Risk, vulnerability, and resilience among youth--论文代写范文

即使更一般性的调查,如家庭的形成,教育和经济稳定的因素,倾向描述这些领域的消极方面,如早期,婚外生育，学校辍学和贫困，尤其是弱势群体或高危青年。下面的paper代写范文进行论述。

INTRODUCTION 
  Most youth in America have a good chance of becoming productive members of adult society. However, for a particular group of young people, at-risk youth, the probability of maturing into responsible adulthood is less certain. "At-risk youth" is a term commonly used to describe those adolescents for whom there is a high probability (risk) of negative life events, because their demographic, individual, economic, or social characteristics predict that they are vulnerable (Dryfoos, 1990, pg. 5). Sociologists and demographers have published numerous studies exploring the factors contributing to adult life outcomes among youth deemed to be at risk. This set of studies has focused heavily, however, on the likelihood of negative life events rather than positive, or socially productive ones. 

  Even when accomplishments of a more general nature are investigated, such as family formation, educational achievement or economic stability, the tendency is still to describe the negative aspects of those domains, such as early, non-marital childbearing (Myers and Moore. 1990). school drop out (Rumberger, 1983), and poverty (Moore, Myers, Morrison, Nord, Brown, and Edmonston, 1993), particularly among disadvantaged or at-risk youth. In fact, studies assessing resilient behavior or productive life events among youth are quite limited relative to the abundant research on negative life outcomes. Beyond the fields of sociology and demography, however, the concept of resilience (i.e., success or adaptation in the presence of disadvantage) is hardly new. Within the areas ofpsychopathology and child development, this issue has been a major focus of research (Rutter, 1987; Luthar. 1991; Werner, 1989; Germezy, 1985). The education literature has also explored positive adaptations, such as educational progress, attendance, and school completion among disadvantaged young people (Pollard, 1989; Connell, Spencer, and Aber, 1993). 

  Although a few of these studies take a longitudinal approach or are epidemiologic in nature (Rutter, 1987; Werner, 1989) most of this work involves small and select samples, or are based on cross-sectional data analyses. Nonetheless, the information generated in the fields of developmental psychology and psychopathology could be particularly helpful in moving other social science disciplines toward a broader understanding of productive life events among young people. Indeed, recently the disciplines of sociology and social demography have begun to incorporate findings from the research on resilience and adolescent development from the developmental and education literatures. 

  Studies in the areas of sociology and social demography are now beginning to document positive achievements among at-risk youth (Clark, 1983; Dubow and Luster. 1990), and protective factors contributing to positive adaptations (Pollard, 1989; Wilson. 1987: Sugland, Blumenthal and Hyatt, 1993; Sugland and Hyatt, 1993; Furstenberg and Hughes. 1993; Brown, 1993a). Although most of these studies have a clearly defined theoretical base, there is still a lack of conceptual clarity with respect to the mechanisms through which protective factors minimize risk, and there is little consistency across studies with respect to how risk or resilience is defined. Policy, programs, and future research targeted toward disadvantaged youth could well be informed by research conducted under a clear conceptual framework. 

  However, because studies on resilience are being conducted in many scientific disciplines (i.e., education, sociology, mental healthand child development), researchers are often unaware or only peripherally aware of work being done by colleagues in other disciplines. Bridging this disciplinary gap could inform research in any one discipline in general, and could help shape the scientific discourse focusing specifically on adolescence. Further, a sharper conceptual framework on risk and resilience in adolescence could come from a melding of work in these disciplines (sociology, social demography, education. developmental psychology, and developmental psychopathology). In this paper, we review research on risk and resilience from two primary disciplines developmental psychology/psychopathology and social demography/sociology. This paper is one piece of a larger research endeavor -- "Pathways to Achievement Among At-Risk Youth" that focuses on socioeconomic achievements among disadvantaged adolescents. 

  This larger research effort documents that positive adaptations to disadvantage do indeed occur among at-risk youth, and that specific family and community-based investments in youth can be instrumental in fostering resilience in young adult life (See Brown. 1993a, Brown, 1993b; Sugland, Blumenthal, and Hyatt, 1993; Sugland and Hyatt, 1993; Furstenberg and Hughes, 1993 for full project analyses). However, analyses from this project also indicate that the process of resilience is highly complex. Our ability to understand these complexities is hindered by a lack of conceptual clarity and consistency concerning definitions of "risk" and "resilience", and the mechanisms through which resilience may emerge. To provide a broader theoretical context for the larger project, we discuss the contributions and limitations of research on risk and resilience from these two research disciplines. Perhaps because these two bodies of work tend to focus on different age ranges (developmental psychology and psychopathology with younger children), tend to work with different samples (small and selfselected vs. more representative) and tend to focus on different definitions of risk and positivedevelopment, few attempts have been made to summarize findings across these two disciplines. 

  The present review briefly summarizes research approaches, operationalizations, and key findings from the two research traditions. Our goal is to highlight consistencies across disciplines in hopes of developing a coherent framework that can he used to study resilient behavior among at-risk youth. We make no claim that our critique is exhaustive. Rather we have chosen to highlight studies in these two disciplines that can enhance our understanding as to why some disadvantaged youth succeed against the odds, and the specific mechanisms through which that success is achieved. From this interdisciplinary perspective we will attempt to extract a more comprehensive list of both risk and protective factors, and a sense of the range of options in operationalizing these variables. We will conclude by integrating these findings into a new conceptual framework for understanding resilience among disadvantaged youth. 

 RESILIENCE IN THE DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY/PSYCHOPATHOLOGY LITERATURES 
  Within the disciplines of child development and child psychopathology, a longstandirw problem has been the relative emphasis placed on problematic outcomes and the predictors of such outcomes, and the neglect of positive adaptations particularly under circumstances of stress and deprivation. This imbalance has begun to be addressed in recent years. A growing body of research addresses the issue of "resilience" in children, that is, "the manifestation of competence in children despite exposure to stressful events" (Garmezy, Masten & Tellegen, 1984, p. 98). Yet it must be acknowledged that progress has been uneven. For example, most of the research on resilience in child development to date focuses on preadolescent children and young adults (Luthar. 1991). Luthar (1991) cautions that it may be inappropriate to generalize findings on childhood resilience from one age range to another, or from one population subgroup to another. Factors associated with resistance to stress may change as children develop, and may differ by socioeconomic and ethnic group. There is a noticeable gap in this literature on resilience among youth (an important exception being the work by Luthar, 1991). This gap contrasts sharply with the emphasis place on youth in the sociological and social demography approaches to resilience. Even very recent reviews of the child development literature on adolescence point repeatedly to the focus on problem behaviors, and a lack of research (sometimes even a lack of clear definition) on positive outcomes.（paper代写)

  51Due原创版权郑重声明：原创范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。（paper代写)
  51due为留学生提供最好的服务，想获取更多paper代写范文，亲们可以进入主页 www.51due.com  为留学生提供paper代写服务，了解详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041哟。