Journal of Educational Research and Studies Vol.1 (1), pp.

1-7, February, 2013

http://www.peakjournals.org/sub-journals-JERS.html
ISSN 2329-3039
2013 Peak Journals

Full Length Research Paper

Resilience and psychological well- being among congenitally

blind, late blind and sighted individuals
Muhammad Zeeshan and Naeem Aslam*
 Accepted 25 February, 2013

Present research aimed to investigate the phenomenon of resilience and

psychological well-being among congenitally blind, late blind and sighted
individuals. Moreover, it explained the effect of other variables such as age,

PE
gender, education, socio-economic status and employment on resilience
and psychological well-being. Ego Resiliency scale and affectometer-2
Scale were used to collect the data. Sample of the study consisted of 150
individuals including congenitally blind (n = 50, 33.39%), late blind (n = 50,
33.39%) and sighted individuals (n= 50, 33.39%). Purposive convenient
sampling technique was used to collect the data. ANOVA and independent
sample T-test were applied to test the hypotheses. Congenitally blind Head Office:
scored higher on resilience, whereas sighted individuals scored higher on 31, CA Street,
psychological well-being. Male scored higher on resilience and Ipaja, Lagos S
psychological well-being as compared to females. Adults scored lower than Tel: 08025387
E-mail: info@
adolescence on resilience and well-being. Educated and employed
individuals scored higher on resilience and psychological well-being. Our Ref:
Individuals belonging to middle socio-economic status scored higher on National Institute of Psychology,
resilience. Practical Implications of the study are discussed and Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad,
suggestions for future research have been made. Pakistan.

Key words: Resilience, psychological well- being, congenitally blind, late blind, *Corresponding author. E-mail:
sighted individuals. psy_naeem@yahoo.com.
INTRODUCTION
According to world health
organization (WHO, 2009)
about 314 million people
are visually impaired
worldwide and 45 million
of them are blind. Most
people with visual
impairment are the older
adults. The prevalence of
visual impairment, and
especially blindness, vary
greatly by the
developmental status of
geographic region (Cheng
et al., 2013). Females are
more at risk at every age,
in every part of the world.
About 87% of the world's
visually impaired live in
developing countries.
Women were found to
have a significant excess
of severe visual
impairment and blindness
(Jadoon et al., 2006). In
another study, Vaughan
and Asbury (2006) found
that there are at least 13
million totally blind
persons in the world, with
the number increasing
each year. Prevalence of
blindness varied
throughout the country.
Rural areas have a higher
prevalence of blindness
as compared to the urban
areas (Jadoon et al.,
2006). There is significant
excess of visual
impairment among the
elderly and the
uneducated individuals.
Mills (2010) explains
psychological well-being
as a balance between
positive and negative
effect. In a meta-analysis,
on the basis of 198
studies that compared
psychological well-being
of visually impaired
individuals with
unimpaired control groups
or population norms, on
average, visually impaired
people showed a strong
decline of vision-specific
psychological well-being
(Pinquart and Pfeiffer,
2009). McIlvane and
Reinhardt (2001) explored
the relationship between
social support and
psychological well being
that women with high
support from both friends
and family had better
psychological well-being,
whereas men with high
support from both friends
and family or just from
family had better
psychological well-being.
Studies showed that
individuals with visual
disability may require
more assistance and

supervision, than those who does not have a disability
(Bain, 1998; Dobson et al., 2001; Roberts and Lawton,
2000). Parents of children with a disability tend to have
lower than average incomes (Dobson et al., 2001;
Lukemeyer et al., 2000). Educated sighted individuals
had better psychological well-being as compared to
individuals with visual impairment. And they are likely to
experience more stress, lower levels of marital
satisfaction, poorer mental health and lower levels of
well-being than control (Gardner and Harmon, 2002;
Patterson, 2002).
Linely and Joseph (2005) found the prevalence of
depression and lower well-being in visually impaired
groups to be at least twice as high as that found in normal
populations. Social adjustment to vision loss is construed
to involve difficulties in social functioning, changes in
social support, and loneliness. Although research findings
indicate loss of social activity and, to a lesser extent, loss
of social support among the visually impaired, the
relationship between vision loss and loneliness remains
unclear. There are, however, firm indications that social
support can provide an effective buffer against age-
related vision loss. In one research, comparison of the
behavioral and emotional adaptation of late visually
impaired and sighted people found that age-related visual
impairment was associated with other forms of
substantial loss that increased over a six-year period.
Individuals from 10 European countries, who had a
severe vision loss in their adulthood, were taken in this
study. Lower vision was associated with a highly
significant negative impact on all measured aspects of
well-being. This data from a large population based in
Europe provide evidence that persons with low vision
have a higher probability of concentration problems
during reading and entertainment; losing interest and
enjoyment in their activities; feeling fatigued, irritable,
sad, and tearful; having less hope for the future; and
wishing for death. Effective measures of early detection,
prevention, rehabilitation, education and research, as well
as a holistic view of a patient, could help counter these
problems, thereby improving mental and physical health
and reducing the economic impact of low vision (Linely
and Joseph, 2005).
Resilience, another important variable of the study, is
seen as having the ability to function effectively or
positively in adverse circumstances (Schoon, 2006).
Compared to childhood resilience, little is understood
about resilience in adulthood (Bartley, 2006).
Researchers in childhood and adolescent development
first described resilience as a factor enabling children in
adverse circumstances to develop into well-adjusted and
successful adults. The concept of resilience was
developed to help explain why some children do well
under disadvantaged circumstances. Resilience is
attributed to children who grew up under unfavorable
circumstances without showing unfavorable conse-
quences (Masten, 2001). It is defined as the capacity
Zeeshan and Aslam 2
for successful adaptation, positive functioning, or
competence despite high risk, chronic stress, or
prolonged or severe trauma (Egeland et al., 1993). As a
result of this adaptive flexibility, individuals with a high
level of resiliency are more likely to experience positive
effect, and have higher levels of self confidence and
better psychological adjustment than individuals with a
low level of resiliency (Block and Kremen, 1996; Klohnen,
1996). When confronted by stressful circumstances,
individuals with a low level of resiliency may act in a
perseverative manner or chaotically and diffusely, and in
either case, the resulting behavior is likely to be
maladaptive (Block and Kremen, 1996).
Studies indicate that gender has a notable effect on
individuals resilience and self-esteem. Male is found to
have more level of resilience and self-esteem than female
(Heady and Wearing, 2005). Younger men and men from
all age groups tend to make more use of adaptive coping
strategies that focus on the immediate problem than
women (Heady and Wearing, 2005; Luthar, 2003; Werner,
2001). Gurin et al. (2002) studied the relationship of
socioeconomic status and level of resilience. They
concluded that within the low, middle and upper
socioeconomic population, middle socioeconomic class
was more equip to deal with daily stressors. And their
level of resilience was found to be significantly higher
than low and high socioeconomic groups. Studies also
indicate that between all three socioeconomic groups,
people belonging to middle socioeconomic group
possess higher level of resilience. As they are faced up
with more challenges in life, where as lower class move
to quickly give up as they have no resources to call upon,
where as upper class have to face lesser challenges in
life so both are very low on the level of resilience (Heady
et al., 1993; Meddley, 2001). In a study, it was seen that
married individuals cope with life situations and daily
stressors much better than their unmarried counterparts
(Riolli et al., 2002). Johonson and Wiechalt (2004)
suggested that education had an influence on
psychological subjective well-being; whereas, some other
researchers found that this effect is not very strong.
Rationale of the study
In Pakistan there are a large number of people who are
visually impaired. Sudden vision loss at the any stage of
life is a traumatic experience for an individual. It may lead
toward the psychological distress. Whereas the physical,
psychological and socioeconomic distress of blindness is
well recognized, in view of the relative paucity of
literature, the attitude of the medical community toward
psychosocial care of the visually impaired individuals can
be described as not very enthusiastic. While many often
perceived people who are visually impaired as helpless,
resentful, bitter, and unhappy, some advocated that
blindness itself does not create emotional disturbance.

Instead, it is societal prejudices that cause emotional
distress. This research is an attempt to understand the
demographic and psychosocial problems of a group of
blind people in Pakistan as a way of attracting more
attention to and providing information that can improve
the psychosocial care of the visually challenged people.
The emphasis on the blind individuals may differ from
society to society. We conducted this study with some
hope that research and the further development of
services will improve the lot of blind people throughout
the world.
Objectives
Present research aims to investigate the phenomenon of
resilience and psychological well-being among
congenitally blind, late blind and sighted individuals.
Moreover, it explains the effect of other variables such as
age, gender, education, socio-economic status and
employment on resilience and psychological well-being.
Hypotheses
1. Congenitally blind have high resilience as compared to
late blind and sighted individuals.
2. Sighted individuals have high score on psychological
well-being as compared to congenitally blind and late
blind.
3. Males have high score on resilience and psychological
well-being as compared to female.
4. Adults have high score on resilience and psychological
well-being as compared to adolescents.
5. Educated and employed individuals have high score
on resilience and psychological well-being as compared
to uneducated and unemployed individuals.
6. Individuals belonging to middle socio-economic status
are more resilient, while Individuals belonging to high
socio-economic status have more psychological well-
being.
METHODOLOGY
Instruments
Ego Resiliency Scale (ER): The Ego Resiliency scale
(ER) developed by Block and Kremen (1996) is a short
inventory scale to assess (trait-based) psychological
resilience defined as the capacity of the individual to
effectively adjust to frustrating or stressful life encounters.
Urdu translated version of ego resiliency scale
(Nangiana, 2002) was used in the present study. The ER
has 14 items and each question require a response on 4-
point scale ranging from 1, with the answer does not
apply at all, to 4 with the answer applies very strongly.
J. Educ. Res. Stud. 3
The maximum score can be 56. All items of the scale
are positively scored Those who score low on this
measure are expected to experience more emotional
distress or problems compared to those who score high
when adversity is controlled. Sample items include I
quickly get over and recover from being startled, and I
enjoy dealing with new and unusual situations.
Coefficient alpha was 0.81 and the testretest reliability
was 0.67. The alpha reliability of the Ego Resiliency Scale
is (r =0.81). The Scale was checked for face validity by
the authors before using it in the present research.
Well-being Affectometer-2 Scale: A valid and reliable
measure of well being in terms of general happiness,
based on negative and positive feelings was developed
by Kammann and Flett (1983). It consists of 39 items
divided in two parts. Part 1 comprised of 19 statements
and part II consists of 20 objective items. Part I and part II
of well being scale will be scored on 5 point? likert type
scale. Range of scores of well being scale is in between
39 to 195. Split half reliability of Urdu version of well-
being scale (Affectometer-2) was found to be highly
significant that is, r is 0.75 (n = 50) between two parts,
and alpha coefficient was 0.88 (n = 50) which is highly
significant (Naheed, 1997).
Sample
Sample of the current study comprised of 150 individuals.
It included the Adult blind (n = 50, 33.39%), congenitally
blind (n = 50, 33.39%) and sighted individuals (n = 50,
33.39%). Both male (n = 120, 80%) and female (n = 30,
20%) were included in the research. The sample of blind
individual was taken from Pakistan Foundation Fighting
Blindness.
The sample of the control group was taken from the
different regions of Islamabad using Purposive convenient
sampling technique. There was also division of educated and
uneducated individuals in the sample educated (n = 129, 86%)
and uneducated (n = 21, 14%) individuals who had the middle
school education were considered educated and individuals
who had the qualification below middle were considered
uneducated. Age range of the sample was between 18-30
years. Individuals who had their age 18-23 were put into the
bracket of adolescence (n = 122, 81%) and individuals who had
their age 24-30 were considered as adults (n = 38, 19%) in the
current research. Data was comprised of both employed (n
=24, 16%) and unemployed (n = 126, 84%). The total sample
was categorized in three socio-economic classes; high socio-
economic class (n =15, 10%), middle socio-economic class (n =
90, 60%) and low socio-economic class (n = 45, 30%). Socio-
economic classes were determined on the basis of monthly
family income.
 Zeeshan and Aslam 4

Table 1. Mean, Standard Deviation and F values for congenitally blind, late blind, and sighted individuals on Ego Resiliency
Scale and Affectometer-2 (N = 150).

Congenitally Blind Late Sighted

(n = 50) Blind Individuals
(n = 50) (n = 50)
Variables
M SD M SD M SD F p
Ego Resiliency 23.47 1.664 19.21 2.320 21.13 2.321 4.61 .000
Well Being 14.78 2.619 13.93 2.584 14.87 3.722 1.47 .002
Between groups df = 1; Within group df = 148; Groups total df = 149
 results indicate significant phenomenon of resilience
differences in resilience and psychological well-being
among congenitally blind, among congenitally blind,
Procedure late blind, and people results also indicate late blind and sighted
without visual impairment significant mean individuals. We also aimed
Permission was acquired F (1,148) = 4.61, p < differences in to see the role of other
from the concerned 0.001). The results psychological well-being variables such as age,
authorities in order to indicate significant t(148) = 1.42, p < 0.05).
gender, education, socio-
collect the data. After differences in Table 2(c) shows mean
economic status and
taking the written consent psychological well-being differences between
among congenitally blind, adolescents and adults on employment on resilience
from the respondents,
late blind, and people Ego Resiliency scale and and psychological well-
they were told about the
purpose and importance without visual impairment affectometer-2. The being. On the basis of
of the study. They were (F (1,148)1.47, p < 0.01). results show non- literature review, we
assured that this Table 2(a) shows mean significant mean expected that congenitally
information will be used differences between male differences in resilience blind have high resilience as
only for research purpose and female on Ego t(148) = 1.48, p > 0.05). compared to late blind and
and the information they Resiliency scale and The results also indicate sighted individuals and
will provide would be kept affectometer-2. The non-significant mean sighted individuals have high
confidential. results show significant differences in psychological well-being.
Questionnaires were mean differences in psychological well-being Males have high score on
individually administered resilience (t = 3.026, df = t(148) = 1.38, p > 0.05). resilience and psychological
on the participants. 148, p < 0.01). The results Table 2(d) shows mean well-being as compared to
Writers were provided to also indicate significant differences between
female. Moreover, educated
the blind participants to fill mean differences in employed and
and employed individuals
the questionnaires. psychological well-being unemployed on Ego
Resiliency scale and have high score on resilience
t(148) = 1.14, p < 0.05).
Table 2(b) shows mean affectometer-2. The and psychological well-being
differences between results show significant and the individuals
RESULTS
educated and uneducated mean differences in belonging to middle socio-
on Ego Resiliency scale resilience (t = 4.311, df = economic status are more
The present study was
carried out to examine the and affectometer-2. The 148, p < 0.05). The results resilient, while Individuals
mean differences in results show significant also indicate significant belonging to high socio-
resilience and mean differences in mean differences in economic status have more
psychological well-being resilience t(148) = 1.32, p psychological well-being
among congenitally blind, < 0.01). The t(148)= 3.128, p < 0.05).
late blind, and people Table 3 shows the
without visual impairment. results of one way
Mean differences in analysis of variance for
resilience and Ego Resiliency scale and
psychological well-being affectometer-2 with
with respect to various respect to high, middle,
demographic variables and lower socio-economic
including gender, age, status. The results
education, employment indicate significant
and socio-economic differences in resilience
status were also among upper, middle, and
examined. Alpha reliability lower socio-economic
coefficients of all status (F(1,148) = 4.96, p
subscales used in the < 0.01). The results
study were computed. T- indicate significant
test and ANOVA was differences in
applied to explore the psychological well-being
differences in among upper, middle, and
demographic variables. lower socio-economic
Table 1 shows the results status F(1,148) = p <
of one way analysis of 0.01).
variance for Ego
Resiliency scale and
affectometer-2 with DISCUSSION
respect to congenitally
blind, late blind and The objective of the present
sighted individuals. The study was to investigate the
 J. Educ. Res. Stud. 5

Table 2. Mean, Standard Deviation and t values for Gender, Education, Age, and Employment on Ego Resiliency Scale and
affectometer-2 (N = 150).

Scales Variable N M SD t p
Male 120 20.46 2.256
a. Ego Resiliency Female 30 19.43 2.482 2.806 .005
Male 120 19.10 3.064
b. Well Being Female 30 18.04 2.042 1.137 .033
Educated 129 20.34 2.315
c. Ego Resiliency Uneducated 21 19.53 2.091 1.325 .008
Educated 129 18.34 3.087
d. Well Being Uneducated 21 17.14 2.511 1.423 .021
Adolescence 112 18.34 3.089
e. Ego Resiliency Adulthood 38 17.14 2.531 1.483 .139
Adolescence 112 18.54 3.501
f. Well Being Adulthood 38 17.26 3.081 1.384 .167
Employed 24 19.51 4.211
g. Ego Resiliency Unemployed 126 17.81 3.452 4.311 .024
Employed 24 18.23 3.332
h. Well Being Unemployed 126 17.39 3.237 3.128 .007
df = 148

Table 3. Mean, Standard Deviation and F values for high, middle, and low socio-economic status on Ego Resiliency Scale
and Affectometer-2 (N = 150).

High SES Middle SES Lower SES

(n = 15) (n = 90) (n = 45)
Scales

M SD M SD M SD F p
Ego Resiliency 19.21 2.449 21.73 2.189 20.18 2.320 4.963 .008
Well Being 13.64 4.191 12.98 4.025 10.52 3.128 5.541 .003
Between groups df = 1; Within group df = 148; Groups total df = 149
psychological well-being.
To test the hypotheses,
we used the t-test and
ANOVA to see the
differences between the
groups.
Our first hypothesis was
that congenitally blind will
have high resilience as
compared to late blind
and sighted individuals,
who were supported by
the research. Findings of
our study are in line with
the previous studies. For
example, Bonanno (2004)
have investigated the
level of resilience between
congenitally blind, late
blind and sighted people.
The study was conducted
in the university of
Heidelberg Germany.
Results showed that
among all three groups
congenitally blind had the
higher level of resilience
as they are faced up with
challenges in life. Results
of the present study also
indicated that congenitally
blind scored higher on
resilience as compared to
late blind and sighted
people. The second
hypothesis that sighted
individuals will have high
score on psychological
well-being as compared to
congenitally blind and late
blind was also supported
in the current research. In
one study, Charney
(2004) studied the
relationship of visual
impairment and
psychological well-being.
In this study, a (2003) found that women
comparison between
visually impaired and
sighted people on
psychological well-being
was drawn. This study
concluded that visually
impaired either congenital
or late will show lower
level of psychological
well-being as compared to
sighted people. The
findings of the current
study also suggest that
there are significant mean
differences among
congenitally blind, late
blind and people without
visual impairment. Sighted
people have scored
higher than congenitally
blind and late blind on
affectometer-2 scale.
The hypothesis that
male will have high score
on resilience and
psychological well-being
as compared to female, is
supported by the results
of the current study. As far
as gender differences in
resilience are concern,
there are significant mean
differences in the scores
of male and female on
resilience and
psychological well-being.
Friburg et al. (2005)
studied the gender
differences in resilience
and found that male
possess more resilience
than female. The current
study also confirms this
finding that male have a
higher level of resilience
than female.
There is also research
evidence that women are
low on psychological well-
being as compared to
men. Bonanno et al.
experience more negative
emotion then men.
Results showed that
there are no
significant mean

differences in the scores of adults and adolescence on
resilience and psychological well-being. Previous
research literature also states that age and resilience are
not interrelated (Luthar, 2003; Werner, 2000).We also
hypothesized that educated and employed individuals
have high score on resilience and psychological well-
being as compared to uneducated and unemployed
individuals. Results are significant and consistent with the
past studies. We also expected that individuals belonging
to middle socio-economic status are more resilient, while
Individuals belonging to high socio-economic status have
more psychological well-being. Findings showed the
significant mean differences among the scores of low,
middle and high socio-economic groups. The middle
socio-economic group scored higher on resilience than
both low and high socio-economic groups. Previous
researches also confirm these findings that psychological
wellbeing and resilience is higher among those partici-
pants who belongs to the middle socio-economic group,
as compared to those participants who belong to either
low or high socioeconomics groups (Heady and Wearing,
2005; Meddley, 2001).
Limitations and Suggestions
The questionnaires used in this study were self-report
measures in which sample of the study rated themselves
on resilience and psychological well-being. Such self
rating is less reliable due to self biasness. In the future
research, in-depth investigation should be done into the
phenomenon. Sample of the present study was collected
from Rawalpindi and Islamabad. So the findings are less
generalizable. Visually impaired population of other
regions should also be included in the future research.
The current research was limited to the level of resilience
and psychological well-being. Many other variables are
also important in relation to visual impairment (e.g. self-
esteem, social support, inter personal relationships, etc).
Future studies should consider these variables an order
to get a more comprehensive sight into the psychological
problems of visually impaired community. Another
limitations of the study is the merely reliance on the cross
sectional data. Longitudinal studies can better give us the
better picture of the causality.
Implications of the study
The present study can be very insightful when any
program community is designed especially regarding late
blind community. It is one of the few indigenous studies
available in Pakistani culture on blind individuals which
provides empirical data on blind community that can help
firstly in awareness of common people and secondly it
lays a base line for further researches. This research
highlights the difference between congenital and late
Zeeshan and Aslam 6
blindness. It provides evidence that late blindness is more
challenging than congenital blindness. Specialized
separate interventions can be designed for congenital
blind and late blind individuals.
Conclusion
The present study is insightful in understanding the
psychological health of visually impaired individuals with
respect to resilience and psychological well-being.
Specialized counseling services can be helpful in
facilitating the well being among the individuals with
visual impairment. Moreover, resilience can serve as a
protective factor to enhance the wellbeing and cope with
life adversities. In addition, government and non-
governmental organziations need to consider the
planning of long-term mental health and educational
policies for the visually challenged and such policies need
to be based on an outreach model. Continued research
in this area will uncover the pathways and suggest ways
to improve health and well-being among those individuals
experiencing serious life stress.
REFERENCES
Bain K (1998). Children with severe disabilities: options for residential
care. Med. J. Aust. 169:598-600
Bartley M (2006). Capability and Resilience: Beating the Odds. London,
University College London.
Block J, Kremen AM (1996). IQ and ego-resiliency: Conceptual and
empirical connections and separateness. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.
70:349361.
Bonanno GA (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we
underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive
events? Am. Psychol. 59(1):20-28.
Bonanno GA, Rennicke C, Dekel S, Rosen J (2003). Self-enhancement
and resilience among survivors of the September 11 th terrorist attack
on the world Trade centre. Am. Psychol. 59(1):20-28.
Cheng JW, Cheng SW, Cai JP, Wei Li (2013). The prevalence of visual
impairment in older adults in mainland China: a systematic review
and meta-analysis. Ophthalmic. Res. 49(1):1-10. doi:
10.1159/000327144 000327144
Charney DS (2004). Psychological mechanism of resilience and
vulnerability: implications for successful adaptation to extreme stress.
Am. J. Psych. 161(2):195-216.
Dobson BS, Middleton A, Beardsworth A (2001). The impact of
childhood disability on family life. York, York Publishing Service for
Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Egeland B, Carlson E, Stroufe LA (1993). Resilience as process. Dev.
Psychopathol. 5:517-528.
Kammann R, Flett R (1983) Affectometer 2: A scale to measure current
level of general happiness. Aust J Psychol. 35:259265
Friburg O, Barlang D, Martinussen M, Rosenvinge JH (2005).
Resilience predicting Psychiatric symptoms: A prospective study of
protective factors and their role in adjustment to stressful life events.
Int. J. Meth. Psychiatr. Res. 14:29-42.
Gardner J, Harmon T (2002). Exploring resilience from a parent's
perspective: A qualitative study of six resilient mothers of children with
an intellectual disability. ASW 55(1):60-68.
Gurin G, Veroff J, Feld S (2002). Americans view their mental health.
New York: Basic Books.
Heady B, Kelly J, Wearing A (1993). Dimensions of mental health: Life
satisfaction positive effect, anxiety & depression. SOCI. 29:63-82.
Heady H, Wearing F (2005). Resilience in the face of catastrophe:

Optimism, personality and Coping in the Kosovo crisis. JASP.
32:1604-1627.
Jadoon MZ, Brendan D, Rupert RA (2006). Prevalence of Blindness and
Visual Impairment in Pakistan: The Pakistan National Blindness and
Visual Impairment Survey. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. 47:4749-4755.
Johonson JL, Wiechalt SA (2004). Introduction to the special issue on
resilience. SUMU. 39(5):657-670.
Klohnen EC (1996). Conceptual analysis and measurement of the
construct of ego-resiliency. J. Pers. Soc. Psycho. 70:10671079.
Lukemeyer A, Meyers MK, Smeeding T (2000). Expensive Children in
Poor Families: Out-of Pocket Expenditures for the Care of Disabled
and Chronically Ill Children in Welfare Families. J. Marriage Fam.
62:399-415.
Linely PA, Joseph S (2005). The human capacity for growth through
adversity. Am. Psychol. 60(3):262-264.
Luthar SS (2003). The construct of resilience: implication for
interventions and social policies. Dev. Psychopathol. 12:857-885.
Masten AS (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in
development. Am. Psychol. 56:227238.
McIlvane JM, Reinhardt JP (2001). Interactive effect of support from
family and friends in visually impaired elders. J. Gerontol B Psychol.
Sci. Soc. 56(6):374-82
Mills (2010). Psychological Well-being in Long Term Care, retrieved on
22 December http:// geropsychology
.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/psychological-well-being-in-long-term-
care/
Meddley EA (2001). Resilience processes in adolescents: Personality
profiles, self worth and coping. J. Adol. Resi. 18:347-362.
J. Educ. Res. Stud. 7
Nangiana L (2002). Relationship of ego resiliency with internal locus of
control among adolescents, Unpublished M.Sc dissertation. National
Institute of psychology.Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
Naheed S (1997). Professional attitude of school teachers and their
well-being. Unpublished M.Phil dissertation. National institute of
psychology Quaid-i-Azam University Islamabad.
Patterson JM (2002). Integrating Family Resilience and Family Stress
Theory. J. Marriage Fam. 64:349-360.
Pinquart M, Pfeiffer JP (2009). Psychological well-being in visually
impaired and unimpaired individuals. BJVI., 29(1) 27-45. DOI
10.1177/0264619610389572.
Riolli L, Savicki V, Cepani A (2002). Resilience in the face of
catastrophe: Optimism, personality and Coping in the Kosovo crisis.
JASP. 32:1604-1627.
Roberts KD, Lawton C (2000). Acknowledging the extra care parents
give their disabled children. Child: Care, Health Dev. 27(4):307-319.
Schoon I (2006). Risk and Resilience: Adaptations in Changing Times.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Vaughn E, Asbury TR (2006). The world of blind. New York. McMillan.
Werner EE (2001). Journeys from childhood to midlife: Risk, resilience,
and recovery. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
World Health Organization (2009). Constitution of the World Health
Organization. Visual impairment and blindness, Fact Sheet, retrieved
from http:// www.who.int/ mediacentre/ factsheets/ fs282/en/