- Analyze the reliability and validity of the scales in the questionnaire.
- In-depth interviews with 7 high school students and 2 homeroom teachers.
- Study 2 specific cases.
- Analyze the current situation of stress response of high school students with different personality types and influencing factors from the results of questionnaires, in-depth interviews and case studies.
d. Research results
- Stress coping questionnaire of high school students with different personality types
- Chapter 2 of the thesis: Organization and research methods.
- Topic: Current status of stress response of high school students with different personality types.
- Topic: Factors affecting the ability to cope with stress of high school students with different personality types.
- Minutes of in-depth interviews.
- Results of research on 2 specific cases.
- Complete thesis.
2.1.2. Research area and subjects
2.1.2.1. Research area
The study was conducted at 2 high schools in Nam Tu Liem district, Hanoi city (D.M high school and TV high school) and 2 high schools in Hoang Hoa district, Thanh Hoa province (LDB high school and HH2 high school). The study area was selected based on the introduction of some staff and teachers of 4 high schools, with the purpose of facilitating the implementation of the study.
2.1.2.2. Research object
The research sample was a random, convenient sample. The official survey subjects were 571 students from grades 10 to 12 who voluntarily participated in the survey. The demographic information of the 571 survey participants is shown specifically as follows:
Table 2.1. Some characteristics of the research sample
Objective characteristics
Location | Total | |||||
Hanoi City | Thanh Hoa | |||||
Quantity | % | Quantity | % | |||
Total | 292 | 51.1 | 279 | 48.9 | 571 | |
Class | 1. Grade 10 | 97 | 33.2 | 92 | 33.0 | 189 |
2. Grade 11 | 99 | 33.9 | 94 | 33.7 | 193 | |
3. Grade 12 | 96 | 32.9 | 93 | 33.3 | 189 | |
Sex | 1. Male | 157 | 53.8 | 109 | 39.1 | 266 |
2. Female | 135 | 46.2 | 170 | 60.9 | 305 | |
Maybe you are interested!
-
Research on the Current Characteristics of Forest Resources and Factors Affecting Forest Resources Management in the National Park Area -
Location, Research Subject. -
Testing the Difference in Service Quality at Cinestar Hue Cinemas According to the Characteristics of the Research Sample -
Research on agrobiological characteristics of some apricot varieties and technical measures affecting the growth and flowering of Yen Tu yellow apricot in Hanoi - 22 -
Characteristics of Vietnamese Garment Enterprises with Research Sampling
2.2. Research methods
2.2.1. Document research method
2.2.1.1. Purpose
Building a theoretical basis for stress response of high school students with different personality types.
2.2.1.2. Content
Synthesize and analyze domestic and foreign documents related to stress response of high school students with different personality types. In particular, search, synthesize and analyze the results of monographs, specialized journal articles, scientific articles published in proceedings of specialized scientific conferences directly related to the research problem to write the overview chapter and theoretical basis of the thesis.
2.2.1.3. How to proceed
Search for documents related to stress, stress coping, personality and personality types published in the form of books, theses, specialized scientific journal articles, scientific reports published in specialized scientific conference proceedings by domestic and foreign authors.
From there, code, classify by topics and conduct analysis, record the results of existing studies, point out limitations and gaps.
in those studies, thereby affirming the urgency of researching the thesis topic.
Systematize and analyze theoretical issues related to stress response of high school students with different personality types, thereby building a theoretical basis and research theoretical framework for the thesis.
2.2.2. Expert method
2.2.2.1. Purpose
To gather opinions of experts in the fields of psychology, education... to clarify research content.
2.2.2.2. Content
Ask for experts' opinions on the content of the tool concepts in the thesis, the basis for classifying coping, classifying personality types and ways of coping with stress of high school students, as well as factors affecting coping with stress of high school students with different personality types. At the same time, ask for experts' opinions to conduct a survey form, build a typical psychological portrait.
2.2.2.3. How to proceed
To build a highly reliable form, we consulted and asked for input from psychological experts - teachers with in-depth understanding of stress, stress coping, personality types and stress coping in students with different personality types... in the form of outline comments and through direct discussions (see appendix 2 and appendix 4).
2.2.3. Questionnaire survey method
2.2.3.1. Purpose
Survey to assess the current situation of stress response and factors affecting stress response of high school students with different personality types.
2.2.3.2. Content
This study used the following scales to include in the questionnaire:
(1) The Big Five Inventory – Short form (BFI – S) by Lang, John, Ludtke, Schupp & Wagner (2011) was used to examine the personality types of high school students.
