Resilience in the Context of Sexual Violence: A Scoping Review

Background/purpose: Sexual violence (SV) is a prevalent public health and human rights problem that impacts as many as one in three women and one in six men. While much attention has been offered to the detrimental health impacts of SV, resilience in the aftermath of SV has also received considerable attention. Despite this application of a strengths-based lens in SV studies, research has been hindered by inconsistencies in the conceptualization of resilience. The purpose of this study was to understand current definitions of resilience and then develop a definition that can be used universally in SV research.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review to synthesize the current, peer-reviewed literature on resilience after SV. We completed a comprehensive search of Web of Science, PubMed, and Psych Info to gather available literature. Inclusion criteria included studies that were conducted in North America with survivors aged 14 and older and where resilience was a central concept. We reviewed 590 abstracts and retained 52 studies for full text review. Our final sample comprised 25 studies. We extracted the following information: a) definitions of resilience, b) measures/assessments of resilience, c) correlates associated with resilience, and d) interventions to promote resilience. Thematic analysis of this data then occurred to identify the relevant themes associated with each category.

Results: There was no uniform definition of resilience across studies. From the 17 studies that included a definition, we identified three primary themes. First, resilience can derive from physical and emotional attributes and environmental factors. Second, resilience is the action of coping with or adapting to adversity. Finally, five of the studies conceptualized resilience as the resumption of “regular” or “normal” functioning. Regarding measures of resilience, 12 studies used scales to help assess resilience, with the Conor-Davidson Resilience Scale being the most common instrument. Despite these differences in definitions and measurements of resilience, resilience was consistently found amongst SV survivors in these studies. However, the search did not yield any studies that featured rigorously applied interventions to promote resilience after the occurrence of SV.

Conclusions and Implications: After synthesizing the available literature, we present the following definition of resilience: “Resilience is a dynamic, nonlinear process that occurs continuously after SV victimization. It refers to the capacity to cope and adapt to life after SV in ways that are culturally sensitive and guided by the survivor’s own preferences and desired outcomes. Overall, resilience is a living, breathing, moving concept that can shift in how it manifests over time.”

Thus, the value of our scoping review is threefold. First, it offers a definition of resilience that can be applied to future work with survivors of SV. In light of our expanded definition, new measures of resilience should be developed that are more survivor focused and dynamic. Finally, we urge scholars to engage SV survivors beyond the scope of participation in their future research and measurement projects, which will allow their valuable voices to drive research.