Psychological Reports: Disability & Trauma

Psychological Reports: Disability & Trauma
2015, 117, 2, 354-375. © Psychological Reports 2015
RESILIENCE THEORY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

FOR CHINESE ADOLESCENTS1
JIN-LIANG WANG AND DA-JUN ZHANG
Center for Mental Health Education, School of Psychology, Southwest University,

Chongqing, China
MARC A. ZIMMERMAN
Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health

University of Michigan, USA
Summary.—Over the past 20 years, resilience theory has attracted great atten-
tion from both researchers and mental health practitioners. Resilience is defined as
a process of overcoming the negative effects of risk exposure, coping successfully
with traumatic experiences, or avoiding the negative trajectories associated with
risks. Three basic models of resilience have been proposed to account for the mecha-
nism whereby promotive factors operate to alter the trajectory from risk exposure
to negative consequences: compensatory model, protective model, and inoculation
model. Assets and resources are two types of promotive factors found to be effective
in decreasing internalizing and externalizing problems. Considering the protective or
compensatory role of assets and resources in helping youth be resilient against nega-
tive effects of adversity, resilience could be applied to Chinese migrant and left-be-
hind children who are at risk for internalizing (e.g., depression, anxiety) and external-
izing problems (e.g., delinquent behaviors, cigarette and alcohol use). Additionally,
psychological suzhi-based interventions, a mental health construct for individuals
that focuses on a strengths-based approach, can be integrated with resilience-based
approach to develop more balanced programs for positive youth development.
Resilience theory has attracted great attention from both researchers

and mental health practitioners in the last past 20 years. The pioneers of re-
silience theory were Norman Garmezy, Emmy Werner, Anne Masten, and
Sir Michael Rutter (Garmezy, Masten, & Tellegen, 1984; Rutter, 1985; Gar-
mezy, 1993; Werner, 1993), who tried to answer the question why some ad-
olescents develop into well-adjusted and relatively healthy adults in the
face of adversity. Two perspectives currently exist regarding the concept of
resilience: the trait-oriented perspective (Baruth & Caroll, 2002; Connor &
Davidson, 2003; Mak, Ng, & Wong, 2011) and the process-oriented perspec-
tive (Brenner & Zimmerman, 2010; Hurd & Zimmerman, 2010; Stoddard,
Whiteside, Zimmerman, Cunningham, Chermack, & Walton, 2013). The
former viewpoint defines resilience as a personal trait that helps some at-
risk youth overcome adversity and subsequently achieve optimal or even
exceptional adjustment. This perspective implies that resilience is some-
Address correspondence to Jin-Liang Wang, School of Psychology, Southwest University,
1
Beibei, Chongqing 400715, China, or e-mail (wangjinliang09@gmail.com).
DOI 10.2466/16.17.PR0.117c21z8 ISSN 0033-2941
02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 354 01/10/15 10:18 AM

RESILIENCE IN CHINESE ADOLESCENTS 355
thing one is born with and places responsibility on the individual for fail-
ing to overcome adversity (Block & Kremen, 1996; Tugade & Fredrickson,
2004; Ahern, Kiehl, Sole, & Byers, 2006). In addition, a trait approach does
not consider contextual influences, variability of resilience across contexts,
or developmental phases. A trait-based approach also assumes a single
level of competence that can be measured with a self-report questionnaire
and does not consider ecological factors in research on resilience (Luthar,
Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000; Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005). In terms of this
perspective, researchers have mainly examined trait-based measures' rela-
tionship with mental health issues (Campbell-Sills, Cohan, & Stein, 2006;
Davydov, Stewart, Ritchie, & Chaudieu, 2010; Houri, Nam, Choe, Min,
& Matsumoto, 2012; Peng, Zhang, Li, Li, Zhang, Zuo, et al., 2012). For in-
stance, Campbell-Sills, et al. (2006) reported that psychological resilience
was a moderator in childhood maltreatment and participants' current psy-
chiatric symptoms. In another recent study, Peng, et al. (2012) found that
resilience moderated association between negative life events and mental
health problems, suggesting that promoting resilience may be helpful for
the adjustment of college students.
The process-oriented perspective regards resilience as an interac-
tion of individuals and their environment for overcoming the negative
effects of risk exposure, coping successfully with traumatic experiences,
or avoiding the negative trajectories associated with risks (Fergus & Zim-
merman, 2005). This review is based on the latter perspective, as resilience
is not a quality that is always present in every situation. Rather, resilience
is defined by the context, population, risk, promotive factors, and the out-
come. Many researchers share this concept of resilience. Masten, Best, and
Garmezy (1990), for example, defined resilience as “a process of, or capac-
ity for, or the outcome of successful adaptation despite challenging and
threatening circumstances” (p. 459). Werner (1993) used the concept of re-
silience to refer to those children who successfully cope with biological
and social risk factors. In spite of this, several researchers have used the
trait-oriented perspective, reporting that resilience is an important char-
acteristic that protects individuals against the negative effects of stressful
events (Ungerson, 2004; Ong, Bergeman, Bisconti, & Wallace, 2006; Ong,
Zautra, & Reid, 2010; Mak, et al., 2011; Liebenberg, Ungar, & van de Vijver,
2012; Ying, Wu, Lin, & Jiang, 2014).
Another reason that a resilience approach is appealing to researchers
and practitioners is that it focuses on a strength-based model rather than
a deficit and problem-oriented approach. Specifically, in deficit and prob-
lem-oriented studies, researchers have centered on risk factors for psycho-
pathology, alcohol and drug use, and delinquency. These risk factors may
include poverty, limited access to education, and unstable social contexts

356 J-L. WANG, ET AL.
(Ndugwa, Kabiru, Cleland, Beguy, Egondi, Zulu, et al., 2010). Several theo-
ries such as problem behavior theory (Jessor & Jessor, 1977; Jessor, Turbin,
& Costa, 2010; Jessor & Turbin, 2014), stage theory of adolescent drug use
(Kandel, 1975), and social influence models (Barnes & Welte, 1986; Nee-
dle, McCubbin, Wilson, Reineck, Lazar, & Mederer, 1986; Begue & Roche,
2009; Martino, Ellickson, & McCaffrey, 2009; Zehe & Colder, 2014) have fo-
cused on risk factors associated with negative outcomes for adolescents.
The common point among these theories is that they identify factors that
define vulnerable children (Jessor, et al., 2010; Ndugwa, et al., 2010; Jessor
& Turbin, 2014).
For a strength-based model, however, researchers are primarily inter-
ested in finding the promotive factors that help adolescents living in ad-
versity overcome deleterious effects of the adversity (Rutter, 1985, 1987;
Luthar, et al., 2000; Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005). Resilience theory pro-
vides a conceptual framework for explaining how some individuals over-
come adversity and achieve healthy development. Resilience theory holds
that youth can avoid the negative effects of risk factors with the help of
some promotive factors (i.e., factors that help promote healthy outcomes).
Researchers have identified two kinds of promotive factors: assets and re-
sources (Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005). Assets refer to intrapersonal posi-
tive factors such as perceived competence, coping skills, and self-efficacy.
Resources include factors external to the individual that can help youth
overcome the negative effects of risk factors such as parental support,
adult mentoring, and availability of youth programming in community
organizations.
Prior to the development of resilience theory, researchers have stud-
ied children who succeeded despite living in extreme poverty. These chil-
dren were labeled as invulnerable (Garmezy, 1971), but this term was later
conceptualized as resilience (Rutter, 1993). Rutter's (1993) original work
focused on mothers' depression as a risk factor for their children's men-
tal distress, but he noticed that the risk model only explained part of the
variance in mental distress. The transition from the term “invulnerable” to
“resilient” is that invulnerability implies that these children are unbreak-
able, invincible, and indestructible under even the most noxious stressors.
Rutter (1987, 1993), however, pointed out that it is impossible for these
children to be thoroughly resistant to adversity or hazards in every situa-
tion. This transition of conceptualizing success in the face of adversity has
resulted in a burgeoning field of child development that has resulted in a
wide range of risk factors and outcomes, while also further developing the
definition of and research on promotive factors.
Finally, researchers have debated whether to use the term “resiliency”
or “resilience” (Luthar, et al., 2000). Luthar, et al. (2000) suggested using

