Competence, Resilience, and Development in Adolescence
Clues for Prevention Science
Abstract and Keywords
This chapter considers ways of preventing adolescent psychopathology deduced from research on risk, competence, and resilience in developmental psychopathology. The first section focuses on competence and the developmental tasks of adolescence. The second describes theory and evidence linking competence and symptoms of psychopathology in adolescence. The third draws on findings from studies of risk and resilience to identify clues about what matters for adolescents at risk and the implications of these clues for resilience-focused theory and intervention. The concluding section highlights the transitions into and out of adolescence as windows of opportunity for prevention and strategic intervention, with some hints at future directions integrating the study of brain and behavioral development.
During the past 30 years, a dramatic transformation has occurred in research concerned with the origins and prevention of mental health problems as developmental psychopathology emerged. Developmental psychopathology (DP) can be defined as the study of behavior problems and related disorders in the full context of human development. This multidisciplinary perspective emphasizes developmental principles, multiple causes and outcomes, the value of integrating theory or knowledge about normal and nonnormal development (competence and psychopathology, resilience and maladaptive behavior), the importance of multiple levels of analysis (molecules to media), and longitudinal studies (Masten, 2006a). From the perspective of developmental psychopathology, if one seeks to understand or alter the mental health of adolescents, it is essential to consider normal and deviant development before, during, and after this period of the life span. This chapter considers clues to preventing adolescent psychopathology deduced from research on risk, competence, and resilience in developmental psychopathology.
The search for understanding the etiology of mental illnesses and problems gave rise to research on resilience, as well as the integrative science of developmental psychopathology in the late 20th century (Masten, 1989, 2001, 2006a). It was recognized decades ago that some children and adolescents were at greater risk for developing mental disorders and problems, including those with biological parents who had serious mental disorders (e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder), (p. 32 ) young people who grew up in very adverse circumstances, or children showing early signs of difficulty controlling their behavior or learning (Garmezy, 1984; Kopp, 1983; Masten & Gewirtz, 2006).
Investigators who wanted to study the origins of mental health problems began to study “high-risk” cohorts of children and youth, in hopes of learning enough about the causes and consequences of mental disorders and problems to inform practice and policy aimed at preventing or ameliorating them. Clinical scientists and experts on psychopathology began to collaborate with colleagues who studied normal human development in research teams and consortia, seeking help from each other in the design and interpretation of longitudinal studies of children and adolescents that would encompass normal and abnormal development (Cicchetti, 1990; Masten, 1989, 2006a). From longitudinal data, risk researchers soon began to note that individuals with the same kind of risks had very different outcomes, and that some children from disastrous backgrounds grew up to be highly competent and healthy adults, that many disorders had origins in childhood or adolescence, and that the same mental health problem could have different beginnings. Perhaps most important, however, these investigators became convinced of the necessity for a developmental approach to science, practice, and policy concerned with the causes, prevention, or treatment of mental health problems.
It was not long before a pioneering group of these scholars and their students began to lay the foundations of DP (Achenbach, 1974, 1990; Cicchetti, 1984, 1989, 1990, 1993; Cicchetti & Cohen, 1995; Gottesman, 1974; Masten & Braswell, 1991; Rutter, 1981; Rutter & Garmezy, 1983; Sroufe 1997; Sroufe & Rutter, 1984). DP, which spans multiple disciplines and levels of analysis, has roots deep in the history of science and medicine. However, it was not until recent decades that conditions were ripe for this cross-cutting approach to take hold as the prevailing framework for the sciences focused on mental health in childhood, adolescence, and, increasingly, across the life span (see Cicchetti, 1990, 2006),
In addition to generally anchoring the study of mental health and illness in development, DP underscored the importance of studying positive life patterns along with the negative ones. Among the early developmental psychopathologists, several leading scientists, including Norman Garmezy, Michael Rutter, and Emmy Werner (Masten, 1989; Masten & Gewirtz, 2006), were intrigued with the phenomenon of resilience in the lives of the people they were observing. Resilience in human development generally refers to positive adjustment among individuals exposed to serious threats to adaptation or development; in other words, doing well in spite of adversity. Developmental psychopathologists recognized that understanding the processes involved in competence and resilience, as well as those in psychopathology, held the promise of informing interventions to promote better development among high-risk children, to prevent mental illness, and to promote earlier or better recovery from psychopathology.
(p. 33 ) In the following discussion of competence, resilience, and psychopathology, this chapter highlights ideas and findings pertinent to prevention and adolescence. The first section is focused on competence and the developmental tasks of adolescence. The next section describes the kind of theory and evidence linking competence and symptoms of psychopathology in adolescence. The third section draws on findings from studies of risk and resilience to identify clues about what matters for adolescents at risk and the implications of these clues for resilience-focused theory and intervention. The concluding section highlights the transitions into and out of adolescence as windows of opportunity for prevention and strategic intervention, with some hints at future directions integrating the study of brain and behavioral development.
Competence and Adolescent Development
The concepts of competence, psychopathology, and resilience, though distinct, all involve judgments about how well a person is doing in life. Competence is a popular concept in many fields, as well as in conversational language, but in developmental science, it has been defined as follows:
Competence develops and has a normative course, as well as multiple dimensions and individual differences. Normatively in the human population, competence would be expected to improve over the course of adolescence, as young people mature and learn, despite increases in specific problems and detours along the roads to adulthood. During the second decade of life, there are major gains across multiple domains of adaptation in basic capabilities and coordinated execution of actions, over the short and long term. There are also huge variations in the timing, pace, and nature of these changes, and in the attendant competence of adolescents as they move through these years (Steinberg et al., 2006).
Competence refers to a family of constructs related to the capacity or motivation for, process of, or outcomes of effective adaptation in the environment, often inferred from a track record of effectiveness in age-salient developmental tasks and always embedded in developmental, cultural, and historical context. (Masten, Burt, & Coatsworth, 2006)
Competence is multidimensional, and across domains of competence, individuals may be advanced in one key domain (e.g., doing well in academic subjects at school) and less advanced in another (e.g., making friends with peers). Individual competence, even in the same domain, may falter, then recover, or get off track for long periods of time. In other words, there is continuity and change or synchronized development and uneven development, across the broad areas encompassed by the concept of competence.
(p. 34 ) Judgments about competence of individuals or groups can be based on formal tests (e.g., school exams, driving tests) or informal expectations widely shared in a community. Scholars long have noted that there are developmentally based standards for behavior and achievement that serve as broad benchmarks for whether life is proceeding well or not (Masten, 2006b; Masten et al., 2006). Developmental tasks can be universal (e.g., learning to communicate in early childhood) or limited to a particular culture, gender, or time in history (e.g., learning to hunt buffalo). In many societies and cultures around the world at this time, adolescents are expected to do well in school, prepare for their roles in society, obey the laws of the society, commit themselves to the religion of the family or community, make friends, and get along with people in the community. In the United States, most adolescents are expected to begin working, driving, and socializing with potential romantic partners. At some point, young people are expected to become competent with respect to adult roles such as supporting a family, rearing children, and contributing to the community. As youth develop, the standards for meeting developmental tasks also increase. This is not an accident, but most likely the result of many generations of adults observing development and learning what young people need to be doing at any particular point in development to succeed later on in that environment and culture. Individuals are judged against age-salient developmental task expectations that reflect a general growth of competence. Perceived or actual failure in these developmental task domains may have important consequences for future competence, opportunities, self-esteem, reputation with others and symptoms of psychopathology (Masten et al., 2006).
Competence in age-salient developmental tasks is assumed to be the integrated result of many processes and interactions at multiple levels of potential analysis, from the molecular to the macro-system level. Extensive research over the course of decades in multiple fields and disciplines has been directed at understanding the developmental processes involved in the achievement of competence or its failures (brain development, cognitive development, social development, intelligence, mental retardation, personality, criminology, learning, academic achievement, motivation, self efficacy, attachment, parenting, education, school climate, etc.). Some have focused on individual differences, including giftedness and negative deviance, and others on normative patterns. Some have focused on change itself and the transitions from one context or level of competence to another.
Scaffolding is an important concept in the history of competence, capturing the idea that there are times in development when support is needed to bridge a developmental transition from one level to the next, when the child is not quite ready to function independently in a new context or new level of achievement. Thus, for example, just as a toddler can use a helping hand until he or she is a skilled walker, an adolescent may need the support of parents, peers, or teachers in navigating the new demands of developmental tasks during adolescence or the transition to adulthood. Scaffolding can be helpful, for example, when adolescents learn (p. 35 ) to drive, move into highly demanding high school classes, live away from home for the first time, or learn to handle new sexual feelings.
Competence and Psychopathology
The study of competence and psychopathology has been connected in many ways, historically, theoretically, and empirically. These connections have great significance for interventions to promote mental health before, during, and subsequent to adolescence, as well as for the basic science of how mental health and illness develop (Masten, 2004; Masten et al., 2006; Steinberg et al., 2006). A detailed discussion of these connections is well beyond the scope of this chapter (see Masten et al., 2006); however, it is important to consider briefly how competence and psychopathology may be related and how attention to these possibilities could illuminate key issues for prevention and policy design.
Evaluating competence and symptoms are both ways of judging adaptation, with overlapping histories in ancient medicine and philosophy, as well as more recent shared histories in the study of psychiatry, psychology, and related social sciences and neurosciences (Masten & Curtis, 2000; Masten et al., 2006). Some of the connections observed between competence and symptoms in research reflect artifacts of overlapping concepts, measurement, or informants with response bias, but some of the links are likely to reflect true causal connections. Causal models have taken several basic forms—common cause models, symptoms of disorders undermining competence, failures in major competence domains leading to symptoms—and more complex combinations and indirect variations of these basic models (see Masten et al., 2006, for a more detailed discussion of these models). A few examples can illustrate some of the intriguing possibilities now being considered in research on adolescent psychopathology.
Common Cause Models
Common antecedents, risk factors, genetically influenced vulnerabilities, and other shared mediating influences could account for the co-occurrence of competence problems and psychopathology in the same adolescent. Parental neglect or maltreatment, bad neighborhoods, negative emotionality, poor impulse control, poor attention control, and stressful life events have been implicated in multiple problems of adolescence, including depression, antisocial behavior, substance abuse, anxiety disorders, as well as difficulties in social and academic competence (Evans et al., 2005; Masten & Gewirtz, 2006; Masten et al., 2006; see also multiple chapters in this volume). The pathways to these problems are undoubtedly complex and highly variable from person to person, but it is certainly possible that multiple difficulties arise in the same individuals and across individuals from dysfunctions or breakdowns in fundamental adaptive systems. (p. 36 ) Those systems could be located within the organism (e.g., dysfunctions of attention in the central nervous system), in relationships (e.g., disturbed attachment relationships or poor parenting in the family system), or in community/society (e.g., poor education or health-care system). It is also possible for extremely adverse environments or major disasters to radically alter available resources, affecting many systems at many levels. Competence in multiple domains, and the quality of functioning along symptom dimensions (e.g., internalizing or externalizing symptoms), may co-occur in people because of common underlying risks and assets, vulnerabilities and protective factors, or the powerful and broad mediating impact of key relationships, as found in the role of parenting or romantic partners. (The topic of adversity and competence is discussed further in the later section on resilience.)
Symptoms of Mental Disorders Undermine Competence
It is also possible that the symptoms of a disorder, such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or autism, are so impairing that they undermine effective behavior in multiple competence domains. Developmental tasks, by definition, require coordinated use of multiple capabilities to direct behavior in context over time (Masten et al., 2006). Adolescents who are too distracted, confused, or anxious to socialize with peers, go to school, or participate in activities due to a mental illness are likely to have problems making friends, achieving at school, and succeeding on the baseball team, and may miss out on many opportunities for normal socialization of competence as a result. Adolescents with significant issues of impulse control or aggression may alienate mainstream peers or get themselves moved into special education classrooms that are not conducive to optimal academic progress.
Competence Failures Contribute to Symptoms and Disorders
Some models also propose that failure in age-salient developmental tasks, which are highly valued by parents, self, and society, can undermine well-being or exacerbate symptoms (Chen, Li, Li, Li, & Liu, 2000; Cole, Martin, Powers, & Truglio, 1996; Kiesner, 2002; Nangle, Erdley, Newman, Mason, & Carpenter, 2003). Perceived failure could lead to feelings of distress or sadness. Cole and colleagues (Cole, Martin, & Powers, 1997; Jacquez, Cole, & Searle, 2004) have proposed such a failure model for depression, and have demonstrated that social competence predicted changes in depressed affect over time, whereas the reverse was not found. Cole et al. (1997) suggest that this effect is mediated by perceived competence. There is also evidence that academic failure (often leading to school dropout) contributes to externalizing symptoms, possibly by increasing affiliation with deviant peers or increasing exposure to violence (Deater-Deckard, 2001; Dishion, Patterson, Stoolmiller, & Skinner, 1991; Masten, Roisman, et al., 2005; Patterson, Forgatch, Yoerger, & Stoolmiller, 1998). Congruent findings also indicate (p. 37 ) that academic success among adolescents predicts desistance from antisocial behavior (Maguin & Loeber, 1996; Thornberry, Lizotte, Krohn, Smith, & Porter, 2003).
Transactional and Progressive Cascade Models
It is also possible for the processes represented by the basic causal models to happen simultaneously or in sequence, so that effects are bidirectional or sequential. For example, peers could be turned off by the behavior of a sad or aggressive youth, excluding or rejecting this person, who in reaction to the rejection becomes more distressed or hostile, which further irritates or alienates peers, and so on. Individuals in deviant peer groups can escalate each other’s bad behavior (Dishion, Andrews, & Crosby, 1995; Dishion & Piehler, in press). Such bidirectional or transactional effects are a common feature of developmental systems theory and developmental psychopathology perspectives (Sameroff, 2000). It is also possible that externalizing behavior contributes to peer rejection, which then contributes to internalizing symptoms in what has been termed a developmental cascade (Masten, Roisman, et al., 2005). Data on antisocial behavior strongly suggest that initial problems of conduct and self-control early in development lead to academic or social problems or both, either of which then contribute to worsening antisocial behavior and/or internalizing symptoms (for reviews of this evidence, see Deater-Deckard, 2001; Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Hinshaw, 2002; Hinshaw & Anderson, 1996; Masten et al., 2006). Such developmental cascades or progressions, sometimes referred to as “snowballing effects,” would account for the broad predictive significance of antisocial behavior for multiple problem outcomes later in development that was observed decades ago (Kohlberg, LaCrosse, & Ricks, 1972). Such cascades also corroborate coercion theory models, initially proposed by investigators from the Oregon Social Learning Center, in which problems arising in the family context, such as noncompliance and aggression in preschoolers, lead to dual failures in the spheres of academic achievement and peer acceptance after children enter the school context (Capaldi, 1992; Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1992).
Implications for Preventive Interventions
Understanding how and why competence and psychopathology are linked in individual development has important implications for mental health intervention and also for the broad societal agenda of promoting positive youth development (see Masten et al., 2006). If there are common causes underlying multiple disorders and competence problems in the same individuals, preventive interventions that address the common causes should have multiple benefits. If competence failures contribute to psychopathology, then one strategy for intervention would be to promote competence in order to prevent or reduce the related psychopathology. Evidence on effective prevention programs and interventions is consistent with the possibility that promoting competence has preventive effects on a variety (p. 38 ) of mental health problems (Cicchetti, Rappaport, Sandler, & Weissberg, 2000; Greenberg, Riggs, & Blair, this volume; Masten, 2001; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Masten et al., 2006; Weissberg, Kumpfer, & Seligman, 2003).
Similarly, it would be possible to design an intervention strategically to interrupt a developmental cascade or progression before the initial problem undermines development in other domains. Late in a progression, even “curing” the original problem may not produce improvements in the other domains that have been affected. Thus, late interventions to help young people regulate affect, attention, or behavior more effectively cannot be expected to undue all the damage to social relationships, cumulative academic achievement, financial ruin, or one’s record in the legal system. Accurately delineating a progressive or cascade causal chain of effects could make it possible to act early in a sequence, treating one problem to prevent a different problem further along a developmental cascade. The timing and nature of preventive interventions would benefit from knowledge about cascades and consideration of spreading effects over time, as well as the developmental level and contexts of the young people involved.
Resilience in Development: Competence in the Context of High Risk or Adversity
More than 3 decades ago, resilience research pioneers were inspired by the possibility that studying resilience would inform prevention and intervention efforts, arguing that we had lessons to learn from understanding how young people overcame adversity or high cumulative risk conditions to succeed in life or how good mental health outcomes are achieved among youth who start down unhealthy roads (Luthar & Cicchetti, 2000; Masten, 1989, 2001, 2004; Masten, Best, & Garmezy, 1990). This section briefly describes progress to date in reaching that goal, with a focus on implications for prevention science and the future integration of neuroscience with behavior in the study of resilience.
Inferring Resilience: Judging Risk and Positive Adaptation
If one is asked to think of a real adolescent who is “resilient,” two judgments would need to be made: (1) that the adolescent is doing okay by some criteria and (2) that the adolescent has overcome significant threat to adaptation or development (Luthar, 2006; Masten, 2001; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998). Similarly, before an investigator can study resilience, that scientist must define resilience in terms of risks and positive outcomes. Resilience is inferential because it refers to good functioning during or following conditions that would be expected to disrupt or, in fact, have already disrupted the lives of typical individuals. This means defining the criteria for risk and positive adaptation.
(p. 39 ) Defining Risk in Resilience Research
Risk generally refers to an elevated probability of an undesirable outcome, although there is discussion of more precise definitions (see Kraemer et al., 1997). In the case of resilience, the threat to adaptation or development must be significant or substantial: though often unstated, the assumption is that this negative influence could alter the course of development or have serious repercussions on adaptive functioning. Many types of risk factors, including genetic risk, have been studied in resilience research. In risk and resilience studies to date, genetic risk has been measured most often by status markers, such as having a parent with a heritable disorder or biological markers of some kind associated with pathological outcomes, rather than a specific gene or set of genes, because the genes associated with vulnerability had not been identified. That is rapidly changing as gene mapping becomes more feasible, and there is likely to be a surge in research on gene-environment interaction, with a focus on both vulnerability and resilience processes (Gottesman & Hanson, 2005; Rutter, 2007; Rutter, Moffitt, & Caspi, 2006). There is extensive research on resilience in relation to risks posed by common negative life events (e.g., divorce, maltreatment), disadvantage (e.g., poverty), and disasters involving large numbers of victims, both natural (e.g., earthquakes, hurricanes) and unnatural (e.g., war, terrorism). Early in the history of risk research, investigators learned that risks often co-occur or pile up in the lives of youth, and they began to consider cumulative risk effects in various ways (Masten, 2001). It has been persuasively argued that cumulative risk conditions call for “cumulative protections” (see Wyman, Sandler, Wolchik, & Nelson, 2000; Yoshikawa, 1994).
Defining Positive Adaptation in Resilience Research
Resilience requires judgments about positive outcomes, which require criteria about positive adaptation or development. Developmental investigators often define those outcomes in terms of competence as defined earlier in this chapter, particularly in relation to success on age-salient developmental tasks. For example a group of adolescents might be judged as competent when they are doing well across multiple domains, including academic achievement in school, social relationships with friends, and following the law in the community and the rules at home (Masten, Coatsworth, et al., 1995; Masten, Hubbard, et al., 1999). Psychiatric researchers also have defined resilience in terms of mental health, such as youth at risk for a mental disorder who remain healthy, or youth who had mental health problems before and now show recovery. Some research includes competence and mental health criteria, defining resilience in terms of doing well socially and academically combined with the absence of mental illness or distress. One of the controversies in this literature has been whether one should be judged to show resilience even when there is internal distress or unhappiness (Luthar, 2006; Masten, 2001; (p. 40 ) Masten & Gewirtz, 2006). Clearly it is possible to be effective in developmental tasks, even with internalizing symptoms, although significant depression or anxiety can interfere with adaptive functioning in the environment. Some would argue that particularly in cases of severe or long-term adversity, with residual suffering as a result of that adversity, observable competence across key developmental tasks constitutes resilience, even with periodic experiences of internal distress. Thus a teenage war survivor who moves to a new country, goes to school, makes friends, participates in the community, and later gets a job, marries, and raises a family successfully, would be considered resilient, even with long-lasting symptoms related to war experiences, such as nightmares, depressed mood, anxiety or panic, and so on. On the other hand, no matter how well a person feels and sleeps, if the adolescent is failing in all domains valued by society as developmental milestones, very few observers would infer resilience.
Patterns and Models of Resilience
Resilience is a broad umbrella that includes a variety of life experiences and patterns of adaptation over time. This umbrella covers observed good functioning under challenging circumstances, observed short- or long-term recovery to normal functioning or development following trauma or disaster, and also improvement from poor adaptation to good adaptation following changes in chronic conditions from terrible to favorable. In the last kind of resilience, good adaptation emerges following normalization of the environment; for example, when children are adopted from orphanages into good homes or moved with their families out of famine regions or war zones.
Nonetheless, in all cases, resilience refers to manifested positive functioning or outcomes (not probabilistic ones) and success by some set of criteria that is sustained over time, at least for a while (i.e., the positive functioning is not just momentary or manifested on a single occasion). Moreover, it is widely assumed that resilience results from many processes and transactions that are occurring within an individual and between an individual and the environment. Resilience, reflecting system interactions and myriad processes of adaptation, must be understood as a life pattern based on many dynamic processes. In human individuals, who are always developing, and particularly during periods of rapid development such as occur over the years of adolescence, understanding resilience requires a developmental perspective. To understand resilience in adolescence requires consideration of changing capacities for adaptation, vulnerabilities, resources, contexts, and opportunities.
Models of resilience include various ingredients, in addition to the risks and outcomes under consideration. Of particular interest, of course, are the potential assets and moderators that make a difference for adaptive success under difficult circumstances. Studies have tested models of resilience that include a wide variety of assets and protective factors, including qualities of individuals and their environments or relationships that might account for better adaptation in hazardous (p. 41 ) situations. General assets are associated with good outcomes in youth under most conditions; outcomes are generally better when a youth has two parents, better parenting, lives in a decent neighborhood and attends a good school, and has normal cognitive abilities. Protective factors refer to influences that play a special role under risky conditions. Parental monitoring, for example, may be generally a good idea, but it can be crucial in a dangerous neighborhood. Some protective factors, more like automobile airbags, are important only during emergencies, such as emergency shelters for teenagers.
There are also different models of how all the components involved in resilience may work to produce resilience (Masten, 2001). Some models focus on people: Some investigators have identified resilient versus maladaptive youth and then compared them with each other and with low-risk youth, to try to figure out what makes a difference. In contrast to these person-focused approaches, investigators have also used variable-focused approaches with multivariate statistics to study the relation among the measured qualities of people, their relationships, and their environments. Investigators have tested models with additive effects and with interactions. They have proposed mediating effects to try to identify when and where key processes are occurring. Investigators have asked, for example: Has the Midwestern farm crisis (Elder & Conger, 2000) or the Great Depression (Elder, 1999) affected adolescents primarily through its effects on their parents (e.g., depression, irritability, or marital conflict undermine parenting quality, which leads to problems in children), more directly (e.g., not enough food, changing jobs or educational opportunities), or in some combination of these ways, as often observed with such profound historical events?
The Short List and Its Implications for Resilience
Despite the diversity of risks and populations studied, the varying definitions of positive adaptation, and the inconsistencies and controversies in the resilience literature, the findings have been remarkably consistent in implicating a set of correlates and predictors of resilience in young people (Luthar, 2003, 2006; Masten, 2001, 2004; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Masten & Powell, 2003). Thus, it is possible to comprise a reasonably stable “short list” of assets and protective factors associated with resilience (Masten, 2001, 2004; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Masten & Reed, 2002; Wright & Masten, 2004). This list in various forms typically includes the following correlates of resilience: decent parents or effective parenting, connections to other competent and caring adults, problem-solving skills, self-regulation skills, positive self-perceptions, beliefs that life has meaning or hopefulness, spirituality or religious affiliations, talents valued by self or society, socioeconomic advantages, community effectiveness and safety, and, for adolescents, connections to prosocial and competent peers.
This list of consistently observed correlates of resilience under diverse conditions suggests the operation of fundamental adaptive systems in human development that (p. 42 ) operate to foster adaptation under high-risk and adverse conditions, as well as serving many other adaptive functions over the course of development (Masten, 2001, 2004; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Masten & Reed, 2002; Wright & Masten, 2004; Yates & Masten, 2004). These adaptive systems have been extensively investigated for many years in the social sciences and other fields, and more recently, have gained the attention of neuroscience researchers. Examples include the following: attachment systems and relationships that provide emotional security and a host of regulatory functions in development; a functional family that serves many roles in the caregiving, socialization, emotional or physical security, and regulation of family members; a central nervous system in good working order that is operating to process information, learn and solve problems, regulate stress, and perform many other roles; a mastery motivational system that motivates efforts to adapt and rewards success; meaning-making systems of belief that provide emotional security, hope, and a sense of coherence in life; community and school organizations that provide opportunities for learning, socialization, contexts for mastery experiences, and so on; and many other cultural and societal systems that nurture and support basic adaptive systems for development. Presumably, these systems have evolved in biological evolution and human cultural evolution because of their adaptive value. Moreover, the development of these systems is itself adaptive in ontogeny, with individual development influenced at multiple levels by experience, including the central nervous system and all the systems regulated by the brain, such as stress regulation. Many chapters in this volume illustrate the burgeoning interest in developmental neuroscience and brain plasticity and the profound implications for preventive interventions of the adaptability of primary adaptive systems during development, discussed further at later points in this chapter.
Prevention and Intervention to Promote Positive Development and to Test Resilience Theory
The significance of the short list and potential adaptive systems that this list may represent are still largely matters of speculation in regard to the causes and processes of resilience. However, randomized experiments to prevent and ameliorate problems among children and youth at risk afford one of the best strategies for testing causal models of resilience (Luthar & Cicchetti, 2000; Masten, 1994; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Masten & Powell, 2003). Youth cannot be randomly assigned to the hazards of life, but it is possible to provide assets and protective resources designed to promote better development or to mobilize adaptive systems on their behalf, and study whether and how these interventions work. Resilience-based models offer guidance for designing and evaluating interventions (Luthar & Cicchetti, 2000; Masten, 2001, 2006b; Masten & Gewirtz, 2006; Masten & Powell, 2003; Yates & Masten, 2004).
A compelling case can be made for the transformative influence of resilience studies on practice and the prevention field (Masten, 2001; Masten & Gewirtz, (p. 43 ) 2006; Masten & Powell, 2003; Masten et al., 2006; Yates & Masten, 2004). Research findings suggest a resilience framework for practice that has shifted away from deficit- or disease-based approaches to more strength- and competence-focused models, infusing more positive goals, measures, methods, and targets of intervention into interventions and systems of care (see Masten, 2006b; Masten & Gewirtz, 2006; Masten & Powell, 2003; or Yates & Masten, 2004). Prevention studies designed on the basis of resilience models have the potential to test mediating and moderating effects hypothesized to make a difference, as well as to improve outcomes. And it is noteworthy that the evidence from the experimental prevention field to date appears to be highly congruent with the findings that have emerged from studies of naturally occurring resilience (see Greenberg et al., this volume; Masten et al., 2006).
As research on brain plasticity and gene expression advances, it is also becoming clear that a new kind of intervention is conceivable. It may be possible to promote resilience by “reprogramming” adaptive systems that have not developed well for various reasons. Investigators are beginning to consider the possibilities of intervening to modify systems that regulate affect, attention, stress, or behavior that are crucial to learning, adaptation to stress, and appropriate social behavior (see Buonomano & Merzenich, 1998; Dahl & Spear, 2004; Greenberg et al., this volume; Rueda, Rothbart, Saccomanno, & Posner, this volume; and other papers in this volume). It may also be possible to prevent the development of mental disorders through preventive interventions with genetically vulnerable individuals, in effect promoting resilience by altering the course of epigenesis or brain development (e.g., Chang, Gallelli, & Howe, this volume). As gene-environment interactions become better explicated in the mental health field, it may also be possible to prevent maladaptive gene expression through favorable changes in the moderating environment, such as by improving parenting or education and reducing maltreatment. Research on gene-environment interactions involving specific genes and particular life experiences (e.g., Caspi et al., 2002) may provide additional evidence supporting the protective strategies already emerging from interventions designed on the basis of resilience.
Resilience and Adolescent Development: Two Key Transitional Windows
In addition to the broad models and findings emerging from resilience research with implications for prevention, this research domain has often included adolescents in longitudinal studies, and thus investigators have focused attention on patterns of risk, competence, psychopathology, and protective influences in adolescence, as well as the changes in behavior, context, and relationships that may play a role in risk, vulnerability, protection, and adaptation. Two major transition (p. 44 ) periods stand out for consideration from this work, characterized by concentrated change in individual adolescents, their contexts, relationships, and life experiences: early adolescence and the transition to adulthood (which is referred to here as emerging adulthood).
Early adolescence is a time when there are many biological and brain changes, accompanied by changes in appearance, interest and motivation, risk-seeking behavior, schools context, peer interaction, mobility, and relationships with parents (Dahl & Spear, 2004; Steinberg et al., 2006). All of the major aspects of a resilience model are changing: age-salient developmental tasks and what is required to succeed at school or with friends or behave responsibly; risks and adversities change as challenging new experiences pile up from biological, cognitive, and environmental changes and their interaction, and new conflicts emerge with parents or peers; vulnerability appears to increase in a variety of ways, with increasing sleep deprivation, sensitivity to stress, less support or scaffolding from adults, greater exposure to and understanding of negative events and trauma presented on TV or in the community, and even possibly the activation of genetically based vulnerabilities to specific disorders; resources and protection shift as parents avoid or increase monitoring, peers become better friends or more deviant, and opportunities for activities and cultural rites of passage become available. Clearly there is a shifting of challenges, capacity for adaptation, and opportunities at many levels of analysis. For young people who enter this period with a track record of poor adaptation and few resources or protection, the road can be very rocky and there are sharp increases over these years in emotional distress or depression, the risk for substance use and dependence or other risky behaviors, and criminal behavior, particularly among high-risk youth. Young people who were already showing resilience often continue to do well, though some flounder in early adolescence; it is uncommon to see newly emerging resilience during this period. Most of the evidence tracing the course of problem behaviors, such as serious offending, underage drinking, depression, or other internalizing symptoms, over time show generally rising arcs of problems or mental health issues during this period of development, although there are many youth who continue to have low rates of any kind of problems during early adolescence (Dahl & Spear, 2004; Ge, Natsuaki, & Conger, 2006; National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2004/2005; Steinberg et al., 2006; Thornberry & Krohn, 2003). The evidence on this transition suggests that contemporary societies may not be providing adequate scaffolding for many young people in this period of development, though Spear (this volume) has noted that this period in other species also may be fraught with hazard. It is interesting to note that for centuries, this is also a time period when cultures have provided structured support and immersion in the culture through rites of passage, apprenticeships, religious training, and so on.
In contrast, the ending of adolescence and transition to adulthood, or emerging adulthood period (Arnett & Tanner, 2006), which is also characterized by concentrated (p. 45 ) change in individuals, contexts, and their interaction, looks promising as a time of improving prospects and emerging resilience (Masten et al., 2006). Some of the problem behaviors that spiked upward early in adolescence begin to arc downward during emerging adulthood, which is characterized by considerable normative desistance in multiple problem domains of external and internal behavior, including crime (the “age-crime” curve heads downward), party-based drinking, and self-reported symptoms of depression (e.g., Ge et al., 2006; National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2004/2005; Thornberry & Krohn, 2003). There are some bumps upward in problems related to contextual changes (entering military service or college), but these very broad patterns suggest that there must be significant influences at work directing the behavior of young people toward acceptable mainstream adult behavior. Again, youth who enter the years from 18 to 25 with a solid foundation of competence and resources typically navigate this transition well, but additionally, some of the youth who were off track in adolescence begin to get back on track. New resilience emerges (Masten et al., 2004; Masten et al., 2006).
Emergent resilience has been reported for many years in anecdotal accounts or small studies and the qualities associated with “late blooming” are interesting: planfulness, increasing motivation to achieve future goals, connections to adult mentors outside the family, military service, marriage/romantic commitment to prosocial partners, and religious conversion (Masten et al, 2006). This may be a window in human development in modern societies when there is a positive convergence of strategic executive control and future orientation (facilitated by brain development and new capacity for executive functioning), opportunities (to leave home, join transformative new contexts such as the military, college, religious organizations, or the work world), and new adult support beyond the family (e.g., adult mentors, romantic partners) that together spur positive change. It is probably not a coincidence that many cultures around the world provide socially approved contexts and opportunities for young people around this age to move into new environments through work, education, or travel, nor that the legal age of adulthood for various activities often falls around the age of 20 (often 18 to 21).
Normative and individual inflection points in pathways to competence or psycho-pathology across adolescence may arise from a confluence of changes in adaptive capacity or motivation, contextual demands or supports, and opportunities. Turning points may also result from life-altering experiences that jolt development down a new path, as might happen after traumatic experiences, unplanned pregnancy, religious conversion, or other events.
Transitions into and out of adolescence are periods in which there are marked changes in individuals, relationships, contexts, experiences, developmental task (p. 46 ) demands, and opportunities for young people, that alter the risks and assets, vulnerabilities and protections, capacity and nature of adaptive systems. The best individual protections for negotiating the psychosocial hazards of early adolescent transitions are the human and social capital accrued in childhood, typically reflected in success in earlier age-salient developmental tasks and well-functioning adaptive systems for learning and regulating behavior, and positive relationships with parents and peers. Additionally, effective cultures and communities provide scaffolding in many forms to support successful transitions during early adolescence. Children who enter the challenges of adolescence and secondary schooling protected by good self-regulation skills, good relationships with prosocial and caring adults and prosocial peer friends, positive reputations with parents, peers and teachers, and positive beliefs about themselves have a far lower risk for psycho-pathology and disability than children who enter this transition already struggling and unprotected. Already maladaptive youth often face the challenges of this transition with very little scaffolding or protection. Moreover, for children who already have behavioral and emotional problems, the kinds of trouble that ensue may further weaken the protection afforded by human and social capital and the regulatory capacity they provide, while at the same time increasing the intensity of adversity youth experience, accelerating psychopathology or disability, and leading to lifelong consequences.
Similarly, the accomplishments and skills of adolescence set the stage for successful transitions to adulthood. In addition, however, there appears to be a window of opportunity in the transition to adulthood that opens as a result of converging developmental influences that alter the individual, the context, and the opportunities and motivation for changing the life course. These changes not only generate a general positive trend away from deviant behavior among normative young people in their late teens and early twenties, but also afford second chances for some of the youth who have gotten off the expected competence pathways during adolescence to turn their lives around. This window appears to reflect in part the brain development (connectivity, efficiency, etc.) underlying the improvements in a spectrum of executive functioning skills around this time, as well as growing knowledge, experience, physical prowess, and attractiveness, reaching the age of majority with its attending freedoms of action, the growing competence of friends and romantic partners, and the opportunities provided by supportive adults and society at large to promote the development of adult success and civic engagement.
The findings to date across a broad array of studies of competence, resilience, and psychopathology suggest that effective and well-timed prevention efforts could be strategically directed in several key ways: (a) intervening early in well-described progressions to prevent cascades in development that result in snowballing disabilities and comorbidity; (b) promoting competence and regulatory capacity (both self-regulation and social regulation); (c) reducing trauma exposure (p. 47 ) and boosting protection for children in risky environments; (d) strengthening the scaffolds during periods of marked change, such as early adolescence; or (e) providing opportunities, mentors, and second chances for adolescents in the transition to adulthood. Specific and coordinated efforts could take many forms.
The current explosion of research on the human genome, gene-environment interaction, and brain plasticity throughout the life course heralds a new era of research on vulnerability and resilience, with the potential to revolutionize preventive interventions for mental health throughout the life span. It is now conceivable that the vulnerabilities and adaptive systems implicated in the development of competence and psychopathology in youth might themselves be targeted for change with the aim of redirecting development. It may be possible to improve the odds for competence or recovery and reduce the risks for psychopathology and the attendant burden of suffering it imposes on youth, their families, and society. Much work lies ahead, but there are clear and compelling signs of benefits to prevention science from integrating what is known about competence, resilience, and plasticity across disciplines and systems of human functioning through a developmental approach.
Achenbach, T. M. (1974). Developmental psychopathology. Oxford, England: Ronald Press.
Achenbach, T. M. (1990). What is “developmental” about developmental psychopathology? In J. Rolf, A. S. Masten, K. Nuechterlein, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Arnett, J. J., & Tanner, J. (Eds.) (2006). Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
Buonomano, D. V., & Merzenich, M. M. (1998). Net interaction between different forms of short-term synaptic plasticity and slow IPSP’s in the hippocampus and auditory cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 80, 1765–1774.
Capaldi, D. M. (1992). Co-occurrence of conduct problems and depressive symptoms in early adolescent boys: Pt. II. A 2-year follow-up at grade 8. Development and Psychopathology, 4, 125–144.
Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Martin, J., Craig, I. W., et al. (2002). Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science, 297, 851–854.
Chang, K., Gallelli, K., & Howe, M. (2007). Early identification and prevention of early-onset bipolar disorder. In D. Romer & E. Walker (Eds.), Adolescent psychopathology and the developing brain: Integrating brain and prevention science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chen, X., Li, D., Li, Z.-Y., Li, B.-S., & Liu, M. (2000). Sociable and prosocial dimensions of social competence in Chinese children: Common and unique contributions to social, academic, and psychological adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 36, 302–314.
(p. 48 ) Chen, X., Rubin, K. H., & Li, B. (1995). Depressed mood in Chinese children: Relations with school performance and family environment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 938–947.
Cicchetti, D. (1984). The emergence of developmental psychopathology. Child Development, 55, 1–7.
Cicchetti, D. (Ed.). (1989). The emergence of a discipline: Rochester symposium on developmental psychopathology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cicchetti, D. (1990). An historical perspective on the discipline of developmental psychopathology. In J. Rolf, A. S. Masten, D. Cicchetti, K. H. Nuechterlein, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology (pp. 2–28). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cicchetti, D. (1993). Developmental psychopathology: Reactions, reflections, and projections. Developmental Review, 13, 471–502.
