In preparation for the conference I am going to, I have taken the plunge into the resilience literature. I was really hesitatnt to do this, because it is such a big area, but getting my feet wet hasn't turned out to be all that bad.
So I have been wondering why some people say "resilience" and others say "resiliency" and I wasn't even sure if one of them was grammatically incorrect. BUT, they really mean two different things. The former, resilience, refers to the dynamic process of adaptaion in the context of adversity. Resiliency, refers to a personal trait or characteristc one has. Ann Masten (1994) encouraged researchers to adhere to these definitions when using the words, to eliminate confusion in research. However, this is a debate in the field. . .is it a trait or a process? One implication with referring to resiliency as a personal characterisitcs is that it might be assumed that some people simply do not "have what it takes" to overcome adversity.
In light of this, I say I believe it is a process and that it is possible to foster resilience in those who are facing or may face adversity in the future. BUT. . .where does my hope construct fit into this? I think Snyder's theory suggests that hope is more of a personal characterisitc, based on the fact that it is cognitive and has the elements of 1) ability to set goals, 2) pathway thinking, and 3) agency thinking.
So I am back at the beginning. . .resilience or resiliency?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment