Abstract
BACKGROUND: The learning disabilities literature has had a long-standing focus on identifying risk factors that can inform diagnostic assessment and guide intervention efforts. While many existing conceptual models of learning disabilities have acknowledged the theoretical possibility of resilience mechanisms (Bishop & Snowling, 2004; Catts & Petscher, 2022; McGrath, Peterson, & Pennington, 2020; Pennington, 2006), few studies have empirically investigated such processes. However, more attention has been recently directed towards resilience mechanisms that may operate in the context of learning disabilities. Initial studies have found that cognitive-linguistic abilities and individual differences in task behaviors may play a role in supporting academic skills (specifically reading) despite the presence of risk factors (Eklund, Torppa, & Lyytinen, 2013; van Viersen, de Bree, & de Jong, 2019). However, many empirical results that signal potential for resilience processes are difficult to synthesize because methods and analyses are not consistent across studies. For example, studies may operationalize and analytically investigate resilience mechanisms in differing ways, leading to challenges in understanding the replicability and generalization of findings. CONCLUSIONS: In this paper, we make recommendations for standardized practices for studying resilience mechanisms, drawing from the well-validated guidelines for resilience science that have been established within the developmental psychopathology (DP) literature (Masten, Narayan, & Wright, 2023).This theoretical paper outlines the DP perspective on resilience, demonstrates the application of specific DP principles to the learning disabilities field, and provides a set of methodological recommendations for the inclusion of resilience-based methods alongside the prevailing risk-based methodology in learning disability research.