Explore the vast range of titles available.

Decades of research have consistently shown that the most common outcome following potential trauma is a stable trajectory of healthy functioning, or resilience. However, attempts to predict resilience reveal a paradox: the correlates of resilient outcomes are generally so modest that it is not possible accurately identify who will be resilient to potential trauma and who not. Commonly used resilience questionnaires essentially ignore this paradox by including only a few presumably key predictors. However, these questionnaires show virtually no predictive utility. The opposite approach, capturing as many predictors as possible using multivariate modelling or machine learning, also fails to fully address the paradox. A closer examination of small effects reveals two primary reasons for these predictive failures: situational variability and the cost-benefit tradeoffs inherent in all behavioural responses. Together, these considerations indicate that behavioural adjustment to traumatic stress is an ongoing process that necessitates flexible self-regulation. To that end, recent research and theory on flexible self-regulation in the context of resilience are discussed and next steps are considered. Although correlates of resilience after trauma are known, paradoxically, prediction of resilient outcomes is surprisingly weak. Predictors have generally small effects which suggests that the solution to the paradox must involve flexible self-regulation.

Complicated and persistent grief reactions afflict approximately 10% of bereaved individuals and are associated with severe disruptions of functioning. These maladaptive patterns were defined in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) as persistent complex bereavement disorder (PCBD), but its criteria remain debated. The condition has been studied using network analysis, showing potential for an improved understanding of PCBD. However, previous studies were limited to self-report and primarily originated from a single archival dataset. To overcome these limitations, we collected structured clinical interview data from a community sample of newly conjugally bereaved individuals (N = 305). Gaussian graphical models (GGM) were estimated from PCBD symptoms diagnosed at 3, 14, and 25 months after the loss. A directed acyclic graph (DAG) was generated from initial PCBD symptoms, and comorbidity networks with DSM-5 symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) were analyzed 1 year post-loss. In the GGM, symptoms from the social/identity PCBD symptoms cluster (i.e. role confusion, meaninglessness, and loneliness) tended to be central in the network at all assessments. In the DAG, yearning activated a cascade of PCBD symptoms, suggesting how symptoms lead into psychopathological configurations. In the comorbidity networks, PCBD and depressive symptoms formed separate communities, while PTSD symptoms divided in heterogeneous clusters. The network approach offered insights regarding the core symptoms of PCBD and the role of persistent yearnings. Findings are discussed regarding both clinical and theoretical implications that will serve as a step toward a more integrated understanding of PCBD.

Psychological resilience has become a popular concept. Owing to that popularity, the word resilience has taken on myriad and often overlapping meanings. To be a useful framework for psychological research and theory, the authors argue, the study of resilience must explicitly reference each of four constituent temporal elements: (a) baseline or preadversity functioning, (b) the actual aversive circumstances, (c) postadversity resilient outcomes, and (d) predictors of resilient outcomes. Using this framework to review the existing literature, the most complete body of evidence is available on individual psychological resilience in children and adults. By contrast, the research on psychological resilience in families and communities is far more limited and lags well behind the rich theoretical perspective available from those literatures. The vast majority of research on resilience in families and communities has focused primarily on only one temporal element, possible predictors of resilient outcomes. Surprisingly, however, almost no scientific evidence is actually available for community or family resilient outcomes. We close by suggesting that there is room for optimism and that existing methods and measures could be relatively easily adapted to help fill these gaps. To that end, we propose a series of steps to guide future research.

In this paper, inspired by the plenary panel at the 2013 meeting of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Dr. Steven Southwick (chair) and multidisciplinary panelists Drs. George Bonanno, Ann Masten, Catherine Panter-Brick, and Rachel Yehuda tackle some of the most pressing current questions in the field of resilience research including: (1) how do we define resilience, (2) what are the most important determinants of resilience, (3) how are new technologies informing the science of resilience, and (4) what are the most effective ways to enhance resilience? These multidisciplinary experts provide insight into these difficult questions, and although each of the panelists had a slightly different definition of resilience, most of the proposed definitions included a concept of healthy, adaptive, or integrated positive functioning over the passage of time in the aftermath of adversity. The panelists agreed that resilience is a complex construct and it may be defined differently in the context of individuals, families, organizations, societies, and cultures. With regard to the determinants of resilience, there was a consensus that the empirical study of this construct needs to be approached from a multiple level of analysis perspective that includes genetic, epigenetic, developmental, demographic, cultural, economic, and social variables. The empirical study of determinates of resilience will inform efforts made at fostering resilience, with the recognition that resilience may be enhanced on numerous levels (e.g., individual, family, community, culture).

Until recently, resilience among adults exposed to potentially traumatic events was thought to occur rarely and in either pathological or exceptionally healthy individuals. Recent research indicates, however, that the most common reaction among adults exposed to such events is a relatively stable pattern of healthy functioning coupled with the enduring capacity for positive emotion and generative experiences. A surprising finding is that there is no single resilient type. Rather, there appear to be multiple and sometimes unexpected ways to be resilient, and sometimes resilience is achieved by means that are not fully adaptive under normal circumstances. For example, people who characteristically use self-enhancing biases often incur social liabilities but show resilient outcomes when confronted with extreme adversity. Directions for further research are considered.

Although burnout syndrome has been investigated in depth, studies specifically focused on palliative home care are still limited. Moreover, there is still a lack of evidence regarding the interplay between emotional flexibility and sensitivity to context in preventing burnout in home care settings. For these reasons, the aims of this study were to examine burnout symptoms among practitioners specializing in palliative home care and to investigate the role of regulatory flexibility and sensitivity to context in understanding burnout. An exploratory cross-sectional design was adopted. A convenience sample (n = 65) of Italian specialist palliative care practitioners participated in this study. Participants were recruited between February and April 2019 from two palliative home care services that predominantly cared for end-of-life cancer patients. The Italian version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the Flexible Regulation of Emotional Expression (FREE) scale (a measure of emotional flexibility), and the Context Sensitivity Index (CSI) (a measure of sensitivity to context) were administered. Analyses of variance were conducted using the three MBI factors as dependent variables and profession as an independent variable. Subsequently, three identical analyses of covariance were conducted with age, work experience, flexibility and sensitivity to context as covariates. The results showed a low burnout risk for all three of the MBI factors, and there were no gender differences. An ANOVA revealed a significant effect of profession type and age on the emotional exhaustion factor of the MBI, and an ANCOVA indicated that these effects persisted after covariates were accounted for. The results also showed a significant effect of the FREE score on emotional exhaustion. These findings can help explain the differential contributions of profession type and age to the burnout symptoms investigated. In addition, the emotional flexibility component, as an aspect of resilience, represents a significant and specific factor of emotional exhaustion. Interventions to prevent burnout must consider these relationships.

Background: Psychological resilience has grown in popularity as a topic of study in psychotraumatology research; however, this concept remains poorly understood and there are several competing theories of resilience. Objective: This study sought to assess the support for one proposed theory of resilience: the flexibility sequence. Method: This study use secondary data analysis of panel survey data (N = 563). Participants were aged 18 years or over and based in the UK. A series of sequential mediation models was used to test the flexibility sequence theory as a proposed pathway of resilience on mental health outcomes (post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression) among a trauma-exposed sample from the UK. Results: The 'feedback' component of the proposed flexibility sequence components was associated with reduced symptom severity with all outcomes, whereas 'context sensitivity' and 'repertoire' were significantly associated only with depression as an outcome. When indirect mediation pathways were modelled via the flexibility sequence, statistically significant effects were observed for all outcomes under investigation. Conclusions: These findings support the theorized flexibility sequence pathway of resilience, suggesting that the combination of these skills/processes performs more favourably as a framework of resilience than any in isolation. Further research into more elaborate associations and feedback loops associated with this pathway is warranted. The components of the flexibility sequence were not uniformly associated with reduced psychopathology. The path model of following the proposed flexibility sequence was associated with reduced psychopathology, and therefore is more than the sum of its parts in predicting resilience. The flexibility sequence is a promising framework for understanding and promoting resilience in a trauma-exposed sample.

Background: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive disorder (MDD) are two highly comorbid psychological outcomes commonly studied in the context of stress and potential trauma. In Hubei, China, of which Wuhan is the capital, residents experienced unprecedented stringent lockdowns in the early months of 2020 when COVID-19 was first reported. The comorbidity between PTSD and MDD has been previously studied using network models, but often limited to cross-sectional data and analysis. Objectives: This study aims to examine the cross-sectional and longitudinal network structures of MDD and PTSD symptoms using both undirected and directed methods. Methods: Using three types of network analysis - cross-sectional undirected network, longitudinal undirected network, and directed acyclic graph (DAG) - we examined the interrelationships between MDD and PTSD symptoms in a sample of Hubei residents assessed in April, June, August, and October 2020. We identified the most central symptoms, the most influential bridge symptoms, and causal links among symptoms. Results: In both cross-sessional and longitudinal networks, the most central depressive symptoms included sadness and depressed mood, whereas the most central PTSD symptoms changed from irritability and hypervigilance at the first wave to difficulty concentrating and avoidance of potential reminders at later waves. Bridge symptoms showed similarities and differences between cross-sessional and longitudinal networks with irritability/anger as the most influential bridge longitudinally. The DAG found feeling blue and intrusive thoughts the gateways to the emergence of other symptoms. Conclusions: Combining cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis, this study elucidated central and bridge symptoms and potential causal pathways among PTSD and depression symptoms. Clinical implications and limitations are discussed. This study examined the cross-sectional and longitudinal network structures of depression and post-traumatic disorder symptoms using undirected and directed methods. The most central depressive symptoms included sadness and depressed mood, whereas the most central post-traumatic disorder symptoms changed from irritability and hypervigilance to difficulty concentrating and avoidance of reminders over time. Bridge symptoms showed similarities and differences between cross-sessional and longitudinal networks with irritability/anger as the most influential bridge longitudinally.

Currently little is known about the interrelations between changes in psychiatric symptoms and changes in resources (personal, social, financial) amid large-scale disasters. This study investigated trajectories of psychiatric symptoms and their relationships with different patterns of changes in personal, social, and financial resources between 2020 and 2022 amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A population-representative sample (N = 1333) was recruited to complete self-report instruments at the pandemic’s acute phase (February–July 2020, T1), and again at 1-year (March–August 2021, T2) and 1.5-year (September 2021–February 2022, T3) follow-ups. Respondents reported depressive and anxiety symptoms, self-efficacy, perceived social support, and financial capacity. Growth mixture modeling (GMM) identified four trajectories of depressive and anxiety symptoms: resilience (72.39–74.19%), recovery (8.40–11.93%), delayed distress (7.20–7.35%), and chronic distress (8.33–10.20%). Four patterns were demonstrated in resource changes: persistent high resources (40.89–47.64%), resource gain (12.08–15.60%), resource loss (6.30–10.43%), and persistent low resources (28.73–36.61%). Loss and gain in financial resources characterized chronic distress and resilience, respectively. Loss in personal resources characterized delayed distress, whereas loss or no gain in social resources was related to chronic/delayed distress. Respondents in resilience were also more likely to have persistent high resources while those with delayed/chronic distress were more likely to have persistent low resources. These results provide an initial evidence base for advancing current understanding on trajectories of resilience and psychopathology in the context of resource changes during and after large-scale disasters.