HEALTH PROMOTION: SHOSHANI & STEINMETZ

Question 1

What were the 2 aims

Answer 1

• To investigate whether participants in the positive psychology intervention group had better mental health outcomes i.e optimisim throughout middle school compared with a control group
• To also investigate whether the efficacy of the intervention was affected by specific socio-demographic factors

Question 2

Describe the sample

Answer 2

• They recruited 1038 adolescents
• from 7th-9th grade
• ages 12- 15 years at the start
• All from 2 large middle schools in the centre of Israel
• 537: the intervention group
• 501: the wait list control gtoup

Question 3

Describe the methodology

Answer 3

• Field experiment
• Longitudinal took place over 2 school years
• Had a mixed design:
  > Intervention versus control (Independent measuresS)
  > All took measures before and after the intervention period (Repeated measures)

Question 4

Describe the first 3 self reports

Answer 4

• Brief symptom Inventory: To identify clinical relevant psychological symptoms in adolescents such as depression using a 4 point likert scale
• The Rosenberg self-esteem scale: Evaluates self worth using a 4-point likert with 10 items
• The General Self Efficacy scale: Assesses how people cope with daily hassles and life events using a 4-point likert

Question 5

Describe the second 3 self reports

Answer 5

• Satisfaction with life scale: Assesses an overall ssatisfaction with life e.g ‘In most ways, my life is close to ideal’. They use a 7-point liker with 1-strongly disagree and 7-strongly agree
• The Life Orientation Test-Revised: Assesses how optimisitc or pessimistic a person is using a 5-point likert scale
• Socio-demographic measures: Gathers background information on the students including age, gender and socioeconomic status.

Question 6

How were the teachers prepped

Answer 6

• They were trained group dynamics and positive psychology by clinical psychologists
• This was done in 15 two- hour sessions every 2 weeks
• a teachers textbook included lesson plans and activities to ensure that all teacheres delivered the lessons in the same way

Question 7

Describe what the intervention group did

Answer 7

• The programme included activities, discussions and reading poems
• Teachers conducted parallel sessions with their students and had psychologists randomly check that the sessions were running appropriately
• The important component was gratitude.
• They discussed 5 or more things they were grateful for each week and also wrote gratitude letters to people who had a positive impact on their lives

Question 8

What did the wait list control group do

Answer 8

• They continued with their normal social science lessons

Question 9

State 3 results

Answer 9

• Both groups showed slightly higher levels of psychological symptoms at the start of the study.
• Participants in the intervention group showed significant decreases in psychological distress between the beginning and the end of the study
• the intervention group showed significant increases of optimisim overtime compared to the control

Question 10

What did they conclude

Answer 10

• The intervention was found to be effective for both low and high-risk students

Question 11

State 2 strengths

Answer 11

• The use of longitudinal design. They had a follow up in the year 2010-2011 and again in 2012. This allowed the researchers to monitor the long term effects of the intervention.
• The use of a control group allowed researcher to determine the effect of the intervention and whether or not it brought mental health changes to the sample. This was central to the validity

Question 12

State 3 weaknesses

Answer 12

• The students completed the same self reports at 4 points across the two years. They could have recognised the questions as measurements to the success of the programme and so weakening the validity due to demand characteristics
• The lack of generalisability as only 2 israeli schools were involved. With only ages 11-15 years, it is possible the intervention was more successful with this age group and for these specific schools. This could be less effective for older teens
• The wait list control group did not benefit from the intervention, so were at risk of increased mental health symptoms

Question 13

Use of children:

Answer 13

• In the study, they sent informed parental consent forms and student assent forms
• This meant that both the parents and children knew what they would be doing

Question 14

Applicability:

Answer 14

• This study can help schools with students who struggle with transitions to schools and other factors.
• By using an intervention that is proactive rather than reactive, it could reduce the pressure on support services such as therapy for children.

Question 15

Individual versus situational:

Answer 15

• This focuses on the situational side
• This involves focusing on factors like having strong social networks or faith which increases our happiness.
• However it tends to ignore individual explanations i.e personality. For instance those with a chronic illness may need to come to terms with the negative aspects of their illness and adjust their coping behaviours.