Chapter 3

Re-inventing Resilience
A Model of "Culturally-Focused
Resilient Adaptation"

CAROLINE S. CLAuss-EHLERS

INTRODUCTION

Traditional paradigms in counseling and c1inical psychology literature have placed

a tremendous emphasis on pathology-driven models. The search to classify what
was wrong with the individual dates back to 1833 when Emil Kraepelin published
the first classification of adult psychopathologies. Kraepelin (1833) assumed an
organic etiology for each disease classification and led the way for the disease-
focused zeitgeist in psychology. Pietrofesa, Hoffman, and Slete (1984), for in-
stance, describe psychotherapy as an enterprise that deals with the more serious
problems of mental illness. For Trotzer & Trotzer (1986), the goal of psychother-
apy is to develop a long-term relationship focused on reconstructive change. More
recently, the growing field of developmental psychopathology has attempted to
understand how developmental processes contribute to the onset and formation
of psychopathology throughout the life span (Wenar & Kerig, 2001). While this
literature asks important questions about childrens' weIl being, exploration is also
needed about critical issues connected to health promotion and prevention. If de-
velopmental variables such as behavior, unconscious processes, and cognition can
contribute to maladaptive behaviors and poor emotional health, wouldn't we expect
lo see lhe same combination of factors contribute to positive, adaptive behaviors?
Positive psychology has moved away from a focus on disease to scientifi-
cally explore protective factors, assets, and strengths (Lopez, Prosser, Edwards,
Magyar-Moe, Neufeld, & Rasmussen, 2002). Resilience is one such concept in
positive psychology and has been defined as "the ability to thrive, mature, and

27
C. S. Clauss-Ehlers et al. (eds.), Community Planning to Foster Resilience in Children
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004
28 Carotine S. Clauss-Ehlers

increase competence in the face of adverse circumstances or obstacles" (Gordon,

1996, p. 63). More broadly defined, resilience has been viewed as a "process,
capacity or outcome of successful adaptation despite challenges or threatening
circumstances ... good outcomes despite high risk status, sustained competence
under threat and recovery from trauma" (Masten, Best, & Garmezy, 1990, p. 426).
The concept of resilience is critical for youth as it means they are better equipped
to cope with life circumstances. Resilience is also important in a preventive sense
as it is thought that sufficient resilience will prevent children and adolescents from
future problems (Arrington & Wilson, 2000; Kumpfer, 1999). Kumpfer (1999),
for instance, describes how the "systematic application of methods for increasing
resilience could improve child outcomes and prevent future problem behaviors and
poor life adjustment, which are becoming increasingly costly to treat" (p. 180).
To date, however, there has been little research and writing that highlights
cultural factors that influence resilience. As discussed below, resilience has often
been defined as consisting of particular "resiliency factors" or "personality traits"
(Kumpfer, 1999; Wolin & Wolin, 1993). While this research helps us understand
what promotes resilience in the individual child, more recent literat ure has begun to
examine the connection between the resilient individual and his or her surrounding
environment. The focus of much of this work centers on how risk and resilience
processes present themselves in the child's environmental context. According to
Kumpfer (1999), family, neighborhood, school, and the peer group have an impact
on the child's socialization process. In the face of stress, these environmental
faetors ean either provide a proteetive buffer that supports the ehild or eontribute
to a negative impact that the child experiences.
This chapter discusses how cultural background is an additional aspect 01'
socialization that must be explored in our understanding of resilience. Culture is
defined as the transmission of shared values, beliefs, skills, and adaptive behaviors
between generations and through shared participation in settings and situations
(Carter, 1995; Falicov, 1995). The author defines cultural resilience as the way
that the individuaJ's cultural background, supports, values, and environmental ex-
perience help facilitate the process of overcoming adversity. Examining resilience
through a socioculturallens means we begin to look at individuals in interaction
with a cultural environment that presents opportunities and challenges (C1auss-
Ehlers, 2003). The purpose of this chapter is to critically explore resilience from
a sociocultural perspective. For the author, this means moving away from the tra-
ditional definition of resilience as a conglomeration of character traits. Rather,
readers are invited to become more cuIturally responsive by considering a new
contextual model of resilience that the author introduces as culturally-focllsed re-
silient adaptation (CRA). This model attempts to explore how culture relates to
resilience as it incorporates culture and diversity into resilience efforts and views
successful adjustment to stress as a function of individual traits in interaction with
the larger sociocultural environment.
Re-inventing Resilience 29

To highlight the importance of incorporating culture and diversity into re-

silience processes, this chapter will first discuss the trait-based approach to re-
silience. It will then review current studies that inc1ude culture as an important
aspect of resilience. From these reviews, the cuIturally-focused resilient adapta-
tion model will be discussed as a dynamic framework that examines the individual
in interaction with his/her environment in a sociocultural context.

TRAIT-BASED APPROACH TO RESILIENCE

As mentioned in Chapter Two, the construct of resilience evolved out of re-

search conducted in the developmental psychopathology field (Cicchetti, 1990;
Garmezy 1987; Rutter, 1975). Developmentalists gradually turned their interest
from studying the onset of severe psychopathology, to learning about etiology
and prevention for children at risk of developing problems befare they became
symptomatic. For instance, Garmezy (1987) and colleagues moved away from
looking at adults with schizophrenia to study sources that support stress resistance
in children of parents with schizophrenia. Following Garmezy's (1987) study, a
large body of research looks at resilience in terms of different individual character
traits. These studies found that individuals with greater amounts of certain char-
acteristics were more apt to successfully negotiate negative life experiences. The
inherent idea in much of this work is that if we can in still such characteristics in a
child, that individual will be better equipped to cope with adverse li fe experiences.
The character-trait approach to resilience has looked at and identified various
correlates of resilient people that include: easy temperament, sec ure attachment,
basic trust, problem-solving abilities, an internallocus of control, an active coping
style, enlisting people to help, making friends, acquiring language and reading weil,
realistic self-esteem. a sense of harrnony, adesire to contribute to others, and faith
that one's lire matters (Davis, 2001). Werner and Smith (1982), for instance, found
easy temperament to be a protective factor among infants. Their longitudinal study
indicated that resilient children were more responsive and flexible, both of which
led to more positive responses from caretakers. Gordon (1996) found five personal
characteristics contributed to resilience in adolescence that included intelligence,
androgyny, independence, social skills, and internallocus of control.
In her comprehensive review of resilience literature, Kumpfer (1999) orga-
nizes internal personality capabilities into five major cluster variables: I) spiri-
tual or motivation al characteristics, 2) cognitive competence, 3) behavioral/social
competencies, 4) emotional stability and emotional management, and 5) physical
well-being and physical competencies. Each of Kumpfer's (1999) internal com-
petencies is summarized below. It is suggested that her work be consulted for
an excellent, in-depth description of those traits and processes that contribute to
resilience.
30 Caroline S. Clauss-Ehlers

Spiritual/Motivational Competencies
According to Kumpfer (1999), spiritual/motivational resiliency characteris-
tics include belief systems that "serve to motivate the individual and create a
direction for their efforts" (p. 197). Several studies, have shown that spirituality
predicts resilience (Dunn, 1994; Masten, 1994). Variables to be included in this
domain include (but are not limited to) purpose in life (Neiger, 1992), spirituality
(Dunn, 1994), an internallocus of control (Werner & Smith, 1992), and hopeful-
ness and optimism (Seligman, 1975). It appears that having a belief system helps
individuals confront and cope with fears and adversities. Resilient individuals have
also shown that spirituality hel ps them believe they can create better results for
themselves and know when to give up on what they cannot control (Werner &
Smith, 1992).

Cognitive Competencies
Variables that correlate with resilience in the cognitive competence category
are characterized by cognitive abilities that help an individual accomplish their
goals. Some of the competencies in this category include intelligence (Long &
Vaillant, 1984), reading skills (Luthar & Zigler, 1992), insight (Wolin & Wolin,
1993), and self-esteem (Bandura, 1989). Intelligence has been found to correlate
with children who are resilient (Werner, 1985) and acts as a protective factor that
can promote school success and work achievement in later life. Reading is one such
component 01' intelligence that fosters resilience by promoting verbal competence.
Some researchers state that insight is the number one factor in resilience (Wolin
& Wolin, 1993). States Kumpfer (1999): " ... resilient children from dysfunctional
parents are aware very early in life that they are different from and stronger than
their sick parent. While empathetic and caring, they develop "adaptive distancing"
to protect their sense 01' healthy separation from the parent's mal adaptive coping
skills and life patterns" (p. 203). Finally, positive self-esteem helps children take
on challenges that can further their development and subsequent competencies.

Behavioral/Social Competencies
The behavioral/social competence domain involves the ability to carry out
much 01' what is known in the cognitive arena. Variables include social skills, street
smarts (Garmezy & Masten, 1986), communication (Wolin, 1991) and problem
solving skills (Rutter & Quinton, 1994). The ability to effectively interact with
people and be aware of the situation has been found to correlate with resilience
(Garmezy & Masten, 1986). It is also hypothesized that those who are comfortable
with the direction they plan to take are more likely to have great problem solving
Re-inventing Resilience 31

abilities. Trusting oneself to resolve issues is connected to self-efficacy in that it

creates self-trust, initiative, and a belief in personal control (Wolin, 1993).

