東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

The Personal Projects Approach: A me...

Forwell, Susan Jane.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The Personal Projects Approach: A method to use with persons with multiple sclerosis.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	The Personal Projects Approach: A method to use with persons with multiple sclerosis./
Author:	Forwell, Susan Jane.
Description:	180 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-11, Section: B, page: 5937.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International66-11B.
Subject:	Health Sciences, Rehabilitation and Therapy. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3196806
ISBN:	9780542425356

The Personal Projects Approach: A method to use with persons with multiple sclerosis.
Forwell, Susan Jane.

The Personal Projects Approach: A method to use with persons with multiple sclerosis. - 180 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-11, Section: B, page: 5937.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Southern California, 2005.

The study purpose was to determine the psychometric credibility of the Personal Projects Approach (PPA) with persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). Test-retest and alternate form reliability, face and convergent/discriminant validity, and clinical utility were examined. Thirty-eight MS and 25 control participants were involved. Results indicated that the number of personal projects listed, the cross-impact rating score, and 9 of 19 dimensions achieved 48-hour test-retest reliability with ICC values greater than .70. The nine dimensions were: absorption, control, time adequacy, progress, outcome, other's view, stress, difficulty, and negative impact. Four dimensions (enjoyment, value congruency, initiation, and physical ability) had ICCs between .60 and .69. Alternate form reliability testing indicated that sequencing of dimensions was not a factor in responses.

ISBN: 9780542425356Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017926
Health Sciences, Rehabilitation and Therapy.

The Personal Projects Approach: A method to use with persons with multiple sclerosis.
LDR:03455nmm 2200313 4500 001 1825249
005 20061206115503.5
008 130610s2005 eng d
020 $a 9780542425356
035 $a (UnM)AAI3196806
035 $a AAI3196806
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Forwell, Susan Jane. $3 1914269
245 1 4 $a The Personal Projects Approach: A method to use with persons with multiple sclerosis.
300 $a 180 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-11, Section: B, page: 5937.
500 $a Adviser: Ruth Zemke.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Southern California, 2005.
520 $a The study purpose was to determine the psychometric credibility of the Personal Projects Approach (PPA) with persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). Test-retest and alternate form reliability, face and convergent/discriminant validity, and clinical utility were examined. Thirty-eight MS and 25 control participants were involved. Results indicated that the number of personal projects listed, the cross-impact rating score, and 9 of 19 dimensions achieved 48-hour test-retest reliability with ICC values greater than .70. The nine dimensions were: absorption, control, time adequacy, progress, outcome, other's view, stress, difficulty, and negative impact. Four dimensions (enjoyment, value congruency, initiation, and physical ability) had ICCs between .60 and .69. Alternate form reliability testing indicated that sequencing of dimensions was not a factor in responses.
520 $a Face validity of modules 1 and 2 was supported by unsolicited comments of respondents and through a procedural and theoretical analysis. Contributing factors included listing personal projects relevant to respondents, flexibility to use population relevant dimensions, and the considerable attention given by respondents. Module 3 face validity was unclear due to the lack of clarity on which respondents' judgments were based.
520 $a Convergent/discriminant validity were tested by evaluating the ability of the PPA to discriminate between MS and control participants. There was no difference between groups for number of personal projects listed (x 2=.004, p=.95) or cross-impact score (x2=.06, p=.81). Of the 10 personal project categories, no difference between groups emerged. The categories academic (x2=3.16, p=.08) and work-related (x 2=3.33, p=.07) set themselves apart from other categories. No differences between groups emerged for 16 of 19 dimensions. Of these 16, three (control, stress, and challenge) had p-values between .05 and .07. Three dimensions (difficulty, negative impact, and physical ability) showed a significant difference (p≤.035). This study was not powered for principle components analysis, though other studies have shown 4 out of 6 of these dimensions loaded onto one factor variously called stress, project strain, or anxiety-absorption.
520 $a Testing clinical utility raised three issues: writing requirement, session duration, and instructions. These were accommodated and the PPA was determined to be feasible. Findings suggest that PPA is a credible and acceptable method for research with persons with MS.
590 $a School code: 0208.
650 4 $a Health Sciences, Rehabilitation and Therapy. $3 1017926
650 4 $a Psychology, Psychometrics. $3 1017742
690 $a 0382
690 $a 0632
710 2 0 $a University of Southern California. $3 700129
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 66-11B.
790 1 0 $a Zemke, Ruth, $e advisor
790 $a 0208
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2005
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3196806