Journal of Counseling Psychology © 2011 American Psychological Association

2011, Vol. 58, No. 4, 610 – 617 0022-0167/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0025195

Resilience: Enhancing Well-Being Through the Positive Cognitive Triad

Winnie W. S. Mak, Ivy S. W. Ng, and Celia C. Y. Wong

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

The present study tested whether the relationships among resilience, life satisfaction, and depression
could be explained by positive views toward the self, the world, and the future (positive cognitive triad).
Structural equation modeling and mediation analyses were conducted based on 1,419 college students in
Hong Kong. The model of positive cognitive triad as mediator between resilience and well-being fit the
data (comparative fit index ⫽ .94, Tucker–Lewis index ⫽ .93, root-mean-square error of approxima-
tion ⫽ .08). Findings showed resilience to be significantly related to positive cognitions about the self,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

the world, and the future. Individuals who had higher level of resilience held significantly more positive
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

cognitions and reported significantly higher levels of life satisfaction and lower levels of depression. The
utility of the positive cognitive triad as the mechanism through which resilience enhances well-being was
supported. Applications in cultivating resilience and positive cognitions in counseling services are
discussed.

Keywords: resilience, positive cognitive triad, Chinese

Although college entrance offers students opportunities for per-
sonal growth and development, college life can be frustrating and
stressful. In addition to academic stress, financial strain, time
constraints, or interpersonal stress can impact students’ well-being
(Rocha-Singh, 1994). An optimal amount of stress can be stimu-
lating and encouraging; however, when stress is overwhelming,
emotional problems may occur. Therefore, for many years, coun-
selors and researchers have investigated factors that protect stu-
dents from the negative consequences of stress and promote their
overall well-being. Particularly in many Asian countries (e.g.,
Hong Kong, Japan, mainland China, Singapore), due to the strong
focus placed on academic success and familial expectations that
they pursue academic excellence, students put heavy pressure on
themselves to excel academically. Such intensive stress may result
in the deterioration in mental health and well-being, with cases
resulting in depression and suicide (Ang & Huan, 2006; Zeng & Le
Tendre, 1998). On the other hand, resilience is repeatedly found to
be negatively associated with psychological distress among col-
lege students (Beasley, Thompson, & Davidson, 2003; Mathis &
Lecci, 1999), suggesting that it may serve an important role in
helping students to adapt functionally in the midst of challenges or
difficulties. To promote students’ resilience in the face of stressors
and hardships, we must understand the possible mechanisms
through which resilience affects functioning and positive change.
In order to understand the mechanism by which students adapt
to the daily stressors of college life, we proposed and tested a
pattern of positive thinking that may explain the linkage between
resilience and well-being. Resilience has been a major construct in
positive psychology and is believed to play an important role in
fostering one’s well-being. Both self-reported and observer-based
measures of trait resilience were found to be related to individuals’
global adjustment, work and social functioning, and physical and
psychological health (Klohnen, 1996). In a longitudinal study of
midlife adjustment among women, trait resilience at the beginning
of midlife has been found to be positively related to life satisfac-
tion and negatively related to psychological distress in later midlife
(Klohnen, Vandewater, & Young, 1996). Although varied defini-
tions have been proposed (Kaplan, 1999), resilience is broadly
defined as the ability to bounce back from adversity and to suc-
cessfully adapt to the demands of stressful situations (Tugade &
Frederickson, 2004). It refers to positive adjustment in spite of
challenging or threatening circumstances (Masten, Best, & Gar-
mezy, 1990). Across varied models of resilience, emphasis is
placed on the transactional interaction between the person and the
environment (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000), wherein indi-
viduals mobilize personal and social resources in response to the
stressful situations in order to protect themselves from risks (Block
& Kremen, 1996; Eriksson & Lindstrom, 2005; Rew & Horner,
2003). For the present study, we took the trait and dynamic models
of resilience into account by conceptualizing resilience as a dis-
positional capacity that is conducive to adaptive functioning
through the way individuals construe themselves, their social sur-
roundings, and their future.

This article was published Online First September 5, 2011.

Winnie W. S. Mak, Ivy S. W. Ng, and Celia C. Y. Wong, Department
of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Ivy S. W. Ng is now at LaSalle Investment Management Securities Hong
Kong.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Winnie
W. S. Mak, Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong
Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong, China. E-mail: wwsmak@
psy.cuhk.edu.hk
Resilience, Positive Cognitive Triad, and Well-Being
Though numerous results have indicated that resilience can
buffer individuals from adversity, proportionately fewer studies
have focused on identifying the underlying mechanism. Among
these were Tugade and Frederickson (2004), which postulated trait
resilience to be associated with the use of positive affect. In other
words, resilient individuals are suggested to make use of positive

610
 RESILIENCE AND POSITIVE COGNITIVE TRIAD
emotions to bounce back from adversities. Although the mediation
of positive emotionality has been supported (Tugade & Frederick-
son, 2004), how positive emotions are cultivated was left unan-
swered. According to the cognitive model of depression (Beck,
1987), the way individuals perceive and interpret adversity affects
the way they feel and how they relate to the world. Depressed
individuals have been found to view themselves, their world, and
their future in a negative fashion, which is referred to as the
negative cognitive triad (Beck, 1987). We propose, conversely,
that resilient individuals may have a positive view about them-
selves, the world, and the future (hereafter referred to as the
positive cognitive triad), which promotes their positive emotion-
ality and life satisfaction and protects them from depression. In
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
other words, being resilient promotes the development of positive
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
cognitions about themselves, the world, and the future that lead to
the enhancement of well-being and amelioration of distress.
Positive View of the Self and Well-Being
Resilient people are often characterized as being self-
efficacious, confident, and determined (Wagnild & Young, 1990;
Werner & Smith, 1992). People with such characteristics are likely
to generate more positive self-talk that boosts their self-image and
promotes self-agency. With such positive frame of mind, resilient
people develop a positive view about themselves, which prompts
them to seek out and attend to experiences that positively reflect on
themselves to maximize their psychological well-being (Walsh &
Banaji, 1997). To thrive in the midst of hardships, resilient indi-
viduals need to have a strong faith in themselves and to believe
that they are worthy of better conditions in life. People with high
trait resilience have been found to have high self-esteem (Benetti
& Kambouropoulos, 2006) and self-confidence (Klohnen, 1996).
Such high self-regard pushes resilient individuals to persist and
endure in times of struggle (Smokowski, Reynolds, & Bezruczko,
1999).
Self-esteem has been found to be an essential feature of mental
health and an important protective factor against the development
of mental disorders and behavioral problems, such as depression,
anxiety, violence, and substance use (Lillehoj, Trudeau, Spoth, &
Wickrama, 2004). It was suggested that people with high self-
esteem adopt adaptive strategies that can promote growth, such as
requesting help and spending more time and effort solving prob-
lems (Brooks, 1994). In particular, self-esteem was found to be
associated with various psychological and physical health indica-
tors (i.e., loneliness, feeling trapped, suicidal ideation, subjective
health, and substance use) among homeless youths (Kidd & Sha-
har, 2008). It was also found to act as a mediator between eco-
logical risk (e.g., neighborhood decay and stressful life event) and
depression (Prelow, Weaver, & Swenson, 2006), thus revealing
positive self-view’s protective role against adversity.
Positive View of the World and Well-Being
Because studies have demonstrated that resilient people have an
energetic approach to life, are curious and open to new experi-
ences, and have interpersonal insight (Klohnen, 1996; Tugade &
Frederickson, 2004), we hypothesized that trait resilience would be
associated with positive view of the world. People with high level
of resilience tend to have a positive outlook toward the world,
611
which motivates them to bounce back from adversity and to move
forward (Parr, Montgomery, & DeBell, 1998). With a positive
view of the environment, they are more capable of seeing oppor-
tunities in difficult situations and finding solutions for tackling
problems (Wang, 2009). They are also more likely to solicit
external support to help themselves. When experiencing stress,
individuals with more social resources are less likely to perceive
the situation as threatening. Instead, they regard social resources as
support and hence have a greater sense of mastery when facing
challenges (Cohen & McKay, 1984). In a longitudinal study
among college students, individuals who held a positive view of
the world enjoyed better subjective well-being, including purpose
in life, environmental mastery, and self-acceptance (Feist, Bodner,
Jacobs, Miles, & Tan, 1995).
Positive View of the Future and Well-Being
Research suggests that resilient individuals display confident
optimism for the future (Klohnen, 1996; Werner & Smith, 1992).
Previous research has demonstrated that college students with a
high level of hope are less influenced by the negative impact of
stress and hence have fewer health problems (Zaleski, Levey-
Thors, & Schiaffino, 1998). Moreover, they are likely to embrace
self-agentic talk, such as “I can do this” and “I am not going to be
stopped” (Snyder, LaPointe, Crowson, & Early, 1998). When
individuals come across problems, self-agency helps them apply
the requisite motivation to the best alternative pathway (Snyder,
1994). Previous research indicated that people with a high level of
hope have better problem-solving skills. They are more likely to
accept challenges and adopt more active coping strategies rather
than passive-avoidant coping strategies (Horton & Wallander,
2001; Scheff, 1990; Thoits, 1995). As a result, they are more likely
to sustain under stress or in the face of problems (Ong, Edwards,
& Bergeman, 2006). In a longitudinal study on hope, it was found
that hope could predict middle school students’ life satisfaction
and externalizing and internalizing behaviors over a 1-year period
(Valle, Huebner, & Suldo, 2006).
Aims of the Study
Resilience is proposed to foster positive views of the self, the
world, and the future within individuals. Such intrapersonal cog-
nitive capacity (positive cognitive triad) propels individuals to
better cope with stress and adversity and facilitates their overall
well-being. In the present study, we examined the impact of
resilience in the adoption of a positive cognitive triad on life
satisfaction and depression. Although resilience is developed
based on socialization practices and learning in the family and the
environment (Werner, 1993), positive cognitive triad reflects more
of the current cognitive schema of the individuals, which actively
interact with the current experiences that individuals are facing.
Moreover, although the conceptual links among resilience, life
satisfaction, and depression mentioned above are strong, few em-
pirical studies have directly examined their relationships with an
explicit attempt to tie them together. Likewise, the mediating role
of positive cognitive triad between trait resilience and different
facets of well-being has yet to be examined. Therefore, our aim in
this study was to test the mediating role of positive cognitive triad
between trait resilience and well-being.
 612 MAK, NG, AND WONG
Method
Participants
The sample consisted of 1,419 Chinese young adults, 660 male
and 759 female, recruited from seven universities and other tertiary
institutions in Hong Kong. The mean age of the participants was
20.9 years (SD ⫽ 3.21). Among them, 33.4% were first-year
undergraduates, 24.9% were second-year undergraduates, 26.5%
were third-year or above undergraduates, 8.2% were college grad-
uates, and 2% were graduate students. Another 5% came from
other tertiary institutions, such as community colleges and voca-
tional training schools.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Procedure
Participants were recruited on the Internet platform. Invitation
e-mails about the study were disseminated to mailing lists for each
of the seven local universities, forums, and newsgroups for tertiary
students. After reading the description of the study and indicating
their informed consent, individuals completed the online question-
naire. All participants could voluntarily enroll in a random draw,
out of which five of the participants were awarded HK$100
(⬃US$13) for their participation in the study. The study was
approved by the Survey and Behavioral Research Ethics Commit-
tee of the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Measures
When available, the Chinese version of a measure was used.
Measures lacking an available Chinese version, including the
Ego-Resiliency Scale, State Hope Scale, and View of the World
Scale, were translated into Chinese with the back translation
method (Brislin, 1970) by two independent translators who were
bilingual in Chinese and English. Discrepancies were reconciled
by the panel before the translation was finalized and used.
Demographic information. Participants provided demo-
graphic information including age, gender, and level of education.
Resilience. Trait resilience was measured with the 14-item
Ego-Resiliency Scale (Block & Kremen, 1996), which has been
validated among Chinese (Yu & Zhang, 2007). It was administered
to assess psychological resilience, which is the capacity to modify
responses to changing situational demands, especially frustrating
or stressful encounters. Each item was rated on a 4-point Likert
scale, from (1) does not apply at all to (4) applies very strongly.
Criterion validity was supported by its associations with various
well-being indicators (e.g., subjective happiness, psychology well-
being, depression; Letzring, Block, & Funder, 2005). The scale’s
internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) in the present study was
.79. Three parcels were used as indicators in model testing, with
factor loadings ranging from .64 to .75.
View of the self. The Chinese version of the 10-item Rosen-
berg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) was used to measure
self-esteem (i.e., how people look at themselves in a positive way).
Participants rated items on a 4-point Likert scale, from 1 (not at all
true) to 4 (exactly true), with higher scores indicating higher
self-esteem. Consistent with the findings in previous study that
Chinese have a different interpretation of the meaning of the item
“I wish I could have more respect for myself” (Farruggia, Chen,
Greenberger, Dmitrieva, & Macek, 2004), the item was found to
have a close-to-zero corrected item–total correlation (r ⫽ .05) in
the present study. Thus, it was dropped in later analyses. Internal
consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) in the present study was .86. Three
parcels were used as indicators in model testing, with factor
loadings ranging from .80 to .92.
View of the world. The 10-item View of the World Scale,
which was one of the subscales in the Cognitive Triad Inventory
(Beckham, Leber, Watkins, Boyer, & Cook, 1986), was used to
assess the extent to which individuals held a negative view toward
the world and their perceived social support. Participant ratings
were made on an 8-point Likert scale from 1 (totally disagree) to
8 (totally agree). Criterion validity was supported by its associa-
tions with various well-being indicators (i.e., self-esteem, hope-
lessness, depression; Beckham et al., 1986). In the original version
of the View of the World Scale, the items were bidimensional,
measuring both positive and negative views of the world, with the
positive items recoded to assess the negative view of the world.
The correlation between the mean score of items assessing the
positive view of the world and the mean score of items assessing
the negative view of the world was moderate (r ⫽ ⫺.41) in the
present study, which suggested the recoded negative items may not
be equivalent to the positive view of the world. Thus, only five
positively worded items were retained. Individuals with higher
scores held a higher level of positive views toward the world and
social support. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) of the five
positively worded items in the present study was .81. Three parcels
served as indicators in model testing, with factor loadings ranging
from .69 to .84.
View of the future. The six-item State Hope Scale (Snyder et
al., 1996) was used to measure the extent of hope individuals held
toward ongoing events in their lives. Participants rated items on an
8-point Likert scale, from 1 (definitely false) to 8 (definitely true),
with higher scores indicating greater level of hope. Construct
validity and criterion validity were supported by its associations
with dispositional hope, state self-esteem, and positive and
negative affect (Snyder et al., 1996). However, Item 1 had
almost zero item–total correlation (r ⫽ .07), and it was dropped
in later analyses. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) for
the remaining five items was .86 in the present study. Three
parcels served as indicators in model testing, with factor load-
ing ranging from .80 to .88.
Life satisfaction. Life satisfaction was measured with the
Chinese version of the five-item Satisfaction With Life Scale
(Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985), together with one
item from the Delighted–Terrible Scale (Andrews & Withey,
1976). This six-item measure has been used to assess individuals’
cognitive and affective evaluations of their life and has been
validated among Chinese college students (Kwan, Bond, & Sin-
gelis, 1997). Participants rated on a 7-point Likert scale, from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), with higher scores indi-
cating greater life satisfaction. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s
alpha) of the scale was .91 in the present study. Three parcels were
used as indicators in model testing, with factor loadings ranging
from .87 to .91.
Depression. The Chinese version of the 21-item Beck De-
pression Inventory–II (Beck, Brown, & Steer, 1996) was used to
assess the intensity of depression. Participants selected the options
that best described their situation in the past 2 weeks, including the
 RESILIENCE AND POSITIVE COGNITIVE TRIAD
day on which the questionnaire was administered, on a 4-point
Likert scale, with higher scores indicating greater level of depres-
sion. Criterion validity was supported by its associations with
suicidal ideation and self-esteem among Hong Kong Chinese
adolescents (Sun, Hui, & Watkins, 2006). Internal consistency
(Cronbach’s alpha) of the Beck Depression Inventory–II was .91 in
the present study. Three parcels were extracted and used in model
testing, with factor loadings ranging from .90 to .94.
Data Analytic Plan
Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses were conducted
among the scales used in the theoretical model. To test the theo-
retical model (see Figure 1) mentioned in the introduction, we used
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
the following steps. Before testing the structural model, we con-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
ducted a confirmatory factor analysis to assess the goodness of fit
of the measurement model, as suggested by Kline (2005). Then,
the structural model was tested with structural equation modeling
to examine whether positive cognitions on the self, the world, and
the future mediated the relationships between resilience and well-
being (i.e., life satisfaction and depression). To evaluate the overall
model fit, we used indices including chi-square (␹2) statistics,
comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), and root-
mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA; Kline, 2005). For
CFI and TLI, values greater than .9 indicate acceptable model fit
(Bentler, 1990; Muthén & Muthén, 1998 –2007). For RMSEA, a
value between .05 and .08 reflects reasonable model fit (Browne &
Cudeck, 1993). Analyses were performed with Mplus for Win-
dows Version 5.1 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998 –2007).
In the analysis of structural equation modeling, all constructs
were indicated by three parcels based on groupings of their scale
Figure 1. Hypothesized structural model. Standardized path coefficients are shown. Measurement errors and
parceled indicators are omitted for clarity. Parameter estimates from the latent factors to their corresponding
parceled indicators are shown in Table 2. ⴱ p ⬍ .001.
613
items. The parcels were created based on Russell, Kahn, Spoth,
and Altmaier’s (1998) suggestions. Exploratory factor analyses
were conducted in accordance with the principal-components
method for the above scales. The items were then rank-ordered
according to the magnitude of factor loadings, and pairs of the
highest and lowest ranked items were successively assigned to
each parcel to equalize the average loadings of each parcel on its
factor. Using parcels of items as indicators is a common technique
to manifest latent factors in structural equation modeling, with the
advantages of being more parsimonious, decreasing the possibili-
ties of correlated residuals and double loadings, and reducing
sampling errors (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, 2002).
Results
Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations
The means, standard deviations, and correlations for all vari-
ables are shown in Table 1. All variables significantly correlated
with each other in a way that supported the hypothesized moderate
to strong interrelationships among the factors they represented.
Self-esteem, view of the world, and hope were positively corre-
lated with trait resilience. Similarly, self-esteem, view of the
world, and hope were positively correlated with life satisfaction
and negatively correlated with depression. Finally, trait resilience
was positively correlated with life satisfaction and negatively
correlated with depression. The above findings provided prelimi-
nary evidence for the hypothesized relations among variables and
allowed for further analyses to examine the hypothesized media-
tion model.
 614 MAK, NG, AND WONG

Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Between Major Variables in the Theoretical
Model (N ⫽ 1,410)

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Trait resilience — .51 .38 .52 .39 ⫺.38

2. Self-esteem — .39 .64 .58 ⫺.61
3. View of the world — .48 .57 ⫺.45
4. Hope — .65 ⫺.61
5. Life satisfaction — ⫺.62
6. Depression —
M 2.59 2.79 5.92 4.78 3.88 16.67
SD 0.44 0.54 1.25 1.42 1.34 10.94

Note. All correlations are significant at the .001 level (2-tailed) with listwise deletion. SD ⫽ standard deviation.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Measurement Model studies have demonstrated the positive relationship of trait resil-
ience with physical and psychological health (Klohnen, 1996) and
Result of the confirmatory factor analysis showed that the life satisfaction (Klohnen et al., 1996) and the negative relation-
overall model yielded an adequate fit, ␹2(120) ⫽ 852.93, p ⫽ .000, ship of trait resilience with depression (Edward, 2005; Miller &
CFI ⫽ .96, TLI ⫽ .95, RMSEA ⫽ .07. Standardized factor
loadings ranged from .69 to .94 and were all significant at the p ⬍
.001 level. Table 2
Unstandardized and Standardized Loadings for the Hypothesized
Structural Model of Positive Cognitive Triad on Structural Model
Resilience and Well-Being
Parameter estimate Unstandardized Standardized
Results of structural equation modeling showed that the pro-
posed model yielded a satisfactory fit, ␹2(125) ⫽ 1,174.66, p ⫽ Measurement model
Trait resilience 3 TR1 1.00 0.64ⴱ
.000, CFI ⫽ .94, TLI ⫽ .93, RMSEA ⫽ .08. In sum, trait resilience Trait resilience 3 TR2 1.07ⴱ (0.05) 0.66ⴱ
was significantly related to higher levels of positive view on the Trait resilience 3 TR3 1.28ⴱ (0.06) 0.75ⴱ
self (i.e., self-esteem; R2 ⫽ .54), the world (R2 ⫽ .36), and the Self-esteem 3 RSE1 1.00 0.92ⴱ
future (i.e., hope; R2 ⫽ .59), and positive cognitive triad was Self-esteem 3 RSE2 0.90ⴱ (0.02) 0.86ⴱ
Self-esteem 3 RSE3 0.96ⴱ (0.03) 0.80ⴱ
significantly related to life satisfaction (R2 ⫽ .58) and depression View of world 3 PVW1 1.00 0.82ⴱ
(R2 ⫽ .39). Unstandardized and standardized loadings for the View of world 3 PVW2 0.89ⴱ (0.03) 0.84ⴱ
hypothesized structural model are shown in Table 2. All specific View of world 3 PVW3 0.90ⴱ (0.04) 0.69ⴱ
indirect effects via the positive cognitive triad on life satisfaction Hope 3 H1 1.00 0.80ⴱ
and depression were significant. In particular, significant specific Hope 3 H2 0.98ⴱ (0.03) 0.88ⴱ
Hope 3 H3 0.98ⴱ (0.03) 0.80ⴱ
indirect effects of trait resilience on life satisfaction (unstandard- Life satisfaction 3 LS1 1.00 0.87ⴱ
ized indirect effect ⫽ 0.70, standardized indirect effect ⫽ 0.17, Life satisfaction 3 LS2 1.02ⴱ (0.02) 0.90ⴱ
p ⬍ .001) and depression (unstandardized indirect effect ⫽ ⫺0.40, Life satisfaction 3 LS3 0.90ⴱ (0.02) 0.91ⴱ
standardized indirect effect ⫽ ⫺0.22, p ⬍ .001) via self-esteem Depression 3 BDI1 1.00 0.91ⴱ
Depression 3 BDI2 0.97ⴱ (0.02) 0.90ⴱ
were found. Significant specific indirect effects of trait resilience Depression 3 BDI3 1.03ⴱ (0.02) 0.94ⴱ
on life satisfaction (unstandardized indirect effect ⫽ 0.80, stan- Structural model
dardized indirect effect ⫽ 0.19, p ⬍ .001) and depression (unstan- Trait resilience 3 self-esteem 1.22 (0.06) 0.73ⴱ
dardized indirect effect ⫽ ⫺0.18, standardized indirect effect ⫽ Trait resilience 3 view of world 2.32 (0.15) 0.60ⴱ
⫺0.10, p ⬍ .001) via positive view of the world were found. Trait resilience 3 hope 3.23 (0.18) 0.77ⴱ
Self-esteem 3 life satisfaction 0.57 (0.08) 0.23ⴱ
Specific indirect effects of trait resilience on life satisfaction Self-esteem 3 depression ⫺0.32 (0.04) ⫺0.30ⴱ
(unstandardized indirect effect ⫽ 1.23, standardized indirect ef- View of world 3 life satisfaction 0.34 (0.03) 0.32ⴱ
fect ⫽ 0.30, p ⬍ .001) and depression (unstandardized indirect View of world 3 depression ⫺0.08 (0.01) ⫺0.17ⴱ
effect ⫽ ⫺0.40, standardized indirect effect ⫽ ⫺0.22, p ⬍ .001) Hope 3 life satisfaction 0.38 (0.03) 0.39ⴱ
Hope 3 depression ⫺0.12 (0.02) ⫺0.29ⴱ
via hope were also found to be significant.
Note. Standard errors are in parentheses. TR1 ⫽ trait resilience factor 1;
Discussion TR2 ⫽ trait resilience factor 2; TR3 ⫽ trait resilience factor 3; RSE1 ⫽
self-esteem factor 1; RSE2 ⫽ self-esteem factor 2; RSE3 ⫽ self-esteem factor
The present study tested the mediating role of positive cognitive 3; PVW1 ⫽ positive view of world factor 1; PVW2 ⫽ positive view of world
triad between the relationship of trait resilience with life satisfac- factor 2; PVW3 ⫽ positive view of world factor 3; H1 ⫽ hope factor 1; H2 ⫽
hope factor 2; H3 ⫽ hope factor 3; LS1 ⫽ life satisfaction factor 1; LS2 ⫽ life
tion and depression. It is one of the few studies that has attempted satisfaction factor 2; LS3 ⫽ life satisfaction factor 3; BDI1 ⫽ depression factor
to tie all the variables together through the testing of a cognitive 1; BDI2 ⫽ depression factor 2; BDI3 ⫽ depression factor 3.
ⴱ
mechanism by which resilience promotes well-being. Previous p ⬍ .05.
 RESILIENCE AND POSITIVE COGNITIVE TRIAD
Chandler, 2002). The present findings showed that such relation-
ship between resilience and well-being can be mediated by posi-
tive view of the self, the world, and the future. In other words,
individuals who are more resilient tend to have confidence in
themselves, perceive the world in a positive light, and have hope
for the future.
This is consistent with results of previous studies showing that
trait resilience is positively related to self-esteem and self-
confidence (Benetti & Kambouropoulos, 2006; Klohnen, 1996).
Resilient individuals are more likely to have a positive sense of
themselves and to regard themselves highly. Through the positive
view of the self, people may be motivated to bounce back from
failure because of their higher levels of self-efficacy and determi-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
nation (Wagnild & Young, 1990; Werner & Smith, 1992). In
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
addition, findings supported the possibility that resilient individu-
als endorse a more positive view of the world. Having a sense that
they is securely located in the social world and a positive view of
the environment, such individuals are more capable of seeing
opportunities in difficult situations (Wang, 2009) and more com-
petent to meet future challenges (Scheff, 1990). This is consistent