- Scale description : the scale consists of 15 items and 5 factors: extroversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness to experience and sensitivity. Each trait consists of 03 items, as follows:
+ Sensitivity, including items 1, 2, 3
+ Extroversion, including items 4, 5, 6
+ Experience readiness, including items 7, 8, 9
+ Likeability, including items: 10, 11, 12
+ Dedication, including items: 13, 14, 15
- How to calculate the scale score: The items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale. The scale begins with the prompt: “The following statements are about different personality types of people. Please read each statement in turn and circle one of the numbers on the right that represents the level that you think best fits you from 1 = completely unsuitable to 5 = completely suitable”. The respondent will rate the options from 1 point (completely unsuitable) to 5 points (completely suitable). The score for each personality type is the average score of the items in the scale.
The shortened BFI-S scale consists of only 15 items extracted from the complete Big Five Inventory scale. Studies have shown that this shortened form of the BFI-S fully reflects the necessary information that can be obtained by the complete BFI. Therefore, the shortened BFI-S can help professionals obtain a general picture of an individual's personality traits when there is not enough time to use the complete BFI. The authors assert that the BFI-S scale can be used in psychometric measurement and is a useful shortened scale for assessing individual personality type (Frieder, John, Ludtke, Schupp, and Wagner, 2011).
In this study, the Big Five Inventory – Short form (BFI – S) scale was Vietnamized and used in Vietnam by two authors Truong Thi Khanh Ha and Tran Ha Thu (2017). In which, authors Truong Thi Khanh Ha and Tran Ha Thu (2017) studied “Using the Big Five Inventory – Short form (BFI – S) personality scale on a group of Vietnamese subjects” for the first time Vietnamized and used the BFI – S scale in Vietnam with Cronbach Alpha reliability = 0.804; KMO validity = 0.72.
(2) The Coping Strategies Inventory (CSI) by Garcia et al. (2007), a shortened version, was used to survey and assess the current state of stress coping of high school students with different personality types.
- Description of the checklist : The Stress Coping Strategies Checklist we used in this study is from Garcia and colleagues (2007), shortened from the original CSI version of Tobin, Halroyd and Reynolds (1989) to assess coping strategies to stressful states or events in the past month. This shortened CSI consists of 40 questions (the original CSI of Tobin and colleagues consists of 72 questions), assessing coping in the following 8 basic ways: cognitive restructuring, blaming oneself, daydreaming, expressing emotions, seeking social support, problem solving, problem avoidance and self-isolation . However, when conducting factor analysis, the results did not allow Garcia and colleagues (2007) to group these 8 small groups into 4 larger groups: problem-focused confrontation; emotion-focused confrontation; problem-focused avoidance; Emotionally focused avoidance also divided into two top-level groups, confrontation and avoidance, as Tobin and colleagues did in their 1989 study.
Each basic coping style is assessed through 5 items describing the manifestation aspects of that coping style. Specifically as follows:
+ Cognitive restructuring: includes items 6, 14, 22, 30, 38
+ Blame yourself: includes items 2, 10, 18, 26, 34
+ Dream: includes items 4, 12, 20, 28, 36
+ Expressing emotions: includes items 3,11, 19, 27, 35
+ Search for social support: includes items 5, 13, 21, 29, 37
+ Problem solving: includes items 1, 9, 17, 25, 33
+ Avoiding the problem: includes items 7, 15, 23, 31, 39
+ Isolate yourself: includes items 8, 16, 24, 32, 40
- How to score the checklist: Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale. The checklist begins with the suggestion: “Each person often reacts differently when faced with difficulties, challenges and stressful situations.
in life. Below are common emotional reactions, thoughts and actions when we face stress. Please read each content in turn and circle 1The appropriate number corresponds to the extent to which you perform that content to cope with stress and stressful situations.in the past month as follows: 1= never , 2= sometimes , 3= occasionally , 4= often , 5= very often. Respondents will rate according to options from 1 point (never) to 5 points (very often). The score for each coping method is the average score of the items in the scale.
With an alpha coefficient ranging from 0.63 to 0.89 and a fairly high convergent validity between scales, the CSI version of Garcia et al. (2007) is a scale with sufficient reliability and validity to measure people's coping responses to stressful events.
