The title of this research study is Stressful life events and the tripartite model: Relations to anxiety and depression in adolescent females. The study was investigated by Jeremy Fox, Leslie Halpern, Julie Ryan, and Kelly Lowe (2011). This paper will expand on previous information reported, which included the background and methodology of the research study. This paper will include the results: including data collection methods and data analysis procedures, and the conclusion: including the study findings, weaknesses, strengths, limitations, and whether the findings support the hypotheses.
Results: Data Collection Methods The study was based on a tripartite model, which consists of three parts. This tripartite model included the following three self-reporting measures, which were used to collect the data: Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), Adolescent Perceived Events Scale (APES), and Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) (Fox, Halpern, Ryan, & Lower, 2010). Results: Ways the data collection procedures are appropriate for this study The PANAS was designed to access how different words make individuals feel and was originally designed for use with adults but has proved very effective in samples of adolescents.
The APES was designed to access life events for the ages between 12 and 20, and the BSI was designed to access the distress levels of adolescents beginning with at the age of13 (Fox et al. , 2010). The three self-reporting measures were appropriate data collection procedures because each was developed to use for the appropriate age group to access their human feelings. Results: Ways appropriate steps were taken to protect the rights of the subjects Before the study could be conducted the researchers had to go to the school administrators and received permission to conduct the study.
After the researchers received permission to continue, information was distributed through class announcements to the students and counselors. The study was completely voluntary and those wanting to participate were given contact information, which included parental written consent and the students written agreement that they are volunteering to participate. Questionnaires were completed in small groups or individually, and students were guaranteed their responses would be confidential. There was at staff member in attendance, all the time, to help in any way.
Results: Ways the data collection tool was used to support the reliability and validity of the study Previous studies researched discovered above average relationships between the PANAS and other trials of reactivity (Fox et al, 2010). Previously studies, also revealed the negative affectivity (NA) scale to have extremely good validity with trials of depression and anxiety, and the positive affectivity (PA) scale is more heavily related with trials of depression than anxiety in adolescents (Fox et al. , 2010).
The APES has been shown to have satisfactory reliability and validity in samples of adolescent in previous research studies. The APES has, also shown validity with peer-report scales of life events and measurement of adolescent emotional and behavior problems (Fox et al. , 2010). The anxiety and depression scales have revealed to be greatly linked with comparable scales of clinician-rated and interview-based assessments (Fox et al. , 2010). Data Analysis Procedure (DAP): Ways the data analysis procedures are appropriate for the data collected
Before completing the analysis, each of the studied variables was observed for regularity. The study consisted of three independent variables, negative affectivity (NA), positive affectivity (PA), and negative life events (NLE) (Fox et al. , 2010). The dependent variables were brief symptom inventory (BSI) anxiety and brief symptom inventory (BSI) depression (Fox et al. , 2010). The observation of the variables proved that the procedures were appropriate for the collected data from the participants.
Data Analysis Procedure: Ways the data analysis procedures are appropriate for testing the hypotheses The researchers proposed three hypotheses: 1) High stressful life events and high NA should be related to symptoms of both anxiety and depression. Low PA, however, should be uniquely related to symptoms of depression. 2) NA should moderate the relationship between stressful life events and symptoms of both anxiety and depression. 3) PA should moderate the relationship between stressful life events and symptoms. (Fox et al. , 2010, p. 46)
After translating the collected data into facts and studying the association between the variables, the hypotheses were tested. It was found that the data analysis procedures to be appropriate to help answer the hypotheses. However, it was found there was mixed evidence for the first hypotheses, which was concerning tripartite models structure. The data supported the other two hypotheses (Fox et al. , 2010). Data: Key distinctions between qualitative and quantitative data Qualitative data deals with descriptions, which it can be observed not measured.
Qualitative data analysis is more for exploratory purposes and usually is done through interviews (Henninger, 2009). Quantitative data deals with numbers, data that can be measured. Qualitative data analysis allows researchers to test their hypotheses and is done through surveys (Henninger, 2009). This was a quantitative research study. However, semi-structured interviews were also given to the study members; this was a portion a bigger study regarding stress and coping responses of adolescents (Fox et al. , 2010).
There was not any data reported regarding the interviews. Conclusion: Summary of the findings The communication between negative affectivity and the occurrence of a negative life event consistently projected depressive and anxious indicators, whereas the communication between positive affectivity and the occurrence of a negative life event only projected symptoms of depression.
The findings seem to encompass and confirm the tripartite model as a ‘‘reactivity to stress’’ model of anxiety and depression in youth (Fox et al. 2010). Centered on the findings it may be proposed that high negative affectivity forms the growth of depression and anxiety by boosting reactivity in adolescents during stressful situations and events (Fox et al. , 2010). However, low positive affectivity seems to only influence the tendency for adolescents to encounter depressive indicators when faced with stress (Fox et al. , 2010). Conclusion: Strengths of the scientific merit of the study
The study could increase current information on the risk and defensive issues, as well as, emphasize the associations between positive affectivity, negative affectivity, and stressful events (Fox et al. , 2010). It also might add knowledge of numerous ways through which temperament could influence the development of adopting childhood disorders (Fox et al. , 2010).
Additional study is needed, to define whether the associations between negative affectivity, positive affectivity, and stressful life events do truly place children at risk for growth of depression and anxiety (Fox et al. 2010). The study examined models doubtful to account for the complete picture. Even though this study specifically focused on reactivity, further research is needed to clarify the influences of the guiding elements of temperament (Fox et al. , 2010).
Conclusion: Limitations of the scientific merit of this study The study had significant results, but there are a number of limitations to be considered, such as the small sample size may limit findings, and the sample was entirely female and mostly African American (Fox et al. 2010). It is uncertain whether differences would have been established if a sample of adolescent males had also been researched. Future research should be conducted to repeat this study with a larger and more diverse sample.
The study could show weaknesses because it consisted totally of youth self-report, it is unclear whether this single source may have overstated the connections found or whether these results would be upheld when using parent or teacher reports (Fox et al. 2010). Conclusion: Is the hypotheses supported by the findings The findings on the first hypothesis were mixed evidence, but the other two hypotheses were supported by the findings. This paper has included the results: including data collection methods and data analysis procedures, and the conclusion: including the study findings, weaknesses, strengths, limitations, and whether the findings support the hypotheses.