Skip to main content

Child Psychological Adjustment to War and Displacement: A Discriminant Analysis of Resilience and Trauma in Syrian Refugee Children

An Author Correction to this article was published on 21 October 2021

This article has been updated


The ongoing war in Syria has led to the displacement of 12 million people since 2011, with minors representing 40% of all refugees. Syrian children living in refugee camps are at risk of developing a wide range of mental health problems, given their previous and ongoing exposure to episodes of violence, disruption of family ties, and discontinuous access to education. In this study, we drew on the salutogenic paradigm to investigate whether, and to what extent, high/low levels of resilience were associated with other indicators of mental health and post-traumatic response in Syrian children living in refugee camps. The sample was composed of 311 Syrian children living in Jordanian refugee camps as a consequence of the war in Syria. We administered quantitative self-report measures to assess participants’ exposure to trauma, individual levels of resilience, and mental health, performing discriminant analysis to examine the association between resilience and trauma/mental health. Syrian children living in Jordanian refugee camps reported intense exposure to traumatic events. The linear discriminant equation supported adoption of the function [Wilk’s Lambda (Λ = 0.827)]: lower levels of resilience were associated with trauma symptoms (re-experiencing, avoidance, and hyperarousal) and emotional problems, while higher levels of resilience were associated with pro-social behaviours. The findings of the present study suggest that resilience acts as a protective factor buffering children from the consequences of trauma and challenging life conditions. We discuss the implications for interventions designed to promote the wellbeing and mental health of children living in refugee camps.


  • Syrian children living in refugee camps are at risk of developing psychological sequelae.

  • Children with different levels of resilience may display differential patterns of trauma symptoms, emotional problems, and prosocial behaviours.

  • We performed discriminant analysis to verify whether trauma symptoms, emotional adjustment, and prosocial competence distinguished highly resilient children from peers with low resilience.

  • Prosocial behaviours were found to predict membership of the highly resilient cohort, while trauma and emotional distress predicted membership of the low resilience group.

  • Clinical intervention designed to boost social resilience may help to reduce symptoms in children.

Syrian child victims of armed conflicts and displacement are at risk of psychological burden as a result of exposure to multiple and cumulative traumatic experiences (Nehring et al., 2019; Yayan et al., 2020). Posttraumatic Stress Syndromes (PSS) along with emotional and behavioural impairments are the most frequently reported consequences for children’s psychological functioning in the aftermath of military violence and displacement (Buchmüller et al., 2018; Karam et al., 2019). Most research conducted with child refugees and their caregivers has focused on psychological dysfunction and poor mental health following cumulative traumatic experiences (Hodes & Vostanis, 2019; Khan et al., 2019; Nasıroğlu et al., 2018; Norredam et al., 2018; Giordano et al., 2019a, 2019b, 2019c). Threatening events can induce higher and even incapacitating levels of arousal, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress in refugee children. Calamities such as getting separated from family members or losing their home and community ties can trigger a sense of sadness, grief, and depression (Bean et al., 2007). Accordingly, an 11% rate of PTSD has been recorded among child and adolescent refugees in resettlement countries, alongside a 5% rate of depression (Fazel et al., 2005). Psychiatric disorders such as psychosis are a further documented risk for refugee children and adolescents, (Fearon et al., 2006; Kirkbride et al., 2006; Hollander et al., 2016; Priebe et al., 2016).

Accordingly, Syrian child refugees commonly experience grief over losing their homes, family members, significant relationships, and support structures (Hassan et al., 2015). A study conducted with 1000 Syrian refugee children and adolescents showed that 45.6% had developed PTSD symptoms, which in turn displayed a high rate of comorbidity with emotion dysregulation (Khamis, 2019). In another study carried out with 1115 Syrian children displaced in Turkey, anxiety and depression were found to be significantly associated with PTSD (Yayan et al., 2020). In a sample of 8000 displaced Syrian children, 15.1% reported ongoing fears, while 26% mentioned having suicidal thoughts (James et al., 2014).

Parental factors have also been shown to play a role in shaping the effects of trauma exposure on Syrian refugee children. For example, parental psychological functioning was associated with a global measure of mental distress, emotional issues, and conduct problems in a group of 263 Syrian child refugees who had been resettled in Turkey (Eruyar et al., 2018). In another study with 384 child refugees from Syria living in Turkish refugee camps, attachment patterns were found to predict PTSD, while conduct problems were predicted by a lack of emotional warmth, rejection and over-protection on the part of parents, as well as by insecure attachment relationships (Eruyar et al., 2020).

On the other hand, the child victims of war and extreme violence have also been observed to display resilience and coping strategies. Indeed, children can display considerable resources and ability to adjust in the face of war-related hardship (Motti-Stefanidi, 2018; Yaylaci, 2018). Different definitions of resilience have been adopted, helping to build up a multifaceted picture of how the child resists the burdens of war and military violence (Keles et al., 2018).

Cicchetti and Rogosch define resilience as “a dynamic process that encompasses the attainment of positive adaptation within the context of exposure to significant adversity that typically exerts major assaults on biological and psychological development” (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2012; p.1), an approach that is more focused on individual ability to adapt than on contextual factors fostering or hindering adjustment to adversity. Investigation of individual resources has frequently focused on stable and dispositional trajectories of resilience, leading scholars to argue that resiliency may be essentially a developmental trait (Bonanno, 2004). Authors have variously conceptualized resilience in children as: an extraordinary set of competences allowing individuals to resist hardships via personal resources such as coping strategies (Kocijan-Hercigonja et al., 1998); a constellation of personality traits (for a critique of this perspective, see Masten, 2014); a form of emotion regulation (Southwick et al., 2014), and even genetic factors (Kim‐Cohen et al., 2004).

In contrast, Masten (2015) proposed that resilience is a process through which a dynamic system expresses its capacity to adapt to disturbances that threaten its function, viability, or development. Similarly, Windle (2011) described resilience as the process of adapting to and managing significant sources of stress or trauma, analysing multiple micro and macro factors whose dynamic interaction may help individuals to adjust to adversity. From these more ecological perspectives, protective individual, relational and environmental resources or assets can all contribute to fostering resilience. Finally, embracing a socio-ecological perspective, Ungar (2008) defined resilience as the capacity of individuals to make culture-sensitive use of psychological, social, cultural, and physical resources so as to go on functioning in the wake of exposure to hardship. Each of these systems plays a specific role in enhancing resilience in children (Cesana et al., 2018; Giordano & Ferrari, 2018; Masten, 2011; Tol et al., 2013; Giordano et al., 2015). Furthermore, examining the interplay between resources and risk factors is a key line of inquiry within resilience research and can shed light on the mechanisms underpinning both vulnerability and adaptation (Luthar, 2006; Masten, 2014; Masten & Curtis, 2000).

Recent advances within the diverse field of inquiry into children’s adjustment to war (Liu et al., 2017) have led to shift in focus from individual to environmental and socio-ecological factors (Giordano et al., 2019a, 2019b, 2019c; Ungar, 2011). Accordingly, authors have begun to document the key role of environment, social relations, and culture-specific dimensions of resiliency in promoting functioning among war-affected children (Catani, 2018; Diab et al., 2018). Increasingly, scholars have emphasized the relational characteristics of resilience, in terms of the collective support required to cope with hardship (Turner et al., 2012; Walsh, 1998). In this study, we draw on the concept of relational resilience, understood as a process of “adaptive accommodation and transformation to loss, dislocation, and radically changed circumstances” (Turner et al., 2012; p. 7) via the mobilization of social competences and behaviours (Bang & Collet, 2020).

Qualitative studies conducted with Syrian refugees have indicated that resilience can take the form of communal coping strategies such as seeking social support, remaining in touch with family members in Syria, practicing the Muslim faith, and adaptive fatalism. Such features of resilience are more characteristic of collectivist societies than of Western individualist cultures (Atari-Khan et al., 2021). Free access to education facilities and primary health care were found to foster the expression of prosocial competencies and resiliency among Syrian child refugees in Turkey (Ekmekci, 2017). In addition, most refugee children from northern Syria were able to maintain family ties despite having been displaced, thus improving their chances of benefiting from both protective parenting and relational factors (Kirisçi, 2014). Finally, Çelebi and colleagues (2017) found that a sense of efficacy and meaningfulness based on their ethnic identity and a sense of belonging were effective in buffering Syrian children against the mental and physical impact of perceived discrimination. In sum, collectivist societies place more emphasis on the relational environment than on individuals, pursuing healing through relationships and social networks, as well as enacting personal well-being via prosocial behaviors that can promote survival and coping skills in the aftermath of traumatic experiences (Atari-Khan et al., 2021; Bemak & Chung, 2017; Veronese & Barola, 2018).

The salutogenic model introduced by Antonowsky in the domain of the health sciences shares multiple characteristics with ecological theories of resilience (Antonovsky, 1996). Both perspectives are systems-oriented and focus on complex, multilevel social and relational factors, in recognition of the fact that individualistic approaches may fail to adequately capture human adaptation to hardship and trauma (Mittelmark, 2021). Eriksson and Lindström (20062010) observed that later theoretical formulations of both approaches emphasizes processes and the role of systemic and relational factors above personal attributes. Indeed, both the resilience and salutogenesis paradigms invoke the contribution of individual, group and community resources to coping with adversity. Thus, the aim of this exploratory study, which was also informed by a salutogenic perspective (Höltge et al., 2018) focused on ‘ease’, rather than ‘disease’, was to define differential protective and risk trajectories with respect to traumatic experience in highly resilient children versus children with low resilience (Bethancourt & Khan, 2018).

We adopted a discriminant analysis approach as that most suited to identifying factors with the power to differentiate between groups. Specifically, we conducted a discriminant analysis to determine the extent of trauma symptoms, psychological adjustment, and prosocial competence in a group of highly resilient children versus children classified as low resilient.

Based on existing research, we hypothesized that highly resilient children would display greater relational skills in terms of prosocial behaviors as measured by the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (H1), while children with low resilience would be at greater risk of developing trauma symptoms, and would display greater emotional distress and more limited prosocial skills (H2) (Derluyn & Broekaert, 2007). Our secondary research aim was to document the pivotal role of the social and relational bases of resilience, understood as a human capability that emerges from nurturing social contexts (Peltonen et al., 2014).


Sample and Procedure

The sample was composed of 311 Syrian children, from age 7 to 14 (M = 10.49, SD = 2.16). The sample was evenly balanced between genders: boys (n = 155, 49.8%) and girls (n = 156, 50.2%). The recruitment process was carried out in tented refugee settlements and local villages by social workers at Child and Family Protective Places (CFPs) in the Community Development Centres of Ajloun, Jerash, and Balqa. The CFPs - run by JOHUD (the Jordanian Hashemite Fund for Human Development) in partnership with INTERSOS NGO and financed by UNICEF and OCHA - offered psycho-social programs aimed at enhancing child protection and fostering relational resilience among children and their families (Giordano et al., 2021). Interested parents provided written consent for their children to participate, and children provided verbal assent. Families were fully briefed about the aims of the study.

Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) being aged between 7 and 14 years at the time of the study, (2) being Syrian and living in a refugee camp and (3) having been exposed to traumatic events in the three months prior to the study (4) attending one of the CFPs in Ajloun, Jerash, or Balqa for no longer than two months. This last criterion was designed to minimize the potential for bias due to participation in psycho-social interventions focused on relational resilience. Out of 380 children who met the eligibility criteria, 311 participated in the study, yielding a response rate of 82%.

All research data was collected anonymously, and all analyses were performed on aggregate scores. Participation in the study was voluntary, and no financial, monetary, or other incentives were provided. Completion of the research protocol required approximately 20 min. The data was collected over a two-month period in July and August 2014. Trained local educators and social workers were asked to administer the questionnaires and assess the children directly at the camp where they were based. The data collection settings were designed to offer a relational space (Hydén, 2014) where participants could feel free to express their representations and opinions (Veronese et al., 2016; Veronese & Pepe, 2021). Participants were aware that they were free to withdraw from the study at any time. All phases of the research were conducted following American Psychological Association (APA) ethical guidelines (APA, 2010) and the code of conduct outlined in the Declaration of Helsinky (1967). The research was approved by the IRB of the University of Milano-Bicocca. None of the authors have financial or other kinds of conflict of interest to declare in relation to the research aims and outcomes.


Child and Youth Resilience Measure (CYRM-28; Ungar & Liebenberg, 2009). The CYRM-28 is a self-report questionnaire designed to assess dimensions of resilience in children and adolescents. The measurement model comprises three correlated factors: personal skills (e.g., “I’m able to solve problems without harming myself or other”), social resources (e.g., “my caregiver(s) stand(s) by me during difficult times”), and contextual factors (e.g., “I feel I belong at my school”). The 28 items are rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (“Not at all”) to 5 (“A lot”). A cumulate global score ranging from 28 to 140 may be used, with high scores on the cumulate index indicating greater potential for resilience. Given that there were no validated standard Arabic versions of the instrument available in the existing literature, the items were translated and culturally adapted following the back-translation method (Brislin, 1981) by a group of Lebanese research psychologists employed by the NGO, Himaya, who had conducted a similar study with Syrian refugees in the Lebanon (Maragel & Manachi, 2018). In the present study, the reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha; Cronbach, 1951) for the global score was α = 0.832.

Childhood War Trauma Questionnaire (CWTQ; Macksoud & Aber, 1996). The CWTQ is a semi-structured interview evaluating the types of traumatic experience to which a child has been exposed and with what frequency. The instrument comprises two sub-sections: the first records demographic information (e.g., age, gender, and place of residence) while the second concerns the child’s direct and indirect experience of, and exposure to, war. A binary rating (“yes”, “no”) is assigned to the different types of trauma, which are grouped into the following categories: Separation, Victim of Violent Acts, Involvement in Hostilities, Displacement, Bereavement, Exposure to Shelling or Combat, Witness Violent Acts, Physical Injuries, Emigration, and Extreme Depravation. The CWTQ also yields a unidimensional score ranging from 0 to 12, with a high score indicating severe exposure to traumatic experience.

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman & Goodman, 2009). The SDQ is a quantitative behavioral screening measure for children and adolescents aged between 3 and 16 years. It is used in research, in the evaluation of treatment outcomes, and as part of clinical assessments of children’s mental well-being (Goodman et al., 2000). The measurement model comprises five dimensions: emotional symptoms (5 items), conduct problems (5 items), hyperactivity/inattention (5 items), peer relationship problems (5 items), prosocial behavior (5 items). The questionnaire items are rated on a Likert ordinal response scale ranging from “not true” (0) to “certainly true” (2). We administered the Arabic version of the questionnaire (Almaqrami & Shuwail, 2004; Thabet et al., 2000). The Cronbach reliability scores obtained in the present study were emotional symptoms (α = 0.544), conduct problems (α = 0.479), hyperactivity/inattention (α = 0.432), peer relationship problems (α = 0.403), and prosocial behavior (α = 0.587). This poor reliability performance as measured by Cronbach’s alpha may have been due to violation of basic assumptions (specifically, tau-equivalence and uncorrelated errors; Birnbaum et al., 1968). In such cases, true reliability can be underestimated (Raykov, 1997) and the greatest lower bound (GLB) measure should be preferred as a reliability index (Trizano-Hermosilla & Alvarado, 2016). GLB values for the SDQ measures were as follows: emotional symptoms (α = 0.738), conduct problems (α = 0.725), hyperactivity/inattention (α = 0.718), peer relationship problems (α = 0.689), and prosocial behavior (α = 0.788). In any case, the Arabic version of the questionnaire adopted in this study has been validated by other authors (Emam et al., 2016). Other studies conducted on the factor structure of the SDQ suggest that the original model may be viewed as reliable and appropriate for use in empirical research (see for example McAloney-Kocaman & McPherson, 2017; Palmieri & Smith, 2007). Accordingly, we deployed the subscales of the SDQ as empirical measures of children’s psychological adjustment.

Post-Traumatic Stress Reaction Checklist for Children (PTSRC; Macksoud et al., 1990). The PTSRC is a self-report tool for assessing PTSD symptoms in children. Three types of symptom are evaluated: re-experiencing the trauma (e.g., “Do you sometimes feel as if the trauma is happening all over again?”), hyper-arousal (e.g., “Is it more difficult for you to concentrate or pay attention to things than before?”) and avoidance strategies (e.g., “Do you try not to think about what happened?”). The Arabic version of the instrument has been validated and consists of 14 items, each representing a specific PTSD symptom listed in the DSM IV-TR (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Items are rated dichotomously (0 = absence of the symptom; 1= presence of the symptom). Reliability scores in the present study were re-experiencing trauma (α = 0.789), hyperarousal (α = 0.742), and avoidance strategies (α = 0.703).

Data Analysis Strategy

In order to identify patterns of association between children’s resilience scores, trauma symptoms, and mental health, a discriminant analysis approach was applied (see Lachenbruch & Goldstein, 1979; Veronese & Pepe, 2017). Discriminant analysis (DA) is a powerful multivariate data analysis technique that involves estimating a quantitative linear function with a view to classifying observations into empirically grounded, mutually exclusive groups (Landau & Everitt, 2003). When applied to the data for a set of variables, the linear equation provides a basis for separating the data points, assigning them either to a given category or to an alternative category. A crucial feature of DA is the use of this linear combination of variables to generate a new “hypothetical” group membership function, which is empirically founded rather than based on predefined classification strategies (Veronese & Pepe, 2020). Cross-validation of the equation’s performance by assigning observations to the hypothetical groups lends added value to this kind of analysis.

Given that the main aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy of a linear combination of trauma exposure, trauma symptoms, and children’s mental health in differentiating between high and low levels of resilience, the data were analyzed following a stepwise approach. First, two groups (high-resilience versus low-resilience) were created using the cumulate CYRM-28 score and the inter-quartile distance as classification criteria. This meant that the children were divided into two mutually exclusive cohorts. In light of this binary classification, expected membership was computed using Fisher’s linear discriminant function (Posse, 1992). This procedure allows a multivariate observation, x, to be turned into a univariate observation, y, such that the y values derived from each of the populations to be classified are separated to the greatest possible extent (Ye et al., 2005). In this study, the performance of the linear function in discriminating between the two groups was evaluated based on four different outputs. First, Wilk’s Lambda (λ) was calculated to identify the proportion of total variance that was not accounted for by the differences between cohorts. We opted for a discriminant analysis approach because we wished to answer the research question: ‘in relation to what variables are these groups most different?’. We decided to investigate two groups (high vs. low resilience) in order to gather information about the highest and lowest scoring subjects. We agree that in general the practice of dichotomizing continuous variables leads to a loss of information (see MacCallum et al., 2002). Second, canonical discriminant function coefficients were used to assess the strength and direction of the association between the binary target variable and the data sets for the other study variables (McLachan, 2004). Third, we implemented a resubstitution estimate procedure (Solow, 1990) to verify the accuracy of the linear function in classifying “blind” observations. Finally, we calculated Press’s Q statistic (i.e., a chi-square statistic with one degree of freedom) to assess whether the discriminant function was statistically better than a chance model at classifying cases (Hahs-Vaughn, 2016; see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1

The formula for estimating Press’s Q statistic. N = total sample size, n = number of correctly classified observations, k = number of groups

To control for possible sources of co-variation, the variables age and gender were included in the discriminant linear function. The rationale for this methodological decision was dual: (1) inclusion of potential covariates made our analysis of the study variables more specific and informative (Pearl, 2001; Pepe & Addimando, 2014; Veronese et al., 2017a, 2017b) and (2) it also allowed us to test for the Yule-Simpson effect (i.e., a statistical association that holds for the entire sample but is trivial or reversed in the individually assessed cohorts, Ramanana-Rahary et al., 2009).

The outcomes are reported in the next section. All the analyses were performed using SPSS 21.0.


General Descriptive and Zero-order Correlations

Mean values, standard deviations, and other descriptive statistics are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Summary of main descriptive statistics

Participants’ levels of exposure to different types of potentially traumatic event are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 Children’s exposure to traumatic events (CWTQ)

Approximately half of the sample (46.3%) had been exposed to two or more traumatic events. Ten percent of the participating children reported having experienced over seven different traumatic episodes. The sample had experienced a mean of 3.5 events associated with military violence, war, and displacement. Zero order correlations are reported in Table 3.

Table 3 Zero-order correlations between children’s trauma symptoms, resilience, mental health, and exposure to trauma

Analysis of the zero-order correlations among variables suggests that, in general, resilience was associated with more prosocial behavior (r = 0.207) and fewer emotional problems (r = −0.154). Also, exposure to trauma was found to be mainly correlated with emotional problems and trauma symptoms. The number of traumatic events to which children had been exposed was correlated with age, with older children obtaining higher scores than younger children. There were no other significant correlations with participants’ demographic characteristics. In addition, statistically significant correlations were found between emotional problems and the re-experiencing (r = 0.265), hyper-arousal (r = 0.149) and avoidance (r = 0.205) sub-domains of trauma. Hyperactivity/inattention on the other hand was significantly correlated with the other dimensions of mental health (i.e., emotion problems, conduct problems, and peer relationship issues).

Results of Discriminant Analysis

The 11 selected quantitative indicators (SDQ, PTSRC, CWTQ and demographics) were included concurrently in the discriminant function analysis for classifying observations. The linear equation output supported adoption of the function: specifically, both Wilk’s Lambda (Λ = 0.827) and chi-square values (χ2(11) = 29.37, p = 0.002) were robustly statistically significant. The linear discriminating function accounted for approximately 40 percent of variance, and canonical correlation was 0.416. A more detailed picture emerged from analysis of the individual variables’ relative contribution to the equation (see Table 4).

