Impact of Resilience Training on Stress and Life Satisfaction - Lab Report Example

Impact of Resilience Training on Stress and Life Satisfaction Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Abstract The study aimed to establish the effectiveness of resilience training on stress and satisfaction. A mixed study design made of two independent variables phase made of two levels, pre-training and post training and practice method made of two levels (practice method; traditional and technologically enhanced. The dependent variables were stress coping and life satisfaction. The study hypothesis was training will be effective such that those individuals who participated in the training will have benefits leading to reduced stress and improved life satisfaction. The study also sought to establish whether the hypothesis that technologically enhanced practice methods would yield more benefits to the participants and that participants using the technologically –enhanced method would register greater improvement with time than those using traditional method Introduction To minimize the negative effects of stress there is need for training to individuals working in organizations as well as to students in various institutions of learning. Stress training have been identified as a cognitive behaviour intervention that has been used in the recent past to minimize the effects of stress (Kumpfer, 1999). Analysis was conducted before training (pre-training) and after training (post-training) to ascertain effectiveness of training on the levels of stress. Results shown that, stress training was an effective method of coping with anxiety and improved performance of individuals under stress. The dependent variables were stress coping and life satisfaction. In the recent past higher stress level are due to changing working environment as well as the demands of to meet the over increasing technological advancement. The implications of stress has been found to be more common to those individuals who carry on tasks in high technology setting or students whose work is too demanding (Cooper et al, 2009). Therefore, the study identified that there is need for training which as a cognitive behaviour approach developed to manage stress in early 1970 as intervention programs for phobia. Since then, stress training has been indicated as the best program to reduce the effects of stress in an array of settings. However, Kumpfer (1999) noted that studies on stress training lacked thorough evaluation and most the research carried out did not contain empirical reports and mostly concentrated on case studies. Therefore, earlier studies on stress training did not have suitable controls. This study presents an analysis on the importance of training and stress coping. The main purpose of this study is to ascertain the efficiency of training on stress, give a summary on the effectiveness of stress training and document the overall effectiveness of this identified approach as well as identifying under which circumstances the stress training can be most effective. Stress training was initially developed as a program in hospitals to help patients cope with physical pain, phobic reactions as well as the anger (Rothwell et al, 2004). However, stress training have been employed as an all –inclusive intervention in managing stress and have been used for an array of applications such as occupational stress and speech anxiety (Coultas et al, 2012). Resilience training is important and was designed to convey skills to improve the resistance to stress. Individuals are well informed of the stressors through training and how they can cope in case of depression and its objective is to arm the individual with appropriate skills to cope with stress. The stress training takes into account three stage training intervention. The first phase of training is the conceptualization where its main goal is to help the individual to ascertain the nature of stress and the negative effects of stress. The second stage encompasses imparting of skills and rehearsals that are necessary for stress management (Lally & Gardner, 2013). The main aim of this stage is to enhance stress coping methods and improve the individual’s ability to handle the effects of stress. The last phase of training involves application of already acquired skills in coping with stressful situations (Doherty, 2007). However, stress training may differ based on the circumstances that cause stress and the type of stress itself. Even though some studies document that stress training is effective other results from different studies according to Coultas et al, (2012) seem to be equivocal. He argues is practically impossible to investigate from a narrative literature review the effectiveness of this approach of stress training to reduce the negative effects of stress on individuals. The study sought to test three main hypotheses; Hypotheses 1: Training will be effective such that participation in the training will be beneficial leading to improvements across time. Hypotheses 2: The use of technologically enhanced practice methods will be more effective than traditional practice methods. Hypothesis 3: There will be greater improvement across time for those in the technologically enhanced practice methods condition compared to the traditional practice methods condition. The study also sought to answer to the following questions; Did these aspects of individual functioning vary because of training? Were these measures of coping and well-being affected by practice method employed? Studies of this stress management intervention have demonstrated a beneficial effect on depression, general mental health, and propensity to innovation. Mediators of change in emotion-focused and problem-focused worksite stress management interventions. The study was designed to build on prior work by focusing on the impact of reinforcing skills development and generalization once participants leave the training environment. Thus, the focus was on training transfer. Method Participants The number of participants was 73 in Pre-training and 72 in Post-Training. However, the number of participants that could be matched in both the pre-training and post-training phases was 65 that was inclusive of 14 males, 51 females). Information about the age of these participants is provided below. Table 2: AGE N Valid 65 Missing 0 Mean 22.5846 Median 22.0000 Mode 22.00 Std. Deviation 4.05005 Participants were provided with five statements with which you may agree or disagree based on the 1-7 scale below, where each participant was required to indicate his or her agreement by placing the appropriate number in the line preceding that item in an open an honest manner. The main dependent variables are stress, coping, efficacy, life satisfaction, and compliance with embedding the learning. Design The design used was a 2 (Phase: pre-training, post-training) by 2 (Practice method: traditional, technologically enhanced) mixed model design. Allocation to the traditional versus technologically enhanced conditions was initially random, but some people allocated to the technologically enhanced condition had to be reallocated to the Traditional condition, as they did not have a Smartphone. Table 1: A table showing a 2 by 2 design Traditional (pen and paper) Technological enhanced (App.) Pre-training Post-training In the description of traditional and technologically enhanced practice/transfer methods, Students were allocated to two methods of skills practice. Those who were in the technology arm of the design were provided a Smartphone Application that could send reminders each day to students to log their stress and stress level. They also prompted users to enter details about stressors, generated coping suggestions for the students based on what they entered on the log, contained information about coping strategies including access to audio recordings where relevant and enabled the participants to see their progress over time, to track changes in their stress levels. Materials and Procedure All participants completed the pre-training survey and then were part of a training program to build resilience. Part of the training involved reinforcement and training transfer. Participants were encouraged to practice skills introduced in the training course through the completion of follow-up exercises. These exercises were either completed using traditional methods or technologically enhanced methods. Three weeks after the pre-training survey was completed participants completed the post-training survey. Participants attended a two-hour resilience-training workshop incorporating Psycho-education about the consequences of chronic stress and adaptive ways of coping in addition to the transactional model of stress. Results We conducted a median split on the stress scale to divide the sample into low stress and high stress participants at the pre-training phase. The impact of the independent variables Phase and Practice method has been examined for the variables AAQ-II and Life Satisfaction separately for low stress and high stress sub-samples. Dichotomized TIPSS Please identify the support tool that you were assigned to use for the past month. Smartphone Application Low Stress High Stress Total Paper Workbook 19 14 33 11 21 32 Total 30 35 65 DV 1 COPING AAQ-II: Means and standard deviations (in brackets) as a function of Phase and Delivery method. LOW STRESS (as assessed at pre-training) Traditional n=10 Technologically-enhanced N= 19 Total AAQ- II Pre-Training phase 66.5 18.84 18.03 (5.21) (10.09) Post-Training phase 14.6 16.52 15.86 (6.45) (8.66) 15.55 17.68 ANOVA output: Main effect Phase F(1,27) = 3.46, p = .07 (Ms: pre-training = 18.03, post-training = 15.86) Main effect Practice Method F(1, 27) = .03, p = .86 (Ms: traditional = 15.55, technology = 17.68) Interaction: Phase x Practice Method F(1, 27) = .48, p = .49 HIGH STRESS (as assessed at pre-training) Traditional N=21 Technologically- enhanced N=14 Total AAQ- II Pre-Training phase 25.29 27.00 25.97 (9.23) (7.28) Post-Training phase 22.67 23.57 23.02 (6.80) (6.30) Total 23.98 25.29 ANOVA output: Main effect Phase F(1,33) = 6.23, p < .05 (Ms: pre-training = 25.97, post-training = 23.02) Main effect Practice Method F(1, 33) = .32, p = .58 (Ms: traditional = 23.98, technology = 25.29). Interaction Phase x Practice Method F(1, 33) = .11, p = .74 DV 2 LIFE SATISFACTION: Means and standard deviations (in brackets) as a function of Phase and Delivery method LOW STRESS (as assessed at pre-training) Traditional n=10 Technologically-enhanced N= 19 Total Life Satisfaction Pre-Training phase 28.20 25.79 26.62 (4.94) (4.43) Post-Training phase 29.90 24.90 26.62 (3.51) (5.74) Total 29.05 25.35 ANOVA output: Main effect Phase F(1,27) = .25, p = .62 (Ms: pre-training = 26.62, post-training = 26.62) Main effect Practice Method F(1, 27) = 4.65, p < .04 (Ms: traditional = 29.05, technology = 25.35) Interaction Phase x Practice Method F(1, 27) = 2.58, p = .12 HIGH STRESS (as assessed at pre-training) Traditional n=21 Technologically-enhanced N= 14 Total Life Satisfaction Pre-Training phase 21.43 20.14 20.91 (6.59) (6.27) Post-Training phase 22.52 21.79 22.22 (7.02) (6.53) Total 21.98 20.97 ANOVA output: Main effect Phase F(1,33) = 4.33, p < .05 Ms: pre-training = 20.91, post-training = 22.22) Main effect Practice Method F(1, 33) = .21, p = .65 Ms: traditional = 21.98, technology = 20.97) Interaction Phase x Practice Method F(1, 33) = .17, p = .68 Discussion The study found out that the training was more effective for participants who reported high stress before the training. Analysis of variance of two samples made up of low and high stress participants during the pre and post training phase showed that the acceptance and action questionnaire-II score(AAQ=II) for individuals with high stress was lower regardless of phase or method. This indicated that the training was more impactful on high stress participants an indication of more psychological flexibility (Coultas & Grossman, 2012). The pattern was different when AAQ-II score for high and low stress participants was compared. The results showed that with time the impact on the flexibility for the high stress group was more pronounced than low stress group. For both the high and low stress group traditional method recorded, a higher AAQ-II score indicating it was more effective than the technologically enhanced method. This was inconsistent with hypothesis that the later was more effective than the former. For both samples, the practice method has insignificant impact on the responses and there was no salient interaction between practice method and phase. Resilience training has little impact on the low stress sample irrespective of the practice method used; the AAQ-II ANOVA score was 18.03 before the training and 15.86 after the training. Findings from the analyses on life satisfaction using ANOVA indicated that resilience training had no impact on participants in both phases, this is shown by the identical score of 26.62 in both pre and post training phase. The traditional practice method was more effective for the low stress groups as indicated by a higher score of 29.05 against the technologically enhanced method, which had a score of 25.35 (Wander & Robert, 2009). The pattern was different for the high stress sample, a higher life satisfaction was indicated during post training than pre training showing that the resilience training was effective and that it has a higher impact on life satisfaction for the high stress group of participants using traditional method registered more improvement than those using technologically –enhanced method. For both samples, there was no interaction between phase and delivery, which was inconsistent with the hypothesis that there would be greater improvements across time for participants using the technologically enhanced practice method compared to the traditional practice method condition. Resilience training has therefore been shown to reduce stress and increase life satisfaction, which is in accordance with study of Coultas and Grossman (2012) and behavioural and cognitive theory. Coultas and Grossman contend that resilience training can be an effective way of stress management (Coultas & Grossman, 2012). Their study showed that training could significantly reduce the level of anxiety and depression and thereby improving the life of an individual. Based on the precepts of the cognitive and behavioural theory, coping strategies play a crucial task in reducing stress levels in individuals and as a result improves the quality of psychological health and life in general. Based on precept cognitive and behavioural. The fact that the sample size was small may have given a wrong indication on the effectiveness of the resilience training. Additionally, allocation to the traditional and technologically –enhanced conditions was done randomly and when some participants allocated to technologically-enhanced condition had to be relocated to traditional method since they did not possess a Smartphone. This tilted the balance towards the traditional methods. In future, a more balanced and larger sample could be used to eliminate this limitation. The role played by training in reducing stress and improving life satisfaction is immense as has been shown in this study. References Cooper L, Valerie J and Bond W, (2009).Organizational stress Management: a Strategic Approach. Basingstoke: palgrave, Macmillan Coultas, C. W., Grossman, R. and Salas, E. (2012) Design, Delivery, Evaluation, and Transfer of Training Systems, in Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, Fourth Edition (ed G. Salvendy), John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA. Doherty, W. (2007). Crisis intervention training for disaster workers : an introduction.Michigan:Loving Healing Press Grossman, Rebecca and Salas, Eduardo, The Transfer of Training: What Really Matters (June 2011). International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 15, Issue 2, pp. 103-120, 2011. Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1841254 Kumpfer, K. L. (1999). 'Factors and processes contributing to resilience.' In Glantz & Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and development: Positive life adaptations. New York: Kluwer Academic. Lally, P., & Gardner, B., (2013) Promoting habit formation. Health Psychology. Review 7, S137-S158. Rothwell,J., Gerity, P. and Gaerther , A.(2004). Linking training to performance: a guide for workforce development professionals. Washington D.C: American Association of Community Colleges Tannenbaum, E. Kraiger, K. and Smith-Jentsch, K., (2012) the Science of Training and Development in Organizations: What matters in practice. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13, 74-101. Wander, A. And Robert, J. (2009). Workforce Training. London: Sage Read More

This study presents an analysis on the importance of training and stress coping. The main purpose of this study is to ascertain the efficiency of training on stress, give a summary on the effectiveness of stress training and document the overall effectiveness of this identified approach as well as identifying under which circumstances the stress training can be most effective. Stress training was initially developed as a program in hospitals to help patients cope with physical pain, phobic reactions as well as the anger (Rothwell et al, 2004).

However, stress training have been employed as an all –inclusive intervention in managing stress and have been used for an array of applications such as occupational stress and speech anxiety (Coultas et al, 2012). Resilience training is important and was designed to convey skills to improve the resistance to stress. Individuals are well informed of the stressors through training and how they can cope in case of depression and its objective is to arm the individual with appropriate skills to cope with stress.

The stress training takes into account three stage training intervention. The first phase of training is the conceptualization where its main goal is to help the individual to ascertain the nature of stress and the negative effects of stress. The second stage encompasses imparting of skills and rehearsals that are necessary for stress management (Lally & Gardner, 2013). The main aim of this stage is to enhance stress coping methods and improve the individual’s ability to handle the effects of stress.

The last phase of training involves application of already acquired skills in coping with stressful situations (Doherty, 2007). However, stress training may differ based on the circumstances that cause stress and the type of stress itself. Even though some studies document that stress training is effective other results from different studies according to Coultas et al, (2012) seem to be equivocal. He argues is practically impossible to investigate from a narrative literature review the effectiveness of this approach of stress training to reduce the negative effects of stress on individuals.

The study sought to test three main hypotheses; Hypotheses 1: Training will be effective such that participation in the training will be beneficial leading to improvements across time. Hypotheses 2: The use of technologically enhanced practice methods will be more effective than traditional practice methods. Hypothesis 3: There will be greater improvement across time for those in the technologically enhanced practice methods condition compared to the traditional practice methods condition.

The study also sought to answer to the following questions; Did these aspects of individual functioning vary because of training? Were these measures of coping and well-being affected by practice method employed? Studies of this stress management intervention have demonstrated a beneficial effect on depression, general mental health, and propensity to innovation. Mediators of change in emotion-focused and problem-focused worksite stress management interventions. The study was designed to build on prior work by focusing on the impact of reinforcing skills development and generalization once participants leave the training environment.

Thus, the focus was on training transfer. Method Participants The number of participants was 73 in Pre-training and 72 in Post-Training. However, the number of participants that could be matched in both the pre-training and post-training phases was 65 that was inclusive of 14 males, 51 females). Information about the age of these participants is provided below. Table 2: AGE N Valid 65 Missing 0 Mean 22.5846 Median 22.0000 Mode 22.00 Std. Deviation 4.05005 Participants were provided with five statements with which you may agree or disagree based on the 1-7 scale below, where each participant was required to indicate his or her agreement by placing the appropriate number in the line preceding that item in an open an honest manner.

Read More