![]() From an understanding of these structural and functional relationships, preventive and therapeutic intervention strategies can be plausibly established. burnout, in the context of academic stress, just as previous research has suggested ( 10, 11). In this case, questions may refer to the most likely possible relationship between components of resilience and a given variable: What factors in resilience will be strongest in predicting the psychological variable positivity, or coping strategies? Positivity and coping strategies were selected as important behavioral factors that can help predict states of engagement vs. Questions that illustrate structural analysis could be: Do all components of resilience have the same functionality? Is it possible to identify certain components of resilience that have a proactive value and others that are more reactive in nature? In complementary fashion, Functional analysis contributes to a procedural view of the behaviors associated with each component of resilience, in relation to other variables ( 9). Structural analysis of resilience makes it possible to reach a precise understanding of the role of each behavioral component of the theoretical construct, in order to infer therapeutic adjustment strategies for each person ( 7, 8). The distinction between structural and functional analysis of resilience is not often reflected in the previous literature, despite the importance of this distinction. The analysis of resilience, as a psychological variable in the sphere of preventive and therapeutic intervention, is important from both the structural and functional points of view ( 4– 6). An example of this is the Monographic, in which this research is inserted ( 3). To do this, they have focused their interest on the role of resilience and well-being. Numerous recent investigations have analyzed mental health prevention strategies in young University students, in order to minimize the psychological effects of this situation ( 1, 2). The problem of academic stress in the University context and the demands of therapeutic response in this context has had great relevance in recent times. ![]() We conclude with practical implications for therapeutic intervention: (1) the proactive factors of resilience reflect a perception of self-efficacy and the ability to change adaptively (2) the reactive factors of resilience are usually associated with withstanding experiences of change, uncertainty or trauma. Results of structural analysis showed an acceptable model of relationships between variables. Their negative relationship to burnout factors, and positive relation to engagement factors, is especially important. The factors of resilience and positivity had significant differential associations (positive and negative) with factors of coping strategies. The results offered evidence of associations and predictive relationships between resilience factors, positivity, coping strategies and engagement-burnout. An ex post-facto design involved bivariate association analyses, multiple regression and structural predictions. A population of 1,126 undergraduate students with different student profiles gave their informed, written consent, and completed validated questionnaires (CD-RISC Scale Positivity Coping Strategies of Stress Engagement, and Burnout). The aim was to establish a model with linear, associative, and predictive relations, to identify needs and make proposals for therapeutic intervention in different student profiles. In a population of young adults, this study analyzes possible linear relations of resilience and positivity to coping strategies and engagement-burnout. 7STEM Unit and Centre for Workplace Excellence, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia. ![]() 6Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.5Stress Prevention Unit, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy. ![]() 4Konrad Lorenz University Foundation, Bogota, Colombia.3UCD School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.2School of Psychology, University of Almería, Almería, Spain.1School of Education and Psychology, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.Santos 3 Angélica Garzón-Umerenkova 4 Salvatore Fadda 5 Giuliana Solinas 6 Silvia Pignata 7 ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |