understanding pri scores rsch 6109. overview review of stress theory review of coping theory pri...
TRANSCRIPT
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
RSCH 6109RSCH 6109
OverviewOverview
Review of Stress TheoryReview of Stress Theory
Review of Coping TheoryReview of Coping Theory
PRI ScoresPRI Scores
Teacher StressTeacher Stress
Research FindingsResearch Findings
What is Stress? What is Coping?What is Stress? What is Coping?
What is Stress? What is Coping?What is Stress? What is Coping?
Response models (Selye)Response models (Selye)
Stimulus models (Holmes & Rahe)Stimulus models (Holmes & Rahe)
Conservation of resources model Conservation of resources model (Hobfoll)(Hobfoll)
Transactional models (Lazarus & Transactional models (Lazarus & Folkman)Folkman)
Selye ModelSelye Model
Oldest modelOldest model
Originated the concept of Originated the concept of stressstress
Physiological responsePhysiological response
The non-specific response of The non-specific response of the body to demandsthe body to demands
Autonomic nervous systemAutonomic nervous system
Why is this model Why is this model
limited?limited?
Selye ModelSelye Model
Overly simplifiedOverly simplified
Ignores the cognitive Ignores the cognitive componentcomponent
Reactive, Ignores preventionReactive, Ignores prevention
Coping limited to:Coping limited to:
Diet, Exercise, Meditation, Diet, Exercise, Meditation, Yoga Tension ControlYoga Tension Control
Holmes & Rahe ModelHolmes & Rahe Model
Focuses on negative life Focuses on negative life eventsevents
Assumes that stress increases Assumes that stress increases as the number of significant as the number of significant
changes or negative stimulichanges or negative stimuli
increasesincreases
Why is this model Why is this model
limited?limited?
Holmes & Rahe ModelHolmes & Rahe Model
Overly simplifiedOverly simplified
Ignores the cognitive Ignores the cognitive componentcomponent
Focuses on demands, or Focuses on demands, or stimuli, but not reactions to stimuli, but not reactions to themthem
Coping limited to:Coping limited to:
Adaptation to changeAdaptation to change
Hobfoll ModelHobfoll Model
Includes personal and Includes personal and external resources the external resources the individual can harness to individual can harness to combat stresscombat stress
Perceived controlPerceived control
Stress comes from loss of Stress comes from loss of resourcesresources
Why is this limited?Why is this limited?
Hobfoll ModelHobfoll Model
Research base focuses Research base focuses
on people who have had on people who have had
large losseslarge losses
Ignores daily hasslesIgnores daily hassles
Resources can remain Resources can remain constant while demands constant while demands increaseincrease
Transactional Models of StressTransactional Models of Stress(Lazarus and Folkman)(Lazarus and Folkman)
Stress results from Stress results from perceptions of inequality perceptions of inequality between resources and between resources and demands demands
Appraisals of resources and Appraisals of resources and demands mediate the stress demands mediate the stress responseresponse
Perceived Inequality = Risk for StressPerceived Inequality = Risk for Stress
ResourcesHigh Moderate Low
DemandsHigh D=R D>R D>R
Moderate D<R D=R D>R
Low D<R D<R D=R
Can the car handle the road?Can the car handle the road?
4x4 Sedan Moped
Off Road D=R D>R D>R
Highway D<R D=R D>R
In town D<R D<R D=R
Attribution TheoryAttribution TheoryPerceptions are central Perceptions are central
to the stress responseto the stress response
Our thoughts about Our thoughts about
negative life events, negative life events,
demands, and changesdemands, and changes
impact our perceptions of impact our perceptions of
resources and demandsresources and demands
Attribution TheoryAttribution Theory
HealthyHealthy UnhealthyUnhealthy
Low StressLow Stress High stressHigh stress
InternalInternal ExternalExternal
Specific Specific GlobalGlobal
UnstableUnstable StableStable
Expanded Transactional ModelExpanded Transactional Model
Preventive ResourcesPreventive Resources
Combative ResourcesCombative Resources
Emotion-Focused CopingEmotion-Focused Coping
Problem-Focused CopingProblem-Focused Coping
Expanded Transactional ModelExpanded Transactional Model
Preventive Combative
Problem Focused Organization StructuringScanning Stress Monitoring
Percieved Control Self-DirectednessHumor Tension Control
Maintaining Perspective Cognitive RestructuringSelf-Acceptance Acceptance
Emotion Focused Maintaining Perspective Cognitive RestructuringSocial Resourcefulness Social Support, Self-Disclosure
Self-Acceptance AcceptanceScanning Stress Monitoring
Humor Tension Control
Expanded Transactional ModelExpanded Transactional ModelMcCathy & Lambert 2002McCathy & Lambert 2002
Review ModelsReview Models
Response models (Selye)Response models (Selye)
Stimulus models (Holmes & Rahe)Stimulus models (Holmes & Rahe)
Conservation of resources model Conservation of resources model (Hobfoll)(Hobfoll)
Transactional models (Lazarus & Transactional models (Lazarus & Folkman)Folkman)
Review – What is Stress? Coping?Review – What is Stress? Coping?Stress is the perceived inequality between Stress is the perceived inequality between resources and demandsresources and demands
The stress response is a The stress response is a
physiological response to physiological response to
sustained stresssustained stress
Coping involves strategies used to Coping involves strategies used to
prevent and combat stressprevent and combat stress
Review – What is Stress? Coping?Review – What is Stress? Coping?
Daily Hassles
Perceived Inequality
Perceived Stress
Stress Response
Burnout
PRI Model of PreventionPRI Model of Prevention
Scale Subscale
Percieved Control Feelings of Efficacy Regarding Stress PreventionFeelings of Mastery Regarding Stress PreventionPersistance
Maintaining Perspective Maintaining a Flexible PerspectiveMaintaining Self-DirectionCognitive Restructuring of PerspectiveKnowing your Limits
Social Resourcefulness Reciprocity in RelationshipsComfort in RelationshipsFeedback from RelationshipsAssistance in Relationships
PRI Model Model of PreventionPRI Model Model of Prevention
Scale Subscale
Scanning Anticipation of DemandsRecognition of Opportunities to Prevent StressPlanning AheadFollow Through
Self-Acceptance Identify ComfortAccepting LimitationsBalance
Tension Release
Preventive Resources
T Scores T Scores Mean = 50, SD = 10Mean = 50, SD = 10
40-60 = Expected or 40-60 = Expected or ““normal” rangenormal” range
T Scores reflect relative position in T Scores reflect relative position in the populationthe population
Norm sample = 1,366Norm sample = 1,366
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
T Scores < 40 are considered low,T Scores < 40 are considered low,
suggest an area for growthsuggest an area for growth
T Scores > 60 are considered high,T Scores > 60 are considered high,
suggest an area of strengthsuggest an area of strength
Why is it important to help the Why is it important to help the
client identify relative strengths and client identify relative strengths and
weakness in coping skills?weakness in coping skills?
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
T score Percentile
30 235 740 1645 3150 5055 6960 8465 9370 98
All test scores have some error in themAll test scores have some error in them
The reliability of a set of scores The reliability of a set of scores helps us understand how much errorhelps us understand how much errorthey containthey contain
The Standard Error of MeasurementThe Standard Error of Measurementhelps us estimate how much errorhelps us estimate how much errorthere is in a particularthere is in a particulartest scoretest score
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
SEM = σSEM = σ22XX √√ (1 - r (1 - rxx’ xx’ ))
The expected amount of error in a The expected amount of error in a
test score is like the difference test score is like the difference
between the true score and the between the true score and the
observed scoreobserved score
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
Scale SEM
Percieved Control 3Maintaining Perspective 4Social Resourcefulness 4Scanning 4Self-Acceptance 4Preventive Resources 2
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
We can use the SEM to interpretWe can use the SEM to interpret
test scores in terms of “True” scorestest scores in terms of “True” scores
by creating confidence intervalsby creating confidence intervals
Observed score +/- 1.96 * SEMObserved score +/- 1.96 * SEM
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
Scale T Score 95% LL 95% UL
Percieved Control 51.26 45.38 57.14
Maintaining Perspective 45.38 37.54 53.22
Self-Acceptance 58.23 50.39 66.07
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
We are 95% confident that theWe are 95% confident that the
client’s true score on the Perceivedclient’s true score on the Perceived
Control scale falls in the intervalControl scale falls in the interval
from 45 to 57from 45 to 57
Understanding PRI ScoresUnderstanding PRI Scores
Current Strategies for Measuring StressCurrent Strategies for Measuring Stress
Negative Life EventsNegative Life Events
BurnoutBurnout
Physiological SymptomsPhysiological Symptoms
Psychological SymptomsPsychological Symptoms
Situational DemandsSituational Demands
Daily HasslesDaily Hassles
DemotivationDemotivation
CClassroomlassroom AAppraisalppraisal ofof RResources and esources and DDemandsemands
Preschool Version (PS)Preschool Version (PS)
School-aged Version (SA)School-aged Version (SA)
Difference ScoreDifference Score
Resources - DemandsResources - Demands
Theory Supporting the Theory Supporting the CClassroom lassroom AAppraisal of ppraisal of RResources and esources and DDemandsemands
Context-specific AppraisalContext-specific Appraisal
of Demandsof Demands
Context-specific AppraisalContext-specific Appraisal
of Resourcesof Resources
Global EfficacyGlobal Efficacy
Task-specific EfficacyTask-specific Efficacy
Grouping Teachers by Risk for StressGrouping Teachers by Risk for Stress
Classified Teachers into 3 groups:Classified Teachers into 3 groups:
PSPS SA SA
R>DR>D 34.4%34.4% 30.9% 30.9%
R=DR=D 35.0%35.0% 34.9%34.9%
D>RD>R 30.6%30.6% 34.2%34.2%
Group DifferencesGroup Differences
Mean Number of Children in Mean Number of Children in Classroom with Behavior Classroom with Behavior ProblemsProblems
PSPS SA SA
R>DR>D 1.971.97 2.97 2.97
R=DR=D 2.352.35 2.802.80
D>RD>R 3.693.69 4.234.23
SA Group DifferencesSA Group Differences
Percentage of Classrooms with At Percentage of Classrooms with At Least One LD ChildLeast One LD Child
MeanMean
R>DR>D 80.0% 80.0% 3.663.66
R=DR=D 96.1%96.1% 3.363.36
D>RD>R 98.0%98.0% 4.654.65
Research FindingsResearch Findings
No statistically significant No statistically significant differences except for the differences except for the reported number of children reported number of children with behavior problems and with behavior problems and LDLD
Low risk of stress groups Low risk of stress groups ratedrated
innovations as more innovations as more effectiveeffective
Research FindingsResearch Findings
The relationship of teacher The relationship of teacher quality to student quality to student achievement seems to achievement seems to moderated by the moderated by the concentration of special concentration of special needs children in the needs children in the classroomclassroom
ImplicationsImplications
How are children assigned to How are children assigned to classrooms?classrooms?
Concentration of disruptive Concentration of disruptive and LD children in inclusive and LD children in inclusive classroomsclassrooms
Counselors can help Counselors can help enhance teacher self-efficacy enhance teacher self-efficacy and stress prevention skillsand stress prevention skills