Association of Adverse Childhood Experiences with Resilience and Work Engagement among Working Adults in India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70917/ijcisim-2026-4981Keywords:
Correlational Research design, Adverse Childhood Experiences, Resilience, Work engagementAbstract
Background: While there is broad agreement that Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are a significant contributor to long-term psychological and occupational challenges, many studies have focused on the negative consequences and not discussed what occurs following this traumatic development, within Indian contexts especially. There is little empirical evidence regarding resilience and work engagement along with its association with ACE among working adults in India and this indicates that strengths-based adaptation after exposure to adversity is under-researched. This lack is significant for Organizations to practice well-being and in a trauma-informed way. Methods: The purpose of the present study was to explore the associations among ACEs, resilience and work engagement in working adult population in India. The ACE-IQ, Brief Resilience Scale (BRS-6) and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) were completed by 310 working professionals (aged 25–35 years and with at least two years’ experience) via a purposive sampling strategy, utilizing a correlational research design.
Results: The findings revealed that there were positive correlations between ACEs with resilience, as well as between resilience with work engagement, where the correlation was modest, but significant in both cases. These findings indicate that, individuals with higher childhood adversity can be associated with greater resilience and more vigour, commitment and absorption in their job.
Conclusion: Finally, in the context of the current study, a strengths-based perspective is validated in that ACEs are not always correlated with worse occupational functioning, and, in some circumstances, can be correlated with strong and vibrant professional functioning. For further study, longitudinal and mediation/moderation designs are recommended, as well as adding other protective factors (social support, meaning in life, organizational climate) and testing further trauma-informed and resilience-building interventions in a variety of occupational and cultural settings.