| 1965 | All children have the same needs for healthy development. |
| 1970 | Some conditions or circumstances—such as “absent father,” “teenage mother,” “working mom,” and “day care”—are harmful for every child. |
| 1975 | All children are not the same. Some children are resilient, coping easily with stressors that cause harm in other children. |
| 1980 | Nothing inevitably causes harm. Both maternal employment and preschool education, once thought to be risks, may be helpful. |
| 1985 | Factors beyond the family, both in the child (low birthweight, prenatal alcohol exposure, aggressive temperament) and in the community (poverty, violence), are risky for children. |
| 1990 | Risk–benefit analysis finds that some children are “invulnerable” to, or even benefit from, circumstances that destroy others. |
| 1995 | No child is invincibly resilient. Risks are always harmful—if not to learning, then to emotions; if not immediately, then long term. |
| 2000 | Risk–benefit analysis involves the interplay among many biological, cognitive, and social factors, some within the child (genes, disability, temperament), the family (function as well as structure), and the community (including neighborhood, school, church, and culture). |
| 2008 | Focus on strengths, not risks. Assets in the child (intelligence, personality), the family (secure attachment, warmth), the community (schools, after-school programs), and the nation (income support, health care) must be nurtured. |
| 2010 | Strengths vary by culture and national values. Both universal ideals and local variations must be recognized and respected. |
| 2012 | Genes as well as cultural practices can be either strengths or weaknesses; differential susceptibility means identical stressors can benefit one child and harm another. |
| 2015 | It is difficult to predict what makes one child resilient and another not, but early intervention—prenatal and infancy—before problems appear, is most effective. |