Infurna Frank J, Luthar Suniya S
Arizona State University, Tempe
Arizona State University, Tempe.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2016 Mar;11(2):175-94. doi: 10.1177/1745691615621271.
We attempted to replicate findings that "most people are resilient" following three events: spousal loss, divorce, and unemployment. We applied growth mixture models to the same longitudinal data set that has previously been used to assert that resilience is ubiquitous. When using identical model specifications, as in prior studies, we found that resilient trajectories were most common, but the number of trajectories identified was different. When we relaxed two assumptions used in prior studies-that (a) all classes have similar variability in levels of postadversity adjustment and (b) there is no variability in changes within classes-we found that a resilience class was least common. Methodologically, our results show how findings on trajectories of change following major life stressors can vary substantially, depending on statistical model specifications. Conceptually, the results underscore the errors inherent in any categorical statements about "rates of resilience" among individuals confronted with major life stressors. Pragmatically, they underscore the dangers in recommending against prophylactic interventions (on the basis of one method of analyzing longitudinal data) for individuals who have experienced major life stressors.
在经历配偶离世、离婚和失业这三件事之后，“大多数人都具有恢复力”。我们将增长混合模型应用于同一个纵向数据集，该数据集此前曾被用于断言恢复力是普遍存在的。与之前的研究一样，当使用相同的模型规范时，我们发现恢复力轨迹最为常见，但所识别出的轨迹数量有所不同。当我们放宽之前研究中使用的两个假设，即（a）所有类别在逆境后调整水平上具有相似的变异性，以及（b）类别内部的变化不存在变异性时，我们发现恢复力类别是最不常见的。从方法学角度来看，我们的结果表明，关于重大生活压力源后变化轨迹的研究结果会因统计模型规范的不同而有很大差异。从概念上讲，这些结果强调了在对面临重大生活压力源的个体做出任何关于“恢复力比率”的分类陈述时所固有的错误。从实际角度来看，它们强调了（基于一种分析纵向数据的方法）对经历过重大生活压力源的个体不推荐预防性干预措施的危险性。
