Abstract
ABSTRACTThis study tested a theoretical relationship between trauma exposure, youth coping strategies and peer, family and community level factors on psychological distress and well-being among 399 trauma-affected youth in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to analyze paths and to assess differences in relationships by gender. Psychological distress was measured by self-reports of internalizing problems (depression and anxiety), externalizing problems (aggression and behavioral problems) and somatic complaints (pain without medical cause). Self-reports of happiness, hope and self-esteem were measures of well-being. Findings from this study suggest gender differences in how individual coping strategies and external factors explain mental health resilience in trauma-affected youth. Problem-focused coping strategies were associated with higher psychological distress in both boys and girls. Use of avoidance was associated with better well-being in girls and boys and use of faith-based coping strategies was associated with better well-being in boys. Use of both problem-focused and emotion-focused coping strategies (coping flexibility) resulted in lower psychological distress in boys and girls. The home environment including closeness to family, caregiver post traumatic stress disorder and violence in the home was associated with psychological distress and well-being. Having close peer relationships, village safety and enrollment in school benefited well-being. Results from these SEM of resilience suggest that interventions should (1) work to build the coping repertoire of youth, (2) support reduction in psychological distress through improved family relationships and caregiver mental health and (3) target improved well-being through support of positive peer and community relationships and school enrollment.
Highlights
The field of resilience research was pioneered in the early 1970s with research focusing on positive adaptation for children at risk for psychopathology (Garmezy, 1971; Kolar, 2011).M
Some scholars have argued that contexts of conflict are the “ultimate challenge to resilience” where serious life adversities and exposure to potentially traumatic events affect whole populations and are risk factors for mental health (Barber, 2013)
While resilience can be measured by a variety of indicators such as economic indicators or physiological, a considerable amount of research has focused on resilience in mental health and well-being outcomes
Summary
Subsequent research has focused on identifying factors that allowed some individuals to cope better than others when faced with adversity (Garmezy, 1971; Masten, 2013; Masten, Neemann, & Andenas, 1994; Rutter, 1987; Werner, 1997). Some scholars have argued that contexts of conflict are the “ultimate challenge to resilience” where serious life adversities and exposure to potentially traumatic events affect whole populations and are risk factors for mental health (Barber, 2013). Resilience in mental health and well-being has been defined as “the attainment of desirable social outcomes and emotional adjustment, despite exposure to considerable risk” Research argues that in order to fully understand paths to mental health resilience, there is a need to identify both protective and promotive factors; protective factors decrease the likelihood of mental health problems and promotive factors increase psychological well-being (Patel & Goodman, 2007)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
