Dale M. Hilty, Associate Professor at the Mt. Carmel College of Nursing. He received his PhD in counseling psychology from the Department of Psychology at The Ohio State University. He has published studies in the areas of psychology, sociology, and religion. Between April 2017 and April 2018, his ten research teams published 55 posters at local, state, regional, national, and international nursing conferences.
The purpose of this educational intervention was to examine the effects of stress and stressors experienced by first semester Bachelor of Science of Nursing undergraduate students. One-hundred and eighty-four questionnaires were completed by the participants. The questionnaire consisted of two sections. First, the Brief College Student Hassle Scale (BCSHC) measured stressors (Ward & Hay, 2015) where participants rated their school and personal stress levels.rnrnHypothesis 1: Determine whether the stress was a multidimensional construct for BSN students. Using SPSS 25, exploratory factor analysis principle axis (EFAPE) was used to select underlying factors and items (loadings >.50). Hypothesis 2: Determine if the coefficient alpha reliability coefficients for the EFAPE common factors had estimates greater than .70. Hypothesis 3: Determine the difference between participant ratings on questions measuring School Stress Level and Personal Stress Level. Using SPSS 25, the independent t-test would be to determine significant differences between the two groups. Hypothesis 4: Determine whether a mean difference in the answers measuring stress relieving techniques and the effects of stress was presented for the fore-mentioned groups. Using SPSS 25, chi-square test would evaluate this hypothesis.rnrnResultsrnHypothesis 1: The EFAPE analysis found two factors (eigenvalues: 2.25, 1.71) based on the scree test accounting for 65.9% of the variance. Six of the BCSHC hassles/frustrations had factor loadings greater than .50. The common factors were named School (three questions) Personal (three questions). Hypothesis 2: Coefficient alpha estimates: School, .748 and Personal, .721. rn rnHypothesis 3: Independent t-test found significant differences for the two groups (School, p=.004; Personal, p=.000). Hypothesis 4: Chi-square test was applied to relieving stress techniques and stress effects data, resulting significant findings (p=.012-.041). rn
Dale M. Hilty, Associate Professor at the Mt. Carmel College of Nursing. He received his PhD in counseling psychology from the Department of Psychology at The Ohio State University. He has published studies in the areas of psychology, sociology, and religion. Between April 2017 and June 2018, his ten research teams published 100 posters at local, state, regional, national, and international nursing conferences.
Researchers have used self-efficacy to investigate online learning, physical therapy, diabetes type 2, work engagement, teacher education, exercise behavior, chemotherapy treatment, Alzheimer disease, counseling, clinical reasoning, and online shopping (Bradley et al., 2017; Costello et al., 2017; Lalnuntluangi, et al., 2017; Lee, 2017; Lisbona et al., 2018; Malinauskas et al., 2018; Middelkamp et al., 2017; Papadopoulou et al. 2016; Salamizadeh, et al., 2017; Ümmet, 2017; Venskus & Craig, 2017; & Yahong et al., 2018). \r\n\r\nMethods \r\nA second study was designed to examine self-efficacy, competitive greatness, and attachment styles. Scales used to analyze these constructs were: Generalized self-efficacy (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995), Wooden Pyramid of Success Questionnaire (WPSQ; Hilty, 2017), and Nursing Attachment Styles Questionnaire (Hilty, Bumgardner, & Taylor, 2018). Competitive greatness is defined as being the best you can be when your best is needed, continuous self-improvement, and appreciating difficult challenges. Regarding attachments styles, secure individuals offer positive descriptions and greater levels of achievement in their personal and professional relationships (Ravitz, et al., 2009). \r\n \r\nParticipants (N=78) in this educational intervention were BSN senior students. The self-efficacy scale was used to create two groups (e.g., high self-efficacy scores, moderate-low self-efficacy scores). Hypothesis 1: BSN students with high scores on self-efficacy would have high scores on competitive greatness. Hypothesis 2: Three attachment styles would be different based on self-efficacy scores (e.g., high self-efficacy scores, moderate-low self-efficacy scores). An Independent t-test would be used to test these hypotheses.\r\n \r\nResults \r\nUsing SPSS 25, independent t-test analyses were significant on competitive greatness (p=.001), meaning BSN students with high scores on self-efficacy also had high scores on competitive greatness. Secure (p=.009) and avoidant (p=.003) styles were significant (i.e., high self-efficacy and high secure scores, high self-efficacy and low avoidant scores). \r\n\r\nThe independent t-test findings revealed significant differences between self-efficacy and competitive greatness (i.e., being the best you can be when your best is needed, continuous self-improvement, appreciating difficult challenges). Significant differences were found between the high and moderate-low self-efficacy groups on the secure and avoidant common factors. \r\n