Saved in:
| Hovedforfatter: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Sprog: | engelsk |
| Udgivet: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Fag: | |
| Online adgang: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20131668 |
| Tags: |
Tilføj Tag
Ingen Tags, Vær først til at tagge denne postø!
|
Indholdsfortegnelse:
- <p>The popular adolescent self-help literature on failure and resilience leans heavily on three framings — Duckworth's grit, Dweck's growth mindset, and the generalised "bounce back / every failure is a lesson" narrative — that have weakened substantially under post-2017 replication and meta-analytic scrutiny: Credé-Tynan-Harms 2017 reduced the unique predictive validity of grit beyond conscientiousness to near zero [1]; Sisk-Plomin et al. 2018 reduced average growth-mindset intervention effects to d ≈ 0.08 with the originally-claimed SES moderation not surviving full meta-analysis [2]; and Eskreis-Winkler and Fishbach 2019 demonstrated experimentally that people frequently do not learn from failure without explicit scaffolding because failure is ego-threatening and tunes out attention [3]. This paper synthesises the empirical resilience literature — Bonanno's 2004 four-trajectory taxonomy and 2021 update [4], [5], Masten's Ordinary Magic [6], the Luthar-Cicchetti-Becker 2000 review [7], the Werner-Smith Kauai longitudinal studies [8], [9], Garmezy 1991 [10], Compas 2001 [11], Tugade-Fredrickson 2004 [12] — together with the coping and meaning-making literature [13], [14], [15], the failure-attribution work [16], and self-compassion [17], [18] to produce evidence-based pedagogy for Vietnamese adolescents 14–19 recovering from documented setbacks. Three findings are load-bearing. First, Bonanno's resilience-trajectory finding — the modal response to severe adversity is resilience (40– 65% across many event types), with recovery (gradual return to baseline over months), delayed dysfunction, and chronic dysfunction as minority trajectories — implies that pedagogy must not pathologise temporary regulation periods as "failure to bounce back". Second, the Eskreis-Winkler-Fishbach 2019 finding that failure does not automatically teach contests the popular "every failure is a lesson" framing and requires explicit scaffolding (attribution work, meaning-making, structured reengagement) to convert setback into learning. Third, the Vietnamese exam-cycle culture compounds setback shame through face-saving (mất mặt) dynamics, family-disappointment cascades, and the conflation of academic outcome with filial worth that i1.3 documented; setback recovery in this context is not a private psychological event but a relationally-located event that the cultural script poorly accommodates. The substantive contribution is a five-phase operational practice set — immediate aftermath (first 48–72 hours: regulation, support, decision moratorium per i3.6), meaning-making (Park 2010 framework [15], distinct</p>