Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-f97m6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-21T08:29:05.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Problems defining resiliency: Illustrations from the study of maltreated children

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2008

Joan Kaufman*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh, Department of Psychiatry
Alexandra Cook
Affiliation:
Boston University, Department of Psychology
Libby Arny
Affiliation:
State of Connecticut, Department of Children and Youth Service
Brenda Jones
Affiliation:
Yale University, Department of Psychology
Todd Pittinsky
Affiliation:
Families and Work Institute, New York
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Joan Kaufman, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh, 3811 O'Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.

Abstract

In this article, operational definitions of resiliency used in previous studies are reviewed. Data from a sample of 56 maltreated school-age children are then explored to highlight how variations in the source, type, and number of assessments obtained affect the rates of children classified as resilient. Assessments were obtained in three domains: academic achievement, social competence, and clinical symptomatology. Two sources of information were used to assess each domain, and three different data integration procedures were used to calculate rates of resiliency in the maltreated cohort. It is concluded that the most appropriate definition of resiliency to be used in future investigations depends on the aims of the study. If the goal of the study is to assess overall functioning, there is an advantage to using more broad, multidimensional assessments. If, in contrast, the goal of the study is to determine why some high-risk children develop particular types of problems, to identify underlying etiological processes associated with different outcomes, there is an advantage to using narrower definitions.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable