Cited by 597Resilience and Mental HealthChild Abuse and TraumaChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Annual research review: resilience—clinical implications

Rutter, Michael·2013·Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: It is a universal finding that there is huge heterogeneity in people’s responses to all kinds of stress and adversity. Resilience is an interactive phenomenon that is inferred from findings indicating that some individuals have a relatively good outcome despite having experienced serious adversities. Methods: Resilience can only be inferred if there has been testing of environmental mediation of risks and quantification of the degree of risk. The use of ‘natural experiments’ to test environmental mediation is briefly discussed. The literature is then reviewed on features associated with resilience in terms of (a) those that are neutral or risky in the absence of the risk experience (such as adoption); (b) brief exposure to risks and inoculation effects; (c) mental features (such as planning, self‐regulation or a sense of personal agency); (d) features that foster those mental features; (e) turning point effects; (f) gene‐environment interactions; (g) social relationships and promotive effects; and (h) the biology of resilience. Results: Clinical implications are considered with respect to (a) conceptual implications; (b) prevention; and (c) treatment. Conclusion: Resilience findings do not translate into a clear programme of prevention and treatment, but they do provide numerous leads that focus on the dynamic view of what may be involved in overcoming seriously adverse experiences.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02615.x

Cites

106 of 106 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
Rutter, M.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Rutter, Michael
Venue
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-09-28
Volume
54
Issue
4
Pages
474-487
ISSN
  • 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7610
OpenAlex
W2163419000
Cited by
597
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 54 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • British Academy
  • Academy of Medical Sciences
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, adversity, natural experiment, adoption, inoculation effect, self-regulation, individual agency, gene-environment interaction, interpersonal relationships, prevention, treatment, adverse childhood experiences
MeSH terms
Achievement, Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Anomie, Mental Disorders, Character, Child, Child Abuse, Divorce, Humans, Individuality, Internal-External Control, Interpersonal Relations, Life Change Events, Problem Solving, Psychosocial Deprivation, Reinforcement, Psychology, Risk Factors, Self Concept, Social Control, Informal, Social Environment, Social Responsibility, Social Support, Parenting, Family Conflict, Resilience, Psychological, Gene-Environment Interaction

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