Resilience in children in the aftermath of disasters: A systematic review and a new perspective on individual, interpersonal, group, and intergroup level factors

Abstract

Disasters can impact upon individuals, families, and communities in multiple ways. Research has mainly focused on risk and protective factors relating to the child (individual level) and the family (interpersonal level), not taking into account the processes at the level of social groups. The present review aims to (a) review psychological research on disasters determined by natural events in childhood, (b) distinguish individual, interpersonal, group, and intergroup levels, (c) emphasize the importance of considering resilience as a key outcome. We reviewed 294 studies (in addition to 28 reviews-meta-analyses, and 29 naturalistic interventions), and identified factors at the individual (e.g., demographics, exposure, individual differences), interpersonal (e.g., parentchild relationship, family and school environment), group (e.g., social identity, group membership), and intergroup (relations between different groups) levels. We argue that an integrated model of these factors and their interplay is needed to design interventions to enhance resilience in children and their communities. We extend previous theorizations by providing a wider conceptualization of distress and resilience, and by considering the interplay between factors at different levels. A multidimensional approach to the consequences of disasters in children is crucial to understand

The Emergency of Prosociality: a developmental perspective on altruism and human prosocial behavior in the face of disaster

“…Emergency situations are intrinsically uncertain, with an array of possible impacts on victims and their living conditions, livelihood, health and in the most extreme conditions, life itself. They have consequences on an individual level, as well as on an interpersonal, group, and intergroup level, making the question of prosocial actions amongst individuals, both children and adults, all the more essential in these contexts (Cadamuro et al, 2021). Despite individual danger including the risk of losing one's life, prosocial behaviors are observed in many different emergency situations (e.g., natural disasters, wars, terror attacks…) regardless of their timeframe, location and outcome, although they do not give rise to one single type of behavior.…”

“…Protective factors can buffer the psychological impact of exposure to emergencies and related secondary adversities (Fegert et al, 2020;Masten & Narayan, 2012;Pfefferbaum et al, 2015). Individual-level as well as collective-level factors interact to promote resilience following a disasters (Cadamuro et al, 2021). Peer and caregiver support, adaptive coping, emotion regulation, perceived sense of control, self-esteem, and prosocial behaviors have all been associated with lower psychopathology after an emergency (Fegert et al, 2020;Lengua et al, 2005;Lewis et al, 2015;Masten & Narayan, 2012;Pfefferbaum et al, 2015).…”

Experiencing Change: Rhythms of Everyday Life Between Continuities and Disruptions

“…Studies have also looked at the psychological consequences of sudden social and natural disasters on people's distress levels and behavioral changes, and researchers have investigated factors that influence adaptation and resilience, such as attachment, intelligence, behavioral regulation, and community systems (Masten & Obradovìc, 2008). Researchers have also studied how different factors on the individual level (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, mental health, cognitive skills), and interpersonal and intergroup levels (e.g., social support, social status, intergroup conflict) influence the impact of change on our lives and affect our resources for adaptation (Cadamuro et al, 2021). The broader social, political, and economic factors that affect individual lives have also been taken up, especially within such social theories as Durkheim's classic study on suicide (1897/1951) and more recent research such as Rosa's (2013) work on social acceleration.…”

Alone in the disaster? The independent nature of behavioural instructions for evacuation

“…Consequently, people will respond with such behaviour (and be most open to risk communication) that corresponds to their normative understanding of what constitutes an appropriate response. At the same time, a large body of research on crowd behaviour demonstrated that the collective experience of disaster can translate into a social identity, hence, leading people to think and act as an interdependent entity rather than as independent individuals (Cadamuro et al, 2021; Drury et al, 2009). In sum, one may expect that risk communication that focuses on independent responses falls short in addressing people with an interdependent self‐construal tendency and vice versa.…”