7 The Australian Community Psychologist Volume 23 No 2 August 2011 © The Australian Psychological Society Ltd Psychologists’ Understandings of Resilience: Implications for the Discipline of Psychology and Psychology Practice Lynne Cohen Julie Ann Pooley Catherine Ferguson Craig Harms Edith Cowan University Current adoptions of strength-based approaches, as suggested by the positive psychology movement, asks professionals to develop different perspectives on familiar constructs. Given that we have little understanding how psychologists define and work with psychological phenomena, this current study sought to determine how Western Australian registered psychologists understand resilience. The 213 participants were asked to provide definitions and information about their understanding of resilience via an open-ended questionnaire. Demographic questions included the level and year of qualification(s) and nature of psychological work undertaken. The definitions obtained from the participants were rated against definitions of resilience in the literature. The participants understandings of resilience were also assessed against the constructs believed to underpin resilience, as presented in the resilience literature. Although the concept of resilience is widely researched and much information is published in psychological journals, participants in this study did not fully articulate the concept and its relevance to strength-based approaches. As resilience provides an important basis for interventions that improve client outcomes, the results of this study have Individuals are confronted with difficult challenges at some time during their lives. Psychologists across a variety of domains deal on a daily basis with clients who are facing adversity or some difficulty and historically a deficit approach has been adopted, focusing on what has gone wrong for clients (Adame, & Leitner, 2008; Tedeschi & Kilmer, 2005). Psychologists are trained to assist individuals to develop strategies which will assist them to manage these difficulties. Many psychologists work on an individual basis or through group interventions. Postgraduate psychology training programs traditionally do not include a focus on the strengths of the individual and more often focus on the deficits of the individual. However, a strength-based approach asks different questions and extends the information sought from the client with a resultant increase in options for interventions (Harniss, Epstein, Ryser & Pearson, 1999), and the potential to reduce future interactions with the mental health system (Tedeschi & Kilmer, 2005). In recent times, the positive psychology movement has gained ground and encourages psychologists to operate from a different model with research reporting that human strengths can act as buffers against mental illness (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) indicated that psychology had become “a science largely about healing” and that the “disease model does not move psychology closer to the prevention of . . . serious social problems” (p. 5) such as increases in violence. Indeed, some individuals encounter very challenging situations which place them at risk for serious negative psychological, physical, and social consequences. However, not all individuals respond similarly to these types of challenging situations. Some go on to engage in antisocial and risky behaviours (e.g., crime, violence or substance abuse) while others go on to lead healthy and productive lives. What distinguishes this