HPC · Science Deep Dive 18 June 2026 · revised 11 October 2026

The Neuroscience of Resilience: How Your Brain Learns to Handle Adversity.

Resilience is not a personality trait you either have or lack. It is a set of trainable neural circuits whose architecture the brain rewrites in response to structured stress exposure. Here is what the science actually says, and what to do with it.

Section: Identity & Inner Game · Emotional Agility
Reading time: 22 min read
Sources: 36 · reviewed

THE VERDICT, IN BRIEF
The neuroscience of resilience has answered its founding question. The brain's stress-recovery system (the amygdala–PFC–hippocampus circuit, modulated by the HPA axis and the NPY–CRF neurochemical toggle) is not fixed at birth, not determined by childhood, and not beyond intervention in adulthood. It responds to structured training with moderate, replicated effect sizes across hundreds of studies and tens of thousands of participants. The effect is not miraculous: Hedges's g = 0.48 will not make you impervious to stress. But it will shift the probability curve: recovery becomes faster, breakdown less likely, and the biological cost of ordinary functioning lower. That is what the evidence supports, stated with full confidence and without exaggeration. Read the full verdict →

01Beyond the Wellness Deck

Resilience is a trainable circuit, not a character trait

The word resilience has been so thoroughly absorbed into corporate wellness decks and self-help book subtitles that it has lost its scientific edge. Executives are told to "build resilience" the way they are told to "stay hydrated," as if it were a vague act of personal maintenance with no underlying machinery. That vagueness is a problem, because the neuroscience of resilience is not vague at all. It describes specific circuits, measurable neurochemicals, and trainable capacities that determine whether a given stressor tips into disorder or drives adaptation.^[1]^[6]

The scale of the problem those circuits are being asked to solve is not small. A 2025 global analysis of Gallup World Poll data found that 35.1% of the population reports significant psychological stress, with high-income countries at 36%.^[36] That figure has been climbing steadily: 85% of countries reported worse psychological stress in 2020 than in 2008.^[4] The brain's stress-response architecture was not designed for chronic, ambient, inescapable load. It was designed for acute stress, threats that resolve.

That matters because the gap between the stress environment the brain evolved for and the one it now inhabits is not a metaphor. It is a measurable mismatch between circuit design and circuit demand. The neuroscience of resilience is the study of what happens in that gap.^[4]^[36]

The history

The distinction between resilience-as-trait and resilience-as-process is not semantic. It changes what you look for, what you measure, and what you try to change. A trait model sends you looking for personality scores. A process model sends you into the brain, looking for the circuits that determine how quickly the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis shuts down after a threat passes, how efficiently the prefrontal cortex overrides an amygdala alarm, and whether the hippocampus can still generate new neurons under chronic load.^[2]^[6]

The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, the most widely used instrument in the field, shows longitudinal stability of r = 0.71 over 1.5 years, high enough to be useful but far from the ceiling of a fixed trait.^[15] That gap is where training lives. It means the score you get today is not the score you are stuck with.

What the neuroscience adds to this is a map. Not a motivational poster, but an actual circuit diagram: which brain regions, which neurochemicals, which feedback loops. That map is what this article builds.^[35]

02The Mechanism

The Resilience Circuit: Five Nodes That Determine Whether Stress Builds or Breaks You

The architecture of resilience begins with a paradox. The same brain structures that generate the stress response are the ones that must shut it down. The amygdala, a pair of almond-shaped nuclei deep in the temporal lobes, fires the opening shot. It receives sensory threat signals and generates the cascade of fear, vigilance, and physiological arousal that we experience as stress. In low-resilience individuals, the amygdala is hyperactive and slow to habituate: it keeps sounding the alarm after the threat has passed.^[2]^[8]

The signal travels from the amygdala to the HPA axis, the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal cascade that releases cortisol into the bloodstream. This is the body's chemical mobilisation system. In acute stress, it is adaptive: cortisol sharpens attention, liberates energy, and suppresses non-essential functions. In chronic stress, it becomes the problem. Sustained cortisol elevation (what Bruce McEwen called allostatic overload) damages the very structures that are supposed to regulate it.^[4]^[5]^[9]

The brake on this system is the prefrontal cortex. The ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) project inhibitory connections down to the amygdala, dampening its alarm signal. This top-down regulation is what makes cognitive reappraisal possible: the ability to reframe a threat as manageable.^[2]^[12]

Threat fires the amygdala, which mobilises the HPA axis and releases cortisol; the prefrontal cortex sends inhibitory projections back to the amygdala to enable reappraisal, and the hippocampus contextualises the signal and clamps cortisol release, the balance of these three nodes determines adaptation or disorder.

Diagram · HPC

The fourth node in the circuit is the hippocampus. It serves two functions that are critical for resilience. First, it contextualises threat, telling the amygdala whether a given stimulus is genuinely dangerous or merely reminiscent of something that once was. Second, it provides negative feedback to the HPA axis, helping to shut down cortisol release once the stressor resolves.^[2]^[27]

Chronic stress shrinks the hippocampus. Specifically, it atrophies the dentate gyrus, the region where adult neurogenesis (the birth of new neurons) occurs. This is not a metaphor. MRI studies have documented hippocampal volume loss in chronic PTSD, major depression, and sustained occupational stress.^[29]^[27] The good news is that the process reverses. Erickson's landmark 2011 randomised controlled trial showed that 12 months of aerobic exercise increased hippocampal volume by 2.12% in older adults, effectively reversing one to two years of age-related shrinkage.^[11]

The fifth node is neurochemical. Two peptides in the amygdala operate as a molecular toggle. Neuropeptide Y (NPY) is anxiolytic: it counters fear and avoidance. Corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) is anxiogenic: it drives the stress cascade. Evidence in animal models links the NPY system to stress responses, while its therapeutic use in humans still needs clinical testing.^[24]

03Evidence

The Five Strongest Studies on Resilience Neuroscience

01The claim

The single load-bearing finding

The hero study finds 0.48 Hedges's g.

Not all evidence is equal, and the resilience literature is enormous enough to hide weak findings behind impressive volume. What follows is a ranked hierarchy of the five studies that carry the most methodological weight: the ones whose design, sample size, and causal clarity earn them the right to anchor an argument.

Pooled estimate

0.48 Hedges's g

02How we measured

Ranking the resilience studies

Studies scored on design, sample, rigour, causality, replication, citations.

Because resilience interventions span CBT, mindfulness, and exercise across wildly different populations, heterogeneity is the field's central problem, making design breadth and independent replication the criteria that determine which effect sizes are actually trustworthy.

Rubric weights

Design/30

Sample/20

Rigour/15

Causality/15

Replication/10

Citations/10

03The spread

Heterogeneity across 5 studies

Methodological quality across the ranked studies.

The hierarchy reveals a pattern that is easy to miss when studies are cited one at a time. The mechanistic work (Feder, Kuehn) identifies the circuit. The intervention meta-analysis (Liu) confirms the circuit responds to training. The neuroplasticity studies (Hölzel, Leone) show the circuit physically reorganises. This is not a scatterplot of loosely related findings. It is a convergence from different methodologies, different populations, and different decades on the same underlying claim.^[7]^[2]^[8]^[9]^[10] The weakest link in the chain is the structural neuroplasticity evidence.

Rubric spread

→ 64 /100

Highest to lowest rubric score across the ranked studies.

04What does not hold

Negative knowledge

What the evidence base does not support.

Two additional meta-analyses reinforce the hierarchy's central finding. A meta-analysis of 20 RCTs in patients with chronic illness found a large effect size for resilience improvement (g = 0.79) and an even larger effect for depression reduction (g = −0.96), suggesting that resilience training may be most potent precisely in the populations that need it most.^[19]

The studies

5 trials. One pooled answer.

Below: the anchor study in full; then the forest plot at scale; then the supporting trials in ranked order.