Emotional Stability and Emotional Management

The emotional stability and emotional management domain refers to the indi-
vidual's ability to deal with and manage emotional reactions to life circumstances.
Variables that fall under this competency include recognition of feelings, humor,
hopefulness, and the ability to control anger and depression. A key characteristic
of resilient people is their optimism and ability to recognize feelings. Recognizing
feelings can subsequently lead to greater emotional management in tense situations
where angry and depressive feelings might arise. Humor has been found to corre-
late with maintaining friendships (Masten, 1982), positive temperament (Werner,
1989) and the ability to "find the comic in the tragic" (Kumpfer, 1999, p. 208).

Physical Well-Being and Physical Competencies

Variables that correlate with resilience in the physical well-being and physical
competence domain include good health (Werner & Smith, 1992), health main-
tenance skills, and physical attractiveness (Kaufman & Zigler, 1989). Kumpfer
(1999) states that children with good physical health might internalize this as
being strong and competent. Masten (1994) discusses how mastery of a physical
talent such as music or sports can enhance self-esteem. Finally, physical attractive-
ness has been found to correlate with resilience, particularly if it also relates to
charm and social skills (Kaufman & Zigler, 1989).

CROSS-CULTURAL RESEARCH ON RESILIENCE

While critical in terms of the characteristics we want to foster in children,

the problem with the trait-based approach is that it leaves resilience way too much
up to the individual child. To the extent that protective processes interact with
stressors in the environment, resilience is actually a much more dynamic construct
than first conceptualized (Rutter, 1987). Having said this, increasingly the litera-
ture has come to view resilience not as static, but as an ever-changing concept that
emerges from environmental interactions. Winfield (1994) describes resilience as
a dynamic construct whose processes involve the supports and stressors available
to individuals as they interact with the surrounding environment. Similarly, Pianta
and Walsh (1998) emphasize that "behavior cannot be understood without ref-
erence to the context(s) in which that behavior is demanded and/or supported"
(p. 410). In recent work, Masten (2001) went on to define resilience as "a class of
32 Caroline S. Clauss·Ehlers

phenomenon characterized by good outcomes in spite of serious threats to adap-

tation or development" (p. 228).
The importance of environment is also apparent in research that indicates
a child may do well in one setting, such as school, while simultaneously doing
poorly in another, like horne. Luthar, Doernberger, and Zigler (1993) talk about
how a child may be socially competent in a high stress situation but an ineffec-
tive coper in others. These researchers define resilience as a "process that results
when an individual reacts to risk factors, or vulnerabilities, that are present in
their environment. As a result, resilience is an interactional process consisting of
individual characteristics and the environment. The process of resilience can be
fostered by '" protective processes" (Arrington & Wilson, 2000, p. 225; Winfield.
1994).
While this working definition reftects the dynamic complexity at the root
of resilience and moves beyond a trait-based model, research is just beginning
to look at how resilience manifests itself in different cultural contexts. Much of
the research that explores positive psychology constructs such as resilience has
focused on predominantly White sampies (Lopez et al., 2002). As a result, little is
known about how resilience plays out in non-White cultural groups. Some writing
has begun to move towards an understanding of resilience that incorporates culture
and diversity. The following section reviews current work that looks at how culture
and diversity inftuence resilience processes, or "wh at works for different people"
(Lopez et al., 2002).
Cohler, Scott, and Musick (1995) discuss how culture can interact with stres-
sors and development so that risk has a different impact and manifestation on
different individuals. This is evidenced in the cultural formulation of illness sec-
tion in the American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual olMental Disorders (4th ed.) (DSM-IV) where the meaning of symptoms
are viewed in relation to the norms 01' the cultural reference group. Ataques de
nervios is one widely recognized culture bound syndrome in Latin America. An
ataque de nervios might initially look like Panic Disorder as symptoms include
being out of control, trembling, heat in the chest rising to the head, crying, and
uncontrollable shouting. However, because ataques are associated with a precip-
itating event such as the loss of a family member, aseparation from a spouse, or
witnessing an accident, coupled with the individual's fairly quick return to normal
functioning, they are not related to Panic Disorder. Rather, ataques can be seen as
a culturally acceptable way to express emotional distress.
Belgrave, Chase-Vaughn, Gray, Addison, and Cherry (2000) conducted a
study on the effectiveness of a cultural and gender specific intervention program
designed to increase resiliency among African American preadolescent females.
These researchers decided to implement a resilience-based intervention for ado-
lescents who faced contextual risk factors such as drugs, criminal activity, and
violence. The intervention incorporated two strategies: resource enhancement
Re-inventing Resilience 33

