Most people stay steady after trauma, and resilience courses add less than promised

Key takeaways

• Across 54 studies of events from military deployment to bereavement, about two in three people (65.7%) followed a steady, resilient path, and about one in five recovered gradually².
• Researchers can predict how many people will be resilient far better than which people will be, because single factors explain little³.
• A 2020 Cochrane review of 44 trials found resilience training may lower stress and depression right afterward, but it rated all of that evidence very low certainty⁶.
• In a meta-analysis of 66,807 people, grit overlapped heavily with conscientiousness, a long-studied personality trait, and was only weakly tied to school performance¹⁰.
• Struggling for a long time after a loss or trauma is not a personal failure: NIMH advises professional help when symptoms don’t ease or interfere with daily life¹⁵.

Six months after the September 11, 2001, attacks, researchers surveyed 2,752 people in New York. You might expect a city in crisis. Instead, 65% reported one or no symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)⁴.

Even among people who had been in or near the World Trade Center that morning, or who joined the rescue effort, more than half had few or no symptoms⁴.

That result was not a fluke. Psychologist George Bonanno of Columbia University and his colleagues have tracked people through bereavement, disasters, serious illness and war. Again and again, the most common response is a steady one²³.

Yet in 2009, the U.S. Army launched a $125 million program to teach resilience to soldiers on a mass scale⁸.

If you value the body’s and mind’s own ability to heal, this research is good news. It also comes with a warning. The products and programs sold under the resilience label have promised more than their evidence delivers.

Resilience is so common that researchers call it the usual outcome

The American Psychological Association describes resilience as both a process and a result: adjusting well when life gets hard, partly by staying flexible in your thinking, feelings and behavior¹. The APA adds that the skills and resources behind it can be learned and practiced¹.

Researchers who study it look at paths over time, called trajectories. They measure people repeatedly after a “potentially traumatic event,” something that can cause lasting harm but doesn’t always.

In 2018, Bonanno’s team pooled 54 such studies². The events ranged from military deployment, assaults and disasters to heart attacks, cancer, spinal cord injury and the death of a loved one².

Four paths showed up again and again:

• Resilient: stayed fairly steady throughout, about 65.7%².
• Recovery: struggled at first, then improved, about 20.8%².
• Chronic: stayed distressed, about 10.6%².
• Delayed: seemed fine, then got worse later, about 8.9%².

Each share was estimated separately, so they add up to a bit more than 100%. The pattern is the point: a steady path is the most common one.

Studies that measured people before the event found even more resilience, about 74% on average³. Studies that started afterward may miss steady people, who are less likely to sign up³.

Resilience was less common in children². Rates also looked somewhat lower for ongoing stress than for a single blow, though that gap wasn’t statistically clear². Resilience is common, not guaranteed.

The count is still debated

Not everyone accepts the two-thirds figure. In 2016, researchers Infurna and Luthar reanalyzed well-being data from people who went through divorce, widowhood or job loss, and concluded that resilience was less common than reported⁵.

Bonanno’s team replied that the reanalysis used different data and weaker statistical models⁵. The disagreement is about how common resilience is, not whether a resilient majority exists in many settings.

Resilience is a pattern you live, not a trait you’re born with

Older research treated resilience as a fixed personality feature. A Cochrane planning document for reviews of resilience training says that view has largely been replaced⁷. Most researchers now see resilience as an outcome: staying mentally healthy despite real adversity⁷.

That shift matters because of what Bonanno calls the resilience paradox. Researchers can predict quite well how many people in a group will be resilient. They are poor at predicting which ones³.

Single factors, such as optimism or income, usually show only weak links to outcomes³. Even models that combine many predictors explain only about 1% to 6% of the differences between people³.

So what does help? Bonanno’s team points to flexibility³. In their model, resilient people tend to do three things:

• Read the situation: notice what this moment demands.
• Pick a fitting tool: choose from a range of ways to cope.
• Check and adjust: notice whether it worked and switch if it didn’t.

They also warn against assuming any one strategy always works³. Talking it out, reframing and seeking support usually help, but not every time. Setting feelings aside or staying busy is often costly, but can help in some moments³.

Training helps a little, briefly, on very shaky evidence

In July 2020, Cochrane, a respected network that pools the best available trials, reviewed resilience training⁶. It found 44 randomized trials, in which people are assigned by chance to training or a comparison group. Thirty-nine involved health care workers, 6,892 people in all⁶.

Most programs were group classes held in person. Many ran longer than 12 hours, and 19 combined approaches such as mindfulness and cognitive behavioral therapy, a skills-based talk therapy⁶.

Right after training, people scored somewhat higher on resilience and somewhat lower on stress and depression⁶. Anxiety and well-being showed no clear change⁶.

The catch: Cochrane rated the certainty of every result very low⁶. It graded only results measured right after training, and just three trials reported on harms, finding none⁶. The reviewers said future research is very likely to change these conclusions⁶.

The Army’s big experiment

In 2009, the U.S. Army launched Comprehensive Soldier Fitness, a $125 million effort to build mental fitness in soldiers and families, according to a 2013 review⁸. More than a million soldiers received it, though it’s unclear how many used the materials⁸⁹.

The program trained noncommissioned officers as “Master Resilience Trainers” who taught their units⁸. Its civilian model was the Penn Resiliency Program at the University of Pennsylvania, associated with psychologist Martin Seligman⁸⁹. That program received a no-bid contract worth $31.35 million, according to The War Horse, a nonprofit newsroom⁹.

By 2013, the program’s only test of its own effectiveness was an internal evaluation by its staff that hadn’t been peer reviewed⁸. Drawing on surveys of more than 22,000 soldiers, it reported tiny gains: “good coping,” for example, rose by 0.71%⁸. Even the largest effects fell below the level researchers usually call small⁸.

That survey didn’t measure PTSD at all⁸. A footnote said the online modules had no impact⁸. In 2013, three researchers reviewing the program in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found no evidence that it prevents PTSD⁸.

None of this means soldiers gained nothing. It means a huge rollout came before the proof.

Grit and post-traumatic growth were oversold

Two popular ideas often travel with resilience. Both deserve a closer look.

Grit looks a lot like an old trait

Grit, as researchers measure it, combines two parts: perseverance of effort and consistency of interest over time¹⁰. In 2016, Marcus Credé of Iowa State University and colleagues pooled 88 samples covering 66,807 people¹⁰.

Grit correlated 0.84 with conscientiousness, a long-studied personality trait, so the two overlap heavily¹⁰. Credé called grit a relabeling of conscientiousness¹¹. Its link with school performance was weak, 0.18¹⁰. The perseverance part did better than the consistent-interests part¹⁰.

Study habits, class attendance and adjustment to school were far more strongly tied to academic performance than grit was¹¹. An earlier grit study reported that grittier West Point cadets were 99% more likely to finish basic training. Credé argued that was a misreading and estimated the real increase at closer to 3%¹¹.

Persistence is a fine value. Just don’t expect a grit score to predict your future.

Growth after trauma is real to people, but hard to measure

Many people say a loss or crisis changed them for the better: closer relationships, clearer priorities, deeper faith. Those stories deserve respect.

The research question is narrower: does a popular questionnaire capture real change? In 2009, a team led by University of Minnesota researchers surveyed students twice, two months apart¹². They then studied the 122 who went through a traumatic event in between¹².

Scores on the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, a questionnaire that asks people how much they have changed, mostly didn’t match actual before-and-after change¹². Perceived growth went along with more distress, while measured growth went along with less¹².

Perceived growth was also tied to positive reinterpretation, a way of coping by looking for the good in a bad event¹². Saying “I grew” may sometimes be a way of handling pain that’s still there. If you feel you’ve grown, that’s yours to claim. If you don’t, nothing is wrong with you.

What the evidence shows

Claim	What the research found	Evidence level
Most people stay fairly steady after a potentially traumatic event	65.7% resilient across 54 studies; 74% in studies that started before the event23	Strong evidence
A quiz can measure a fixed resilience trait that predicts how you’ll cope	Scales match current mood but haven’t predicted later outcomes37	Evidence says no
Resilience training lowers stress right afterward	Small to moderate short-term gains in health workers; very low certainty6	Promising but early
Training brings lasting benefits or prevents PTSD	Few long-term data; no evidence the Army program prevents PTSD68	Not enough evidence
Grit is a distinct trait that strongly predicts success	Nearly identical to conscientiousness; weak link with grades10	Evidence says no
Growth questionnaires capture real change after trauma	Perceived growth didn’t match measured change in a prospective study12	Not enough evidence
Matching your coping to the situation supports resilience	The three-step pattern tracked with fewer symptoms in one study; no trial yet shows training improves it3	Promising but early

What tends to help: people, routines, flexibility and meaning

Since no single trait decides who copes well, the most useful steps are ordinary ones. The National Institute of Mental Health suggests the following after a traumatic event¹⁵:

• spend time with supportive friends and relatives;
• keep regular routines for meals, exercise and sleep;
• avoid alcohol and drugs as ways to cope;
• set realistic goals and focus on what you can manage.

The Cochrane planning document lists factors researchers study as possible supports for resilience. They include social support, active coping, a sense of meaning or purpose, and religion or spirituality⁷. Bonanno’s review adds exercise and positive emotions to the list of small, real correlates³.

None of these is a cure. But they fit values many natural-health readers already hold: community, daily rhythm, time outdoors, faith and self-reliance. Resilience, as researchers now see it, is less a special trait than a set of ordinary resources you keep in good repair.

Purpose deserves its own look, and our article on purpose and long life covers that research. A later article in this library covers social support in depth.

A resilience inventory you can fill out in 10 minutes

This is our own tool, not a validated test. For each area, answer the question as plainly as you can, then choose one small step for the coming week.

Area	Ask yourself	One small step this week	Why it’s here
Connections	Who could I call at 10 p.m. if things went badly?	Send one message to someone you’ve drifted from	Supportive people are on NIMH’s coping list15
Routines	Are my meals, movement and sleep holding steady?	Fix one wake time and add one daily walk	NIMH advises steady routines15
Coping tools	What do I usually do when stressed, and does it fit this situation?	List three ways you cope and note which helped this week	No single strategy works everywhere3
Meaning	What still matters to me right now?	Do one thing tied to faith, family, nature or craft	Meaning and spirituality are studied supports7
Help sources	Do I know where I’d go for professional help?	Save 988 in your phone and find one local counselor	NIMH points to professional care when symptoms persist1415

A 3-step check for hard moments (our words, based on the flexibility model³):

1. Read it. Ask, “What does this moment need from me: action, comfort or patience?”
2. Pick it. Ask, “Which of my options fits that need best?”
3. Check it. Later, ask, “Did that help? If not, what will I try next time?”

Score nothing. Just notice which areas feel thin and start there.

When struggling isn’t a resilience failure

About one in three people doesn’t follow the steady path, at least at first². That is a normal part of human variation, not weakness. Some people need treatment, and effective treatments exist¹⁴.

Prolonged grief. In March 2022, psychiatry’s diagnostic manual, the DSM-5-TR, added prolonged grief disorder¹³. For adults, it applies at least 12 months after a death. Signs include intense longing for the person, or constant thoughts of them, nearly every day for at least a month¹³. At least three other signs must also be present, such as a sense that part of who you are is gone, disbelief, intense emotional pain, numbness, intense loneliness, or feeling life has no meaning¹³. The grief must also cause serious distress or trouble functioning¹³. One meta-analysis estimated that about 10% of people bereaved by natural causes develop prolonged grief¹³. A later article covers grief.

PTSD. NIMH says fear after trauma is normal and most people recover over time¹⁴. A PTSD diagnosis requires symptoms lasting at least a month, such as reliving the event, avoiding reminders, feeling on edge, and lasting changes in mood or thinking¹⁴. Talk therapy, medication or both can help¹⁴. A later article covers trauma.

