Theoretical frameworks applied
This article briefly outlines core theoretical influences informing the Rock Steady system. It does not represent the operational framework itself, nor its application.
William James
The program is anchored by four influential theoretical frameworks, one of which is William James’s work (1902) on self-governance and ethics (Brennan & Boutroux, 1912), which often resurfaces in modern studies related to educational reforms. To James, changing ourselves is a matter of reorienting our own experiences and habits of thinking and acting, rather than passively judging them based on external opinions (Stagoll, 2023), which is often known as self-blame or people-pleasing.
Power Treat Meaning Framework
The other core pillar of the program is the Power Threat Meaning Framework (PTMF; Johnstone et al., 2018), which openly discusses the impact of power imbalance, be it relationship-specific or systemic. The framework represents a major shift in approaching distress and provides evidence-based insight into why and how our social and personal functioning is influenced by power structures, cultural norms, and family systems (Boyle, 2022). It was developed in response to the growing “drug culture”—the trend of prescribing pills to address all forms of complaints.
Social Exchange Theory
Social exchange theory serves as a backbone of the system (Lawler & Thye, 2006; Cook & Emerson, 1978). This constantly expanding theory describes how all human interactions involve some form of give-and-take, whether in power, emotions, or other resources such as time, attention, money, or labor. Social resilience, in its essence, is handling these exchanges well; consequently, the Rock Steady system actively promotes gaining awareness of these dynamics. Social life can be defined as a flow of interpersonal interactions in which power and influence are exercised (Cook et al., 2013), shaping life outcome and overall life experience.
Early Warning System
The fourth theory represents a neurobiological perspective. Often appearing in public discussions as the Fight–Flight–Freeze System (FFFS, Gray & McNaughton, 2000), the foundational premise of the model is an early-warning system that is responsible for rapid responses to threat, including social, emotional, physical, or any other form of danger. The framework has its roots in work from the 1970s, when Gray and colleagues introduced the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS) and Behavioral Activation System (BAS) to explain avoidance and approach behaviors (Gray et al., 2016). Following studies have associated physiological changes with the theory, expanding both the understanding of threat responses and the definition of threat.
Operational structure
The resilience work is designed to help identify and respond to underlying emotional and power exchanges embedded into interactions. Some of these exchanges are subtle or unintentional, yet when result in deficit lead to fatigue and collapse. The work phases revolve around real-life contexts, while the scenario-based drills replicate the influence of ancestral social environments that were built on play- and interaction-based learning (Damasio, 2007). This approach, called evolutionary-relevant setups, is regarded as more effective than traditional learning structures (Gruskin & Geher, 2018), particularly in the case of such complex topics as social resilience.
The work is structured into phases to break the task of building social awareness into smaller, manageable practices. With a combination of visual, textual, and interactive materials, it makes the engagement an active, self-directed process, rather than passive take on information (Gonzales, 2015), giving more responsibility and control over the outcome (Sejpal, 2013). The social resilience work is best suited to adult professionals, as the ability for self-reflection for recognizing hidden assumptions develops during early adulthood (King & Kitchener, 2004), from around 20 years of age.
The work phases are client-centered, require no note-taking, and build on methodological and theoretical innovation to achieve results with as little forced memorization as possible. The phases gradually increase the amount of effort required, in line with the growing competence, so the engagement stays both challenging and highly rewarding at the same time. These are core factors of flow-based learning (Csikszentmihalyi & LeFevre, 1989), which ensure deeply ingrained outcomes.
Summary
The Rock Steady resilience work is designed to develop the capability to effectively manage high pressure situations and navigate complex social and interpersonal dynamics, the training of which falls beyond the reach of formal setups yet strongly correlates with life trajectory (Algan et al., 2014), including social position, life quality, and life expectancy.
References
Algan, Y., Beasley, E., Vitaro, F., & Tremblay, R. (2014). The impact of non-cognitive skills training on academic and non-academic trajectories: From childhood to early adulthood.
Boyle, M. (2022). Power in the power threat meaning framework. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 35(1), 27-40.
Brennan, B. P., & Boutroux, E. (1912). The Ethics of William James. Longmans, Green, and Company.
Cook, K. S., Cheshire, C., Rice, E. R., & Nakagawa, S. (2013). Social exchange theory. Handbook of social psychology, 61-88.
Cook, K. S., & Emerson, R. M. (1978). Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. American sociological review, 721-739.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & LeFevre, J. (1989). Optimal experience in work and leisure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 56(5), 815.
Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. (2007). Social conduct, neurobiology, and education. Learning in the global era: International perspectives on globalization and education, 104-117.
Gonzales, E. E. (2015). A Modular Approach Utilizing Decision Tree in Teaching Integration Techniques in Calculus. Department of Arts, Sciences and Teacher Education, City College of Calamba, Calamba City, Laguna, Philippines.
Gray, J. D., Hanna, D., Gillen, A., & Rushe, T. (2016). A closer look at Carver and White’s BIS/BAS scales: Factor analysis and age group differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 20-24.
Gruskin, K., & Geher, G. (2018). The evolved classroom: Using evolutionary theory to inform elementary pedagogy. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 12(4), 336.
Johnstone, L. & Boyle, M. with Cromby, J., Dillon, J., Harper, D. et al. (2018a). The Power Threat Meaning Framework: Towards the identification of patterns in emotional distress, unusual experiences and troubled or troubling behaviour, as an alternative to functional psychiatric diagnosis. Leicester: British Psychological Society. Available from www.bps.org. uk/PTM-Main
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2004). Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educational psychologist, 39(1), 5-18.
McNaughton, N., & Gray, J. A. (2000). Anxiolytic action on the behavioural inhibition system implies multiple types of arousal contribute to anxiety. Journal of affective disorders, 61(3), 161-176.
Khotimah, H., & Hidayat, N. (2022). Interactive Digital Comic Teaching Materials to Increase Student Engagement and Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Elementary Education, 6(2).
Lal, S., & Adair, C. E. (2014). E-mental health: a rapid review of the literature. Psychiatric services, 65(1), 24-32.
Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. (2006). Social exchange theory of emotions. Handbook of the sociology of emotions, 295-320.
Ramdoss, S., Lang, R., Mulloy, A., Franco, J., O’Reilly, M., Didden, R., & Lancioni, G. (2011). Use of computer-based interventions to teach communication skills to children with autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Journal of Behavioral Education, 20, 55-76.
Sejpal, K. (2013). Modular method of teaching. International Journal for Research in Education, volume 2, p. 169 – 171
Stagoll, C. S. (2023). Transforming One’s Self: The Therapeutic Ethical Pragmatism of William James. State University of New York Press.