GC UNIVERSITY LAHORE
BELIEF IN A JUST WORLD AND SUBJECTIVE
WELL-BEING IN MOTHERS OF NORMAL AND
DOWN SYNDROME CHILDREN
NAME: IRAM FATIMA
Session 2006-2009
REG. NO. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
BELIEF IN A JUST WORLD AND SUBJECTIVE
WELL-BEING IN MOTHERS OF NORMAL AND
DOWN SYNDROME CHILDREN
Submitted to the GC University Lahore in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the award of the degree of PhD in Psychology
By
Iram Fatima
Reg. No. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004
Session: 2006-2009
Department of Psychology
GC UNIVERSITY LAHORE
RESEARCH COMPLETION CERTIFICATE
It is certified that the research work contained in this thesis titled “Belief in a just
world and subjective well-being in mothers of normal and Down syndrome children” has
been carried out and completed by Iram Fatima, Reg. No. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004 under my
supervision during her PhD studies in the subject of Psychology.
Dated: _____________
Supervisor
_________________
Prof. Dr. Kausar Suhail
Submitted through
______________________
Prof. Dr. Farah Malik Chairperson Department of Psychology GC University Lahore
__________________
Controller of Examinations GC University Lahore
DECLARATION
I, Iram Fatima, Reg. No. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004, PhD scholar in the subject of
Psychology, session 2006-2009, hereby declare that the matter printed in the thesis “Belief in
a just world and subjective well-being in mothers of normal and Down syndrome children” is
my own work. I have presented a paper based on a part of this thesis with the title “Belief in a
just world and subjective well-being in mothers of Down syndrome children” in ISJR
conference held in Adelaide, Australia. I presented another paper derived from thesis in an
international conference arranged by Deptt of Psychology, GC University Lahore. I have also
submitted an article derived from the thesis and with the title of thesis in “International
Journal of Psychology” for publication. Apart from the above mentioned presentations and
submission the research work contained in the thesis has not been in any form printed,
published and submitted as research work, thesis or publication in any university, research
institution etc. in Pakistan or abroad.
__________________ Signature of Deponent
Date: _______________
i
ABSTRACT
Subjective well being has long been studied in relation to a number of personality and
demographic variables. A comparatively recently identified correlate of subjective well-being is
belief in a just world (BJW). The present study aimed to explore how three dimensions of belief
in a just world, personal belief in a just world, belief in ultimate justice, and belief in immanent
justice relate to trait well-being dimensions and state well-being dimensions in mothers of
normal and Down syndrome children. It further aimed to compare strength of justice beliefs in
two groups of mothers. It was hypothesized that personal belief in a just world and ultimate
belief in justice will be positively related with trait well-being dimensions and negatively related
with state well-being dimensions in mothers of normal and Down syndrome children. Moreover,
these relationships would be stronger for mothers of a Down syndrome child compared to
mothers of normal children. Finally, the associations would persist after taking into account
demographic variables, generalized self efficacy, personal perceived control and perceived
social support. Tryout study was conducted to translate Scales of Belief in Immanent and
Ultimate Justice (Maes, 1998b), Personal Perceived Control Scale (Hollway, 2003), and Social
Support Short Form Questionnaire (Sarason, Sarason, Shearin & Pierce, 1987) into Urdu. Urdu
translations of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Zigmond & Snaith, 1983) by Mumford,
Tareen, Bajwa, Bhatti and Karim (1991), Trait Well-Being Inventory (Dalbert, 1992) by Fatima
(2004), Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, 1999) by Fatima and Khalid (2007),
Generalized Self Efficacy Scale (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) by Tabbasum, Rehman,
Schwarzer, and Jerusalem (2003) were already available. The two versions of all the scales
except for Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were administered on 35 bilingual females to
check the equivalence of Urdu version of the scales with their English version. In main study
mothers of normal and Down syndrome children (n = 100 each) were matched on age of the
child, mothers’ marital status, education level and monthly family income. Interviews were
conducted with mothers using Urdu versions of all the scales. Psychometric properties of the
scales were assessed before running the main analysis and all the scales were found to be
reliable and valid. A set of hierarchical regression analyses revealed that personal belief in a just
world was the strongest predictor of all aspects of well-being as expected in the two groups of
mothers. Belief in ultimate justice was negatively related to anxiety in mothers of a Down
syndrome child while it was positively related to anxiety in mothers of normal children.
Contrary to the expectations, belief in immanent justice was positively related to life satisfaction
and mood level in the two groups of mothers. These relationships persisted after controlling for
ii
demographic and other psychological variables in the study. Moreover, mothers of a Down
syndrome child did not differ from mothers of normal children in strength of BJW. The findings
support the role of personal BJW as a personal resource to enhance the well-being of both
people struggling with difficult conditions of life and those in normal circumstances. The results
were discussed in the context of Pakistani socio-cultural scenario. The findings of this work
have important implications for mental health professionals and researchers.
iii
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Belief in a Just World (BJW) 1 1.1.1 Positive Illusions and BJW 2 1.1.2 Functions of BJW 4 1.1.3 Strategies for Maintaining Belief in a Just World 7 1.1.4 Categorization of BJW 8 1.1.5 BJW as a Buffer or a Personal Resource 11
1.2 Psychological Well-Being 12 1.2.1 Multidimensional Model of Well-Being 13 1.2.2 Subjective Well-Being (SWB) 14
1.3 Common Correlates of SWB and BJW 18 1.3.1 Perceived Control 18 1.3.2 Self-Efficacy 21 1.3.3 Social Support 23 1.3.4 Demographic Variables 24
1.4 Developmental Disabilities in Children 25
1.5 Rationale of the Current Investigation 26
1.6 Objectives of the Study 27
2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 28
2.1 SWB of Mothers of Children with Down Syndrome 28
2.2 BJW in Adverse and Non-Adverse Situations 29
2.3 BJW and Well-Being 30
2.4 Other Psychological Resources 36
2.5 Demographic Variables 41
2.6 Hypotheses 44
3 METHOD 46
3.1 Phase 1: Translation and Adaptation of the Scales 46 3.1.1 Step 1 46 3.1.2 Step II 54
iv
3.2 Phase II: Main study 57 3.2.1 Sample 57 3.2.2 Instruments 59 3.2.3 Procedure 59
4 RESULTS 61
4.1 Psychometric Analysis 61 4.1.1 Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale 62 4.1.2 Trait Well-Being Inventory 64 4.1.3 Personal Belief in a Just World Scale 66 4.1.4 Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate justice 67 4.1.5 Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6) 68 4.1.6 Personal Perceived Control Scale 70 4.1.7 Generalized Self Efficacy Scale 72 4.1.8 Summary of Psychometric Analysis of Scales 73
4.2 Main Analysis 74
5 DISCUSSION 90
5.1 Conclusions 104
5.2 Limitations 105
5.3 Implications 106
6 REFERENCES 108
APPENDICES 127
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Problematic Items and their Original and Revised Translations 53
Table 3.2 Correlations between Urdu and English Versions of the Scales (N = 35) 55
Table 3.3 Correlations between English Scales (Light face) and their Urdu Versions (Bold face) (N = 35)
56
Table 3.4 Frequency Distribution of Mothers of Normal and Down syndrome Children According to their Demographic Status (n= 100)
59
Table 4.1 Item Characteristics of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (N = 200) 63
Table 4.2 Item Characteristics of the Trait Well-Being Inventory (N = 200) 65
Table 4.3 Item Characteristics of the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (N = 200) 66
Table 4.4 Item Characteristics of Scales of Belief in Ultimate and Immanent Justice. (N = 200)
67
Table 4.5 Item Characteristics of SSQ-6 (N = 200) 69
Table 4.6 Item Characteristics of Personal Perceived Control Scale (N= 200) 70
Table 4.7 Item Characteristics of Generalized Self Efficacy Scale (N = 200) 73
Table 4.8 Comparison of Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children on Study variables (N = 200) 74
Table 4.9 Correlations between Study Variables for Mothers of a Down Syndrome Child (light face) and Mothers of Normal Children (bold face; n = 100 each)
77
Table 4.10 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Life Satisfaction (N = 200)
80
Table 4.11 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Mood level (N = 200)
83
Table 4.12 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Depression (N = 200)
84
Table 4.13 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Anxiety (N = 200)
86
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 Perceived Availability of Support Explaining Life Satisfaction in Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children 82
Figure 4.2 Belief in Ultimate Justice Explaining Anxiety in Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children 88
Figure 4.3 Figural Representation of Results for Main Variables in the Study 89
vii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Informed Consent Form for Pilot Study: Phase I and Main study 128
Appendix B Informed Consent Form for Pilot Study: Phase II 129
Appendix C Demographic Data Sheet 130
Appendix D Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 131
Appendix E Trait Well-Being Inventory 132
Appendix F Personal Belief in a Just World Scale 133
Appendix G Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice 134
Appendix H Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6) 135
Appendix I Personal Perceived Control Scale 136
Appendix J Generalized Self Efficacy Scale 137
Appendix K Permission for Use of Scales 138
1
Chapter 1
1 INTRODUCTION
For a long time, focusing on the psychological problems of human beings, identifying
their factors and finding ways to cure them, psychologists had been ignoring that
humans have strengths and resources that help them not only keep sane but also achieve
heights of growth. These positive traits and virtues help the individual survive in
hardest conditions of life, find the ways to fulfill one’s aims and make the world a
pleasant place to live in for themselves and for others. One such resource that has not
been given due attention in psychology is belief in a just world (BJW). In Pakistan
particularly, this phenomenon has been scarcely investigated. Belief in a just world
(BJW) not only governs one’s level of well-being in normal circumstances but also
serves one in adverse conditions. The current work was carried out to investigate the
relationship between BJW and subjective well-being (SWB) in mothers of a child with
Down syndrome as compared to mothers of normal children taking into account
demographic variables, self efficacy, perceived control and perceived social support.
This chapter discus the theoretical constructs relevant to this study.
1.1 Belief in a Just World (BJW) Justice has always been one of the major concerns for human beings. Children are
formally and informally taught the importance of justice. “Good people are always
rewarded and bad people are always punished” is the main theme of all childhood
stories. This theme remains part and parcel of our thinking all over the life as it makes
the world predictable and meaningful place to live in. However, as the children grow up
cognitively, they develop the ability to see randomness in the world but they have still
the need to find out meaning in this randomness. They learn that bad people are not
always punished and good people do not always get the reward for their good deeds,
yet they tackle with this information either by giving meaning to the injustice, or by
helping the victims or solving the problems.
Despite its importance, subjective aspects of justice have been quite ignored by the
psychologists. Lerner was the first to introduce the justice motive theory (Lerner, 1965,
1975). In his own words
2
Individuals have a need to believe that they live in a world where people
generally get what they deserve. The BJW enables the individual to confront his
physical and social environment as though they were stable and orderly. Without
such a belief it would be difficult for the individual to commit himself to the
pursuit of long-range goals or even to the socially regulated behavior of day-to-
day life. Since the belief that the world is just serves such an important adaptive
function for the individual, people are very reluctant to give up this belief, and
they can be greatly troubled if they encounter evidence that suggests that the
world is not really just or orderly after all (Lerner & Miller, 1978, pp. 1030-
1031).
This motive guides human behavior and thinking. It helps the people to describe the
world as a meaningful place to live which in turn provides the foundation for
meaningful action in the world. It implies making efforts to maintain justice and react
to injustice. BJW is indicative of justice motive. The stronger one’s BJW, the harder
one will try to achieve justice. The more the person makes efforts to maintain or
establish justice, the more the one is sure that justice will be achieved.
The strength of justice motive varies from individual to individual, however. Cognitive
development plays a major role in fostering these beliefs (Maes & Kals, 2002). Positive
emotional orientation in the family is another important factor for the development of
strong BJW (Dalbert, 2001; Sallay & Dalbert, 2004) and development in intact families
fosters stronger beliefs in a just world than development in single parent families
(Sallay & Dalbert, 2004). Once the belief is developed, people are more likely to
preserve their belief even when they experience unfairness by evaluating experiences of
their life as fair (Dalbert & Stoeber, 2006). Since it becomes part of their cognitive
schemata which influences their cognitions and feelings and serves important adaptive
functions for them it is considered one of the positive illusions (Lipkus, Dalbert, &
Siegler, 1996).
1.1.1 Positive Illusions and BJW Over the course of their lives, individuals accumulate experiences about themselves and
the world in which they are living. These experiences are interpreted into personal
theories about the self and social environment. Such theories represent cognitive
schemata. They are source of the knowledge, which serves as an individual’s cognitive
3
filter and influence different aspects of individual’s thought. These schemata are mostly
not based on real life experiences. More often they reflect positively biased descriptions
of the world or the self and are therefore often called positive illusions (Taylor &
Brown, 1988) or positive cognitive biases (Cummins & Nistico, 2002). Most
commonly described positive illusions include positive view of self, illusion of control,
and unrealistic optimism.
It has been suggested that positive illusions or positive cognitive biases are
characteristic of normal thought and they promote various aspects of mental health or
psychological well being, including the ability to engage in pro-social behavior, to be
happy and to live a purposeful life (Taylor & Brown, 1988). Positive illusions are
particularly adaptive in threatening situations when individual’s cognitive processes
filter the negative information conveyed by the situation and distort it in positive
direction. For example, Taylor and Armor (1996) found that positive illusions are
correlated with successful adjustment to stressful circumstances, including extreme
adversity. In the same vein, Erez, Johnson, and Judge (1995) found that those with a
positive disposition tended to use more self-deception, which in turn increased their
subjective well-being. Lightsey (1994) found that people with positive cognitions are
less likely to be distressed in face of negative events.
Positive cognitive biases or positive illusions have been much criticized for their role in
maintaining and promoting psychological well being, as suggested by Taylor and
Brown (1988, 1994). Much of the criticism is based on the notion that it is rational
thought and not the distortion of reality that predicts mental health (Colvin & Block,
1994; Myers & Brewin, 1996). Cummins and Nistico (2002) answer this criticism by
differentiating between delusions and cognitive biases. According to them delusional
beliefs are incongruent with reality and thus fail to be adaptive, while on the other hand
cognitive biases are beliefs based in reality but with a positive bias in favor of the
individual.
BJW has been considered another positive illusion not generally caused by direct
experience of just and unjust experience in life (Dalbert, 2001). On the other hand
people are motivated to protect their belief in justice even when they experience
injustice by denying it in their own world (Lerner, 1980). This notion implies that
people perceive more justice for themselves than for others. Although, a recent study
4
has challenged this claim with the findings that strength of BJW is affected by
knowledge of just and unjust events in the world (Sutton et al., 2008), various adaptive
functions of BJW are becoming popular in researches studying BJW. These functions
are listed below
1.1.2 Functions of BJW People are willing to defend and maintain their BJW even in the presence of obvious
injustices in every-day life (Furnham, 2003; Hafer & Begue, 2005). People face
injustices in two ways: either they observe injustices or they face injustice in their own
lives.
Typical reactions to observed injustices include derogating and blaming the victims and
social exclusion of victims. As such BJW has become a widely discussed motive for
the well-known “blaming the victim” phenomenon. There is large body of empirical
support for this. Lerner and others experimentally demonstrated that the more severe
the undeserved suffering of victims of various injustices, and the less observers were
able to help, the more these observers derogated the victims (for a review, see Lerner &
Miller, 1978; Maes, 1998a). Up to 1990 the Just World research focused exclusively on
observers’ reaction to unfairness. Self report studies showed that BJW measured by
different just world scales (e.g., those of Dalbert, Montada & Schmitt, 1987; Lipkus,
1991; Rubin & Peplau, 1975) correlated with the level of derogation of unemployed
people, victims of Aids or cancer, residents of the third world, and other victim groups
(For a review, see Furnham & Procter, 1989).
People also try to maintain BJW when they face injustices in their own lives. Injustices
in personal life may be of very mild nature, like comparatively difficult assignments,
timely unfairness of teachers, and stressful demands of others, or of severe nature, for
example, unemployment, imprisonment, suffering from a fatal disease, having a
disabled child and lower social status.
Whether observed or experienced injustice is, BJW performs certain adaptive functions
for the people, which enable them to see the world as orderly and stable place to live in.
Despite this it is only in the last decade that focus of the research has been shifted to the
adaptive functions of BJW (Furnham, 2003). Three main functions of BJW have been
identified (Dalbert, 2001).
5
1.1.2.1 Personal contract and obligation to behave fairly BJW is indicative of personal contract, the terms of which are that individual will do
certain things and give up certain things in order to get desired outcome. The concern
with one’s own deserving gets linked to commitment to justice, to the insistence that
others get what they deserve. People recognize that their own ability to deserve what
they want depends on other people. Over the course of their development and in
interaction with their peers, children learn that fairness is the basis for mutual respect
and good social relationships. Those concerned with the fair treatment of others
maintain the social groups while those behaving unfairly exclude themselves from
social unit. Thus, there is strong interdependence between the individual and others.
Others can provide welcome response such as rewards and a sense of belonging, both
of which will be accorded to those who strive for justice, in so doing, show respect for
others and concern for social unit. So the individual is obliged to behave fairly to get
fair rewards. The stronger the BJW, the more compelled the individual feels to strive
for justice. This means that individuals higher in BJW strive to achieve their goals by
just means.
1.1.2.2 Trust in fairness Obligation to behave fairly leads to trust in fairness of others. This trust in fairness has
two aspects. First, high just world believers have the confidence that they will be
treated fairly by others. They are less suspicious of others, less cynical about pro-social
behavior of others (Furnham, 1995), and reveal more trust in others when help is
needed (Dalbert & Braun, 1997). Secondly, persons high in BJW trust that they will not
fall victim to an unforeseeable fate such as a serious traffic accident or robbery. This
trust in fairness has three major consequences.
(A) Investment in the future: People with strong BJW are more likely to behave and
act in particular way which they think will be rewarded tomorrow may be in remote
future as in the case of young prisoners who were reported to reveal less disciplinary
problems if they had strong belief in personal just world. Strong believers were also
surer that they would achieve their goals (Otto & Dalbert, 2005). Similarly high
believers may help others in the times of need with the expectation that they would get
the reward for their deed in the long run (Zuckerman, 1975).
6
(B) Buffer against stress: Because they are confident that they will be treated fairly,
individuals high in BJW feel less threatened and less distressed by the demands of
others (Tomaka & Blascovich, 1994). Thus BJW serves as a buffer protecting mental
health when individuals are under threat.
(C) Better performance: Individuals who maintain a strong BJW feel less threatened
and more challenged by the need to achieve. They feel fewer negative emotions in the
achievement situation, and achieve better results (Tomaka & Blascovich, 1994). This is
also true for school children continuously confronted with demands to achieve higher
(Dalbert & Maes, 2002). Subjects high in BJW expect to be treated fairly by others and
thus believe that they will be asked to perform only those tasks which they are able to
do. This strengthens their confidence in being able to solve the problems and reduces
feelings of threat and distress, thus leading to better results.
1.1.2.3 Interpretation of events of personal life in a meaningful way The third function of BJW is to provide framework, helping individuals to
interpret events of their personal life in a meaningful way. When individuals high in
BJW experience unfairness that cannot be resolved in reality they usually try to
assimilate this experience to their BJW. They either deny the injustice (Furnham, 1991;
Lipkus & Siegler, 1993; Montada, Schmitt, & Dalbert, 1986), or they try to find the
reason for injustice. They make causal attributions to find out meaning to their
seemingly random fate, which leaves positive impact on their adjustment efforts.
Lupfer, Doan, and Houston (1998) reported from an experimental study that strong just
world believers when allowed to find reasons for an event were less distressed than
those who could not find reasons.
Overall the functions of BJW have a variety of consequences and thus impact on
psychological well-being, either directly or mediated by these consequences. Pathways
to psychological well being are expected to be different for those who face common
and mild injustices in every day life, and for those who face such misfortunes with
which they have to cope for a longer period of time.
In everyday life, reducing threats, investment in the future, and higher level of
achievement are common effects of BJW, while in victims of misfortune interpreting
7
the events of life in meaningful way is more common. These various consequences lead
to the common goal, that is, better mental health and psychological well-being.
The proposition that people need to believe in a just world because of its adaptive
functions suggests that people must find ways of coping with evidence of injustice.
Although some of the strategies are implied in the functions, because of their
importance they are delineated separately.
1.1.3 Strategies for Maintaining Belief in a Just World Lerner (1980) discussed nine main strategies people use for dealing with threats to the
belief in a just world. These strategies are grouped in four categories discussed below.
1.1.3.1 Rational strategies The two rational strategies are the primary ways of dealing with injustice. These are
prevention and restitution. Prevention is acting to prevent injustice before it occurs and
restitution is restoring justice to unjust situations. These strategies are referred to as
rational because they involve accepting the presence of injustice.
1.1.3.2 Non-rational strategies They involve refusal to accept the presence of injustice. This is done in four ways. First
of these strategies is denial or withdrawal. It includes both the physical and mental
avoidance of injustice and physical and psychological withdrawal from threats to the
belief in a just world. Other three strategies in non rational category involve
reinterpretation of unjust event. Reinterpretation is done of cause for example blaming
the innocent victims; of character such as derogating the character of victim; or of
outcome, for example, by reasoning that suffering builds character.
1.1.3.3 Protective strategies These are characterized by general ways of thinking about the world. First, people
preserve a belief in a just world by thinking of the world in terms of ultimate justice,
reasoning that justice at least occurs in the long run. Second, people perceive their
environment as consisting of two different worlds: a world where sufferers of unjust
fate reside and one’s own world. This multiple worldview allows one to deal with
threats to one’s need to believe in a just world by denying the injustice in their world.
8
1.1.3.4 Penultimate defense
Finally, Lerner (1980) proposed a penultimate defense in which people claim that they
do not believe in a just world. By holding this belief they actually defend themselves
from threats to the need to believe in a just world.
Of these tactics, irrational strategies have received much research attention in the just
world literature (see Furnham, 2003; Hafer & Begue, 2005). Rational strategies have
been ignored by the researchers to the extent that the just world believers are thought to
be employing only irrational strategies to cope with threat to their need to believe in a
just world (Albee, 1986). It is only in the last decade that protective strategies have got
attention of the researchers. In this reference, Maes (1998b) conducted studies with
ultimate and immanent belief in justice while Dalbert (1999) differentiated personal
BJW from general BJW.
1.1.4 Categorization of BJW Although BJW was perceived as having many facets as it is implied in the strategies to
protect one’s belief in a just world, earlier correlational researches misunderstood it as a
one-dimensional phenomenon (Rubin & Peplau, 1975). However it is just recently that
differentiation between various just world beliefs have got attention of the researchers.
Two important categorizations are discussed below.
1.1.4.1 Personal versus general BJW As it has been said earlier that BJW is the belief that on the whole people get what they
deserve and they deserve what they get. But people see justice in their own
environment differently from the other people’s environment. One’s BJW is more
threatened and thus person is more motivated to preserve one’s BJW when injustice
occurs with oneself than it occurs with others. The more just world research focuses on
the domain of mental health (Dalbert, 2001) the more important is the differentiation
between a general and a more personal BJW. Besides the Lerner’s (1980) earlier
reference to the idea that people have biased perception of justice in their own world
and other people’s world, there are several theoretical and empirical findings within the
BJW literature that highlight the need to differentiate self from others.
Hafer and Olson (1993) examined the relationship between the BJW and women’s
reported discontent, with their own, and other women’s working situations (personal
9
versus group discontent). They found that the BJW was unrelated to personal
discontent but was inversely associated with group discontent. As a possible
explanation for these results, they suggested that their general measure of the BJW
(Rubin & Peplau, 1975) and measure of personal discontent differed in their levels of
specificity. That is, the Just World Scale assessed subjects’ views about the fairness of
the world in general, across many types of situations, whereas personal discontent was
measured in relation only to subjects’ specific job situations.
Distinction between personal and general belief in a just world was also implied in
Furnham and Procter’s construct of multidimensional belief in a just world (Furnham &
Procter, 1989, 1992). According to them, the BJW should be considered a
multidimensional construct that can be examined along two dimensions. The first
dimension is world type, which consists of (a) a just world in which people are always
rewarded for their good actions and punished for bad ones, (b) an unjust world in which
there are bad outcomes for good deeds and good outcomes for bad deeds, and (c) a
random world in which there is no relationship of actions and their outcomes. The
second dimension concerns the areas of control in which people perceive justice. The
areas of control consist of the personal, interpersonal, and political spheres. Based on
these dimensions, a person may perceive the world as fair, unfair, or random in one
sphere of life but not another.
Another study by Dalbert and Yamauchi (1994) hints towards self versus other
distinction. They measured general BJW and justice judgments about the situation of an
unprivileged group in Hawaii and Germany. They observed that the subjects with a
greater BJW and who were more socially similar to the disadvantaged group judged the
disadvantaged group’s situation as more fair. Dalbert and Yamauchi suggested that if
the subjects perceived the people of unprivileged group similar to them they identified
themselves with them and in order to protect their BJW denied the injustice to these
people.
To study this phenomenon more clearly an attempt was made by Lipkus et al. (1996) to
develop a measure to assess BJW for self as distinguished from general or global BJW
and it was hypothesized that personal BJW would be a better predictor for
psychological well being than general BJW. As predicted, the BJW for self most
strongly and consistently predicted decreases in depression and stress, and increases in
10
life satisfaction. Finally, Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, 1999) was
developed to measure the belief that overall events in one’s life are just. It has been
observed that people differentiate the general from personal BJW (e.g., Dalbert, 1999;
Dalbert & Radant, 2004; Fatima & Khalid, 2007) and endorse personal BJW more than
general BJW (Begue, 2002; Cubela & Ivanov, 2000; Cubela, Prorokovic, & Gregov,
1999; Dalbert, 1999).
1.1.4.2 Ultimate and immanent belief in justice Maes (1998b) proposed a differentiation between two variants of general BJW: One is
the tendency to perceive or see justice in the events that have occurred (belief in
immanent justice) and the other is the tendency to believe that forthcoming events will
settle any injustice that occurs (belief in ultimate justice). Maes (1998b) related the
belief in immanent justice to the phenomenon observed by Piaget, in which children
view events as the direct and just payment for previous actions (Piaget as cited in
Gruber & Vonèche, 1977) and belief in ultimate justice to certain religious doctrines, in
which compensation for the present injustice on earth is promised in another world or
within large time frame.
Validity of the distinction between the two beliefs was first worked out in a study on
attitudes towards cancer (Maes, 1998b). Different correlational pattern was observed
for the two beliefs. Belief in ultimate justice was accompanied by a more positive
impression of the cancer patients, personal importance of the religion, the ability to find
meaning in severe illness; expectation that cure is possible, trust in prevention, and
beliefs in personal freedom and control. On the other hand belief in immanent justice
was associated with accusation, blame, and acceptance of sanctions against victims
(Maes, 1998b). In another study using more general measures of belief in immanent
and ultimate justice Maes and Schmitt (1999) reached similar conclusions using a
sample of West Germans and East Germans for a research project “Justice as a problem
within reunified Germany.” They concluded that immanent justice goes along with
tendency to strict and rigorous judgments while ultimate justice correlates with
mildness and understanding. They also observed that immanent justice was associated
with higher sensitivity to the experience of injustice as a victim while ultimate justice
favors the experience of injustice as a favored person or as a neutral observer. Begue
(2002) also observed different pattern of correlation for the two beliefs with religious
11
participation as positively associated with belief in ultimate justice but unrelated with
belief in immanent justice.
Importance of the distinction between the two beliefs has also been demonstrated in the
area of school psychology (Maes & Kals, 2002, 2004). In a study conducted on a large
sample of German students the two facets of the belief measured with school specific
questionnaire were distinguished by means of factor analysis. Results showed that
belief in ultimate justice was able to protect students’ mental well being whereas belief
in immanent justice was associated with more school anxiety, and fear of others.
Similarly, belief in ultimate justice was associated with the perception of solidarity and
learning enjoyment in class, whereas belief in immanent justice was associated with the
experience of rivalry and competition in class (Maes & Kals, 2002). In another study
with school students they observed that belief in ultimate justice went along with more
curiosity while belief in immanent justice was negatively related to curiosity. They also
demonstrated positive relationship of belief in ultimate justice and negative relationship
of belief in immanent justice with life satisfaction (Maes & Kals, 2004).
In nut shell it seems reasonable to classify the general BJW into ultimate and immanent
belief in justice which have different correlates. But unfortunately this distinction has
not gained much attention of the researchers. More popular is the distinction between
general and personal BJW.
Implied in the categorization of justice beliefs is that not all types of beliefs in justice
are beneficial for psychological well-being. Moreover, the distinction between two
dimensions of the general belief in a just world raises doubts about whether personal
belief in a just world is necessarily more adaptive than general one.
1.1.5 BJW as a Buffer or a Personal Resource When people face unjust experiences their BJW is threatened and they try to protect
their belief by assimilating the injustice to their BJW either by denying the adverse
experience or by justifying it. Thus it is assumed that BJW gets particularly activated in
unfair situations and helps the people to maintain their well-being. This theorizing is in
line with the buffer hypothesis which states that BJW is more adaptive for victims of
injustice than for non-victims. Some of the earlier studies have provided support for
this hypothesis (Dalbert, 1998, 2001, 2002, as cited in Dalbert, 2001). On the other
12
hand personal resource hypothesis states that BJW is a resource that is adaptive in all
conditions of life whether unfair or not. It helps people to cope with diverse situations
of life effectively and thus enhance their well-being. More recent studies confirm this
view of BJW as a personal resource (Correia, Kamble & Dalbert, in press; Cubela &
Kvartuc, 2007; Dzuka & Dalbert, 2002). Personal resource hypothesis implies that
strong BJW may initiate different coping strategies in different situations of life but the
consequence is enhanced psychological well-being.
Describing the importance of BJW for well-being in different conditions of life it is
pertinent to discuss the very concept of psychological well-being.
1.2 Psychological Well-Being The concept of psychological well-being has been defined as positive psychological
functioning and experience (Ryff, 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2001). In this sense
psychological well-being may be understood as positive mental health but what defines
positive functioning and what constitutes good life has been a controversial issue.
Nonetheless, different approaches of psychological well-being have been followed by
the researchers in the field of well-being.
Two relatively different but overlapping approaches are eudaimonism and hedonism
(Ryan & Deci, 2001). Eudaimonism focuses on meaningful life and self-actualization,
and defines well-being in terms of the degree to which a person is fully functioning and
hedonism focuses on happiness and defines well-being in terms of pleasure attainment
and pain avoidance.
Keyes, Shmotkin, and Ryff (2002) extended the distinctions between the eudaimonic
and hedonic approaches by renaming them as psychological or multidimensional well-
being and subjective well-being. They used the terms to highlight the fact that
multidimensional well-being does not only mean self-realization. It also includes other
aspects like positive relations with others, and self acceptance, and studies of subjective
well-being include not only happiness (hedonic well-being) but also cognitive
assessment of life satisfaction.
Following Keyes et al.’s distinction between multidimensional well-being and
subjective well-being the review of the two approaches is presented below.
13
1.2.1 Multidimensional Model of Well-Being The concept of psychological well-being is based on philosophical descriptions of a
good person (Ryff, 1989, 1995; Ryff & Keyes, 1995). Well-being is perceived as a sum
of characteristics that should be present in an ideal human being and can be objectively
assessed (Ryff & Singer, 1998). This approach identifies six specific characteristics that
must be present in the individual to be psychologically well. The list includes, self-
acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose
in life, and personal growth. Brief description of each characteristic is given below.
Self-acceptance: It is about recognizing and accepting both good and bad qualities in
one self.
Positive relations with others: Person with positive relations will have trust in others,
empathize with others, help others when it is required, and is capable of having close
relationship with others,
Autonomy: Person with autonomy is master of his or her own self. Person takes one’s
own decisions, rejects the pressures from society, and judges the things by one’s own
standards.
Environmental mastery: Person with high environmental mastery has ability to
manipulate others, can create the environment that suits him, and can make use of
existing opportunities to fulfill his or her needs.
Purpose in life: Person with purpose in life has a sense of directedness, feels there is
meaning to present and past life, holds beliefs that give life purpose and has aims and
objectives for living.
Personal growth: Person with high score on this dimension has feeling of continued
development, sees self as growing and expanding, is open to new experiences, has
sense of realizing his or her potential and sees improvement in self and behavior over
time.
Ryff (1989) and Ryff and Keyes (1995) found that these values have not been
represented in subjective well-being research. Keyes et al. (2002) conducted a study in
America and from factor analysis concluded that subjective well-being and
14
multidimensional well-being were related, but had distinct status. They also found that
strongly existential aspect of multidimensional well-being (i.e., purpose in life and
personal growth) most clearly separated from the affective and cognitive component of
subjective well-being.
1.2.2 Subjective Well-Being (SWB) Studies conducted with reference to subjective well-being (SWB) deal with how and
why people think of their life in positive ways and feel good. So the literature on
subjective well-being includes studies on happiness, life satisfaction, and positive
emotions (Diener, 1984). In recent years the term SWB has been precisely used to refer
to people’s cognitive and affective evaluation of their lives (Diener, 2000; Diener &
Diener, 2000; Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Diener, Suh, & Oishi, 1997; Keyes
et al., 2002). Thus, a person with high SWB is one who is satisfied with life, and
seldom experience negative emotions such as sorrow and rage. On the other hand, a
person with low SWB is one who is dissatisfied with life, experiences little joy and
happiness, and often goes through unpleasant feelings.
1.2.2.1 Components of SWB The cognitive and affective components of SWB have been found to be separable well-
being variables which sometimes move in different directions over time and must be
studied separately to get a complete picture of SWB (Diener, 1984; Diener, Lucas, &
Scollon, 2006; Lucas, Diener, & Suh, 1996; Shmotkin, 2005.).
(A) Affective component of SWB: It is also referred as emotional well-being or
happiness, and is traceable to Bradburn’s (1969) work. Bradburn distinguished between
positive affect and negative affect and defined happiness as the balance between the
two.
Although there have been controversies regarding the independence or interdependence
of positive and negative affect (Diener et al., 1999; Diener & Emons, 1984; War,
Barter, & Brownbridge, 1983), there is no controversy on the fact that high positive
affect and low negative affect lead to happiness. So the researchers adopt basically two
types of measures for measuring the affect as a component of SWB. These measures
can be categorized as measures of positive and negative affect and direct measures of
happiness. Some examples of measures of affect are Affectometer (Kamman & Flett,
15
1983), and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988).
Examples of direct measures of happiness include single item scales like Gurin Scale
(Gurin, Veroff, & Feld, 1960), and Andrews and Withey’s Delighted Terrible Scale
(Andrew & Withey, 1976), and multiple item scales like Subjective Happiness Scale
(Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999) and Mood Level Scale (Dalbert, 1992).
(B) Cognitive aspect of SWB: It is also called life satisfaction. It refers to a
judgmental process, in which individuals assess the quality of their lives on the basis of
their own subjective standards. People compare their perceived conditions of life with
the criterion they have set for themselves, and according to the degree to which the
conditions match their standards they report high or low level of life satisfaction. In this
way life satisfaction is a conscious cognitive judgment of one’s life in which the criteria
for judgment are up to the person (Pavot & Diener, 1993).
Life satisfaction may be more specific (e.g., marital satisfaction, or satisfaction with
one’s car) or general (e.g., satisfaction with life as a whole). With the understanding
that individuals have unique criteria for a good life, have different standards of success
in different areas of life, and they weigh domains of lives in terms of their own values,
global judgment of life is given more importance than satisfaction with specific
domains. A famous measure of global life satisfaction is Satisfaction with Life Scale
(Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). Another comparable measure of life
satisfaction scale is by Dalbert (1992).
Although both affective and cognitive components are based on evaluative appraisals,
the differences in their processes can be easily identified. People may ignore or deny
negative emotional reactions while still recognizing the undesirable factors in their
lives. Moreover a person’s conscious evaluation of his or her life circumstances may
reflect conscious values and goals. In contrast affective reactions may reflect
unconscious motives and the influences of bodily states to a greater extent than do life
satisfaction ratings.
1.2.2.2 Trait Vs State SWB Becker and Dalbert independently (as cited in Dalbert, 1998) pointed out the
importance of differentiation between trait and state well-being. Cognitive and affective
dimensions together are relatively stable and thus make up the trait part of SWB, while
16
transitory moods like depressive and anxiety symptoms can be considered part of state
well-being. Differentiation between trait and state well-being has been demonstrated in
BJW research with a general conclusion that BJW is more strongly related with trait
well-being dimensions than with state well-being (Dalbert, 1998; Correia, Batista, &
Lima, in press).
Overall the concept of SWB, with its more stable affective and cognitive aspects as
well as mood states, is characterized by its subjectivity. It resides within the individual.
Thus SWB approach pays more attention to people’s emotions, and evaluations, and
does not grant complete authority to the external judgments of behavioral experts to
decide on the well-being of people with yard stick of predetermined values in hand as
in multidimensional approach. Therefore present research follows the SWB approach
of psychological well-being on the ground that inherent in the concept of SWB is that
people have diverse values, goals, and strengths and they are to decide whether their
lives are satisfying based on their individual values, goals and life circumstances. If a
person is satisfied with his or her life, he or she probably has the characteristics that he
or she considers important. Oishi, Diener, Suh, and Lucas (1999) found that what made
people happy depended on their values. For students who highly valued achievement,
getting good grades was predictive of their satisfaction, whereas for those who valued
conformity, family harmony was more important to their life satisfaction. Similarly
Oishi and Diener (2001) concluded from their study on Asians and European
Americans that achieving one’s independent goals did not have positive effect on the
well-being of Asians while it enhanced well-being of European Americans. Another
study by Diener and Fujita (1995) showed that people are happier when they have
resources needed to reach their particular goals. Thus SWB comes at least in part from
achieving values and goals that are subjective rather than objective.
1.2.2.3 Causal models of SWB Several models of the dynamics of SWB have been proposed. These models may be
divided into two categories: bottom up model and top down model.
(A) Bottom up model: The major focus of early researches was to identify the bottom
up factors that influence well-being that is, how do external events, situations, and
demographics influence happiness? According to this objectivist or bottom up tradition
happy people are simply those with the most advantages, for example, people with a lot
17
of wealth, good health, a satisfying relationship, and absence of accidents in their lives
(for a review, see Diener, 1984; Diener et al., 1999). However, there is growing body of
literature with the evidence that objective circumstances, demographic variables, and
life events don’t influence people’s well-being to the extent that it is generally thought
(Diener et al., 1999; Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1999). For example, Campbell, Converse,
and Rodgers (1976) found that demographic factors explained less than 20% of
variability in SWB. Andrews and Withey (1976) could only explain 8% by using these
variables. Moreover, on the basis of his review of literature, Argyle (1999) suggested
that environmental factors account for about 15% of the variance in reported SWB.
Therefore gradually researchers turned to cognitive and personality variables to explain
changes in SWB.
(B) Top down model: According to this model structures within the person determine
how events and circumstances are perceived. Global dimensions of personality in
essence determine levels of SWB. Andrews and Withey (1974) reported data that
supported top down approach. In predicting life satisfaction, they found that the type of
domain satisfactions that were used as predictors did not matter and that weighting the
domain did not produce much better predictions. These findings suggest that
satisfaction with the domains may result from rather than cause global life satisfaction.
In support of the idea that personality factors and not situational factors influence SWB,
Magnus and Diener (1991) found that measures of personality predicted life
satisfaction four years later even after controlling for the influence of intervening life
events. Eid and Diener (2004) also concluded that one’s level of well being is
reasonably stable over time.
Different explanations have been offered for the link between personality and
subjective well being. For example Heady and wearing (1989) through dynamic
equilibrium model proposed that people maintain levels of subjective well being that
are determined by their personalities. Their work revealed that as circumstances of life
and levels of SWB are fairly stable over time, it is reasonable to think of each person as
having his or her own normal equilibrium levels of favorable and adverse events and
normal equilibrium levels of SWB. These equilibrium levels are very predictable on the
basis of stable person characteristics. Changes occur in this equilibrium due to unusual
favorable or adverse life events. However, this change is likely to be temporary,
18
because stable personality traits usually ensure that conditions of life and SWB return
to their equilibrium levels. A quite different process is theorized by those who suggest a
person-environment fit is responsible for personality’s influence on SWB. In a test of
this approach Moskowitz and Cote (1995) found that people are happy when they
engage in behaviors that are representative of their personality.
Present research follows the top down model of subjective well-being when predicting
SWB from BJW. Since BJW is assumed to be a relatively stable personality trait it is
expected that it will influence the well-being as is suggested by the top down model.
1.3 Common Correlates of SWB and BJW As the subjective well being has been studied in relation to many other variables, it is
pertinent to include in the study at least some important variables, observed to effect
well-being, on the one hand, and are related with BJW on the other. These variables
include psychological variables, i.e., personal perceived control, generalized self
efficacy, perceived social support and demographic variables like age, marital status,
education, family size, and income. It is important to control these factors in the study
in order to avoid the relationship between BJW and well-being that may result from the
association of these variables with BJW. By controlling these variables it can be
claimed that the observed relationship between BJW and well-being does not owe to
the other factors.
1.3.1 Perceived Control Control theorists initially defined perceived control as the individual’s ability to bring
changes in the external environment to meet one’s requirements (Rothbaum, Weisz, &
Snyder, 1982; Skinner, 1996). However, this definition suggests that an individual is
only able to control an event by manipulating the external environment, and fails to
acknowledge the notion that individuals can control their response to an event by
manipulating their own cognitions. Consequently, Rothbaum et al. (1982) developed
the two process model of primary and secondary perceived control. Primary perceived
control refers to an individual’s efforts to change the external environment to suite their
specific needs. In contrast, secondary perceived control targets the self and attempts to
achieve changes directly within the individual (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Rothbaum
et al., 1982; Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996).
19
Rothbaum et al. (1982) realized that internal behaviors such as passivity, withdrawal
and submissiveness were not always reflective of lack of control, as it is usually
thought. They may in fact be initiated in an effort to maintain sense of control
particularly when they help to avoid negative effects of stressful situations by diverting
attention to more positive things in life, to more achievable goals and to the human
limitation to have control on every thing.
The two process model was initially adopted by the developmental psychologists to
explain the life span theory of control. This theory proposes the construct of control as
the central theme for characterizing human development from infancy to old age
(Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996). According to the theory
early development is characterized by increased ability to exert primary control over
the environment. As the individuals reach the adulthood, levels of both primary and
secondary control increase and in late middle and old age individuals increasingly
resort to secondary control process (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Schulz &
Heckhausen, 1996).
The Theory also postulates that primary control is more adaptive than secondary
control and secondary control plays a compensatory role when primary control
strategies fail (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995, 1999; Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996).
However, the hypotheses of primacy of primary control has been challenged by Gould
(1999) who argues that whether one control is more adaptive or other, is different in
different cultures. He attributes these differences to collectivism in Asian countries and
individualism in western countries as Asians are more likely to make adjustments in
their own self to accommodate other people while westerns are more likely to expect
other people to take responsibility for their self. Although, Thompson, Collins,
Newcomb, and Hunt (1996) found that primary control explained distress as a sample
of HIV-positive prisoners reported less distress after controlling for secondary control,
however, they did not find support for the compensatory role of secondary control as it
was observed to be associated with more distress when primary control was low. They
also found that primary control did not explain distress in African American prisoners.
In the same vein Heeps (2000) concluded from his study that people who were high on
one control and low on other were less psychologically adjusted than people who were
20
average or high on both controls. Overall primacy of primary control has not been
consistently observed in different cultures.
1.3.1.1 Dimensions of control Control strategies, primary or secondary, can be distinguished with reference to
whether they are based on facts or misperceptions and whether they are adaptive or
maladaptive. Heckhausen and Schulz (1995) named these dimensions as “veridical-
illusory” and “functional-dysfunctional” dimensions (p. 286).
(A) Veridical-Illusory dimension: A strategy may be based on actual relation between
cause and effect or it may be based on some biased thinking. An example of veridical
primary control is casting vote to bring change in government and of illusory primary
control is to read magical verses to bring about change in others behaviors. Similarly
example of veridical secondary control is to correctly estimate one’s limitations and
example of illusory secondary control is devaluing unachievable goals.
(B) Functional-dysfunctional dimension: Both primary and secondary control
strategies whether they are veridical or illusory may be functional or dysfunctional.
Veridical controls are functional if they promote both short term and long term control
and dysfunctional if they are effective for short term and ineffective in the long run.
Referring to the veridical primary control strategies, casting vote to bring change in
government is functional and working day and night may help you achieve some short
term goal but is dysfunctional as it exhausts all the energy. Example of veridical and
functional secondary control strategy is to correctly estimate one’s limitations as it
helps to divert attention to more achievable goals and example of veridical and
dysfunctional secondary control strategy is making pessimistic attributions.
Not all the illusory controls are dysfunctional. Effective strategy, even if based on
wrong perceptions, is functional. Illusory primary control strategy of reading magical
verses to bring about change in other’s behavior is dysfunctional but coping with fatal
disease with the belief that it will be cured is functional. Similarly considering the
illusory secondary control, devaluing unachievable goals is functional but increasing
value of unachievable goals is dysfunctional.
Functional-dysfunctional dimension of control is well demonstrated in Cousins’ (2001)
study on carers of mentally ill people and the comparison group. From the factor
21
analysis of primary and secondary control items she found that both primary and
secondary control items were loaded on factor 1 and some secondary control items
were loaded on factor 2. On inspection of items she observed that items loaded by
factor 1 reflect that problem is being addressed and acknowledged, while items loaded
by factor 2 reflect the denial of the problem. Although she was unable to identify the
two factor structure for primary and secondary control but functional and dysfunctional
dimensions were differentiated which she named as approach and avoidant control
respectively.
As it is usually difficult to assess if the control is based on realistic evaluation or is just
illusory, the control is studied as perceived control. Moreover as the psychologists are
always more interested in subjective aspects of human behavior, the role it plays in
human functioning is considered more important than its objectivity.
1.3.2 Self-Efficacy Another related yet distinct concept is self-efficacy. Bandura (1977) defined self-
efficacy as “conviction that one can successfully execute the behavior required to
produce the outcomes” (p. 193). While the perceived primary and secondary control
refers to the efforts to maintain control either by manipulating the environment or
manipulating one’s own cognitions, self-efficacy refers to individual’s confidence in
one’s ability to have a control over different situations of life.
Self-efficacy has been shown to affect many aspects of human behavior, including
motives, feelings, cognitions, and actions (Bandura, 1997). People with strong belief in
their abilities, set their goals high, are less threatened by stresses of life, find ways to
accomplish their goals, and stick to the path they have selected to reach the destination.
Bandura suggests that roots of this important belief lie mainly in social ties.
1.3.2.1 Determinants of self efficacy Bandura (1994, 1997, 2008) discussed in detail how the belief develops despite so
called hardships in life.
(A) Mastery experiences: Successes in life help to build up strong sense of self-
efficacy, and failures weaken it. However, if success is too easy, people are easily
discouraged by even a small failure. Therefore some difficulties in attaining a goal give
the experience of overcoming obstacles through persistent efforts.
22
(B) Vicarious modeling: Observing other people succeed gives the individual
confidence that one has also the ability needed to be successful. However, the influence
of observation depends on how similar the model is to the observer. Models dissimilar
to the observer do not have any impact on their self efficacy
(C) Social persuasion: People who are encouraged by the significant others that they
are capable to produce desired outcome are more likely to put effort to achieve their
aims. However, mere encouragement is not enough to boost self efficacy if the person
does not experience success as result of the efforts that one puts to achieve one’s goal.
(D) Somatic and emotional states: To some extent people also evaluate their efficacy
on the basis of their physical and emotional reactions to stress. People are likely to
interpret their fatigue, and pain as signs of bodily weakness to perform certain tasks.
Similarly bad moods weaken the belief in one’s capabilities.
Since people have different experiences for different tasks and in different areas of life
it is usually thought that people have varying levels of efficacy for various skills.
Although the domain specific approach of self-efficacy is inherent in Bandura’s (1977)
theory, there is growing interest in more global concept of self-efficacy.
1.3.2.2 General Vs domain specific self efficacy There may be as many self-efficacies as many areas of functioning. To predict
performance in particular area self-efficacy in that area is required. For example, Math
self-efficacy is required for performance in math test, but general self-efficacy defined
as individual’s general sense of control over different situations of life (Schwarzer,
1994) aims at a global and stable belief in ones abilities to deal with variety of stressful
situations over a longer period of time, e.g., migration and recovery from illness. It has
been observed that general self-efficacy explains better general outcomes like overall
health, well being and adaptation. Schwarzer, Hahn, and Jerusalem (1993) concluded
from their longitudinal study on East Germany refugees that people with strong general
self-efficacy were more adapted than people with weak general self-efficacy. In the
same vein Shroder, Schwarzer, and Konertz (1998) observed that cardiac patients with
strong general self-efficacy had a better quality of life after six months of cardiac
surgery than those with weak general self-efficacy.
23
1.3.3 Social Support It is well established that human beings are social animals who depend on others not
only to fulfill their physical needs but also for their psychological needs. People derive
satisfaction from their sense of belongingness to the others around. They benefit from
others either indirectly by learning from their experiences or directly when they get
support from them in times of need. Social support has been defined as the individual’s
perception of care, respect, love and help that one gets from others (Cobb, 1976). Two
major characteristics of social support widely described are the social-network and
functional characteristics of social support. Former is concerned with sources of social
support, for example, marital status, the number of friends or relatives, coworkers,
community organizations who are included in the support system, and frequency of
interaction with them (Berkman & Syme, 1979; Mitchell & Trickett, 1980), while the
later is concerned with the type of support that is provided and level of satisfaction with
the support (Sarason, Levine, Basham, & Sarason, 1983; Vaux & Harrison, 1985).
1.3.3.1 Types of social support Social support is often categorized with reference to what functions it performs for
individuals. Four basic types of social support are described below.
(A) Emotional support: The feelings that person gets from others that one is cared for,
that others understand one’s problems, and that one is being attended to and not alone
in stressful situations are all included in emotional support. This type of support helps
the individual feel comfortable in the times of difficulties.
(B) Esteem support: It involves the perception that one gets due respect from others,
that one’s feelings and ideas are accepted as such and the person gets encouragement
for one’s efforts. This type of support helps to build confidence and improve
individual’s self esteem.
(C) Instrumental support: It involves provision of direct help or support that is
provided in terms of money, professional services or goods in times of stress.
(D) Informational support: It involves information, suggestions that are provided to
solve the problems. For example, the advice a sick person receives from physician or a
friend to treat the illness is informational support.
24
1.3.3.2 Models of social support Whether the social support helps the people in time of stress or in every condition of
life has been extensively explored. The two models of social support are described
below.
(A) Direct effect model: According to this model social support fosters well being in
all circumstances of life, including stressful as well as non stressful. It helps people by
giving them a greater sense of belongingness, better self esteem and confidence in their
self to tackle the problems before they occur (Cohen & Wills, 1985).
(B) Buffering model: According to this model social support benefits the individual in
the time of stress only. When there is no stress social support is of little significance.
Individuals with high social support either do not perceive the difficult situation as
stressful or even if they appraise the situation as stressful they bring changes in their
behavior to handle their problems (Cohen & Wills, 1985).
In summary people get support from others in various situations of life from friends,
family and others around. The perception of this support helps them to maintain their
well-being in stressful as well as non stressful situations of life.
1.3.4 Demographic Variables It has already been mentioned in section 1.2.2.1 that demographics have been one of
the earliest interests of the psychologists as factors influencing subjective well-being.
Although their role has not been found to be as influential as the cognitive and
personality variables, there is no doubt that they act as instruments in providing the
person with certain resources that in turn help them to maintain their well-being. For
example, the money, individual earns to get the necessities and luxuries of life, has
become the yardstick for how valuable an individual is. It provides one not only with
the means for living and to achieve one’s goals but also gives the confidence that one
has control on one’s life (Johnson & Krueger, 2006). Similarly, education is not only
source of exposure to broader horizons but it also equips the individual to deal with
problems more effectively, to enhance one’s capabilities and to spend one’s life in more
meaningful way. People do not enjoy their achievements in isolation. It is important to
share one’s life with other people especially with a partner who physically and
emotionally supports one in the long run. There is ample evidence that marriage is an
25
institution which is a source of stable and meaningful family life. It equally benefits
both men and women (Shields & Wooden, 2003). Importance of marital status is even
more important for Pakistani women as marital status is also a source of economic, and
social security for them in addition to physical and emotional support (Nazir, 2001).
Children are considered part and parcel of happy married life. However, bringing them
up also brings its own stresses and anxiety. Especially when children are young and
dependant on parents to fulfill their needs they cause physical and psychological stress
for their mothers who are considered their primary caretakers. However, when they are
adults and get independent and mothers have more time for themselves they become
source of achievement and fulfillment (Shields & Wooden, 2003). If children are born
with some disability their process of getting independent is hindered and is a source of
long-term adjustments in life of their parents, especially mothers.
1.4 Developmental Disabilities in Children Developmental disabilities are the disabilities that affect the child by birth or in early
years of life and are of relatively permanent nature. Mental retardation, cerebral palsy,
autism and various genetic disorders are generally referred to as developmental
disabilities. These disabilities affect the child’s ability to live independently, to take
care of one self, to learn, to communicate with others, to earn money, and to take
decisions.
As compared to other developmental disabilities, prevalence rate of Down syndrome is
very high. Down syndrome has been reported to affect every 800 live births (Hall,
2004). It is a chromosomal disorder that is generally identified by the phenotypic
features and developmental delay. Three types of Down syndrome are trisomy 21
(presence of 47 chromosomes), translocation (number of chromosomes are normal but
the extra chromosome 21 material is attached with chromosome 14 or other
chromosome), and mosaicism (some cells have 46 and some have 47 chromosomes).
Typical features of Down syndrome are abundant neck skin, mouth corners turned
down ward, general hypotonia, flat face, dysplastic ear, epicanthic eye fold, gap
between first and second toes, and protruding tongue (Fried, 1980). Though not all
types of Down syndrome children have these features, especially mosaic cases,
presence of most of these features along with history of developmental delay is clear
indication of Down syndrome. In Pakistan more than ninety percent of the Down
26
syndrome cases are accurately diagnosed with the help of clinical features in early
years of their life (Ahmad, Ghafoor, Samore, & Chattha, 2004). For more precise
diagnosis chromosomal analyses, karyotyping is recommended. Since the test is
expensive and clinical diagnosis is usually accurate, children are rarely referred for
karyotyping in Pakistan.
Children with Down syndrome often have number of behavioral and physical
problems. They are generally mildly to moderately retarded. Their language is delayed.
They use few words and speak less. Their speech is usually unintelligible. The
weakness in communication is observed throughout their life (Buckley, 1993; Dykens,
Hodapp, & Evans, 2006). They have tendency to engage in problematic behavior such
as doing same thing again and again, disobeying orders, talking with one self and
avoiding others (Feeley & Jones, 2006). Because of number of psychological problems
these children need supervision throughout their life.
These children are also likely to suffer from particular health related problems like
congenital heart diseases, hearing problems, intestinal problems such as blocked small
bowl or esophagus, eye related problems, such as cataracts, thyroid dysfunctions, and
dementia. These children are also more likely to suffer from leukemia and to develop
defective spinal cord. They are also more likely to develop chronic respiratory
infections (Hall, 2004). Although multiple health related problems lead to shorter life
expectancy for these children, if they are properly dealt with these children can live a
longer life.
1.5 Rationale of the Current Investigation Being mother of a special child like one with Down syndrome is a challenging and
stressful situation which requires a lot of patience and grit. Children with Down
syndrome were selected because of high prevalence rate of the disorder. Moreover,
quick diagnosis can be made in case of these children because of their specific facial
features and observable developmental delays. As the disorder is usually diagnosed
early, parents of such children are more ready to accept the limitations of their children
than is the case with other forms of developmental disabilities. Like other children main
responsibility of taking care of such children is put on the mothers. Hence, mothers are
more likely than fathers to face all the pressures and stresses that go with the never
ending task of taking care of a child with disability which may result in more negative
27
outcomes in these mothers than fathers (Hastings et al., 2005; Olsson & Hwang, 2001;
Shin, Nhan, Crittenden, Flory, & Ladinsky, 2006). The study was designed to
understand how such a stress of raising a Down syndrome child would be related with
mothers’ BJW and then which among the different variants of BJW would be more
strongly associated with subjective well-being. The inclusion of control group, mothers
of normal children, provided an opportunity to see whether BJW is influenced by life
circumstances or not and whether the relationship between BJW and well-being
dimensions is stronger in mothers of a Down syndrome child than in mothers of normal
children. Although, previous studies have investigated these links comparing people
with and without any trauma in different countries no such attempt has been made so
far in Pakistan.
1.6 Objectives of the Study The study was designed with the following objectives
1. To understand the role of personal BJW, immanent belief in justice and ultimate
belief in justice in SWB of mothers of a child with Down syndrome as compared to
mothers of normal children after controlling for demographics, perceived control,
perceived social support and self efficacy.
2. To compare the two groups of mothers on strength of Personal BJW, belief in
ultimate justice and belief in immanent justice.
28
Chapter 2
2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In connection with the objectives of this study this chapter will first explore the studies
that relate with subjective well-being of mothers of special children and more
specifically mothers of children with Down syndrome. Then the studies comparing
BJW in adverse and non-adverse situations will be elaborated following the studies
showing relationship between BJW and SWB. In addition, studies with other
psychological resources and demographic variables expected to be related with
subjective well-being on the one hand and BJW on the other are described.
2.1 SWB of Mothers of Children with Down Syndrome Most of the researches conducted with families of disabled children go in line with the
major work done in psychology in general, i. e., searching for the correlates of negative
outcomes in these families than positive ones. Parents, especially mothers having
children with disabilities have long been considered spending pathetic lives. Therefore,
there are more studies with mothers of special children which focus on stress (Hassal,
Rose, & McDonald, 2005; Keller & Honig, 2004; Margalit & Kleitman, 2006; Shin,
Nhan, Crittenden, Flory, & Ladinsky, 2006; Streisand, Swift, Wickmark, Chen, &
Holmes, 2005) and depression (Eisenhover & Blacher, 2006; Maniar, Fatima &
Hamdani, 2002; Olsson & Hwang, 2001) than positive perceptions (Eisenhower, Baker,
& Blacher, 2005; Hastings, Allen, McDermott, & Still, 2002; Hastings et al., 2005;
Kim, Greenberg, Seltzer, & Krauss, 2003) and life satisfaction (Sloper, Knussen,
Turner, & Cunningham, 1991).
More specifically, in parents of children with Down syndrome it has been observed that
they are more stressed and depressed than those of typically developing children. Scott,
Atkinson, Minton, and Bowman (1997) reported that parents of infants with Down
syndrome had significantly greater depression than those of normal children. Roach,
Orsmond, and Barratt (1999) observed that parents of young children with the
syndrome perceived more child-related and parent-related stress than parents of typical
children. Padeliadu (1998) and Hedov, Anneren, and Wikbald (2002) also found greater
stress in these parents.
29
Although general conclusion of these studies is that parents of children with Down
syndrome go through the stressful conditions, some studies report the positive
experiences of the parents. Hanson (2003) in a qualitative study on children with Down
syndrome and their families observed that though these families faced many challenges
regarding development and capabilities of their special children yet they revealed
positive feelings and experiences. Carr (2005) reported families of older people with
Down syndrome as well adjusted and mothers of adults with Down syndrome were not
significantly different in stress from mothers of typical adults. They were also well
satisfied with their life in general.
Results from these studies suggest that although mothers of special children are more
distressed than those of normal children but there are certain personal resources which
help them cope with stressful conditions and maintain their well-being. These resources
may be as functional for them as for common people. One of the recently identified
personal resources is BJW.
Here follows the review of researches with reference to BJW that is supposed to be
protected particularly in unfair situations and is expected to help in the well-being of
people in normal life situations as well as those struggling with difficult life situations
such as mothers of children with Down syndrome.
2.2 BJW in Adverse and Non-Adverse Situations It has been observed in various researches comparing privileged and less privileged
groups that people maintain their BJW in adverse life situations. For example, Rubin
and Peplau (1973) could not find relationship between social class and scores on a just
world scale. Dzuka (2001) did not find differences in BJW of employed and
unemployed. Similarly, Calhoun, Cann, Tedeschi, and McMillan (1998) concluded
from their study that perceptions of the world as just were not influenced by traumatic
events in life. Females are generally understood to be less privileged than males.
However, O’ Conner, Morrison, McLeod, and Anderson (1996) in a Meta analysis of
33 studies found no significant correlation between BJW and gender. There are other
studies which demonstrate that people in unjust societies maintain quite a high level of
BJW. For example, Furnham (1993) observed that people in India and South Africa
endorsed stronger BJW than people in other countries as America, Britain and
Germany. It seems as if with the help of the belief people in less just countries try to
30
justify the obvious injustices in these societies. However, more recent researches report
that justice beliefs are partly experiential and are effected by very harsh experiences of
life. For example, Dzuka and Dalbert (2007) reported that teachers who faced frequent
violence from their students held weaker belief in personal just world than teachers
who reported less frequent violence. Similarly, employees who were frequently
harassed at the work place held weaker personal BJW than those workers who were
reported not to be frequently harassed (Cubela & Kvartuc, 2007). The issue remains to
be settled that to what extent BJW is an illusion and what type and level of adverse
situations weaken its strength.
2.3 BJW and Well-Being Researches conducted in the area of BJW and well being can be categorized into the
researches that were conducted with general BJW and those clearly discriminating
personal from general BJW and ultimate from immanent belief in justice. Firstly, light
will be thrown upon those studies that were conducted with general BJW, following the
studies discriminating personal from general BJW and lastly the studies with ultimate
and immanent belief in justice as the two dimensions of general BJW will be discussed.
BJW has generally been found to be adaptive for both individuals going through unfair
situations as well as those in every day life settings. Bulman and Wortman (1977)
examined 29 accident victims with spinal cord injuries, and observed a significant
positive relationship between victims’ reports of current happiness and BJW.
Studies conducted with general population also reached the similar conclusions as with
sufferers of difficult life situations. A study on under graduate students confirmed that
students strong in BJW were happier than those with weak BJW (Correia, Vala, &
Aguiar, 2001). Dalbert, Lipkus, Sallay, and Goch (2001) also found positive correlation
between general BJW and cognitive and affective aspects of subjective well-being in
German students of ages 19 to 42. In the same vein Dalbert and Sallay (1996) found
positive associations between just world beliefs and satisfaction with one’s life in
Hungary. Confirming these results studies have also shown an inverse correlation
between BJW and negative emotions. Ritter, Benson, and Snyder (1990) observed a
significant negative relationship between BJW and depressive symptoms in a
representative sample of Irish adults. This relationship remained stable, even when
other effects such as the economic situation or the belief in internal control over one’s
31
life course were controlled for. Schmitt and Maes (as cited in Dalbert, 2001) also
reported a significant negative relationship between depression and general BJW for a
sample of about 2,500 German adults. More recently Correia, Batista, et al. (in press)
concluded from their three experimental studies that priming the just world conditions
caused increase in life satisfaction of students. Some other studies indirectly allude to
importance of belief in just world for psychological well-being. These studies measure
self-defeating behavior, and Type A behavior as indicators of low well-being and
provide evidence that BJW acts as buffer against them. For example, Schill, Beyler,
and Morales (1992) reported that especially men low in BJW showed a strong tendency
toward self-defeating behavior. Another evidence for the health promotion effects of
the BJW was provided by a study exploring Type A behavior considered to be a
predictor of coronary heart diseases. Those who were afraid that justice would not
prevail in the long run proved to be more likely to display Type A behavior (Burke,
1985).
The above mentioned studies provide the evidence for role of BJW in enhancement of
well-being in both victims of injustice and non-victims. But it is only with the help of
comparison studies that it can be demonstrated if BJW is more significantly related
with well-being of victims than of non-victims. In this reference Brown and Grover
(1998) compared the psychological distress of 549 police officers exposed to either
high or low levels of stress. Police officers who were high in BJW showed significantly
less psychological distress than those low in BJW. The results were true for the
subgroups of police officers facing high or low levels of stress. However, Dalbert
(1998) concluded from her study on unemployed women, mothers of a disabled child,
and students that although those who were high in BJW were more satisfied with their
life and displayed a better overall mood level than their counterparts who were low in
BJW, but the relationship between belief in just world and life satisfaction was stronger
for victims than for non-victims. In a different sample of unemployed women, mothers
of a disabled child and female students Dalbert (2001) observed that relationship of
BJW with life satisfaction was significantly stronger for victims than for non-victims.