Cicchetti, D. (2006). Development and pscyhopathology. In D. Cicchetti & D. Cohen (Eds.), Development and psychopathology: Vol. 1. Theory and methods (2nd ed., pp. 1–23). New York: Wiley.
Cicchetti, D., & Cohen, D. J. (Eds.). (1995). Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 1. Theory and methods. New York: Wiley.
Cicchetti, D., Rappaport, J., Sandler, I., & Weissberg, R. P. (Eds.). (2000). The promotion of wellness in children and adolescents. Washington, DC: CWLA Press.
Cole, D. A., Martin, J. M., & Powers, B. (1997). A competency-based model of child depression: A longitudinal study of peer, parent, teacher, and self-evaluations. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 505–514.
Cole, D. A., Martin, J. M., Powers, B., & Truglio, R. (1996). Modeling causal relations between academic and social competence and depression: A multitrait-multimethod longitudinal study of children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 258–270.
Dahl, R. E., & Spear, L. P. (Eds.). (2004). Adolescent brain development: Vulnerabilities and opportunities (Vol. 1021). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Deater-Deckard, K. (2001). Annotation: Recent research examining the role of peer relationships in the development of psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 565–579.
Dishion, T. J., Andrews, D. W., & Crosby, L. (1995). Antisocial boys and their friends in early adolescence: Relationship characteristics, quality, and interactional process. Child Development, 66, 139–151.
Dishion, T. J., Patterson, G. R., Stoolmiller, M., & Skinner, M. L. (1991). Family, school, and behavioral antecedents to early adolescent involvement with antisocial peers. Developmental Psychology, 27, 172–180.
Dishion, D. J., & Piehler, T. F. (in press). Peer dynamics in the development and change of child and adolescent problem behavior. In A. S. Masten (Eds.), Multilevel dynamics in developmental psychopathology: 34th Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (2003). A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 39, 349–371.
Elder, G. H., Jr. (1999). Children of the Great Depression: Social change in life experience. 25th Anniversary Edition, Enlarged. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. [Original work published in 1974 by the University of Chicago Press]
Elder, G. H., Jr., & Conger, R. D. (2000). Children of the land: Adversity and success in rural America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Evans, D. L., Foa, E. B., Gur, R. E., Hendin, H., O’Brien, C. P., Seligman, M. E. P., et al. (Eds.). (2005). Treating and preventing adolescent mental health disorders: What we know and what we don’t know: A research agenda for improving the mental health of our youth. New York: Oxford University Press.
(p. 49 ) Garmezy, N. (1984). Risk and protective factors in children vulnerable to major mental disorders. In L. Grinspoon (Ed.), Psychiatry 1983 (Vol. III, pp. 99–104, 159–161). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
Ge, X., Natsuaki, M. N., & Conger, R. D. (2006). Trajectories of depressive symptoms and stressful life events among male and female adolescents in divorced and non-divorced families. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 253–273.
Gottesman, I. I. (1974). Developmental genetics and ontogenetic psychology: Overdue détente and propositions from a matchmaker. In A. D. Pick (Ed.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 55–80). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Gottesman, I. I., & Hanson, D. R. (2005). Human development: Biological and genetic processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 10.11–10.24.
Greenberg, M. T., Riggs, N. R., & Blair, C. (2007). The role of preventive interventions in enhancing neurocognitive functioning and promoting competence in adolescence. In D. Romer & E. Walker (Eds.), Adolescent psychopathology and the developing brain: Integrating brain and prevention science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hinshaw, S. P. (2002). Process, mechanism, and explanation related to externalizing behavior in developmental psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30, 431–446.
Hinshaw, S. P., & Anderson, C. A. (1996). Conduct and oppositional defiant disorders. In E. J. Mash & R. A. Barkley (Eds.), Child psychopathology (pp. 113–149). New York: Guilford Press.
Jacquez, F., Cole, D. A., & Searle, B. (2004). Self-perceived competence as a mediator between maternal feedback and depressive symptoms in adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 355–367.
Kiesner, J. (2002). Depressive symptoms in early adolescence: Their relations with classroom problem behavior and peer status. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 12, 463–478.
Kohlberg, L., LaCrosse, J., & Ricks, D. (1972). The predictability of adult mental health from childhood behavior. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Manual of child psychopathology (pp. 1217–1284). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kopp, C. B. (1983). Risk factors in development. In M. M. Haith & J. J. Campos (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 2: Infancy and developmental psychobiology (4th ed., pp. 1081–1188). New York: Wiley.
Kraemer, H. C., Kazdin, A. E., Offord, D., Kessler, R. C., Jensen, P. S., & Kupfer, D. (1997). Coming to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 337–343.
Luthar, S. S. (Ed.). (2003). Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Luthar, S. S. (2006). Resilience in development: A synthesis of research across five decades. In D. Cicchetti, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Risk, disorder, and adaptation, Volume 3 (2nd ed., pp. 739–795). New York: Wiley.
Luthar, S. S., & Cicchetti, D. (2000). The construct of resilience: Implications for interventions and social policies. Development and Psychopathology, 12, 857–885.
Maguin, E., & Loeber, R. (1996). Academic performance and delinquency. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 20, 145–264.
Masten, A. S. (1989). Resilience in development: Implications of the study of successful adaptation for developmental psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti (Ed.), The emergence of a discipline: Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology (Vol. 1, pp. 261–294). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(p. 50 ) Masten, A. S. (1994). Resilience in individual development: Successful adaptation despite risk and adversity. In M. C. Wang & E. W. Gordon (Eds.), Educational resilience in inner-city America: Challenges and prospects (pp. 3–25). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56, 227–238.
Masten, A. S. (2004). Regulatory processes, risk and resilience in adolescent development. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1021(1–11), 1–25.
Masten, A. S. (2006a). Developmental psychopathology: Pathways to the future. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 47–54.
Masten, A. S. (2006b). Promoting resilience in development: A general framework for systems of care. In R. J. Flynn, P. M. Dudding, & J. G. Barber (Eds.), Promoting resilience in child welfare (pp. 3–17). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Masten, A. S., Best, K. M., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: Contributions from the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and Psychopathology, 2, 425–444.
Masten, A. S., & Braswell, L. (1991). Developmental psychopathology: An integrative framework. In P. R. Martin (Ed.), Handbook of behavior therapy and psychological science: An integrative approach (pp. 35–56). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
Masten, A. S., Burt, K., & Coatsworth, J. D. (2006). Competence and psychopathology in development. In D. Cicchetti & D. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 3. Risk, disorder and psychopathology (2nd ed., pp. 710–741) New York: Wiley.
Masten, A. S., Burt, K., Roisman, G. I., Obradović, J., Long, J. D., & Tellegen, A. (2004). Resources and resilience in the transition to adulthood: Continuity and change. Development and Psychopathology, 16, 1071–1094.
Masten, A. S., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1995). Competence, resilience, and psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 2. Risk, disorder, and adaptation (Vol. 2, pp. 715–752). New York: Wiley.
Masten, A. S., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1998). The development of competence in favorable and unfavorable environments: Lessons from research on successful children. American Psychologist, 53, 205–220.
Masten, A. S., Coatsworth, J. D., Neemann, J., Gest, S. D., Tellegen, A., & Garmezy, N. (1995). The structure and coherence of competence from childhood through adolescence. Child Development, 66, 1635–1659.
Masten, A. S., & Curtis, W. J. (2000). Integrating competence and psychopathology: Pathways toward a comprehensive science of adaptation in development. Development and Psychopathology, 12, 529–550.
Masten, A. S., & Gewirtz, A. H. (2006). Vulnerability and resilience in early child development. In K. McCartney & D. Phillips (Eds.), Handbook of early child development (pp. 22–43). New York: Blackwell.
Masten, A. S., Hubbard, J., Gest, S. D., Tellegen, A., Garmezy, N., & Ramirez, M. (1999). Adversity, resources and resilience: Pathways to competence from childhood to late adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 11, 143–169.
Masten, A. S., Obradović, J., & Burt, K. (2006). Resilience in emerging adulthood: Developmental perspectives on continuity and transformation. In J. J. Arnett & J. Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century (pp. 173–190). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
(p. 51 ) Masten, A. S., & Powell, J. L. (2003). A resilience framework for research, policy, and practice. In S. S. Luthar (Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities (pp. 1–25). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Masten, A. S., & Reed, M.-G. J. (2002). Resilience in development. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 74–88). London: Oxford University Press.
Masten, A. S., Roisman, G. I., Long, J. D., Burt, K. B., Obradović, J., Riley, J. R., Boelcke-Stennes, K., & Tellegen, A. (2005). Developmental cascades: Linking academic achievement, externalizing and internalizing symptoms over 20 years. Developmental Psychology, 41, 733–746.
Nangle, D. W., Erdley, C. A., Newman, J. E., Mason, C. A., & Carpenter, E. M. (2003). Popularity, friendship quantity, and friendship quality: Interactive influences on children’s loneliness and depression. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 32, 546–555.
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (2004/5). Alcohol and development in youth: An interdisciplinary overview. Alcohol Research and Health, 28(3).
Patterson, G. R., Forgatch, M. S., Yoerger, K. L., & Stoolmiller, M. (1998). Variables that initiate and maintain an early-onset trajectory for juvenile offending. Development and Psychopathology, 10, 531–547.
Patterson, G. R., Reid, J. B., & Dishion, T. J. (1992). A social interactional approach: Vol. 4. Antisocial boys. Eugene, OR: Castalia.
Rueda, M. R., Rothbart, M. K., Saccomanno, L., & Posner, M. I. (2007). Modifying brain networks underlying self-regulation. In D. Romer & E. Walker (Eds.), Adolescent psychopathology and the developing brain: Integrating brain and prevention science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rutter, M. (1981). Scientific foundations of developmental psychiatry. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Rutter, M. (1986). Child psychiatry: The interface between clinical and developmental research. Psychological Medicine, 16, 151–169.
Rutter, M. (2007). Gene-environment interplay and developmental psychopathology. In A. S. Masten (Ed.), Multilevel dynamics in developmental psychopathology: Pathways to the future. The Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology (Vol. 34). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rutter, M., & Garmezy, N. (1983). Developmental psychopathology. In E. M. Hetherington (Vol. Ed.), P. H. Mussen (Editor), Carmichael’s manual of child psychology: Vol. 4. Social and personality development (pp. 775–911). New York: Wiley.
Rutter, M., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2006). Gene-environment interplay and psychopathology: Multiple varieties but real effects. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 226–261.
Rutter, M., & Sroufe, L. A. (2000). Developmental psychopathology: Concepts and challenges. Developmental Psychopathology, 12, 265–296.
Sameroff, A. J. (2000). Developmental systems, and psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 12, 297–312.
Spear, L. (2007). The developing brain and adolescent-typical behavior patterns: An evolutionary approach. In D. Romer & E. Walker (Eds.), Adolescent psychopathology and the developing brain: Integrating brain and prevention science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sroufe, L. A. (1997). Psychopathology as an outcome of development. Development and Psychopathology, 9, 251–268.
(p. 52 ) Sroufe, L. A., & Rutter, M. (1984). The domain of developmental psychopathology. Child Development, 55, 17–29.
Steinberg, L., Dahl, R., Keating, D., Kupfer, D. J., Masten, A. S., & Pine, D. (2006). The study of developmental psychopathology in adolescence: Integrating affective neuroscience with the study of context. In D. Cicchetti, & D. Cohen (Ed.), Developmental psychopathology (2nd ed., pp. 710–741). New York: Wiley.
Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. S. (Eds.) (2003). Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.
Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Smith, C. A., & Porter, P. K. (2003). Causes and consequences of delinquency: Findings from the Rochester Youth Development Study. In T. P. Thornberry & M. D. Krohn (Eds.), Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies (pp. 11–46). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.
Weissberg, R. P., Kumpfer, K. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2003). Prevention that works for children and youth. American Psychologist, 58, 425–432.
Wright, M. O’D., & Masten, A. S. (2004). Resilience processes in development: Fostering positive adaptation in the context of adversity. In S. Goldstein & R. Brooks (Eds.), Handbook of Resilience in Children (pp. 17–37). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
Wyman, P. A., Sandler, I., Wolchik, S., & Nelson, K. (2000). Resilience as cumulative competence promotion and stress protection: Theory and intervention. In D. Cicchetti, J. Rappaport, I. Sandler & R. P. Weissberg (Eds.), The promotion of wellness in children and adolescents (pp. 133–184). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yates, T. M., & Masten, A. S. (2004). Fostering the future: Resilience theory and the practice of positive psychology. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 521–539). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Yoshikawa, H. (1994). Prevention as cumulative protection: Effects of early family support and education on chronic delinquency and its risks. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 28–54.