See a professional if symptoms don’t improve over time or start to interfere with daily life, according to NIMH¹⁵. Warning signs include flashbacks or frightening thoughts, nightmares, avoiding reminders, pulling away from family and friends, and physical symptoms such as headaches, stomach problems or a racing heart¹⁵. If a loved one’s symptoms haven’t improved after six to eight weeks, encourage them to talk with a health care provider¹⁴.

If you or someone you know is struggling or having thoughts of suicide, call or text the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline at 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org¹⁴. In a life-threatening emergency, call 911¹⁴.

Questions readers ask

The bottom line

Most people weather terrible events with more steadiness than many assume, and the ones who struggle are not failing a test. Resilience shows up as a path through hard times, built from ordinary supports such as people, routines, meaning and the flexibility to try something else.

Programs, scores and slogans sold under the resilience label have run ahead of their evidence. Keep the basics in good repair, be patient with yourself and others, and reach for professional help when pain lingers or takes over daily life.

Related reading

• Purpose tracks with a longer life, while the Blue Zones story is less certain
• Rituals can steady nerves and honor a loss, but the science is young
• The sleep aid with the clearest warning is the drugstore antihistamine
• Wellness started as a big idea about thriving before office programs made it small
• Work stress has two classic recipes, and both show up in heart studies

Sources

1. American Psychological Association. “Resilience” (definition adapted from the APA Dictionary of Psychology). APA Topics, accessed October 2026. apa.org
2. Galatzer-Levy IR, Huang SH, Bonanno GA. “Trajectories of resilience and dysfunction following potential trauma: A review and statistical evaluation.” Clinical Psychology Review, 2018;63:41–55. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
3. Bonanno GA, Chen S, Galatzer-Levy IR. “Resilience to potential trauma and adversity through regulatory flexibility.” Nature Reviews Psychology, 2023. tc.columbia.edu
4. Armstrong K. “Remarkable Resiliency: George Bonanno on PTSD, Grief, and Depression.” APS Observer (Association for Psychological Science), January 29, 2020. psychologicalscience.org
5. Galatzer-Levy IR, Bonanno GA. “It’s not so easy to make resilience go away” (reply to Infurna and Luthar). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2016;11(2). psychologicalscience.org
6. Kunzler AM, Helmreich I, Chmitorz A, et al. “Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare professionals.” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2020, Issue 7, CD012527 (abstract and plain-language summary). cochrane.org and cochranelibrary.com
7. Cochrane. “Psychological interventions for resilience enhancement in adults” (review protocol, CD012527; references through 2016). Cochrane Library. doi.org
8. Steenkamp MM, Nash WP, Litz BT. “Post-traumatic stress disorder: review of the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2013;44(5):507–512. sites.bu.edu
9. DeFraia D. “The Unknown Legacy of Military Mental Health Programs.” The War Horse, October 2, 2019. thewarhorse.org
10. Credé M, Tynan MC, Harms PD. “Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, published online 2016, doi:10.1037/pspp0000102 (advance copy mirrored at Gwern.net; publisher page not reachable). Gwern.net
11. Iowa State University. “Grit is not a great predictor of success, study finds” (news release on Credé et al.). Via ScienceDaily, May 18, 2016. sciencedaily.com
12. Frazier P, Tennen H, Gavian M, Park C, Tomich P, Tashiro T. “Does self-reported posttraumatic growth reflect genuine positive change?” Psychological Science, 2009;20(7):912–919. experts.umn.edu
13. Treml J, Brähler E, Kersting A. “Prevalence, Factor Structure and Correlates of DSM-5-TR Criteria for Prolonged Grief Disorder.” Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2022;13:880380. frontiersin.org
14. National Institute of Mental Health. “Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.” NIH Publication No. 23-MH-8124, revised 2023. nimh.nih.gov
15. National Institute of Mental Health. “Coping With Traumatic Events.” Last reviewed May 2024. nimh.nih.gov