(e.g., gives access to new resources) and process orientation (e.g., supports re-
lationships needed for successful development). The first strategy consisted of
providing after-school activities while the second involved a focus on developing
positive relationships with others. A third intervention strategy focused on strength-
ening Africentric values and traditions found among individuals of African descent
(Akbar, 1996; Azibo, 1991) such as spirituality; harmony; collective responsibility;
oral tradition; sensitivity to emotional cues; authenticity; balance; eoneurrent time
orientation to past, present and future; and interpersonal/communal orientation
(Belgrave et al., 2(00).
Results of the study indieated that after partieipating in the intervention, par-
tieipants seored signifieantly higher on I) Afrieentrie values; 2) ethnie identity;
and 3) physieal appearanee self-eoneept than those who did not engage in the
exercises designed to inerease feelings of self-worth, Afrieentric values, and eth-
nie/gender identity. The researehers hypothesized that their study eontributed to
an understanding about how to promote resilieney as a protective factor in Afriean
Ameriean girls. They eonc1uded that this gender and ethnieally eongruent inter-
vention was responsive to the group as it promoted self-esteem, ethnie identity,
and eultural values.
Researehers have also found that relational and environmental support pro-
motes aeademic resilience among different cuItural groups. Gonzalez and Padilla
(1997) conducted a study that identified factors that contributed to the aeademic
resilience and achievement among Mexican American high sehool students. They
administered a 314-item questionnaire to three high sehools in California. Stu-
dents who identified themselves as Mexiean were included in the subject pool that
eonsisted of 2, 169 participants.
Demographie data allowed the researehers to distinguish between resilient
(students who reported getting "mostly A's") vs. nonresilient students (students
who reported getting "mostly D's"). The demographie portion of the study found
that resilient students were more likely to be female, have immigrant parents, have
been born outside the United States, have had foreign sehooling, and be more likely
to live with both parents in comparison to nonresilient students. In contrast, nonre-
silient students were more Iikely than resilient students to live with their mothers,
and have parents with lower education levels in eomparison to resilient students.
The researehers eondueted a factor analysis of the questionnaire and found it
reflected three variables: support (a variable that included family and peer support,
parental monitoring, and teaeher feedbaek); sense ofbelonging in sehool (a variable
that refleeted the students' sense of aeeeptance); and eulturalloyalty (a variable that
consisted of familism, nonassimilation, and eultural pride/awareness). Gonzalez
and Padilla (1997) found that a supportive aeademie environment and a sense ofbe-
longing to sehool predieted greater resilienee among Mexiean Ameriean students.
Family and peer support were also signifieant with regard to the partieipant's grade
point average (GPA).
34 Caroline S. Clauss-Ehlers

The study also found that, although culturalloyaIty did not predict resilience,
t tests indicated that the familism subscale showed significant differences between
resilient and nonresilient students. These investigators concluded that "students'
sense ofbelonging to school and their supportive environments can have important
effects on academic achievement" (Gonzalez & Padilla, 1997, p. 315). With regard
to looking at resilience as something that is trait-based vs. environmentally driven,
the authors state that their study reinforces the idea that resilience is not a trait, but
rather "a capacity that develops over time in the context of environmental support"
(Egeland, Carlson, & Sroufe, 1993, p. 19).
In another study, Brodsky (1999) suggests that African American single moth-
ers consider resilience as the ability to find a balance between risk and protective
factors in eight domains: neighborhood, parenting, family, friends, men, personal
characteristics/activities, and spirituality. Her qualitative analysis was conducted
on 10 single African American mothers living in risky neighborhoods. Brodsky
(1999) found that, for the women, "making it" involved balancing stressors and
reSOUl'ces in these eight domains. In addition, the study found that each woman
achieved this balance in her own way, thus finding a unique person-environment fit.
There were, however, three skills that fostered resilience in all the women. These
skills included the ability to" I) appreciate resources and success and re frame some
stressors to allow for contentment in one's current situation; 2) re frame stressors
in ways that are motivating; and 3) locate, recognize, and utilize resources from
supportive domains to deal with the demands of stressful domains-and to set and
strive for new goals" (Brodsky, 1999, p. 157).
Some studies have supported the hypothesis that culture can inftuence how
one understands and copes with an event (Lopez et al., 2002). Strong's (1984)
study compared coping behaviors between Native American and White families
who took care of elderly relatives. Strong (1984) found ditferences between the
two groups in terms of their sense of control and expression of anger. S pecifically,
White families feit more in control and experienced a greater sense of coping than
Native American families. Strong ( 1984) concluded that perhaps Native Americans
were more apt to accept their situation since they feit less II ,ntrol, a dynamic that
corresponds with the tradition al Native American value of noninterference.
Again, moving beyond a trait-based focus, other research looks at how support
systems can be critical to coping. De la Rosa (1988) found Puerto Rican adolescents
with strong support systems were more equipped to deal with stressful situations
and less likely to get ill. Similarly, Colomba, Santiago, and Rossello ( 1999) found
that the more Puerto Rican adolescents seek out family and social support, the less
likely they will become depressed when faced with a stressful situation.
Spencer and Dupree (1996) incorporate cuIture and diversity in their perspec-
tive of resilience. Their identity-focused ecological model states that ecology and
culture have an impact on how children adjust to the environment. They discuss the
concept of an ecocultural character that involves cuItural values and practices that
Re-inventing Resilience 35

have an impact on social interactions and development. For them, the identity-
focused cultural ecological model takes a dynamic approach to looking at risk,
coping, resilience, and outcomes. Keogh and Weisner (1993) also discuss how
both vulnerability and resilience must be understood within the individual's eco-
logical and cultural context. They state that an assessment of supports and risk
factors must go beyond the individual and the family to look at the community and
culture as they are experienced by the child.

A NEW MODEL: CULTURALLY-FOCUSED

RESILIENT ADAPTATION

This review of resilience literature within a multicultural context suggests that

resilience processes lie in the environmental context in addition to individual traits.
The previously cited investigations take a culturally contextual systems perspective
in their understanding of the development of problems and stress (Belgrave et al.,
2000; Brodsky, 1999; Colomba et al., 1999; Gonzalez & Padilla, 1997; Kumpfer,
1999; Strong, 1984). Central to this approach is the idea that behavior must be
understood within the contexts in which that behavior is demanded or supported.
Lopez et al. (2002) state that the multicultural coping literature, such as that men-
tioned above, indicates similarities and differences between coping behaviors of
Whites and other groups. They conclude that, because ofthese differences, current
models of stress and coping may not sufficiently address the unique coping styles
of diverse groups.
Similarly, Pianta and Walsh (1998) state that too often, researchers and the-
orists follow the single characteristic approach to resilience by looking at only
one system as the location of success or failure. This "single-location discourse"
(Pianta & Walsh, 1996) looks only at the child, school, or horne environment
to determine wh at either fostered competence or failed development. Pianta and
Walsh (1998) caution against looking at the impact of only one system on de-
velopment and instead state that resilience consists of the "characteristics of a
process involving the interactions of systems" (p. 411). A developmental systems
approach to resilience argues that resilience is complex (Pianta & Walsh, 1998;
1996) and involves the interaction of many factors over time which, occasionally,
initiate success in a particular domain. Wh at deserves closer scrutiny is the child's
embeddedness in a context that can either mobilize resources that lead to positive
outcomes or introduce stressors that initiate risk. Here resilience is conceptual-
ized as the positive result of interactions among child, school, family, peers, and
community. The more these interactions are child-focused, the more resilience-
resources the child will bring to key developmental tasks and experiences.
A paradigmatic shift from disease to health must be central to new objec-
tives in the field of psychology. Prevention, early intervention, and integrating
36 Caroline S. Clauss-Ehlers

sociocultural support are integral tasks to emerge from a move toward health. So-
ciocultural contexts reflect resources and stressors relevant to a particular child's
experience (Johnson, 1990). It is the larger sociocultural system that is thought to
influence a superordinate cultural framework through which behavior, language,
and communication patterns are understood. Looking at the sociocultural environ-
ment a110ws us to explore ways in which normative and non-normative experiences
influence resilience or stress among diverse groups of children. For instance, socio-
cultural experiences like socioeconomic and cultural differences are increasingly
thought to have an impact on development (Dryfoos, 1996).
To this end, cultural resilience is a term that considers those aspects of one's
cultural background such as cultural values, norms, supports, language, and cus-
toms that promote resilience for individuals and communities. Because culture
is a11 around us, because children operate within ditferent cultural mindsets, and
because there are inherent values built into these frameworks, we can no Ion ger
talk ab out resilience without incorporating culture and diversity. Resilience as it
is defined and practiced, must be relevant to a wide spectrum of culturally diverse
youth. The author's perspective, the culturally-focused resilient adaptation (CRA)
model, asserts that culture and the sociocultural context influence resilient adapta-
tion. Here resilience is not defined as a conglomeration of individual characteristic
traits alone. Culturally-focused resilient adaptation in the face of adversity is de-
fined as a dynamic, interactive process in which the individual negotiates stress
through a combination 01' character traits, cultural background, cultural values, and
facilitating factors in the socioculturaI environment.
Cultural values are those beliefs about what is important to one's cultural
background. Cultural values are posited to enhance resilience since they build
support and protective processes into communities. For instance, Clauss-Ehlers
and Lopez-Levi (2002a; 2002b) talk about cultural values in the Latino commu-
nity such as familismo, respeto, and personalismo. Familismo means that family
needs come before individual desires and inc1ude family obligation, view of family
as a social support, and looking to family members as role models. Respeto com-
pliments familismo as it "acknowledges the authority 01' eIder family members
and senior people in positions of power" (Clauss-Ehlers & Lopez-Levi, 2002a,
p. 8). Personalismo refers to valuing relationships in and of themselves and not as
a means to an end (Clauss, 1998).
The intersection of these cultural values creates what the author introduces
as the child's cultural script for resilience. Latino cultural values, for instance,
allow children to look to extended family for ongoing support, seek out older,
experienced role models, and be encouraged to develop positive relationships with
which they can identify and develop healthy attachments. Such influences help
define contexts of resilience for Latino children who benefit from an extended
family support network. Certainly this hypothesis has been supported by empirical
studies such as those conducted by De La Rosa (1988) and Colomba et al. ( 1999).
Re-inventing Resilience 37

Conversely, this literature also provides information about stressors. For children
whose families immigrate to the United States, for instance, vulnerability might
be the sudden loss of extended family support from members in the country of
origin.
The sociocultural context that arises out of Latino cultural values ilIustrates
a key concept in the CRA model that the author calls faeilitating developmental
environments. A facilitating developmental environment is an environment that
supports optimal development, mastery, and health, and is eulturally syntonie with
the individual's objectives and needs. In the Colomba et al. (1999) study, for
instance, the fact that family support prevented depressive symptoms provides an
example of a facilitating developmental environment.
In contrast, an inteifering developmental environment is one that fails to
promote resilience and optimal development. The interfering developmental en-
vironment is the context that does not res pond to the individual, does not support
mastery and competence, is eulturally dystonie, and creates a baITier in develop-
ment. Interfering developmental environments can be active or passive. The passive
interfering developmental environment fails to support the child simply because
it lacks key resources. Such an environment might be experienced by the family
that immigrates to the United States and experiences cultural value conflicts, loss
of extended family support, and language baITiers. The active interfering develop-
mental environment is the context where intentional behaviors and actions exist
such that they create an adversity potential that undermines the child.
The interaction between contexts and the individual, cultural values, and inter-
personal dynamics create a response to the facilitating or interfering environment.
The process is one of culturally-focused resilient adaptation since the child brings
multiple aspects of self and culture to confront and manage environmental adver-
sity. Out of this process, it is hoped that children develop competent responses to
the various sociocultural environments where they live.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this chapter has been to promote a shift from disease to
health by putting resilience in a multicultural context. Resilience research has
made extraordinary contributions to the positive psychology literature (Cicchetti
& Garmezy, 1993; Conrad & Hammond, 1993; Dunn, 1994; Gordon, 1996). Incor-
porating culture and diversity into these efforts means that we build on scientific
findings to determine how they cOITespond to and reflect the needs of diverse
communities.
It is thought that by understanding the sociocultural contexts in which children
function, we can provide culturally relevant interventions. By looking at resilience
as a culturally-adaptive competency, the author's hope is that we will also look at
 38 Carotine S. Clauss-Ehlers

cIinical interventions that are responsive to the backgrounds of children, families,

and the communities we serve. A Latino child who adheres to the cultural value of
familismo, for instance, might feel she's betraying her paren1s if she has to share
family secrets in individual therapy. This same child, however, might be an active
participant in family therapy since the modality doesn't raise the conflict of talking
to astranger, i.e., the therapist, outside the family. Similarly, the value of persoll-
alismo (Clauss, 1998) suggests that personal, informal treatment settings may be
more germane to treatment than sterile impersonal medical settings. Through dis-
cussing the history and current status of resilience, the author's goal has been to
place resilience in a sociocultural framework. To this end, aspects of the CRA
model incIude:

• Building on the trait-based literature by looking at environmental factors

1hat promote resilience
• Recognizing that coping and resilience processes might diner for ditferent
cultural groups
• Considering how interaction with the sociocultural context can promote
the development of resilience
• Exploring the Culturally Resilient Adaptation model that seeks to incor-
porate culture and diversity with resilience processes
• Conducting empirical research on resilience with diverse groups 10 explore
what works for different people

Re-visiting resilience as a function of culture means that protective factors

and subsequent interventions are viewed as culturally syntonic for African Amer-
ican, Asian and Asian American, Latino, American Indian, and White American
children. To accomplish this fundamental task, readers are invited to consider
three paradigmatic shifts in psychology: a change from a pathology-driven to a
health-promotiofl model of mental health; a change from an excIusively trai1-based
approach to one that incorporates a socioculturally-focused understanding of re-
silience; and last, a move towards culturally relevant interventions at individual,
family, and community levels. Through concerted efforts in all1hese areas, we will
truly be in a position to build on solid research foundations and together, re-invent
resilience.

REFERENCES
Akbar, N. (1996). Afriean metapsyehology of human personality. In O.A. Azibo (Ed.), Afi'ical1 psy-
chology il1 historical perspective and related commentary (pp. 29-46). Trenton, NJ: Aflica World
Press.
American Psychiatrie Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mel1tal disorders (4th
ed.). Washington, oe: Author.
Re-inventing Resilience 39

Arrington. M.A., & Wilson, M.N. (2000). A re-examination of risk and resilienee during adoleseence:
Ineorporating eulture and diversity. Journal '?fChild and Family Studies. 9(2),221-230.
Azibo, D. (1991). African-eentered theses on mental health and nosology of Black/African personality
disorders. Journal of Black Psychology. 15, 173-214.
Bandura, A. (1989). Human ageney in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist. 44(9), 1175-
1184.
Belgrave, EZ., Chase-Vaughn, G., Gray, E, Addison, J.D., & Cherry, Y.R. (2000). The effectiveness
of a eulture-and gender-specific intervention for increasing resiliency among African American
preadolescent females. Journal (}f Black PSycilOlogy, 26(2), 133-147.
Brodsky, A.E. (1999). "MAKING IT": The eomponents and proeess of resilienee among urban, Afriean
Ameriean, single mothers. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 69(2), 148-169.
Carter, R.T. (1995). The injiuence (lf race and racial identity in psyehotherapy: Toward a radally
inclusive model. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Cicehetti, D. (1990). A historical perspeetive on the diseipline of developmental psyehopathology. In
J. Rolf, A. Masten, D. Cieehetti, K. Nueehterlein, & S. Weinbtraub (Eds.), Risk and proteclive
factors in the development of spychopathology (pp. 2-28). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Cicchetti, D., & Garmezy, N. (1993). Prospeets and promises in the study '?fresilience. Development
and Psychopathology, 5,497-502.
Clauss, C.S. (1998). Language: The unspoken variable in psychotherapy practice. Journal (lf Psy-
chotherapy. 35(2),188-196.
Clauss-Ehlers, C.S. (2003). Promoting ecological health resilience for minority youth: Enhanc-
ing health care access through the school health center. Psychology in the Sehools. 40(3),
265-278.
Clauss-Ehlers, C.S., & Lopez Levi, L. (2002a). Violence and community, terms in conflict: An eco-
logical approach to resilience. Journal "f Sodal Distress and the Homeless. 1 J( 4), 265-278.
Clauss-Ehlers, C.S., & Lopez Levi, L. (2002b). Working to promote resilience with Latino youth in
sehools: Perspectives from the U.S. and Mexico. The International Journal of Mental Health
Promotion, 4(4), 14-20.
Cohler, B.1., Seott, EM., & Musick, J.S. (1995). Adversity, vulnerability, and resilienee: Cultural and
developmental perspeetives.1n D. Cieehetti & D.1. Cohen (Eds.), Developmentalpsychopatlzology.
V"I. 2: Risk. disordet; and adaptation (pp. 753-800). NY: John Wiley.
Colomba, M. y', Santiago, E.S .. & Rossello, J. (1999). Coping strategies and depression in Puerto Rican
adoleseents: An exploratory study. Cultural Diversity and Et/mie Minority Psychology. 5, 65-75.
Conrad. M., & Hammond, C. (1993). Proteetive and resouree faetors in high and low-risk ehildren: A
comparison of children with unipolar, bipolar, medically iII, and normal mothers. Development
and Psyehopath%gy, 5, 593-607.
Davis. N.1. (2001). Resilience in elzildhood and adolescence. Panel presentation delivered at George
Washington University, Media Conference, Washington, DC, April.
De La Rosa, M. (1988). Natural support systems of Puerto Rieans: A key dimension for well-being.
Health and Sociall-thrk. 13, 181-190.
Dryfoos, J.G. (1996). Adoleseents at risk: Shaping programs to fit the need. Journal ofNegro Education.
65,5-18.
Dunn, D. (1994). Resilient reintegration of married women with dependent ehildren: Employed and
un employed. (Doetoral Dissertation, Department of Health Edueation, University of Utah, Salt
Lake City, Utah).
Egeland, B., Carlson, E., & Sroufe, L.A. (1993). Resilienee as proeess. Developmentand Psychopathol-
ogy. 5(4), 517-528.
Falicov, C.l (1995). Training to think culturally: A multidimensional eomparative framework. Family
Pmcess. 34,373-387.
 40 Caroline S. Clauss-Ehlers

