Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 297

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding individual resilience in the workplace: the international collaboration of workforce resilience model

Open access
Rees, Clare S., Breen, Lauren J., Cusack, Lynette, Hegney, Desley·2015·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

When not managed effectively, high levels of workplace stress can lead to several negative personal and performance outcomes. Some professional groups work in highly stressful settings and are therefore particularly at risk of conditions such as anxiety, depression, secondary traumatic stress, and burnout. However, some individuals are less affected by workplace stress and the associated negative outcomes. Such individuals have been described as "resilient." A number of studies have found relationships between levels of individual resilience and specific negative outcomes such as burnout and compassion fatigue. However, because psychological resilience is a multi-dimensional construct it is necessary to more clearly delineate it from other related and overlapping constructs. The creation of a testable theoretical model of individual workforce resilience, which includes both stable traits (e.g., neuroticism) as well as more malleable intrapersonal factors (e.g., coping style), enables information to be derived that can eventually inform interventions aimed at enhancing individual resilience in the workplace. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new theoretical model of individual workforce resilience that includes several intrapersonal constructs known to be central in the appraisal of and response to stressors and that also overlap with the construct of psychological resilience. We propose a model in which psychological resilience is hypothesized to mediate the relationship between neuroticism, mindfulness, self-efficacy, coping, and psychological adjustment.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00073

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 64 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Block, 1980, “The role of ego-control and ego-resiliency in the origination of behavior,”, 39
  2. Melchert, 2011, Foundations of Professional Psychology: the End of Theoretical Orientations and the Emergence of the Biopsychosocial Approach, 10.1016/B978-0-12-385079-9.00006-0 · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-385079-9.00006-0
  3. Rutter, 1987, “Parental mental disorder as a psychiatric risk factor,”, 647
  4. Stamm, 2010, The Concise ProQOL Manual
  5. Weick, 1999, “Organizing for high reliability: processes of collective mindfulness,”, 23

Cited by

See all 297

Metadata

Authors
Rees, C. S., Breen, L. J., Cusack, L., & Hegney, D.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2015-02-04
Volume
6
Pages
73-73
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977908674
Cited by
297
References
64
FWCI
20.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding individual resilience in the workplace: the international collaboration of workforce resilience model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00073
The paper
Rees, C. S., Breen, L. J., Cusack, L., & Hegney, D. (2015). Understanding individual resilience in the workplace: the international collaboration of workforce resilience model. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00073

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.