The Effect of Values Affirmation Exercise on Mood and Values Success: A Randomized Trial
Name
Institution
Course
Instructor
Date
Abstract
The current study aimed to investigate the effect of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success. Previous research on the topic revealed inconsistent results regarding the significance of value affirmation for cognitive impacts, necessitating further studies to be initiated. To investigate the problem, a randomized trial design was incorporated into the study, and the participants were provided with CPVI and PANAS questionnaires. The study sample was randomly selected from the target population and assigned to either control or treatment groups. The findings revealed no significant changes in the pre and post-tests results for both the control and treatment groups. The results augmented the literature review outcomes that value affirmation exercise did not have a significant impact on mood and value success. Future studies should investigate the topic further to gain clear insights into it. Notably, the sample population selected for subsequent studies should comprise a large number of participants to raise the statistical power of the findings.
Chapter One
1.1 Introduction and Background
The purpose of the research dwells on the determination of the effects of value affirmation exercise on mood and values success. This chapter covers the study background, statement of the research problem, study justification, the objectives, and the significance of the study. It is envisaged that the proposed approach will offer an in-depth analysis of the research issue and further provide a firm basis for arriving at a conclusion and recommendations.
1.2 Background to the study
Emotional disorder is a key risk factor influencing the well-being and productivity of people in any social setting. Positive emotions translate to augmented productivity, good moods, and rising adherence to personal and organizational values. Emotional expressions such as moods have a significant impact on the livelihood of individuals. Mood disorders cause individuals to fall into depression, alienate themselves from friends and families, and become less productive in their social activities. A report by the National Institute of Mental Health (2017) revealed that approximately 9.7% of adults in the United States suffered from a mood disorder, in particular, females comprised 11.6%, while males’ percentage was 7.7%.
The effects of mood disorders have been documented in multiple studies, revealing the impacts on individual behaviors in distinct settings. The influences span physical and psychological scope and could adversely affect an individual’s wellbeing. The physical manifestation of mood disorders includes fatigue, anger, stress, and frustration, among others. The psychological impacts comprise depression, stress, anxiety, low morale, and reduced productivity (McCarthy et al., 2020; Salles et al., 2016). Despite the mitigative measures of antidepressants and psychotherapy, mood disorders have become prevalent in vast social settings.
The lack of effective interventions for mood disorders has led to increased research on the most efficient approach for the management of mood disorders in distinct social settings. One of the proposed interventions comprises value affirmation practices, which have shown remarkable outcomes in the management of moods (Ransom, 2016; Vu, 2019). Unlike the pharmaceutical approaches such as the use of antidepressant medications, the value affirmation exercises entail the use of natural interventions that have further proven to be cost-effective (Ehret & Sherman, 2018). The findings of this study would illuminate strategic and efficient methods for managing mood disorders.
1.3 Statement of the Problem
The prevalence of mood disorders in the United States has been increasing lately. The value of 9.7% was considered to rise significantly over the years, leading to increased prevalence. The physical and psychological impacts can be severe and can substantially influence the overall population’s wellbeing. The physical impacts such as fatigue, anger, stress, and frustrations could hinder the proper performance of activities for daily living. Notably, the interpersonal relations with other groups in the social milieu will be adversely influenced. The psychological impacts such as depression and anxiety could further affect the individual wellbeing, leading to inefficiency in performing their tasks. Despite the efforts by healthcare agencies and federal institutions, the pharmaceutical interventions have not sufficiently curbed the spread of mood disorders. Healthcare institutions experience rising cases of mental illnesses associated with mood disorders. The implementation of a new mitigation strategy is, therefore, inherent for improved population health. Research on the effectiveness of value affirmation exercises remains scarce, and this study will illuminate their significance in mood management.
1.4 Research Hypothesis
The study hypothesis comprised the null and alternative hypotheses stated below:
H0 – There is no significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
H1 – There is a significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
Research Justification
Considering the increase in cases of mood disorders in the United States and other countries around the globe, the need for a viable solution is imperative. The increased rates could exceed the expected threshold, leading to the adverse effects on the wellbeing of the affected groups of people. Notably, the lack of effective non-pharmaceutical intervention created the need for a new treatment approach that will be not only affordable to the population but also effective in the management of the symptoms. The findings on the effectiveness of the proposed interventions will be used further to make a useful conclusion regarding mood disorder.
1.5 Study Objectives
The primary objective dwells on examining the impact of a values affirmation exercise on values success and mood.
1.6 Significance of the Study
The study is significant to multiple stakeholders across different organizational settings. It will provide management with practical information on the effect of value affirmation exercises on the mood within the organizational setting (Barkoukis et al., 2020). Managers and leaders will apply the technique to encourage employees to deliver quality work within the workplace environment.
1.7 The Scope of the Study
The study examines the perception of 51 participants, who were randomly selected. The chosen sample was a representation of diverse groups from different organizational settings.
1.8 Limitations of the Study
The major limitation includes the number of participants selected for the study. It integrated 51 participants who may not sufficiently represent the target population.
Chapter Two
Literature Review
2.0 Introduction
The literature analyzed in this section hinges on the primary research objective of examining the impact of values affirmation exercises on success and mood. The key areas of perspective comprise the severity and significance of the application of the value affirmation exercise on people’s mood. The outcome will be compared to the study findings, leading to a valid conclusion.
2.1 The Impact of Value Affirmation Exercise on Mood
The use of value affirmation exercise has been documented in multiple studies. The application of the concept has mainly been aimed at minimizing the impacts of psychological stress in enhancing value consistent action and raising acceptance of individual experiences. The Northeastern Center for Advancing Teaching and Learning Through Research (2019, December 3) described value affirmation exercise as a brief writing activity where individuals reflect on the values considered meaningful and incorporate the useful ideas in their lives. Studies have shown distinct outcomes regarding the impacts of value affirmation exercise on individual moods.
Czech et al. (2011) examined the impact of value affirmation exercise on psychological stress. The study hypothesis postulated that values writing reduced anticipatory or post-task-related stress among individuals. The findings failed to prove the hypothesis, indicating that the value affirmation process did not have any significant impact on the levels of anxiety among the participants. Hanselman et al. (2017) examined the impact of value affirmation on the reduction of racial achievement gaps. The findings revealed no evidence of positive influence on the improvement of performance among the racial groups. In a different study by Michals et al. (2019), the relationship between stress relief and value affirmation exercise among college students was determined. The study outcome revealed that value affirmation failed to mediate the level of stress experienced by students or increase their levels of satisfaction with life.
A lack of correlation between value affirmation exercise and success was also exhibited by Jiang (2018). In the study, its significance on job insecurity and creativity was examined. The findings revealed a negative correlation. Also, Carpenter (2017) examined the efficacy of value affirmation exercise in the lessening of non-clinical rumination. The hypothesis stated that the exercise would lead to the lowest level of rumination. The findings failed to support the study hypothesis, indicating that over the short and the long-term periods, value affirmation had no effects on state rumination. Similar results were revealed in a study by Bancroft et al. (2017), which sought to specifically determine the impact of value affirmation in math scores among students. The majority of girls in the participant groups suffered from racial and gender stereotypes, leading to poor performance in math. The findings showed that the effects of value affirmation on math performance were insignificant, falling below the alpha value of 0.001. A conclusion was made that value affirmation did not affect performance. The examination of more studies revealed a weak link between value affirmation and improved performance. Hayes et al. (2019) examined the usefulness of value affirmation in the grade of students in middle school and freshmen. The students were tested in terms of cognitive abilities, self-efficacy, level of stress, and perceived control. The findings showed no positive impact on the outcomes.
Certain studies have equally supported value affirmation exercise in improved performance. One of these studies was carried out by Springer et al. (2018), in which the impact of value affirmation exercise on the devotion of 127 participants to mHealth goals was examined. The levels of adherence to mHealth goals significantly improved, an indication that value affirmation can be quite effective. The behavioral change model exhibited values of (R2=.39, p<.001), which is an indication of significant influence. Brady et al. (2017) also examined the impact of value affirmation exercise on the college grade of Latino students. The results of the experiment showed that the average grade of the students raised by changing their perceptions towards the stress factors. The exercise led to self-affirming thoughts compared to the negative ones, causing improved performance (Barkoukis, 2018). In the end, the self-esteem, integrity, and hope of the students got boosted. Finally, Jordt et al. (2017) delved into the conclusion that value affirmation exercise impacts the achievement gaps among the minority students compared to their white peers in mathematics, technology, science, and engineering. The study hypothesis stated that the performance gap had an emotional and psychological association with the risk of labelling. The results revealed that the implementation of value affirmation exercise caused a decrease in the stated performance gap.
The reviewed literature shows the impact of value affirmation on vast psychological, emotional, and behavioral aspects. The literature supporting the use of the intervention mainly peg on the concept of elimination of negative thoughts, translating to an enhancement in the outcome. The value affirmation practice causes the participants to develop positive thoughts, leading to a boost in the overall results (Borman et al., 2016). The literature against the effectiveness of the value affirmation intervention showed an insignificant link with the variables (Borman et al., 2020; Goyer et al., 2017; Howell, 2017). The evidence presented in each case fails to satisfactorily exhibit the impacts of value affirmation on mood and success. Contentions exist on whether the practice has any positive impact at all. The next section provides an overview of the research methods used in examining the impact of value affirmation on mood and success.
2.2 Theoretical Perspectives
A lot of theories have been employed to explain the association between value affirmation exercises and mood or emotions. The common ones comprise the Lazarus and Folkman’s psychological stress and coping theory and the self-affirmation one. The two concepts have been broadly applied to adequately understand the mechanism of value affirmation through emotive and cognitive aspects. An examination of the models provides a clear understanding of the concepts and the rationale for their implementation in distinct settings.
2.2.1 The Lazarus and Folkman’s Psychological Stress and Coping Theory
The Lazarus and Folkman’s psychological stress and coping theory states that stress occurs when an individual wants to surpass the social and personal resources they have (Biggs et al., 2017). The concept was described as a transactional model of stress and coping, which considers two factors being central to any psychological stress, i.e. appraisal and coping (Harwood et al., 2019). Appraisal constitutes the manner in which an individual perceives and evaluates the importance of the stress factor. Thus, stress has been considered to be related to an individual’s environment. The nature of interactions determines the outcome of successful mitigation (Lannin et al., 2019). The concept of appraisal hinges on the fact that emotional processes primarily depend on the individual expectations manifested (Ben-Zur, 2019; Lannin et al., 2018). The concept of cognitive appraisal has formed the basis for the explanation of individual differences in terms of response to intensity, quality, and duration of emotions during a stressful episode. During the cognitive appraisal process, factors such as values, goals, and motivational factors determine the quality of coping mechanism (Nicholls, 2020). Coping constitutes the behavioral and cognitive efforts to control, tolerate, or reduce the demand factors brought by the stress factor. It also entails the simultaneous implementation of varying action sequences to overcome the challenge (Reavis et al., 2017). The coping mechanism directly relates to the cognitive appraisal process.
Value affirmation entails the sequential implementation of coping mechanisms through cognitive efforts to change the adverse emotions related to the stress factor (Gieselmann et al., 2020; Strachan et al., 2020). The value affirmation exercises can, therefore, aid in the mitigation of the adverse stress factors leading to improvement in emotions. The affirmation process entails minimization of the stress demands to match the social and personal resources that they can quickly mobilize.
2.2.2 The Self Affirmation Theory
The self-affirmation theory postulates that individuals have the ultimate motivation to uphold self-integrity, worthiness, and good thoughts of themselves to enable them to predict useful results. The perceptions of worthiness and self-integrity make people consider themselves as living up to certain expectations existing in the society (Hurst et al., 2020). In cases where self-integrity of an individual suffers from a threat, the self-affirmation response enables them to develop positive thoughts that would help to overcome the challenges (Arpan et al., 2017; Vu, 2019). The self-affirmation theory correlates with the cognitive dissonance study, which reveals that individuals tend to change their attitudes when aligning them with their past behaviors (Harmon-Jones & Mills, 2019; McGrath, 2017; Schüz et al., 2017). The process entails self-justification and rationalization, convincing individuals that their selected course of action was the best for the given situation.
In the context of value affirmation exercise, the self-affirmation theory applies in cases where people attempt to re-establish integrity through affirmations leading to the mitigation of the stress factor. The self-affirmation process enables people to change their moods or attitudes towards threats within their environments, leading to improved response (Sherman et al., 2017; Thomas, 2018). The value affirmation could entail important reflections such as family relations or certain useful skills that boost self-esteem. The theory offers a valid rationale for the usefulness and implementation of value affirmation process in mood changes.
The above literature review reveals that whereas multiple studies have evaluated the significance of value affirmation exercise in distinct cognitive processes, it still remains unclear. The inconsistency in the findings necessitates further research on the subject. The theoretical perspectives provide a blueprint through which the psychological and cognitive processes involved in value affirmation exercises can be analyzed and interpreted.
Chapter Three
Research Methodology
3.0 Introduction
This chapter covers selected research design, study area, target population, selected sampling procedure, sample size, data collection, and data analysis instrument. Justification of each methodology element is provided to prove the selected approaches.
3.1 Research Design
The research design comprises the procedures and methods used in the collection and analysis of research variables. Multiples designs exist and could be applied in the study to augment the outcome, e.g. cross-sectional, experimental, longitudinal, and observational studies and randomized control design. The research study in the current context entails the examination of the proposed intervention effectiveness. The ideal research design is the randomized control method. The selection of the approach hinges on the use of randomization, which eliminates bias and improves clear identification of the research population and analysis of results through statistical methods. The shortcomings of the design are high costs, lack of proper representation of the target population, and decreased abilities for sufficient follow-ups. However, in general, the design befits the current research and would provide a firm basis for data analysis.
3.2 The Target Population
The subject of value affirmation covers a broad perspective within the social paradigm. The targeted population group comprises people actively engaging in activities of daily living and capable of providing responses regarding the impact of value affirmation on their mood and value success. The sample population was randomly selected from adults under the age of 65 living in Northern Ireland. There were 51 participants in total who were haphazardly assigned to the treatment and control groups.
3.3 Sampling Technique
Four major sampling techniques exist and could be used in the current research. They include simple random, cluster, systematic, and purposive samplings. The current study seeks to present each person with an equal chance of participation. The random sampling method proved to be ideal for the study, as it enabled the equal selection of the participants. The random selection technique eliminates bias leading to improvement in the outcome. The approach is also suitable for selecting study participants from a large prospective population, which befits the case in Northern Ireland. The selection of 51 participants conformed to the research protocols, and the prospects deemed capable of meeting the research expectations.
3.4 Participant Selection
The prospective participants were informed about the study subject and objectives. They were given consent forms, which would show their willingness to take part in the experiment. They were further informed about the policies on personal data, i.e. each individual was provided with a unique identification code to limit any chances of their personal data disclosure.
3.4 Research Instruments
The primary research instrument included a questionnaire. Rossell et al. (2019) cited questionnaires as inexpensive, scalable, easy analysis, and visualization. The current research investigates the effect of values affirmation exercise on mood and success. The questionnaire proved to be efficient, less costly, and effective in presenting data. It also enabled the researcher to reach out to broad audience. The collected information was easy to analyze through descriptive and correlational methods. The respondents were issued with questionnaires, which were filled and returned to the researcher.
3.5 Validity and Reliability
Validity refers to the extent to which a research tool measures the intended variables. Reliability, on the other hand, examines the consistency of the results obtained during the study (Singh, 2017). In the current research, validity was measured through the Pearson Correlation to establish the accuracy with which the research variables were reported (Taherdoost, 2016). In measuring reliability, the Cronbach's alpha test was used.
3.6 Data Analysis
The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used in the analysis of the quantitative data collected from the survey questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, correlations, and analysis of covariances, among others, comprise the models derived from the study. The outcome was further visually illustrated to augment its quality.
Chapter Four
Results
4.0 Introduction
This section presents the results of the randomized trial to determine the effects of values affirmation exercise on mood and success. The study sought to address the following hypotheses:
H0 – There is no significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
H1 – There is a significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
This chapter includes the respondents’ personal data, descriptive statistics, validity and reliability tests, and correlational outcomes.
4.1 Personal Data
4.1.1 Groups
The participants were divided into two groups, 0 and 1, for treatment and control groups, respectively. The frequency distributions of the group members are as shown below:
|
Group |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
0 |
25 |
49.0 |
49.0 |
49.0 |
|
1 |
26 |
51.0 |
51.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
According to the group distributions, the treatment group, 0, had 25 participants, while the control group, 1, had 26 participants. In total, 51 participants were involved in the study.
4.1.2 Participant Age
The participants comprised adults with a maximum age of 65 years. The age distributions are as shown in the table below:
|
Age |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
19 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
|
20 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
3.9 |
|
|
21 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
13.7 |
|
|
22 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
23.5 |
|
|
23 |
8 |
15.7 |
15.7 |
39.2 |
|
|
24 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
45.1 |
|
|
25 |
7 |
13.7 |
13.7 |
58.8 |
|
|
26 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
66.7 |
|
|
27 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
68.6 |
|
|
28 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
74.5 |
|
|
29 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
82.4 |
|
|
35 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
84.3 |
|
|
37 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
88.2 |
|
|
41 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
90.2 |
|
|
45 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
92.2 |
|
|
47 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
94.1 |
|
|
48 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
96.1 |
|
|
54 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
98.0 |
|
|
59 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
The table shows the different age groups that took part in the study. The youngest age group comprised adults aged 19, while the oldest was adults aged 59 years. In terms of distributions, the largest group was the one with 23 years old adults represented at 15.7%, followed by 25 year old ones at 13.7%. The least represented group amounted to 2%. The distribution of people in the age groups is appropriate and exhibits minimal bias.
4.1.3 Gender
|
Gender |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
Males |
31 |
60.8 |
60.8 |
60.8 |
|
Females |
20 |
39.2 |
39.2 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
In terms of gender, the participants comprised 31 males and 20 females. The gender balance and distribution enhance the quality and social relevance of a study. In the current context, gender balance is not attained; however, the differential gap between the two groups is not significant.
4.2 Participant Responses
4.2.1 Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS-SF)
4.2.1.1 Negative PANAS-SF
|
bPANAS_Negative |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
15 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
|
16 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
7.8 |
|
|
18 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
11.8 |
|
|
19 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
21.6 |
|
|
20 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
29.4 |
|
|
21 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
35.3 |
|
|
22 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
39.2 |
|
|
24 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
47.1 |
|
|
25 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
56.9 |
|
|
26 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
66.7 |
|
|
27 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
70.6 |
|
|
28 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
76.5 |
|
|
29 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
82.4 |
|
|
30 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
88.2 |
|
|
31 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
90.2 |
|
|
32 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
92.2 |
|
|
34 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
96.1 |
|
|
38 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
|
pPANAS_Negative |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
15 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
|
18 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
9.8 |
|
|
19 |
8 |
15.7 |
15.7 |
25.5 |
|
|
21 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
29.4 |
|
|
22 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
39.2 |
|
|
23 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
47.1 |
|
|
24 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
56.9 |
|
|
25 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
62.7 |
|
|
26 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
64.7 |
|
|
27 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
68.6 |
|
|
28 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
78.4 |
|
|
29 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
82.4 |
|
|
30 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
88.2 |
|
|
31 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
94.1 |
|
|
32 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
98.0 |
|
|
33 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
The above data shows the distinction between the PANAS negative scores. The table shows the frequency of changes in each context. The mean differences and ANOVA in the data distribution can be presented, as shown in the table below:
4.2.1.1.1 ANOVA for bPANAS and pPANAS Negative
|
Descriptives |
||||||||
|
bPANAS_Negative |
||||||||
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Std. Error |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean |
Minimum |
Maximum |
|
|
Lower Bound |
Upper Bound |
|||||||
|
15 |
2 |
20.00 |
7.071 |
5.000 |
-43.53 |
83.53 |
15 |
25 |
|
18 |
3 |
17.67 |
2.887 |
1.667 |
10.50 |
24.84 |
16 |
21 |
|
19 |
8 |
20.13 |
2.696 |
.953 |
17.87 |
22.38 |
16 |
24 |
|
21 |
2 |
20.00 |
.000 |
.000 |
20.00 |
20.00 |
20 |
20 |
|
22 |
5 |
21.20 |
3.962 |
1.772 |
16.28 |
26.12 |
18 |
26 |
|
23 |
4 |
26.25 |
3.500 |
1.750 |
20.68 |
31.82 |
22 |
30 |
|
24 |
5 |
25.40 |
.894 |
.400 |
24.29 |
26.51 |
24 |
26 |
|
25 |
3 |
23.00 |
4.583 |
2.646 |
11.62 |
34.38 |
19 |
28 |
|
26 |
1 |
21.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
21 |
21 |
|
27 |
2 |
24.00 |
4.243 |
3.000 |
-14.12 |
62.12 |
21 |
27 |
|
28 |
5 |
29.00 |
2.345 |
1.049 |
26.09 |
31.91 |
25 |
31 |
|
29 |
2 |
29.00 |
.000 |
.000 |
29.00 |
29.00 |
29 |
29 |
|
30 |
3 |
29.00 |
2.646 |
1.528 |
22.43 |
35.57 |
27 |
32 |
|
31 |
3 |
28.00 |
5.292 |
3.055 |
14.86 |
41.14 |
24 |
34 |
|
32 |
2 |
38.00 |
.000 |
.000 |
38.00 |
38.00 |
38 |
38 |
|
33 |
1 |
34.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
34 |
34 |
|
Total |
51 |
24.59 |
5.532 |
.775 |
23.03 |
26.14 |
15 |
38 |
ANCOVA
|
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects |
|||||
|
Dependent Variable: pPANAS_Negative |
|||||
|
Source |
Type III Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
Corrected Model |
666.353a |
2 |
333.177 |
34.537 |
.000 |
|
Intercept |
154.613 |
1 |
154.613 |
16.027 |
.000 |
|
bPANAS_Negative |
660.802 |
1 |
660.802 |
68.498 |
.000 |
|
Group |
2.800 |
1 |
2.800 |
.290 |
.593 |
|
Error |
463.058 |
48 |
9.647 |
|
|
|
Total |
30939.000 |
51 |
|
|
|
|
Corrected Total |
1129.412 |
50 |
|
|
|
|
a. R Squared = .590 (Adjusted R Squared = .573) |
|||||
The descriptive table shows the mean differences between the pre and post responses. The ANOVA table shows that the differences between the mean values have a p-value of 0.593, an implication that the difference between the values is statistically significant.
4.2.2.2 Positive PANAS-SF
The frequency distribution of the baseline scores are as shown in the table below:
|
bPANAS_Positive |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
15 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
|
20 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
5.9 |
|
|
21 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
7.8 |
|
|
23 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
11.8 |
|
|
24 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
15.7 |
|
|
25 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
21.6 |
|
|
26 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
23.5 |
|
|
27 |
7 |
13.7 |
13.7 |
37.3 |
|
|
28 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
45.1 |
|
|
29 |
8 |
15.7 |
15.7 |
60.8 |
|
|
30 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
70.6 |
|
|
31 |
7 |
13.7 |
13.7 |
84.3 |
|
|
32 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
90.2 |
|
|
33 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
96.1 |
|
|
36 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
|
pPANAS_Positive |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
19 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
|
20 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
5.9 |
|
|
22 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
9.8 |
|
|
24 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
13.7 |
|
|
25 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
19.6 |
|
|
26 |
6 |
11.8 |
11.8 |
31.4 |
|
|
27 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
35.3 |
|
|
28 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
43.1 |
|
|
29 |
10 |
19.6 |
19.6 |
62.7 |
|
|
30 |
7 |
13.7 |
13.7 |
76.5 |
|
|
31 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
78.4 |
|
|
32 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
86.3 |
|
|
33 |
3 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
92.2 |
|
|
34 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
94.1 |
|
|
35 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
98.0 |
|
|
36 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
In both the pre and post-tests, the total number of participants was 51, but the scores varied, as shown in the table.
4.2.2.2.
|
Descriptives |
||||||||
|
bPANAS_Positive |
||||||||
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Std. Error |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean |
Minimum |
Maximum |
|
|
Lower Bound |
Upper Bound |
|||||||
|
19 |
2 |
15.00 |
.000 |
.000 |
15.00 |
15.00 |
15 |
15 |
|
20 |
1 |
20.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
20 |
20 |
|
22 |
2 |
23.50 |
.707 |
.500 |
17.15 |
29.85 |
23 |
24 |
|
24 |
2 |
29.00 |
.000 |
.000 |
29.00 |
29.00 |
29 |
29 |
|
25 |
3 |
28.33 |
3.055 |
1.764 |
20.74 |
35.92 |
25 |
31 |
|
26 |
6 |
26.67 |
1.506 |
.615 |
25.09 |
28.25 |
25 |
29 |
|
27 |
2 |
22.50 |
2.121 |
1.500 |
3.44 |
41.56 |
21 |
24 |
|
28 |
4 |
30.00 |
4.082 |
2.041 |
23.50 |
36.50 |
27 |
36 |
|
29 |
10 |
30.00 |
2.108 |
.667 |
28.49 |
31.51 |
27 |
33 |
|
30 |
7 |
30.00 |
1.826 |
.690 |
28.31 |
31.69 |
27 |
32 |
|
31 |
1 |
30.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
30 |
30 |
|
32 |
4 |
30.25 |
2.630 |
1.315 |
26.07 |
34.43 |
28 |
33 |
|
33 |
3 |
28.00 |
4.359 |
2.517 |
17.17 |
38.83 |
23 |
31 |
|
34 |
1 |
29.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
29 |
29 |
|
35 |
2 |
34.00 |
2.828 |
2.000 |
8.59 |
59.41 |
32 |
36 |
|
36 |
1 |
26.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
26 |
26 |
|
Total |
51 |
28.10 |
4.272 |
.598 |
26.90 |
29.30 |
15 |
36 |
ANCOVA
|
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects |
|||||
|
Dependent Variable: pPANAS_Positive |
|||||
|
Source |
Type III Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
Corrected Model |
340.716a |
2 |
170.358 |
19.441 |
.000 |
|
Intercept |
99.064 |
1 |
99.064 |
11.305 |
.002 |
|
bPANAS_Positive |
339.844 |
1 |
339.844 |
38.782 |
.000 |
|
Group |
32.496 |
1 |
32.496 |
3.708 |
.060 |
|
Error |
420.617 |
48 |
8.763 |
|
|
|
Total |
41703.000 |
51 |
|
|
|
|
Corrected Total |
761.333 |
50 |
|
|
|
|
a. R Squared = .448 (Adjusted R Squared = .425) |
|||||
The descriptive statistics table exhibits the mean differences between the pre and post scores of PANAS positive. The ANOVA table shows a significant value of 0.000, which is an implication that there is a significant difference between the pre and post mean scores.
4.2.3 CPVI Scores
4.2.3.1 bCPVI_Importance
|
bCPVI_Importance |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
17 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
|
20 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
5.9 |
|
|
22 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
13.7 |
|
|
23 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
23.5 |
|
|
24 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
33.3 |
|
|
25 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
43.1 |
|
|
26 |
14 |
27.5 |
27.5 |
70.6 |
|
|
27 |
7 |
13.7 |
13.7 |
84.3 |
|
|
28 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
94.1 |
|
|
29 |
1 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
96.1 |
|
|
30 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
|
pCPVI_Importance |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
15 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
|
20 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
7.8 |
|
|
22 |
5 |
9.8 |
9.8 |
17.6 |
|
|
23 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
25.5 |
|
|
24 |
7 |
13.7 |
13.7 |
39.2 |
|
|
25 |
10 |
19.6 |
19.6 |
58.8 |
|
|
26 |
4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
66.7 |
|
|
27 |
7 |
13.7 |
13.7 |
80.4 |
|
|
28 |
6 |
11.8 |
11.8 |
92.2 |
|
|
29 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
96.1 |
|
|
30 |
2 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
51 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
|
Descriptives |
||||||||
|
bCPVI_Importance |
||||||||
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Std. Error |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean |
Minimum |
Maximum |
|
|
Lower Bound |
Upper Bound |
|||||||
|
15 |
2 |
17.00 |
.000 |
.000 |
17.00 |
17.00 |
17 |
17 |
|
20 |
2 |
21.00 |
1.414 |
1.000 |
8.29 |
33.71 |
20 |
22 |
|
22 |
5 |
24.80 |
2.049 |
.917 |
22.26 |
27.34 |
23 |
27 |
|
23 |
4 |
22.75 |
.500 |
.250 |
21.95 |
23.55 |
22 |
23 |
|
24 |
7 |
25.57 |
.787 |
.297 |
24.84 |
26.30 |
24 |
26 |
|
25 |
10 |
24.60 |
1.578 |
.499 |
23.47 |
25.73 |
22 |
26 |
|
26 |
4 |
25.50 |
.577 |
.289 |
24.58 |
26.42 |
25 |
26 |
|
27 |
7 |
27.14 |
.690 |
.261 |
26.50 |
27.78 |
26 |
28 |
|
28 |
6 |
26.50 |
1.517 |
.619 |
24.91 |
28.09 |
24 |
28 |
|
29 |
2 |
29.00 |
1.414 |
1.000 |
16.29 |
41.71 |
28 |
30 |
|
30 |
2 |
29.50 |
.707 |
.500 |
23.15 |
35.85 |
29 |
30 |
|
Total |
51 |
25.18 |
2.703 |
.379 |
24.42 |
25.94 |
17 |
30 |
|
Test of Homogeneity of Variances |
|||
|
bCPVI_Importance |
|||
|
Levene Statistic |
df1 |
df2 |
Sig. |
|
3.362 |
10 |
40 |
.003 |
ANCOVA
|
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects |
|||||
|
Dependent Variable: pCPVI_Importance |
|||||
|
Source |
Type III Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
Corrected Model |
351.401a |
2 |
175.700 |
62.988 |
.000 |
|
Intercept |
.099 |
1 |
.099 |
.036 |
.851 |
|
bCPVI_Importance |
345.128 |
1 |
345.128 |
123.727 |
.000 |
|
Group |
8.342 |
1 |
8.342 |
2.991 |
.090 |
|
Error |
133.893 |
48 |
2.789 |
|
|
|
Total |
32061.000 |
51 |
|
|
|
|
Corrected Total |
485.294 |
50 |
|
|
|
|
a. R Squared = .724 (Adjusted R Squared = .713) |
|||||
The descriptive table shows the mean distribution between the pre and post scores. The ANCOVA table shows a p-value of 0.090, which is an implication that the mean difference between the bCPVI_Importance and pCPVI_Importance data is not statistically significant.
