Centre d'Information et de documentation du CRA Rhône-Alpes
CRA
Informations pratiques
-
Adresse
Centre d'information et de documentation
du CRA Rhône-Alpes
Centre Hospitalier le Vinatier
bât 211
95, Bd Pinel
69678 Bron CedexHoraires
Lundi au Vendredi
9h00-12h00 13h30-16h00Contact
Tél: +33(0)4 37 91 54 65
Mail
Fax: +33(0)4 37 91 54 37
-
Résultat de la recherche
1 recherche sur le mot-clé 'Stress inoculation'
Affiner la recherche Générer le flux rss de la recherche
Partager le résultat de cette recherche Faire une suggestion
Annual Research Review: Resilience – clinical implications / Michael RUTTER in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54-4 (April 2013)
[article]
Titre : Annual Research Review: Resilience – clinical implications Type de document : Texte imprimé et/ou numérique Auteurs : Michael RUTTER, Auteur Article en page(s) : p.474-487 Mots-clés : Stress inoculation planning school experiences self-control self-reflection turning points gene-environment interactions social relationships Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background: It is a universal finding that there is huge heterogeneity in people’s responses to all kinds of stress and adversity. Resilience is an interactive phenomenon that is inferred from findings indicating that some individuals have a relatively good outcome despite having experienced serious adversities. Methods: Resilience can only be inferred if there has been testing of environmental mediation of risks and quantification of the degree of risk. The use of ‘natural experiments’ to test environmental mediation is briefly discussed. The literature is then reviewed on features associated with resilience in terms of (a) those that are neutral or risky in the absence of the risk experience (such as adoption); (b) brief exposure to risks and inoculation effects; (c) mental features (such as planning, self-regulation or a sense of personal agency); (d) features that foster those mental features; (e) turning point effects; (f) gene-environment interactions; (g) social relationships and promotive effects; and (h) the biology of resilience. Results: Clinical implications are considered with respect to (a) conceptual implications; (b) prevention; and (c) treatment. Conclusion: Resilience findings do not translate into a clear programme of prevention and treatment, but they do provide numerous leads that focus on the dynamic view of what may be involved in overcoming seriously adverse experiences. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02615.x Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=194
in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry > 54-4 (April 2013) . - p.474-487[article] Annual Research Review: Resilience – clinical implications [Texte imprimé et/ou numérique] / Michael RUTTER, Auteur . - p.474-487.
in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry > 54-4 (April 2013) . - p.474-487
Mots-clés : Stress inoculation planning school experiences self-control self-reflection turning points gene-environment interactions social relationships Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background: It is a universal finding that there is huge heterogeneity in people’s responses to all kinds of stress and adversity. Resilience is an interactive phenomenon that is inferred from findings indicating that some individuals have a relatively good outcome despite having experienced serious adversities. Methods: Resilience can only be inferred if there has been testing of environmental mediation of risks and quantification of the degree of risk. The use of ‘natural experiments’ to test environmental mediation is briefly discussed. The literature is then reviewed on features associated with resilience in terms of (a) those that are neutral or risky in the absence of the risk experience (such as adoption); (b) brief exposure to risks and inoculation effects; (c) mental features (such as planning, self-regulation or a sense of personal agency); (d) features that foster those mental features; (e) turning point effects; (f) gene-environment interactions; (g) social relationships and promotive effects; and (h) the biology of resilience. Results: Clinical implications are considered with respect to (a) conceptual implications; (b) prevention; and (c) treatment. Conclusion: Resilience findings do not translate into a clear programme of prevention and treatment, but they do provide numerous leads that focus on the dynamic view of what may be involved in overcoming seriously adverse experiences. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02615.x Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=194