Talk:Psychological resilience

message: This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Isabella De Marchena. 20:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

message: This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 September 2020 and 25 November 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gabrielleswisher. 20:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

message: This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2020 and 1 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jessrose96. Peer reviewers: JaymaGoodwin. 20:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

message: This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 September 2021 and 18 November 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JuliaWeinman. 20:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

message: Focusing exclusively on post traumatic stress and resilience
1. Introduce and explain study of resilience in high risk children
2. Fix grammatical and spelling errors
3. Add possible protective factors
Dhamidov (talk) 02:56, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Edits to be Made 

message: Article phrase "self-efficacy for motivating endeavor at adaptation." -- Please dejargonate.  Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.130.15.14 (talk) 13:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  self-efficacy for motivating endeavor at adaptation 

message:  I wonder if Viktor Frankl with his observations of who survived nazi concentration camps would be an earlier example of resilience.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mont109 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SuggestBot  

message: "Unpublished data" is not a valid source. Also, please provide a full citation so someone, in principle, could check the article. DCDuring 15:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: I tried to translate something from the German Wikipedia. I hope you are pleased with it. English is my third language, so i would be very happy if you could help me and correct my language. Thanks a lot! --Resilienzi 18:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I translated something from the German Wikipedia

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychological_resilience&diff=177589865&oldid=177589739
--Resilienzi (talk) 20:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why did you delete my contributions?

message: "Positive adaptation, on the other hand, is considered in a demonstration of manifested behavior on social competence or success at meeting any particular tasks at a specific life stage, such as the absence of psychiatric distress after the September 11th terrorism attacks on the United States (Luthar & Cicchetti, 2000)."
It's possible I'm just taking this out of context, but the study cited is from 2000, and the article makes it seem as though it refers to 2001. Why after all would the article mention a specific traumatic event unless quoting the study. 76.196.110.161 (talk) 03:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It's odd how September 11 is mentioned twice in that section. It should say something more general about a traumatic experience (and perhaps one example of which being 'terrorist attacks') to avoid sounding so strangely focussed on that particular event, out of all the traumatic events that have been happening to humans (globally) in the last several years.--Tyranny Sue (talk) 12:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Violation of timespace continuum. 

message: if no-one objects, I'll do this. (Reason: 'challenging' is much more descriptive.)--Tyranny Sue (talk) 12:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change of "negative life conditions" to "challenging life conditions" 

message: If someone want to comment my adding in the introduction and in the definition, I'll try to answer. (November 21th, 2009)Zibudizz (talk) 20:50, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putting emphasis on judgment made about adaptation (in resilience) and trying to clarify taht resilience is not (anymore) considered as an individual trait 

message: I found it difficult to accept the following passages at face value:
"A number of social and ethnic groups have been shown to be resilient. Among those are the children of European Jews in the United States, the children of the Vietnamese boat people in the United States. Middle class families in times of the great depression, children of farmers in times of economical crisis, children of Spanish and Vietnamese immigrants in Germany, adoptive children, who went through trauma and malnutrition. And the African American children of African slaves brought to America by slave traders."
and
"They have been studied a lot, and it has been found (as mentioned before) that Vietnamese parents value education and that Vietnamese students spend a lot more time learning than their German counterparts."
(These are just the two most salient btw.) So many exceptions to these statements can be found I'm not sure what the value is in asserting them. Furthermore, what groups could be identified who have been shown to NOT be resilient? (And if there aren't any, what's the value in identifying these? All it really is is a list of numerically populous marginalized groups.)
Historian932 (talk) 20:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll change the paragraph a bit.-- Resilienzi (talk) 17:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quasi-meaningless generalization(s) 

message: Someone put the following text in the resilience article.  Putting it here only because it is (sort of) referenced, in case that is useful to this article:
:Resilience is a term that has been borrowed from the more exact sciences and adopted by psychology.  When used by psychologists it refers to the ability to recover from trauma or crisis.  The term has generated much interest on the part of research psychologists (Bonnano, 2004) and has been used in developing programs to help people cope in the aftermath of traumatic events (Building Resilience Interventions, Baum, et al, 2009).
David Hollman (Talk) 23:02, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition from other article 

message: The sentence, "Two important principles that have been discovered in cumulative risk and resilience are those of developmental trajectories and clustering of factors. (Cairns & Cairns, n.d.)." requires correct referencing, providing a date, as well as referencing at the end of the article under the REFERENCES heading.
This page really needs A LOT of expansion. It is tiny, and there is so much information out there. 139.230.245.21 07:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stray comments

message: ―I have decided to edit this article for Psych 2410A at King’s 2012‖Dhamidov (talk) 03:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: King's University College

message: Under "Factors related to resilience", there is a bullet point list of other factors which starts with:
"The ability to cope with stress effectively and in a healthy manner"
However, the very first sentence of the article defines "Psychological resilience is an individual's tendency to cope with stress and adversity.".  Granted the premise, this sentence doesn't quite make sense. It's like saying a key factor of a circle is it's shape of being a circle.
Belfry (talk) 00:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You are quite right! Please edit, especially if you have access to the source where this comes from.Lova Falk talk 11:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factors 

message: The Section is totally biased, using a christian news network as a source.Therefore it should be deleted, I hope someone who is in charge can do something about it i don't want to do it myself it maybe considered vandalism if i do it.Or some opposing views can be added.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.190.213.155 (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role of religion Section Biased? 

message: Definitely great that a section got added on this, but I think it needs improvement. For the opening paragraph, I would be a bit clearer and more direct about what you will be discussing in that section. Overall though it just seems a bit complex. Perhaps making the wording a little simpler. I would also advise either dividing it into sections or changing it somehow to make it easier to find what one is looking for. Thanks for the contribution though!
Hokinsc (talk) 17:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This section is incredibly long to the point of being very boring.  Thoughts? Gandydancer (talk) 14:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the Wake of the Death of a Family Member 

message: For a university group project, a couple of members and I worked to strengthen this page. For a quick summary of our major changes:
Added a couple of paragraphs to the section on Social Programs. These included two studies supporting social interventions. One was by the Department of Veteran Affairs and another from Israel. //
A contrasting study of cognitive emotion regulatory strategies to the Building section //
Two additional criticisms of resilience, both dealing with the definition //
A description of thriving as it relates to resilience //
Removed the section in the Role of Religion that cited Christianity Today and provided new sources and information. //
Added another section of a specific population, High Achieving Professionals
If anyone has any comments or suggestions please let us know!
Hokinsc (talk) 18:45, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: While I did not look closely, what I did look at seemed well-done to me.  Good finds on the Social Programs section.  Good to see you caught the poor sourcing too.  As I say above, the family section seems a good addition but very long and IMO could use some work.  Nice job! Gandydancer (talk) 14:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I agree that the section could use a bit of work, but I'm not sure how. It appears that two other users added that section a couple of days ago, also as a university project separate from ours, if they have any ideas on how to organize that section better. Hokinsc (talk) 14:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I figured as much.  In my work here I have found it to be extremely difficult to reorganize a long sprawling section.  I really don't believe that instructors understand how hard it is to manage to improve articles.  I've been here since 2006 and I still find it hard.  Students are expected to manage avoiding copy vio, which in itself is extremely difficult, especially when one is new to a subject, and that's just for starters on the difficulties.  Well, good luck... Gandydancer (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  General 

message: :The lead needs to be restructured to conform to policies and guidelines. The second paragraph can possibly be placed in a Resilience section, with Background as a subsection, then some summary information brought up from the body to compliment the lead per: The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important aspects.. 
:The article touches on PTSD especially in the "Related factors" section but there is evidence that PTSD risks can be inherited. A number of 30% would be substantial and it seems this would certainly affect individual "resilience", especially from a family resilience point of view if inheritance was involved, and deserves some mention. A family is a group of individuals and this article is linked to from that one but I did not see a link here to that article. One would think that the Role of the family sub-section of the Children section would be a good place for a main article link. -- Otr500 (talk) 09:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw the casual link to family resilience (related concept) at the bottom of the lead. Otr500 (talk) 12:23, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues 

message: I removed, "Individuals demonstrate resilience when they can face difficult experiences and rise above them with ease.". I didn't look at the history but the content is after the reference and includes what is misleading according to the reference. The reference states, "...the road to resilience is likely to involve considerable emotional distress. "Rising above "difficult experiences" with ease could not be a criteria for demonstrating resilience, and is conflicting. Otr500 (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove misrepresented bloat 

message: Hope this revision is adequate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychological_resilience&diff=prev&oldid=716557960
*Building (V), meaning "bolster" or "strengthen"/"develop" or "grow"
*Development, meaning "Act of improving by expanding, enlarging or refining"/"growth"
Looking through other terms in psychology development is a better choice and the both words share similar meaning. Changing as in the revisions to development seems to be the better tone. The rest of the changes are reversions of accidental deletion of operational definitions-Recheck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.215.196.85 (talk • contribs) 22 April 2016 11:28 (UTC)
:Again, please read WP:BRD. Obtain wp:consensus before restoring your change. Otherwise, it is wp:disruptive editing and wp:edit warring. The American Psychological Association uses "build". "10 ways to build resilience". They don't use develop. Please do not change a quote. I.e. what is enclosed in quotes.
:Please remember to sign your talk with four tildes: "~~~~"
:I disagree with your change from build to 'develop. Build is used correctly here. The article should be written for laymen, not for psychologists. Get consensus before restoring your edit. Jim1138 (talk) 17:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding your defining of Hardiness (psychological) and Self-efficacy. Their removal was not "accidental". Please read wp:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Please don't add definitions. Jim1138 (talk) 18:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thank you for clearing this. But operational definitions seemed useful, that is a systematic approach used in research which describes what they are to the specific research statement. The same would be normally supported by existing sources. I found that bit helpful while going through the article. The rest I leave to your judgement.117.213.18.10 (talk) 10:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  BRD Request 