01Anchor

Comprehensive meta-analysis of resilience interventions

Liu, Ein & Gervasio Clinical Psychology Review 2020 Meta-Analysis · Multi-level · Cross-population

Resilience is trainable. Structured programmes produce measurable improvement across the lifespan, with effect sizes that are clinically meaningful in prevention contexts.

Unmatched statistical power (N = 1,584 independent samples), multi-level analytical framework, and convergence with other meta-analyses.

Rubric breakdown

Design28/30

Sample19/20

Rigour13/15

Causality11/15

Replication8/10

Citations9/10

Total 88/100

The strongest studies, ranked by methodological weight.

Each scored 0–100 against a six-criterion rubric, tagged by design and year; the anchor leads. No study in this set reaches the rubric-90 tier.

Anchor (Rank 1) Supporting

Rank Authors & title Journal · Year Finding Score

Feder & Nestler

Psychobiology and molecular genetics of resilience

Nature Reviews Neuroscience · 2009

Mapped the five neural systems (reward, fear, emotion reactivity, social behaviour, and HPA axis) whose adaptive functioning constitutes resilience. Identified the DHEA:cortisol ratio as a measurable biomarker and NPY as a functional brake on CRF-driven anxiety circuits in the amygdala.^[2]

81/100

Kuehn & Calvert

Neuroimaging correlates of psychological resilience: An Open Science systematic review and meta-analysis

Frontiers in Neuroimaging · 2025

Identified bilateral amygdala and anterior cingulate cortex as universal structural correlates of resilience across PTSD (44%), schizophrenia (18%), major depression (14%), and bipolar disorder (12%). PTSD resilience additionally linked to left hippocampus.^[8]

78/100

Hölzel, Carmody & Vangel

Mindfulness practice leads to increases in regional brain gray matter density

Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging · 2011

Eight weeks of MBSR produced significant increases in grey matter concentration in the left hippocampus, posterior cingulate cortex, temporo-parietal junction, and cerebellum in 16 participants vs. 17 waitlist controls.^[9]

72/100

Leone, Casanave & Postel

Plasticity of human resilience mechanisms

Science Advances · 2025

In 100 Paris 2015 attack survivors (including 34 with chronic PTSD and 19 remitted) plus 72 controls, normalisation of hippocampal inhibitory control predicted PTSD remission and preceded reduction in traumatic memories. Bayesian computational modelling revealed that 2-year recovery involves plastic rebalancing of memory control mechanisms.^[10]

64/100

04Stakes

The cost of a circuit that cannot recover

When the brain's resilience mechanisms fail (through chronic stress, inadequate recovery, or never having been trained) the consequences extend far beyond mood. They show up in cardiovascular risk, immune function, cognitive capacity, and economic productivity.

01 System 01

Cardiovascular & Mortality

The Gutenberg Health Study (N = 12,675) found that low resilience was associated with 38% higher odds of cardiovascular disease and 61% higher odds of peripheral artery disease.^[16] In a US cohort of older adults who had experienced trauma, higher resilience was associated with lower all-cause mortality risk.^[17]

In practice

unexplained fatigue, elevated resting heart rate, poor exercise recovery

02 System 02

Cardiometabolic Risk

In a US cohort of 6,596 older adults with lifetime trauma, higher resilience was associated with lower risk of new cardiometabolic disease over eight years (RR = 0.91 per standard deviation; 95% CI 0.88 to 0.94).^[17] In a separate cohort of African American adults, the relationship between allostatic load and cardiovascular disease varied by sex and resilience level.^[18]

In practice

weight gain despite effort, blood sugar instability, chronic inflammation

System 03

Cognitive & Emotional

Chronic stress without adequate resilience mechanisms produces hippocampal atrophy, impaired working memory, and emotional dysregulation. The dentate gyrus, the hippocampal region responsible for adult neurogenesis, is particularly vulnerable to sustained cortisol elevation.^[29]^[27]^[30]

In practice

brain fog, inability to concentrate, emotional volatility, decision paralysis

04 System 04

Economic & Occupational

The WHO estimates the global economy loses 12 billion workdays annually to stress, depression, and anxiety, at a cost of $1 trillion per year. Workers with poor mental health take nearly five times more unplanned absences than their healthier counterparts.^[26]^[27]^[30]

In practice

burnout, disengagement, absenteeism, declining performance despite effort

05Protocol

A 4-Domain Resilience Training Protocol

Each domain targets a specific node in the resilience circuit. The protocol is evidence-informed: the science supports these actions but does not mandate precise dosing for every individual.

The protocol, as a sequence.

Daily → Daily → 3–5×/week → Ongoing

01 Step 01 · Daily · 30–45 min

Aerobic Exercise

Perform 150+ minutes per week of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise. The evidence puts it at the top of the resilience training hierarchy.

Why

Erickson's RCT demonstrated +2.12% hippocampal volume after 12 months; BDNF (brain-derived neurotrophic factor) mediates neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus; dose-response meta-analyses confirm BDNF elevation scales with exercise intensity.^[11]^[22]^[23]

Common mistake

Treating exercise as optional wellness rather than a core neural maintenance protocol. Skipping intensity: walking alone may not reach the BDNF threshold that drives hippocampal growth.

02 Step 02 · Daily · 10–20 min

Cognitive Reappraisal Practice

Practise structured cognitive reappraisal: reframe stressors by engaging the prefrontal braking system.

Why

Buhle's 48-study meta-analysis confirms reappraisal activates lateral PFC and modulates amygdala. Zhang's 2022 pilot showed 4 weeks of reappraisal training produced measurable changes in prefrontal resting-state activity.^[12]^[31]

Common mistake

Confusing reappraisal with positive thinking. Reappraisal is a specific cognitive skill (reinterpreting the meaning of a stressor), not suppressing the emotion or pretending the stressor doesn't exist.

03 Step 03 · 3–5×/week · 10–20 min

Mindfulness-Based Attention Training

Train attentional control through mindfulness, targeting the ACC and hippocampal connectivity, not structural volume change.

Why

Functional connectivity changes from mindfulness training show more robust replication than structural grey-matter findings. A cluster RCT with first responders found d = 0.73 for resilience at 6-month follow-up.^[32]^[21]^[9]

Common mistake

Expecting structural brain changes from 8 weeks of casual practice. The strongest functional effects come from consistent, protocol-adherent practice over months, not occasional meditation.

04 Step 04 · Ongoing

Social Connection & Stress Buffering

Maintain deliberate social bonds. The brain's oxytocin-mediated stress-buffering system requires social input.

Why

Heinrichs' double-blind RCT (N = 37) showed that social support combined with oxytocin produced the lowest cortisol reactivity during psychosocial stress testing. Social isolation removes this buffer entirely.^[13]^[25]^[26]

Common mistake

Assuming digital connection equals neurobiological connection. The oxytocin-cortisol interaction requires physical presence, shared experience, or deep relational trust, not superficial social media engagement.

Operational logic

The protocol is deliberately conservative. It does not promise transformation in 21 days or claim that any single practice will rewire the brain overnight. The meta-analytic evidence says the average effect is moderate (Hedges's g = 0.48) and that it is distributed across multiple intervention types.^[7] The practical implication is that stacking multiple evidence-informed practices is more likely to produce meaningful change than doubling down on any single one.

The military gendarme RCT illustrates what structured, multi-domain training can achieve. Five months of psychological resilience training produced a large effect on adaptive resources (d = 0.99) and a moderate effect on standardised resilience scores (d = 0.53).^[20] The Resilience@Work programme with first responders (a mindfulness-based cluster RCT) found d = 0.73 at six-month follow-up.^[32] These are not wellness anecdotes. They are controlled comparisons in high-stress operational populations.

That matters because the protocol is not asking the reader to meditate their way to resilience. It is asking them to run a maintenance programme on a biological system, the same way you would maintain cardiovascular fitness or joint mobility. The system has known inputs, known mechanisms, and measurable outputs.^[14]^[28]

06Verdict

The verdict.