with previous studies showing resilience to be positively related to
sense of mastery and active coping (Carver, 1998). In addition,
resilient individuals have been found to have higher levels of hope
and optimism (Klohnen, 1996; Werner & Smith, 1992), and hope
has been found to be associated with positive well-being
(Yarcheski, Scholoveno, & Mahon, 1994; Zaleski et al., 1998) and
negatively associated with depression (Asarnow, Carlson, & Guth-
rie, 1987). Resilient individuals who are progressing toward their
goals enjoy high levels of positive affect and life satisfaction
(Klohnen et al., 1996; Tugade & Frederickson, 2004). Neverthe-
less, given that trait resilience is a multidimensional construct that
consists of a range of characteristics aside from positive cogni-
tions, being resilient may encompass other personal attributes that
may further protect resilient individuals from distress and enhance
their well-being. In the validation paper on the Ego-Resiliency
Scale, Klohnen (1996) found four distinct components of trait
resilience, namely, confident optimism, productive and autono-
mous activity, interpersonal warmth and insight, and skilled ex-
pressiveness. Thus, future studies should further investigate the
multifaceted role of trait resilience and other possible mediators in
enhancing individuals’ well-being.
Limitations of the Study
There were several limitations in the present study. First, par-
ticipants were recruited via the Internet, and participants took part
in the study on a voluntary basis. Thus, we had no information as
to how many individuals received our study announcement online
and, out of those, how many responded and completed our survey.
It is possible there was a self-selection bias in the sampling. Future
studies should employ a random sampling method in recruiting a
representative college sample. Second, the present study focused
on the effects of trait resilience on students’ management of
everyday experiences of challenges. Future studies can consider
extending the model to individuals who have experienced a dis-
tinct traumatic event and examining how the positive cognitive
triad may come into play for the resilient group. Researchers are
also encouraged to test the model with longitudinal data to more
accurately compare how individuals with high levels of trait resil-
615
ience and their counterparts with low levels of trait resilience cope
cognitively with traumatic events. Although the mediation model
is meant to be universally applicable across cultures, it is worth-
while to test it across other ethnic or cultural groups for its
cross-cultural applicability. Notwithstanding the above limitations,
the findings of the present study are stimulating. It is the first
attempt to investigate the mediating role of positive cognitive triad
between trait resilience and well-being.
Implications for Counseling and Prevention
Students nowadays face a lot of pressures. Some of them do not
handle their stress properly, and this, in turn, leads to the deteri-
oration of well-being and the development of depression (Ang &
Huan, 2006; Zeng & Le Tendre, 1998).As Waller (2001) has
suggested that everyone has the potential to be resilient, appropri-
ate interventions may be developed, based on findings of the
present study, in enhancing such potential. The present study
revealed that positive cognitions are important factors that con-
tribute to the effect of trait resilience on well-being. Educators and
counselors may consider teaching positive thinking in classes and
during counseling services. Such education may act as a preventive
intervention that can equip students with self-competence and
positive expectations of the world and the future. Previous studies
have found cognitive– behavioral components to be effective in
enhancing the resiliency of children (Gillham et al., 2006) and
preventing depression among adults (Allart-van Dam, Hosman,
Hoogduin, & Schaap, 2007). Cognitive techniques for defeating
negative beliefs about the future, decatastrophizing techniques,
and real-time-resilience skills for disputing negative beliefs are
taught. In-session exercises and homework assignments are pro-
vided to help participants learn to apply these cognitive skills to
daily life (Gillham et al., 2006; Stice, Burton, Bearman, & Rohde,
2007). Such programs can be further promoted among counseling
centers in the universities via organizing workshops or talks teach-
ing resilient cognitive skills.
As a primary prevention strategy, such workshops or talks could
be integrated during orientation for freshmen to equip students
with stronger resilience and positive cognitions before they burn
out due to academic stress or other problems. In addition to
cultivating positive views about the self, the world, and the future,
families, educators, and counselors should inculcate the spirit of
resilience among young individuals early in their socialization and
education. With these positive cognitions being borne in mind,
students would be more capable of riding through their adversity
and of enjoying better adjustment and well-being in the face of
challenges or difficulties.
References
Allart-van Dam, E. A., Hosman, C. M. H., Hoogduin, C. A. L., & Schaap,
C. P. D. R. (2007). Prevention of depression in subclinically depressed
adults: Follow-up effects on the “Coping with Depression” course.
Journal of Affective Disorders, 97, 219 –228. doi:10.1016/
j.jad.2006.06.020
Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being:
America’s perception of life quality. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Ang, R. P., & Huan, V. S. (2006). Academic Expectations Stress Inven-
tory: Development, factor analysis, reliability, and validity. Educational
 616 MAK, NG, AND WONG
and Psychological Measurement, 66, 522–539. doi:10.1177/
0013164405282461
Asarnow, J. R., Carlson, G. A., & Guthrie, D. (1987). Coping strategies,
self-perceptions, hopelessness, and perceived family environments in
depressed and suicidal children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 55, 361–366. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.55.3.361
Beasley, M., Thompson, T., & Davidson, J. (2003). Resilience in response
to life stress: The effects of coping and cognitive hardiness. Personality
and Individual Differences, 34, 77–95. doi:10.1016/S0191-
8869(02)00027-2
Beck, A. T. (1987). Cognitive models of depression. Journal of Cognitive
Psychotherapy, 1, 5–37.
Beck, A. T., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory
manual (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Beckham, E. E., Leber, W. R., Watkins, J. T., Boyer, J. L., & Cook, J. B.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
(1986). Development of an instrument to measure Beck’s cognitive
triad: The Cognitive Triad Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 54, 566 –567. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.54.4.566
Benetti, C., & Kambouropoulos, N. (2006). Affect-regulated indirect ef-
fects of trait anxiety and trait resilience on self-esteem. Personality and
Individual Differences, 41, 341–352. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.01.015
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psy-
chological Bulletin, 107, 238 –246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Block, J., & Kremen, A. M. (1996). IQ and ego-resiliency: Conceptual and
empirical connections and separateness. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 70, 349 –361. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.349
Brislin, R. (1970). Back translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross
Cultural Psychology, 1, 185–216. doi:10.1177/135910457000100301
Brooks, R. B. (1994). Children at risk: Fostering resilience and hope.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 64, 545–553. doi:10.1037/
h0079565
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model
fit. In K. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models
(pp. 136 –162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Carver, C. S. (1998). Resilience and thriving: Issues, models and linkages.
Journal of Social Issues, 54, 245–266. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
4560.1998.tb01217.x
Cohen, S., & McKay, G. (1984). Social support, stress and the buffering
hypothesis: A theoretical analysis. In A. Baum, J. E. Singer, & S. E.
Taylor (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and health (pp. 253–267). Hills-
dale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The
Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49,
71–75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Edward, K. L. (2005). Resilience: A protector from depression. Journal of
the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 11, 241–243. doi:10.1177/
1078390305281177
Eriksson, M., & Lindstrom, B. (2005). Validity of Antonovsky’s Sense of
Coherence Scale: A systematic review. Journal of Epidemiology and
Community Health, 59, 460 – 466. doi:10.1136/jech.2003.018085
Farruggia, S. P., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Dmitrieva, J., & Macek, P.
(2004). Adolescent self-esteem in cross-cultural perspective: Testing
measurement equivalence and a mediation model. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 35, 719 –733. doi:10.1177/0022022104270114
Feist, G. J., Bodner, T. E., Jacobs, J. F., Miles, M., & Tan, V. (1995).
Integrating top-down and bottom-up structural models of subjective
well-being: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 68, 138 –150. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.1.138
Gillham, J. E., Reivich, K. J., Freres, D. R., Lascher, M., Litzinger, S.,
Shatte, A., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). School-based prevention of
depression and anxiety symptoms in early adolescence: A pilot of a
parent intervention component. School Psychology Quarterly, 21, 323–
348. doi:10.1521/scpq.2006.21.3.323
Horton, T. V., & Wallander, J. L. (2001). Hope and social support as
resilience factors against psychological distress of mothers who care for
children with chronic physical conditions. Rehabilitation Psychology,
46, 382–399. doi:10.1037/0090-5550.46.4.382
Kaplan, H. B. (1999). Toward an understanding of resilience: A critical
review of definitions and models. In M. Glantz & J. Johnson (Eds.),
Resilience and development: Positive life adaptations (pp. 17– 83). New
York, NY: Plenum Press.
Kidd, S., & Shahar, G. (2008). Resilience in homeless youth: The key role
of self-esteem. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 78, 163–172.
doi:10.1037/0002-9432.78.2.163
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation mod-
eling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Klohnen, E. C. (1996). Conceptual analysis and measurement of the
construct of ego-resiliency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 70, 1067–1079. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.5.1067
Klohnen, E. C., Vandewater, E. A., & Young, A. (1996). Negotiating the
middle years: Ego-resiliency and successful midlife adjustment in
women. Psychology and Aging, 11, 431– 442. doi:10.1037/0882-
7974.11.3.431
Kwan, V. S. Y., Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural
explanations for life satisfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-
esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1038 –1051.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.1038
Letzring, T. D., Block, J., & Funder, D. C. (2005). Ego-control and
ego-resiliency: Generalization of self-report scales based on personality
descriptions from acquaintances, clinicians, and the self. Journal of
Research in Personality, 39, 395– 422. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2004.06.003
Lillehoj, C. J., Trudeau, L., Spoth, R., & Wickrama, K. A. S. (2004).
Internalizing, social competence, and substance initiation: Influence of
gender moderation and preventive intervention. Substance Use & Mis-
use, 39, 963–991. doi:10.1081/JA-120030895
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002).
To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits.
Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173. doi:10.1207/
S15328007SEM0902_1
Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resil-
ience: A critical evaluation and guideline for future work. Child Devel-
opment, 71, 543–562. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00164
Masten, A. S., Best, K. M., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and
development: Contributions from the study of children who overcome
adversity. Development and Psychopathology, 2, 425– 444. doi:10.1017/
S0954579400005812
Mathis, M., & Lecci, L. (1999). Hardiness and college adjustment: Iden-
tifying students in need of services. Journal of College Student Devel-
opment, 40, 305–309.
Miller, A. M., & Chandler, P. (2002). Acculturation, resilience, and de-
pression in midlife women from the former Soviet Union. Nursing
Research, 51, 26 –32. doi:10.1097/00006199-200201000-00005
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998 –2007). Mplus user’s guide (5th
ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Ong, A. D., Edwards, L. M., & Bergeman, C. S. (2006). Hope as a source
of resilience in later adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences,
41, 1263–1273. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.03.028
Parr, D. G., Montgomery, M., & DeBell, C. (1998). Flow theory as a model
for enhancing student resilience. Professional School Counseling, 1,
26 –31.
Prelow, H. M., Weaver, S. R., & Swenson, R. R. (2006). Competence,
self-esteem, and coping efficacy as mediators of ecological risk and
depressive symptoms in urban African American and European Amer-
ican youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 506 –516. doi:
10.1007/s10964-006-9068-z
Rew, L., & Horner, S. D. (2003). Youth resilience framework for reducing
health-risk behaviors in adolescents. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 18,
379 –388. doi:10.1016/S0882-5963(03)00162-3
 RESILIENCE AND POSITIVE COGNITIVE TRIAD
Rocha-Singh, I. A. (1994). Perceived stress among graduate students:
Development and validation of the Graduate Stress Inventory. Educa-
tional and Psychological Measurement, 54, 714 –727. doi:10.1177/
0013164494054003018
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Russell, D. W., Kahn, J. H., Spoth, R., & Altmaier, E. M. (1998). Ana-
lyzing data from experimental studies: A latent variable structural equa-
tion modeling approach. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 5, 18 –29.
Scheff, T. J. (1990). Microsociology: Discourse, emotion, and social
structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Smokowski, P. R., Reynolds, A. J., & Bezruczko, N. (1999). Resilience
and protective factors in adolescence: An autobiographical perspective
from disadvantaged youth. Journal of School Psychology, 37, 425– 448.
doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(99)00028-X
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Snyder, C. R. (1994). The psychology of hope: You can get there from here.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
New York, NY: Free Press.
Snyder, C. R., LaPointe, A. B., Crowson, J. J., & Early, S. (1998).
Preferences of high- and low-hope people for self-referential input.
Cognition and Emotion, 12, 807– 823. doi:10.1080/026999398379448
Snyder, C. R., Sympson, S. C., Ybasco, F. C., Borders, T. F., Babyak,
M. A., & Higgins, R. L. (1996). Development and validation of the State
Hope Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 321–335.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.321
Stice, E., Burton, E., Bearman, S. K., & Rohde, P. (2007). Randomized
trial of a brief depression prevention program: An elusive search for a
psychosocial placebo control condition. Behaviour Research and Ther-
apy, 45, 863– 876. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2006.08.008
Sun, R. C. F., Hui, E. K. P., & Watkins, D. (2006). Towards a model of
suicidal ideation of Hong Kong Chinese adolescents. Journal of Ado-
lescence, 29, 209 –224. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.05.005
Thoits, P. A. (1995). Stress, coping, and social support processes: Where
are we? What next? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35, 53–79.
doi:10.2307/2626957
Tugade, M. M., & Frederickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use
positive emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 320 –333. doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.320
Valle, M. F., Huebner, E. S., & Suldo, S. M. (2006). An analysis of hope
as a psychological strength. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 393– 406.
doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.03.005
617
Wagnild, G., & Young, H. M. (1990). Resilience among older women.
Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 22, 252–255. doi:10.1111/j.1547-
5069.1990.tb00224.x
Waller, M. A. (2001). Resilience in ecosystemic context: Evolution of the
concept. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 71, 290 –297. doi:
10.1037/0002-9432.71.3.290
Walsh, W. A., & Banaji, M. R. (1997). The collective self. In R. L.
Thompson & J. G. Snodgrass (Eds.), Annals of the New York Academy
of Sciences: Vol. 818. The self across psychology: Self-recognition,
self-awareness, and the self concept (pp. 193–214). doi:10.1111/j.1749-
6632.1997.tb48256.x
Wang, J. (2009). A study of resiliency characteristics in the adjustment of
international graduate students at American universities. Journal of
Studies in International Education, 13, 22– 45. doi:10.1177/
1028315307308139
Werner, E. E. (1993). Risk, resilience and recovery: Perspectives from the
Kauai Longitudinal Study. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 503–
515. doi:10.1017/S095457940000612X
Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk
children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Yarcheski, A., Scholoveno, M. A., & Mahon, N. E. (1994). Social support
and well-being in adolescents: The mediating role of hopefulness. Nurs-
ing Research, 43, 288 –292. doi:10.1097/00006199-199409000-00006
Yu, X., & Zhang, J. (2007). A comparison between the Chinese version of
the Ego-Resiliency Scale and the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale.
Psychological Science, 30, 1169 –1171. Retrieved from http://
www.lw23.com/pdf_cd055801-3cb2– 4d36 – 8d83– d9cda6e7742d/
lunwen.pdf
Zaleski, E. H., Levey-Thors, C., & Schiaffino, K. M. (1998). Coping
mechanisms, stress, social support, and health problems in college
students. Applied Developmental Science, 2, 127–137. doi:10.1207/
s1532480xads0203_2
Zeng, K., & Le Tendre, G. (1998). Adolescent suicide and academic
competition in East Asia. Comparative Education Review, 42, 513–528.
doi:10.1086/447526
Received August 20, 2010
Revision received June 29, 2011
Accepted July 14, 2011 䡲