ArticlePDF Available

Role of Self-efficacy in Building Resilience among Institutionalized Children of Kashmir

Delhi Psychiatry Journal 2017; 20:(2) © Delhi Psychiatric Society 281
Role of Self-efficacy in Building Resilience among
Institutionalized Children of Kashmir
Nasir Ahmad Bhat, M. Shafiq
Department of Psychology, Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi-110025
Contact: Nasir Ahmad Bhat, E-mail:
Original Article
There is sufficient evidence indicating that self-
efficacy is one of the resilience factors playing an
important role in the times of adversity and
vulnerability. This is a clear self-evaluative belief
among institutionalized children leading to regulate
human functioning and cognitive satisfaction when
perceiving efficient in performance likely to apply
more various thinking styles.1,2 Research evidence
indicated that adolescents valued themselves
moderately able to cope with adversity, adapt
themselves in a new and unfamiliar environment and
perceived themselves as highly able to cope with
demands3. Self-efficacy is referred to both the ability
to successfully cope with change, misfortune or
adversity4,5 and dynamic process of overcoming the
negative effects of risk experience with positive
outcomes6 and avoiding the negative trajectories
associated with these risks7. The concept of self-
efficacy according to Bandura8 was defined as the
belief of a person in his or her ability to organize
and execute certain behaviors that are necessary in
order to produce given attainments. The efficacy
beliefs influence the type of activity orphan children
choose to engage in the levels of effort they spend
to and their perseverance in the face of adversities
suggested the relationships between beliefs
concerning personal ability in a specific task and
the concrete realization of this task.
Resilience is a complex multi-faceted construct
refers an ability among orphans to handle
environmental demands without experiencing
negative effects of orphanhood. In psychology,
resilience is defined as ‘the general capacity for
flexible and resourceful adaptation to external and
internal stressors9 associated with increased quality
of life, wellbeing and functional capacity in times of
Background: There is sufficient evidence indicating that self-efficacy is one of the resilience
factors plays an important role during the times of adversity and vulnerability. It is a
clear self-evaluative belief leading to regulate human functioning and cognitive satisfaction.
The study investigated the nature of the association between general self-efficacy (GSE)
and resilience. Material and Method: Institutionalized children (N=300) who were exposed
to an adverse situation in Kashmir constituted as the sample of the study. Self efficacy
was measured by GSE scale and resilience was assessed with the help of with the help of
Wagnild & Young scale. Results: GSE was correlated with (r = .431, p < .001) and a
significant predictor (
R = .43,
R2 = .186, F (1, 279) = 63.7, p < .001.) of resilience
and orphan children exhibit resilience when responding to adversities and vulnerabilities.
Conclusion: Identifying construct for example self-efficacy that is related to resilience
establish the precise nature of how self-efficacy plays the role in building resilience will
assist the development of intervention promoting resilience in children.
Key Words: Self-efficacy, Resilience, Institutional Children.
Delhi Psychiatry Journal 2017; 20:(2) © Delhi Psychiatric Society
adversity.10 According to Gilligan11 resilient child is
a child who does better than they ought to, bearing
in mind what has happened to them. Resilient
children were often found to use different types of
thinking styles. They are highly efficient both in
general and scholastic context12 and highly elusive
and highly diverse discussed as inferring hardiness,
toughness, and resistance, along with somewhat
paradoxically elasticity and flexibility.13 Several
researchers found that resilient children are better
to coping with difficulties and adopting the hardiness
in traumatic experiences and using problem solving
strategies14 because Resilience mediated the
negative association between emotional intelligence
and psychological distress and highlighting the
importance of inter and intra-individual emotional
competencies in promoting resilience and enhancing
well-being.15 Resilience is both multi-faceted and
multi-leveled. It is described by Gilligan11 and
Connor16 a set of qualities that help a person to
withstand many of the negative effects of adversity
and a potential to exhibit resourcefulness by using
internal and external resources in response to
different contextual and developmental challenges.17
Abiola and colleagues18 offer a full account in terms
of inner strength, competence, optimism, flexibility,
and the ability to cope effectively when faced with
adversity, minimizing the impact of risk factors, such
as stressful life events enhancing the protective
factors, such as optimism, social support, and active
coping that increase people’s ability to deal with life’s
Self-efficacy and Resilience
Like resilience, self-efficacy is context specific
and seems particularly important when individuals
face adversity, when positive self-efficacy beliefs
are associated with increased motivation and per-
severance19,20 and an increased likelihood of reject-
ing negative thoughts regarding own capabilities.21
Self-efficacy as an important characteristic that
distinguished resilient and non-resilient children22 and
is considered to be the foundation of human agency23
and is referred to as an important protective factor
regulating human functioning and emotional
wellbeing through cognitive, motivational, affective,
and selective processes. Self-efficacy, planning,
persistence, anxiety, and uncertain control were
confirmed predictors of resilience.24 The proposes
that resilience research needs to examine indicators
of resiliency in order to identify what processes can
promote protective mechanisms and calls for more
affective and motivational training for adolescents
to assess their impact on their affective and motiva-
tional outcomes.25
Material and Method
The participants for the present study were
drawn from the states different orphanages of both
male and female, having more than a year of
experience in the following placement. The age
range of the participants, was from 13 to 18 years
(Mean = 8.43, SD = .49).
Tools used
General Self-efficacy scale (GSE): This is
10 items, context specific scale measuring adole-
scents General Self-efficacy developed by
Schwarzer and Jerusalem.26 For example one of an
item in this scale is ‘I can always manage to solve
difficult problems if I try hard enough’. Items are
assessed on four point scale ranging from not at all
true to exactly true.
Reliability Cronbach’s Alpha for the measure
of present data was calculated as .67 preferably
closer to .90.
Resilience Scale: This is 25 items, context
specific scale measuring adolescents Resilience
developed by Wagnild27. For example one of an item
in this scale is ‘I have enough energy to do what I
have to do.’ Items are assessed on a seven-point
response scale, ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ to
‘strongly agree’ with higher scores representing
greater resilience to stress.
Reliability Cronbach’s Alpha for the measure
of present data was calculated as .87 preferably
closer to .90.
The data of the present study was collected in
small groups. Before administering the scales, the
investigator established rapport to the subjects and
explained purpose of investigation to them. Partici-
pants were assured that their responses will be kept
strictly confidential. Participants took 10-20 minutes
time in completing the scales. After collect data with
effort, they were thanked for their participation and
Delhi Psychiatry Journal 2017; 20:(2) © Delhi Psychiatric Society 283
Table-1. Pearson’s coefficient of Correlation
on scores of Self-efficacy and Resilience
Variable NMean SD Resilience
Self-efficacy 300 31.93 4.29 .431**
*P < .05,** p < .001
In table-1 Pearson’s coefficient of correlation
was used to examine the relationship between scores
of self-efficacy and resilience. Results revealed
significant positive association between self-efficacy
and resilience (r = .431, p < .001).
Linear regression analysis revealed general self-
efficacy as a significant predictor of resilience and
shows positive and significant relation with resilience.
It was indicated that orphans with high level of self-
efficacy are more resilient as compared to the
orphans with low levels of resilience. Further it was
revealed that orphans experienced high level of
resilience only when they felt about themselves to
be able to cope with. These findings are in the lines
with the study done by Yendork and Somhlaba29 have
studied that the influence of self-efficacy and stress
experienced children living in the orphanage showed
high level of self-efficacy and reveals self-efficacy
a positive predictor of resilience.
Table-2 Linear Regression analysis predicting Resilience from Self-efficacy
RR Square Adjusted R2 Std. error of FSignificance
.43 .186 .183 15.17 63.70 .000
Predictor Standardized t-value Significance
Self-efficacy .431 7.98 .000
Dependent variable-self-efficacy
In table-2, Linear Regression analysis revealed
that resilience shows significant contribution on self-
efficacy. In explaining scores on resilience R =
.43, R2 = .186, F (1, 279) = 63.7, p < .001. These
variables jointly explained 19% variance in the
scores on Resilience. Self-efficacy was found
positively and significantly related to Resilience (β
= .43, t = 7.98, p < .001) indicated that orphans with
high level of self-efficacy were more resilience as
compared to the lower level of self-efficacy.
Present study wanted to find out the role of
self-efficacy in building resilience among Institu-
tionalized Children of Kashmir.
The findings obtained from the scores of present
study revealed positive association between self-
efficacy and resilience means that self-efficacy is
directly proportional to resilience among orphan
children. Present study was supported by the
previous finding of Hinz et al28 have found that
general self-efficacy was moderately to highly
associated with resilience.