"The brain does not store resilience. It practises it, and it forgets how if you stop.", Adapted from Tabibnia & Radecki (2018)

Bottom line

The brain does not decide whether you are resilient. Your training decides what the brain builds.

The argument

The neuroscience of resilience has answered its founding question. The brain's stress-recovery system (the amygdala–PFC–hippocampus circuit, modulated by the HPA axis and the NPY–CRF neurochemical toggle) is not fixed at birth, not determined by childhood, and not beyond intervention in adulthood. It responds to structured training with moderate, replicated effect sizes across hundreds of studies and tens of thousands of participants. The effect is not miraculous: Hedges's g = 0.48 will not make you impervious to stress. But it will shift the probability curve: recovery becomes faster, breakdown less likely, and the biological cost of ordinary functioning lower. That is what the evidence supports, stated with full confidence and without exaggeration.

The reader who has followed this argument from the opening now holds a different map of resilience than the one they arrived with. The old map said resilience was about character: some people have it, others don't. The new map says resilience is about circuits, specific identifiable neural systems whose architecture responds to specific, identifiable interventions.^[6]^[2]^[3]

That reframing has practical consequences. It means resilience is not something you build once and possess forever. It is something you maintain, the way an athlete maintains cardiovascular capacity or a musician maintains motor cortex refinement. The circuit decays without input. Chronic stress degrades the hippocampus. Social isolation removes the oxytocin buffer. Physical inactivity lets BDNF-driven neuroplasticity stall.^[11]^[29]^[33]

Same training. Same study. Two different outcomes.

Resilience Training: Adaptive Resources vs Resilience Scale

01Claim

Trainable Circuit

The brain's resilience mechanisms operate through a five-node circuit (amygdala, HPA axis, prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, and NPY–CRF toggle) whose architecture is structurally and functionally modifiable through evidence-based intervention.^[2]^[8]

02Consequence

Cumulative Degradation

Without deliberate maintenance, the resilience circuit degrades under chronic stress. Hippocampal volume shrinks. Allostatic load accumulates. Cardiovascular risk, mortality, and cognitive impairment increase measurably. The Gutenberg cohort's +36% mortality finding is not a prediction; it is an observed outcome.^[16]^[34]

03Lever

Multi-Domain Training

The strongest approach targets multiple circuit nodes simultaneously: aerobic exercise for hippocampal neurogenesis, cognitive reappraisal for prefrontal–amygdala regulation, mindfulness for attentional connectivity, and social connection for oxytocin-mediated buffering. No single intervention is sufficient; the circuit responds to coordinated input.^[7]^[14]

Put it to work

Where this science goes next on HPC

AssessmentEmotional Agility AssessmentScore where you actually stand Protocol90-Day Emotional Agility ProtocolTurn the mechanism into practice GlossaryEmotional IntelligenceThe definition, held to the evidence

07Bibliography

The bibliography.

36 sources · ~5h est. corpus read · 36 visible

RCT · 3 Meta · 6 Review · 4 Cohort · 1 Journal · 21 Book · 1

Type

Sort

01 Book

Southwick, S. M., & Charney, D. S2012

Resilience: The science of mastering life's greatest challenges

Cambridge University Press

no doi
↩
02 Review

Rubric 81/100

Feder, A., Nestler, E. J., & Charney, D. S2009

Psychobiology and molecular genetics of resilience

Nature Reviews Neuroscience446–457

doi: 10.1038/nrn2649
a b c d e f g h
03 Journal

Russo, S. J., Murrough, J. W., Han, M. H., Charney, D. S., & Nestler, E. J2012

Neurobiology of resilience

Nature Neuroscience1475–1484

doi: 10.1038/nn.3234
↩
04 Review

McEwen, B. S2007

Physiology and neurobiology of stress and adaptation: Central role of the brain

Physiological Reviews873–904

doi: 10.1152/physrev.00041.2006
a b c
05 Journal

McEwen, B. S1998

Stress, adaptation, and disease: Allostasis and allostatic load

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences33–44

doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb09546.x
↩
06 Journal

Kalisch, R., Müller, M. B., & Tüscher, O2015

A conceptual framework for the neurobiological study of resilience

Behavioral and Brain Sciences

doi: 10.1017/S0140525X14000199
a b c d
07 Meta

Rubric 88/100

Liu, J. J. W., Ein, N., Gervasio, J., Battaion, M., Reed, M., & Vickers, K2020

Comprehensive meta-analysis of resilience interventions

Clinical Psychology Review

doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101917
a b c
08 Meta

Rubric 78/100

Kuehn, A., Calvert, M. L., & James, G. A2025

Neuroimaging correlates of psychological resilience: An Open Science systematic review and meta-analysis

Frontiers in Neuroimaging

doi: 10.3389/fnimg.2025.1487888
a b c d
09 Journal

Rubric 72/100

Hölzel, B. K., Carmody, J., Vangel, M., Congleton, C., Yerramsetti, S. M., Gard, T., & Lazar, S. W2011

Mindfulness practice leads to increases in regional brain gray matter density

Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging36–43

doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2010.08.006
a b c d
10 Journal

Rubric 64/100

Leone, G., Casanave, H., Postel, C., Fraisse, F., Vallée, T., de La Sayette, V., Dayan, J., Peschanski, D., Eustache, F., & Gagnepain, P2025

Plasticity of human resilience mechanisms

Science Advances

doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adq8336
a b
11 Journal

Erickson, K. I., Voss, M. W., Prakash, R. S., Basak, C., Szabo, A., Chaddock, L., Kim, J. S., Heo, S., Alves, H., White, S. M., Wojcicki, T. R., Mailey, E., Vieira, V. J., Martin, S. A., Pence, B. D., Woods, J. A., McAuley, E., & Kramer, A. F2011

Exercise training increases size of hippocampus and improves memory

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences3017–3022

doi: 10.1073/pnas.1015950108
a b c
12 Meta

Buhle, J. T., Silvers, J. A., Wager, T. D., Lopez, R., Onyemekwu, C., Kober, H., Weber, J., & Ochsner, K. N2014

Cognitive reappraisal of emotion: A meta-analysis of human neuroimaging studies

Cerebral Cortex2981–2990

doi: 10.1093/cercor/bht154
a b
13 Journal

Heinrichs, M., Baumgartner, T., Kirschbaum, C., & Ehlert, U2003

Social support and oxytocin interact to suppress cortisol and subjective responses to psychosocial stress

Biological Psychiatry1389–1398

doi: 10.1016/S0006-3223(03)00465-7
↩
14 Journal

Tabibnia, G., & Radecki, D2018

Resilience training that can change the brain

Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research59–88

doi: 10.1037/cpb0000110
a b
15 Journal

Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. T2003

Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)

Depression and Anxiety76–82

doi: 10.1002/da.10113
↩
16 Journal

Author not identified in source2025

Psychological resilience, cardiovascular disease, and mortality, Insights from the German Gutenberg Health Study

doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2025.111970
a b
17 Cohort

Nishimi, K., Bürgin, D., & O'Donovan, A.2023

Psychological resilience to lifetime trauma and risk for cardiometabolic disease and mortality in older adults: A longitudinal cohort study

Journal of Psychosomatic Research175 · 111539

doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2023.111539
a b
18 Journal

Felix, A. S., Nolan, T. S., Glover, L. M., Sims, M., Addison, D., Smith, S. A., Anderson, C. M., Warren, B. J., Woods-Giscombe, C., Hood, D. B., & Williams, K. P.2023

The Modifying Role of Resilience on Allostatic Load and Cardiovascular Disease Risk in the Jackson Heart Study

Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities10(5) · 2124-2135

doi: 10.1007/s40615-022-01392-6
↩
19 Meta

Janitra, F. E., Chen, R., Lin, H. C., Sung, C. M., Chu, H., Lee, C. K., Niu, S. F., Liu, H. I., Chang, L. F., Banda, K. J., & Chou, K. R.2024

Efficacy of resilience-related psychological interventions in patients with long-term diseases: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

International Journal of Mental Health Nursing33(5) · 1388-1406

doi: 10.1111/inm.13334
↩
20 RCT

Author not identified in source2024

Psychological intervention programme for developing resilience in military personnel: A randomized controlled trial

no doi
↩
21 RCT

Guendelman, S., Bayer, M., Prehn, K., & Dziobek, I.2022

Towards a mechanistic understanding of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) using an RCT neuroimaging approach: Effects on regulating own stress in social and non-social situations

NeuroImage254 · 119059

doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119059
↩
22 Journal

Liu, P. Z., & Nusslock, R.2018

Exercise-Mediated Neurogenesis in the Hippocampus via BDNF

Frontiers in Neuroscience12 · 52

doi: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00052
↩
23 Meta

Yuping, Z., Tianbi, L., Wentao, S., Yun, L., & Guodong, Z.2024

The Optimal Type and Dose of Exercise for Elevating Brain‐Derived Neurotrophic Factor Levels in Patients With Depression: A Systematic Review With Pairwise, Network, and Dose-Response Meta‐Analyses

Depression and Anxiety2024(1) · 5716755

doi: 10.1155/da/5716755
↩
24 Journal

Kautz, M., Charney, D. S., & Murrough, J. W.2017

Neuropeptide Y, resilience, and PTSD therapeutics

Neuroscience Letters649 · 164-169

doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2016.11.061
↩
25 Journal

Author not identified in source2010

Social Support and Resilience to Stress: From Neurobiology to Clinical Practice

7(6), 35–4035–40

no doi
↩
26 Journal

Author not identified in source2022

Roles of Oxytocin in Stress Responses, Allostasis and Resilience

23(1), 265

no doi
a b
27 Journal

Leschik, J., Lutz, B., & Gentile, A.2021

Stress-Related Dysfunction of Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis, An Attempt for Understanding Resilience?

International Journal of Molecular Sciences22(14) · 7339

doi: 10.3390/ijms22147339
a b c d
28 Journal

Author not identified in source2023

Neural signatures of stress susceptibility and resilience in the amygdala-hippocampal network

no doi
↩
29 Review

Author not identified in source2016

Stress Effects on Neuronal Structure: Hippocampus, Amygdala, and Prefrontal Cortex

no doi
a b c
30 Journal

Veltri, A., Beatino, M. F., Corsi, M., Chiumiento, M., Caldi, F., Guglielmi, G., Foddis, R., Perugi, G., & Buselli, R.2026

Emotional Dysregulation and Stress-Related Psychopathology in Workers Exposed to Occupational Stress

Behavioral Sciences16(1) · 105

doi: 10.3390/bs16010105
a b
31 Journal

Wang, X., He, Y., & Feng, Z.2022

The antidepressant effect of cognitive reappraisal training: prefrontal–amygdala circuit modification

16, 919002

doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.919002
↩
32 RCT

Joyce, S., Shand, F., Lal, T. J., Mott, B., Bryant, R. A., & Harvey, S. B.2019

Resilience@Work Mindfulness Program: Results from a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial with First Responders

Journal of Medical Internet Research21(2) · e12894

doi: 10.2196/12894
a b
33 Journal

Author not identified in source2012

Social influences on neuroplasticity: Stress and interventions to promote well-being

15(5), 689–695689–695

no doi
↩
34 Meta

Author not identified in source2021

Allostatic load and its impact on health: A systematic review

90(1), 11–3411–34

no doi
↩
35 Review

Yao, Z. F., & Hsieh, S.2019

Neurocognitive Mechanism of Human Resilience: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Review

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health16(24) · 5123

doi: 10.3390/ijerph16245123
↩
36 Journal

Author not identified in source2025

Global evidence on the prevalence of and risk factors associated with stress

PMID 39805499

no doi
a b

The protocol card