14
M.C. Meyers M. van Woerkom R. de Reuver Amsterdam, July 2014 The Effects of a Strengths Intervention on Students’ Personal Growth Initiative - PsyCap as a Mediator

Meyers ps7

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: Meyers ps7

M.C. MeyersM. van WoerkomR. de Reuver

Amsterdam, July 2014

The Effects of a Strengths Intervention on Students’ Personal Growth Initiative -

PsyCap as a Mediator

Page 2: Meyers ps7
Page 3: Meyers ps7

NOW WHAT?

Page 4: Meyers ps7

“Active, intentional engagement in the process of personal growth” (Robitschek, 1998, p. 184)

- influences the extent to which someone seeks out and capitalizes on

opportunities to grow (Robitschek et al., 2012)

- predicts environmental exploration and vocational identity in students (Robitschek & Cook, 1999)

- can be developed through interventions that stimulate growth activities(Thoen, & Robitschek, 2013)

PERSONAL GROWTH INITIATIVE PGI

Page 5: Meyers ps7

STRENGTH OR DEFICIENCIES?

Page 6: Meyers ps7

Group t0(pre)

Intervention t1(post)

t3 (1 m)

t4(3 m)

Strengths x x x x

Deficiencies x x x x

RESEARCH DESIGN

Sample: N=98(90)

Master students in their final year

79% female; mean age: 22.9

Page 7: Meyers ps7

Help students to identify their strong points & encourage them to develop and use their strengths (based on Quinlan et al., 2012)

- 1 training day

- Groups of 10-14 students

- Various work forms

- Preparations & homework assignments

STRENGTHS INTERVENTION

Page 8: Meyers ps7

Personal Growth Initiative Scale PGIS (Robitschek, 1998)

Sample item: ‘I have a specific action plan to help me reach my goals’

Reliability: α0 = .75; α1 = .80.; α2 = .83.; α3 = .83

Psychological Capital

New General Self-efficacy Scale (Chen, Gully, & Eden, 2001)

Life Orientation Test – Revised (LOT-R; Scheier, Carver, & Bridges, 1994)

Brief Resilience Scale (Smith et al., 2008)

State Hope Scale (Snyder et al., 1996)

Reliability: α0 = .88; α1 = .85; α2 = .92; α3 = .91

MEASURES

Page 9: Meyers ps7

RESULTS I

Wilks’ Lambda=.89, F(3,84)=3.46, p<.05; partial η2=.11

Page 10: Meyers ps7

RESULTS II

Wilks’ Lambda=.92, F(3,85)=3.46, p=.06; partial η2=.08

Page 11: Meyers ps7

RESULTS III

DV: Personal Growth Initiative (t3)

B(SE) β B(SE) β B(SE) β

Step 1

Gendera -.11(.13) -.07 -.08(.13) -.05 -.05(.12) -.03

PsyCap (t0) .49(.16) .29** .41(.16) .24* -.25(.22) -.15

PGI (t0) .48(.10) .45*** .49(.10) .47*** .48(.09) .46***

Step 2

Group b .27(.10) .20* .17(.10) .13

Step 3

PsyCap (t2) .73(.18) .51***

R2 =.45 ∆R2=.04* ∆R2=.09***

95% Bootstrap CI [.01, 0.20]

Page 12: Meyers ps7

The strengths training enhances students’ personal growth initiative

� working on strengths might produce personal resources

(PsyCap) that motivate students’ self-development

� It is not just a matter of encouraging young people to develop

themselves, but a matter of encouraging development in the right

area: the area of individual strengths

CONCLUSION

Page 13: Meyers ps7

Limitations

• Small sample size

• Missing no-treatment control group

• High work-load during the semester as possible confounding factor

Future Research

• Conduct a similar training with working adults or MBA students

• Investigate the effects of interventions with a combination of working on strengths and weaknesses

LIMITATIONS & FUTURE RESEARCH

Page 14: Meyers ps7

Contact: [email protected]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION!