| Literature DB >> 34894781 |
Shima Gadari1, Jamileh Farokhzadian2, Parvin Mangolian Shahrbabaki2,3.
Abstract
Children, especially girls, are more vulnerable during crises, who need to acquire skills such as social self-efficacy to meet the challenges of the environment. Given that, much progress has been made in e-learning; its capabilities can be used to promote children's health. This study aimed to determine the effect of virtual resilience training on the social self-efficacy of elementary school girls. This experimental study was performed on primary school girls aged 9-10 years in southeastern Iran. Students were selected by convenience sampling and divided into intervention (n = 40) and control (n = 37) groups by using randomized allocation. The Children's Social Self-Efficacy in Peer Interaction Scale was used for data collection before, immediately, and one month after the intervention. No significant difference was found between the two groups of intervention and control in the score of social self-efficacy before the intervention. However, the score of students in the intervention group improved immediately and one month after the intervention, and a significant difference was observed between the two groups (p = .0001). Virtual resilience training has improved the social self-efficacy of elementary school girls and facing challenges is inevitable in today's world, so resilience training seems necessary to prevent social and psychological harm in such children.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19 outbreak; Social self-efficacy; elementary school girls; resilience; virtual education
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34894781 PMCID: PMC8829153 DOI: 10.1177/13591045211056504
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry ISSN: 1359-1045 Impact factor: 2.544
Figure 1.Explanation of sample size and sampling.
Summary of resilience training sessions.
| Session | Duration, min | Aim | Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| One | 30 | Orientation | The researcher introduced herself, was acquainted with the group members, explained the rules of participating in the workshop and goals of the program, and tried to communicate with members. Then she did a pretest and explained the concepts of resilience and social self-efficacy. |
| Two | 30 | Self-awareness | The concept of self-awareness was trained, strengths and weaknesses were identified, and self-worth and self-esteem were strengthened with an educational clip. The purpose was to make individuals aware of their feelings, desires, and thoughts and identify their strengths and weaknesses, so they could realize their value and self-esteem. |
| Three | 30 | Problem-solving skills | Since problem-solving training took a lot of time, it was conducted in two sessions; interpersonal and social problem-solving was trained by using a clip. The purpose was to achieve successful and efficient problem-solving and understand the problem-solving steps. |
| Four | 25 | Problem-solving skills | A story related to problem-solving skills was told in a clip to better understand the importance of the issue. At the end of the session, participants were asked questions about the problem-solving steps and most of them answered correctly. |
| Five | 25 | Responsibility | Responsibility was trained by a clip and participants were explained how to divide the tasks into several controllable parts so that they can perform the tasks gradually. The purpose was to familiarize students with responsibility. A short video was sent to the students after the training session. |
| Six | 30 | Identify positive and negative thoughts | The focus was to identify positive and negative thoughts with an example and strategies for coping with negative thoughts were described. A clip was provided to train them how to analyze things from a positive perspective and be optimistic about the future. The purpose was how to fight against negative thoughts and view events optimistically. An animation was sent to the students. |
| Seven | 30 | Communication | A short video on communication methods was sent to the group 3 hours before the training, and students were asked to submit their comments. Then, a clip was provided about social and interpersonal relationships. The purpose was to familiarize members with the three common types of social communication (aggressive, passive, and assertive) and effective interpersonal relationships. At the end, an animation was sent. |
| Eight | 25 | Friendship and making friends | Students discussed about the importance of friendship and making friends. For evaluation of their views, students were asked to describe the features of a good friend. Then, a clip about the importance of friendship and an animation related to the subject were sent to the group. The purpose was to communicate with peers and make friends, because friends play an important supportive role in times of trouble. |
| Nine | 25 | Positive and negative emotions | A clip was provided about how to negotiate, how to defend the rights, and how to express positive and negative emotions. Then, an animation was sent. |
| Ten | 25 | Relaxation exercises and how to cope with stress | A clip was provided about relaxation exercises and how to cope with stress (muscle relaxation and deep breathing) and solve daily problems. Then, an animation was sent to the group. |
| Eleven | 30 | Empathy, helping friends, and family | Students discussed about empathy, caring for, helping friends and family, their perspectives were examined, and empathetic behaviors and methods were encouraged. An animation and a clip related to the topic were sent. |
| Twelve | 30 | Review and posttest | The previous sessions were reviewed, the characteristics of a resilient person were described, and the posttest was done. |
Comparison of participants’ characteristics between the intervention and control groups.
| Variable | Group | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | Control | test[ | |||||
| N | % | N | % | ||||
| Mother’s education | Diploma | 11 | 27.5 | 10 | 27 | .17 | .74 |
| Academic | 29 | 72.5 | 27 | 73 | |||
| Father’s education | Diploma | 18 | 45 | 15 | 40.5 | 1.11 | .73 |
| Academic | 22 | 55 | 22 | 59.5 | |||
| Mother’s job | Employed | 17 | 42.5 | 16 | 43.2 | .9 | .69 |
| Housewife | 23 | 57.5 | 21 | 56.8 | |||
| Father’s job | Employed | 38 | 95 | 35 | 95 | .62 | .71 |
| Retired | 2 | 5 | 2 | 5 | |||
| Number of children | One | 13 | 32.5 | 14 | 37.8 | 1.1 | .76 |
| Two | 21 | 55 | 21 | 56.8 | |||
| Three or more | 5 | 12.5 | 2 | 5.4 | |||
| Birth order | First | 27 | 67.5 | 23 | 62.2 | 1.4 | .93 |
| Second | 11 | 27.5 | 13 | 35.1 | |||
| Third or more | 2 | 5 | 1 | 2.7 | |||
aChi-square test.
Comparison of the social self-efficacy scores at different times between the intervention and the control groups.
| Variable | Group | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | Control | |||||
| M | M | |||||
| Before intervention | 55.80 | 12.49 | 58.2 | 13.17 | ||
| Immediately after the intervention | 81.67 | 7.3 | 58.51 | 12.88 | ||
| One month after the intervention | 81.25 | 7.06 | 58.7 | 12.76 | ||
| Source of change | Sum of squares | df | F | Eta2 | ||
| Group | 12,113.34 | 1 | 64.66 | <.0001 | .46 | |
| Time | 6559.58 | 1 | 63.041 | <.0001 | .45 | |
| Group-time interaction | 5898.54 | 1 | 56.69 | <.001 | .26 | |
| Error | 7804.68 | 75 | ||||
Comparison of changes the social self-efficacy scores at different times in the intervention and control groups (follow-up Bonferroni test).
| Time | Group (I) | Group (J) | (I-J) | SE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | Experimental | Control | −2.4 | .67 | .052 |
| Immediately after | Experimental | Control | 23.16 | .65 | <.001 |
| One month after the intervention | Experimental | Control | 22.15 | .64 | <.001 |
Comparison of changes the social self-efficacy scores at different times within each group (follow-up Bonferroni test).
| Group | Time (I) | Time (J) | (I-J) | Se | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | One month after the intervention | Immediately after the intervention | −.42 | .27 | 0.3 |
| Before the intervention | 25.45 | .63 | <.001 | ||
| Immediately after the intervention | Before the intervention | 25.87 | .61 | <.001 | |
| Control | One month after the intervention | Immediately after the intervention | .19 | .25 | .23 |
| Before the intervention | .5 | .69 | .54 | ||
| Immediately after the intervention | Before the intervention | .31 | .66 | .45 |