Traditionally, resilience has been viewed as a general positive adaptation to stressors. However, the hallmark of resilience – returning to the previous state following a perturbation – may also have severe downsides, which are often overlooked. Specifically, it may be unrealistic to return to the previous state or resilience may cause a person to become stuck in an undesirable state. In this article, we first call for a more nuanced theoretical conceptualization of resilience. To do so, we draw on insights from dynamical systems theory help to clearly define the role of a stressor and the idealized pathway to adapt to it. Then, we exemplify the potential downsides of resilience in the context of trauma and social adversity, learning, and goal-disengagement. In conclusion, researchers and practitioners should become more cautious with the term resilience and provide nuanced accounts for what they mean to avoid potentially harmful consequences.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hill et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: