Meaning and Resilience in War-Affected Populations During Crisis

Pninit Russo-Netzer^1*Ricardo Tarrasch^2,3Rotem Saar-Ashkenazy³Jonathan Guez⁴

• ¹Achva Academic College, Arugot, Israel
• ²Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel
• ³Ashkelon Academic College, Ashkelon, Israel
• ⁴Achva Academic College, Havat Shikmim, Israel

Introduction: The unprecedented events of October 7, 2023, profoundly affected mental health and functioning in Israel. This study examined how protective psychological factors—particularly meaning in life (MIL) and optimism—contribute to resilience during wartime trauma, and explored how individuals derive and ascribe meaning in this context. Methods: A mixed-methods design combined quantitative and qualitative approaches. The quantitative sample comprised 758 Israeli adults surveyed during the early phase of the war. Stepwise multiple regression analyses tested which theorized protective factors—social support, prioritizing meaning, presence of meaning, optimism, psychological distress, loneliness, and concern about the state’s future—predicted resilience. In parallel, thematic analysis of two open-ended questions examined (a) activities that provided a sense of meaning during the war and (b) meanings ascribed to the October 7 events; exploratory chi-square and t-tests linked themes with individual differences and study variables. Results: The final regression model was significant and explained 36% of the variance in resilience. Optimism emerged as the strongest positive predictor (β = .31, p < .001), followed by presence of meaning (β = .10, p = .015), prioritizing meaning (β = .13, p = .002), and social support (β = .08, p = .017), whereas psychological distress (β = −.17, p < .001) and concern about the state’s future (β = −.09, p = .006) were negative predictors. Qualitatively, participants reported deriving meaning from volunteering and contribution, maintaining daily routines, nurturing relationships, and engaging in religious/spiritual practices. These themes were generally associated with higher resilience. Discussion: Converging quantitative and qualitative evidence highlights the central role of optimism and meaning-making in resilience amid collective trauma. Meaning-related orientations and social support provide complementary contributions alongside optimism, suggesting practical targets for prevention and intervention. Findings inform meaning-centered and strengths-based strategies to bolster resilience during war and crisis.