords
- resilience, vulnerability, life events, mental health, well-being, life satisfaction, posttraumatic stress symptoms, functional disability, U-shaped relationship, moderation
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Life Change Events, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Stress, Psychological, United States, Likelihood Functions, Resilience, Psychological
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
