Balancing consistency and flexibility: exploring trait and state optimism in rats using the cognitive judgement bias test.

The term “recovery” is widely used in the research literature and in clinical settings. As early as 1982, the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) defined recovery as reaching “a state of physical and psychological health such that abstinence from dependency-producing drugs is complete and comfortable” (). In 2007, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration defined recovery from alcohol and drug problems as “a process of change through which an individual achieves abstinence and improved health, wellness and quality of life” (, ). In mental health research, Tew J proposed that “life recovery” means regaining a sense of control over one's life and finding a satisfying and valuable life position for oneself (). Dimitrios and colleagues conducted a study to explore the definition of ‘recovery' for delirium and proposed that in the older adluts, a full recovery may never be achieved, it is perhaps better to define recovery according to a symptomatic status that can be measured by a variety of diagnostic instruments (). In 2021, Cieza and colleagues characterized recovery as a complex, multidimensional, and dynamic process across the entire lifespan and population groups, with its core focus on restoring health, function, and dignity (). A mixed-method systematic review conducted by Lukacs and colleagues in 2024 explored how recovery was defined and measured among patients with low back pain. The review found that more than one-third of published studies lacked a formal definition of recovery (). Consequently, the meaning of recovery varies substantially across disciplines and clinical contexts. Recovery capital is fundamentally grounded in the concept of recovery; therefore, changes in how recovery is understood may directly influence the interpretation and application of recovery capital. As the concept of recovery has expanded across addiction medicine, mental health, healthy aging, and chronic disease management, the conceptualization of recovery capital has also evolved, resulting in increasing conceptual ambiguity and inconsistency in its definition and application. The concept of recovery capital was first proposed by Granfield and Cloud in 1999 within the context of addiction recovery. Grounded in the biopsychosocial model, it was used to describe the personal and social resources individuals may draw upon to overcome substance misuse (). Over two decades have passed since the term's first introduction. However, the conceptualization of recovery capital remains inconsistent across the literature, particularly regarding whether it should be understood as exclusively strengths-based or whether it may also encompass negative dimensions. Such conceptual ambiguity may hinder the theoretical development, empirical measurement, and practical application of recovery capital (). This issue is particularly relevant in the context of healthy aging and chronic disease management. Healthy aging is defined as the process of developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables wellbeing in older age (). Increased longevity provides older adults with opportunities to reconsider how later life may unfold (). However, aging is also associated with an increased risk of multimorbidity (). In current clinical reasoning, when facing diverse physical and psychological responses among older adults under frequent and multiple health stressors, what needs to be addressed is not only their diseases, but also whether they are able to recover from such “adversities” (). The recovery process in later life is deeply embedded in the resources available to individuals. Whether older adults have access to and are able to mobilize internal and external resources is of critical importance for their recovery outcomes (). Older adults often experience age-related functional decline, frailty, and reductions in intrinsic capacity, which further complicate recovery processes and highlight the need for resource-based perspectives (, ). Recovery capital may therefore serve as a key resource framework for understanding how older adults mobilize personal and external resources across the aging life-course to maintain functional ability and social participation. Accordingly, examining recovery capital in older populations may provide important insights for public health and geriatric nursing practice.