This checklist was translated into Vietnamese by Nguyen Phuoc Cat Tuong (2010) with a reliability of Cronbach Alpha = 0.84 and in the study of Nguyen Thi Diem Hang (2016) also with a fairly high reliability of Cronbach Alpha = 0.84. In this study, we used the Vietnamese translation of author Nguyen Thi Diem Hang (2016).
(3) Percieved Stress Scale (PSS) by Cohen & Williamson (1988). This is the scale used to survey the current stress level of high school students.
- Scale description : The scale consists of 10 very easy-to-understand and simple questions that measure the extent to which the subject perceives their life in the past month as unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overwhelming .
- How to calculate scale scores: Items are evaluated on a 5-level Likert scale as follows: 1= never; 2= almost never; 3= sometimes; 4= often; 5= very often. These qualitative indicators are converted to quantitative from 1 - 5 for questions 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10; for questions 4, 5, 7, 8, the scores are reversed from 5 - 1, meaning 5 points = never ; 4 points = almost never; 3 points = sometimes ... Scores are calculated from 1 to 50, the higher the score, the more
The more severe the stress level. Below 34 points: acute stress, controllable; from 34 to 40 points: starting to be overloaded by stress, not able to control the obstacles encountered, need support to overcome; above 40 points: severe stress, need examination and treatment.
The PSS scale has a fairly high reliability with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.78. The construct validity, predictive validity, and discriminant validity are all relatively high (Cohen and Williamson, 1988, p. 386). This scale has been translated into Vietnamese by Nguyen Hoang Dong and Ho Cong Nghiep (2018) with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.82, so the stress scale can provide accurate results.
(4) The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) by Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet & Farley (1988)
- Purpose : to assess the level of social support that high school students with different personality types receive, and on that basis, to find out the influence of this characteristic on their coping style.
- Description : This scale is designed to measure the support of social supports as perceived by individuals in many different cultures. The scale consists of 12 items assessing three main sources of support: family (including items 3, 4, 8, 11); friends (including items 6, 7, 9, 12) and other special people (including items 1, 2, 5, 10), each source is surveyed in 04 questions with 05 levels of choice from " completely disagree " to " completely agree ". This scale has been translated into Vietnamese by Nguyen Phuoc Cat Tuong (2010), the reliability and validity are quite high with r = 0.87 and the study of Dinh Thi Hong Van (2014) with a fairly high reliability of 0.85; support from special people is 0.72; Family support is 0.85 and friend support is 0.75. The thesis uses the scale of author Dinh Thi Hong Van (2014).
- How to calculate the scale score: The social support scale consists of 12 items. The items of the social support scale are scored as follows: completely disagree = 1 point; disagree = 2 points; neither agree nor disagree = 3 points; agree
= 4 points; strongly agree = 5 points. The higher the total score, the more social support and vice versa.
(5) The Life Orientation Test – Revised – LOT – R by Scheier and Carver (1985) was used to survey the level of optimism or pessimism of high school students; on that basis, to study the influence of optimism – pessimism on ways of coping with stress in life.
- Description: The LOT – R test is designed to assess the differences between individuals in terms of optimism and pessimism in life outlook. LOT – R is quite simple, consisting of 10 items, of which 3 items 1, 4, 10 assess optimism and 3 items 3, 7, 9 assess pessimism. In particular, items 2, 5, 6 and 8 are items with the function of “filling in” to prevent the subject from knowing that they are being assessed on optimism. Each item has 5 levels of choice from “completely agree” to
"totally disagree"
- Scoring: Do not count points for questions 2, 5, 6 and 8 (because these are items with the function of "filling in"). For questions 1, 4 and 10 explaining optimism, the scores will be given according to the following levels: completely agree = 5 points; agree = 4 points; neither agree nor disagree = 3 points; disagree = 2 points; completely disagree = 1 point. For questions 3, 7 and 9 explaining pessimism, the scores will be reversed, meaning completely agree = 1 point, agree = 2 points, neither agree nor disagree = 3 points; disagree = 4 points; completely disagree = 5 points. On this scale, according to Scheier and Carver (1985), the scores have the following meanings: 1 point is extremely pessimistic and 30 points is extremely optimistic and generally 15 points is relatively optimistic.
With a fairly high reliability and validity, r = 0.78 for the pessimistic scale and r = 0.75 for the optimistic scale, LOT – R is widely used for research in the world. In Vietnam, this scale has been used in the study of Phan Thi Mai Huong (2007) with a reliability of 0.76. Thus, the use of this scale can bring quite accurate results in studying the correlation between coping capacity and optimism.