the term “resilience” to refer to a process perspective and the term “resil-
iency” to refer to the trait-based approach. This distinction, however, may
confuse rather than clarify which approach individuals are using in their
research because the difference is subtle, as both words are nouns that in-
dicate an ability to bounce back from adversity. Here the terms are used
interchangeably, but both in the context of a process-orientation to resil-
ience research. A trait-based approach is not consistent with an ecological-
oriented analysis of development and suggests that resilience is an immu-
table characteristic of individuals that ignores contextual factors that may
help youth overcome hardship.
THREE MODELS OF ADOLESCENTS' RESILIENCE
Three basic models of resilience have been proposed to account for
the mechanism whereby promotive factors alter the trajectory from risk
exposure to negative consequences. These three models are the compen-
satory, protective, and inoculation models.
The compensatory model holds that promotive factors can counteract
the adverse outcomes associated with risk exposure. Thus, a promotive
factor can contribute to an outcome in an additive (but opposite) man-
ner with the risk factor to predict an outcome (Zimmerman, Steinman, &
Rowe, 1998; Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005). In this manner, the risk factor
and compensatory factor have opposite, but main (direct) effects on a spe-
cific outcome. When the risk factor is held constant, the outcome variable
differs as a function of the compensatory factor and vice versa. This model
is tested by examining the unique, direct effects of the risk and compen-
satory variable in a multiple-regression analysis or with structural equa-
tion modeling (SEM). Zimmerman, et al. (1998), for example, found that
parental support in a sample of urban African American adolescents com-
pensated for the negative effects of violent friends, being around violent
adults, and fighting. In another longitudinal study with a large adoles-
cent sample, Zagar and Busch (2009) reported that promotion of alterna-
tive thinking, mentoring, and life skills training can prevent or ameliorate
risks for delinquency occurring during adolescence development.
The protective model holds that promotive factors (i.e., assets and re-
sources) moderate or reduce the negative effects of adversity exposure on
youths' development (Garmezy, et al., 1984). This model can be examined
by analyzing an interaction effect between risk and promotive factors for
predicting an outcome. The interaction effect is typically entered after the
main effects of the risk and promotive factor are entered in a regression
equation. Therefore, the test of the protective model is a third step in the
regression equation used in compensatory model analysis, whereby the
interaction term (centered risk multiplied by centered promotive factor)

is entered after the main effects for the risk and promotive factor are ac-
counted for (Zimmerman & Brenner, 2010). Protective models can also be
tested in SEM using multiple group analysis with groups defined by the
promotive factor (or summary of factors) of interest. Stoddard, Zimmer-
man, and Bauermeister (2012), for instance, investigated the effects of cu-
mulative risk and promotive factors on adolescent violent behavior. They
found that higher levels of cumulative risk were associated with higher
levels of violent behaviors. Higher levels of cumulative promotive factors
were associated with less violent behaviors and moderated the association
between risk and violent behaviors.
A third resilience model is the inoculation model (also named chal-
lenge model). The inoculation model suggests that, if the youth has been
exposed to low levels of risk previously, later risk exposure can lead to a
lower level of negative consequence. Thus, a low level of previous expo-
sure to risk can provide youth with the effect of an inoculation. Too lit-
tle risk, however, may not prepare youth for the possible greater adver-
sity they may face as they become young adults. Similarly, too much risk
may pose too much difficulty from which to recover (i.e., to be resilient).
In terms of data analysis, the inoculation model implies the presence of a
second-order term in a multiple-regression equation, which can explain
the nonlinear relationship between risk and the adolescent outcome (Gar-
mezy, et al., 1984).
RESILIENCE AND ADOLESCENTS' INTERNALIZING PROBLEMS AND
EXTERNALIZING PROBLEMS
Recently, researchers of adolescent resilience have focused on how
promotive factors may help in decreasing adolescents' likelihood of in-
ternalizing problems, such as depression or low self-acceptance, as well
as reducing the chance of externalizing behaviors such as risky and de-
linquent activities (Mason, Schmidt, Abraham, Walker, & Tercyak, 2009;
Hurd & Zimmerman, 2010; Cooper, Brown, Metzger, Clinton, & Guthrie,
2012). Researchers have established strong evidence that adolescents' in-
ternal assets and external resources are promotive factors that can help
them avoid the potentially harmful consequences of risk exposure (Muel-
ler, Gavin, Oman, Vesely, Aspy, Tolma, et al., 2010). From this perspective,
risk increases the likelihood of a bad outcome and therefore greater adver-
sity for the individual to face. Thus, adversity characterizes the situation
that risk poses to an individual.
Resilience and Adolescents' Internalizing Problems
The intrapersonal component of resilience processes, that is, assets,
are crucial promotive factors that help youth cope with stress and adver-
sity. For instance, Kliewer, Cunningham, Diehl, Parrish, Walker, Atiyeh, et

al. (2010) investigated the promotive role of emotional regulation in the as-
sociation between exposure to violence and internalizing symptoms. They
found that exposure to violence was associated with more internalizing
problems, while the children's emotional regulation skills were inversely
associated with internalizing problems. Additionally, this skill interacted
with violence exposure to decrease the effect of the exposure on the symp-
toms. Their finding is in line with the protective model in resilience theory
and provides support for the protective role of emotional regulation skill
as a buffer for the negative influence of violence exposure on internaliz-
ing problems.
Researchers have also found that resources such as parental support,
community support, and mentors can be protective factors that buffer
against decreased well-being and adjustment in the face of stress (Mason,
et al., 2009; Cooper, et al., 2012; Hurd & Zimmerman, 2010). Cooper, et
al. (2012), for example, found that parental support and community sup-
port emerged as protective factors for American adolescents' depression
symptoms, school suspensions, and school engagement. Howard, Budge,
and McKay (2010) investigated the moderating role of family and peer
support on the relationship between exposure to violence and academic
performance, symptoms of distress, and persistence intentions of com-
pleting education. They found that peer and family support has a pro-
tective-stabilizing effect for violence exposure. A protective-stabilizing
effect is one type of protective effect that prevents continued exposure
from accumulating into an increasingly negative effect. Specifically, How-
ard, et al. (2010) found that family support provided a protective-stabiliz-
ing effect for the association between exposure to violence and symptoms
of distress, while peer support had a protective-stabilizing effect for ex-
posure to violence and persistence intentions for completing education.
Brody, Murry, Gerrard, Gibbons, McNair, Brown, et al. (2006), for example,
demonstrated that supportive and engaged parenting practices reduced
the negative effects of racial discrimination on problems in school con-
duct and symptoms of depression in African American adolescents. These
studies provided empirical evidence for the role of resources on attenu-
ating the negative association between risk exposures and internalizing
problems and supported the protective model.
Resilience and Adolescents' Externalizing Problems
Resilience and adolescents' substance use and violent behaviors.—A num-
ber of assets and resources have been identified that compensate for or
protect against risks for cigarette, alcohol, and illegal drug use among ad-
olescents (Lee & Cranford, 2008) and violent behaviors (Borowsky, Ire-
land, & Resnick, 2002; Zagar & Busch, 2009). Researchers have reported
that assets including religious belief (Wills, Yaeger, & Sandy, 2003), self-

esteem (Byrne & Mazanov, 2001), internal locus of control (Scheier, Bot-
vin, & Miller, 2000), and positive affect (Scheier, et al., 2000) decreased the
negative effects of stressful or negative life events on substance use, which
supported the protective model. For example, a latent growth analysis of
religiosity and life events stress indicated that religiosity decreased the
effects of life stress on initial substance use and slowed down the rate of
substance abuse (Wills, et al., 2003). Wills, Sandy, Shinar, and Yaeger (1999)
found that positive affectivity protected adolescents against the negative
effects of emotional distress on cigarette, alcohol, and marijuana use.
Researchers have found that promotive factors like religiosity (Bar-
kin, Kreiter, & DuRant, 2001), anger control skills (McMahon, Todd, Marti-
nez, Coker, Sheu, Washburn, et al., 2013), positive racial identity (Caldwell,
Kohn-Wood, Schmeelk-Cone, Chavous, & Zimmerman, 2004), positive ac-
ademic beliefs (Borowsky, et al., 2002), alternative thinking, and life skills
(Zagar & Busch, 2009) helped buffer against or counteract the negative ef-
fects of risk factors on violent intentions and behaviors, supporting either
the compensatory or protective model. Barkin, et al. (2001), e.g., found that
involvement in conventional activities like church attendance can decrease
the effect of violence exposure on 11- to 12-year-olds' intention to use vio-
lence. Specifically, the more frequently these younger adolescents attended
religious services, the more likely they were to choose non-violent methods
to resolve hypothetical conflict even in the face of exposure to violence. In
a sample of African American young adults, Caldwell, et al. (2004) found
that the centrality of race for men and the meaning others attribute to being
Black for both men and women were moderators that decreased the influ-
ence of racial discrimination on violent behavior. These two studies pro-
vided support for the protective model. In a more recent study, Zagar and
Busch (2009) reported that alternative thinking and life skills can decrease
delinquency effectively, supporting the compensatory model.
Concerning resources, promotive factors such as family connected-
ness, parental support, adult mentors, and mentoring were all found to
compensate for the negative effects of emotional distress, parental smok-
ing, and delinquent behavior on substance use and violent intentions
and behaviors (Fleming, Kim, Harachi, & Catalano, 2002; Lloyd-Richard-
son, Papandonatos, Kazura, Stanton, & Niaura, 2002; Zimmerman, Bin-
genheimer, & Notaro, 2002; Zagar & Busch, 2009; Brenner, Bauermeister,
& Zimmerman, 2011), which have supported the compensatory model.
Zimmerman, et al. (2002), for example, found that non-parental support-
ive adults (i.e., natural mentors) who are a part of adolescents' social net-
works, such as extended family members, neighbors, and family mem-
bers' friends, compensated for the negative effects of friends' problem
behaviors and problem behavior norms on alcohol and marijuana use.

Brenner, et al. (2011) also reported that friends' alcohol use was positively
associated to adolescents' alcohol use, while maternal support, which
measured mother's emotional and instrumental support and closeness,
was inversely related with it. Zagar and Busch (2009) also reported that
mentoring was a compensatory factor for delinquency reduction.
Borowsky, et al. (2012) found that academic performance, parental pres-
ence, parent-family connectedness, and school connectedness can compen-
sate for the cumulative effects of prior violent behavior, violence victimiza-
tion, substance use, and school problems on violent behavior (Borowsky,
et al., 2002), supporting the compensatory model. In studies that have sup-
ported the protective model of resilience, researchers reported that the neg-
ative effects of fighting and violent modeled behavior from friends and
adults were decreased by parental support (Zimmerman, et al., 1998). In
another study, Howard and Budge (2010) investigated the moderating role
of family and peer support on the relationship between exposure to vi-
olence on academic performance, symptoms of distress, and persistence
intentions. Their results indicated that family support provided a protec-
tive-stabilizing moderating effect between exposure to violence and symp-
toms of distress, and that peer support had a protective-stabilizing mod-
erating effect between exposure to violence and persistence intentions. In
a study using sample of Chinese adolescents, it was revealed that adoles-
cents growing up in non-intact families reported higher risk behaviors
than those growing up in intact families (Shek & Leung, 2013).
Resilience and adolescents' sexual behavior.—Youth assets and external
resources are protective factors that help youth avoid risky sexual behav-
iors (Mueller, et al., 2010; Elkington, Bauermeister, & Zimmerman, 2011).
Elkington, et al. (2011) found support for a compensatory model of resil-
ience. They found that family involvement and parental support coun-
teracted (compensated for) the deleterious effects of social influences and
substance use on youth condom use (Elkington, et al., 2011). Dilorio, Mc-
Carty, and Denzmore (2006) reported that discussion about sex with moth-
ers diminished the association between sex-based discussion with peers
and youths' risky sexual behavior. In a study which examined the relation-
ship between parental support and condom use trajectories and its corre-
lates in a predominantly African American sample from adolescence to
young adulthood, Pingel, Bauermeister, Elkington, Fergus, Caldwell, and
Zimmerman (2012) found that parental support can help promote consis-
tent condom use through adolescence and into young adulthood in the
presence of youths' own substance use and psychological distress, which
are known to increase sexual risk. Regarding studies supporting the pro-
tective model of resilience, Rai, Stanton, Wu, Li, Galbraith, Cottrell, et al.
(2003) found that the association of peer norms with sexual activity was

moderated by parental monitoring, with greater parental monitoring sub-

stantially decreasing the association between peer norms and sexual ac-
tivity.
RESILIENCE-BASED INTERVENTION
The results of resiliency-based research suggest that interventions
that enhance adolescents' assets and resources may promote positive
youth development and prevent internalizing and externalizing behavior.
Fergus and Zimmerman (2005) proposed that internal assets, including
social skills for relating to peers, self-efficacy for health-promoting behav-
ior, academic skills, and participation in extracurricular and community
activities, are particularly critical to help adolescents overcome risk ex-
posure. Researchers have reported several studies on the applicability of
resilience-based interventions on the prevention of adolescents' risky be-
haviors (Botvin, Schinke, Epstein, & Diaz, 1994; Shochet, Dadds, Holland,
Whitefield, Harnett, & Osgarby, 2001; Franzen, Morrel-Samuels, Reischl,
& Zimmerman, 2009; Brody, Chen, Kogan, Smith, & Brown, 2010; Allen,
Garcia-Huidobro, Hurtado, Allen, Davey, Forster, et al., 2012). Resilience
interventions have focused on three types of interventions implemented,
which are school-based, family-based, and community-based interven-
tions.
School-based Interventions
Several school-based interventions were developed to promote resil-
ience in adolescents, some during the school days and others after school.
These programs focused on enhancing assets or resources, or did both. Re-
sults of a meta-analysis of 165 school-based programs, programs focusing
on improving social skills and self-control (i.e., assets), as well as chang-
ing the school environment (i.e., resource), are more effective in reducing
adolescent problems than traditional instructional and behavioral modifi-
cation strategies (Perry, Kelder, Murray, & Klepp, 1992; Wilson, Gottfred-
son, & Najaka, 2001). For instance, in a program focused on asset building,
Botvin, et al. (1994) designed a classroom-based project to help adoles-
cents develop skills for resisting social influences to use substances. Their
program helped develop skills related to building self-esteem, decreasing
anxiety, communicating effectively, developing relationships with others,
and asserting rights.
In another study, Caplan, Weissberg, Grober, Sivo, Grady, and Ja-
coby (1992) designed a school-based competency intervention for sixth-
and seventh-grade students in an urban and in a suburban school (control
group) to help them develop stress management skills and problem-
solving skills. They also focused on enhancing self-esteem, assertiveness,
and substance use knowledge. Adolescents in the experimental group re-

ported improvement in coping, conflict resolution, impulse control, and

problem-solving skills compared with the control group. For the ado-
lescents in the experimental group alcohol use also decreased, while no
change was found for the control group (Caplan, et al., 1992).
Several programs were also designed as after-school interventions.
The Youth Empowerment Solutions for Peaceful Communities (YES) pro-
gram was implemented to help youth prevent and reduce violence behav-
iors. Through three main intervention components, which include youth
empowerment, adult capacity building, and community development, the
YES program offers youth the opportunity to design community change
projects and address neighborhood violence. Youth were connected with
supportive adults to help them develop citizenship skills, ethnic identity
and pride, program development, and implementation experience. Evalu-
ation of the program suggests that youth in the program reported more ef-
fective conflict resolution skills and the geographic areas around the inter-
vention sites have fewer assaults nearby after projects that focused on the
physical environment (e.g., community gardens, murals) were completed
(Hurd, Zimmerman, & Reischl, 2011).
Family-based Interventions
Another approach for resilience-based interventions is to focus on
family environments. Several interventions have focused on families as
a way to develop assets and resources (Shochet, et al., 2001; Brody, et al.,
2010). The Resourceful Adolescent Program (RAP) is a family-based pro-
gram that includes three sessions for participants' parents (Shochet, et al.,
2001). It includes sessions on affirming participants' strengths, learning
skills for handling stress, developing social support networks, and con-
ducting interpersonal relationships (Shochet, et al., 2001). In a more recent
study, Brody, et al. (2010) designed a family-centered preventive interven-
tion (i.e., Adult in Making, AIM) to help African American youth who had
left high school reduce their risk behaviors. Through increasing the provi-
sion of family-based buffering processes, such as parental emotional and
instrumental support, and racial socialization, the AIM program buffered
the negative effects of leaving school early on risk behavior. In another
community-based smoking prevention program, 336 Latino immigrant
families were recruited and randomized into intervention or delayed
treatment conditions. Parenting skills and parent-youth relational factors
associated with lower smoking and other substance use in youth were tar-
geted. This intervention was effective in decreasing the youths' intention
to smoke 6 mo. post-intervention (Allen, et al., 2012).
Additionally, researchers have designed interventions using trait-ori-
ented perspective to help those exposed to risks. For example, Chen, Shen,

Gao, Lam, Chang, and Deng (2014) designed a short-term cognitive-be-

havioral therapy (CBT) to increase psychological resilience among chil-
dren who lost their parents in an earthquake by providing general sup-
port. The CBT intervention was shown to be effective in reducing PTSD
and depressive symptoms and improving psychological resilience.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ADOLESCENTS' DEVELOPMENT IN CHINA
Resilience theory can be applied to all disadvantaged populations
to understand their process of overcoming adversity through mobiliz-
ing their assets and resources. In literature, resilience theory has been ap-
plied to study populations facing adversity in both Western and Eastern
samples (Chung & Emery, 2010; Kukihara, Yamawaki, Uchiyama, Arai, &
Horikawa, 2014). Yet, it is also noteworthy that the process of resilience
may also vary for different groups of adolescents (Fergus & Zimmer-
man, 2005). As suggested by Fergus and Zimmerman (2005), resilience
for urban and suburban youth may differ from resilience for rural youth.
Similarly, resilience may differ for youth of high and low socioeconomic
status, for boys and girls, for early adolescents and late adolescents, or for
immigrant and non-immigrant youth. Therefore, cultural and social con-
text differences should be given full consideration for its application in
China. In this review, the focus is two disadvantaged adolescent groups in
China (i.e., migrant children and left-behind children) that have attracted
much attention from both researchers and mental health education practi-
tioners. Additionally, resilience-based intervention and psychological su-
zhi-based intervention, a mental health construct for individuals that fo-
cuses on a strengths-based approach, can be integrated to develop a more
balanced program for positive youth development.
Resilience Theory and Disadvantaged Adolescent Groups in China
Currently, migrant children and left-behind children (also called stay-
home children) are the two main disadvantaged youth groups in China.
The emergence of these two groups is caused by the unprecedented eco-
nomic growth in urban centers and the decrease of employment oppor-
tunities in rural areas. This has resulted in large rural-to-urban migra-
tion. The majority of rural-to-urban migrant workers take jobs with low
pay. Additionally, their children face obstacles to accessing primary ed-
ucation because of China's place-based public resource distribution and
management system. In spite of this, a large number of rural children still
accompany their parents and enter the migration process, becoming mi-
grant children (Zeng, 2011; Yuan, Fang, Liu, & Lin, 2012; Liu, Zhao, &
Shen, 2013). The children whose parents cannot afford their living and ed-
ucation in urban areas have to stay in rural areas most often to live with
grandparents or other relatives. These youth are referred to as left-behind
children (Xiang, 2007; Li & Meng, 2012).

It has been estimated that 40 million migrant children under 14 years

of age live in China. Their disadvantaged socioeconomic status leads to
discrimination against them in schools and communities. Under this situ-
ation, the migrant children usually have a sense of inferiority, which has
been found to be related to internalizing problems or externalizing prob-
lems, such as depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, delinquent behaviors,
etc. (Liu, 2013). With regard to the left-behind children, it has been es-
timated that 52 million children have been left behind by their migrant
parent(s) in rural communities (National Women Union, 2013). The left-
behind children live in a single-parent family or a no-parent family, cared
for by grandparents, relatives, nonrelatives, or even themselves. Due to
the long separation from their parent(s), these children lack parental affec-
tion, which may result in externalizing and internalizing problems such
as delinquent behavior, cigarette use, anxiety, and depression symptoms
(Fan & Sang, 2005; Zhou, Sun, Liu, & Zhou, 2005; Zhao & Liu, 2010). Thus,
both migration and staying home without parents are significant risk fac-
tors for these youth.
Although migrant children and left-behind children are exposed to
adversity from both discrimination and limited parental support, not all
of these children report internalizing or externalizing problems. Resilience
theory can be applied to help identify promotive factors that may help
them avoid negative outcomes. Research on resilience among migrant and
left-behind children may be a useful approach, but it has not been widely
applied in Chinese culture or with these rural children. This would be
a useful direction for research because resilience theory was originally
developed from studies of children and adolescents in Western cultures
(Garmezy, 1970, 1971), and findings from adolescents in Western countries
(mainly the United States) may not be generalizable to at-risk Chinese
children. Brenner and Zimmerman (2010) suggested that studies of resil-
ience processes based on the models of risk, promotive factors, and devel-
opmental or behavioral outcomes need to take into consideration circum-
stances of different cultural contexts. Particular assets and resources may
vary across specific cultures, although the way they operate and compen-
sate for, protect against, or inoculate youth from the negative effects of risk
exposure is expected to be consistent across cultures (Brenner & Zimmer-
man, 2010). For example, adaptation to change is a vital and historic part
of the Chinese culture and way of life in China, and theoretically adapta-
tion to change belongs to the asset components of resilience. Its promotive
role in helping migration and left-behind children overcoming their ad-
versity, however, needs to be examined empirically.
In recent years, researchers have begun to study migrant children and
left-behind children using resilience theory (Zhao & Liu, 2010; Zeng, 2011;

Fan, Fang, Liu, Lin, & Yuan, 2012), and several have reported support for
the compensatory model. Native identification, for example, was found
to attenuate the negative effects of perceived discrimination on migrant
children's socio-cultural adaptation (Fan, et al., 2012). Social support was
a promotive factor against the effect of stress on psychological adaptation
(Zeng, 2011). Few researchers studying migrant and left-behind children
have examined the applicability of protective and inoculation models of
resilience. Additionally, most researchers have focused on individual as-
sets and family-level resources and have not explored school and com-
munity-level resources. Another limitation of this literature is the almost
complete reliance on cross-sectional research. Moreover, the studies that
are longitudinal typically include only two time points (Hou, Yuan, Liu,
Lin, & Fang, 2011; Yuan, et al., 2012); to understand more completely the
developmental factors associated with the resilience process for adoles-
cents' internalizing and externalizing problems, it is necessary to obtain
more waves of data (ideally at least four waves) over longer periods of
time so that analysis of developmental trajectories can be studied. Addi-
tionally, it is necessary to investigate the trajectories of internalizing and
externalizing problems and examine whether assets and resources can
help alter negative trajectories predicting in the risk models.
Resilience Theory and Psychological Suzhi
The concept of psychological suzhi was put forward based on the no-
tion of positive psychology. Positive psychology is an approach to mental
health that urges psychologists to adopt a more positive-focused perspec-
tive regarding human potentials, motives, and capacities (Zhang, 2009).
Psychological suzhi (suzhi lexically means disposition or quality) refers to
a one's personal qualities along three dimensions: cognition, individual-
ity, and adaptability (Zhang, 2009). Cognition refers to quality of critical
thinking, creativity, and coping abilities. Individuality includes concepts
such as achievement motivation, self-esteem, and identity. Adaptability is
a notion of interpersonal skills, being flexible in different social contexts.
Suzhi is closely related to an individual's adaptive, developmental, and
creative behaviors, and it is characterized by steadiness, essentiality, and
implicitness (Zhang, 2009). Substantially, psychological suzhi is a stable
psychological quality while mental health is a positive and sound psy-
chological state. Zhang (2012) proposed that individuals with high psy-
chological suzhi are less likely to suffer from psychological distress; even
if psychological distress occurs to them, they can recover by themselves.
In contrast, individuals with low psychological suzhi tend to suffer from
psychological distress and are not able to recover by themselves (Wang &
Zhang, 2012b).

Researchers have found that psychological suzhi provides adoles-

cents with a strong buffer against negative outcomes (i.e., depression,
low satisfaction with life, anxiety, etc.) caused by stressful events (Wang &
Zhang, 2012a; Zhang, 2012; Zhang & Wang, 2012). Zhang (2012) proposed
that as an intrapersonal factor (i.e., assets) psychological suzhi can either
have a direct positive effect on an individual's mental health (compensa-
tory model of resilience) or play a protective role against the negative ef-
fects of stressful events on mental health (protective model of resilience).
It is useful to note, however, that resilience is different from psychological
suzhi because resilience emphasizes both intrapersonal assets (e.g., traits,
emotional control, self-efficacy, intelligence) and social resources (e.g.,
family support, peer support, adult mentors, community programs) while
psychological suzhi focuses more on individuals' intrapersonal compo-
nents. The second difference between psychological sushi and resilience is
that resilience theory focuses attention on strengths and suzhi applies that
notion to a practice model for enhancing mental health. Therefore, suzhi
is based on the notion that psychological strengths are necessary to face
adversity successfully, and details the kinds of strengths that are the focus
of the approach.
Psychological suzhi and resilience also have significant overlap. Both
conceptual models suggest a focus on strength-based education and pre-
vention that are designed to enhance personal assets (e.g., coping skills,
problem-solving skills) and family and community resources (e.g., parent-
ing skills, community programs). Some assets in the resilience theory are
similar to the individual-focused dimensions of psychological suzhi. The
individual level components in the psychological suzhi, e.g., have some
overlap with resilience-based assets because they both include self-effi-
cacy, emotional control, and coping skills. The adaptation component in
psychological suzhi is similar to the adaptive outcomes of resilience. Table
1 provides a comparison between resilience and psychological suzhi.
A resilience-based approach informs psychological suzhi interven-
tions. School-based interventions focusing on improving social compe-
tency and self-control (Perry, et al., 1992; Wilson, et al., 2001), e.g., can facil-
itate the self-efficacy and emotional control skills central to psychological
suzhi. Similarly, family-based programs like the RAP intervention noted
above include constructs from both resilience and suzhi. RAP focused on
skill building for coping with stress, developing social support, and en-
hancing interpersonal relationships (Shochet, et al., 2001). These are vital
assets and resources consistently found to help youth overcome the nega-
tive effects of risk exposure (i.e., to be resilient in the face of stress), and
they also promote social-oriented adaptability, coping, and self-efficacy
that are central to psychological suzhi.

TABLE 1
COMPARISON ON COMPONENTS BETWEEN RESILIENCE AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SUZHI
Resilience Psychological Suzhi
Basic components Assets and resources Cognitive, individual, and
adaptable components
Underlying assumptions Overcoming adversity and Developing personal abilities
adaptation facing risk for positive development
regardless of vulnerability
Cognitive factors Coping skills, intelligence, Achievement motivation,
self-efficacy coping ability, creativity
Individual factors Self-esteem, identity, Motivation, self-esteem,
perceived competence identity
Social factors Social support, mentoring, Flexibility, interpersonal skills
neighborhood cohesion
Cross-cultural Considerations When Applying

Resilience Theory to Chinese Context
As a theory, resilience and the idea of relying on assets and resources
to alleviate or protect against risk may be stable across cultural contexts
but has not been widely tested outside of Western contexts. It is likely,
however, that cultural differences between East and West may shape dif-
ferences in risks, resources, assets, and different risk exposures. Culture
and background, for instance, influence experiences of adversity and can-
not be ignored as potential sources of stress. Cultural issues may also af-
fect differences in assets and resources available to youth. Some resources
that have shown to be effective buffers against negative outcomes among
American adolescents might not be common in China, such as siblings
and church activity. Meanwhile, some resources may play more important
roles for Chinese youth, such as relationship with grandparents, because
in China they are common caretakers for children.
Additionally, some assets found to play a protective role in buffering
the negative effect of adversity on internalizing problems in the West may
not have a similar function for Chinese adolescents. Hsieh, Zimmerman,
Xue, Bauemeister, Caldwell, Wang, et al. (2014), for example, examined ac-
tive coping as a protective factor in a test of resilience from the negative
effects of stress in a cross-sectional study of Chinese adolescents from Bei-
jing and Xian. They found that active coping did not mitigate the effects of
stress on behavioral problems. Thus, research on resilience in China may
need to consider both the most relevant constructs and measures that may
help youth overcome risks they face and the most appropriate measures
for Chinese youth. The application of resilience theory in China may help
further understanding of the vital promotive factors that help Chinese

youth overcome adversity and risk. This information would also be useful
for informing the factors to focus on in a psychological suzhi intervention.
Conclusion
Resilience theory provides a useful framework to understand how
people develop positively despite adversity. Two important components
in resilience theory, assets and resources, have been empirically shown to
either compensate for or buffer the negative effects of risks and adversity.
Additionally, the resilience-based interventions are effective in decreas-
ing internalizing and externalizing problems. This implies that the resil-
ience theory can be applied to disadvantaged youth in China (i.e., migrant
children and left-behind children) to investigate the promotive factors
(compensatory and protective) that may contribute to their positive de-
velopment. Resilience theory focuses on both individual characteristics
and environmental resources, while psychological suzhi emphasizes indi-
vidual strengths. The integration of the two could help inform the design
of more balanced programs for positive youth development in both China
and other more Western cultures.
REFERENCES
AHERN, N. R., KIEHL, E. M., SOLE, M. L., & BYERS, J. (2006) A review of instruments mea-
suring resilience. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 29(2), 103-125.
ALLEN, M. L., GARCIA-HUIDOBRO, D., HURTADO, G. A., ALLEN, R., DAVEY, C. S., FORSTER, J.
L., & SVETAZ, M. V. (2012) Immigrant family skills-building to prevent tobacco use
in Latino youth: study protocol for a community-based participatory randomized
controlled trial. Trials, 13, 242.
BARKIN, S., KREITER, S., & DURANT, R. H. (2001) Exposure to violence and intentions to
engage in moralistic violence during early adolescence. Journal of Adolescence,
24(6), 777-789.
BARNES, G. M., & WELTE, J. W. (1986) Patterns and predictors of alcohol use among
7–12th grade students in New York State. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47(1), 53-62.
BARUTH, K. E., & CAROLL, J. J. (2002) A formal assessment of resilience: the Baruth Protec-
tive Factors Inventory. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 58, 235-244.
BEGUE, L., & ROCHE, S. (2009) Multidimensional social control variables as predictors
of drunkenness among French adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 32(2), 171-191.
BLOCK, J., & KREMEN, A. M. (1996) IQ and ego-resiliency: conceptual and empirical con-
nections and separateness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(2), 349-
361.
BOROWSKY, I. W., IRELAND, M., & RESNICK, M. D. (2002) Violence risk and protective factors
among youth held back in school. Ambulatory Pediatrics, 2(6), 475-484.
BOTVIN, G. J., SCHINKE, S. P., EPSTEIN, J. A., & DIAZ, T. (1994) Effectiveness of culturally
focused and generic skills training approaches to alcohol and drug abuse preven-
tion among minority youths. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 8(2), 116-127.

BRENNER, A. B., BAUERMEISTER, J. A., & ZIMMERMAN, M. A. (2011) Neighborhood variation

in adolescent alcohol use: examination of socioecological and social disorganiza-
tion theories. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 72(4), 651-659.
BRENNER, A. B., & ZIMMERMAN, M. A. (2010) Resilience in adolescence: overcoming neigh-
borhood disadvantage. In J. W. Reich, A. Zautra, & J. S. Hall (Eds.), Handbook of
adult resilience. New York: Guilford Press. Pp. 283-308.
BRODY, G. H., CHEN, Y-F., KOGAN, S. M., SMITH, K., & BROWN, A. C. (2010) Buffering effects
of a family-based intervention for African American emerging adults. Journal of
Marriage and Family, 72(5), 1426-1435.
BRODY, G. H., MURRY, V. M., GERRARD, M., GIBBONS, F. X., MCNAIR, L., BROWN, A. C., &
CHEN, Y-F. (2006) The Strong African American Families program: prevention of
youths' high-risk behavior and a test of a model of change. Journal of Family Psy-
chology, 20(1), 1-11.
BYRNE, D. G., & MAZANOV, J. (2001) Self-esteem, stress and cigarette smoking in adoles-
cents. Stress & Health, 17(2), 105-110.
CALDWELL, C. H., KOHN-WOOD, L. P., SCHMEELK-CONE, K. H., CHAVOUS, T. M., & ZIMMER-
MAN, M. A. (2004) Racial discrimination and racial identity as risk or protective
factors for violent behaviors in African American young adults. American Journal
of Community Psychology, 33(1-2), 91-105.
CAMPBELL-SILLS, L., COHAN, S. L., & STEIN, M. B. (2006) Relationship of resilience to per-
sonality, coping, and psychiatric symptoms in young adults. Behaviour Research
and Therapy, 44(4), 585-599.
CAPLAN, M., WEISSBERG, R. P., GROBER, J. S., SIVO, P. J., GRADY, K., & JACOBY, C. (1992) Social
competence promotion with inner-city and suburban young adolescents: effects
on social adjustment and alcohol use. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
60(1), 56-63.
CHEN, Y., SHEN, W. W., GAO, K., LAM, C. S., CHANG, W. C., & DENG, H. (2014) Effectiveness
RCT of a CBT intervention for youths who lost parents in the Sichuan, China,
earthquake. Psychiatric Services, 65(2), 259-262.
CHUNG, Y., & EMERY, R. (2010) Early adolescents and divorce in South Korea: risk, resil-
ience and pain. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 41(5), 855-870.
CONNOR, K. M., & DAVIDSON, J. R. T. (2003) Development of a new resilience scale: the
Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD–RISC). Depression and Anxiety, 18(2), 76-
82.
COOPER, S. M., BROWN, C., METZGER, I., CLINTON, Y., & GUTHRIE, B. (2012) Racial discrimi-
nation and African American adolescents' adjustment: gender variation in family
and community social support, promotive and protective factors. Journal of Child
and Family Studies, 22(1), 15-29.
DAVYDOV, D. M., STEWART, R., RITCHIE, K., & CHAUDIEU, I. (2010) Resilience and mental
health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(5), 479-495.
DILORIO, C., MCCARTY, F., & DENZMORE, P. (2006) An exploration of social cognitive theory
mediators of father-son communication about sex. Journal of Pediatric Psychology,
31(9), 917-927.
ELKINGTON, K. S., BAUERMEISTER, J. A., & ZIMMERMAN, M. A. (2011) Do parents and peers
matter? A prospective socio-ecological examination of substance use and sexual
risk among African American youth. Journal of Adolescence, 34(5), 1035-1047.

FAN, F., & SANG, B. (2005) Absence of parental upbringing and left-behind children's
personality, academic achievements as well as behavior problems. Journal of Psy-
chological Science, 28(4), 855-858.
FAN, X-H., FANG, X-Y., LIU, Y., LIN, X-Y., & YUAN, X-J. (2012) The effects of social sup-
port and social identity on the relationship between perceived discrimination
and socio-cultural adjustment among Chinese migrant children. Acta Psychologica
Sinica, 44(5), 647-663.
FERGUS, S., & ZIMMERMAN, M. A. (2005) Adolescent resilience: a framework for under-
standing healthy development in the face of risk. Annual Review of Public Health,
26, 399-419.
FLEMING, C. B., KIM, H., HARACHI, T. W., & CATALANO, R. F. (2002) Family processes for
children in early elementary school as predictors of smoking initiation. The Journal
of Adolescent Health, 30(3), 184-189.
FRANZEN, S., MORREL-SAMUELS, S., REISCHL, T. M., & ZIMMERMAN, M. A. (2009) Using pro-
cess evaluation to strengthen intergenerational partnerships in the Youth Empow-
erment Solutions program. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community,
37(4), 289-301.
GARMEZY, N. (1970) Process and reactive schizophrenia: some conceptions and issues.
Schizophrenia Bulletin, 2, 30-74.
GARMEZY, N. (1971) Vulnerability research and the issue of primary prevention. Ameri-
can Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 41(1), 101-116.
GARMEZY, N. (1993) Children in poverty: resilience despite risk. Psychiatry, 56(1), 127-136.
GARMEZY, N., MASTEN, A. S., & TELLEGEN, A. (1984) The study of stress and competence
in children: a building block for developmental psychopathology. Child Develop-
ment, 55(1), 97-111.
HOU, S-M., YUAN, X-J., LIU, Y., LIN, X-Y., & FANG, X-Y. (2011) The effect of social support
and perceived discrimination on loneliness among migrant children: a longitudi-
nal study. Psychological Development and Education, 4, 401-411.
HOURI, D., NAM, E. W., CHOE, E. H., MIN, L. Z., & MATSUMOTO, K. (2012) The mental health
of adolescent school children: a comparison among Japan, Korea, and China.
Global Health Promotion, 19(3), 32-41.
HOWARD, K. A. S., BUDGE, S. L., & MCKAY, K. M. (2010) Youth exposed to violence: the
role of protective factors. Journal of Community Psychology, 38(1), 63-79.
HSIEH, H., ZIMMERMAN, M., XUE, Y., BAUEMEISTER, J. A., CALDWELL, C. H., WANG, Z., & HOU,
Y. (2014) Stress, active coping, and problem behaviors among Chinese adoles-
cents. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 84, 364-376.
HURD, N. M., & ZIMMERMAN, M. A. (2010) Natural mentoring relationships among ado-
lescent mothers: a study of resilience. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20(3), 789-
809.
HURD, N. M., ZIMMERMAN, M. A., & REISCHL, T. M. (2011) Role model behavior and youth
violence: a study of positive and negative effects. The Journal of Early Adolescence,
31(2), 323-354.
JESSOR, R., & JESSOR, S. L. (1977) Problem behavior and psychosocial development: a longitudi-
nal study of youth. New York: Academic Press. P. 281.
JESSOR, R., & TURBIN, M. S. (2014) Parsing protection and risk for problem behavior ver-
sus pro-social behavior among U.S. and Chinese adolescents. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 43(7), 1037-1051.

