Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: While there has been growing interest in the concept of resilience, there has been little attention paid to the cultural and contextual factors that influence children's healthy growth and development under adversity. Using findings from the International Resilience Project, a study of over 1500 youth in 11 countries on five continents, it has been possible to show that there are both generic and culturally specific aspects to resilience. METHOD: Fourteen communities were invited to participate based on the variability in the risks children face in each setting. A minimum of 60 youth in each community were administered the Child and Youth Resilience Measure. Qualitative interviews were also conducted with a subsample of youth. RESULTS: Both homogeneity and heterogeneity in the overall sample was demonstrated, with exploratory factor analyses suggesting at least four subgroups of youth distinguished by their status as Western or non-Western, boys or girls, and the degree of social cohesion of their communities. Qualitative data explains these differences as related to seven tensions experienced by youth developmentally. CONCLUSION: This work highlights the need for greater cultural and contextual sensitivity in how resilience is understood. Implications for practice with at-risk youth include the need to understand the contextual specificity of positive development under stress.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".