Luciano, Emelyn Creus. 4 0
Life experiences influencing self-handicapping behavior : basis for an improved counseling program / 6 6 Emelyn Creus Luciano. - - - xiv, 73 pages 28 cm. - - - - - . - . - 0 . - . - 0 .
Thesis (M.A.) -- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, 2009.;A thesis presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Arts, Sciences, and Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Industrial Psychology major in Clinical Psychology.
5
ABSTRACT: This quasi-experimental research is undertaken to determine the effects of counseling to suspected self-handicappers and to document the influence of life experiences in self-handicapping behaviors of the students in the City College of Tagaytay. Specifically, this study seeks to articulate on and answer the following questions: 1. What is the profile of the experimental and control group in terms of the following: a. Age; b. Gender; c. Religion; d. Socio-Economic Status? 2. What is the mean grade point average and mean I.Q. of the respondents when grouped according to the: a. Control Group and b. Experimental Group? 3. What is the mean pre-test and post-test self-handicapping scores of the respondents based on the PALS test when grouped according to: a. Control and b. Experimental? 4. Is there a significant difference between the self handicapping scores based on the following combinations: a. Pre-test and Pre-test scores of the control group and experimental group b. Post-test and Post-test scores of the control group and experimental group c. Between the pre-test and post-test of the control group d. Between the pre-test and post-test of the experimental group? The findings if the study are as follows: 1. The profile of the respondents under the control and the experimental groups in terms of age ranges between 16 to 28 years old. The sample is composed of 25 females and 15 males; 29 of them are members of the Roman Catholic and one is from Iglesia ni Cristo. In terms of civil status; 37 of them are single while 3 are married. Regarding the respondents' socio-economic status both in the Control and Experimental Groups: 11 0f them belong to class B, 19 fall in class C and 10 of them belong to class D. 2. The mean of the respondents' GPA under the control group is 87.9% and the I.Q. is 63.25 points on the scale of 140-item test, while the mean of the respondents' GPA under the experimental group is 80.2% and I.Q. is 66.75 points, respectively. This finding interprets into a difference of 7.7 greater GPA recorded with the Control Group while the Experimental Group posted an average of 3.50 higher IQ points. 3. The mean performance of the control group in the PALS Pre-test is 2.9 which is less than the experimental group at 4.3. Meanwhile, the post-test mean performance of the control group is 2.53 which is greater than the experimental group at 2.25. 4. The combination of pre-test vs. pre-test between the control and experimental group and the pre-test and post within the experimental group yielded a significant difference while the other combinations did not produce any significant difference. The findings of the study led to the following conclusions: 1. The control and experimental groups' Pre-test results have no significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. This is evidenced by the computed t-value of 1.51013 which is less than the tabulated t-value of 1.729. 2. The control group and experimental group Post-test have a significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. This attested that counseling had a quantifiable effect on the respondents. 3. The Pre-test and Post-test results of control group has no significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. 4. The Pre-test and Post-test of experimental group have a significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. This implies that the intervention of counseling is significant to the students under experimental group who underwent counseling. Based on the findings and conclusion, the following recommendations were formulated: 1. Results of this study are only a speck of the correlation of a lot more still unidentified variables. Further investigations are necessary to examine self-handicapping behavior as a real and valid phenomenon in young adults. 2. A standardized set of instruments must be formulated and administered to the widest possible population by future researchers to validate the results of this study. 3. Self-realization and Self-awareness can be an effective intervention towards self-handicapping behavior. 4. Guidance counselors should give attention and time for those students who are manifesting self-handicapping behavior so that they can be an instrument of minimizing if not totally eliminating these cases. 5. Guidance Counselors should possibly implement the proposed guidance program for self-handicapping behavior to minimize if not totally eliminate this case.