Garmezy, N. (1987). Stress, competence, and development: Continuities in the study of schizophrenie
adults, children vulnerable to psychopathology, and thc search tor stress-rcsistant children. Amer-
ican Journal ofOrthopsychiatry (57) 2,159-174.
Garmezy, N., & Masten, A.S. (1986). Stress, competence, andresilience: Common frontiers fortherapist
and psychopathologist. Behavior Therapy, 57(2),159-174.
Gonzalez, R., & Padilla, A.M. (1997). The academic resilience of Mexican American high school
students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 19(3), 301-317.
Gordon, K.A. (1996). Resilient Hispanic youths, self-concept and motivational patterns. Hispanic
Journal ofBehavioral Sciences, 18,63-73.
Johnson, S.D. (1990). Toward clarifying culture, race, and ethnicity in the context of multicultural
counseling. Journal ofMulticultttral Counseling and Developlllent, 18(1),41-50.
Kaufman, J., & Zigler, E. (1989). The intergenerational transmission of child abuse. In D. Cicchetti &
V Carlson (Eds.), Child Maltreatlllent: Theory and research on the causes and consequences "f
chi/d abttse and neglect (pp. 129-150). Camblidge: Cambridge University Press.
Keogh, B.K., & Weisner, T. (1993). An ecocultural perspective on risk and protective factors in chil-
dren's development: Implications for learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and
Practice, 8,3-10.
Kraepelin, E. (1883). COlllpendium der psychiatire. Liepzig: Abe!.
Kumpfer, K.L. (1999). Factors and processes contributing to resilience: The resilience framework.
In M.D. Glantz & J.L. Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and developlllem: Positive life adaptations
(pp. 179-224). New York: Kluwer AcademiclPlenum Publishers.
Long, J.VF., & Vaillanta, G.E. (1984). Natural history of male psychological health XI: Escape from
the underclass. AlIlerican Journal "fPsychiatly, 141,341-346.
Lopez, SJ., Prosser, E.C., Edwards, L.M., Magyar-Moe, J.L., Neufeld, J.E., & Rasmussen, H.N.
(2002). Putting positive psychology in a multicultural context. In e.R. Snyder & SJ. Lopez
(Eds.), Handbook ofpositive psyclwlogy. (pp. 700-714). New York: Oxford University Press.
Luthar, S.S., Doernberger, e.H., & Zigler, E. (1993). Resilience is not a unidimensional construct:
Insights from a perspective study of inner-city adolescents, Del'elopmem and Ps)'clwpall/Ology.
5,703-717.
Luthar, S.S., & Zigler, E. (1992). Intelligence and social competence among high-risk adolescents.
Developlllem and Psychopathology, 4,287-299.
Masten, A.S. (1982). HUlIlor and creative thinking in stress resistant children. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Masten, A.S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. AlIlerican PSYCllOlogist,
56(3),227-238.
Masten, A.S. (1994). Resilience in individual development: Successful adaptation despite risk and
adversity. In M.e. Wang & E.W. Gordon (Eds.), Educational resilience in inner-city America
(pp. 3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Masten, A.S., Best, K.M., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: Contributions from the
study of children who overcome adversity. Developlllent and Psychopathology, 2, 425-222.
Neiger, B. (1991). Resilielll reilltegration: Use ofstrtlctural equations modeling. Doctoral disseltation,
University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Pianta, R.e., & Walsh, DJ. (1998). Applying the construct of resilience in schools: Cautions form a
developmental systems perspective. School Psyclwlogy Review, 27(3),407-417.
Pianta, R.C., & Walsh, D. (1996). High-risk children in the schools: Creating sustaining relationships.
New York: Routledge.
Pietrofesa, J.J., Hoffman, A.,' & Splete, H.H. (1984). Counseling: An introduction (2nd Ed.), Boston:
Houghton Mil'flin.
Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. American Joumal ()fOrthopsy-
chiatry, 52,316-331.
Re-inventing Resilience 41

Rutter, M., & QuintOll, D. (1994). Long-term follow-up of women institutionaIized in ehildhood:
Faetors promoting good funetioning in adult life. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,
18.225-234.
Seligman. M. (1975). Helplessness: On depression. development, alld death. San Francisco: Freeman,
Spencer. M.B., & Dupree. D. (1996). Afriean-American youths' ecoeulturaI challenges and psyehoso-
cial opportunities: An alternative analysis of problem behavior outcomes. In D. Cicchetti & S.L.
Toth (Eds.) Adolescellce: Opportullities and chal/enges (pp, 259-282). Rochester, NY: University
of Rochester Press.
Strong, C. (1984). Stress and earing for the elderly relatives: Interpretation and coping strategies in an
American Indian and White sampie. The Gerol1tologist, 24,251-256.
Trotzer, 1.P., & Trotzer, T.B. (1986). Marriage andfamily. Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development.
Wenar, c., & Kerig, P. (2001). Developmemal psychopathology: From infancy through adolescence.
14th Ed.), Boston: McGraw HilI.
Wemer. E.E. (1985). Stress and protective factors in children's lives. In A.R. Nicol (Ed.), Longitudinal
studies in child psychology and psychiatry (pp. 335-355). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Werner, E.E. (1989). High-risk ehildren in young adulthood: A longitudinal study from birth to 32
years. American Journal (lfOrthopsychiatry, 59, 72-81.
Wemer, E.E., & Smith, R.S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk childrenfrom birth 10 adulthood.
Ithaca, New York: Comell University Press.
Winfield, L.F. (1994). Developing resilience in urban youth, NCREL Monograph, Oak Park, IL: North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Wolin, S.J. (1991). Paper presented at the Protecting Vulnerable Children Project, Children of A\co-
holies Foundation, Ine. Prineeton University, Princeton, NJ, November, 1991.
Wolin, S.J., & Wolin, S. (1993). Bound and determined: Growing up resilient in a troubledfamily.
New York: Villard Press.