The relationship between significant others' positive and negative statements, self-talk and self-esteem

This study investigated the effect of self-talk in mediating between positive and negative statements made by significant others and self-esteem with children in grades 3 to 7. Students completed questionnaires on the frequency of positive and negative statements from parents, teachers, and peers. Findings suggest that self-talk does mediate between significant others' statements and children's self-esteem.

Children's self-talk and significant others' positive and negative statements

A sample of 675 elementary school children in Grades 3-7 were administered the Self-talk Inventory and the Significant Others' Statements Inventory. The psychometric properties of both scales were investigated and the relationships between positive and negative self-talk and significant others' (parents, teachers, siblings and peers) positive and negative statements were explored using correlational and multiple regression analyses. Sex and age differences were also examined. The significant relationships and differences are described.

The relationship between closeness to significant others and self-esteem

One hundred and forty-three children (61 boys and 82 girls) between 8 and 12 years of age participated in a study which focused on closeness to significant others and its relationship with self-esteem. A closeness rating scale was developed to determine quantitatively how close children feel to their mother, father, two closest peers, and current teacher. Marsh's (1990) eight general self-concept items from the Self-Description Questionnaire 1 (SDQI), together with eight items from Burnett's (1994) Self-scale, were administered to the children, who ranged in age from 8 to 12 years, to measure their self-esteem. Closeness to mother was found to correlate most significantly with a child's self-esteem, while closeness to teacher was related more strongly to self-esteem for girls than for boys.

Career motivation in nursing students and the perceived influence of significant others

This paper is a report of a study investigating the motivation of nursing students, their reasons for entering nursing and the perceived influence of others in their decision-making.

Outcomes of hearing aid fitting for older people with hearing impairment and their significant others

As hearing impairment affects communication. it seems intuitive that both the person with hearing impairment and the significant other (SO) will experience effects as a result of the impairment and subsequent rehabilitation. The present study examined the effect that hearing impairment and aural rehabilitation has on the person with hearing impairment and the SO's quality of life (QOL). Ninety-three people with hearing impairment completed a measure of hearing-specific QOL (Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly) and health-related QOL (Short Form-36), while 78 SOs completed a modified version of the Quantified Denver Scale and the Short Form-36. prior to and 3 months following hearing aid fitting. The results emphasize the significant impact of hearing impairment on both the person with hearing impairment and the SO. The results also demonstrate the effective role that hearing aids play in reducing Such negative effects for both parties.

Don't forget asking the others! - The added value of significant other's reports on patient interpersonal style for the prediction of therapy process and outcome

Theory: Interpersonal factors play a major role in causing and maintaining depression. It is unclear, however, to what degree significant others of the patient need to be involved for characterizing the patient's interpersonal style. Therefore, our study sought to investigate how impact messages as perceived by the patients' significant others add to the prediction of psychotherapy process and outcome above and beyond routine assessments, and therapist factors. Method: 143 outpatients with major depressive disorder were treated by 24 therapists with CBT or Exposure-Based Cognitive Therapy. Interpersonal style was measured pre and post therapy with the informant‐based Impact Message Inventory (IMI), in addition to the self‐report Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP‐32). Indicators for the patients' dominance and affiliation as well as interpersonal distress were calculated from these measures. Depressive and general symptomatology was assessed at pre, post, and at three months follow‐up, and by process measures after every session. Results: Whereas significant other's reports did not add significantly to the prediction of the early therapeutic alliance, central mechanisms of change, or post‐therapy outcome including therapist factors, the best predictor of outcome 3 months post therapy was an increase in dominance as perceived by significant others. Conclusions: The patients' significant others seem to provide important additional information about the patients' interpersonal style and therefore should be included in the diagnostic process. Moreover, practitioners should specifically target interpersonal change as a potential mechanism of change in psychotherapy for depression.