5
2 = =
2
2 --0------
6 --0-- 2 --------
0 2 --
--20------
--------20--
--------20--
----2
/ 2
/ 2
/
/
Life experiences influencing self-handicapping behavior : basis for an improved counseling program / 6 6 Emelyn Creus Luciano. - - - xiv, 73 pages 28 cm. - - - - - . - . - 0 . - . - 0 .
Thesis (M.A.) -- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, 2009.;A thesis presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Arts, Sciences, and Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Industrial Psychology major in Clinical Psychology.
5
ABSTRACT: This quasi-experimental research is undertaken to determine the effects of counseling to suspected self-handicappers and to document the influence of life experiences in self-handicapping behaviors of the students in the City College of Tagaytay. Specifically, this study seeks to articulate on and answer the following questions: 1. What is the profile of the experimental and control group in terms of the following: a. Age; b. Gender; c. Religion; d. Socio-Economic Status? 2. What is the mean grade point average and mean I.Q. of the respondents when grouped according to the: a. Control Group and b. Experimental Group? 3. What is the mean pre-test and post-test self-handicapping scores of the respondents based on the PALS test when grouped according to: a. Control and b. Experimental? 4. Is there a significant difference between the self handicapping scores based on the following combinations: a. Pre-test and Pre-test scores of the control group and experimental group b. Post-test and Post-test scores of the control group and experimental group c. Between the pre-test and post-test of the control group d. Between the pre-test and post-test of the experimental group? The findings if the study are as follows: 1. The profile of the respondents under the control and the experimental groups in terms of age ranges between 16 to 28 years old. The sample is composed of 25 females and 15 males; 29 of them are members of the Roman Catholic and one is from Iglesia ni Cristo. In terms of civil status; 37 of them are single while 3 are married. Regarding the respondents' socio-economic status both in the Control and Experimental Groups: 11 0f them belong to class B, 19 fall in class C and 10 of them belong to class D. 2. The mean of the respondents' GPA under the control group is 87.9% and the I.Q. is 63.25 points on the scale of 140-item test, while the mean of the respondents' GPA under the experimental group is 80.2% and I.Q. is 66.75 points, respectively. This finding interprets into a difference of 7.7 greater GPA recorded with the Control Group while the Experimental Group posted an average of 3.50 higher IQ points. 3. The mean performance of the control group in the PALS Pre-test is 2.9 which is less than the experimental group at 4.3. Meanwhile, the post-test mean performance of the control group is 2.53 which is greater than the experimental group at 2.25. 4. The combination of pre-test vs. pre-test between the control and experimental group and the pre-test and post within the experimental group yielded a significant difference while the other combinations did not produce any significant difference. The findings of the study led to the following conclusions: 1. The control and experimental groups' Pre-test results have no significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. This is evidenced by the computed t-value of 1.51013 which is less than the tabulated t-value of 1.729. 2. The control group and experimental group Post-test have a significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. This attested that counseling had a quantifiable effect on the respondents. 3. The Pre-test and Post-test results of control group has no significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. 4. The Pre-test and Post-test of experimental group have a significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. This implies that the intervention of counseling is significant to the students under experimental group who underwent counseling. Based on the findings and conclusion, the following recommendations were formulated: 1. Results of this study are only a speck of the correlation of a lot more still unidentified variables. Further investigations are necessary to examine self-handicapping behavior as a real and valid phenomenon in young adults. 2. A standardized set of instruments must be formulated and administered to the widest possible population by future researchers to validate the results of this study. 3. Self-realization and Self-awareness can be an effective intervention towards self-handicapping behavior. 4. Guidance counselors should give attention and time for those students who are manifesting self-handicapping behavior so that they can be an instrument of minimizing if not totally eliminating these cases. 5. Guidance Counselors should possibly implement the proposed guidance program for self-handicapping behavior to minimize if not totally eliminate this case.
5
2 = =
2
2 --0------
6 --0-- 2 --------
0 2 --
--20------
--------20--
--------20--
----2
/ 2
/ 2
/
/