Table 4 Standardized linear function coefficient for discriminant analysis

In calculating the standardized discriminant coefficients, we took the group with low resilience scores as the baseline group. Negative coefficients indicate that scores were significantly lower in the reference group, while positive values denote higher scores among this cohort. The discriminant analysis suggested that the derived function comprises the following components: prosocial behaviors, emotional problems, and trauma symptoms (specifically, re-experiencing, avoidance, and hyper-arousal). The coefficients for the other variables did not attain statistical significance, meaning that scores were similar across the two groups. With regard to the main differences between the two cohorts, the high resilience group (HRG) obtained higher scores for prosocial behaviors than did the low resilience group (LRG), while the LRG displayed higher levels of emotional problems, re-experiencing, and avoidance. Finally, the variable gender (0.237) contributed significantly, in that it was more frequently associated with belonging to the cohort of high resilient children. With regard to classification power, the predictive accuracy of the model was 66.7% for the HRG sub-sample; sensitivity and specificity for the cross-validation sample were 74.4 and 55.6%, respectively. Hence, out of 149 children, 110 were classified correctly. These values were reflected in the statistically significant Press’s Q score: 30.95 (p < 0.001) and endorsed acceptance of the linear function. Table 5 presents the main descriptive statistics for the study variables by cohort of children (i.e., LRG vs HRG).

Table 5 Summary of the main descriptive statistics for the two cohorts of children


In this quantitative cross-sectional study, we set out to explore domains of trauma, resilience and psychological adjustment in Syrian children aged 7–14 years who were living in refugee camps in Jordan after being displaced as a result of war. Our results suggested that prosocial behaviors, emotional problems, and symptoms of trauma were the main contributors to a linear discriminant function with the power to classify children as displaying high or low resilience.

We found that a leading characteristic of the high resilience group was the capacity to establish good social relationships in contexts typically characterized by the disruption of social networks, poor community ties, and an increased sense of social isolation (Juan et al., 2018; Giordano et al., 2019; Veronese et al., 2017b; Veronese et al., 2018). Research showed that during the process of relocation the emotional needs of individuals increase markedly, while their support social network is severely disrupted (Sluzki, 1992). Feelings of isolation may lead children feeling lost, not knowing whom to trust, or where to find help or reliable information. Therefore, having supportive relationships appears as a key priority for the wellbeing of migrant children. Syrian children who successfully maintained good social competence and functioning were associated with membership of the high resilience cohort.

In contrast, higher levels of trauma and emotional distress, together with low prosocial competence, were associated with membership of the low resilience group (Newnham et al., 2018). These results are in line with previous studies conducted with children with a history of interpersonal trauma, which found that children with low resilience were more likely to have negative outcomes, such as higher levels of trauma symptoms and other emotional problems, than were peers with high resilience (Haskett et al., 2006). The negative correlation between resilience and trauma-related symptoms may thus be explained by the fact that resilience comes into play shortly after exposure to trauma has occurred, before symptoms arise, thus buffering subjects against the development of mental health conditions (van der Walt et al., 2014). Other studies that have investigated the latent construct of trait resilience found that positive affect is an associated trait that draws on resilience to shield individuals from emotional challenges (Chang et al., 1997; Gross & John, 2003).

Therefore, trauma symptoms and emotional distress are present in displaced children with low resilience, likely exposing them to a greater risk of developing psychological syndromes (Gormez et al., 2018). Other studies conducted on Syrian children have observed that trauma-related symptoms can augment children’s sense of social isolation and loneliness, while negative emotions can heighten their sense of ongoing threat and uncertainty (Khamis, 2019).

The negative association between prosocial competence and resilience is in line with previous studies that identified a relationship between low resilience and a low propensity to engage in prosocial behaviors (Sanders et al., 2019). We might argue that a deficit in prosocial competence following the loss of secure bonds, and the exposure to interpersonal violence related to war and displacement could augment children’s sense of being isolated and unsupported, their perceptions of personal suffering, and their risk of incurring poor mental health (trauma symptoms and emotional dysregulation) (Kletter & Carrion, 2018). Accordingly, all our hypotheses were supported by the empirical data, suggesting that the group of children that reported a high level of resilience was better equipped to cope effectively with the aftermath of war. Importantly, greater resilience was associated with more frequent deployment of prosocial behaviors and resources as assessed by the SDQ (prosocial behaviors) scale (Giordano et al., 2019). We thus propose that prosocial competence may have contributed to protecting our participants from war-related burden. Future research could usefully investigate the causal factors facilitating children’s development of pro-social behaviors, thus helping to define a complex conceptual model of relational human functioning and its power to protect children from war trauma. Furthermore, with regard to refugee children specifically, war and post-war conditions give rise to continual traumatic events, for which children must compensate by refining their adjustment strategies if they are to reduce the risk of psychological breakdown. Hence, we require a more in-depth understanding of the relations between exposure to trauma, ongoing and cumulative traumatic experience, and the prosocial competences that shape resilience and survival skills (Veronese & Barola, 2018). We might plausibly hypothesize a curvilinear relationship between exposure to trauma and the prosocial behaviours that protect children from trauma symptoms. When the pressure of traumatic events is such that it risks undermining relational functioning in child victims of war, it is crucial to know what other domains of functioning and wellbeing might buffer them from the effects of ongoing trauma, protect their social functioning, and prevent disruption of their resilience competences (Veronese et al., 2017b; Veronese & Cavazzoni, 2020; Veronese et al., 2018). Future research may shed light on these complex and interlocking relationships by providing a better understanding of the internal and external processes that can enhance children’s agency in face of hardship (Betancourt & Khan, 2008; Giordano et al., 2012; Giordano et al., 2015) and their relational resiliency (Vindevogel, 2017) during war and forced displacement.

In sum, our work challenges exclusively individualist definitions of resilience (Barber, 2013; Vindevogel, 2017), leaving room for a more culture-sensitive concept of relational resilience, especially in relation to members of collectivist societies such as Syrian child refugees (Dionigi, 2016; Panter‐Brick et al., 2018). Instead of having an internal locus of control, as can be the case for members of individualistic societies that value personal ability, children in collectivist cultures may experience trauma and resilience in terms of relational competences and ties more than in terms of self (Buse et al., 2013). Future research might provide a more critical and in-depth analysis of relational resilience, questioning current Western understandings and addressing the limitations of a person-centred definition of resilience, particularly in relation to contexts characterized by ngoing trauma and stratified hardships (Giacaman, 2020). Indeed, prosocial behaviors reflect the capacity of resilient refugee children from Syria to enact survival skills thanks to social networking, family ties, and connectedness with other community members. Now, one of the arguments for resilience as a community process is that it shifts responsibility for adapting to hardship away from children and places it on the shoulders of their communities, which have the potential to harm them but should provide them with support. This is particularly relevant to collectivistic societies in which family and community relations are the main pillars of society (Alameddine et al., 2019; Giordano et al., 2021). Clearly, this is problematic in the context of designing programs to help refugee children who have been displaced to foreign countries. Nevertheless, interventions aimed at reconstructing social capital and networks for children affected by war are urgently required (Veronese et al., 2010; Veronese & Cavazzoni, 2020).

In the future, ethnographic and qualitative research designs will help to shed light on non-Western characteristics of relational and community resilience in collectivistic Muslim societies. Indeed, relationships—in terms of giving and receiving support within peer groups and families, kindness, and solidarity—may significantly contribute to shaping resilience in children coping with uncertain and unstable life contexts (Walsh, 1998). Helping others, helping one another, overcoming their self-interest, and taking responsibility for other people may boost resilient behaviours and foster children’s personal well-being (Jordan, 1992; Goodman, 2004).


