The DOI matches its Crossref record; 136 of the 137 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Resilience through the lens of interactionism: A systematic review.
Abstract
This systematic review presents findings from a conceptual and methodological review of resilience measures using an interactionist theoretical framework. The review is also intended to update findings from previous systematic reviews. Two databases (EBSCOHost and Scopus) were searched to retrieve empirical studies published up until 2013, with no lower time limit. All articles had to meet specific inclusion criteria, which resulted in 17 resilience measures selected for full review. Measures were conceptually evaluated against an interactionist framework and methodologically reviewed using Skinner's (1981) validity evidence framework. We conclude that inconsistencies associated with the definition and operationalization of resilience warrant further conceptual development to explain resilience as a dynamic and interactive phenomenon. In particular, measures of resilience may benefit from a greater focus on within-person variance typically associated with behavioral consistency across situations. The use of alternative measurement modalities to self-report scales, such as situational judgment tests, is proposed as a way of advancing knowledge in this area.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Two theoretical perspectives differentiate resilience as either a relatively stable trait or a dynamic process (Fletcher and Sarkar, 2013; Pangallo et al., 2015).”
From Media for Coping During COVID-19 Social Distancing: Stress, Anxiety, and Psychological Well-Being (2020) · cites this paper as Pangallo et al., 2015
In the citing paper
“One key resiliency factor is the presence and cultivation of positive emotions and affect (Fletcher and Sarkar, 2013; Pangallo et al., 2015).”
From Media for Coping During COVID-19 Social Distancing: Stress, Anxiety, and Psychological Well-Being (2020) · cites this paper as Pangallo et al., 2015
In the citing paper
“Adversity can occur both in the form of chronic, long-lasting, and systemic stressors (such as ongoing abuse), or in the form of acute stressors, (including isolated events such as personal loss or changes in life conditions; Pangallo et al., 2015).”
From Media for Coping During COVID-19 Social Distancing: Stress, Anxiety, and Psychological Well-Being (2020) · cites this paper as Pangallo et al., 2015
In the citing paper
“In this context, two variables have frequently been identified as resiliency factors: optimism and hope (Gillespie et al., 2007; Pangallo et al., 2015).”
From Media for Coping During COVID-19 Social Distancing: Stress, Anxiety, and Psychological Well-Being (2020) · cites this paper as Pangallo et al., 2015
In the citing paper
“In addition to general trait resilience, several individual difference variables are known to facilitate positive adaptation to stressors and adversity, and these are often referred to as resiliency factors (Windle, 2011; Pangallo et al., 2015).”
From Media for Coping During COVID-19 Social Distancing: Stress, Anxiety, and Psychological Well-Being (2020) · cites this paper as Pangallo et al., 2015
Citations
Cites
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.44.3.513 · Cited by 18,187
Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)
Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. T. (2003) · Depression and Anxiety · doi:10.1002/da.10113 · Cited by 11,793
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use
Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (1989) · Cited by 9,595
The Construct of Resilience: A Critical Evaluation and Guidelines for Future Work
Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00164 · Cited by 9,381
Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit
Cohen, J. (1968) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0026256 · Cited by 8,736
Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development.
Masten, A. S. (2001) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.56.3.227 · Cited by 8,497 · cited 3×
“For instance, there is little agreement as to how best to define resilience (Shaikh & Kauppi, 2010), resulting in variations in how adversities and adaptive outcomes have been operationalized (Masten, 2001; Masten, Best, & Garmezy, 1990; Werner & Smith, 1982).”
Using Self-Report Assessment Methods to Explore Facets of Mindfulness
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191105283504 · Cited by 7,511 · cited 2×
“Similar challenges have been encountered in the operationalization of other latent constructs such as mindfulness (Baer, Smith, Hopkins, Krietemeyer, & Toney, 2006) and body awareness (Mehling et al., 2009).”
Bonanno, G. A. (2004) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.59.1.20 · Cited by 6,851
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 137 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Resilience training in the workplace from 2003 to 2014: A systematic review
Robertson, I. T., Cooper, C. L., Sarkar, M., & Curran, T. (2015) · Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1111/joop.12120 · Cited by 729
Chmitorz, A., Kunzler, A., Helmreich, I., Tüscher, O., Kalisch, R., Kubiak, T., Wessa, M., & Lieb, K. (2018) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2017.11.002 · Cited by 663
Towards a Transversal Definition of Psychological Resilience: A Literature Review
Sisto, A., Vicinanza, F., Campanozzi, L. L., Ricci, G., Tartaglini, D., & Tambone, V. (2019) · Medicina · doi:10.3390/medicina55110745 · Cited by 547
Resilience in the Workplace: A Multilevel Review and Synthesis
Hartmann, S., Weiß, M., Newman, A., & Hoegl, M. (2019) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12191 · Cited by 639
Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare professionals
Kunzler, A. M., Helmreich, I., Chmitorz, A., König, J., Binder, H., Wessa, M., & Lieb, K. (2020) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012527.pub2 · Cited by 390
Metadata
- Authors
- Pangallo, A., Zibarras, L., Lewis, R., & Flaxman, P.
- Affiliations
- City, University of London (GB)
- Kingston University London (GB)
- Venue
- Psychological Assessment
- Published
- 2015-03
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-20
- ISSN
- 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-134X
- OpenAlex
- W2161180255
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 137
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10
- FWCI
- 2.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
- BIROn (Birkbeck, University of London) (submittedVersion)
- Research Repository (Kingston University London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- resilience, resilience indicators, interactionism, within-person variance, behavioral consistency, situational judgment tests, self-report scale, operationalization of resilience
- MeSH terms
- Concept Formation, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Judgment, Resilience, Psychological, Self Report
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.
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