message: This article requires content expansion.79.141.161.8 (talk) 04:02, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Content expansion

message: I know this is kind of a personal nit-pick, but I'm incredibly psychologically-resilient, and also don't respond well to social support at all.  I've been able to cope with and self-correct depression; and have no trouble with psychiatric treatment because things like severe anxiety, drug withdrawal, and severe depression as side-effects don't bother me--inasmuch as I find these feelings annoying, and have observed the workings of my mind reasoning out that suicide would be the most-appropriate response, and found this pleasingly enlightening as I now understand why people kill themselves when extremely depressed.  Obviously I didn't kill myself; it was only a drug side-effect and, while unpleasant, could be eliminated in any case by waiting long enough or finding appropriate treatment.  It's not that nothing phases me; negative experiences have profound impact, and later similar experiences are easier to handle because they are familiar and thus do not require nearly as much effort to bring under control.  External experiences—including psychiatric issues—can be corrected so as to remove the source of the problem.
In my case, my key social need is to get away from people.  I don't want or need support; and support doesn't actually exist, because other people's concern severely interferes with my ability to cope.  I don't really have friends and have no concept of whatever the emotional basis of family is, as much as I've had others try to explain it.
This is common in writings about depression, anxiety, ADHD, substance abuse, and other psychiatric problems.  It's not just Wikipedia; every credible text on ADHD or depression will necessarily emphasize the need for social support from family and close friends, going as far as to dictate in no uncertain terms that a lack of sufficient support is a perfect guarantee of failure.  I can't believe I'm a subset of one in that nobody else is actively-harmed by such emotional support; I understand I have safety behaviors and that I'm lacking the coping mechanisms to deal with that additional negative stimulus, although one could argue that such stimulus comes almost exclusively when ability to cope is already stretched to the limit in general.
As with all people, I find things more-interesting when they seem more personally-relevant; and I would be interested in seeing any modern research on people who need to avoid social support as such.  As always, WP:NOR; but hasn't anyone in the field of psychiatry and clinical psychology noticed this in some subset of individuals?  Is there just a one-sentence notation for specific populations that needs to point to this particular psychiatric condition? --John Moser (talk) 00:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lean on social factors 

message: I don't see where in this reference there is mention of factors which develop and sustain a person's resilience. Can someone help me out or provide an alternate reference? Thanks. --Dr.enh (talk) 05:25, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Related Factors

message: What is meant by spiritual in this paragraph. 
Resilience is the integrated adaptation of physical, mental and spiritual aspects in a set of "good or bad" circumstances, a coherent sense of self that is able to maintain normative developmental tasks that occur at various stages of life.
Modern psychology looks for natural explanations as opposed to supernatural ones. The mind being a product of the brain, etc. While some scientists, for example Carl Sagan used the word spiritual he used it in an idiosyncratic way, to mean any experience that takes your breath away and/or produces a sense of awe.
But the fact the the word "spiritual" is used by different people to mean very different things, means that I have absolutely no idea what "spiritual" means as used above. Xanomead (talk) 11:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spiritual 

message: I spent all afternoon looking for the source(s) for the statements and more in general the distinction individualistic-collectivistic cultures. The sources mentioned (Ma et al, 2004) cannot be found on the web, however there is a source "Family resilience und er economic hardship", Ma et al, 2003, according to Google Scholar cited twice as "Family resilience under economic recession", which, as far as I can see, only can be downloaded in Chinese from The Hong Kong Institute of Asian-Pacific Studies. When I translate it provisionally (Google Translate after OCR in ABBYY), there is nothing to be found about the statements (like “I am analytical and curious”, “belong, duty, give, harmony, obey, share, together”) or the subject in general. Googling for those quotes renders not even more than a few hits, none in this context of individualistic-collectivistic culture. So where do the sentences come from? It's a sensible, relevant and interesting paragraph, but it needs a traceable source, in my opinion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niccienic (talk • contribs) 16:49, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear source(s) paragraph "Resilience in individualist and collectivist communities" 

message: — Assignment last updated by Smalls2023 (talk) 15:39, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone

message: Kh 176.202.18.219 (talk) 18:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gondwana 

message: — Assignment last updated by Rahneli (talk) 19:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone

message: — Assignment last updated by Janaebrianne (talk) 20:54, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Neuroscience