Training to build confidence and resilience may bring small gains.

The review

1. 01

   Who took part

   3,911 people took part in 41 studies: 24 with workers and 17 with students. Most studies were in Europe or North America, and the paper gives no ages.

2. 02

   What they did

   Most of the training was done in groups, led by a trainer, and lasted from a few hours to 10 months. The other groups were on a waiting list (19 studies), got nothing extra (14) or did a placebo activity (8).

3. 03

   What happened

   Confidence, optimism and bounce-back each rose more than in the other groups, by small to medium amounts. Hope and the overall score rose a little, but the authors say those results are not robust. The abstract also mentions well-being and performance, but the paper only describes those and does not pool them.

What the review found

1. HelpedOther outcomes

   Across 41 studies, the training gave people a small boost on all four measures.

   Pooled analysis of 41 studies with 3,911 people · vs those on a waiting list, given nothing or a placebo · they rated themselves · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited; mixes trials with other kinds of study

2. HelpedMotivation

   Across 18 studies, the training made people more confident than the other groups did.

   Pooled analysis of 18 studies · vs those on a waiting list, given nothing or a placebo · they rated themselves · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited; mixes trials with other kinds of study

3. HelpedOther outcomes

   Across 12 studies, the training made people expect better things, though some studies seem missing.

   Pooled analysis of 12 studies · vs those on a waiting list, given nothing or a placebo · they rated themselves · ⚠ signs that small negative studies went unpublished; whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited; mixes trials with other kinds of study

4. HelpedOther outcomes

   Across 12 studies, the training helped people bounce back from setbacks more than the other groups did.

   Pooled analysis of 12 studies · vs those on a waiting list, given nothing or a placebo · they rated themselves · ⚠ the studies disagreed a lot; whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited; mixes trials with other kinds of study

Source