SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Gelişim ve Psikoloji Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2

Psychological Resilience from the Ecological Systems Perspective

Ekolojik Sistemler Perspektifinden Psikolojik Sağlamlık

Zülfiye Güzin TOPCU
Haktan DEMİRCİOĞLU
Pages
125–147
Publication Date
2020-12-15
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, it is predicted that the ecological perspective can guide important inferences for understanding and contributing resilience.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Psychological resilience is a multidimensional phenomenon.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Rather than being a fixed and unchangeable structure, it is thought to have a variable structure shaped by interaction with the environment.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, it is predicted that the ecological perspective can guide important inferences for understanding and contributing resilience.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:psikolojik sağlamlık · ekolojik sistemler kuramı · riskler

Abstract

Psychological resilience is a multidimensional phenomenon. Rather than being a fixed and unchangeable structure, it is thought to have a variable structure shaped by interaction with the environment. There are several theories in the literature to explain how resilience functions in children and adults, how it is shaped and how it can be supported. It has been seen that Bronfenbrenner's ecological system theory can help explain psychological resilience, taking into account the risks and protective factors. Based on this, the foundations and rationales of this argument are discussed in this study. Risks and stress, definitions of psychological resilience, protective factors, perspective of the ecological system approach to psychological resilience and final conclusions about resilience are given, respectively. In the discussion part, the reasons for why resilience can be explained from an ecological perspective in the literature are given. As a result, it is predicted that the ecological perspective can guide important inferences for understanding and contributing resilience.

Özet

Psikolojik sağlamlık, çok boyutlu bir olgudur. Sabit ve değişmez bir yapıdan ziyade, çevre ile etkileşimle şekillenen ve değişken bir yapıya sahip olduğu düşünülmektedir. Psikolojik sağlamlığın çocuklarda ve yetişkinlerde nasıl işlediğini, nasıl şekillendiğini ve nasıl desteklenebileceğini açıklayabilmek amacıyla literatürde çeşitli kuramlar bulunmaktadır. Psikolojik sağlamlığı açıklamak için, riskler ve koruyucu faktörlerin de hesaba katılması ile Bronfenbrenner’ın ekolojik sistem teorisinin yardımcı olabileceği görülmüştür. Buna istinaden bu çalışmada, bu savununun temelleri ve gerekçeleri tartışılmıştır. Sırasıyla, riskler ve stres, psikolojik sağlamlık tanımları, koruyucu faktörler, ekolojik sistem yaklaşımının psikolojik sağlamlığa bakış açısı ve sağlamlığa dair son çıkarımlara yer verilmiştir. Tartışma kısmında ise, literatürde sağlamlığın neden ekolojik perspektifle açıklanabileceğine dair gerekçelere yer verilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, ekolojik perspektifin, sağlamlığı anlama ve sağlamlığa katkıda bulunmak adına önemli çıkarımlara rehberlik edebileceği öngörülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

TOPCU, Z. G., DEMİRCİOĞLU, H. (2020). Psychological Resilience from the Ecological Systems Perspective. Gelişim ve Psikoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2, 125–147. https://ajindex.com/articles/371262

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Allan, R., & Ungar, M. (2014). Resilience-Building Interventions with Children, Adolescents, and Their Families. In S. Prince-Embury & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), Resilience Interventions for Youth in Diverse Populations (pp. 447–462).
  2. Springer. Archdall, K., & Kilderry, A. (2016). Supporting children's resilience: Early childhood educator understandings. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41(3), 58-65.
  3. Armstrong, A. R., Galligan, R. F., & Critchley, C. R. (2011). Emotional intelligence and psychological resilience to negative life events. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(3), 331–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.025
  4. Arseneault, L., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Taylor, A., Rijsdijk, F. V., Jaffee, S. R., … Measelle, and J. R. (2003). Strong genetic effects on cross-situational antisocial behaviour among 5-year-old children according to mothers, teachers, examiner-observers, and twins’ self-reports. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 44(6), 832–848.
  5. Atwool, N. (2006). Attachment and resilience: Implications for children in care. Child Care in Practice, 12(4), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/13575270600863226
  6. Avdagic, E., Wade, C., McDonald, M., McCormack, D., Dakin, P., Macvean, M.,. & Phan, T. (2018). Resilience in young children: A Delphi study to reach consensus on definitions, measurement and interventions to build resilience. Early Child Development and Care, 1-12.
  7. Baldwin, A. L., Baldwin, C., & Cole, R. E. (1990). Stress-resistant families and stress-resistant children. In D. C. J. Rolf, A. S. Masten & S. W. K. H. Neuchterlein (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology (pp. 257–280).
  8. Cambridge University Press.
  9. Banny, A. M., Cicchetti, D., Rogosch, F. A., Oshri, A., & Crick, N. R. (2013). Vulnerability to depression: A moderated mediation model of the roles of child maltreatment, peer victimization, and 5-HTTLPR genetic variation among children from low-SES backgrounds. Biophysical Chemistry, 257(5), 2432–2437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2010.12.017.Two-stage
  10. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: a test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244.
  11. Bonanno, G. A. (2004).
  12. Loss, Trauma, and Human Resilience: Have We Underestimated the Human Capacity to Thrive After Extremely Aversive Events? American Psychologist, 59(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20 Bonanno,