Relationship between the Contentment of Mothers of Infants with Parenting Advice and Their Recognition in Judging Credibility

M. Tada, Reiko Okahisa, Y. Matsushita, Saori Nakano
{"title":"Relationship between the Contentment of Mothers of Infants with Parenting Advice and Their Recognition in Judging Credibility","authors":"M. Tada, Reiko Okahisa, Y. Matsushita, Saori Nakano","doi":"10.15344/2394-4978/2020/329","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study sought to clarify the contentment of mothers of infants with parenting advice, judgment regarding credibility of parenting advice, and the relationship between such contentment and judgment. Methods: We conducted an anonymous, self-reported questionnaire-based survey from April to June 2016, targeting 1,118 mothers of infants in Prefecture A. The questions covered basic attributes, contentment with parenting advice, and judging the credibility of such advice. Descriptive statistics were compiled for each factor. A t-test was performed to examine the relationship between contentment with parenting advice and judging the credibility of parenting advice. This study was conducted with the approval of the Ethics Committee of Tokushima University Hospital. Results: The questionnaires were returned by 272 subjects (collection rate of 24.3%), with 265 determined as valid (valid response rate of 23.7%). The mean score for contentment concerning parenting advice was 6.17 (standard deviation: ±1.69). More than 80% of the subjects indicated being able to select credible parenting advice, and more than 70% had sought professional consultation about childrearing. However, among subjects who had not sought professional consultation, some had wanted to seek professional consultation but had not been able to do so. Relating contentment to judging the credibility of parenting advice, the mean contentment scores of the subjects who felt able to select credible parenting advice were significantly higher than the scores of those who did not (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Although study participants’ contentment relating to parenting advice seemed higher than that of teenage mothers, their levels of contentment appeared insufficient. Additionally, some subjects wanted to seek professional consultation about childrearing but could not. Furthermore, mothers who reported being able to select credible parenting advice were found to obtain and apply sufficient parenting advice, compared to those who did not feel the same confidence.","PeriodicalId":91514,"journal":{"name":"International journal of nursing & clinical practices","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of nursing & clinical practices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15344/2394-4978/2020/329","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

Background: This study sought to clarify the contentment of mothers of infants with parenting advice, judgment regarding credibility of parenting advice, and the relationship between such contentment and judgment. Methods: We conducted an anonymous, self-reported questionnaire-based survey from April to June 2016, targeting 1,118 mothers of infants in Prefecture A. The questions covered basic attributes, contentment with parenting advice, and judging the credibility of such advice. Descriptive statistics were compiled for each factor. A t-test was performed to examine the relationship between contentment with parenting advice and judging the credibility of parenting advice. This study was conducted with the approval of the Ethics Committee of Tokushima University Hospital. Results: The questionnaires were returned by 272 subjects (collection rate of 24.3%), with 265 determined as valid (valid response rate of 23.7%). The mean score for contentment concerning parenting advice was 6.17 (standard deviation: ±1.69). More than 80% of the subjects indicated being able to select credible parenting advice, and more than 70% had sought professional consultation about childrearing. However, among subjects who had not sought professional consultation, some had wanted to seek professional consultation but had not been able to do so. Relating contentment to judging the credibility of parenting advice, the mean contentment scores of the subjects who felt able to select credible parenting advice were significantly higher than the scores of those who did not (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Although study participants’ contentment relating to parenting advice seemed higher than that of teenage mothers, their levels of contentment appeared insufficient. Additionally, some subjects wanted to seek professional consultation about childrearing but could not. Furthermore, mothers who reported being able to select credible parenting advice were found to obtain and apply sufficient parenting advice, compared to those who did not feel the same confidence.
婴儿母亲对育儿建议的满足感与可信度判断的关系
背景:本研究旨在阐明婴儿母亲对育儿建议的满意度、对育儿建议可信度的判断,以及这种满意度与判断之间的关系。方法:2016年4月至6月,我们对A州1118名婴儿母亲进行了一项匿名、自我报告的问卷调查。问题包括基本属性、对育儿建议的满意度以及对此类建议可信度的判断。对每个因素进行了描述性统计。采用t检验来检验对育儿建议的满意度与判断育儿建议可信度之间的关系。这项研究是在德岛大学医院伦理委员会的批准下进行的。结果:272名受试者(收集率为24.3%)返回了问卷,其中265人被确定为有效(有效回答率为23.7%)。对育儿建议的满意度平均得分为6.17(标准差:±1.69)。超过80%的受试者表示能够选择可信的育儿建议,超过70%的人寻求过有关育儿的专业咨询。然而,在没有寻求专业咨询的受试者中,有些人想寻求专业咨询,但未能做到,能够选择可信育儿建议的受试者的平均满意度得分显著高于没有选择可信育儿咨询的受试人(p<0.01)。结论:尽管研究参与者对育儿建议的满意度似乎高于青少年母亲,但他们的满意度似乎不足。此外,一些受试者希望寻求有关育儿的专业咨询,但无法。此外,与那些没有同样信心的母亲相比,那些报告能够选择可信的育儿建议的母亲被发现能够获得并应用足够的育儿建议。
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