PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 14, 2026Adversity and Resilience Science0 citationsOpen Access

An Evaluation of Factors Predicting the Resilience of Child Sexual Abuse Survivors in Rural and Urban Zimbabwe

View Full Paper
TMTaruvinga Muzingili

Key Points

  • The study aims to evaluate predictors of resilience among CSA survivors in Zimbabwe and assess a resilience-building program's effects.
  • Longitudinal quasi-experimental design tracking 1,573 CSA survivors aged 12-19.
  • Linear Mixed-Effects Modelling was used to analyze data for individual variability.
  • Resilience-building program focusing on individual, social, institutional, and community factors implemented over 5 years.
  • Resilience scores improved from M = 3.0 (baseline) to M = 4.5 (post-test), β = 12.45, p < .001.
  • Strong predictors included self-esteem (β = 3.58), mentorship (β = 2.78), and psychological support (β = 3.45), all significant (p < .001).
  • Urban survivors benefited more from institutional support, while rural survivors relied on coping mechanisms and traditional healing.

Abstract

Abstract Child sexual abuse (CSA) has severe psychological, social, and developmental consequences, yet resilience—the ability to adapt positively despite adversity—offers a pathway for recovery. This study evaluates predictors of resilience among CSA survivors in rural and urban Zimbabwe and assesses the impact of a structured resilience-building program on individual, social, institutional, and community factors over 5 years. A longitudinal quasi-experimental design was used, tracking 1,573 CSA survivors aged 12–19 at enrolment and 1,021 at post-test. Linear Mixed-Effects Modelling (LMM) was applied to account for individual variability and non-randomized group differences. Resilience scores significantly improved from M = 3.0 (baseline) to M = 4.5 (post-test), β = 12.45, p < .001. Strong predictors included self-esteem (β = 3.58), mentorship (β = 2.78), psychological support (β = 3.45), and educational access (β = 3.02, all p < .001). Urban survivors benefited more from institutional support, whereas rural survivors relied on coping mechanisms and traditional healing. The program effectively enhanced resilience, but individual variability suggests a need for personalized interventions. Strengthening institutional support in rural areas and integrating cultural healing practices into formal programs can improve accessibility and effectiveness. These findings inform policy and programmatic strategies for the recovery of CSA survivors.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Taruvinga Muzingili (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0567fda550a87e60a203b5https://doi.org/10.1007/s42844-026-00222-6
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper