Effect of Internal Locus of Control on Anxiety-Related Stress - Dissertation Example

?Middlesex Department of Psychology Application for Ethical Approval Summary of application (researcher to complete) Roxanne Mahfouz Student number: M00303530 Degree: Psychology with Criminology UG Title of proposal: Investigating relationship between locus of control, self-efficacy, and anxiety and their influence on students Performance Research area & methodology (put an X in as many boxes as apply) Clinical Cognition + Emotion x Developmental Forensic Health Not health Occupational Psycho physiological Social / Psychosocial Sport + Exercise Empirical/Experimental Questionnaire-based x Qualitative Not qualitative Analysis of existing data Source Are there any sensitive elements to this study (delete as appropriate)? NO If you are unclear about what this means in relation to your research please discuss with your Supervisor first Does the study involve ANY of the following? Clinical populations; Children (under 16 years); Vulnerable adults such as individuals with mental or physical health problems, prisoners, vulnerable elderly, young offenders; Political, ethnic or religious groups/minorities; Sexually explicit material / issues relating to sexuality; Mood induction; Deception NO If the study involves any of the first three groups above, the researcher may need CRB (police check). PG students are expected to have CRB. UG students: have you discussed this matter with your supervisor? NO Is this a resubmission / amended application? NO If so, you must attach the original application with the review decision and comments (you do not need to re-attach materials etc if the resubmission does not concern alterations to these). Please note that in the case of complex and voluminous applications, it is the responsibility of the applicant to identify the amended parts of the resubmission. By submitting this form you confirm that: You are aware that any modifications to the design or method of the proposal will require resubmission; all materials, documents and data relating to this proposal will be kept by you until completion of your studies at Middlesex, in compliance with confidentiality guidelines. (i.e., only you and your supervisor will be able to access the data); you will provide all original paper and electronic data to the supervisor named on this form on completion of the research / dissertation submission; you have read and understood the British Psychological Society’s Code of Ethics and Conduct, and Code of Human Research Ethics. 2 Reviewer’s decision (ethics committee member to complete) APPROVE APPROVE SUBJECT TO LETTERS OF AGREEMENT FROM COLLABORATING INSTITUTION(S) REVISE AND RESUBMIT NOT APPROVED For Revise and Resubmit decisions, particular attention should be paid to the following: Section 1 details incomplete Clarity of research proposal Professionalism and presentation of participant documentation (Information sheet, informed consent, debriefing) Completeness of ethical approval form (individual questions requiring clarification may be identified here) Risk assessment 2a FOR DOUBLE REVIEW ONLY – Reviewer 2 APPROVE APPROVE SUBJECT TO LETTERS OF AGREEMENT FROM COLLABORATING INSTITUTION(S) REVISE AND RESUBMIT NOT APPROVED For Revise and Resubmit decisions, particular attention should be paid to the following: Section 1 details incomplete Clarity of research proposal Professionalism and presentation of participant documentation (Information sheet, informed consent, debriefing) Completeness of ethical approval form (individual questions requiring clarification may be identified here) Risk assessment 2b OFFICE: FOR RISK ASSESSMENT, letter/s of acceptance matching FRA1 received (specify): PART date___________________________ from _________________________________ ALL date ___________________________ 2c Any additional comments from reviewer(s) 3 Background and Aims This study aims at examining the relationship between locus of control, self-efficacy, anxiety and students Performance. Locus of control is a personality psychology theory that refers to the extent an individual believe that they can control events that affect them (Demirkan and Selcan, 2006). Locus of control (LOC) is a dimensional construct that refers to a person’s ability to control events in their lives (Demirkan and Selcan, 2006). In other words the locus of control represents the degree to which an individual perceive reinforcing events, prizes, successes or failures in their lives to be the result of their own actions (an "internal" LOC) or fate and chance (an "external" LOC; Bandura, 1986; Rotter, 1966). While the control of a person’s control of their own life is dependent on chance, fate and powerful external forces, explained as external control, maintaining the control of an individual’s life events is described as internal control (Rotter, 1966). When the environmental conditions are insufficient to explain a person’s success or failures, locus of control is utilized to make the circumstances clear. For example, different individual perceive events (good or bad) differently. These different ways are based on either internal locus of control or external locus of control. Self-efficacy is a person's ability to judge about their ability to perform a particular activity.  In this case, it refers to the student's "I can" belief or likewise the "I cannot" belief .  Self efficacy is different from self-esteem, in that self esteem reflects on how students self worth or value, self-efficacy on the other hand reflects on the confidence of a student in relation to how they are able to perform specific tasks. A student may have high self-efficacy in one area while having a low self-efficacy in another area. For example, high self-efficacy in mathematics may not coincide with high self-efficacy in literature. However, it is important to note that having high self-efficacy does not essentially mean that the person believe they will be successful in accomplishing that task. Self-efficacy is an indication of how strong a student believes that they have the potential and skills to do well, they may also tend to believe other factors will hinder them from doing well. A growing body researching on human behavior reveals that there is a positive relationship between students' self-efficacy and their academic performance (Gulveren, 2008). My goal in this project is to investigate this relationship through conducting a research in my school. The expected result in this area is that students with low self-efficacy toward a task are more likely to be unsuccessful in their academic performance. Those with high self-efficacy are expected to be the high performers because they tend to work hard and persist longer in the face of difficulties. Self-efficacy thus influences the activities students select, the level of effort they put in the task and how persistent they are when faced with difficulties. Anxiety is the displeasing feeling of fear and concern, usually induced by psychological stress (Mamlin, 2001). Psychological stress is the feeling of mental strain and pressurei, which can be rooted from a variety of sources, ranging from crises and catastrophes such as natural disasters, to everyday hassles such as making decisions or meeting deadlines (Craske, 2010). Typical symptoms of the anxiety caused by psychological stress restlessness and concentration problems. Anxiety can also manifest itself physically, in the form of headaches, shortness of breath and heart palpitationsii. Anxiety covers four general areas; physical tension, physical symptoms, dissociative anxiety mental apprehensioniii. Mental apprehension is the anxiety caused by an upcoming event, which causes a psychological or physical stress (Hattie, et al. 1997). Events such as interviews or even certain life events such as marriages can induce mental apprehension. In most cases, anxiety can be attributed to environmental factors, but there is also evidence that suggests genetic predispositions can also cause of anxiety; for instance the PLXNA2 gene. My research will seek to find how much control students (from each year of study) have over their environment and their academic performance. This will be accomplished by giving the students questionnaires to fill out. By finding evaluating the answers that will filled by the students, an association or lack of it between these variables will be established. Based on the above literature it is predicted that student grades will be related to LOC, anxiety and self-efficacy. Aims & Hypotheses/Research Questions: My research, has tried to answer the research questions as stated below. These questions are designed to express the relationships between locus of control and academic learning performance of students. The questions are as follows; Research Question 1: What are the effects of locus of control, self-efficacy, and anxiety on the academic performance of the students? Research Question 2: Is there any correlation between the attitudes of students interviewed and their academic performance ? Research Question 3: Is there any relationship between academic performance of students and locus of control (internal and external factors), self-efficacy, and anxiety? Participants: I will be surveying at least 90 undergraduate students studying at Middlesex University (30 from each year of study). They will be approached and requested to participate in the study. Materials I will use one questionnaire that will contain three sections namely the self efficacy scale, LOC questionnaire and the anxiety scale. The following LOC scale will determine the correlation between the LOC and the grade point average; Internal LOC 0 14 28 External LOC GPA 4.0 2.0 0.0 1. My grades reflect the effort I put in class (Fill T or F in the box) 2. I came to the university because it was expected of me 3. I have determine my career goals 4. I have a knack for writing 5. I never write well no matter how hard I try 6. I would choose units of the course because it is easy to get good grades 7. I find it very challenging to make a change of the impression the professor makes for me 8. There are some subjects I can never do well in them 9. Some students get free rides in the university classes 10. Sometimes I feel hopeless of changing my situation 11. I never feel hopeless, I feel there is something I can do to improve my situation 12. I will never allow social activities to affect my studies 13. There are other important matters in my life than getting good grades 14. Studying everyday for me is important 15. For some subjects I do not find it important to attend the lectures 16. I consider myself highly motivated to succeed in life 17. I am an above average student 18. Finishing assignment is important for me 19. The university curriculum largely determines what I do than what I want to learn 20. I am known for making decisions not taken serious by others 21. I am distracted very fast 22. I can be easily talked out when revising my notes 23. I get anxious sometime and then I am unable to accomplish my tasks 24. I often feel that some bad thing may happen to me 25. I keep changing my career goals 26. I feel that someday I will make a recognizable contribution to the world if I continue working hard 27. I am motivated by this drive to be a significant person in the world 28. There are more important things in my life besides graduating from the university Beck Anxiety Inventory will be used to determine the anxiety level of students as illustrated below. Score Range 0.9 Minimal 10.16 Mild 17.29 Moderate 30.63 Severe The following self-efficacy scale will be used; Very Untrue 1 2 3 4 5 6 Very True 7 The following question will be used; How much confidence do you have that you can successfully (Grade appropriately from 1-7 in the box): 1. I know how to schedule my time to accomplish my tasks. 2. I take more than 80% of notes in class 3. I find revising a challenge 4. I perform well in tests 5. I find my academic work interesting and absorbing 6. I am very capable of succeeding in this university 7. I am a very good student Procedures: The survey will be conducted by approaching the students, giving them the information sheet, which explains what my study is about, and then asking them to fill a consent form. Thereafter, I will give each participating student a questionnaire to fill out after which I will give him/her debriefing sheet and thank him/her for his/her time. Analysis I will use correlation analyses and multiple regression to find a relationship between the variables. References Benjamin J Sadock, M.D., Harold I. Kaplan, Virginia A Sadock, M.D., (2007), Kaplan & Sadock's Synopsis of Psychiatry: Behavioral Sciences/Clinical Psychiatry, 10th edition, Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Berzoff Joan, (2011), Inside Out and Outside In: Psychodynamic Clinical Theory and Psychopathology in Contemporary Multicultural Contexts, Third edition, United Kingdom, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Craske, M.G.,Kircanski,K.,Epstein, A., Wittchen, H. U., Pine, D.S.,Lewis-Fernandez, R.,Hinton, D. E. (2010) Panic disorder: A review of DSM-IV Panic Disorder and proposals for DSM-V,Depression and Anxiety,27,93-112. David Healy, Psychiatric Drugs Explained, Section 5: Management of Anxiety, Elsevier Health Sciences, 2008, pp. 136–137 Gulveren, H. (2008). Investigation of Relations Between Internal-External Locus of Control Trait Anger, Anger Expression Styles and Intelligence in 12 Grade High School Students. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Maltepe University, Social Sciences Institute, Istanbul. Hans, T. (2000).  A meta-analysis of the effects of adventure programming on locus of control.  Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 30(1),33-60. Hattie, J. A., Marsh, H. W., Neill, J. T. & Richards, G. E. (1997). Adventure Education and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experiences that have a lasting effect. Review of Educational Research, 67, 43-87. Joan Berzoff, 2011, Inside Out and Outside In: Psychodynamic Clinical Theory and Psychopathology in Contemporary Multicultural Contexts, Third edition, United Kingdom, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Mamlin, N., Harris, K. R., Case, L. P. (2001). A Methodological Analysis of Research on Locus of Control and Learning Disabilities: Rethinking a Common Assumption. Journal of Special Education, Winter. Marsh, H. W. & Richards, G. E. (1987). The multidimensionality of the Rotter I-E Scale and its higher order structure: An application of confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 39-69. Nunnally, C. J. (1997). Psychometric Theory. New York: MacGraw-Hill. Passer Michael, Ronald Smith, Nigel Holt, Andy Bremner, Ed Sutherland, Michael Vliek (2009) McGrath Hill Education, UK: McGrath Hill Companies Inc. p 790 Sven Ake Chistianson, (1992) The Handbook of Emotion and Memory: Research and Theory, Hilsdale, New Jersey, Lawrence Elbaum Associates. Zung WW (1971). "A rating instrument for anxiety disorders". Psychosomatics, 12, 371–379.  4 Ethical questions Yes/No 1 - Will you inform participants of their right to withdraw from the research at any time, without penalty? Yes 2 - Will you provide a full debriefing at the end of the data collection phase? Yes 3 - Will you be available to discuss the study with participants, if necessary, to monitor any negative effects or misconceptions? Yes 4 - Under the Data Protection Act, participant information is confidential unless otherwise agreed in advance. Will participant anonymity be guaranteed? Yes 5 - Is this research or part of it going to be conducted in a language other than English (note, full translations of all non-English materials must be provided and attached to this document)? No 6 - Is this research to be conducted only at Middlesex University? (If not, a completed Risk Assessment form - see Section 8 – must be completed, and permission from any hosting or collaborative institution must be obtained by letter or email, and appended to this document, before data collection can commence). Yes Are there any ethical issues that concern you about this particular piece of research, not covered elsewhere on this form? If so please outline them below. No 5 Information sheet Name: Roxanne Mahfouz Adm. No: M00303530 Date: Middlesex University Department of Psychology STUDENT INFORMATION SHEET I am conducting this research as a partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree course in Psychology with Criminology. The research involves investigating the relationship between locus of control, self-efficacy, and anxiety and their influence on students Performance. Each participating student will therefore be asked to fill a questionnaire on LOC, anxiety, self-efficacy and they will be asked about their grades. Participation in this research is voluntary. You do not have to take part if you do not want to. If you decide to take part, you may withdraw at any time without giving a reason. An Ethics Committee reviews all proposals for research using human participants before they can proceed. The Middlesex Psychology Department’s Ethics Committee have reviewed this proposal. Thank You. NB. All responses will be confidential and anonymous What is the purpose of the research? The purpose of my study was to investigate the impact of locus of control and self efficacy among students in my university and the perceived influence of the control on their academic performance. Reflecting on the purpose of the study, participants were taught on its importance and the reason they should take part in the research. What will happen to me if I take part? The time frame for any participant involved in the research will depend on the task assigned. Given that the participants will be interviewed at Middlesex University, they should be prepared to complete the questionnaire as well as respond to it the interview accordingly. Various research methods will be included in the research such as document review and observation. What are the possible disadvantages to taking part? Different areas tend to be prone to risks, and hence the necessity of having appropriate interventions and measures which will be adopted in the prevention of such risks is important. The entire research may be time consuming and so participants should realize that they will have to leave their duties to fully concentrate on the research. “Participation in this research is entirely voluntary. You do not have to take part if you do not want to. If you decide to take part you may withdraw at any time without giving a reason.” Who is organising and funding the research? Middlesex University What will happen to the data? When doing research, information security is important because it ensures all data and information is secure. Who has reviewed the study? “All proposals for research using human participants are reviewed by an Ethics Committee before they can proceed. The Middlesex Psychology Department’s Ethics Committee have reviewed this proposal.” 6 Informed consent Middlesex University School of Health and Education Psychology Department Written Informed Consent Title of study and academic year: Degree: Psychology with Criminology Researcher’s name: Roxanne Mahfouz Supervisor’s name and email: I have understood the details of the research as explained to me by the researcher, and confirm that I have consented to act as a participant. I have been given contact details for the researcher in the information sheet. I understand that my participation is entirely voluntary, the data collected during the research will not be identifiable, and I have the right to withdraw from the project at any time without any obligation to explain my reasons for doing so. I further understand that the data I provide may be used for analysis and subsequent publication, and I provide my consent that this may occur. __________________________ ___________________________ Print name Sign Name date: _________________________ To the participant: Data may be inspected by the Chair of the Psychology Ethics panel and the Chair of the School of Health and Education Ethics committee of Middlesex University, if required by institutional audits about the correctness of procedures. Although this would happen in strict confidentiality, please tick here if you do not wish your data to be included in audits: ___________ 7 Debriefing This is my final year project to investigate the relationship between the student grade, self-efficacy, locus of Control and anxiety. You will be asked to fill questionnaires and the results will be scored in the appropriate scale. If you wish to know more about the area of research, have any queries or concerns about your rights as a participant in this experiment, please contact: Jean Waugh (tutor): J.waugh@live.mdx.ac.uk Roxanne Mahfouz: rm1102@live.mdx.ac.uk 8 INDEPENDENT FIELD/LOCATION WORK RISK ASSESSMENT FRA1 This proforma is applicable to, and must be completed in advance for, the following field/location work situations: 1. All field/location work undertaken independently by individual students, either in the UK or overseas, including in connection with proposition module or dissertations. Supervisor to complete with student(s). 2. All field/location work undertaken by postgraduate students. Supervisors to complete with student(s). 3. Field/location work undertaken by research students. Student to complete with supervisor. 4. Field/location work/visits by research staff. Researcher to complete with Research Centre Head. 5. Essential information for students travelling abroad can be found on www.fco.gov.uk FIELD/LOCATION WORK DETAILS Name ………………………………………………. Student No Research Centre (staff only)……………………………………….. Supervisor …………………………………………. Degree course ………………………………………………………. Telephone numbers and name of next of kin who may be contacted in the event of an accident NEXT OF KIN Name ………………………………………………………………………….. Phone ………………………………………………………………………….. Physical or psychological limitations to carrying out the proposed field/location work ……….………….………….…………..………………………………………. ……….………….………….…………..………………………………………. ………………………………………………………………………………….. Any health problems (full details) Which may be relevant to proposed field/location work activity in case of emergencies? ……….………….………….…………..………………………………………. ……….………….………….…………..………………………………………. Locality (Country and Region) ………………………………………………………………………………….. ……….………….………….…………..………………………………………. Travel Arrangements ………………………………………………………………………………….. ……….………….………….…………..………………………………………. NB: Comprehensive travel and health insurance must always be obtained for independent overseas field/location work. ……….………….………….…………..………………………………………. ………………………………………………………………………………….. Dates of Travel and Field/location work ……….………….………….…………..……………………………………………….………….………….…………..……………………… Examples of Potential Hazards : Adverse weather: exposure (heat, sunburn, lightening, wind, hypothermia) Terrain: rugged, unstable, fall, slip, trip, debris, and remoteness. Traffic: pollution. Demolition/building sites, assault, getting lost, animals, disease. Working on/near water: drowning, swept away, disease (weils disease, hepatitis, malaria, etc), parasites’, flooding, tides and range. Lone working: difficult to summon help, alone or in isolation, lone interviews. Dealing with the public: personal attack, causing offence/intrusion, misinterpreted, political, ethnic, cultural, socio-economic differences/problems. Known or suspected criminal offenders. Safety Standards (other work organizations, transport, hotels, etc), working at night, areas of high crime. Ill health: personal considerations or vulnerabilities, pre-determined medical conditions (asthma, allergies, fitting) general fitness, disabilities, persons suited to task. Articles and equipment: inappropriate type and/or use, failure of equipment, insufficient training for use and repair, injury. Substances (chemicals, plants, bio- hazards, waste): ill health - poisoning, infection, irritation, burns, cuts, eye-damage. Manual handling: lifting, carrying, moving large or heavy items, physical unsuitability for task PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION VERY CAREFULLY Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment List the localities to be visited or specify routes to be followed (Col. 1). For each locality, enter the potential hazards that may be identified beyond those accepted in everyday life. Add details giving cause for concern (Col. 2). If no hazard can be identified beyond those of everyday life, enter ‘NONE’. 1. LOCALITY/ROUTE (specify here the exact name and address of each locality/organization) 2. POTENTIAL HAZARDS The University Field/location work code of Practice booklet provides practical advice that should be followed in planning and conducting field/location work. Risk Minimisation/Control Measures PLEASE READ VERY CAREFULLY For each hazard identified (Col 2), list the precautions/control measures in place or that will be taken (Col 3) to "reduce the risk to acceptable levels", and the safety equipment (Col 5) that will be employed. Assuming the safety precautions/control methods that will be adopted (Col. 3), categorise the field/location work risk for each location/route as negligible, low, moderate or high (Col. 4). Risk increases with both the increasing likelihood of an accident and the increasing severity of the consequences of an accident. An acceptable level of risk is: a risk which can be safely controlled by person taking part in the activity using the precautions and control measures noted including the necessary instructions, information and training relevant to that risk. The resultant risk should not be significantly higher than that encountered in everyday life. Examples of control measures/precautions: Providing adequate training, information & instructions on field/location work tasks and the safe and correct use of any equipment, substances and personal protective equipment. Inspection and safety check of any equipment prior to use. Assessing individuals fitness and suitability to environment and tasks involved. Appropriate clothing, environmental information consulted and advice followed (weather conditions, tide times etc.). Seek advice on harmful plants, animals & substances that may be encountered, including information and instruction on safe procedures for handling hazardous substances. First aid provisions, inoculations, individual medical requirements, logging of location, route and expected return times of lone workers. Establish emergency procedures (means of raising an alarm, back up arrangements). Working with colleagues (pairs). Lone working is not permitted where the risk of physical or verbal violence is a realistic possibility. Training in interview techniques and avoiding /defusing conflict, following advice from local organizations, wearing of clothing unlikely to cause offence or unwanted attention. Interviews in neutral locations. Checks on Health and Safety standards & welfare facilities of travel, accommodation and outside organizations. Seek information on social/cultural/political status of field/location work area. Examples of Safety Equipment: Hardhats, goggles, gloves, harness, waders, whistles, boots, mobile phone, ear protectors, bright fluorescent clothing (for roadside work), dust mask, etc. If a proposed locality has not been visited previously, give your authority for the risk assessment stated or indicate that your visit will be preceded by a thorough risk assessment. 3. PRECAUTIONS/CONTROL MEASURES 4. RISK ASSESSMENT (low, moderate, high) 5. SAFETY/EQUIPMENT PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AND SIGN AS APPROPRIATE DECLARATION: The undersigned have assessed the activity and the associated risks and declare that there is no significant risk or that the risk will be controlled by the method(s) listed above/over. Those participating in the work have read the assessment and will put in place precautions/control measures identified. NB: Risk should be constantly reassessed during the field/location work period and additional precautions taken or field/location work discontinued if the risk is seen to be unacceptable. Signature of Field/location worker (Student/Staff) ……….……………..………….…………..…………… Date ……….……………..… Signature of Student Supervisor ……….……………..………….…………..…………… Date …….……………..…... APPROVAL: (ONE ONLY) Signature of Director of Programmes (undergraduate students only) ……….……………..………….…………..…………… Date ……….……………..… Signature of Research Degree Co-ordinator or Director of Programmes (Postgraduate) ……….……………..………….…………..…………… Date ……….……………..… Signature of Research Centre Head (for staff field/location workers) ……….……………..………….…………..…………… Date ……….……………..… FIELD/LOCATION WORK CHECK LIST 1. Ensure that all members of the field party possess the following attributes (where relevant) at a level appropriate to the proposed activity and likely field conditions: Safety knowledge and training? Awareness of cultural, social and political differences? Physical and psychological fitness and disease immunity, protection and awareness? Personal clothing and safety equipment? Suitability of field/location workers to proposed tasks? 2. Have all the necessary arrangements been made and information/instruction gained, and have the relevant authorities been consulted or informed with regard to: Visa, permits? Legal access to sites and/or persons? Political or military sensitivity of the proposed topic, its method or location? Weather conditions, tide times and ranges? Vaccinations and other health precautions? Civil unrest and terrorism? Arrival times after journeys? Safety equipment and protective clothing? Financial and insurance implications? Crime risk? Health insurance arrangements? Emergency procedures? Transport use? Travel and accommodation arrangements? Important information for retaining evidence of completed risk assessments: Once the risk assessment is completed and approval gained the supervisor should retain this form and issue a copy of it to the field/location worker participating on the field course/work. In addition the approver must keep a copy of this risk assessment in an appropriate Health and Safety file. Read More