Resilience: what it means, common myths and what helps build it

The American Psychological Association (APA) defines resilience as the process of adapting well in the face of adversity, trauma, tragedy, threats or significant sources of stress, such as family and relationship problems, serious health problems, or workplace and financial stressors. As well as “bouncing back” from hard experiences, it can also involve profound personal growth (APA, 2020).

Resilience is not necessarily a personality trait that only some people are born with. Certain factors may make some people more resilient than others, but according to the APA resilience involves behaviours and thoughts that anyone can learn and develop (APA, 2020). Researchers define it in slightly different ways: as a stable path of healthy functioning after a highly adverse event, or as a process of drawing on resources to sustain well-being. Most definitions share the idea of healthy adaptation over time after adversity, and resilience is seen less as present or absent than as a matter of degree that can differ from one area of life to another (Southwick et al., 2014). A researcher who studied children growing up with adversity concluded that the most surprising finding was the ordinariness of resilience, which usually arises from the normal workings of human adaptive systems rather than from anything extraordinary (Masten, 2001).

This guide uses research to describe how resilience differs from toughness, positivity, simply enduring and grit, how common it is after hard events, what goes with it, what resilience questionnaires such as the Korean resilience quotient can and cannot tell you, and what helps. It also covers what goes wrong when “resilience” is used to blame people who are struggling. mind.io does not offer a resilience test.

Being resilient does not mean not going through difficulty or distress. Emotional pain and stress are common in people who have been through major adversity, and the APA says the road to resilience is likely to involve considerable emotional distress (APA, 2020). The trauma researcher Rachel Yehuda says that some of the most resilient people she knows have had, or still have, very severe post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that they struggle with every day, without succumbing to its negative effects (Southwick et al., 2014). Not crying, or acting as if nothing happened, is not what resilience means.

Nor is it the same as always thinking positively. The APA does encourage a hopeful outlook, but it also recommends not catastrophising difficulties and adopting a balanced, realistic way of thinking (APA, 2020). Researchers point out that when people set out to change themselves, high expectations far from reality can end in disappointment and a sense of oneself as a failure, so too much optimism can backfire (Mahdiani & Ungar, 2021). The resilience researcher George Bonanno says the right way to cope depends on the situation, so there is no single perfect way to cope (Southwick et al., 2014). What research says about the “law of attraction”, the idea that thoughts alone draw what you want, is in the law of attraction guide.

It also differs from gritting your teeth and getting through it alone. The APA notes that painful events can lead some people to isolate themselves, but that accepting help and support from people who care about you is important, and that getting help when you need it is crucial in building resilience (APA, 2020).

Grit is a separate idea. It was defined as “perseverance and passion for long-term goals”, and in the first studies it accounted for an average of 4% of the differences in success outcomes such as educational attainment, university grades, staying on at the US Military Academy at West Point and spelling bee rankings. Grit was highly correlated with conscientiousness, one of the Big Five traits, though it still predicted success over and beyond IQ and conscientiousness (Duckworth et al., 2007). If resilience is about adapting well after adversity, grit is closer to holding on to a goal. Researchers also point out that stepping away from a path that does not suit you can be a wise and resilient move (Mahdiani & Ungar, 2021). A growth mindset, the belief that abilities can be developed through effort and learning, is also a different idea from grit and is covered separately in the growth mindset guide. How well grit predicts success, and how it differs from conscientiousness, is covered in the grit guide.

Researchers follow people who have been through a major event, assessing them several times over months or years, and sort the course of their reactions into a few patterns. The “resilient” pattern is a relatively brief period of disruption followed by continued health, and it is a different path from struggling for a while and then gradually recovering (Southwick et al., 2014; Bonanno, 2004). Bonanno argued that this kind of resilience is more common than is often believed (Bonanno, 2004).

A review of 54 studies (67 cases) of how people fare after potentially traumatic events found the resilient pattern was the most common, at 65.7% on average. Recovery after a difficult period came to 20.8%, long-lasting symptoms (chronic) to 10.6% and symptoms that appeared later (delayed) to 8.9%; each share was averaged separately, so they do not add up to 100%. The review only included studies of more than 100 people assessed at least three times, with the first assessment, as a rule, within a year of the event (two years for studies that began before it). The events included military deployment, accidents, war, natural disasters, spinal cord injury and illnesses such as SARS and breast cancer; most studies looked at PTSD symptoms after a single event such as a trauma or accident in adulthood. The resilient pattern was more common on average in studies of single events, while recovery and chronic patterns were more common after long-lasting adversity (Galatzer-Levy et al., 2018).

In a probability sample of 2,752 people in the New York area surveyed in the 6 months after the 11 September 2001 attacks, 65.1% had no PTSD symptoms or just one, the study’s definition of resilience. The share was lower among people who were more highly exposed, but it never fell below one third, even in the exposure groups with the steepest rises in PTSD (Bonanno et al., 2006). A study that followed older couples from before one partner’s death is covered in the guide to grief.

The shares of each pattern depend heavily on how the statistical model is specified, though. Earlier studies of life satisfaction around the death of a spouse, divorce and job loss in a German household panel reported 58.7%, 71.8% and 69.0% in the resilient pattern. When other researchers re-analysed the same data with the same models, the resilient pattern was still the most common, but when they relaxed two strict assumptions of those models it consistently came out as the least common. They warned that any categorical statement about “rates of resilience” carries errors (Infurna & Luthar, 2016).

So even if “most people turn out fine” holds in many studies, it does not mean you have failed if you are still struggling. Taking a long time is one of the common courses too, and it is a reason to get support.

An analysis of the same 11 September survey (2,752 people) found that gender, age, race or ethnicity, education, level of exposure, change in income, social support, how often people had chronic illness, and recent and past stressful life events each predicted resilience. This analysis defined resilience as zero or one PTSD symptom and described it as going with low levels of depression and substance use (Bonanno et al., 2007). Bonanno sums up that economic resources, social resources, personality and genes all play a part, but that no single demographic, personality or biological factor has been shown to predict or enhance resilience by more than a small degree (Southwick et al., 2014).

This is what researchers call the resilience paradox: resilience is the most common outcome after potential trauma, yet the factors linked with it are generally so modest that it is not possible to tell accurately who will be resilient and who will not (Bonanno, 2021). The factors below are therefore tendencies that go together on average, not guarantees that you will be fine if you have them.

Connection with others comes up again and again. Many studies indicate that social support is essential for physical and psychological health, and it may buffer genetic and environmental vulnerabilities and confer resilience to stress, though specific interventions to increase social support for people with mental illness or at higher risk still need more research and development (Ozbay et al., 2007). If loneliness has lasted a while, see loneliness: what helps.

Flexibility in how you cope also draws attention. In a study of New York college students after the 11 September attacks, students who were better at both deliberately enhancing and suppressing their emotional expression in a lab task had less distress by the end of their second year, even after their initial distress and other factors were taken into account (Bonanno et al., 2004). Bonanno names three parts of flexibility: reading the situation, having a range of ways to cope, and adjusting using feedback (Southwick et al., 2014).

Sleep is linked too. A meta-analysis of 63 studies in healthy people found weak positive correlations between resilience and sleep duration (r = 0.11) and sleep quality (r = 0.27); in studies that followed people over time, the correlation with sleep quality was 0.18. There was evidence of high publication bias among the sleep quality studies, and correlations cannot show which causes which (Arora et al., 2022). Sleep problems are covered in insomnia: what helps.

mind.io does not offer a resilience test. The Korean “resilience quotient” test, often called the KRQ-53, is a 53-item questionnaire printed in Kim Joo-han’s popular book Resilience (Kim, 2011); its total adds up three scores, for self-regulation, interpersonal skills and positivity (Lee, 2011). Before that, a research team including Kim had developed a 27-item version for adolescents with 618 middle-school, 796 high-school and 420 university students and reported its validity in a journal, with nine sub-factors grouped into control, positivity and sociability (Shin et al., 2009).

Scales widely used in research outside Korea include the 25-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) (Connor & Davidson, 2003), whose Korean version showed good reliability and validity in 576 nurses, university students and firefighters (Baek et al., 2010), and the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), built to measure the ability to bounce back from stress itself rather than the resources that may promote resilience (Smith et al., 2008). This guide prints no items or cut-off scores from any scale.

Bonanno points out that commonly used resilience questionnaires include only a few presumed key predictors and show virtually no ability to predict who will be resilient after potential trauma (Bonanno, 2021). A review of 43 randomised trials of resilience training likewise counted defining resilience as a trait or a sum of protective factors, and measuring it with unsuitable instruments, among the major problems, and proposed measuring it instead as change in mental health relative to the amount of stress a person has faced (Chmitorz et al., 2018). Resilience can also differ between areas of life: someone who adapts well at work may not in their relationships (Southwick et al., 2014). A low score is not a verdict that you “lack resilience”, and a high score is no guarantee you will cope with whatever comes.

Studies pooling resilience-training programmes generally report small to moderate effects, but the evidence is not yet solid. A meta-analysis of 11 randomised controlled trials found that resilience programmes moderately raised resilience scores (effect size 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.64), with subgroup analyses suggesting that programmes based on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), on mindfulness, or on a mix of the two were all effective. Two of the authors were associated with a company that offers resilience training (Joyce et al., 2018). A larger meta-analysis of 268 studies (1,584 independent samples) found an overall effect of g = 0.48 across outcomes that included not only resilience but also coping, emotion, symptoms and well-being; the authors called this small but statistically significant, and noted that effects varied widely and many fell short of practical significance (Liu et al., 2020).

A Cochrane review of 44 randomised trials in healthcare professionals found that, right after the programme, people who had the training may report higher resilience than control groups (standardised mean difference, SMD 0.45; 12 studies, 690 people), lower depression (SMD −0.29; 14 studies, 788 people) and lower stress (SMD −0.61; 17 studies, 997 people), but there was little or no evidence of an effect on anxiety or well-being. The certainty of all these results was very low, and the lack of medium- and long-term data means they should be read cautiously (Kunzler et al., 2020). A review of training studies has also found many problems with how they define and measure resilience and how they are designed (Chmitorz et al., 2018).

Exercise has been studied too. A meta-analysis of 10 randomised or quasi-experimental studies found that exercise programmes raised resilience scores compared with groups that did not exercise (no intervention, a waiting list or usual care; SMD 0.49), with programmes longer than 8 weeks (0.64) doing better than those of 8 weeks or less (0.30). But the studies were few, all measured resilience only right after the programme, and they relied on self-reported scores (C. Liu et al., 2026).

The APA suggests connecting with empathetic, trustworthy people, looking after your body with enough sleep, good food, water and regular exercise, not masking pain with alcohol or other substances, helping others, and breaking problems into manageable pieces and starting with what you can do today (APA, 2020). This list is practical guidance, not a summary of trials testing each item.

Practising a kinder way of treating yourself in hard times is another option. A meta-analysis of 27 randomised trials of self-compassion interventions found moderate improvements compared with control groups in self-compassion (g = 0.75), stress (0.67), depression (0.66) and anxiety (0.57), though publication bias may be present (Ferrari et al., 2019). This meta-analysis did not report resilience itself as an outcome. Practices are in how to build self-compassion, everyday stress in how to relieve stress, and exhaustion from work in how to recover from burnout.

“Resilience” should not be used to blame people who are struggling. Researchers warn that talk of resilience can make the individual the only one expected to change, steer people towards positive thinking instead of questioning injustices such as racism, and be misused to make people tolerate inequality or to hand those without power the responsibility for changing their lives (Mahdiani & Ungar, 2021). People need basic social and material resources to weather adversity, and building healthy family and community environments is seen as one of the most important ways to foster resilience (Southwick et al., 2014). When the situation itself is the problem, such as overwork or discrimination, getting help to change it or get out of it may come before trying to endure more.

The APA says it is important to get professional help if, after a traumatic or other stressful experience, you cannot function as well as you would like or manage basic daily activities (APA, 2020). If your mood has been low for more than 2 weeks, you cannot stop worrying, you can barely sleep or the very thought of work exhausts you, you can look at this with the depression check-in (PHQ-9), the anxiety check-in (GAD-7) and the burnout self-check. Self-checks are not a diagnosis. If memories or nightmares keep coming back after a major event, see trauma and PTSD.

Talk to a school or workplace counselling service, your family doctor or a mental health professional. Outside Korea, your family doctor is a good first step to local support.

If hard times pile up until you feel you cannot hold on any longer, or you have thoughts of ending your life, that is not because you lack resilience. Please do not carry it alone, and reach out to a crisis line right away: call or text 988 in the US and Canada, call Samaritans on 116 123 in the UK and Ireland, or find a line at findahelpline.com elsewhere. If you are in immediate danger, contact your local emergency services.

Q. Are people born resilient? A. Not necessarily. According to the APA, resilience is not necessarily a trait that only some people possess, and it involves behaviours and thoughts that anyone can learn and develop (APA, 2020). Resources, personality and genes play a part, but each only a small one (Southwick et al., 2014).

Q. Where can I take a resilience test or measure my resilience quotient? A. mind.io does not offer a resilience test. The Korean resilience quotient (KRQ-53) is a 53-item questionnaire printed in a popular book (Lee, 2011), and scales widely used in research outside Korea include the CD-RISC and the BRS. But scores on such questionnaires do little to predict who will be resilient (Bonanno, 2021). You can look at how you treat yourself in hard times with the self-compassion test.

Q. Do resilient people feel less pain? A. Not necessarily. Resilient people still go through difficulty and distress, and the road to resilience is likely to involve considerable emotional distress (APA, 2020).

Q. I hear most people turn out fine, so why am I still struggling? A. In a review of 54 studies the resilient pattern averaged 65.7%, but recovering after a difficult period was also common, at 20.8% (Galatzer-Levy et al., 2018), and these shares change a great deal with how the statistical model is specified (Infurna & Luthar, 2016). Struggling for a long time is not a failure; it is a reason to get support.

Q. Do resilience training programmes work? A. Small to moderate effects have been reported (Joyce et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2020), but in a Cochrane review of programmes for healthcare professionals the certainty of the evidence was very low, and little is known about whether the effects last (Kunzler et al., 2020).

Q. Things keep going wrong and I feel like disappearing. A. That is not because you lack resilience. Please do not carry this alone. Reach out to a crisis line right away: call or text 988 in the US and Canada, call Samaritans on 116 123 in the UK and Ireland, or find a line at findahelpline.com elsewhere. If you are in immediate danger, contact your local emergency services.

References: American Psychological Association (2020), Building your resilience, https://www.apa.org/topics/resilience/building-your-resilience; Southwick, S. M., Bonanno, G. A., Masten, A. S., Panter-Brick, C., & Yehuda, R. (2014), Resilience definitions, theory, and challenges: interdisciplinary perspectives, European Journal of Psychotraumatology 5, 25338, https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v5.25338; Masten, A. S. (2001), Ordinary magic: resilience processes in development, American Psychologist 56(3), 227-238, https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227; Mahdiani, H., & Ungar, M. (2021), The dark side of resilience, Adversity and Resilience Science 2, 147-155, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42844-021-00031-z; Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007), Grit: perseverance and passion for long-term goals, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 92(6), 1087-1101, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087; Bonanno, G. A. (2004), Loss, trauma, and human resilience: have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events?, American Psychologist 59(1), 20-28, https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20; Galatzer-Levy, I. R., Huang, S. H., & Bonanno, G. A. (2018), Trajectories of resilience and dysfunction following potential trauma: a review and statistical evaluation, Clinical Psychology Review 63, 41-55, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2018.05.008; Bonanno, G. A., Galea, S., Bucciarelli, A., & Vlahov, D. (2006), Psychological resilience after disaster: New York City in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attack, Psychological Science 17(3), 181-186, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01682.x; Infurna, F. J., & Luthar, S. S. (2016), Resilience to major life stressors is not as common as thought, Perspectives on Psychological Science 11(2), 175-194, https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615621271; Bonanno, G. A., Galea, S., Bucciarelli, A., & Vlahov, D. (2007), What predicts psychological resilience after disaster? The role of demographics, resources, and life stress, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 75(5), 671-682, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.75.5.671; Bonanno, G. A. (2021), The resilience paradox, European Journal of Psychotraumatology 12(1), 1942642, https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2021.1942642; Ozbay, F., Johnson, D. C., Dimoulas, E., Morgan, C. A., Charney, D., & Southwick, S. (2007), Social support and resilience to stress: from neurobiology to clinical practice, Psychiatry (Edgmont) 4(5), 35-40, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2921311/; Bonanno, G. A., Papa, A., Lalande, K., Westphal, M., & Coifman, K. (2004), The importance of being flexible: the ability to both enhance and suppress emotional expression predicts long-term adjustment, Psychological Science 15(7), 482-487, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00705.x; Arora, T., Grey, I., Östlundh, L., Alamoodi, A., Omar, O. M., Hubert Lam, K. B., & Grandner, M. (2022), A systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the relationship between sleep duration/quality, mental toughness and resilience amongst healthy individuals, Sleep Medicine Reviews 62, 101593, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2022.101593; Lee, M. H. (2011), Column on Kim Joo-han’s book “Resilience” [in Korean], Pressian, https://www.pressian.com/pages/articles/66135; Kim, J. H. (2011), Resilience [in Korean], Wisdom House; Shin, W. Y., Kim, M. G., & Kim, J. H. (2009), Development and validation of a resilience quotient test [in Korean], Studies on Korean Youth 20(4), 105-131; Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. T. (2003), Development of a new resilience scale: the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), Depression and Anxiety 18(2), 76-82, https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113; Baek, H. S., Lee, K. U., Joo, E. J., Lee, M. Y., & Choi, K. S. (2010), Reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Psychiatry Investigation 7(2), 109-115, https://doi.org/10.4306/pi.2010.7.2.109; Smith, B. W., Dalen, J., Wiggins, K., Tooley, E., Christopher, P., & Bernard, J. (2008), The brief resilience scale: assessing the ability to bounce back, International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 15(3), 194-200, https://doi.org/10.1080/10705500802222972; Chmitorz, A., Kunzler, A., Helmreich, I., et al. (2018), Intervention studies to foster resilience: a systematic review and proposal for a resilience framework in future intervention studies, Clinical Psychology Review 59, 78-100, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2017.11.002; Joyce, S., Shand, F., Tighe, J., Laurent, S. J., Bryant, R. A., & Harvey, S. B. (2018), Road to resilience: a systematic review and meta-analysis of resilience training programmes and interventions, BMJ Open 8(6), e017858, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017858; Liu, J. J. W., Ein, N., Gervasio, J., Battaion, M., Reed, M., & Vickers, K. (2020), Comprehensive meta-analysis of resilience interventions, Clinical Psychology Review 82, 101919, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101919; Kunzler, A. M., Helmreich, I., Chmitorz, A., König, J., Binder, H., Wessa, M., & Lieb, K. (2020), Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare professionals, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 7, CD012527, https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012527.pub2; Liu, C., Liang, J., Nie, Y., et al. (2026), The effect of exercise interventions on enhancing psychological resilience: a systematic review and meta-analysis, BMC Psychology 14, 1167, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-026-04940-5; Ferrari, M., Hunt, C., Harrysunker, A., Abbott, M. J., Beath, A. P., & Einstein, D. A. (2019), Self-compassion interventions and psychosocial outcomes: a meta-analysis of RCTs, Mindfulness 10(8), 1455-1473, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01134-6; Ministry of Health and Welfare (2025), Community mental health welfare centres and the mental health crisis line [in Korean], https://www.mohw.go.kr/menu.es?mid=a10706040100