Analysis of the differences in coping alternatives for college entrance examinees according to psychological distance control

Jin Suk Kim, So Hee Jeong
{"title":"Analysis of the differences in coping alternatives for college entrance examinees according to psychological distance control","authors":"Jin Suk Kim, So Hee Jeong","doi":"10.22251/jlcci.2024.24.2.273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives This study was conducted to determine whether there is a difference in the way test takers, who are emotionally vulnerable due to the college entrance examination, create alternatives to cope with conflict situations when they control psychological distance through self-distancing. \nMethods The subjects of the experimental study were 40 prospective high school seniors who completed their second year of high school and took classes during the winter vacation as a preparation course for their third year, and they would be suitable for the purpose of the experiment because they had the highest academic stress throughout their school years. An experimental design was conducted to verify whether self-distancing had a sig-nificant effect on the generation of coping alternatives. Two scenarios were presented that set the psychological distance far and close according to the construal level theory in the situation commonly occurring among test tak-ers when the mock test was taken in the same form as the college entrance exam. The t-test and multivariate analysis of variance(MANOVA) were used as analysis methods. \nResults There was a significant difference in coping style between the self-immersion group who accepted as what happened to them and the self-distancing group who accepted as what happened to others. Compared to groups that are psychologically distanced from themselves, they created more alternatives to cope with conflict situations than those who are immersed in their work, and created more flexible and creative alternatives in quality. Looking at each sub-area of coping alternatives, the self-distancing group had a high percentage of pos-itive coping alternatives to solve problems and low percentage of negative coping. In contrast, the self-immersion group had a high response rate with negative copin and a low response rate with problem-oriented alternatives. \nConclusions This study suggests that adolescents' use of cognitive methods such as self-distancing in conflict situations is effective in coping effectively.","PeriodicalId":414671,"journal":{"name":"Korean Association For Learner-Centered Curriculum And Instruction","volume":"63 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Association For Learner-Centered Curriculum And Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2024.24.2.273","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives This study was conducted to determine whether there is a difference in the way test takers, who are emotionally vulnerable due to the college entrance examination, create alternatives to cope with conflict situations when they control psychological distance through self-distancing. Methods The subjects of the experimental study were 40 prospective high school seniors who completed their second year of high school and took classes during the winter vacation as a preparation course for their third year, and they would be suitable for the purpose of the experiment because they had the highest academic stress throughout their school years. An experimental design was conducted to verify whether self-distancing had a sig-nificant effect on the generation of coping alternatives. Two scenarios were presented that set the psychological distance far and close according to the construal level theory in the situation commonly occurring among test tak-ers when the mock test was taken in the same form as the college entrance exam. The t-test and multivariate analysis of variance(MANOVA) were used as analysis methods. Results There was a significant difference in coping style between the self-immersion group who accepted as what happened to them and the self-distancing group who accepted as what happened to others. Compared to groups that are psychologically distanced from themselves, they created more alternatives to cope with conflict situations than those who are immersed in their work, and created more flexible and creative alternatives in quality. Looking at each sub-area of coping alternatives, the self-distancing group had a high percentage of pos-itive coping alternatives to solve problems and low percentage of negative coping. In contrast, the self-immersion group had a high response rate with negative copin and a low response rate with problem-oriented alternatives. Conclusions This study suggests that adolescents' use of cognitive methods such as self-distancing in conflict situations is effective in coping effectively.
心理距离控制对高考考生应对选择的差异分析
研究目的 本研究旨在确定因高考而情绪脆弱的考生在通过自我疏远来控制心理距离时,他们创造替代方案以应对冲突情境的方式是否存在差异。方法 实验研究的对象是 40 名完成高二学业的准高三学生,他们在寒假期间上课,作为高三的预备课程。我们通过实验设计来验证自我疏导是否对产生替代应对方案有显著影响。在与高考相同形式的模拟考试中,根据构念水平理论,将心理距离设定为远和近两种情景。采用t检验和多元方差分析(MANOVA)进行分析。结果 在应对方式上,接受发生在自己身上的事情的自我沉浸组和接受发生在别人身上的事情的自我疏远组之间存在显著差异。与那些心理上与自己保持距离的群体相比,他们比那些沉浸在工作中的群体创造了更多的替代方法来应对冲突情况,并且在质量上创造了更灵活、更有创造性的替代方法。从应对方法的各个子领域来看,自我疏远组采用积极应对方法解决问题的比例较高,采用消极应对方法的比例较低。相比之下,自我沉浸组采用消极应对方式的比例较高,而采用问题导向型应对方式的比例较低。结论 本研究表明,青少年在冲突情境中使用自我缓解等认知方法能有效地应对冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信