{"title":"评估的动态II:毅力与心理健康指数之间关系的荟萃分析","authors":"T. Pretorius, A. Padmanabhanunni, S. Isaacs","doi":"10.1177/00812463221140245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Identifying the factors that contribute to differential vulnerability in the face of adversity is key to psychology fulfilling its mandate as a helping profession. One such factor, fortitude, which is described as the psychological strength to manage adversity and to stay well, has consistently been linked to psychological well-being. The objective of the research was to statistically integrate studies examining the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being by using a meta-analysis. We used a random-effects model for the meta-analysis. In addition to the overall effect size, we examined publication bias and the moderating role of age and methodological quality. We also performed a subgroup analysis to compare between studies with positive and negative indicators of psychological well-being. In addition, we used robust variance estimation to account for effect-size dependencies, as some studies have reported more than one correlation coefficient. A total of 13 studies reporting 35 correlation coefficients pertaining to the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being were extracted. The meta-analysis revealed a significant overall effect (r = .44, p < .001). The results also indicated that age and methodological quality did not influence the effect size. Subgroup analysis indicated that the overall effect size for studies that used positive indicators (r = .49, p < .001) was higher than that for studies that used negative indicators (r = .36, p < .001). In addition, no visual or statistical evidence of publication bias was observed. The robust variance estimation results also confirmed that the effect-size dependencies did not influence the overall effect size. The study results provide strong evidence regarding the association between fortitude and psychological well-being. This finding has several implications for promoting mental health and suggests that interventions aimed at building fortitude can be leveraged to mitigate psychological distress.","PeriodicalId":47237,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The dynamics of Appraisal II: a meta-analysis of the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being\",\"authors\":\"T. Pretorius, A. Padmanabhanunni, S. Isaacs\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00812463221140245\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Identifying the factors that contribute to differential vulnerability in the face of adversity is key to psychology fulfilling its mandate as a helping profession. One such factor, fortitude, which is described as the psychological strength to manage adversity and to stay well, has consistently been linked to psychological well-being. The objective of the research was to statistically integrate studies examining the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being by using a meta-analysis. We used a random-effects model for the meta-analysis. In addition to the overall effect size, we examined publication bias and the moderating role of age and methodological quality. We also performed a subgroup analysis to compare between studies with positive and negative indicators of psychological well-being. In addition, we used robust variance estimation to account for effect-size dependencies, as some studies have reported more than one correlation coefficient. A total of 13 studies reporting 35 correlation coefficients pertaining to the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being were extracted. The meta-analysis revealed a significant overall effect (r = .44, p < .001). The results also indicated that age and methodological quality did not influence the effect size. Subgroup analysis indicated that the overall effect size for studies that used positive indicators (r = .49, p < .001) was higher than that for studies that used negative indicators (r = .36, p < .001). In addition, no visual or statistical evidence of publication bias was observed. The robust variance estimation results also confirmed that the effect-size dependencies did not influence the overall effect size. The study results provide strong evidence regarding the association between fortitude and psychological well-being. This finding has several implications for promoting mental health and suggests that interventions aimed at building fortitude can be leveraged to mitigate psychological distress.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00812463221140245\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00812463221140245","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The dynamics of Appraisal II: a meta-analysis of the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being
Identifying the factors that contribute to differential vulnerability in the face of adversity is key to psychology fulfilling its mandate as a helping profession. One such factor, fortitude, which is described as the psychological strength to manage adversity and to stay well, has consistently been linked to psychological well-being. The objective of the research was to statistically integrate studies examining the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being by using a meta-analysis. We used a random-effects model for the meta-analysis. In addition to the overall effect size, we examined publication bias and the moderating role of age and methodological quality. We also performed a subgroup analysis to compare between studies with positive and negative indicators of psychological well-being. In addition, we used robust variance estimation to account for effect-size dependencies, as some studies have reported more than one correlation coefficient. A total of 13 studies reporting 35 correlation coefficients pertaining to the relationship between fortitude and the indices of psychological well-being were extracted. The meta-analysis revealed a significant overall effect (r = .44, p < .001). The results also indicated that age and methodological quality did not influence the effect size. Subgroup analysis indicated that the overall effect size for studies that used positive indicators (r = .49, p < .001) was higher than that for studies that used negative indicators (r = .36, p < .001). In addition, no visual or statistical evidence of publication bias was observed. The robust variance estimation results also confirmed that the effect-size dependencies did not influence the overall effect size. The study results provide strong evidence regarding the association between fortitude and psychological well-being. This finding has several implications for promoting mental health and suggests that interventions aimed at building fortitude can be leveraged to mitigate psychological distress.
期刊介绍:
The South African Journal of Psychology publishes contributions in English from all fields of psychology. While the emphasis is on empirical research, the Journal also accepts theoretical and methodological papers, review articles, short communications, reviews and letters containing fair commentary. Priority is given to articles which are relevant to Africa and which address psychological issues of social change and development.