4.7 Article

A conceptual framework for the neurobiological study of resilience

期刊

BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES
卷 38, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X1400082X

关键词

adaptation; allostasis; appraisal; aversion; coping; emotion; emotion regulation; interference; inhibition; mental health; motivation; PASTOR; prevention; reappraisal; recovery; resilience; stress; stressor; trauma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The well-replicated observation that many people maintain mental health despite exposure to severe psychological or physical adversity has ignited interest in the mechanisms that protect against stress-related mental illness. Focusing on resilience rather than pathophysiology in many ways represents a paradigm shift in clinical-psychological and psychiatric research that has great potential for the development of new prevention and treatment strategies. More recently, research into resilience also arrived in the neurobiological community, posing nontrivial questions about ecological validity and translatability. Drawing on concepts and findings from transdiagnostic psychiatry, emotion research, and behavioral and cognitive neuroscience, we propose a unified theoretical framework for the neuroscientific study of general resilience mechanisms. The framework is applicable to both animal and human research and supports the design and interpretation of translational studies. The theory emphasizes the causal role of stimulus appraisal (evaluation) processes in the generation of emotional responses, including responses to potential stressors. On this basis, it posits that a positive (non-negative) appraisal style is the key mechanism that protects against the detrimental effects of stress and mediates the effects of other known resilience factors. Appraisal style is shaped by three classes of cognitive processes - positive situation classification, reappraisal, and interference inhibition -that can be investigated at the neural level. Prospects for the future development of resilience research are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据