Victoria L. Banyard

Over the past two decades, positive psychology research has identified correlates of resilience. Although a range of strengths have been explored, there is a need to identify specific strengths that best support individuals to thrive after interpersonal trauma and adversity. This study assessed the contribution of 24 strengths from the Values in Action (VIA) positive psychology survey, alongside five other measures of strengths identified from resilience research, to identify those that show most promise. In total, 1,440 adults from the United Kingdom and Ireland completed the online VIA survey, and questions on five psychosocial strengths (ecoconnections, mindfulness, psychological endurance, sense of purpose, and social support), adversities (interpersonal victimization and institutional betrayal), and current functioning (subjective well-being, posttraumatic growth, and health-related quality of life). In the first U.K. and Ireland study to assess institutional betrayal alongside other interpersonal adversities and a range of resiliency factors, participants reported high rates of victimization and other trauma. Strengths accounted for greater proportions of variance in all three outcomes compared to adversities. Hope and zest were significantly and positively associated with all three outcomes. Sense of purpose, gratitude, social support, mindfulness, psychological endurance, spirituality, and self-regulation were positively related to at least one outcome. Humor, spirituality, fairness, and leadership were associated with worse functioning in some analyses. Some strengths are more helpful than others for overcoming adversity, and could serve as useful targets for intervention to mitigate the burden of interpersonal adversity. Further work is needed to understand the complexities of strengths on resilience in global contexts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Adolescents and young adults are facing a mental health crisis, with disproportionate burden among youth with diverse gender and sexual identities. Resilience science highlights the importance of modifiable strengths and protective factors as targets for prevention. The Resilience Portfolio Model (RPM) conceptualizes resilience as a multidimensional system of strengths across regulatory, interpersonal, meaning-making, and environmental domains that promote well-being following adversity. This secondary analysis study examined whether strengths across these domains were prospectively associated with mental health and whether these associations differed across social identity groups. Data were drawn from a subsample (N = 1584) from Project Lift Up, a national longitudinal study of 4981 adolescents and young adults (ages 13–22 years), including an oversample of sexual and gender minority youth. Participants completed a baseline survey and follow-ups at six-month intervals. Strengths across the four RPM domains were assessed at different waves (Waves 1–4), and mental health symptoms were assessed at Wave 1 and Wave 5 using the DSM-5-TR Cross-Cutting Symptom Measure. Multiple strengths were independently associated with subsequent global mental health symptoms after adjustment for baseline symptoms, adversity, demographic characteristics, and social determinants of health. Mentoring, hope, self-compassion, and recovering positive affect were associated with lower Wave 5 global symptoms, whereas self-care was associated with higher symptoms. Other interpersonal and environmental strengths were not independently associated with global symptoms. Evidence for moderation was limited to two exploratory interactions involving sexual minority identity, indicating that recovering positive affect and activism may operate differently for these youth. Findings highlight the value of examining multiple dimensions of resilience simultaneously and suggest that regulatory, meaning-making, and selected interpersonal strengths may be particularly relevant to subsequent mental health during adolescence and emerging adulthood.

Background: Self-harm, including suicidal thoughts, self-injurious behavior, and disordered eating, is a major public health concern among adolescents and young adults. Youth increasingly encounter self-harm–related content online, including websites that explicitly encourage harmful behaviors. Although exposure to such content has been linked to poorer mental health, most research is cross-sectional and has not examined longitudinal exposure trajectories. Whether persistent exposure represents a distinct digital risk pattern remains unclear. Objective: This study examined longitudinal trajectories and correlates of exposure to self-harm–encouraging websites over 1 year and tested whether persistent exposure was associated with subsequent suicidal ideation, self-injury, and disordered eating. Methods: We analyzed data from 2197 US youth aged 13 to 22 years who completed waves 2 and 4 of Project Lift Up, a national longitudinal cohort study. Website exposure was categorized into 4 trajectories: none, desist (wave 2 only), new (wave 4 only), and persistent (both waves). Categories reflected reported exposure at the 2 assessment waves rather than the frequency or continuity of website use between assessments. Logistic regression models estimated associations between exposure trajectory and wave 4 suicidal ideation, self-injury, and disordered eating, restricting analyses to participants without the respective outcome at wave 2. Models were adjusted for demographics and wave 2 depression or anxiety symptoms and other mental health indicators. Results: Overall, 26.5% (583/2197) reported exposure to self-harm–encouraging websites at wave 2, and 18.5% (407/2197) reported persistent exposure. Privacy concerns, embarrassment, curiosity, and lack of offline support were associated with greater odds of persistence (adjusted odds ratios [aORs] 1.84‐3.23), whereas accidental exposure was associated with lower odds of persistence (aOR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19‐0.41). Compared with no exposure, persistent exposure was associated with higher odds of suicidal ideation (aOR 1.88, 95% CI 1.24‐2.86; P =.003), self-injury (aOR 3.14, 95% CI 2.05‐4.80; P <.001), and disordered eating (aOR 2.46, 95% CI 1.54‐3.93; P <.001). Adjusted predicted probabilities showed a graded pattern, with persistent exposure associated with the highest predicted probabilities (suicidal ideation: 33.4% vs 21.3%; self-injury: 25.7% vs 10.2%; disordered eating: 11.7% vs 5.3%). New exposure was associated with increased odds of self-injury (aOR 2.32, 95% CI 1.30‐4.15; P =.004) but was not significantly associated with suicidal ideation or disordered eating. The desist trajectory was not significantly associated with outcomes. Conclusions: Persistent exposure to self-harm–encouraging websites may represent a distinct digital risk pattern associated with higher subsequent odds of suicidal ideation, self-injury, and disordered eating. Assessing patterns of repeated website exposure and youths’ motivations for seeking this content—not merely whether exposure occurred—may improve the identification of youth at heightened risk and inform digital prevention and clinical intervention strategies.

Adolescents and young adults have high rates of exposure to the suicide thoughts and behaviors of people in their social networks and also report frequently trying to help. The current study aimed to describe the wide array of helping actions young people take and their perceptions of what was most helpful. Data came from the cross-sectional baseline data of Project Lift-Up, a national longitudinal online survey of adolescents and young adults (ages 13–22 at baseline). Participants who reported exposure to social network members’ suicide thoughts and behaviors were asked about up to 33 helping behaviors they may have tried to use. Participants’ own lived experiences of self-harm were related to greater types of helping for non-suicidal self injury and lower helping for suicide ideation. Lived experience was related to perceiving helping actions to reduce risk or to help the person regulate emotions as most helpful. While the study is limited by its focus on bystanders’ perceptions of helpfulness, the study helps paint a broader picture of the engaged helping young people are providing in their social networks and argues for more nuanced training of potential helpers for this population.

Bystander intervention has become a popular violence prevention strategy for various types of violence, from bullying to gun violence, but may also carry with it bystander burden. The purpose of this manuscript is to understand the impact of being a bystander (we use the term gun violence intervener) who takes action in situations of gun violence and risky gun use, both in terms of a bystander’s own reported emotional reaction and their perceptions of the impact of their actions. The current cross-sectional study used a sub-sample ( n = 2,653) of adolescents and young adults, ages 10 to 34, recruited through the AmeriSpeak panel, who reported being exposed to a gun violence incident where they tried to help. The current sample reporting these bystander experiences comprised three-quarters of the full nationally representative sample. Important contextual factors, including their relationship with the person with access to the firearm, how they found out about it, how long ago it happened, and whether anyone got hurt were explored. Nearly half of interveners felt positively about helping, and emotional benefits were associated with specific helping actions. Findings suggest tailored supports may bolster intervener resilience in gun-related situations. Better understanding the impact of trying to take helpful action will help show ways to better support gun violence interveners and ensure that intervention efforts are both encouraged, suitable and safe.

This study explores patterns of strengths and childhood adversity and how these impact adult wellbeing. Data were from the Growing Up with Opioids study. Participants (n = 1,571, ages 18-60) were recruited through social media. Latent Profile Analysis revealed a seven-class solution: (1) Low Adversity with Very Low Regulatory Strengths, (2) Very Low Adversity with Low Regulatory Strengths, (3) Self-Reliant, (4) Self-Reliance Plus, (5) Regulatory Resilient, (6) Buffered and Connected, and (7) Insulated and Thriving. Among the three adversity and victimization classes (3-5), very high percentages of participants reported growing up in a home with someone who struggled with drugs and/or alcohol. The two classes with the highest strengths, regardless of childhood adversity, had the highest likelihood of positive adult wellbeing indicators. By identifying distinct profiles of adversity and strengths, this research supports a shift toward strengths-based public health strategies that not only mitigate risk but also promote adaptive capacities.

Many psychosocial strengths have been studied in the positive psychology and resilience literatures. This presents a challenge for narrowing down the most helpful strengths for resilience, the process of overcoming trauma and adversity to achieve wellbeing. We bring together measures from two common strengths frameworks to see which ones are most closely associated with thriving after adversity. People who visited the values in action (VIA) website to complete the VIA questionnaire were invited to participate in a research study. 6,430 U.S. participants completed the VIA and answered questions on five psychosocial strengths (sense of purpose, psychological endurance, social support, eco-connections, and mindfulness), two types of adversities (interpersonal victimization and institutional betrayal), and three measures of current functioning (subjective wellbeing [SWB], health-related quality of life [HRQOL], and posttraumatic growth). Logistic regression analyses showed that higher levels of sense of purpose, hope, psychological endurance, zest, self-regulation, social support, and gratitude were significantly associated with above-average scores on all three indicators of functioning. Humor, mindfulness, bravery, perspective taking, love, teamwork, curiosity, and humility were associated with at least one positive outcome. Unexpectedly, several strengths were associated with poorer functioning in at least one analysis, including judgment, prudence, perseverance, creativity, appreciation of beauty, spirituality, kindness, teamwork, and social intelligence. In this first national study of institutional betrayal, it had a unique negative impact on SWB and HRQOL, even after accounting for interpersonal polyvictimization. Some strengths are more helpful for overcoming adversity than others. Although there are doubtless other benefits to these psychosocial strengths, some may create unexpected burdens that can hinder resilience. A basic science of healing can help identify the best intervention targets for people who have been exposed to trauma.