Teacher praise and feedback and students’ perceptions of the classroom environment

The relationships between teacher praise and feedback, and students’ perceptions of the classroom environment were investigated in six rural elementary schools (n 5 747). The Teacher Feedback Scale and My Classroom Scale were developed as part of this study and used to collect the data. Structural equation modelling was used to test a hypothesised model. The results indicated that negative teacher feedback and effort feedback were both related to students’ relationships with their teachers, while ability feedback was associated with perceptions of the classroom environment. Praise was not related to classroom environment or teacher–student relationships. Significant age and gender differences were found. Additionally, differences were found between students who were satisfied with their classroom and those who were dissatisfied. Satisfied students received more general praise, general ability feedback, effort feedback and less negative teacher feedback when compared to dissatisfied students. Research studies have emphasised the influence of signicicant adults (teachers and parents) on students’ personal development (Porlier et al., 1999) and the importance of significant others’ verbal statements when directed at children (Burnett, 1996a). The relationships between negative and positive statements made by teachers, parents, peers and siblings and children’s self-talk have been investigated (Burnett, 1996a) and positive statements (praise) have been found to be more beneficial than verbal criticism (Burnett, 1999). The quality of life in the classroom in recent times has been considered of great importance to students (Thorp et al., 1994) and this is recognised by Baker (1999) who reported a relationship between students’ satisfaction with the learning environment, and differential teacher feedback and praise. This study investigated the relationships between teacher praise and feedback, and how students perceived their classroom and their relationship with their teacher.

Disclosing donation decisions : the role of organ donor prototypes in an extended theory of planned behaviour

This study explored the role of donor prototype evaluations (perceptions of the typical organ donor) in organ donation communication decisions using an extended theory of planned behaviour (TPB) model. The model incorporated attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, moral norm, self-identity, and donor prototype evaluations to predict intentions to record consent on an organ donor register and discuss the organ donation decision with significant others. Participants completed surveys assessing the extended TPB constructs related to registering (n = 359) and discussing (n = 282). Results supported a role for donor prototype evaluations in predicting discussing intentions only. Both extended TPB structural equation models were a good fit to the data, accounting for 74 and 76% of the variance in registering and discussing intentions, respectively. Participants’ self-reported discussing behaviour (but not registering behaviour given low numbers of behavioural performers) was assessed 4 weeks later, with discussing intention as the only significant predictor of behaviour (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.11). These findings highlight the impact of people's perceptions of a typical donor on their decisions to discuss their organ donation preference, assisting our understanding of the factors influencing individuals' communication processes in efforts to bridge the gap between organ supply and demand.

Determining the psychosocial predictors of living, living-related, and posthumous organ donation

The worldwide organ shortage occurs despite people’s positive organ donation attitudes. The discrepancy between attitudes and behaviour is evident in Australia particularly, with widespread public support for organ donation but low donation and communication rates. This problem is compounded further by the paucity of theoretically based research to improve our understanding of people’s organ donation decisions. This program of research contributes to our knowledge of individual decision making processes for three aspects of organ donation: (1) posthumous (upon death) donation, (2) living donation (to a known and unknown recipient), and (3) providing consent for donation by communicating donation wishes on an organ donor consent register (registering) and discussing the donation decision with significant others (discussing). The research program used extended versions of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and the Prototype/Willingness Model (PWM), incorporating additional influences (moral norm, self-identity, organ recipient prototypes), to explicate the relationship between people’s positive attitudes and low rates of organ donation behaviours. Adopting the TPB and PWM (and their extensions) as a theoretical basis overcomes several key limitations of the extant organ donation literature including the often atheoretical nature of organ donation research, thefocus on individual difference factors to construct organ donor profiles and the omission of important psychosocial influences (e.g., control perceptions, moral values) that may impact on people’s decision-making in this context. In addition, the use of the TPB and PWM adds further to our understanding of the decision making process for communicating organ donation wishes. Specifically, the extent to which people’s registering and discussing decisions may be explained by a reasoned and/or a reactive decision making pathway is examined (Stage 3) with the novel application of the TPB augmented with the social reaction pathway in the PWM. This program of research was conducted in three discrete stages: a qualitative stage (Stage 1), a quantitative stage with extended models (Stage 2), and a quantitative stage with augmented models (Stage 3). The findings of the research program are reported in nine papers which are presented according to the three aspects of organ donation examined (posthumous donation, living donation, and providing consent for donation by registering or discussing the donation preference). Stage One of the research program comprised qualitative focus groups/interviews with university students and community members (N = 54) (Papers 1 and 2). Drawing broadly on the TPB framework (Paper 1), content analysed responses revealed people’s commonly held beliefs about the advantages and disadvantages (e.g., prolonging/saving life), important people or groups (e.g., family), and barriers and motivators (e.g., a family’s objection to donation), related to living and posthumous organ donation. Guided by a PWM perspective, Paper Two identified people’s commonly held perceptions of organ donors (e.g., altruistic and giving), non-donors (e.g., self-absorbed and unaware), and transplant recipients (e.g., unfortunate, and in some cases responsible/blameworthy for their predicament). Stage Two encompassed quantitative examinations of people’s decision makingfor living (Papers 3 and 4) and posthumous (Paper 5) organ donation, and for registering and discussing donation wishes (Papers 6 to 8) to test extensions to both the TPB and PWM. Comparisons of health students’ (N = 487) motivations and willingness for living related and anonymous donation (Paper 3) revealed that a person’s donor identity, attitude, past blood donation, and knowing a posthumous donor were four common determinants of willingness, with the results highlighting students’ identification as a living donor as an important motive. An extended PWM is presented in Papers Four and Five. University students’ (N = 284) willingness for living related and anonymous donation was tested in Paper Four with attitude, subjective norm, donor prototype similarity, and moral norm (but not donor prototype favourability) predicting students’ willingness to donate organs in both living situations. Students’ and community members’ (N = 471) posthumous organ donation willingness was assessed in Paper Five with attitude, subjective norm, past behaviour, moral norm, self-identity, and prior blood donation all significantly directly predicting posthumous donation willingness, with only an indirect role for organ donor prototype evaluations. The results of two studies examining people’s decisions to register and/or discuss their organ donation wishes are reported in Paper Six. People’s (N = 24) commonly held beliefs about communicating their organ donation wishes were explored initially in a TPB based qualitative elicitation study. The TPB belief determinants of intentions to register and discuss the donation preference were then assessed for people who had not previously communicated their donation wishes (N = 123). Behavioural and normative beliefs were important determinants of registering and discussing intentions; however, control beliefs influenced people’s registering intentions only. Paper Seven represented the first empirical test of the role of organ transplant recipient prototypes (i.e., perceptions of organ transplant recipients) in people’s (N = 465) decisions to register consent for organ donation. Two factors, Substance Use and Responsibility, were identified and Responsibility predicted people’s organ donor registration status. Results demonstrated that unregistered respondents were the most likely to evaluate transplant recipients negatively. Paper Eight established the role of organ donor prototype evaluations, within an extended TPB model, in predicting students’ and community members’ registering (n = 359) and discussing (n = 282) decisions. Results supported the utility of an extended TPB and suggested a role for donor prototype evaluations in predicting people’s discussing intentions only. Strong intentions to discuss donation wishes increased the likelihood that respondents reported discussing their decision 1-month later. Stage Three of the research program comprised an examination of augmented models (Paper 9). A test of the TPB augmented with elements from the social reaction pathway in the PWM, and extensions to these models was conducted to explore whether people’s registering (N = 339) and discussing (N = 315) decisions are explained via a reasoned (intention) and/or social reaction (willingness) pathway. Results suggested that people’s decisions to communicate their organ donation wishes may be better explained via the reasoned pathway, particularly for registering consent; however, discussing also involves reactive elements. Overall, the current research program represents an important step toward clarifying the relationship between people’s positive organ donation attitudes but low rates of organ donation and communication behaviours. Support has been demonstrated for the use of extensions to two complementary theories, the TPB and PWM, which can inform future research aiming to explicate further the organ donation attitude-behaviour relationship. The focus on a range of organ donation behaviours enables the identification of key targets for future interventions encouraging people’s posthumous and living donation decisions, and communication of their organ donation preference.