For decades, the impact of war and forced displacement on child victims has been studied in depth, yielding a vast amount of data on these children’s mental health and psychological suffering. As a result, dozens of symptoms-oriented and psychiatrically-informed interventions for reducing children’s vulnerability in the wake of traumatic events have been developed and empirically validated (Betancourt et al., 2013; Newnham et al., 2018). In parallel, non-clinical psychosocial interventions aimed at reinforcing children’s resilience and resistance have also been designed and implemented (El-Khani & Calam, 2019; Veronese & Barola, 2018; Wessells, 2018; Giordano & Ungar, 2021). Less has been done in terms of clinical and therapeutic intervention aimed at enhancing children’s relational competences and pro-social behaviors as protective factors buffering them against trauma and emotional exhaustion. In our view, clinical intervention designed to strengthen these skills would make a key contribution to reducing symptoms in children (Sim et al., 2019; Giordano et al., 2019; Giordano et al., 2019; Giordano & Ferrari, 2018). Indeed, trauma symptoms and emotional dysregulation among children may be strongly associated with relational issues arising from displacement and precarious living conditions in host countries (Khamis, 2019). Thus, relational therapies could potentially have even greater impact in conditions like those faced by the Syrian child refugees in our sample. Indeed, social isolation, disruption of community ties, and the loss of social capital and relational networks can all augment self-perceived vulnerability, allowing traumatic memories to be reactivated and symptoms produced (Fazel & Betancourt, 2018). Accordingly, we may conclude that prevalently clinically-informed and symptoms-oriented interventions cannot sufficiently address the underlying conditions that maintain and—most probably—will continue to increase, children’s vulnerability. Salutogenic and multilevel psycho-social approaches should be aimed at transforming relational contexts, not just individuals (Höltge et al., 2018; van der Merwe et al., 2019), and at producing health within the community. Ultimately, when it comes to the mental health and psychological wellbeing of war-affected and displaced children, promoting their prosocial competences within their broader social context represents a key step towards building a future resilient, healthy, and functioning society.


As in all empirical research, this study presents limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the sample size was relatively small, while the specific characteristics of the participants suggest that caution is required in generalizing the results to other cultures and settings. In relation to this, the sample might also be viewed as meeting the criteria for a cohort, in that all the participating children were receiving psychosocial support at the time of data collection. As a result, they may have been more resilient than children living in other refugee camps or experiencing other challenging situations. Consequently, our findings may be viewed as transferable (Polit & Beck, 2010) rather than generalizable. Second, the research design was cross-sectional, meaning that longitudinal research is required to assess potential causal relationships between resilience, mental health, and trauma, while our findings here should be read in terms of probabilistic rather than casual associations.

Another limitation is our reliance on a continuous variable (resilience) to define high versus low resilience groups, which meant that we could not capture the effects of intermediate degrees of resilience in the population under study as well as weakening the statistical power of our analysis. Nevertheless, we chose to conduct discriminant analysis because we wished to verify which of our variables significantly predicted, and to what extent (weight), to membership of resilient and non-resilient cohorts, with a view to defining a meaningful profile for each of these groups (Cai et al., 2016). On the contrary, treating resilience as a continuous variable would have prevented us from building up a detailed profile of these cohorts (Press & Wilson, 1978). In addition, discriminant analysis allowed us to evaluate the associations between the variables of interest and each of the groups, making the interpretation of our results more meaningful. It has been shown that when sample sizes are equal, and homogeneity of variance/covariance holds, discriminant analysis is more accurate than using alternative regression techniques (Alayande & Adekunle, 2015).

Another limitation of the present study was that the items on the traumatic checklist were presented as binary dichotomic “yes/no” variables. Although this made for a more agile and easy to administer instrument suited to the disrupted and unstable research setting, it prevented us from accessing information about the frequency and severity of child exposure to potentially traumatic events.

Finally, all the variables under study were measured using quantitative self-report questionnaires. This may have given rise to common-method variance in our data (i.e., a spurious shared variance that is attributable to the method rather than to the construct). Future research should thus follow a mixed-method approach combining qualitative and quantitative data to provide a more comprehensive picture of resilience, mental health, and trauma in children escaping from was zones.

Change history


  1. Alameddine, M., Fouad, F. M., Diaconu, K., Jamal, Z., Lough, G., Witter, S., & Ager, A. (2019). Resilience capacities of health systems: accommodating the needs of Palestinian refugees from Syria. Social Science & Medicine, 220, 22–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alayande, S., & Adekunle, B. (2015). An overview and application of discriminant analysis in data analysis. IOSR J Math, 11, 12–5.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Almaqrami, M. H., & Shuwail, A. Y. (2004). Validity of the self-report version of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire in Yemen. Saudi Medical Journal, 25(5), 592–601.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text revision). Washington, DC: Author.

  5. American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, Amended June 1, 2010). Retrieved from:

  6. Antonovsky, A. (1996). The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health Promotion International, 11(1), 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Atari-Khan, R., Covington, A. H., Gerstein, L. H., Herz, H. A., Varner, B. R., Brasfield, C., & Deogracias-Schleich, A. (2021). Concepts of resilience among trauma-exposed Syrian refugees. The Counseling Psychologist, 49(2), 233–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bang, H., & Collet, B. (2020, November 5). “I Defeat Those Fears and Start a New Life”: Iraqi Refugee Students’ PTSD, Wisdom, and Resilience. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology. Advance online publication.

  9. Barber, B. K. (2013). Annual research review: The experience of youth with political conflict–challenging notions of resilience and encouraging research refinement. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(4), 461–473.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bean, T., Derluyn, I., Eurelings‐Bontekoe, E., Broekaert, E., & Spinhoven, P. (2007). Comparing psychological distress, traumatic stress reactions, and experiences of unaccompanied refugee minors with experiences of adolescents accompanied by parents. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 195, 288–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bemak, F., & Chung, R. C.-Y. (2017). Refugee trauma: Culturally responsive counseling interventions. Journal of Counseling & Development, 95, 299–308.

  12. Betancourt, T. S., & Khan, K. T. (2008). The mental health of children affected by armed conflict: protective processes and pathways to resilience. International review of psychiatry, 20, 317–328.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Betancourt, T. S., Meyers-Ohki, M. S. E., Charrow, M. A. P., & Tol, W. A. (2013). Interventions for children affected by war: an ecological perspective on psychosocial support and mental health care. Harvard review of psychiatry, 21, 70–91.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Birnbaum, A., Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. MA: Addison-Wesley, Reading.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? American Psychologist, 59, 20–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Brislin, R. W. (1981). Cross-cultural encounters: Face-to-face interaction (No. 94). Allyn & Bacon.

  17. Buchmüller, T., Lembcke, H., Busch, J., Kumsta, R., & Leyendecker, B. (2018). Exploring mental health status and syndrome patterns among young refugee children in Germany. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 212.

  18. Buse, N. A., Bernacchio, C., & Burker, E. J. (2013). Cultural variation in resilience as a response to traumatic experience. Journal of Rehabilitation, 79(2), 15–23.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cai, H., Lam, N. S. N., Zou, L., Qiang, Y., & Li, K. (2016). Assessing community resilience to coastal hazards in the lower Mississippi River basin. Water, 8(2), 46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Catani, C. (2018). Mental health of children living in war zones: a risk and protection perspective. World Psychiatry, 17(1), 104–105.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Çelebi, E., Verkuyten, M., & Bagci, S. C. (2017). Ethnic identification, discrimination, and mental and physical health among Syrian refugees: The moderating role of identity needs: Refugees, social identity, and health. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 832–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cesana, M. L., Giordano, F., Boerchi, D., Rivolta, M., & Castelli, C. (2018). Drawing to reconstruct: Pilot study on acknowledging prisoners' internal and external resources in a penitentiary institution. World Futures, 74(6), 392–411.

  23. Chang, E. C., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & D'Zurilla, T. J. (1997). Optimism and pessimism as partially independent constructs: Relationship to positive and negative affectivity and psychological well-being. Personality and individual Differences, 23(3), 433–440.

  24. Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. A. (2012). Gene by environment interaction and resilience: Effects of child maltreatment and serotonin, corticotropin releasing hormone, dopamine, and oxytocin genes. Development and psychopathology, 24(2), 411.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Derluyn, I., & Broekaert, E. (2007). Different perspectives on emotional and behavioural problems in unaccompanied refugee children and adolescents. Ethnicity and Health, 12, 141–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Diab, S. Y., Palosaari, E., & Punamäki, R. L. (2018). Society, individual, family, and school factors contributing to child mental health in war: the ecological-theory perspective. Child abuse & neglect, 84, 205–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Dionigi, F. (2016). The Syrian refugee crisis in Lebanon: State fragility and social resilience. Retrieved from internet on January, 20, 2021, at

  29. Ekmekci, P. E. (2017). Syrian refugees, health and migration legislation in Turkey. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 19, 1434–1441.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. El-Khani, A., & Calam, R. (2019). Promoting mental health for children and their caregivers affected by the Syrian conflict. In An International Perspective on Disasters and Children’s Mental Health (pp. 301–322). Springer, Cham.

  31. Emam, M. M., Hilal, M. M. A., Kazem, A. M., & Alkharousi, S. J. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Arabic self-report version of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Research in developmental disabilities, 59, 211–220.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Eriksson, M., & Lindström, B. (2006). Antonovsky’s sense of coherence scale and the relation with health: A systematic review. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 60(5), 376–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Eriksson, M., & Lindström, B. (2010). Bringing it all together: The salutogenic response to some of the most pertinent public health dilemmas. In A. Morgan, M. Davies & E. Ziglio (Eds.), Health assets in a global context (pp. 339–351). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Eruyar, S., Maltby, J., & Vostanis, P. (2018). Mental health problems of Syrian refugee children: the role of parental factors. European child & adolescent psychiatry, 27(4), 401–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Eruyar, S., Maltby, J., & Vostanis, P. (2020). How do Syrian refugee children in Turkey perceive relational factors in the context of their mental health? Clinical child psychology and psychiatry, 25(1), 260–272.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Fazel, M., & Betancourt, T. S. (2018). Preventive mental health interventions for refugee children and adolescents in high-income settings. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 2(2), 121–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Fazel, M., Wheeler, J., & Danesh, J. (2005). Prevalence of serious mental disorder in 7000 refugees resettled in western countries: a systematic review. Lancet, 365, 1309–1314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Fearon, P., Kirkbride, J., Morgan, C., Dazzan, P., Morgan, K., Lloyd, T., & Murray, R. (2006). Incidence of schizophrenia and other psychoses in ethnic minority groups: results from the MRC AESOP Study. Psychological Medicine, 36, 1541–1550.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ferguson, C. J. (2009). An effect size primer: a guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(5), 532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Giacaman, R. (2020). Reflections on the meaning of ‘resilience’in the Palestinian context. Journal of Public Health, 42, e369–e400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Giordano, F., Castelli, C., Crocq, L., & Baubet, T. (2012). Le non-sens et le chaos dans les dessins des enfants victimes du tremblement de terre aux Abruzzes. In Annales Médico-psychologiques, revue psychiatrique (Vol. 170, No. 5, pp. 342-348).Elsevier Masson.

  42. Giordano, F., Cipolla, A., Ragnoli, F., & Brajda, B. (2019a). Transit Migration and Trauma: the Detrimental Effect of Interpersonal Trauma on Syrian Children in Transit in Italy. Psychological Injury and Law, 12(1), 76–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Giordano, F., Cipolla, A., & Ungar, M. (2021). Tutor of Resilience: A Model for Psychosocial Care Following Experiences of Adversity. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 559154

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Giordano, F., & Ferrari, C. (2018). Processi di resilienza in minori vittime di violenza: un progetto di intervento con adolescenti in Lituania. Maltrattamento e abuso all’infanzia, 2, 105–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Giordano, F., Orenti, A., Lanzoni, M., Marano, G., Biganzoli, E., Castelli, C., & Baubet, T. (2015). Trauma and temporal discontinuity in children victims of natural disasters. The Test de trois dessins: Avant, pendant et avenir. [Trauma e discontinuità temporale nei minori vittime di disastri naturali. Il Test de trois dessins: Avant, pendant et avenir]. Maltrattamento e Abuso all’Infanzia, 17(2), 87–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Giordano, F., Ragnoli, F., & Brajda Bruno, F. (2019b). Data on resilience and trauma-related symptoms in Lithuanian children victims of violence. Data in Brief, 23, 10379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Giordano, F., Ragnoli, F., Brajda Bruno, F., & Boerchi, D. (2019c). Resilience and trauma-related outcomes in children victims of violence attending the Assisted Resilience Approach Therapy (ARAT). Children and Youth Services Review, 96, 286–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Giordano, F., & Ungar, M. (2021). Principle-driven Program Design versus Manualized Programming in Humanitarian Settings. Child Abuse and Neglect, 111, e104862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Goodman, A., & Goodman, R. (2009). Strengths and difficulties questionnaire as a dimensional measure of child mental health. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(4), 400–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Goodman, J. H. (2004). Coping with trauma and hardship among unaccompanied refugee youths from Sudan. Qualitative Health Research, 9, 1177–1196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Goodman, R., Ford, T., Simmons, H., Gatward, R., & Meltzer, H. (2000). Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to screen for child psychiatric disorders in a community sample. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 177(6), 534–539.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Gormez, V., Kılıç, H. N., Orengul, A. C., Demir, M. N., Demirlikan, Ş., Demirbaş, S., & Semerci, B. (2018). Psychopathology and associated risk factors among forcibly displaced Syrian children and adolescents. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 20(3), 529–535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348–362.

  54. Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. (2016). Applied multivariate statistical concepts. London: Routledge.

  55. Haskett, M. E., Scott, S. S., Willoughby, M., Ahern, L., & Nears, K. (2006). The parent opinion questionnaire and child vignettes for use with abusive parents: Assessment of psychometric properties. Journal of family violence, 21(2), 137–151.

  56. Hassan, G., Kirmayer, L. J., Mekki-Berrada, A., Quosh, C., El Chammay, R., Deville-Stoetzel, J. B., & Ventevogel, P. (2015). Culture, context and the mental health and psychosocial wellbeing of Syrians: A review for mental health and psychosocial support staff working with Syrians affected by armed conflict. Geneva: UNHCR, 14-15.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Hodes, M., & Vostanis, P. (2019). Practitioner review: Mental health problems of refugee children and adolescents and their management. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 60, 716–731.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Hollander, A., Dal, H., Lewis, G., Magnusson, C., Kirkbride, J., & Dalman, C. (2016). Refugee migration and risk of schizophrenia and other non‐affective psychoses: cohort study of 1.3 million people in Sweden. British Medical Journal, 352, i1030.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Hydén, M. (2014). The teller-focused interview: Interviewing as a relational practice. Qualitative Social Work, 13(6), 795–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Höltge, J., Mc Gee, S. L., Maercker, A., & Thoma, M. V. (2018). A salutogenic perspective on adverse experiences. European Journal of Health Psychology, 25, 53–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. James, L., Sovcik, A., Garoff, F., & Abbasi, R. (2014). The mental health of Syrian refugee children and adolescents. Forced Migration Review, 47.

