| Literature DB >> 34084841 |
Maryam Bahlgerdi1,2, Mohammadreza Miri2, Gholamreza Sharifzadeh3, Ensiyeh Norozi2, Tayebeh Hosseini4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social vitality is one of the most important social indicators to develop a sense of public satisfaction. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of educational intervention based on theory of planned behavior (TPB) and self-regulatory strategies on the social vitality of women employee.Entities:
Keywords: Attitude; education; self-regulation; social vitality; theory of planned behavior
Year: 2021 PMID: 34084841 PMCID: PMC8150065 DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_963_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Educ Health Promot ISSN: 2277-9531
Figure 1Conceptual framework of the Theory of Planned Behavior
Structure and content of educational sessions
| Number of session | Title of the session | Target variables |
|---|---|---|
| First session | Introduction, expression of goals, definition of vitality. Providing statistics on the status of vitality in Iran and different countries (importance and necessity of the subject) | Aiming to raise awareness |
| Expressing the effects of vitality and happiness on body and soul | Attracting attention with the aim of increasing awareness | |
| Identify the important behaviors and beliefs of others in people’s lives about Discussion of cheerfulness | Aiming to influence the constructs of subjective norm | |
| Identifying women’s beliefs about the impact of cheerfulness on various aspects of their personal, family, social: organizational life (examining some misconceptions about cheerfulness) | Aim to improve attitude | |
| Second session | Identify barriers to happiness | With the aim of influencing the control and self-regulatory |
| empowering women employees to increase social vitality (teaching positive thinking techniques and teaching life in the present) | ||
| Third session | Identifying facilitators and strategies for people to be happy and empowering employee women to increase social vitality training techniques | With the aim of influencing control perceived behavior and self-regulating |
| The fourth session | Training to express emotions and training to maintain and pay attention to the importance of happiness | With the aim of influencing self-regulation |
| Empowering women employees to increase the vitality of the community, increase social relations and interpersonal intimacy | ||
| The fifth session | The general summary of the content, answering the questions and solving the problem after the end of the education | - |
Comparison of the frequency distribution of demographic information in the intervention and control groups
| The name of variable | The study group | Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Control | ||
| Level of education | |||
| Diploma | 4 (12.9) | 2 (5.7) | 0.12 |
| Technician | 0 | 2 (5.7) | |
| Bachelor | 11 (35.5) | 21 (60) | |
| Master | 14 (45.2) | 9 (25.7) | |
| Doctorate | 2 (6.5) | 1 (2.9) | |
| Married status | |||
| Single | 7 (22.6) | 5 (14.3) | 0.43 |
| Married | 24 (77.4) | 33 (85.7) | |
| Income status | |||
| Moderate | 20 (64.5) | 21 (60) | 0.71 |
| Good | 11 (35.5) | 14 (40) | |
| Location status | |||
| Private house | 22 (71) | 24 (68.6) | 0.86 |
| Rental house | 6 (19.4) | 6 (17.1) | |
| House parents | 3 (9.7) | 5 (14.3) | |
| Status of service | |||
| Unit manager | 2 (6.5) | 2 (5.7) | 0.28 |
| Unit responsible expert | 2 (6.5) | 7 (20) | |
| Unit expert and others | 27 (87.1) | 26 (74.3) | |
Comparison of the mean scores of the constructs of the theory of planned behavior before, immediately, and 3 months after the intervention in the intervention and control groups
| Constructs | Group | ANOVA ( | The Bonferroni | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | Immediately | After 3 months | ||||
| Attitude | Intervention ( | 55.4±7.8 | 58.8±5.8 | 59.2±5.5 | 0.016 | Previous with 3 months (0.045) |
| Control ( | 58.1±5.3 | 59±5.6 | 58.3±5.9 | 0.47 | ||
| 0.104 | 0.91 | 0.54 | ||||
| Subjective norm | Intervention ( | 75.3±10.8 | 80.6±9.7 | 80.7±9.8 | 0.029 | Previous, immediately with 3 months (0.05) |
| Control ( | 79.5±9.3 | 79.5±9.4 | 79±9.6 | 0.81 | ||
| 0.103 | 0.64 | 0.46 | ||||
| Perceived behavior control | Intervention ( | 46.3±8.6 | 52.3±8.5 | 51.8±7.9 | 0.001 | Previous with immediately (0.005) |
| Previous with 3 months (0.01) | Control ( | 49.9±8.4 | 50.3±9.2 | 49.6±9.6 | 0.75 | |
| 0.09 | 0.35 | 0.32 | ||||
| Intention behavior’s | Intervention ( | 28.4±4.7 | 31±3.7 | 31.3±3.9 | 0.006 | Previous with immediately (0.037) |
| Previous with three months (0.027) | Control ( | 28.9±4.6 | 28.8±4.4 | 28.2±4.6 | 0.28 | |
| 0.65 | 0.031 | 0.004 | ||||
ANOVA=Analysis of variance, SD=Standard deviation
Comparison of mean changes in attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavior, construct behavior’s intention, and happiness before with 3 months after intervention in the intervention and control groups
| Time | The study group ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | ||
| Attitude | 3.81±8.2 | 0.26±4.9 | 0.035 |
| Subjective norm | 5.39±13.1 | −0.49±5.6 | 0.019 |
| Perceived behavior control | 5.58±10.1 | −0.26±5.5 | 0.004 |
| Intentional behavior | 2.9±5.8 | −0.77±3.03 | 0.002 |
| Happiness | 8±12.2 | 1.68±9.38 | 0.02 |
SD=Standard deviation
Comparison of the mean happiness score before, immediately, and 3 months after the intervention in the intervention and control groups
| Time | The study group (group), | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | ||
| Previous | 40.9±9.9 | 45.7±11.7 | 0.08 |
| Immediately | 53.1±12.7 | 49.5±12.2 | 0.23 |
| With 3 months | 49.9±14.6 | 47.4±12.5 | 0.6 |
| <0.001 | 0.031 | ||
| Previous with immediately | Previous with immediately | ||
| Previous with 3 months | |||
SD=Standard deviation