Background
This paper initiates a systematic review of primary research on resilience training in high-risk occupations.
Hypotheses/Research Questions
Psychological resilience may be central to Positive Psychology as one way to face the dark side of life. But is resilience training universally effective?
Sample Characteristics and Sample Size
33 papers totalling 10,741 participants, 12 occupations, and eight countries.
Design
To include empirical studies featuring data collection, and create transparency through multidimensional layers, an adaptation of SPICO (Study design, Participants, Interventions, Comparison, and Outcomes) was used, incorporating the Layered Integrated Framework Example, and occupation as follows:
Study Design; LIFE model; Participants; Interventions; Occupation; Comparison; Outcomes (SLPIOCO).
Results
81% (n = 118) of Principal Outcomes reaching statistical significance showed improved wellbeing.
This study suggests:
Resilience training improves wellbeing for people in high-risk occupations, especially when delivered shortly before trauma exposure, and where made relevant to the specific population.
Care must be taken not to erroneously provide resilience training when instead organisational improvements in the cultural and societal domains would be more relevant to alleviating stressors.
Resilience training may be less effective for people who have already been exposed to adverse events (or who are already experiencing the negative sequelae of trauma). Given the moral imperative that people who work in high-risk occupations must be adequately prepared for repeated exposure to adverse stressors, including if they are already suffering from primary or vicarious trauma exposure, further research is recommended to investigate how best to improve the resilience training for this population.
Scientific Contribution
This study suggests that a multidimensional framework is relevant when evaluating the effectiveness of resilience training. Further research is recommended to enhance the understanding of how far resilience interventions can impact into the collective domain, to tap into the depth and power of collective functioning and systemic healing that potentially reside there.