Indirect Effect of Adverse Childhood Experiences on Resilience through Emotion Regulation, Depression, and Peer Conflict Resolution Strategy of Early Adolescents In Taiwan

Background and Purpose: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are well-established predictors of negative developmental outcomes, but the mechanisms linking ACEs to resilience in youth are not fully understood. Although research has linked ACE exposure to emotion dysregulation, depressive symptoms, and impaired social functioning, few studies have empirically tested these factors as mediators between ACEs and resilience in early adolescence. This gap is particularly pronounced in non-Western contexts, where unique cultural and familial dynamics may influence these pathways. Grounded in resiliency theory and the resilience challenge model, this study investigated both the direct and indirect effects of ACEs on resilience—via emotion regulation, peer conflict-resolution strategies, and depression—among early adolescents in Taiwan. Gender differences in these pathways were also explored.

Methods: We analyzed secondary data from a longitudinal project by the NTU Children and Family Research Center in northern Taiwan. Participants included 2,198 fifth-grade students (1,152 boys and 1,046 girls) from 39 elementary schools in Keelung City. ACEs were measured using six items from the traditional Chinese ACE Questionnaire. Emotion regulation, peer conflict resolution strategies, depression, and resilience were assessed with the ERQ (10 items), ROCI-II (22 items), CES-D (20 items), and Brief CD-RISC (10 items), respectively. Structural equation modeling (SEM) evaluated the mediation model, and bootstrapping (2,000 resamples, 95% CI) assessed indirect effects. Multi-group SEM tested for gender invariance.

Results: The structural model showed good fit (χ² = 19.53, p < .001; CFI = .988; RMSEA = .061). ACEs directly predicted lower resilience (β = -.11) and were associated with poorer emotion regulation (β = -.07), less effective peer conflict resolution strategies (β = -.07), and higher depression (β = .21). Emotion regulation (β = .12) and peer conflict resolution strategies (β = .54) positively predicted resilience, while depression negatively predicted resilience (β = -.15). Bootstrapping confirmed significant indirect effects of ACEs on resilience through emotion regulation (β = -.008, 95% CI [-.015, -.003]), peer conflict resolution strategies (β = -.036, 95% CI [-.057, -.016]), and depression (β = -.033, 95% CI [-.043, -.024]). The direct effect of ACEs on resilience exceeded the combined indirect effects, indicating partial mediation. Multi-group analysis indicated that the ACEs-to-emotion regulation pathway was significant for girls but not boys.

Conclusions and Implications: ACEs undermine adolescent resilience both directly and indirectly via socioemotional mechanisms. Emotion regulation, peer conflict resolution, and depression are modifiable intervention targets. These findings support trauma-informed, gender-responsive interventions in schools to enhance emotional skills, interpersonal abilities, and mental health, promoting resilience among youth facing adversity.