  62. Johansen, K., & Studsrød, I. (2019). Help goes around in a circle: young unaccompanied refugees’ engagement in interpersonal relationships and its significance for resilience. International Journal of Migration, Health and Social Care.

  63. Jordan, J. (1992). Relational resilience. Work in Progress, No. 57, Stone Center for Developmental Services and Studies.

  64. Juang, L. P., Simpson, J. A., Lee, R. M., Rothman, A. J., Titzmann, P. F., Schachner, M. K., & Betsch, C. (2018). Using attachment and relational perspectives to understand adaptation and resilience among immigrant and refugee youth. American Psychologist, 73, 797–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Kadir, A., Battersby, A., Spencer, N., & Hjern, A. (2019). Children on the move in Europe: a narrative review of the evidence on the health risks, health needs and health policy for asylum seeking, refugee and undocumented children. BMJ paediatrics open, 3, 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Karam, E. G., Fayyad, J. A., Farhat, C., Pluess, M., Haddad, Y. C., Tabet, C. C., & Kessler, R. C. (2019). Role of childhood adversities and environmental sensitivity in the development of post-traumatic stress disorder in war-exposed Syrian refugee children and adolescents. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 214, 354–360.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Keles, S., Friborg, O., Idsøe, T., Sirin, S., & Oppedal, B. (2018). Resilience and acculturation among unaccompanied refugee minors. International journal of behavioral development, 42, 52–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Khamis, V. (2019). Posttraumatic stress disorder and emotion dysregulation among Syrian refugee children and adolescents resettled in Lebanon and Jordan. Child Abuse & Neglect, 89, 29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Khan, N. Z., Shilpi, A. B., Sultana, R., Sarker, S., Razia, S., Roy, B., & McConachie, H. (2019). Displaced Rohingya children at high risk for mental health problems: findings from refugee camps within Bangladesh. Child: care, health and development, 45(1), 28–35.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Kien, C., Sommer, I., Faustmann, A., Gibson, L., Schneider, M., Krczal, E., & Brattström, P. (2019). Prevalence of mental disorders in young refugees and asylum seekers in European Countries: a systematic review. European child & adolescent psychiatry, 28(10), 1295–1310.

  71. Kim‐Cohen, J., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., & Taylor, A. (2004). Genetic and environmental processes in young children’s resilience and vulnerability to socioeconomic deprivation. Child development, 75, 651–668.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Kirkbride, J., Fearon, P., Morgan, C., Dazzan, P., Morgan, K., Tarrant, J., & Jones, P. (2006). Heterogeneity in incidence rates of schizophrenia and other psychotic syndromes: Findings from the 3‐center AeSOP study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63, 250–258.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Kletter, H., & Carrion, V. G. (2018). Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Youth Exposed to War and Terror. In Sleep and Combat-Related Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (pp. 363–372). Springer, New York, NY.

  74. Kocijan-Hercigonja, D., Rijavec, M., Marusic, A., & Hercigonja, V. (1998). Coping strategies of refugee, displaced, and nondisplaced children in a war area. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 52(1), 45–50.

  75. Lachenbruch, P. A., & Goldstein, M. (1979). Discriminant analysis. Biometrics, 69–85.

  76. Landau, S., & Everitt, B. S. (2003). A handbook of statistical analyses using SPSS. Chapman and Hall/CRC.

  77. Liebenberg, L., Ungar, M., & Vijver, F. V. D. (2012). Validation of the child and youth resilience measure-28 (CYRM-28) among Canadian youth. Research on social work practice, 22(2), 219–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Liu, J. J., Reed, M., & Girard, T. A. (2017). Advancing resilience: An integrative, multi-system model of resilience. Personality and Individual Differences, 111, 111–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Luthar, S. S. (2006). Resilience in development: A synthesis of research across five decades. In D. J. Cohen & D. Cicchetti (eds), Development and Psychopathology, vol 3, Risk, disorder and adaptation (pp. 739–795). USA: Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  80. MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological methods, 7(1), 19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Macksoud, M. S., & Aber, J. L. (1996). The war experiences and psychosocial development of children in Lebanon. Child Development, 67, 70–88.

  82. Maragel, M., & Manachi, S. (2018). The resilience of Syrian refugee children in Lebanon. In Syrian refugee children in the Middle East and Europe (pp. 32–45). Routledge.

  83. Masten, A. S. (2011). Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for research, practice, and translational synergy. Development and psychopathology, 23(2), 493–506.

  84. Masten, A. S. (2014). Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child development, 85, 6–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Masten, A. S. (2015). Ordinary magic: Resilience in development. Guilford Publications.

  86. Masten, A. S., & Curtis, W. J. (2000). Integrating competence and psychopathology: Pathways towards a comprehensive science of adaptation in development. Developmental Psychopathology, 12, 529–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Mbwayo, A. W., Mathai, M., Harder, V. S., Nicodimos, S., & Vander Stoep, A. (2020). Trauma among Kenyan school children in urban and rural settings: PTSD prevalence and correlates. Journal of child & adolescent trauma, 13(1), 63–73.

  88. McAloney-Kocaman, K., & McPherson, K. (2017). Factor structure and reliability of the parent-informant strengths and difficulties questionnaire in a Scottish preschool sample. Early Education and Development, 28(3), 368–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. McLachlan, GL. (2004). Discriminant analysis and statistical pattern analysis. New York: Wiley.

  90. van der Merwe, L., Biggs, R., & Preiser, R. (2019). Building social resilience in socio-technical systems through a participatory and formative resilience approach. Systemic Change Journal, 1–34.

  91. Mittelmark, M. B. (2021). Resilience in the Salutogenic Model of Health. In Multisystemic Resilience (pp. 153–164). Oxford University Press.

  92. Motti-Stefanidi, F. (2018). Resilience among immigrant youth: The role of culture, development and acculturation. Developmental Review. Advance online publication.

  93. Nasıroğlu, S., Çeri, V., Erkorkmaz, Ü., & Semerci, B. (2018). Determinants of psychiatric disorders in children refugees in Turkey’s Yazidi refugee camp. Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 28, 291–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Nehring, I., Schlag, E., Qirjako, E., BüYükyaglioglu, C., Mall, V., Sattel, H.,… & Aberl, S. (2019). Health State of Syrian Children and Their Parents in a German Refugee Camp. Journal of Refugee Studies. Article published ahead of print on April 26.

  95. Newnham, E. A., Kashyap, S., Tearne, J., & Fazel, M. (2018). Child Mental Health in the Context of War: An Overview of Risk Factors and Interventions for Refugee and War-Affected Youth. In Mental Health of Refugee and Conflict-Affected Populations (pp. 37–63). Springer, Cham.

  96. Norredam, M., Nellums, L., Nielsen, R. S., Byberg, S., & Petersen, J. H. (2018). Incidence of psychiatric disorders among accompanied and unaccompanied asylum-seeking children in Denmark: a nation-wide register-based cohort study. European child & adolescent psychiatry, 27, 439–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Palmieri, P. A., & Smith, G. C. (2007). Examining the structural validity of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in a US sample of custodial grandmothers. Psychological assessment, 19(2), 189.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Panter‐Brick, C., Dajani, R., Eggerman, M., Hermosilla, S., Sancilio, A., & Ager, A. (2018). Insecurity, distress and mental health: experimental and randomized controlled trials of a psychosocial intervention for youth affected by the Syrian crisis. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 59(5), 523–541.

