Resilience in psychology refers to the idea of an individual's tendency to cope with stress and adversity.

This coping may result in the individual "bouncing back" to a previous state of normal functioning, or simply not showing negative effects. A third, more controversial form of resilience is sometimes referred to as 'post traumatic growth' or 'steeling effects' where in the experience adversity leads to better functioning (much like an inoculation gives one the capacity to cope well with future exposure to disease). Resilience is most commonly understood as a process, and not a trait of an individual. Recently there has also been evidence that resilience can indicate a capacity to resist a sharp decline in functioning even though a person temporarily appears to get worse. A child, for example, may do poorly during critical life transitions (like entering junior high) but experience problems that are less severe than would be expected given the many risks the child faces. Resilience is that ineffable quality that allows some people to be knocked down by life and come back stronger than ever. Rather than letting failure overcome them and drain their resolve, they find a way to rise from the ashes. Psychologists have identified some of the factors that make someone resilient, among them a positive attitude, optimism, the ability to regulate emotions, and the ability to see failure as a form of helpful feedback. Even after a misfortune, blessed with such an outlook, resilient people are able to change course and soldier on. According to Hans Selye (1956), defined stress is a feeling of strain and pressure, feeling of anxiety and being overwhelmed, overall irritability, feeling of insecure, nervousness, social withdrawal, loss of appetite, depression, panic attacks, exhaustion, high or low blood pressure, skin problems, insomnia, lack of sexual desire (sexual dysfunction), migraine, gastrointestinal problems (constipation or diarrhoea), and for women menstrual problems. It may cause more serious conditions like heart problems. Small amounts of stress may be desired, beneficial, and even healthy. Positive stress helps improve athletic performance. It also plays factor in motivation, adaptation, and reaction to the environment. Excessive amounts of stress may lead to many problems in the body that could be harmful. Stress could be something external and related to the environment but also may not be directly created by external events, but instead by the internal perceptions that
1

cause an individual to have anxiety/negative emotions surrounding a situation, such as pressure, discomfort, etc., which they then deem stressful. According to Graham, S. (2011). Defined, Self-efficacy as the measure of one's own competence to complete tasks and reach goals. Psychologists have studied self-efficacy from several perspectives, noting various paths to the development of self-efficacy; the dynamics of self-efficacy, and lack thereof, in different settings; interactions between self-efficacy and self-concept; and habits of attribution that contribute to, or detract from, self-efficacy. Self-efficacy affects every area of human endeavour, by determining the beliefs a person holds regarding his or her power to affect situations, thus strongly influencing both the power a person actually has to face challenges competently and the choices a person is most likely to make. These effects are particularly apparent, and compelling, with regard to behaviors affecting health. Self-efficacy is distinct both from efficacy and from self-esteem, confidence, and self-concept. Understanding how to foster the development of self-efficacy is important for policymakers, educators, and others in leadership positions, and to anyone seeking to build a happier, more productive life. Self-efficacy is a person's judgment about being able to perform a particular activity. It is a student's "I can" or "I cannot" belief. Unlike self-esteem, which reflects how students feel about their worth or value, self-efficacy reflects how confident students are about performing specific tasks. High self-efficacy in one area may not coincide with high self-efficacy in another area. Just as high confidence in snow skiing may not be matched with high confidence in baseball, high self-efficacy in mathematics does not necessarily accompany high self efficacy in spelling. Self-efficacy is specific to the task being attempted. However, having high self-efficacy does not necessary mean that students believe they will be successful. While self-efficacy indicates how strongly students believe they have the skills to do well, they may believe other factors will keep them from succeeding. A growing body of research reveals that there is a positive, significant relationship between students' self-efficacy beliefs and their academic performance. Our goal with this project is to increase the self-efficacy of the student you are working with. People with low self-efficacy toward a task are more likely to avoid it, while those with high self-efficacy are not only more likely to attempt the task, but they also will work harder and persist longer in the face of
2

difficulties. Self-efficacy influences: (1) what activities students select, (2) how much effort they put forth, (3) how persistent they are in the face of difficulties, and (4) the difficulty of the goals they set. Students with low self-efficacy do not expect to do well, and they often do not achieve at a level that is commensurate with their abilities. They do not believe they have the skills to do well so they don't try. The connection between self-efficacy and achievement gets stronger as students advance through school. By the time students are in college, their self-efficacy beliefs are more strongly related to their achievement than any measure of their ability. If we wish to develop high educational achievement among our students, it is essential that we begin building stronger self-efficacy as early as possible. Roesch and Amirkham (1997) defined,Internal Attribution, the act of placing blame on some type of factor or criteria that could be controlled by an individual for the cause of a certain event. Attribution is a concept in social psychology addressing the processes by which individuals explain the causes of behavior and events. Can also be referred to as dispositional attribution. Blaming a factor, agent, or force within ones control for causing an event. Also known as a dispositional attribution. Example: When a cashier is short with her at the grocery store, the woman decides he must be a rude and crabby person all the time. We all have a need to explain the world, both to ourselves and to other people, attributing cause to the events around us. This gives us a greater sense of control. When explaining behavior, it can affect the standing of people within a group (especially ourselves). When another person has erred, we will often use internal attribution, saying it is due to internal personality factors. When we have erred, we will more likely use external attribution, attributing causes to situational factors rather than blaming ourselves. And vice versa. We will attribute our successes internally and the successes of our rivals to external luck. When a football team wins, supporters say we won. But when the team loses, the supporters say they lost. Our attributions are also significantly driven by our emotional and motivational drives. Blaming other people and avoiding personal recrimination are very real self-serving attributions. We will also make attributions to defend what we perceive as attacks. We will
3

point to injustice in an unfair world. People with a high need to avoid failure will have a greater tendency to make attributions that put themselves in a good light. We will even tend to blame victims (of us and of others) for their fate as we seek to distance ourselves from thoughts of suffering the same plight. We will also tend to ascribe less variability to other people than ourselves, seeing ourselves as more multifaceted and less predictable than others. This may well because we can see more of what is inside ourselves (and spend more time doing this). In practice, we often tend to go through a two-step process, starting with an automatic internal attribution, followed by a slower consideration of whether an external attribution is more appropriate. As with Automatic Believing, if we are hurrying or are distracted, we may not get to this second step. This makes internal attribution more likely than external attribution.

References Roesch and Amirkham (1997) Psychology,London,Printice Hall Hans Selye (1956) The Stress of Life, New York: McGraw-Hill Graham, S. (2011). Self-efficacy and academic listening. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(2), 113-117. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from the Scholars Portal database