Co-constructing self-efficacy narratives : a study of four mature age university students

This thesis reports on a study in which research participants, four mature aged females starting an undergraduate degree at a regional Australian university, collaborated with the researcher in co-constructing a self-efficacy narrative. For the purpose of the study, self-efficacy was conceptualized as a means by which an individual initiates action to engage in a task or set of tasks, applies effort to perform the task or set of tasks, and persists in the face of obstacles encountered in order to achieve successful completion of the task or set of tasks. Qualitative interviews were conducted with the participants, initially investigating their respective life histories for an understanding of how they made the decision to embark on their respective academic program. Additional data were generated from a written exercise, prompting participants to furnish specific examples of self-efficacy. These data were incorporated into the individual's self-efficacy narrative, produced as the outcome of the "narrative analysis". Another aspect of the study entailed "analysis of narrative" in which analytic procedures were used to identify themes common to the self-efficacy narratives. Five main themes were identified: (a) participants' experience of schooling . for several participants their formative experience of school was not always positive, and yet their narratives demonstrated their agency in persevering and taking on university-level studies as mature aged persons; (b) recognition of family as an early influence . these influences were described as being both positive, in the sense of being supportive and encouraging, as well as posing obstacles that participants had to overcome in order to pursue their goals; (c) availability of supportive persons – the support of particular persons was acknowledged as a factor that enabled participants to persist in their respective endeavours; (d) luck or chance factors were recognised as placing participants at the right place at the right time, from which circumstances they applied considerable effort in order to convert the opportunity into a successful outcome; and (e) self-efficacy was identified as a major theme found in the narratives. The study included an evaluation of the research process by participants. A number of themes were identified in respect of the manner in which the research process was experienced as a helpful process. Participants commented that: (a) the research process was helpful in clarifying their respective career goals; (b) they appreciated opportunities provided by the research process to view their life from a different perspective and to better understand what motivated them, and what their preferred learning styles were; (c) their past successes in a range of different spheres were made more evident to them as they were guided in self-reflection, and their self-efficacious behaviour was affirmed; and (d) the opportunities provided by their participation in the research process to identify strengths of which they had not been consciously aware, to find confirmation of strengths they knew they possessed, and in some instances to rectify misconceptions they had held about aspects of their personality. The study made three important contributions to knowledge. Firstly, it provided a detailed explication of a qualitative narrative method in exploring self-efficacy, with the potential for application to other issues in educational, counselling and psychotherapy research. Secondly, it consolidated and illustrated social cognitive theory by proposing a dynamic model of self-efficacy, drawing on constructivist and interpretivist paradigms and extending extant theory and models. Finally, the study made a contribution to the debate concerning the nexus of qualitative research and counselling by providing guidelines for ethical practice in both endeavours for the practitioner-researcher.

The psychosocial factors influencing aggressive driving behaviour

Many drivers in highly motorised countries believe that aggressive driving is increasing. While the prevalence of the behaviour is difficult to reliably identify, the consequences of on-road aggression can be severe, with extreme cases resulting in property damage, injury and even death. This research program was undertaken to explore the nature of aggressive driving from within the framework of relevant psychological theory in order to enhance our understanding of the behaviour and to inform the development of relevant interventions. To guide the research a provisional ‘working’ definition of aggressive driving was proposed encapsulating the recurrent characteristics of the behaviour cited in the literature. The definition was: “aggressive driving is any on-road behaviour adopted by a driver that is intended to cause physical or psychological harm to another road user and is associated with feelings of frustration, anger or threat”. Two main theoretical perspectives informed the program of research. The first was Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, which identifies both the person-related and situational characteristics that contribute to aggressive driving, as well as proposing that aggressive behaviours can serve either an ‘instrumental’ or ‘hostile’ function. The second main perspective was Anderson and Bushman’s (2002) General Aggression Model. In contrast to Shinar’s model, the General Aggression Model reflects a broader perspective on human aggression that facilitates a more comprehensive examination of the emotional and cognitive aspects of aggressive behaviour. Study One (n = 48) examined aggressive driving behaviour from the perspective of young drivers as an at-risk group and involved conducting six focus groups, with eight participants in each. Qualitative analyses identified multiple situational and person-related factors that contribute to on-road aggression. Consistent with human aggression theory, examination of self-reported experiences of aggressive driving identified key psychological elements and processes that are experienced during on-road aggression. Participants cited several emotions experienced during an on-road incident: annoyance, frustration, anger, threat and excitement. Findings also suggest that off-road generated stress may transfer to the on-road environment, at times having severe consequences including crash involvement. Young drivers also appeared quick to experience negative attributions about the other driver, some having additional thoughts of taking action. Additionally, the results showed little difference between males and females in the severity of behavioural responses they were prepared to adopt, although females appeared more likely to displace their negative emotions. Following the self-reported on-road incident, evidence was also found of a post-event influence, with females being more likely to experience ongoing emotional effects after the event. This finding was evidenced by ruminating thoughts or distraction from tasks. However, the impact of such a post-event influence on later behaviours or interpersonal interactions appears to be minimal. Study Two involved the quantitative analysis of n = 926 surveys completed by a wide age range of drivers from across Queensland. The study aimed to explore the relationships between the theoretical components of aggressive driving that were identified in the literature review, and refined based on the findings of Study One. Regression analyses were used to examine participant emotional, cognitive and behavioural responses to two differing on-road scenarios whilst exploring the proposed theoretical framework. A number of socio-demographic, state and trait person-related variables such as age, pre-study emotions, trait aggression and problem-solving style were found to predict the likelihood of a negative emotional response such as frustration, anger, perceived threat, negative attributions and the likelihood of adopting either an instrumental or hostile behaviour in response to Scenarios One and Two. Complex relationships were found to exist between the variables, however, they were interpretable based on the literature review findings. Factor analysis revealed evidence supporting Shinar’s (1998) dichotomous description of on-road aggressive behaviours as being instrumental or hostile. The second stage of Study Two used logistic regression to examine the factors that predicted the potentially hostile aggressive drivers (n = 88) within the sample. These drivers were those who indicated a preparedness to engage in direct acts of interpersonal aggression on the road. Young, male drivers 17–24 years of age were more likely to be classified as potentially hostile aggressive drivers. Young drivers (17–24 years) also scored significantly higher than other drivers on all subscales of the Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992) and on the ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive careless style’ subscales of the Social Problem Solving Inventory – Revised (D’Zurilla, Nezu & Maydeu-Olivares, 2002). The potentially hostile aggressive drivers were also significantly more likely to engage in speeding and drink/drug driving behaviour. With regard to the emotional, cognitive and behavioural variables examined, the potentially hostile aggressive driver group also scored significantly higher than the ‘other driver’ group on most variables examined in the proposed theoretical framework. The variables contained in the framework of aggressive driving reliably distinguished potentially hostile aggressive drivers from other drivers (Nagalkerke R2 = .39). Study Three used a case study approach to conduct an in-depth examination of the psychosocial characteristics of n = 10 (9 males and 1 female) self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers. The self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers were aged 24–55 years of age. A large proportion of these drivers reported a Year 10 education or better and average–above average incomes. As a group, the drivers reported committing a number of speeding and unlicensed driving offences in the past three years and extensive histories of violations outside of this period. Considerable evidence was also found of exposure to a range of developmental risk factors for aggression that may have contributed to the driver’s on-road expression of aggression. These drivers scored significantly higher on the Aggression Questionnaire subscales and Social Problem Solving Inventory Revised subscales, ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive/careless style’, than the general sample of drivers included in Study Two. The hostile aggressive driver also scored significantly higher on the Barrett Impulsivity Scale – 11 (Patton, Stanford & Barratt, 1995) measure of impulsivity than a male ‘inmate’, or female ‘general psychiatric’ comparison group. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey (Carlson, 1982), the self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers scored equal or higher scores than the comparison group of incarcerated individuals on the subscale measures of chemical abuse, thought disturbance, anti-social tendencies and self-depreciation. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey personality profiles, seven participants were profiled ‘markedly anti-social’, two were profiled ‘negative-explosive’ and one was profiled as ‘self-centred’. Qualitative analysis of the ten case study self-reports of on-road hostile aggression revealed a similar range of on-road situational factors to those identified in the literature review and Study One. Six of the case studies reported off-road generated stress that they believed contributed to the episodes of aggressive driving they recalled. Intense ‘anger’ or ‘rage’ were most frequently used to describe the emotions experienced in response to the perceived provocation. Less frequently ‘excitement’ and ‘fear’ were cited as relevant emotions. Notably, five of the case studies experienced difficulty articulating their emotions, suggesting emotional difficulties. Consistent with Study Two, these drivers reported negative attributions and most had thoughts of aggressive actions they would like to take. Similarly, these drivers adopted both instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours during the self-reported incident. Nine participants showed little or no remorse for their behaviour and these drivers also appeared to exhibit low levels of personal insight. Interestingly, few incidents were brought to the attention of the authorities. Further, examination of the person-related characteristics of these drivers indicated that they may be more likely to have come from difficult or dysfunctional backgrounds and to have a history of anti-social behaviours on and off the road. The research program has several key theoretical implications. While many of the findings supported Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, two key areas of difference emerged. Firstly, aggressive driving behaviour does not always appear to be frustration driven, but can also be driven by feelings of excitation (consistent with the tenets of the General Aggression Model). Secondly, while the findings supported a distinction being made between instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours, the characteristics of these two types of behaviours require more examination. For example, Shinar (1998) proposes that a driver will adopt an instrumental aggressive behaviour when their progress is impeded if it allows them to achieve their immediate goals (e.g. reaching their destination as quickly as possible); whereas they will engage in hostile aggressive behaviour if their path to their goal is blocked. However, the current results question this assertion, since many of the hostile aggressive drivers studied appeared prepared to engage in hostile acts irrespective of whether their goal was blocked or not. In fact, their behaviour appeared to be characterised by a preparedness to abandon their immediate goals (even if for a short period of time) in order to express their aggression. The use of the General Aggression Model enabled an examination of the three components of the ‘present internal state’ comprising emotions, cognitions and arousal and how these influence the likelihood of a person responding aggressively to an on-road situation. This provided a detailed insight into both the cognitive and emotional aspects of aggressive driving that have important implications for the design of relevant countermeasures. For example, the findings highlighted the potential value of utilising Cognitive Behavioural Therapy with aggressive drivers, particularly the more hostile offenders. Similarly, educational efforts need to be mindful of the way that person-related factors appear to influence one’s perception of another driver’s behaviour as aggressive or benign. Those drivers with a predisposition for aggression were more likely to perceive aggression or ‘wrong doing’ in an ambiguous on-road situation and respond with instrumental and/or hostile behaviour, highlighting the importance of perceptual processes in aggressive driving behaviour.

Alone against the crowd: Individual differences in referees' ability to cope under pressure

This paper contributes to the recent debate about the role of referees in the home advantage phenomenon. Specifically, it aims to provide a convincing answer to the newly posed question of the existence of individual differences among referees in terms of the home advantage (Boyko, Boyko, & Boyko, 2007; Johnston, 2008). Using multilevel modelling on a large and representative dataset we find that (1) the home advantage effect differs significantly among referees, and (2) this relationship is moderated by the size of the crowd. These new results suggest that a part of the home advantage is due to the effect of the crowd on the referees, and that some referees are more prone to be influenced by the crowd than others. This provides strong evidence to indicate that referees are a significant contributing factor to the home advantage. The implications of these findings are discussed both in terms of the relevant social psychological research, and with respect to the selection, assessment, and training of referees.

An examination of monotony and hypovigilance, independent of fatigue : relevance to road safety

Driving is a vigilance task, requiring sustained attention to maintain performance and avoid crashes. Hypovigilance (i.e., marked reduction in vigilance) while driving manifests as poor driving performance and is commonly attributed to fatigue (Dinges, 1995). However, poor driving performance has been found to be more frequent when driving in monotonous road environments, suggesting that monotony plays a role in generating hypovigilance (Thiffault & Bergeron, 2003b). Research to date has tended to conceptualise monotony as a uni-dimensional task characteristic, typically used over a prolonged period of time to facilitate other factors under investigation, most notably fatigue. However, more often than not, more than one exogenous factor relating to the task or operating environment is manipulated to vary or generate monotony (Mascord & Heath, 1992). Here we aimed to explore whether monotony is a multi-dimensional construct that is determined by characteristics of both the task proper and the task environment. The general assumption that monotony is a task characteristic used solely to elicit hypovigilance or poor performance related to fatigue appears to have led to there being little rigorous investigation into the exact nature of the relationship. While the two concepts are undoubtedly linked, the independent effect of monotony on hypovigilance remains largely ignored. Notwithstanding, there is evidence that monotony effects can emerge very early in vigilance tasks and are not necessarily accompanied by fatigue (see Meuter, Rakotonirainy, Johns, & Wagner, 2005). This phenomenon raises a largely untested, empirical question explored in two studies: Can hypovigilance emerge as a consequence of task and/or environmental monotony, independent of time on task and fatigue? In Study 1, using a short computerised vigilance task requiring responses to be withheld to infrequent targets, we explored the differential impacts of stimuli and task demand manipulations on the development of a monotonous context and the associated effects on vigilance performance (as indexed by respone errors and response times), independent of fatigue and time on task. The role of individual differences (sensation seeking, extroversion and cognitive failures) in moderating monotony effects was also considered. The results indicate that monotony affects sustained attention, with hypovigilance and associated performance worse in monotonous than in non-monotonous contexts. Critically, performance decrements emerged early in the task (within 4.3 minutes) and remained consistent over the course of the experiment (21.5 minutes), suggesting that monotony effects can operate independent of time on task and fatigue. A combination of low task demands and low stimulus variability form a monotonous context characterised by hypovigilance and poor task performance. Variations to task demand and stimulus variability were also found to independently affect performance, suggesting that monotony is a multi-dimensional construct relating to both task monotony (associated with the task itself) and environmental monotony (related to characteristics of the stimulus). Consequently, it can be concluded that monotony is multi-dimensional and is characterised by low variability in stimuli and/or task demands. The proposition that individual differences emerge under conditions of varying monotony with high sensation seekers and/or extroverts performing worse in monotonous contexts was only partially supported. Using a driving simulator, the findings of Study 1 were extended to a driving context to identify the behavioural and psychophysiological indices of monotony-related hypovigilance associated with variations to road design and road side scenery (Study 2). Supporting the proposition that monotony is a multi-dimensional construct, road design variability emerged as a key moderating characteristic of environmental monotony, resulting in poor driving performance indexed by decrements in steering wheel measures (mean lateral position). Sensation seeking also emerged as a moderating factor, where participants high in sensation seeking tendencies displayed worse driving behaviour in monotonous conditions. Importantly, impaired driving performance was observed within 8 minutes of commencing the driving task characterised by environmental monotony (low variability in road design) and was not accompanied by a decline in psychophysiological arousal. In addition, no subjective declines in alertness were reported. With fatigue effects associated with prolonged driving (van der Hulst, Meijman, & Rothengatter, 2001) and indexed by drowsiness, this pattern of results indicates that monotony can affect driver vigilance, independent of time on task and fatigue. Perceptual load theory (Lavie, 1995, 2005) and mindlessness theory (Robertson, Manly, Andrade, Baddley, & Yiend, 1997) provide useful theoretical frameworks for explaining and predicting monotony effects by positing that the low load (of task and/or stimuli) associated with a monotonous task results in spare attentional capacity which spills over involuntarily, resulting in the processing of task-irrelevant stimuli or task unrelated thoughts. That is, individuals – even when not fatigued - become easily distracted when performing a highly monotonous task, resulting in hypovigilance and impaired performance. The implications for road safety, including the likely effectiveness of fatigue countermeasures to mitigate monotony-related driver hypovigilance are discussed.

Factors influencing health promotion activities in midlife and older Australian women with a chronic disease

Background: Chronic diseases including type 2 diabetes are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in midlife and older Australian women. There are a number of modifiable risk factors for type 2 diabetes and other chronic diseases including smoking, nutrition, physical activity and overweight and obesity. Little research has been conducted in the Australian context to explore the perceived barriers to health promotion activities in midlife and older Australian women with a chronic disease. Aims: The primary aim of this study was to explore women’s perceived barriers to health promotion activities to reduce modifiable risk factors, and the relationship of perceived barriers to smoking behaviour, fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity and body mass index. A secondary aim of this study was to investigate nurses’ perceptions of the barriers to action for women with a chronic disease, and to compare those perceptions with those of the women. Methods: The study was divided into two phases where Phase 1 was a cross sectional survey of women, aged over 45 years with type 2 diabetes who were attending Diabetes clinics in the Primary and Community Health Service of the Metro North Health Service District of Queensland Health (N = 22). The women were a subsample of women participating in a multi-model lifestyle intervention, the ‘Reducing Chronic Disease among Adult Australian Women’ project. Phase 2 of the study was a cross sectional online survey of nurses working in Primary and Community Health Service in the Metro North Health Service District of Queensland Health (N = 46). Pender’s health promotion model was used as the theoretical framework for this study. Results: Women in this study had an average total barriers score of 32.18 (SD = 9.52) which was similar to average scores reported in the literature for women with a range of physical disabilities and illnesses. The leading five barriers for this group of women were: concern about safety; too tired; not interested; lack of information about what to do; with lack of time and feeling I can’t do things correctly the equal fifth ranked barriers. In this study there was no statistically significant difference in average total barriers scores between women in the intervention group and those is the usual care group of the parent study. There was also no significant relationship between the women’s socio-demographic variables and lifestyle risk factors and their level of perceived barriers. Nurses in the study had an average total barriers score of 44.48 (SD = 6.24) which was higher than all other average scores reported in the literature. The leading five barriers that nurses perceived were an issue for women with a chronic disease were: lack of time and interferes with other responsibilities the leading barriers; embarrassment about appearance; lack of money; too tired and lack of support from family and friends. There was no significant relationship between the nurses’ sociodemographic and nursing variables and the level of perceived barriers. When comparing the results of women and nurses in the study there was a statistically significant difference in the median total barriers score between the groups (p < 0.001), where the nurses perceived the barriers to be higher (Md = 43) than the women (Md = 33). There was also a significant difference in the responses to the individual barriers items in fifteen of the eighteen items (p < 0.002). Conclusion: Although this study is limited by a small sample size, it contributes to understanding the perception of midlife and older women with a chronic disease and also the perception of nurses, about the barriers to healthy lifestyle activities that women face. The study provides some evidence that the perceptions of women and nurses may differ and argues that these differences may have significant implications for clinical practice. The study recommends a greater emphasis on assessing and managing perceived barriers to health promotion activities in health education and policy development and proposes a conceptual model for understanding perceived barriers to action.