Background: The concept of resilience in familial and social contexts has gained prominence in academic and policy discussions. However, the interplay between family life and social inequalities, and how these relate to each other in the resilience literature, has yet to be documented. Objective: This scoping review addresses this gap by analysing 250 articles published between 1998 and 2023. We compare the concept of resilience as applied in family and social resilience studies through four constitutive elements: (1) the unit of analysis, (2) definitions, (3) types, and (4) the risks, outcomes, and explanatory factors that are examined empirically. Results: While both perspectives study individuals’ resilience, the emphasis in family resilience is on families, whereas social resilience studies focus more on communities and societies. Both perspectives emphasize the centrality of risks in defining resilience, yet family resilience scholarship seeks solutions within the family, while social resilience highlights community dynamics. Additionally, family resilience studies explore topics related to family-specific risks and resources, while social resilience studies examine external risks and resources. Conclusions: The family resilience scholarship follows the clinical tradition in the resilience literature, viewing families as a separate entity that is resourceful and agentic. Socioeconomic risks are recurrent themes in social resilience literature, but not in family resilience. Contribution: Understanding resilience through the lens of family inequalities in socioeconomic contexts can bridge these two perspectives. Incorporating factors such as labour market dynamics, family transitions, and educational attainment into definitions of risks, outcomes, and explanatory factors of resilience can enhance this integration.

中文翻译：

---

家庭和社会弹性：实证文献的范围综述（作者：Abrar Bawati、Rense Nieuwenhuis、Merve Uzunalioǧlu、Max Thaning）


背景： 家庭和社会背景下的复原力概念在学术和政策讨论中越来越受到重视。然而，家庭生活和社会不平等之间的相互作用，以及它们在复原力文献中的相互关系，尚未被记录下来。目的：本范围综述通过分析 1998 年至 2023 年间发表的 250 篇文章来解决这一差距。我们通过四个构成要素比较了家庭和社会弹性研究中应用的弹性概念：（1） 分析单位，（2） 定义，（3） 类型，以及 （4） 实证检查的风险、结果和解释因素。结果：虽然这两种观点都研究个人的弹性，但家庭弹性的重点是家庭，而社会弹性研究更侧重于社区和社会。这两种观点都强调风险在定义弹性方面的核心地位，但家庭弹性奖学金在家庭内部寻求解决方案，而社会弹性则强调社区动态。此外，家庭弹性研究探讨了与家庭特定风险和资源相关的主题，而社会弹性研究则研究了外部风险和资源。结论： 家庭复原力奖学金遵循复原力文献中的临床传统，将家庭视为一个足智多谋且具有代理性的独立实体。社会经济风险是社会弹性文献中反复出现的主题，但在家庭弹性中不是。贡献： 通过社会经济背景下的家庭不平等来理解复原力可以弥合这两个观点。 将劳动力市场动态、家庭过渡和教育程度等因素纳入风险、结果和弹性解释因素的定义中，可以加强这种整合。