JESSOR, R., TURBIN, M. S., & COSTA, F. M. (2010) Predicting developmental change in
healthy eating and regular exercise among adolescents in China and the United
States: the role of psychosocial and behavioral protection and risk. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 20(3), 707-725.
KANDEL, D. (1975) Stages in adolescent involvement in drug use. Science, 190(4217), 912-
914.
KLIEWER, W., CUNNINGHAM, J. N., DIEHL, R., PARRISH, K. A., WALKER, J. M., ATIYEH, C., NEACE,
B., DUNCAN, L., TAYLOR, K., & MEJIA, R. (2010) Violence exposure and adjustment
in inner-city youth: child and caregiver emotion regulation skill, caregiver–child
relationship quality, and neighborhood cohesion as protective factors. Journal of
Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 33(3), 37-41.
KUKIHARA, H., YAMAWAKI, N., UCHIYAMA, K., ARAI, S., & HORIKAWA, E. (2014) Trauma,
depression, and resilience of earthquake/tsunami/nuclear disaster survivors of
Hirono, Fukushima, Japan. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 68(7), 524-533.
LEE, H. H., & CRANFORD, J. A. (2008) Does resilience moderate the associations between
parental problem drinking and adolescents' internalizing and externalizing
behaviors? A study of Korean adolescents. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 96(3),
213-221.
LI, H., & MENG, Q. (2012) Meta analysis on study of left behind children's mental health.
China Journal of Health Psychology, 20(1), 77-79.
LIEBENBERG, L., UNGAR, M., & VAN DE VIJVER, F. (2012) Validation of the Child and Youth
Resilience Measure–28 (CYRM–28) among Canadian youth. Research on Social
Work Practice, 22(2), 219-226.
LIU, X. (2013) Influences of perceived personal and group discrimination on the subjec-
tive well-being among Chinese migrant children. Journal of Psychological Science,
36(1), 116-121.
LIU, X., ZHAO, J-X., & SHEN, J-L. (2013) Perceived discrimination and subjective well-
being among urban migrant children: the effects of mediators and moderators.
Acta Psychologica Sinica, 45(5), 568-584.
LLOYD-RICHARDSON, E. E., PAPANDONATOS, G., KAZURA, A., STANTON, C., & NIAURA, R. (2002)
Differentiating stages of smoking intensity among adolescents: stage-specific psy-
chological and social influences. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70(4),
998-1009.
LUTHAR, S. S., CICCHETTI, D., & BECKER, B. (2000) The construct of resilience: a critical
evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543-562.
MAK, W. W. S., NG, I. S. W., & WONG, C. C. Y. (2011) Resilience: enhancing well-being
through the positive cognitive triad. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58(4), 610-
617.
MARTINO, S. C., ELLICKSON, P. L., & MCCAFFREY, D. F. (2009) Multiple trajectories of peer
and parental influence and their association with the development of adolescent
heavy drinking. Addictive Behaviors, 34(8), 693-700.
MASON, M. J., SCHMIDT, C., ABRAHAM, A., WALKER, L., & TERCYAK, K. (2009) Adolescents'
social environment and depression: social networks, extracurricular activity, and
family relationship influences. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings,
16(4), 346-354.
MASTEN, A. S., BEST, K. M., & GARMEZY, N. (1990) Resilience and development: contribu-
tions from the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and Psycho-
pathology, 2, 425-444.

MCMAHON, S. D., TODD, N. R., MARTINEZ, A., COKER, C., SHEU, C-F., WASHBURN, J., & SHAH,
S. (2013) Aggressive and prosocial behavior: community violence, cognitive, and
behavioral predictors among urban African American youth. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 51(3-4), 407-421.
MUELLER, T., GAVIN, L., OMAN, R., VESELY, S., ASPY, C., TOLMA, E., & RODINE, S. (2010) Youth
assets and sexual risk behavior: differences between male and female adolescents.
Health Education & Behavior, 37(3), 343-356.
NATIONAL WOMEN UNION. (2013, May 10) Report on life-behind and migrant children in China.
Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://acwf.people.com.cn/n/2013/0510/c9
9013-21437965.html.
NDUGWA, R. P., KABIRU, C. W., CLELAND, J., BEGUY, D., EGONDI, T., ZULU, E. M., & JESSOR, R.
(2010) Adolescent problem behavior in Nairobi's informal settlements: applying
problem behavior theory in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Urban Health, 88, 298-
317.
NEEDLE, R., MCCUBBIN, H., WILSON, M., REINECK, R., LAZAR, A., & MEDERER, H. (1986) Inter-
personal influences in adolescent drug use: the role of older siblings, parents, and
peers. The International Journal of the Addictions, 21(7), 739-766.
ONG, A. D., BERGEMAN, C. S., BISCONTI, T. L., & WALLACE, K. A. (2006) Psychological resil-
ience, positive emotions, and successful adaptation to stress in later life. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 730-749.
ONG, A. D., ZAUTRA, A. J., & REID, M. C. (2010) Psychological resilience predicts decreases
in pain catastrophizing through positive emotions. Psychology and Aging, 25(3),
516-523.
PENG, L., ZHANG, J., LI, M., LI, P., ZHANG, Y., ZUO, X., & XU, Y. (2012) Negative life events
and mental health of Chinese medical students: the effect of resilience, personality
and social support. Psychiatry Research, 196(1), 138-141.
PERRY, C. L., KELDER, S. H., MURRAY, D. M., & KLEPP, K. I. (1992) Communitywide smok-
ing prevention: long-term outcomes of the Minnesota Heart Health Program and
the Class of 1989 Study. American Journal of Public Health, 82(9), 1210-1216.
PINGEL, E. S., BAUERMEISTER, J. A., ELKINGTON, K. S., FERGUS, S., CALDWELL, C. H., & ZIM-
MERMAN, M. A. (2012) Condom use trajectories in adolescence and the transition
to adulthood: the role of mother and father support. Journal of Research on Adoles-
cence, 22(2), 350-366.
RAI, A. A., STANTON, B., WU, Y., LI, X., GALBRAITH, J., COTTRELL, L., & BURNS, J. (2003) Rela-
tive influences of perceived parental monitoring and perceived peer involvement
on adolescent risk behaviors: an analysis of six cross-sectional data sets. The Jour-
nal of Adolescent Health, 33(2), 108-118.
RUTTER, M. (1985) Resilience in the face of adversity: protective factors and resistance to
psychiatric disorder. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 598-611.
RUTTER, M. (1987) Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. The American
Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57(3), 316-331.
RUTTER, M. (1993) Resilience: some conceptual considerations. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 14, 626-631.
SCHEIER, L. M., BOTVIN, G. J., & MILLER, N. L. (2000) Life events, neighborhood stress,
psychosocial functioning, and alcohol use among urban minority youth. Journal of
Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse, 9(1), 19-50.
SHEK, D. T. L., & LEUNG, H. (2013) Positive youth development, life satisfaction, and
problem behaviors of adolescents in intact and non-intact families in Hong Kong.
Frontiers in Pediatrics, 1, 1-7.

SHOCHET, I. M., DADDS, M. R., HOLLAND, D., WHITEFIELD, K., HARNETT, P. H., & OSGARBY, S.
M. (2001) The efficacy of a universal school-based program to prevent adolescent
depression. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30(3), 303-315.
STODDARD, S. A., WHITESIDE, L., ZIMMERMAN, M. A., CUNNINGHAM, R. M., CHERMACK, S. T.,
& WALTON, M. A. (2013) The relationship between cumulative risk and promotive
factors and violent behavior among urban adolescents. American Journal of Com-
munity Psychology, 51(1-2), 57-65.
STODDARD, S. A., ZIMMERMAN, M. A., & BAUERMEISTER, J. A. (2012) A longitudinal analysis
of cumulative risks, cumulative promotive factors, and adolescent violent behav-
ior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22(3), 542-555.
TUGADE, M. M., & FREDRICKSON, B. L. (2004) Resilient individuals use positive emotions
to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 86(2), 320-333.
UNGERSON, C. (2004) Whose empowerment and independence? A cross-national per-
spective on “cash for care” schemes. Ageing & Society, 24, 189-212.
WANG, X-Q., & ZHANG, D-J. (2012a) Looking beyond PTH and DFM: the relationship
model between psychological suzhi and mental health. Journal of Southwest Uni-
versity, 38(6), 67-74.
WANG, X-Q., & ZHANG, D-J. (2012b) The criticism and amendment for the dual-factor
model of mental health: from Chinese psychological suzhi research perspectives.
International Journal of Clinical Medicine, 3, 319-327.
WERNER, E. E. (1993) Risk, resilience, and recovery: perspectives from the Kauai Longi-
tudinal Study. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 503-515.
WILLS, T. A., SANDY, J. M., SHINAR, O., & YAEGER, A. (1999) Contributions of positive and
negative affect to adolescent substance use: test of a bidimensional model in a
longitudinal study. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 13(4), 327-338.
WILLS, T. A., YAEGER, A. M., & SANDY, J. M. (2003) Buffering effect of religiosity for ado-
lescent substance use. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17(1), 24-31.
WILSON, D. B., GOTTFREDSON, D. C., & NAJAKA, S. S. (2001) School-based prevention of
problem behaviors: a meta-analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17(3), 247-
272.
XIANG, B. (2007) How far are the left-behind left behind? A preliminary study in rural
China. Population, Space and Place, 13, 179-191.
YING, L., WU, X., LIN, C., & JIANG, L. (2014) Traumatic severity and trait resilience as
predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder and depressive symptoms among ado-
lescent survivors of the Wenchuan earthquake. PLOS One, 9(2), e89401.
YUAN, X-J., FANG, X-Y., LIU, Y., & LIN, X-Y. (2012) The relationship between stress cop-
ing, depression and social anxiety among migrant children: a longitudinal study.
Psychological Development and Education, 3, 283-291.
ZAGAR, R. J., & BUSCH, K. G. (2009) Empirical risk factors for delinquency and best treat-
ments: where do we go from here? Psychological Reports, 104, 279-308.
ZEHE, J. M., & COLDER, C. R. (2014) A latent growth curve analysis of alcohol-use specific
parenting and adolescent alcohol use. Addictive Behaviors, 39(12), 1701-1705.
ZENG, S. (2011) The stress and social support of migrant children and the protective
role of social support in the relation between stress and psychological adaptation.
Journal of Psychological Science, 34(3), 631-635.

ZHANG, D. J. (2009) Psychological suzhi and its structure. Advance in Psychology Research,
70, 239-250.
ZHANG, D-J. (2012) Integrating adolescents' mental health and psychological suzhi cul-
tivation. Journal of Psychological Science, 35(3), 530-536.
ZHANG, D-J., & WANG, X-Q. (2012) An analysis of the relationship between mental health
and psychological suzhi: from the perspective of connotation and structure. Jour-
nal of Southwest University, 38(3), 69-74.
ZHAO, J. X., & LIU, X. (2010) Rural left-home-children's depression and antisocial behav-
ior: the process role of daily pleasures. Psychological Development and Education,
19, 252-254.
ZHOU, Z. K., SUN, X. J., LIU, Y., & ZHOU, D. M. (2005) The psychological development
and education issues among stay-home children in urban areas. Journal of Beijing
Normal University (Social Science Edition), 187, 71-79.
ZIMMERMAN, M. A., BINGENHEIMER, J. B., & NOTARO, P. C. (2002) Natural mentors and ado-
lescent resiliency: a study with urban youth. American Journal of Community Psy-
chology, 30(2), 221-243.
ZIMMERMAN, M. A., & BRENNER, A. B. (2010) Resilience in adolescence: overcoming neigh-
borhood disadvantage. In J. W. Reich, A. J. Zautra, & J. S. Hall (Eds.), Handbook of
resilience. New York: Guilford Press. Pp. 283-308.
ZIMMERMAN, M. A., STEINMAN, K. J., & ROWE, K. (1998) Violence among urban African
American adolescents: the protective effects of parental support. In X. B. Arriaga
& S. Oskamp (Eds.), Addressing community problems: psychological research and inter-
ventions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp. 78-103.
Accepted August 25, 2015.

Psychological Reports: Disability & Trauma

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psychological Reports: Disability & Trauma

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psychological Reports: Disability & Trauma

2015, 117, 2, 354-375. © Psychological Reports 2015

RESILIENCE THEORY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

JIN-LIANG WANG AND DA-JUN ZHANG

Center for Mental Health Education, School of Psychology, Southwest University,

Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health

Resilience theory has attracted great attention from both researchers

Beibei, Chongqing 400715, China, or e-mail (wangjinliang09@gmail.com).

DOI 10.2466/16.17.PR0.117c21z8 ISSN 0033-2941

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 354 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 355 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 356 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 357 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 358 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 359 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 360 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 361 01/10/15 10:18 AM

moderated by parental monitoring, with greater parental monitoring sub-

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 362 01/10/15 10:18 AM

ported improvement in coping, conflict resolution, impulse control, and

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 363 01/10/15 10:18 AM

Gao, Lam, Chang, and Deng (2014) designed a short-term cognitive-be-

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 364 01/10/15 10:18 AM

It has been estimated that 40 million migrant children under 14 years

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 365 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 366 01/10/15 10:18 AM

Researchers have found that psychological suzhi provides adoles-

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 367 01/10/15 10:18 AM

Cross-cultural Considerations When Applying

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 368 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 369 01/10/15 10:18 AM

BRENNER, A. B., BAUERMEISTER, J. A., & ZIMMERMAN, M. A. (2011) Neighborhood variation

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 370 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 371 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 372 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 373 01/10/15 10:18 AM

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 374 01/10/15 10:18 AM

Accepted August 25, 2015.

02_AMS_PR_Wang_150128.indd 375 01/10/15 10:18 AM

You might also like