4.2.3.2 bCPVI_Success
|
Descriptives |
||||||||
|
bCPVI_Success |
||||||||
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Std. Error |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean |
Minimum |
Maximum |
|
|
Lower Bound |
Upper Bound |
|||||||
|
11 |
3 |
13.00 |
.000 |
.000 |
13.00 |
13.00 |
13 |
13 |
|
14 |
1 |
12.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
12 |
12 |
|
15 |
3 |
12.33 |
2.309 |
1.333 |
6.60 |
18.07 |
11 |
15 |
|
16 |
4 |
15.75 |
1.500 |
.750 |
13.36 |
18.14 |
15 |
18 |
|
17 |
1 |
13.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
13 |
13 |
|
18 |
3 |
19.67 |
2.309 |
1.333 |
13.93 |
25.40 |
17 |
21 |
|
19 |
2 |
17.50 |
4.950 |
3.500 |
-26.97 |
61.97 |
14 |
21 |
|
20 |
6 |
19.00 |
1.673 |
.683 |
17.24 |
20.76 |
17 |
21 |
|
21 |
7 |
21.14 |
2.035 |
.769 |
19.26 |
23.03 |
18 |
24 |
|
22 |
4 |
19.50 |
.577 |
.289 |
18.58 |
20.42 |
19 |
20 |
|
23 |
7 |
20.29 |
2.360 |
.892 |
18.10 |
22.47 |
17 |
22 |
|
24 |
4 |
23.25 |
1.708 |
.854 |
20.53 |
25.97 |
21 |
25 |
|
25 |
3 |
23.00 |
1.000 |
.577 |
20.52 |
25.48 |
22 |
24 |
|
26 |
1 |
28.00 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
28 |
28 |
|
27 |
2 |
26.50 |
.707 |
.500 |
20.15 |
32.85 |
26 |
27 |
|
Total |
51 |
19.27 |
4.162 |
.583 |
18.10 |
20.45 |
11 |
28 |
|
Test of Homogeneity of Variances |
|||
|
bCPVI_Success |
|||
|
Levene Statistic |
df1 |
df2 |
Sig. |
|
3.348a |
11 |
36 |
.003 |
|
a. Groups with only one case are ignored in computing the test of homogeneity of variance for bCPVI_Success. |
|||
ANCOVA
|
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects |
|||||
|
Dependent Variable: pCPVI_Success |
|||||
|
Source |
Type III Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
Corrected Model |
128.225a |
2 |
64.113 |
4.600 |
.015 |
|
Intercept |
16.256 |
1 |
16.256 |
1.166 |
.286 |
|
bCPVI_Importance |
127.874 |
1 |
127.874 |
9.175 |
.004 |
|
Group |
.684 |
1 |
.684 |
.049 |
.826 |
|
Error |
668.951 |
48 |
13.936 |
|
|
|
Total |
21680.000 |
51 |
|
|
|
|
Corrected Total |
797.176 |
50 |
|
|
|
|
a. R Squared = .161 (Adjusted R Squared = .126) |
|||||
The descriptive table shows the various means between bCPVI_Success and pCPVI_Success. The ANOVA table summarizes the differences between the means. The p-value for the ANOVA outcome stands at 0.826, which is an implication that the difference between bCPVI_Success and pCPVI_Success is not statistically significant.
4.3 Conclusion
The results suggest that there are no significant differences between the treatment and control groups for the CPVI importance, CPVI success, PANAS positive, and PANAS negative. The subsequent chapter presents a detailed analysis and discussion of the results.
Chapter Five
Discussion and Conclusion
5.1 Introduction
This chapter entails a discussion of the results through the lens of the literature review findings and analysis of the correlational trend. The study aimed at examining the efficacy of value affirmation exercise on mood and success in engagement in different activities. The results determined that no changes in mood can happen. The areas of focus in the current chapter include discussion of the population demographics, CPVI importance, CPVI Success, PANAS negative, and PANAS positive. The chapter ends with a discussion of study recommendations.
5.2 Discussion on Demographics
The value affirmation exercise aimed to gather opinions from adults not exceeding 65 years of age. The diversity in participants’ age shows that the selected sample adequately represented the targeted population. The diverse age groups enabled the collection of distinct opinions regarding the study subject. Also, gender plays a vital role in the diversification of opinions regarding various research subjects. The study of the effect of value affirmation on the mood and success of participants stands to yield varied responses from different genders. The current study integrated 60.8% males and 39.2% females, a slight deviation from the point of balance. The gender balance formed a firm basis for collecting unique and diverse opinions from the participants. Finally, the research participants were divided into treatment and control groups. The treatment group comprised 49% of the participants, while the control group comprised 51% of the participants. The balance between these groups enabled the researcher to perform the Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) tests adequately, creating a clear distinction between the baseline and post-test groups. The demographic results met the desired threshold for gathering data on the effects of value affirmation exercise on positive and negative mood and success.
5.3 Discussion of the Test Results
The experiment was administered through two sets of questionnaires – CPVI and PANAS. The results of each questionnaire can be analyzed to provide a clear perspective of the outcomes.
5.3.1 The CPVI Importance and Success
The CPVI tool required the participants to consider how they wanted to live their lives. A set of values affirmations were then provided to enable them to express the importance and level of success in conforming to the values. The questionnaires were administered to both groups, and the results were recorded at the pre- and post-test levels. The results reveal that value affirmation exercise has no impact on mood changes and levels of success in integrating the values. The participants’ responses showed that despite considering the values as necessary, they could not successfully implement them in research.
5.3.2 PANAS Negative and PANAS Positive
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS-SF) tool constitutes a tool with positive and negative values. The mean outcomes revealed a distinction between the responses for positive and negative values at the baseline and post-test levels. The analysis of COVARIANCE showed that the negative and positive responses for both the treatment and control groups lacked statistical significance. A conclusion can be made that even after a week of value affirmation, there was no change in the moods and level of success in the integration of values among the participants.
5.3.3 Analysis of the Results
The study outcomes are consistent with the observations made in the literature review that value affirmation exercises lack the significant impact on mood. The majority of the journal articles with empirical tests showed a lack of correlation between value affirmation and changes in mood or success in the implementation of values. Relatively, a few studies supported the use of value affirmation exercise in mood improvement. This section delves into the various arguments presented in justification of the outcomes.
The theoretical models spanning the self-affirmation theory and the Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) model of stress and coping provided a blueprint through which the concept can be analyzed. The CPVI importance and success questionnaire responses can be analyzed through the lens of the two theories to interpret the responses of the participants in both the pre- and post-test outcomes. Based on the Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) model, the participants could have appraised their current situations and established the likely impacts. The coping mechanism then determined the coping strategy, which included the ranks attached to the given values. The scores for the pre- and post-test results reveal the coping mechanisms that the participants considered useful to manage the situation. In the case of Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS-SF), the responses stemmed from the participants’ perceptions of their prevailing challenges alongside the perceived effective coping mechanism. The scores to affirmations such as interested, excited, or proud depended on the extent to which the participants perceived them effective in mitigating their stressful situations.
The self-affirmation theory also provides a basis upon which the actions of the respondents can be explained. The inherent motivation to ensure self-integrity, become virtuous, and be in a position to predict positive outcomes of the situations led to the participant responses (Graham-Rowe et al., 2019). In the context of the CPVI questionnaire, the participants sought to transform their attitudes in defense of their self-integrity. A similar case occurred with the responses in the PANAS-SF questionnaires, where the ranking of the responses depended on the need for self-integrity and improvement in personal thoughts (Shin et al., 2019). The current study sought to determine the effect of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success. The study hypothesis stated that:
H0 – There is no significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
H1 – There is a significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
The findings of the randomized study revealed that no significant difference existed between the experimental and control groups in each case. The null hypothesis is, therefore, accepted in the study.
H0 – There is no significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
H1 – There is a significant impact of values affirmation exercise on mood and values success
The outcome of the research study strongly correlates with the literature review findings. Akin to the case depicted in the reviewed literature, the relationship between the value affirmation exercise and the significant cognitive processes such as moods and value success remains unclear.
5.4 Conclusion
The findings of the study point at a weak link between value affirmation exercises and mood and value success. The self-affirmation exercises have minimal effects on the positive or negative moods or value success on individuals of different ages. Therefore, unclear findings necessitate further research on the issue.
5.5 Recommendations
- Future research should incorporate larger sample size to increase the statistical power of the study
- More thorough research should be conducted on the effects of value affirmation on mood and value success to minimize the existing inconsistencies in the findings.
References
1257
