You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:
The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.
Please note that you are now editing the latest revision of this page, which is not the approved one shown by default.
To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:
1+ paragraphs on any combination of the following:
The first day consisted of an excellent range of thought provoking presentations. An important issue which was raised was the need for further discussion on the usage of words such as robustness since it may have been used in slightly different contexts by different speakers. Also the group discussions seemed to focus on the characterization of resilient vs. non-resilient (vulnerable) individuals. There too some clarity is needed. It is likely that people will differ in their resiliencies and vulnerabilities to different stressors and display different degrees of resiliencies. Thus tests of resiliencies at any level, should consider graded tests (i.e., stressor is applied at diff intensities, magnitude, duration) so that such tests can distinguish between different degrees of resiliencies. This would be especially pertinent to assessing changes in the degree of resilience over time (e.g., longitudinal studies) and especially for the testing of potential therapies intended to improve resiliencies.