  99. Pearl, J. (2001) Direct and indirect effects. In Proceedings of the seventeenth conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence (pp. 411–420). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.

  100. Peltonen, K., Qouta, S., Diab, M., & Punamäki, R. L. (2014). Resilience among children in war: The role of multilevel social factors. Traumatology, 20, 232–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Pepe, A., & Addimando, L. (2014). Teacher-parent relationships: influence of gender and education on organizational parents’ counterproductive behaviors. European Journal of psychology of education, 29(3), 503–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010). Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths and strategies. International journal of nursing studies, 47(11), 1451–1458.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Posse, C. G. (1992). Projection pursuit discriminant analysis for two groups. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 21(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Press, S. J., & Wilson, S. (1978). Choosing between logistic regression and discriminant analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 73(364), 699–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Priebe, S., Giacco, D., & El‐Nagib, R. (2016). WHO Health Evidence Network Synthesis Report 47. Public health aspects of mental health among migrants and refugees: A review of the evidence on mental health care for refugees, asylum seekers and irregular migrants in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Ramanana-Rahary, S., Zitt, M., & Rousseau, R. (2009). Aggregation properties of relative impact and other classical indicators: Convexity issues and the Yule-Simpson paradox. Scientometrics, 79(2), 311–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Sanders, M. R., Turner, K. M. T., & Metzler, C. W. (2019). Applying self-regulation principles in the delivery of parenting interventions. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 22, 24–42.

  109. Sim, A., Bowes, L., & Gardner, F. (2019). The Promotive Effects of Social Support for Parental Resilience in a Refugee Context: a Cross-Sectional Study with Syrian Mothers in Lebanon. Prevention Science, 20, 674–683.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Sluzky, C. E. (1992). Disruption and reconstruction of networks following migration/relocation. Family Systems Medicine, 10(4), 359–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Solow, A. R. (1990). A randomization test for misclassification probability in discriminant analysis. Ecology, 71(6), 2379–2382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Southwick, S. M., Bonanno, G. A., Masten, A. S., Panter-Brick, C., & Yehuda, R. (2014). Resilience definitions, theory, and challenges: interdisciplinary perspectives. European journal of psychotraumatology, 5, 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Thabet, A. A., Stretch, D., & Vostanis, P. (2000). Child mental health problems in Arab children: application of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. International journal of social psychiatry, 46(4), 266–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Tol, W. A., Song, S., & Jordans, M. J. (2013). Annual research review: Resilience and mental health in children and adolescents living in areas of armed conflict—A systematic review of findings in low- and middle-income countries. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 54(4), 445–460.

  115. Trizano-Hermosilla, I., & Alvarado, J. M. (2016). Best alternatives to Cronbach’s alpha reliability in realistic conditions: congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 769.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Turner, J. E., Goodin, J. B., & Lokey, C. (2012). Exploring the roles of emotions, motivations, self-efficacy, and secondary control following critical unexpected life events. Journal of Adult Development, 19, 215–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Ungar, M. (2008). Resilience across cultures. The British Journal of Social Work, 38(2), 218–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Ungar, M., & Liebenberg, L. (2011). Assessing resilience across cultures using mixed methods: Construction of the child and youth resilience measure. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(2), 126–149.

  119. Ungar, M. (2011). The social ecology of resilience: addressing contextual and cultural ambiguity of a nascent construct. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 81, 1–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Ungar, M. (2012). Social ecologies and their contribution to resilience. In M. Ungar (Ed.), The social ecology of resilience: A handbook of theory and practice (pp. 13–31). New York, NY: Springer Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  121. Van der Walt, L., Suliman, S., Martin, L., Lammers, K., & Seedat, S. (2014). Resilience and post-traumatic stress disorder in the acute aftermath of rape: A comparative analysis of adolescents versus adults. Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 26, 239–249.

  122. Veronese, G., & Barola, G. (2018). Healing stories: an expressive-narrative intervention for strengthening resilience and survival skills in school-aged child victims of war and political violence in the Gaza Strip. Clinical child psychology and psychiatry, 23, 311–332.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Veronese, G., Castiglioni, M., & Said, M. (2010). The use of narrative-experiential instruments in contexts of military violence: The case of Palestinian children in the West Bank. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Veronese, G., & Cavazzoni, F. (2020). “I Hope I Will Be Able to Go Back to My Home City”: Narratives of Suffering and Survival of Children in Palestine. Psychological Studies, 65(1), 51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Veronese, G., Cavazzoni, F., & Antenucci, S. (2018). Narrating hope and resistance: A critical analysis of sources of agency among P alestinian children living under military violence. Child: care, health and development, 44, 863–870.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Veronese, G., & Pepe, A. (2017). Life satisfaction and trauma in clinical and non-clinical children living in a war-torn environment: a discriminant analysis. Journal of health psychology,

  127. Veronese, G., & Pepe, A. (2020). Life satisfaction and trauma in clinical and non-clinical children living in a war-torn environment: a discriminant analysis. Journal of health psychology, 25(4), 459–471.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Veronese, G., & Pepe, A. (2021) Measuring traumatic reactions in Palestinian children: a psychometric assessment of the Children Revised Impact of Event Scale-Arabic Version (CRIES-13A). Child Psychiatry & Human Development. Article published ahead of print on January, 01, 1–11.

  129. Veronese, G., Pepe, A., & Afana, A. (2016). Conceptualizing the wellbeing of helper operating in war-like condition: a mixed-method approach. International Social Work, 59, 938–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. Veronese, G., Pepe, A., Jaradah, A., Al Muranak, F., & Hamdouna, H. (2017a). Modelling life satisfaction and adjustment to trauma in children exposed to ongoing military violence: an exploratory study in Palestine. Child abuse & neglect, 63, 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Veronese, G., Pepe, A., Jaradah, A., Murannak, F., & Hamdouna, H. (2017b). “We must cooperate with one another against the Enemy”: Agency and activism in school-aged children as protective factors against ongoing war trauma and political violence in the Gaza Strip. Child abuse & neglect, 70, 364–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Vindevogel, S. (2017). Resilience in the context of war: a critical analysis of contemporary conceptions and interventions to promote resilience among war-affected children and their surroundings. Peace and conflict: journal of peace psychology, 23, 76–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Walsh, F. (1998). Strengthening family resilience. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Wessells, M. G. (2018). Supporting resilience in war-affected children: How differential impact theory is useful in humanitarian practice. Child abuse & neglect, 78, 13–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Windle, G. (2011). What is resilience? A review and concept analysis. Reviews in clinical gerontology, 21(2), 152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Yaylaci, F. T. (2018). Trauma and resilient functioning among Syrian refugee children. Development and psychopathology, 30, 1923–1936.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Yayan, E. H., Düken, M. E., Özdemir, A. A., & Çelebioğlu, A. (2020). Mental health problems of Syrian refugee children: posttraumatic stress, depression and anxiety. Journal of pediatric nursing, 51, e27–e32.

  138. Ye, J., Janardan, R., & Li, Q. (2005). Two-dimensional linear discriminant analysis. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 17, 1569–1576.

Download references


Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Milano - Bicocca within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guido Veronese.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Veronese, G., Pepe, A. & Giordano, F. Child Psychological Adjustment to War and Displacement: A Discriminant Analysis of Resilience and Trauma in Syrian Refugee Children. J Child Fam Stud 30, 2575–2588 (2021).

Download citation


  • Relational resilience
  • War refugees
  • Prosocial behaviours
  • Children