Cited by 297Resilience and Mental HealthChild Abuse and TraumaChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Understanding and promoting resilience in children and youth

Sapienza, Julianna K, Masten, Ann S·2011·Current Opinion in Psychiatry

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In a context of global concern about the consequences of stress and extreme adversities, advances in theory and methods for studying human resilience have ushered in a new era of integrative, biopsychosocial research. This review highlights recent theory, findings, and implications of resilience research on young people. RECENT FINDINGS: Resilience research has shifted toward dynamic system models with multiple levels of interaction, including research on the neurobiology of stress and adaption, epigenetic processes, and disasters. Growing evidence indicates individual differences in biological sensitivity to negative and positive experiences, including interventions. Early experiences show enduring programming effects on key adaptive systems, underscoring the importance of early intervention. Studies of developmental cascades demonstrate spreading effects of competence and symptoms over time, with important implications for the timing and targeting of interventions. Disaster research suggests guidelines for planning to protect children in the event of large-scale trauma. SUMMARY: Research is integrating the study of resilience across system levels, with implications for promoting positive adaptation of young people faced with extreme adversity. However, studies on neurobiological and epigenetic processes are just beginning, and more research is needed on efficacy, as well as strategic timing and targeting, of interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/yco.0b013e32834776a8

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sapienza, J. K., & Masten, A. S.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Masten, Ann S
Venue
Current Opinion in Psychiatry
Published
2011-07
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
267-273
ISSN
0951-7367 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2005843381
Cited by
297
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 17
FWCI
2.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
resilience, children and young people, stress and adaptation, neurobiology of stress, epigenetics, early intervention, developmental cascades, disaster research, child protection, biopsychosocial model
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Child, Humans, Life Change Events, Poverty, 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.

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