Institutionalized children with high level of self-
efficacy can easily understand the meaning of their
life that can be more meaningful to others because
self-efficacy is not only based on competence but
behavioral and prospective as well. Self-efficacy
beliefs drive persons to strive proactively for goals
and mold their own future 30. Orphan once go through
the high levels of resilience gains strength to respond
the stress in various domains of life.
1. Saroghad S, Rezayee AM, Masoumee F. The
relationship between thinking styles and self
efficacy of pre-university male and female
students in Shiraz. J Women Society 2010; 1 :
2. Negahi M, Ghashghaeizadeh, N, Hoshmandja
M. The survey of the relationship between
learning styles and thinking styles with academic
self-efficacy in English language among the
students of Islamic Azad university of Behbahan.
Delhi Psychiatry Journal 2017; 20:(2) © Delhi Psychiatric Society
J Life Sci Biom 2012; 3 : 75-82.
3. Sagonea E, De Caroli ME. Relationships bet-
ween resilience, self-efficacy, and thinking styles
in Italian middle adolescents, Procedia - Soc
Behav Soc 2013; 92 : 838-845.
4. Wagnild GM, Young HM. Development and
psychometric evaluation of the Resilience Scale.
J Nur Meas 1993; 1 : 165-178.
5. Garmezy N. Reflections and commentary on
risk resilience and development. In: Stress, risk
and resilience in children and adolescents:
Processes, mechanisms and interventions.
Haggerty R, Sherrod L, Garmezy NM, Rutter
(Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
1996; 1-17.
6. Rutter M. Resilience in the face of adversity.
Br J Psychiatry 1985; 147 : 598-611.
7. Olsson C, Bond L, Burns J, Vella-Broderick D,
Sawyer S. Adolescent resilience: A concept
analysis. J Adolesce 2003; 26 : 1-11.
8. Bandura A. Social foundation of thought and
action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
9. Klohen E. Conceptual analysis and measure-
ment of the construct of ego resiliency, J Pers
Soc Psychol 1996; 70 : 1067-79.
10. Abiola T, Udofia O. Psychometric assessment
of the Wagnild and Young’s resilience scale in
Kano, Nigeria. BMC Res Notes 2011; 4 : 509.
11. Gilligan R. Promoting Resilience: A Resource
Guide on Working with Children in the Care
System. London: British Agencies for Adoption
and Fostering 2001.
12. Schwarzer R, Warner, LM. Perceived self-
efficacy and its relationship to resilience. In:
Resilience in Children, Adolescents, and Adults:
Translating Research into Practice. Prince
Embury A, & D.H. Saklofske (Eds.). New York:
The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality,
Springer 2013; 139-150.
13. Friedland N. Introduction-The ‘elusive’ concept
of social resilience. In: The Concept of Social
Resilience. N. Friedland, A. Arian, A,
Kirschnbaum, A. Karin, N. Fleischer (eds).
Haifa: The Technion. Samuel Neaman Institute,
2005; 7-10.
14. Connor KM, Davidson JRT, Lee L. Spirituality,
resilience, and anger in survivors of violent
trauma: A community survey. J Trauma Stress
2003; 16 : 487-494.
15. Kinman G, Louise G. Exploring stress resilience
in trainee social workers: The role of emotional
and social competencies. Br J Soc Work 2011;
41 : 261-275.
16. Connor KM. Assessment of resilience in the
aftermath of trauma. J Clin Psychiatry 2006;
67 (supp l2) : 46-49.
17. Pooley J, Cohen L. Resilience: a definition in
context. Aust Commun Psychol 2010; 22 : 30-
18. Abiola T, Udofia O. Psychometric assessment
of the Wagnild and Young’s resilience scale in
Kano, Nigeria. BMC Res. Notes 2011; 4 : 509.
19. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The Exercise of
Control. New York, NY: Freeman, 1997.
20. Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara GV,
Pastorelli C. Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of
children’s aspirations can career trajectories.
Child Dev 2001; 72 : 187-206.
21. Ozer E, Bandura A. Mechanisms governing
empowerment effects: a self-efficacy analysis.
J. Pers Soc Psychol 1990; 58 : 472-486.
22. Hamill SK. Resilience and self-efficacy: the
importance of efficacy beliefs and coping
mechanisms in resilient adolescents. Colgate
Univ J Sci 2003; 35 : 115-146.
23. Bandura A, Pastorelli C, Barbaranelli C,
Caprara GV. Self-efficacy pathways to
childhood depression. Jour Pers Soc Psychol
1999; 76 : 258-269.
24. Martin AJ, Marsh HW. Academic buoyancy:
Towards an understanding of students’
everyday academic resilience. J Sch Psychol
2008; 46 : 53-83.
25. Waxman HC, Gray JP, Padron YN. Review of
Research on Educational Resilience: Research
Report. Washington, DC: Institute of Education
Sciences 2003.
26. Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. General Self-
Efficacy Scale. In: Measures in health psycho-
logy: A users portfolio. Causal and control
beliefs. J. Weinman, S. Wright & M. Johnston
(Eds.). Windsor, England: NFER-Nelson 1995;
27. Wagnild GM. The Resilience Scale User’s
Guide for the US English version of the
Resilience Scale and the 14-Item Resilience
Scale (RS-14). Worden, MT: The Resilience
Delhi Psychiatry Journal 2017; 20:(2) © Delhi Psychiatric Society 285
Centre 2009.
28. Hinz A, Schumacher J, Albani C, Schmid G,
Brähler E. Bevölkerungsrepräsentative
Normierung der Skala zur Allgemeinen
Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung (Population-
representative norm for the General Self
Efficacy Scale). Diagnostica 2006; 52 : 26-32.
29. Salifu Yendork J, Somhlaba NZ. Do Social
Support, Self-efficacy and Resilience Influence
the Experience of Stress in Ghanaian Orphans?
An Exploratory Study. Child Care Pract 2015;
21 : 140-159.
30. Diehl M, Semegon AB, Schwarzer R. Assessing
attention control in goal pursuit: A component
of dispositional self-regulation. J Pers Assess
2006; 86 : 306-317.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
The construct of perceived self-efficacy is the belief that one can perform novel or difficult tasks and attain desired outcomes, as spelled out in the Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1997). This “can do”-cognition reflects a sense of control over one’s environment and an optimistic belief of being able to alter challenging environmental demands by means of one’s own behavior. Hence, it represents a self-confident view of one’s capability to deal with certain stressors in life.
Full-text available
Academic buoyancy is developed as a construct reflecting everyday academic resilience within a positive psychology context and is defined as students' ability to successfully deal with academic setbacks and challenges that are typical of the ordinary course of school life (e.g., poor grades, competing deadlines, exam pressure, difficult schoolwork). Data were collected from 598 students in Years 8 and 10 at five Australian high schools. Half-way through the school year and then again at the end of the year, students were asked to rate their academic buoyancy as well as a set of hypothesized predictors (self-efficacy, control, academic engagement, anxiety, teacher-student relationship) in the area of mathematics. Multilevel modeling found that the bulk of variance in academic buoyancy was explained at the student level. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling showed that (a) Time 1 anxiety (negatively), self-efficacy, and academic engagement significantly predict Time 1 academic buoyancy; (b) Time 2 anxiety (negatively), self-efficacy, academic engagement, and teacher-student relationships explain variance in Time 2 academic buoyancy over and above that explained by academic buoyancy at Time 1; and (c) of the significant predictors, anxiety explains the bulk of variance in academic buoyancy.
Full-text available
The relationships between resilience and self-efficacy, resilience and thinking styles, and self-efficacy and thinking styles were examined in 130 Italian middle adolescents. We applied the Generalized Self-efficacy Scale (Sibilia et al., 1995), the Scholastic Self-efficacy Scale (Pastorelli et al., 1998), the Resilience Scale (Wagnild & Young, 1993), and the Thinking Style Inventory (Sternberg & Wagner, 1992). Results showed that the more the adolescents experienced high levels of resilience, the more they felt themselves able to cope with novelty in various domains of life, especially in scholastic context, and the more they tended to use almost all thinking styles. Significant correlations were noted between generalized and scholastic self-efficacy and thinking styles: the more the adolescents perceived themselves able to cope with stressful events, also at school, the more they adopted almost all thinking styles. Future research could deepen the relationships between sense of coherence, subjective well-being, and thinking styles.
