It is thought of as an innate trait, but research points somewhere slightly different.
Facing the same event, some people recover comparatively quickly. It is easy to read that as innate toughness, but the conclusion that recurs in research is that recovery is an accumulation of ordinary factors: someone to lean on, a routine that holds, and some part of the situation you can control. It is less a rare quality than a set of conditions that work when present.
What appears most steadily across studies is whether there is someone to lean on when things are hard. The number of people need not be large; one relationship where you can describe the situation as it is makes a considerable difference. Since withdrawing from people is a common tendency when struggling, this often has to be reversed deliberately.
Being able to tell what happened in sequence and with cause reduces the weight. The event does not change, but it becomes easier to handle than when it remains a tangled mass. Writing it down or explaining it to someone assists that ordering. This does not mean forcing a positive meaning; making it make sense is enough.
Coping well is not being unshaken but returning after being shaken. People who can change approach with the situation fare better than people who hold one approach throughout. Shifting toward changing the problem where it is controllable and toward managing the feeling where it is not is the core of that flexibility.
The word resilience is sometimes used to mean holding out without help, which is the opposite of what research points at. Seeking help is not weakness but something that shortens recovery. If the enduring is going on a long time and daily life is coming apart, talking to a professional is faster than holding out further.
Each button runs this keyword on that search engine