Expanding the Reflexive Space: Resilient Young Adults, Institutional Cultures, and Cognitive Schemas

Abstract

For many U.S. young adults, being resilient to stressful events hinges on making meaning of such events and thereby minimizing their negative emotional impact. Yet why are some better able to do this than others? In this study, which uses an innovative outlier sampling strategy and linked survey and interview data, we argue that one important factor is connection to institutional cultures associated with higher education, religion/spirituality, and the military. Such cultures provide material for the development of cognitive schemas that can be adopted and applied to their stressful experiences, which include narratives of social progress, divine providence, and self‐discipline. Using a metaphor adapted from the pragmatist philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce, we argue the resulting schemas have the effect of “expanding the space” of reflexive thought, providing new cognitive material for interpreting stress and supporting resilience. Finally, we argue this framing improves in several ways on the concept of meaning making often used in stress process research.

Future Imaginings: Public and Personal Culture, Social Location, and the Shaping of Dreams*†

“…as the sole factor impacting one's cultural capital. Now, many suggest that one's gender, race, age, or other life events are as important as social class when it comes to the cultural capital that becomes an integral part of our thoughts and actions (see, e.g., Lin 2000;Manglos-Weber and Avelis 2019;McDonald and Day 2010). Thus, where one stands in social space-rich or poor, as well as white or a person of color, male or female-should influence the cultural scripts to which we are exposed and the cultural capital deposited in us.…”

School-Based Resources as Protective Factors from the Influence of Parental Incarceration on Depressive Symptoms

“…Whereas exclusionary practices at the macro- and meso-levels likely exacerbate the consequences of PI, Foster and Hagan (2015) contended that inclusionary practices, such as generous social welfare programs and family prison policies, may enhance families’ ability to navigate the incarceration of a parent. Indeed, risk and resilience theories contend that protective factors may buffer children from the consequences associated with exposure to stressful circumstances (Luthar et al 2000; Manglos-Weber and Avelis 2019; Parke and Clarke-Stewart 2003; Rutter 1999). However, our understanding of potential protective factors is limited to select individual characteristics and social dynamics as opposed to macro- or meso-level inclusionary practices.…”

“…Although researchers have extensively examined the collateral consequences of incarceration, few studies have considered possible protective, or resilience factors, which may buffer children from the consequences of PI (Dallaire and Zeman 2013). Indeed, risk and resilience perspectives suggest that protective factors, such as a supportive family and non-family network, can facilitate positive adaptations and outcomes despite experiencing adverse events such as PI (Luthar, Cicchetti, and Becker 2000; Manglos-Weber and Avelis 2019; Parke and Clarke-Stewart 2003; Rutter 1999). Moreover, identifying factors that contribute to resiliency is particularly important for designing and implementing effective public policies (Jenson and Fraser 2016).…”