Today there is recognition of the multiple types and levels of contexts that exist simultaneously, all are possible to influence children’s development (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). Many developmentalists suggested that the contexts in which children develop are dynamically related, hierarchically organized, interdependent, and that they serve co-regulatory and compensatory functions (Call & Mortimer, 2001). These complicated and intertwined factors embedded in the children’s context are also keys of deciding a child to be resilient or vulnerable. Meanwhile, the developmental outcomes we choose to judge how well adjusted a child is may also affect the decision we made to offer more or less resources to that child. Some resources and materials may combined to create utilities and made the children more resilient. On the other way, they may offset one another, and made the children more vulnerable. Luthar, Cicchetti, and Becker (2000) suggested that the researchers of resilience field should consider to examine the differences between single outcome and multiple outcomes. So at this study, we proposed to questions. The first question is when multiple outcomes are assessed, whether these should be examined separately or somehow integrated. The second question is when multiple outcomes are considered separately, are some of these accorded more importance than others as the most critical indicators of resilience.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward and experimental ecology of human development, American Psychologist, July 1977, 513-531. Call, K.T., & Mortimer, J.T. (2001). Arenas of comfort in adolescence: A study of adjustment in context. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Luthar, S.S., Cicchetti, D.,& Becher, B.（2000）. The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71, 543-562.