Full-text available
Resilience, a construct defined as competence in the face of significant adversity, was examined among adolescents using both self-report and parental data. Participants were 43, 16 to 19 year old high school students currently enrolled in an elective psychology class. Self-efficacy, perceptions of control, response to stress, persistence and coping mechanisms were measured using several questionnaires and structured tasks. The analysis yielded four distinct groups: resilient adolescents, competent adolescents, maladaptive adolescents, and a low adversity/low competence group. The resilient and competent adolescents were similar in terms of self-efficacy and coping mechanisms, and the maladaptive and low competence/low adversity group scored lower on these measures than the resilient and competent groups. Self-efficacy and the ability to articulate coping responses were important personality characteristics that distinguished the resilient group from the maladaptive youths as predicted. Internal control, response to stress, persistence and the ability to select positive coping options did not differ across the four groups, leading to the possibility that these characteristics may serve a less important role in the development of competence in the face of adversity. Further investigation is needed to look at longitudinal correlations between resiliency and the effect of self-efficacy and coping strategies.
Full-text available
The high levels of stress and burnout endemic to social work have been found to contribute to the current retention problems in the UK. It has been argued that resilience is a protective factor that enhances the ability to manage stress, and promotes wellbeing in the social care context. Little is known, however, about the individual difference factors that promote resilience in this context, or whether this protects the well-being of staff. In order to inform the development of interventions to enhance the work-related well-being of early career social workers, this study examined several emotional and social competencies (i.e. emotional intelligence, reflective ability, empathy and social competence) as predictors of resilience in 240 trainees. Whether resilience predicted psychological distress was also investigated, together with the role played by resilience in the relationship between emotional intelligence and distress. The emotional and social competencies explained 47 per cent of variance in resilience. A significant negative relationship was found between resilience and psychological distress. Resilience fully mediated the negative association between emotional intelligence and psychological distress, highlighting the importance of inter- and intra-individual emotional competencies in promoting resilience and enhancing well-being. How these findings might inform the curriculum to help trainees enhance resistance to workplace stress is considered.
Much of the literature suggests that the availability of certain protective factors can help to buffer the adverse effects of negative life events such as parental loss and the negative experiences surrounding placement in orphanages. Following on from this perspective, the present study explores the influence of perceived social support, self-efficacy and resilience on the stress experience (as measured by the symptoms of depression and anxiety) of 200 children in Accra, Ghana. The sample comprised 100 orphans placed in orphanages and 100 non-orphans - all aged between seven and 17 years. The children completed the Children's Depression Inventory, the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale, the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the General Self-efficacy Scale and the 14-item Resilience Scale. The results revealed that orphans had significantly stronger perceptions of social support from friends than non-orphans, whereas non-orphans had significantly stronger perceptions of support from families than orphans. However, both the orphans and non-orphans reported high levels of self-efficacy and resilience. Regression analyses also revealed that self-efficacy emerged as a significant positive predictor of resilience for the orphaned children, whereas self-efficacy and perceived social support emerged as significant positive predictors of resilience for the non-orphans. Implications of the findings are discussed.
Zusammenfassung. Für die Skala zur Allgemeinen Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Jerusalem und Schwarzer steht eine Normierung anhand einer repräsentativen deutschen Bevölkerungsstichprobe bisher aus. Im Jahr 2001 wurde eine bevölke-rungsrepräsentative Erhebung (N = 2019; Alter: 16–95 Jahre) durchgeführt, bei welcher neben der Skala zur Allgemeinen Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung auch andere Fragebögen eingesetzt wurden: Gießener Beschwerdebogen, Systems of Belief Inventory, Portraits Values Questionnaire und Resilience Scale. Die eindimensionale Struktur der Skala zur Allgemeinen Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung wurde bestätigt. Männer und jüngere Personen haben höhere Mittelwerte als Frauen und ältere Personen. Unter Validierungsgesichtspunkten ist die Nähe zur Resilienzskala (r = .68) hervorzuheben. Es werden Normwerte in Form von T-Werten und Prozenträngen mitgeteilt. Schlüsselwörter: Skala zur Allgemeinen Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung, Normierung, Standardisierung, bevölkerungsrepräsenta-tive Stichprobe Standardization of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in the German population Abstract. For the General Self-Efficacy Scale developed by Jerusalem and Schwarzer there are no norm values available based on a representative German sample. In 2001, a representative investigation was conducted (N = 2019, age: 16–95 years) which contained the following questionnaires: General Self-Efficacy Scale, Giessen Complaints List, Systems of Belief Inventory , Portraits Values Questionnaire, und Resilience Scale. The one-dimensional structure of the Self-Efficacy Scale was confirmed. Age and gender effects were detected: Males and younger examinees show higher mean values than women and older examinees. The correlation to the Resilience Scale (r = .68) is rather high. Norm values as percentile ranks and T-values are reported.