Moreover, mothers of disabled children had overall better mood than women in other
two groups. In another study Dalbert (as cited in Dalbert, 2001) compared the
relationship between BJW and mental health in a group of German female students and
women who were expecting to lose their jobs. She found that women high in BJW were
32
more satisfied with their life and showed a better overall mood level even after the age
and group membership was controlled before the effect of BJW was analyzed. In
addition, buffering effect of BJW was observed for negative mood state in victim
sample only. In the same vein Dalbert (2002) conducted two experiments to study the
effect of beliefs in a just world as a buffer against anger. Overall, it was concluded that
general BJW functioned as a buffer against anger in an anger arousing situation, but not
in happy, sad or neutral situation.
Despite the evidence for strong relationship between BJW and well-being provided by
above mentioned studies some studies report mixed findings regarding BJW and well-
being relationship. For example, Benson and Ritter (1990) in a study of unemployed
and working adults found a negative relationship between BJW and depressive
symptoms in working adults and positive relationship for unemployed individuals.
Lipkus et al. (1996) reported on two studies with student samples. In the first study they
did not find relationship between BJW and different dimensions of psychological well-
being, but in the second study they observed negative relationship between BJW and
depression, and a positive relationship between BJW and life satisfaction. After
controlling for the big five personality dimensions, especially neuroticism and
extraversion, the BJW’s relationship with depressive symptoms and life satisfaction
were still significant. Dalbert (1998) observed that BJW was positively related to
depression in sample of unemployed women and mothers of mentally retarded children.
Another study conducted by Cheung and Kwok (1996) reported a negative relationship
between BJW and mental health. In their sample of Hong Kong students, BJW was part
of a broader factor reflecting a conservative orientation, and this conservative
orientation proved to correlate positively with hopelessness. Correia, Batista, et al. (in
press) did not observe the role of BJW in mood enhancement.
Overall studies conducted on diverse samples, for example, victims of spinal cord
injuries, unemployed women, women threatened by job security, mothers of disabled
children, working adults, police officers, and school and university students, provide
quite a convincing evidence for strong relationship between BJW and psychological
well-being. This evidence is provided through direct as well as indirect indicators of
well-being, and two studies (Correia, Batista, et al., in press; Dalbert, 2002), which
were experimental in nature, confirm the cause and effect relationship between BJW
33
and well-being. Moreover, comparison studies also provide some support for buffer
hypotheses which states that role of BJW is more pronounced in enhancement of well-
being in those who face adverse situations than those who do not go through such
circumstances.
Line of research that distinguishes between personal BJW from general BJW follows
the assumption that it is personal BJW that is related to well-being rather than general
BJW (Lipkus et al. 1996). This hypothesis has been proved with observations made on
people in every day life settings as well as on individuals going through stressful
conditions of life.
Most of the studies that have been conducted with people in daily life settings included
school, college and university students as participants. The two studies on under
graduate students conducted to distinguish two types of beliefs found that BJW for self
predicted greater life satisfaction and less depression as compared to general BJW
(Lipkus et al. 1996). When the personality dimensions were controlled, BJW for the
self continued to predict life satisfaction but not depression. Again in four questionnaire
and one experimental study with students Dalbert (1999) confirmed that personal BJW
played more central role in predicting the psychological well-being and need to defend
this belief was more pronounced. Similar finding was reported by Cubela et al. (1999)
who carried out the study on university students, and found that level of endorsement of
BJW statements was significantly higher for the personal than general BJW scale, and
personal BJW was especially significant contributor in explaining the variance of life
satisfaction ratings. In another study with students in England Sutton and Douglas
(2005) studied the relationship between BJW for self and psychological health and
concluded that BJW for self explained variation in life satisfaction independently of
BJW for others, locus of control, self esteem and social desirable responses.
Relationship between BJW for self and life satisfaction was also consistently observed
in two studies by Sutton et al. (2008).
Importance of personal BJW has also been evidenced in school psychology. Dalbert
and Maes (2002) observed that school students with strong belief in justice for their self
were less distressed. In the same vein Dalbert and Dzuka (2004) in two studies on
German and Slovakian adolescent students reached the conclusion that personal BJW
more strongly predicted life satisfaction and positive affect than general BJW. Pattern
34
of relationship persisted after controlling for personality dimensions. Similarly Correia
and Dalbert (2007) concluded from their three studies on Portuguese school students
that personal but not general BJW consistently predicted life satisfaction after
controlling for self efficacy and self esteem. Kamble and Dalbert (2008) also reported
from study with school students in India that students strong in personal BJW
experienced less distress at school and less depressive symptoms. Besides various
studies conducted with students, one study conducted in Pakistan reported strong and
direct relationship of personal BJW with life satisfaction and overall mood level in
female college teachers after controlling for general BJW, indicating that teachers with
strong personal BJW were happier and more satisfied with their life than people whose
belief was weaker (Fatima, 2004).
Relatively few studies have been conducted on individuals facing at least apparently
unfair situations to see how personal BJW influences subjective well being in them.
Dalbert and Braun (1997) carried out a study on cancer patients. Cancer patients high in
personal BJW were less depressed and showed a better overall mood level than those
low in personal BJW. The adaptive relationship between personal BJW and different
dimensions of well-being emerged even when controlling for interpersonal trust. Old
age is usually associated with deterioration in physical as well as mental health, and
dependency on others. A study conducted with elderly people living in senior
residences in Slovakia reported that personal BJW was significantly related to life
satisfaction and affect in old people. The relationship persisted even after controlling
for subjective health and social contacts (Dzuka & Dalbert, 2006). Importance of
personal BJW has also been observed for well-being of survivors of natural disasters.
Otto, Boos Dalbert, Schops, and Hoyer (2006) observed in a corelational study that
strong personal BJW was related to less depression, anxiety and general distress in
flood victims in Germany. The associations persisted after age, sex, and other stresses
and losses were taken into account.
Comparison studies have been conducted with personal BJW to demonstrate whether
the belief works more for the victims than non-victims. Violence is generally perceived
as unfair. In this regard Dzuka and Dalbert (2007) observed in their comparative study
on teachers who reported frequent violence from their students and those who did not
report violence from their students that teachers who experienced more violence and
35
had weak personal BJW experienced more negative affect. However personal BJW was
similarly and significantly related to life satisfaction and positive affect in victims and
non victims. Similarly, Correia, Kamble, and Dalbert (in press) reported that students
who are bullied at school, those who bullied them and those who defended the bullied
students equally benefited from personal BJW. Students with strong BJW were less
distressed than week believers. Moreover, this relationship was true in both India and
Portugal. Unemployment is another form of stressful situation as it not only causes
economical dependence on others but also results in reduced confidence and
meaningful life. Dzuka and Dalbert (2002) concluded from their two studies on
unemployed individuals that personal but not general BJW significantly predicted life
satisfaction, positive mood and self esteem after controlling for sex, length of
unemployment, subjective economic condition, and personality dimensions. Personal
BJW was equally adaptive for those who had been unemployed for short period and for
those who were unemployed for longer period. Another study (Cubela & Kvartuc,
2007) observed the relationship between various facets of justice beliefs including
personal BJW and adjustment process in those who reported frequent experience of
harassment at work place and those who rarely or not at all reported harassment at
workplace. It was found that BJW was beneficial for everyone irrespective of whether
they were harassed or not.
Taken collectively, these studies underline that psychological well-being is more
strongly correlated with the personal BJW than with the general BJW, and although the
relationship is valid for victims of injustice as well as people in daily life settings there
is some evidence that BJW is particularly helpful in reducing negative symptoms in
victims of violence.
General BJW can be further classified into ultimate and immanent belief in justice as
suggested by Maes (1998b). One is the tendency to perceive or see justice in the events
that have occurred (belief in immanent justice) and the other is the tendency to believe
that any unjust experience at present will be compensated in future (belief in ultimate
justice). The importance of this distinction has been demonstrated in the area of well-
being with the finding that belief in ultimate justice explains mental health significantly
more than belief in immanent justice. In a study on attitude towards severe illness belief
in ultimate justice was positively associated with ability to find meaning in severe
36
illness, and the hope that one will be treated successfully. Belief in immanent justice
was not related to any of these dimensions (Maes, 1998b). In another study on school
students, Maes and Kals (2002) reported that belief in immanent justice was positively
related to school anxiety and fear of others and belief in ultimate justice was negatively
related to stress. Similarly, another study (Maes & Kals, 2004) showed that belief in
ultimate justice was positively related with students’ satisfaction with their
achievement, with one’s school and with one’s private life. Belief in immanent justice
was also positively related to satisfaction with achievements and with school, but
relationship was significantly weaker for satisfaction with school. Moreover, belief in
immanent justice was negatively related with satisfaction with one’s private life.
Although very few studies have been conducted with immanent and ultimate belief in
justice, the overall conclusion seems to favor the notion that ultimate but not immanent
belief in justice is adaptive.
2.4 Other Psychological Resources This section will describe studies investigating relationship of other psychological
resources with BJW and well-being. Researches on a number of psychological
variables will be discussed here, i.e., perceived control, self efficacy and perceived
social support.
A number of studies point to the adaptive role of perception of control. DeNeve and
Cooper (1998) reported from a meta analyses that sense of control and related concepts,
for example, internal locus of control (Emmons & Diener, 1985) or desire of control
(Burger, 1992) are among the strongest predictors of subjective well being. The
importance of perceived control and locus of control is also supported by studies that
have found these variables to function as moderators of the relation between stressors
and adaptation outcomes. For example, Edge (2002) found Perceived control to be
positively correlated with personal well-being in women diagnosed with breast cancer
as well as in the comparison group. Another study by Misajon and Cummins (2001)
indicated the importance of control with regard to the subjective well being in both
patients of arthritis and normal population.
Studies differentiating primary and secondary control also report the strong relationship
between subjective well-being and the two dimensions of control. Heeps (2000)
37
concluded from his two studies that people who had high levels of both control had
more positive affect and positive thinking than people who were high on one control
and low on the other. Moreover, secondary control played its adaptive role in people
with high as well as low primary control. Petito and Cummins (2000) also observed
that in adolescents both of primary and secondary control strategies benefitted their
subjective quality of life. In the same vein, Maher and Cummins (2001) reported that
subjective quality of life of both young people of ages 18 to 25 years and old people of
ages 65 to 89 years was predicted by both primary and secondary control although
impact of secondary control was marginally significant for elderly people. Another
study conducted on people with the age range of 18 years to 89 years reported the
importance of both primary and secondary control in predicting subjective well-being
(Hollway, 2003). Lake (2004) also reported that primary and secondary control was
positively related to life satisfaction in a large sample of adults. Cousins (2001)
although could not find discrimination between primary and secondary control
concluded that approach control (which included both primary and secondary control
items) predicted subjective quality of life in both caregivers of mentally ill patients and
non-caregivers after controlling for personality. Overall there is convincing evidence
that primary and secondary control strategies predict well-being of young adults as well
as old people. This was true for both forms of control and studies did not reach the
consensus regarding the superiority of one over the other.
Relationship between belief in a just world and control has also been observed in early
researches (Lerner, 1980; Rubin & Peplau, 1973; Zuckerman & Gerbasi, 1977a,
1977b). Important thing to be noted is that all of theses studies were conducted with
scales using items relating to primary control thus ignoring the secondary control which
might be a very important coping strategy when one is not able to change the external
environment.
Another construct similar to perceived control is self-efficacy. Various researches
report that self-efficacy is related to different aspects of psychological well-being for
individuals in different situations, e.g., in heart patients personal efficacy has been
reported to be related to life satisfaction (Waltz & Bandura, 1988). Similar results have
been observed for people with spinal cord injuries (Hampton, 1998; Hampton &
Marshall, 2000), and members of mutual aid organization (Cheung & Sun, 2000). High
38
self-efficacy has been found to be associated with low level of depression in
adolescents (Stewart et al., 2004) and indirectly influencing anxiety through its effect
on self esteem in both adolescents and children (Dahlbeck & Lightsey, 2008). In older
adults also belief in one’s abilities has been found to be negatively related to depression
in both males and females (Holahan, Holahan, & Belk, 1984). Two studies conducted
in Pakistan also identified significant negative relationship between general self-
efficacy and depression in a sample of physically handicapped adolescents (Tabassum
& Rehman, 2005) and in adult hospitalized stroke patients (Nawaz, 2004).
Several studies have shown that self-efficacy contributes to psychological well-being of
both mothers and fathers with children of different ages and problems (e.g., Lam &
Kwok, 2003; Taylor, 2001). In another study, Hastings and Brown (2002) observed that
behavioral problems of children lowered mothers’ self-efficacy which in turn resulted
in depression and anxiety in these mothers. Hassall et al. (2005) observed that parenting
efficacy significantly predicted parental stress in mothers of children with intellectual
disability. Christian (2007) also identified self-efficacy as an important contributor of
satisfaction in these mothers.
In more general population, Maciejewski (2000) concluded from a large scale study
with more than 2000 adults that self-efficacy mediates the relationship between stresses
of life and depression. Luszczynska, Guti rrez-Do a, and Schwarzer (2005) also
reported positive relationship of self-efficacy with life satisfaction in Poland, Turkey
and America, with positive effect in Costa Rica and negative relationship with anxiety
and depression in Costa Rica and Germany.
Although self-efficacy has been vastly reported in research literature as adaptive for
people of all ages and in variety of situations, yet there are few studies which contradict
these findings. For example, in a longitudinal study in which the effects of learned
helplessness, cognitive distortions, self-efficacy and optimism were observed on
depression in cardiac patients, it was found out that although self-efficacy was
significantly correlated with depression it did not predict it. Only optimism seemed to
predict it (Shnek, Irvine, Stewart, & Abbey, 2001). Similarly in another study with
diabetic patients, Connell, Davis, Gallant, and Sharpe (1994) studied the role of social
support, self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and illness threat on depression and found
that outcome expectancies and self-efficacy were not significant predictors of
39
depression. In nut shell self-efficacy has been reported to be an important correlate of
well-being in variety of situations. Despite its reported importance in various studies
some studies which took into account other socio-cognitive variables cast doubt on its
predictive value.
As far as the relationship between BJW and self efficacy is concerned Begue (2005)
concludes from his study that BJW for self performs a stress buffering role in
association with self efficacy. Hafer and Olson (1998) concluded from their study that
although beliefs in a just world were not significantly correlated with total scores on
Paulhus’s measure of locus of control, they were marginally correlated with personal
efficacy scale of the measure.
Perceived social support is another important variable linked with person’s well-being.
It is well established that people who perceive themselves to be supported by others
exhibit more positive mental health than those who perceive themselves as not having
support from others and perceived support has been observed to be more effective than
actual number of people in contact (for a review, see Penninx, Kriegsman, VanEijk,
Boeke, & Deeg, 1996). There are studies which show that people with high stress
benefit more from social support than people with low stress (e.g., Pengilly & Dowd,
2000) while the other studies show importance of social support in all conditions of life
(e.g., Stroebe, Stroebe, Abakoumkin, & Schut, 1996).
Sufferings from chronic or acute physical problems have long been considered
stressful. For example, Connel et al. (1994) observed direct and indirect effects of
perceived availability of social support on depression in diabetic patients. Similarly, in
a sample of heart patients significant relationships of support with positive and negative
moods and life satisfaction were observed after coronary bypass surgery over a period
of one year (King, 1993). Persons with spinal cord injury have also been reported to
benefit from social support by experiencing more satisfaction with life and feeling less
depression (Rintala, Young, Hart, Clearman, & Fuhrer, 1992). In another study effect
of social support from different resources on mental health, mediated by self-care
efficacy, was observed in severe acute respiratory syndrome survivors (Mak, Law,
Woo, Cheung, & Lee, 2009).
40
Social support has also been studied helping the caregivers of people suffering from
various physical and psychological problems. In a study social support positively
predicted life satisfaction and negatively predicted depression in both black and white
family caregivers of patients with dementia (Haley et al., 1996). Mothers are usually
primary caregivers of their children and if their children suffer from some chronic
problems the care-giving job becomes particularly stressful for them. Dunst, Trivette,
and Hamby (1994) also observed role of social support in reducing distress in parents
of special children. Horton and Wallander (2001) observed that both satisfaction with
available support and number of available supporters played their role in dampening the
ill effects of maternal distress. Similarly Feldman, McDonald, Serbin, Stack, Secco,
and Yu (2007) observed that social support mediated and moderated the relationship
between child behavior problems and caregiver depression. In another study social
support inversely predicted depression in mothers of special children, but it failed to
predict anxiety in the same group (Weiss, 2002).
Although there is convincing amount of literature that suggests importance of social
support for well-being in mothers of special children some studies point out that this
relationship is confounded by other variables. Ben-Zur, Duvdavany, and Lury (2005)
found social support to be strongly related to life satisfaction, depression and distress in
mothers of intellectually disabled children but after controlling for personality variables
it no longer predicted any of well-being dimensions. In another study Hassall et al.
(2005) found family support to be related to parenting stress but it did not predict stress
when child’s level of behavior problems, and parenting efficacy were controlled for.
Social support has also been observed to benefit the individuals who are not
particularly prone to stresses. For example, Vella-Brodrick (2005) reported importance
of social support in explaining psychological well-being, in a sample of adult males and
females, after controlling for personality and demographic factors. Similarly social
support predicted subjective well-being and negative affect in a large sample of adults
(Gallagher & Vella-Brodrick, 2006). In another study on prison officers social support
reduced the effects of work stressors on burnout (Roman, Joanna, Jan, & Magdalena,
2008). Relationship with other people has been observed to be related to well being in
people of different races. In a study on black and white women social support was
41
strongly related to life satisfaction and depression in both groups (Griffin, Amodeo,
Clay, Fassler, & Ellis, 2006).
Findings from the studies conducted in Pakistan go in line with studies reported in
other countries. For example, Khan (1996) reported that high anxious students
perceived fewer sources of support available to them as compared to low anxious
students. Similarly Pakistani students with better social support reported more
satisfaction with life and less depression (Malik, 2002). In a large scale survey Suhail
and Chaudhary (2004) also found that social support was related to happiness in adults
from different spheres of life in a major city of Pakistan, Lahore, and its suburbs. In
sum perceived social support has been reported as a strong predictor of various well-
being dimensions in stressful as well as non stressful conditions of life but there are
studies that report that personality (Ben-Zur, Duvdavany, & Lury, 2005) and
environmental factors (Hassall, Rose, & McDonald, 2005) do influence this
relationship at least in mothers of special children.
Although not much work has been done to show how social support is related with
BJW, at least one study demonstrate that BJW is associated with trust in others in time
of need (Dalbert & Braun, 1997).
2.5 Demographic Variables In general demographics have been reported to contribute very little to subjective well-
being (Diener et al. 1999; Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1999). However, there are number of
studies which throw light on relationship between demographic variables and well-
being in mothers of special children and in general population.
In Pakistan less educated mothers of seriously ill children have been reported to be
suffering from more depression than more educated mothers (Iqbal & Siddiqui, 2002).
Similar findings were observed for mothers of emotionally handicapped children
(Naeem, 2001). Education has also been found to be negatively related to anxiety in
women in general (Iqbal, Nadeem, & Fatima, 2004). However, Ben-Zur et al. (2005)
did not find education as predictor of mother’s mental health.
There are also inconsistent findings for age of the children contributing to mothers’
well-being. In this reference, mothers of young children with and without disabilities
42
reported significantly higher levels of stress (Behr & Murphy, 1993). Glidden and
Schoolcraft (2003) in an eleven year follow-up study of intellectually disabled children
observed that depression of mothers was highest at the time of birth of their child. It
significantly reduced by the age of five and again increased by the age of 12. However,
Herman and Marcenko (1997) did not observe association between age of child and
parental stress. Similarly, McConkey, Kennedy, Chang, Jarran, and Schukri (2008)
were not able to find significant relationship of age of the child with maternal well-
being in a study on five to eighteen years old intellectually disabled children.
Besides role of age of children in well-being of mothers there is some evidence that
suggest that mothers with more children face more parenting stress than mothers with
less number of children (Lavee & Sharlin, 1996). Number of children was also
positively associated with anxiety in non-working women in Pakistan (Iqbal et al.,
2004).
Various studies show that life satisfaction is stable over life span (Diener, Lucas, &
Oishi, 2002; Ehrlich & Isaacowitz, 2002; Lucas & Gohm, 2000; Suhail & Chaudhary,
2004), while there are rather inconsistent findings regarding the association between
age and affect. Diener et al. and Lucas and Gohm observed that positive affect declined
with age while Ehrlich and Isaacowitz observed that middle aged people had highest
level of positive affect and younger people had lowest level. Suhail and Chaudhary did
not observe any association between age and happiness in their large scale study in
Pakistan.
More consistent findings have been reported for the effect of marital status. Married
people have been reported to be more happy than unmarried people all over the world
(Diener, Gohm, Suh, & Oishi, 2000; Suhail & Chaudhary, 2004). More specifically
single mothers of special children have been observed to be more distressed than
married mothers (Eisenhower & Blacker, 2006). Mental health of single mothers was
poorer than married mothers in Ireland, Taiwan and Jordan (McConkey et al., 2008).
Similarly, single mothers of intellectually disabled children were more depressed than
mothers living with a partner, however, marital status was not related to depression in
mothers of typically developing children (Olsson & Hwang, 2001).
43
Apart from these factors income and money has been observed to be related with
subjective well-being in various nations of the world (Diener, Diener, & Diener, 1995;
Diener & Oishi, 2000; Suhail & Chaudhary, 2004). More specifically financial
resources have been found to be related to positive perceptions and adaptations in
families of children with disabilities. For example, Mak and Ho (2007) found that
family income significantly predicted positive perceptions in mothers of intellectually
disabled children even after controlling for education, social support and coping styles.
Similarly, Sloper et al. (1991) observed that financial problems, employment of father
and mother were related to life satisfaction of mothers of children with Down
syndrome. However, Olsson and Hwang (2001) did not find relationship between socio
economic status and depression in parents of intellectually disabled children.
Demographic variables have not been of much interest for the researchers in the field of
BJW (for reviews, see Furnham, 2003; Furnham & Procter, 1989). Nevertheless, few
studies report rather inconsistent relationship of demographics with BJW. For example
Peplau and Tyler (1975) observed inverse association between age and BJW in men but
no association in women. On the other hand Smith and Green (1984) observed positive
correlation between age and BJW in women but no association in men. More recently
Dalbert (2001) reported curvilinear relationship between age and BJW. She observed
that BJW lost their strength from adolescence to young adulthood. In adulthood and
middle age they were rather stable and after age of 50 there was again increase in
strength of BJW. Smith and Green found low income groups had weaker BJW than
high income groups whereas, Rubin and Peplau (1973) could not find relationship
between social class and BJW.
Reported inconsistencies in the associations of SWB and BJW with demographics may
be due to the differences in cultures in which these studies have been conducted.
Therefore it is important to include them in the study to understand the unique
contribution of BJW in explaining well-being.
Overall, there is convincing evidence that beliefs in just world have an adaptive value
for people in general as well as for people going through stressful conditions of life.
Simultaneously impact of certain psychological and demographic variables on well-
being and how they relate with BJW with reference to various studies has been
reviewed. Therefore, it is pertinent to study all these variables together as potential
44
predictors of SWB in mothers of Down syndrome children, who are generally thought
to be living in more stressful conditions as compared to mothers of normal children, in
order to get a better understanding of contribution of beliefs in a just world after the
other variables are controlled. By comparing these mothers of Down syndrome children
with those of normal it will be possible to examine if the BJW act as buffer to enhance
well-being in stressful conditions or it acts as a personal resource in all conditions of
life. Moreover, by including three dimensions of BJW it will be possible to study their
role independent of each other in explaining well-being which has not been done in any
of the previous studies. In addition, comparison of the two groups with reference to
strength of BJW will throw light on how the BJW is influenced by the stressful
situations of life. However, as the literature review does not provide the conclusive
evidence whether the BJW is weakened or strengthened in response to the adverse
circumstances no hypothesis was formed in this regard. Following hypotheses were
formulated regarding the association of different dimensions of BJW with four aspects
of well-being.
2.6 Hypotheses 1. Personal belief in a just world will be positively related to life satisfaction in
both groups of mothers.
2. Personal belief in a just world will be positively related to mood level in both
groups of mothers.
3. Personal belief in a just world will be negatively related to depression in both
groups of mothers.
4. Personal belief in a just world will be negatively related to anxiety in both
groups of mothers.
5. Belief in ultimate justice will be positively related to life satisfaction in both
groups of mothers.
6. Belief in ultimate justice will be positively related to mood level in both groups
of mothers.
45
7. Belief in ultimate justice will be negatively related to depression in both groups
of mothers.
8. Belief in ultimate justice will be negatively related to anxiety in both groups of
mothers.
9. Personal belief in a just world will positively predict life satisfaction after
controlling for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups
of mothers.
10. Belief in ultimate justice will positively predict life satisfaction after controlling
for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.
11. Personal belief in a just world will positively predict mood level after
controlling for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups
of mothers.
12. Belief in ultimate justice will positively predict mood level after controlling for
demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.
13. Personal belief in a just world will negatively predict depression after
controlling for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups
of mothers.
14. Belief in ultimate justice will negatively predict depression after controlling for
demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.
15. Personal belief in a just world will negatively predict anxiety after controlling
for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.
16. Belief in ultimate justice will negatively predict anxiety after controlling for
demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.
17. The expected relationships between BJW and well-being would be stronger in
mothers of a child with Down syndrome than in mothers of normal children.
46
Chapter 3
3 METHOD
This chapter is concerned with the description of methodology employed in phase 1
and phase 11 of the study. The primary objective of the phase 1 was to translate and
adapt the instruments to be used in main investigation, whereas the phase 11 was
conducted to answer the research questions raised in this work.
3.1 Phase 1: Translation and Adaptation of the Scales Phase 1 was conducted in two steps. In step 1 research measures were translated into
Urdu and their content validity was determined, while in step II equivalence of English
and Urdu versions of the research instruments was assessed. Different samples were
taken in both steps. For step I, mothers from different educational backgrounds were
taken to see if the items were clearly understandable by the variety of women with
respect to education, while to assess the equivalence of English and Urdu versions of
the scales in step II highly educated individuals were required who could understand
both English and Urdu languages.
3.1.1 Step 1
3.1.1.1 Sample Mothers of mentally retarded children (N = 14) participated in the study. Age range of
mothers was 26 to 52 years (M = 37.43, SD = 8.49) and their educational years ranged
from 5 to 16 years. Their monthly family income ranged from none to 100,000 rupees
(M = 20714.29, SD = 25052.03). All of them were house wives and had more than one
child including the special one. Age range of their special children was 5 to 16 years (M
= 9.79, SD = 3.31) and among them there were two females and 12 male children.
3.1.1.2 Instruments The study used Urdu versions of the scales mentioned below. In cases where Urdu
translation was not available the instruments were translated into Urdu. The procedure
of translation is described along with the description of the measures that were
translated for the study.
47
3.1.1.2.1 Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)
State well being was measured with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Zigmond
and Snaith (1983) developed the scale to measure depression and anxiety. Seven items
in the scale measure anxiety and seven measure depression. The scale measures state
aspect of anxiety and depression as the person is asked to respond to the statements
according to his or her feelings in the past week. Though, interestingly the scale has the
word “hospital” in its name, it was designed to use with outpatients as well as general
population. Bjelland, Dahl, Haug, and Neckelmann (2002) in their review of the 747
identified papers that had used HADS, found that most factor analyses demonstrated a
two factor solution in good accordance with the HADS subscales for Anxiety (HADS-
A) and Depression (HADS-D). Cronbach’s alpha for HADS-A varied from .68 to .93
and for HADS-D from .67 to .90. Correlations between HADS and other commonly
used questionnaires for measuring anxiety and depression were in the range of .49 to
.83. The HADS has also been used and validated with Pakistanis living in Pakistan and
abroad. Suhail (2000) found HADS reasonably valid to use with native and British
Pakistanis. This study used original English version of the scale, whereas Mumford,
Tareen, Bajwa, Bhatti, and Karim (1991) have reported the equivalence of Urdu
version with the original version in a study on 120 bilingual Pakistani students.
On each item answers are to be given on 4-point scale ranging from zero to three with
the options that are relevant to each item as each item has different response options.
Conventionally the scores on the HADS-A and HADS-D have been calculated as sum
of scores on all items of a scale but in the present study the scale scores were obtained
by averaging the scores across the items. Possible scale scores range from 0 to 3 with
high scores meaning high anxiety and depression. Thus low scores indicated high state
well-being.
3.1.1.2.2 Trait Well-Being Inventory
Trait well-being was assessed with Trait Well-being Inventory (Dalbert, 1992). The
inventory measures cognitive and evaluative aspects of subjective well-being and
consists of Life Satisfaction Scale (seven items) and Mood Level Scale (six items).
Internal reliability of Life Satisfaction Scale has been reported as α = .87, and of Mood
Level Scale as α = .83 (with heterogeneous sample of adults, N = 1101). The two-factor
structure of the inventory was proved by means of latent structural equation modeling
48
(Dalbert, 1992). Each item is to be rated on 6-point Likert-type rating scale, giving the
score of 6 to ‘strongly agree’, 5 to ‘agree’, 4 to ‘slightly agree’, 3 to ‘slightly disagree’,
2 to ‘disagree’, and 1 to ‘strongly disagree’.
The Urdu version of Trait Well-being Inventory (Fatima, 2004) was used in the present
study. Reported alpha reliability of Life Satisfaction Scale was .89 and of Mood level
scale was .74 (Fatima, 2004). Scale scores were obtained by averaging the scores across
the items for each individual. Two negatively stated items of mood level scale were
reverse scored before calculating the scale score for mood level. Possible scale scores
range from 1 to 6 with high scores meaning high endorsement of the construct.
3.1.1.2.3 Personal Belief in a Just World Scale
The Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, 1999) has been developed to assess
the individual’s belief that the world is just for the self. There are total of seven items in
the scale. The scale is reported to have a good level of internal reliability, ranging from
α = .82 to α = .87 (Dalbert, 1999). The Alpha reliability of Urdu version of Personal
Belief in a Just world Scale was reported to be .93 for a sample of female college
teachers and the discriminant validity was also observed in the same sample which
endorsed personal BJW significantly more than the general BJW. Two-factor structure
of the Personal and General Beliefs in a Just world Scales was also confirmed in
principal component analysis with varimax rotation (Fatima & Khalid, 2007).
Each item is to be rated on 6-point Likert-type rating scale, giving the score of 6 to
‘strongly agree’, 5 to ‘agree’, 4 to ‘slightly agree’, 3 to ‘slightly disagree’, 2 ‘to
disagree’, and 1 to ‘strongly disagree’. Scale scores were obtained by averaging the
scores across the items for each individual. Possible scale score ranges from 1 to 6 with
high score meaning strong personal belief in a just world.
3.1.1.2.4 Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice
Beliefs in immanent and ultimate justice were assessed with Scales of Belief in
Immanent and Ultimate Justice (Maes, 1998b). The Scale of Belief in Immanent Justice
(five items) measures the belief that every thing that happens is an expression of justice
and the Scale of Belief in Ultimate Justice (four items) is measure of the belief that
there may be injustice but every injustice is to be resolved and compensated at some
point in the future. Differentiation between two subscales has been confirmed through
49
factor analyses. Alpha reliability of the Scale of Belief in Immanent Justice has been
reported to be .83 and of the Scale of Belief in Ultimate Justice it was .86 (Maes,
1998b). Each item is to be rated on 6-point Likert-type rating scale, giving the score of
5 to ‘strongly agree’, 4 to ‘agree’, 3 to ‘slightly agree’, 2 to ‘slightly disagree’, 1 to
‘disagree’, and 0 to ‘strongly disagree’ Scale score for each scale is obtained by
averaging the scores across the items. Possible scale score ranges from 0 to 5 with high
score meaning high expression of the construct.
Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice were originally meant to assess the
justice beliefs with reference to the severe illnesses. The items which directly alluded to
disease or illness were adapted to use the scales as measures of general beliefs in
immanent and ultimate justice after discussion with two senior psychologists before
translation into Urdu. From Scale of Belief in Immanent Justice, Item “Severe illnesses
are often a punishment for one‘s way of living” was changed into “Misfortunes are
often a punishment for one‘s way of living”. Item “Illness often follows at the heels of
improper living” was changed into “Bad happening often follows at the heels of
improper living”. Item “Hardly anyone becomes seriously ill without having deserved
it” was changed into “Hardly anyone suffers from something bad without having
deserved it”. Item “Many ill persons can only blame themselves for their suffering” was
modified into “If things go wrong one can only blame oneself for one‘s suffering.” Item
“A truly good person will seldom become very ill” was changed to “A truly good
person will seldom face misfortune.” From Scale of Belief in Ultimate Justice Item “In
the long run, the injustice imposed by illness receives appropriate reparation” was
changed to “ In the long run, the injustice imposed by misfortune receives appropriate
reparation” and item “Even terrible illnesses are often compensated for by fortunate
happenstance later in life ” was modified to “Even terrible problems are often
compensated for by fortunate happenstance later in life.”
Adapted Scales of Belief in Ultimate and Immanent Justice were translated into Urdu
following forward and back translation procedures. Five bilinguals (one MPhil and four
MPhil students in Psychology who were also teaching psychology at college level)
were asked to translate items of these questionnaires into Urdu. They were told that it
was a part of PhD project and they should translate the items in a way that could
convey the meaning present in them as clearly as possible. Their independent
translations were then discussed item by item with a PhD bilingual scholar and the
50
most suitable translations, in terms of their resemblance with expression conveyed by
the English items, and in terms of understandability, were selected. The new Urdu text
was given to five other bilinguals (one PhD, two MPhil and two PhD students in
Psychology), who were requested to back translate it into English. Back translations of
each were then evaluated to determine whether the precise meaning of the items in the
original version had been successfully conveyed. All the back translations conveyed the
same meaning as conveyed by the English version of the questionnaire.
3.1.1.2.5 Sarason Social Support Short-Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6)
Sarason, Sarason, Shearin, and Pierce (1987) prepared an abbreviated version of the 27-
item Social Support Questionnaire (Sarason et al., 1983). Six items, each of which has
two parts, are presented. The first part of each item assesses the number of people that
the individual thinks can support him or her when a particular problem occurs. The
individual can indicate up to nine persons who support him or her. In the second part of
each item individual is asked to indicate how much satisfied he or she is with the help
that he or she gets from those people on a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from very
dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (6). Alpha coefficients for SSQ-6 have been reported to
range from .90 to .93 for both number and satisfaction scores.
The questionnaire was translated following the same procedure that was adopted for the
translation of Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice as given in section
1.1.1.2.4.
3.1.1.2.6 Personal Perceived Control Scale
The Personal Perceived Control scale (Hollway, 2003) consists of two subscales. The
Primary Control Scale assesses the strategies to solve the problem directly and
secondary control scale assesses the strategies to bring cognitive changes when there is
a problem. The scale is based on items developed by Cousins (2001). Three items
measure primary and the same number of items assess secondary control. Hollway
(2003) reports the two-factor structure of the six-item Personal Perceived Control Scale
from principal component analysis. In Hollway’s study, though all the secondary
control items were highly loaded on factor 1 (named secondary control) and the
primary control items loaded strongest on factor 2 (named primary control), two items
of primary control items (item 5 and item 6) were also loaded on factor 1 with loadings
greater than .30 on the secondary control factor indicating that two processes may
51
possess some common aspects. Alpha reliabilities of .74 and .87 have been reported for
the Secondary and Primary Control Scales. All items are positively stated and start with
“when some thing bad happens to me.” Each item is to be rated on 11-point rating scale
ranging from strongly disagree (0) to strongly agree (10).
The scale was translated following the same procedure that was adopted for the
translation of Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice as provided in section
1.1.1.2.4.
3.1.1.2.7 Generalized Self Efficacy Scale
Generalized Self-Efficacy scale with ten items (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) assesses
individual’s belief in his or her ability to deal successfully with variety of situations in
general. The scale has been observed to be uni-dimensional in factor analysis.
Cronbach alpha for the scale has been observed to range from .75 to .91. Test retest
reliability coefficient for six months period was found to be .67, for one year it was .75
and .55 and for two years period it was .47 and .63 (for a review, see Scholz, Gutiérrez-
Doña, Sud, & Schwarzer, 2002).
Tabbasum, Rehman, Schwarzer, and Jerusalem (2003) translated this scale into Urdu.
Nawaz (2004) reported alpha reliability of the Urdu version to be .83. Convergent
validity with well being and discriminant validity with depression were also moderate.
All items are positively stated. Each item is to be rated on a 4-point scale, giving the
score of 4 to ‘exactly true’, 3 to ‘mostly true’, 2 to ‘to some extent true’, and 1 to ‘not at
all true’. Scale score is obtained by averaging the scores across the items. Possible scale
score range from 1 to 4 with high score meaning high generalized self efficacy.
3.1.1.2.8 Demographic Data Sheet
Apart from the scales demographic information about mothers’ age (years), education
(years), and marital status (married; widowed/divorced), total number of her children,
her monthly family income (Pakistani rupees in thousands), and age of the child (years)
was also obtained on a data sheet.
3.1.1.3 Procedure Mothers were contacted through the special education schools where their special
children came daily for the training and rehabilitation. All the data were collected
through one to one administration with the mothers. Mothers were called for routine
52
meeting by the school administration and interview by the researcher was considered a
part of the meeting. The study was introduced as an attempt to investigate mothers’
experiences of upbringing their children. Consent to participate in the study was taken
from the mothers (see Appendix A). The instructions about how to respond to the
statements, written on the booklet of the questionnaires, were read to them and they
were encouraged to ask to repeat the item if they could not follow it. The researcher
and the participant sat side by side with the book let of the questionnaires in the hand of
the researcher in a way that interviewee could see and read the items if she wanted to.
Mothers were encouraged to give any comments on items or the response categories
and to report if they had problem in understanding of any of the items. Any comments
or queries were noted down. Average time taken for an administration of questionnaires
was 45 minutes.
3.1.1.4 Results Items which mothers found difficult to understand were identified and noted down.
Overall there were two items from Scales of Belief in Immanent Justice, three from
Mood Level Scale and two from Generalized Self Efficacy Scale that at least one out of
14 participants reported difficulty in understanding. They were discussed with a senior
bilingual psychologist in the light of comments and responses made to these items and
were rephrased as shown in Table 3.1. The two negatively stated items of Mood level
scale as shown in Table 3.1 were rephrased as positively stated items keeping in view
the difficulty of the participants in responding to these items. So the original reverse
scoring method for these items was also changed according to the meaning of the
statements. Apart from these items mothers did not report problem in understanding of
any of the items in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Life satisfaction Scale of
Trait Well Being Inventory, Belief in Ultimate Justice Scale, Personal Belief in a Just
World Scale, Personal Perceived Control Scale and SSQ-6.
Mothers also reported confusion with response categories of six-point Likert type rating
scales for Trait Well Being Inventory, Personal Belief in Just World Scale, and Scales
of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice and Satisfaction Scale of Social Support
Short Form Questionnaire and 11- point rating scale for Personal Perceived Control
Scale. For all these scales, the main problem appeared to be with number of options
available for responding. No problem was reported for categories of 4-point rating scale
53
of Generalized Self Efficacy Scale. Therefore the response categories of the six-point
and ten-point scales were reduced to 4- points, giving the score of 4 to ‘exactly true’, 3
to ‘mostly true’, 2 to ‘to some extent true’, and 1 to ‘not at all true’ for Trait Well Being
Inventory, Personal Belief in Just World Scale, Scales of Belief in Immanent and
Ultimate Justice and Personal Perceived Control Scale. Response categories for
Satisfaction Scale of SSQ-6 were also reduced to four categories with 4 for ‘very
satisfied’, 3 for satisfied’, 2 for ‘dissatisfied’ and 1 for ‘very dissatisfied’.
Table 3.1
Problematic Items and their Original and Revised translations
54
3.1.2 Step II
3.1.2.1 Sample Bilingual females with age range of 21 to 51 years, and with minimum education of 16
years, both married and unmarried (N = 35), participated in the study. Overall 40
females were approached. Participants with minimum education of Masters were
selected to ensure that only bilinguals who understand both English and Urdu are
included in the sample. Two of them refused to participate, while three left at least one
set of questionnaires incomplete. Hence the final sample consisted of 35 participants
for phase II of the tryout study.
3.1.2.2 Instruments English and adapted Urdu versions of the scales/questionnaires already used and
discussed in step 1 were used in the present study except Hospital Anxiety and
Depression Scale which had already been translated into Urdu following standard
procedures (Mumford et al., 1991).
Scores for each participant were calculated by averaging the scores across the items on
each scale. High scores indicated high endorsement of the construct in all scales.
3.1.2.3 Procedure Bilingual females were approached individually at the Department of Psychology,
GCU Lahore, and University of the Punjab. Initially it was decided to administer the
Urdu and English versions of the questionnaires with time gap of at least 24 hours but
as most of the respondents did not agree to give time for the administration of second
questionnaire it was decided to administer the two versions in one sitting. Written
consent was taken before administration of the questionnaires (see Appendix B). They
were told that the study was part of the PhD study and they would be given two sets of
questionnaires one after the other and they might feel some repetition in them but they
had to respond to the two sets independently of what they had responded before. They
were informed that the information derived from them will be kept secret and will be
used for only research purpose. Moreover, they were also told about their right to
withdraw from the study participation at any stage. In that case they were told that any
previous data or record will be destroyed. Half of them were given first the set of Urdu
questionnaires/scales and then the set of English questionnaires/scales and half were
55
given first the set of English version then the set of Urdu version after they had
completed the first one whether Urdu or English. They were encouraged to give any
comments on items or the response categories and to report if they had problem in
understanding any of the items. The time taken to complete each set varied between 30
to 40 minutes.
3.1.2.4 Results Pearson product moment correlations were calculated between Urdu and English
version of the scales/questionnaires and are presented in Table 3.2, which shows that all
the Urdu translations were significantly correlated with their English versions.
Table 3.2
Correlations between Urdu and English Versions of the Scales (N = 35)
Scales r
Trait Well-Being Inventory
Life Satisfaction Scale .82*
Mood Level Scale .64*
Personal Belief in a Just World Scale .78*
Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate justicea
Belief in Ultimate Justice Scale .61*
Belief in Immanent Justice Scale .76*
Personal Perceived Control Scales
Primary Control Scale .65*
Secondary Control Scale .76*
Generalized Self Efficacy Scale .81*
SSQ-6
Satisfaction with Support .92*
Availability of Support .96*
Note. aadapted English version of the scales were administered along with Urdu version
* p < .001.
56
Table 3.3
Correlations between English Scales (Light face) and their Urdu Versions (Bold face) (N = 35)
Mood Level
Personal Belief in a Just World
Belief in ultimate Justice
Belief in immanent
Justice Primary Control
Secondary Control
Self Efficacy
Satisfaction with Support
Availability of Support
Life satisfaction .58*** .73*** .30 .10 .35* .42** .65*** .05 .37 .63*** .74*** .43** .18 .27 .17 .48** .07 .27
Z .34 .20 .82 .53 .52 1.71 1.54 .15 .84 Mood Level .48** -.00 .23 .23 .25 .48* -.05 .43** .50** .36* .23 .46** .31** .69*** .19 .51**
Z .14 1.92 .01 1.32 .32 1.66 .85 .65 Personal Belief in Just World .39** .24 .40* .50** .61*** -.04 .18 .22 .33 .42 .38* .51** -.10 .17
Z 1.02 .59 .09 .87 .92 .51 .06 Belief in ultimate justice .09 .46** .62*** .37* .10 .12 .15 .41 .38 .35* -.06 .32
Z .37 .35 1.73 .08 1.00 1.30 Belief in immanent Justice .24 .36* .37* -.03 .18 .03 .40* .39* .04 .07
Z 1.18 .30 .15 .00 .85 Primary control .62*** .49** .02 .26 .45** .62*** -.02 .48**
Z 1.34 1.11 .27 1.56 Secondary control .52** .20 -.07 .58** .04 .19
Z .60 1.19 1.93 Self Efficacy .09 .45* .08 .54**
Z .09 .51 Satisfaction with Support -.11 -.00
Z 1.15
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
57
Pearson product moment correlations were also calculated for English and Urdu versions
of the scales separately as presented in Table 3.3 and the significance of the difference
between the correlations of the two versions was checked with Z test using the “SteigerD
version 1.0” software (Stoeber, 2000) which is based on procedures described by Steiger
(1980). All the Z values were within the confidence interval of ±1.96 (p > .05) indicating
that bilateral correlations between scores on English versions of the scales/questionnaires
are similar to correlations between scores on the their Urdu version. Overall conclusion
from results in Tables 3.2 and 3.3 is that the Urdu translations of questionnaires/scales are
equivalent to their English versions.
3.2 Phase II: Main study
3.2.1 Sample Data were collected from two groups of mothers: mothers of a child with Down syndrome
and mothers of normal children.
Mothers of a child with Down syndrome (n = 100) were selected from the 10 special
education schools in Lahore which their special child was attending for rehabilitation
purpose. In all there were 28 schools for intellectually disabled children in Lahore. Out of
them four schools had no child with Down syndrome at the time of study, and two refused
to refer to mothers of children enrolled in their schools. From the remaining 22 schools 12
did not have a medical specialist associated with them to diagnose the syndrome. The data
was collected from remaining 10 schools. The total number of enrolled students in these
schools was 879 at the time of study. Out of them there were 168 clinically diagnosed
children with Down syndrome of the age 4 to 16 years. Mothers of all of them were
requested to participate. In all 104 mothers appeared for the interview. Three of them were
excluded as they did not understand Urdu, the national language of Pakistan, and one left
the school without meeting the researcher, thus leaving a total response rate of 59.52%.
3.2.1.1 Including and excluding criteria for mothers of a child with Down syndrome
Including criteria
1. Mother who had a child diagnosed with Down syndrome by a medical practitioner.
58
2. Mothers whose Down syndrome child was of 4–16 years of age.
3. Mothers whose Down syndrome child was getting education in special education
centers.
Excluding criteria
1. Mothers who were not able to come to school either due to physical illness, for
being out of the city or because of some other engagement.
2. Mothers whose Down syndrome children were getting education with normal
children.
3. Those who did not understand Urdu and were not able to answer according to
given response categories.
Another sample of 100 mothers of normal children was included in the study. These
mothers were matched with mothers of Down syndrome children on marital status,
education, and monthly family income. Moreover, they also had a child with the similar
age of that with Down syndrome as given in Table 3.4. The mothers of normal children
were identified and contacted through researcher’s personal acquaintances (who were
informed about the matching criteria for these mothers). Overall 178 mothers were
contacted. Ten of them were excluded as they did not understand Urdu. Four reported
some sort of disability in any of their children, and 64 refused to participate and, thus
leaving 100 mothers with a total response rate of 56.2%, similar to that reported for other
group of mothers.
3.2.1.2 Including and excluding criteria for mothers of normal children
Including criteria
1. Mothers who were matched on the demographic grouping provided in the Table 3.4.
2. Mothers whose children were going to school and attending the classes according to
their chronological age.
Excluding criteria
1. Mothers who had a child with any physical or psychological handicap.
2. Those who did not understand Urdu and were not able to answer according to given
response categories.
59
Table 3.4
Frequency Distribution of Mothers of Normal and Down syndrome Children According to
their Demographic Status (n = 100 each)
Marital status Married Widow/Divorced Monthly Family income (Pakistani rupees in thousands) Age of the
child (years) Education of
mother (years) 0-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 > 100 0-20 21-40 41-60 n 4-8 0-5 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2
6-10 7 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 9
11-14 7 4 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 13
15 and above 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
9-12 0-5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
6-10 10 3 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 17
11-14 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 12
15 and above 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3
13-16 0-5 6 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 9
6-10 9 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 14
11-14 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
15 and above 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 5
n 51 20 8 4 5 1 9 1 1 N = 100
3.2.2 Instruments Instruments translated and adapted in pilot study as detailed in section 3.1.1 and 3.1.2
were used in the main study along with demographic data sheet which enquired about
mother’s age (years), education (years), marital status (married; widowed/ divorced),
monthly family income (Pakistani rupees in thousands), total number of children, and
child’s age (years).
3.2.3 Procedure To collect the data from mothers of Down syndrome children prior permission was
obtained from the administrators of the special education schools. After the permission
was granted the mothers were called on phone or written request was sent to them by
60
school administration to participate in the study. The mothers were asked to come to the
school during the school timings on the given day if they agreed to participate. The
meetings with the mothers of normal children were arranged at the time and place of
convenience of the mothers.
Participants were informed about the study as an attempt to investigate mothers’
experiences of upbringing their children. The consent to participate in the study was also
taken from them (see Appendix A). They were informed that the information derived from
them will be kept confidential and anonymous and will only be used for research purpose.
Moreover, they were also told about their right to withdraw from the study participation at
any stage. In that case they were told that any previous data or record obtained from them
will be destroyed. The instructions about how to respond to the statements, written on the
booklet of the questionnaires, were read to them and they were encouraged to ask to repeat
the item if they could not follow it. The researcher and the participant sat side by side with
the booklet of the questionnaires in the hand of the researcher in a way that participant
could see and read the items if she wanted too. All their queries about the study were
answered after the administration of questionnaires was completed. Time taken for the
administration varied from 30 to 60 minutes.
61
Chapter 4
4 RESULTS
This chapter is divided into two sections. In section 4.1 psychometric analysis of the
scales employed in this study is described. On the basis of results obtained in this
section main analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses for the study as reported
in section 4.2. Analyses were conducted using SPSS Version 13.00.
4.1 Psychometric Analysis Factor and reliability analyses of the scales, translated and adapted in the pilot study,
were conducted on the combined data of the mothers of Down syndrome and normal
children (N = 200) to determine the construct validity and internal consistency of the
scales. Before conducting the factor analyses data were screened to check for the
suitability of the analyses. Firstly, to see if the sample size was sufficient Kaiser-
Myer-Olkin measure (KMO) of sampling adequacy was calculated. Value of KMO
near to zero indicates insufficient sample size for factor analysis and value close to 1
indicates that size of sample is enough for running the factor analysis. Secondly, as
variables in the factor analyses are supposed to correlate with each other even if they
are measuring the different aspects of same thing, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was
conducted to check the existence of minimal strength of required correlation.
Significant value at the Bartlett’s test of sphericity shows variables are fairly
correlated with each other. Thirdly, to check if the variables were not extremely
correlated as the perfect or extreme correlations make the factor analyses
meaningless, determinant of correlation matrix was checked. Value of the
determinant greater than .00001 indicates that variables are not too highly
correlated.
Two criteria were used to confirm the number of factors. Firstly, Kaiser’s (1960)
criterion of retaining as many factors as many eigen value greater than 1 was
employed. Secondly, a parallel analyses criterion (Lautenschlager, 1989) was used.
According to the criterion random eigen values are obtained and averaged for a
number of random data sets with given number of variables and sample size. It is
assumed that meaningful components extracted from actual sample data should have
62
larger eigen values than averaged eigen values for random data with same sample
size and number of variables. Therefore as many factors are to be retained as many
random eigen values are less than observed eigen values. In the present study
random eigen values were calculated using a software Raneigen version 2.0
(Enzmann, 2003) as described by Enzmann (1997). Item was kept in the scale if it
was theoretically relevant to the particular scale, and if it had factor loading greater
than .30 on that scale. Cronbach alpha was calculated to determine the internal
consistency of the sub-scales. Item total correlations (rit) were also obtained for the
subscales and validity of the following measures was assessed by the procedures
mentioned above.
4.1.1 Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was performed on 14 items of
the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. The data were examined to check for
assumptions for factor analysis. KMO yielded the value of .83 suggesting the good
sample size for factor analysis. Determinant of correlation matrix, .03, was
sufficiently greater than .00001 suggesting that multicollinearity was not the
problem. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (91, N = 200) = 681.25, p <
.001, showing that variables were sufficiently correlated.
As originally the scale consists of two sub-scales, anxiety (Items 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13)
and depression (Items 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14), the number of factors was fixed at two
before running the analysis. Three eigen values greater than 1 emerged, i.e., 4.33,
1.56, and 1.12. To confirm the two factor structure random eigen values were
calculated. For the present scale first random eigen value 1.47 was less than first
calculated value 4.33 and the second random eigen value 1.36 was also less than the
calculated value 1.56 but the remaining random eigen values were greater than
observed values thus justifying the two factor structure.
Looking at the factor loadings of the items in the varimax rotated component matrix
it can be observed that items of the original anxiety subscale were better explained
by the second factor (named anxiety) except for item 7 (“I can sit at ease and feel
relaxed”) which was better explained by factor 1 (Table 4.1). However it was
decided to retain the item in the Anxiety Scale because of its relevance to the
63
anxiety symptoms. Moreover it had factor loading greater than .30 on the factor
named anxiety and the removal of the item from that scale reduced the alpha from
.74 to .71. All items of depression scale showed higher loadings on factor 1 (named
depression). Item 2 was most heavily loaded on factor 1 (factor loading = .78), while
item 5 was most typical of factor 2 (factor loading = .68). Total variance explained
by the two factors was 42.11% with more than two third of the variance in the total
scale scores explained by the first factor (Depression). Cronbach alpha was also
calculated for the two scales separately and the two scales were found to be
adequately internally consistent (Table 4.1).
Table 4.1
Item Characteristics of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (N = 200)
Factor loadings
Items M SD Factor 1 (Depression)
Factor 2 (Anxiety) rit
α if item deleted
1 I feel tense or wound up. 1.78 1.01 .39 .51 .49 .70
3 I get a sort of frightened feeling as if something awful is about to happen. 1.38 1.06 .26 .58 .48 .70
5 Worrying thoughts go through my mind. 1.31 1.03 .09 .68 .48 .70
7 I can sit at ease and feel relaxed. 1.08 0.94 .50 .37 .42 .71
9 I get a sort of frightened feeling like butterflies in the stomach. 0.96 0.91 .37 .58 .54 .69
11 I feel restless as if I have to be on the move. 1.78 1.01 -.18 .57 .25 .75
13 I get sudden feelings of panic. 1.03 1.03 .18 .63 .50 .69
2 I still enjoy the things I used to enjoy. 1.22 1.00 .78 .05 .58 .66
4 I can laugh and see the funny side of things. 0.69 0.78 .73 .21 .57 .67
6 I feel cheerful. 0.59 0.77 .47 .34 .44 .70
8 I feel as if I am slowed down. 1.33 0.89 .38 .37 .37 .71
10 I have lost interest in my appearance. 1.32 0.92 .38 .28 .34 .72
table continues
64
Table 4.1(continued)
Factor loadings
Items M SD Factor 1 (Depression)
Factor 2 (Anxiety) rit
α if item deleted
12 I look forward with enjoyment to things. 0.81 1.01 .76 -.23 .48 .69
14 I can enjoy a good book or radio or TV program. 0.90 1.06 .47 .25 .36 .72
Eigen values 4.33 1.56
% of variance explained 30.95 11.16
α .73 .74
Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.
4.1.2 Trait Well-Being Inventory Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was performed on 13 items of
the Trait Well-Being Inventory. Data were examined for assumptions for factor
analysis. KMO value of .93 pointed to the adequacy of sample size. Determinant of
correlation matrix, .001 > .00001 suggested that variables were not very highly
correlated. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (78, N = 200) = 1323.08,
p<.001, showing that variables were fairly correlated.
As in original scale items 1 to 7 measured life satisfaction and items 8 to 13
measured mood level, number of factors was fixed at two. Three eigen values
greater than 1 emerged i.e., 6.47, 1.20, and 1.02. To confirm the two factor structure
random eigen values were calculated. First random eigen value 1.48 was less than
first calculated value 6.47 and the second random eigen value 1.33 was greater than
the observed value 1.20 thus justifying only one factor, but looking at the factor
loadings of the items in the varimax rotated component matrix in Table 4.2 a two
factor structure can be clearly observed as items 1 to 7 were highly loaded on factor
1 (life satisfaction) and items 8 to 13 were better explained by factor 2 (mood level).
On factor 1 most heavily loaded items were item 3 and 4 with factor loading of .77
and on factor 2 most heavily loaded item was item 10 with factor loading of .82.
Total variance explained by the two factors was 59.02% with more than two third of
65
the variance explained by factor 1 (life satisfaction). Cronbach alpha was calculated
for the two sub-scales separately and their reliabilities were quite good.
Table 4.2
Item Characteristics of the Trait Well-Being Inventory (N = 200)
Factor loadings
Items M SD Factor 1 (Life satisfaction)
Factor 2 (Mood level) rit
α if item deleted
1 When I look back on my life so far I am satisfied. 3.27 0.88 .65 .24 .60 .86
2 I think that time will bring some more interesting and pleasant experiences. 3.41 0.80 .63 .14 .50 .87
3 I am satisfied with my life. 3.16 0.95 .77 .32 .75 .84
4 When I think back on my life so far, I have achieved much of what I aspired to do. 3.00 1.02 .77 .23 .72 .85
5 I believe that much of what I hope for will be fulfilled. 3.36 0.83 .66 .30 .61 .86
6 I am satisfied with my situation. 3.20 0.91 .72 .39 .74 .85
7 My life could hardly be happier than it is. 2.90 1.02 .66 .38 .67 .86
8 I usually feel fairly happy. 2.99 0.98 .35 .74 .72 .83
9 I generally tend to look at the bright side of life. 3.33 0.89 .34 .40 .42 .88
10 I am mostly in really high spirits. 2.89 0.98 .19 .82 .71 .83
11 I usually feel as if I could burst with joy. 2.64 1.06 .22 .77 .66 .84
12 I consider my self to be a happy person. 3.03 0.98 .32 .78 .75 .82
13 I am as happy as most people. 2.98 1.03 .35 .71 .68 .84
Eigen values 6.47 1.20
% of variance explained 49.76 9.26
α .87 .86
Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.
66
4.1.3 Personal Belief in a Just World Scale A Principal component analysis was run on seven items of the scale. As before the
data were examined to check for assumptions for factor analysis. All the
assumptions were met as KMO statistic was .89 suggesting the good sample size.
Determinant of correlation matrix was .018 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity
was significant, χ2 (21, N = 200) = 782.78, p < .001.
Un-rotated factor solution emerged with one factor having eigen value greater than
1, e.i., 4.45. Random eigen value 1.27 was less than the observed value thus
confirming the uni-dimensionality of the scale. As shown in Table 4.3 all items had
greater than .30 loading on the factor with highest loading of .84 on item 7. Total
variation explained by the factor was 63.61%. The alpha analysis indicated that all
items were significantly important for the scale as deletion of most of the items
decreased alpha of the scale. Overall reliability of the scale was considerably high.
Table 4.3
Item Characteristics of the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (N = 200)
Items M SD Factor
loadings rit α if item deleted
1 I am usually treated fairly. 2.68 1.02 .82 .74 .89
2 I believe that most of the things that happen in my life are fair. 2.75 1.01 .82 .74 .89
3 I believe that I usually get what I deserve. 3.12 0.99 .75 .66 .90
4 I think that important decisions that are made concerning me are usually just. 2.78 1.08 .82 .74 .89
5 In my life injustice is the exception rather than the rule. 2.95 1.04 .75 .66 .89
6 I believe that, by and large, I deserve what happens to me. 2.74 1.12 .77 .69 .89
7 Overall events in my life are just. 2.77 1.04 .84 .77 .88
Eigen values 4.45
% of variance explained 63.61
α .90
Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.
67
4.1.4 Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate justice Principal Component analysis with varimax rotation was run on the nine items. All the
assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO measure of sampling adequacy
yielded the value of .79 suggesting the good sample size. Determinant of correlation
matrix was .104 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (36, N =
200) = 442.49, p < .001.
Items 1 to 4 assessed ultimate belief in justice and items 5 to 9 assessed immanent belief
in justice. Number of the factors was fixed at two. Two eigen values greater than 1
emerged, i.e., 3.11 and 1.71. Random eigen values 1.34 and 1.22 were less than observed
values thus confirming the two factor structure. Looking at the factor loadings in the
varimax solution in Table 4.4 it can be seen that items 1 to 4 were highly loaded on
factor 2 which can be labeled as belief in ultimate justice and items 5 to 9 were highly
loaded on factor 1 which can be labeled as belief in immanent justice. Maximum factor
loading was .81 on item 9 in factor 1 and the same on items 2 and 3 on factor 2. Total
percentage of the variance explained by the two factors was 53.6. Alphas for the two
sub-scales were found to be satisfactory.
Table 4.4
Item Characteristics of Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice (N = 200)
Factor loadings Items M SD Factor 1
(Ultimate BJ) Factor 2
(Immanent BJ)rit
α if item deleted
1 Even terrible problems are often compensated for by fortunate happenstance later in life. 3.31 0.90 .18 .55 .38 .73
2 Even amidst the worse suffering, one should not lose faith that justice will prevail and set things right. 3.78 0.55 .02 .81 .56 .61
3 Even persons who suffer from severe misfortune can expect that, in the end, something good will happen to balance everything out.
3.69 0.64 .07 .81 .55 .60
4 In the long run, the injustices imposed by misfortune receive appropriate reparation. 3.40 0.78 .20 .73 .54 .60
table continues
68
Table 4.4 (continued)
Factor loadings
Items M SD Factor 1
(Ultimate BJ) Factor 2
(Immanent BJ) rit α if item deleted
5 Bad happening often follows at the heels of improper living. 3.20 0.98 .35 .17 .24 .79
6 If things go wrong one can only blame oneself for ones suffering. 3.10 1.02 .74 .18 .59 .68
7 A truly good person will seldom face misfortune. 2.66 1.22 .70 .20 .54 .70
8 Hardly any one suffers from something bad without having deserved it. 2.50 1.20 .80 .03 .61 .67
9 Misfortunes are often punishment for ones way of living. 2.59 1.21 .81 -.01 .60 .67
Eigen values 3.11 1.71
% of variance explained 34.60 19.00
α .75 .70
Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold. BJ = belief in justice.
4.1.5 Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6) Principal Component analysis with varimax rotation was run on the 12 items. All the
assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO measure of sampling adequacy
yielded the value of .79 suggesting the good sample size. Determinant of correlation
matrix was .001 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (66, N =
200) = 619.21, p < .001.
Items 1a to 6a assessed perceived availability of social support and items 1b to 6b
assessed satisfaction with social support. Number of the factors was fixed at two. Two
eigen values greater than 1 emerged, i.e., 4.29 and 3.34. Random eigen values 1.42 and
1.31 were less than observed values thus confirming the two factor structure. Looking at
the factor loadings in the varimax solution in Table 4.5 it can be seen that items 1a to 6a
were highly loaded on factor 1 which can be labeled as availability of support and items
1b to 6b were highly loaded on factor 2 which can be labeled as satisfaction with
support. Maximum factor loading was .89 on item 6a in factor 1 and .84 on item 6b on
69
factor 2. Total percentage of the variance explained by the two factors was 63.60. Alphas
for the two sub-scales were found to be satisfactory.
Table 4.5
Item Characteristics of SSQ-6 (N = 200)
Factor loadings
Items M SD
Factor 1 (Availability of support)
Factor 2 (Satisfaction with support) rit
α if item deleted
1a Who can you really count on to be dependable when you need help? 3.68 2.40 .83 .09 .70 .87
2a Who can you really count on to help you feel more relaxed when you are under pressure or tense? 2.45 1.90 .81 .05 .72 .86
3a Who accepts you totally, including both your worst and your best points? 3.42 2.48 .66 .03 .60 .89
4a Who can you really count on to care about you, regardless of what is happening to you? 2.84 2.03 .81 .07 .74 .86
5a Who can you really count on to help you feel better when you are feeling generally down-in-the-dumps? 2.34 1.85 .84 .02 .72 .86
6a Who can you count on to console you when you are very upset? 2.72 1.94 .89 .02 .76 .86
1b How satisfied are you? 3.47 0.63 .06 .67 .63 .87
2b How satisfied are you? 3.37 0.74 .04 .73 .65 .87
3b How satisfied are you? 3.43 0.74 .02 .75 .62 .87
4b How satisfied are you? 3.53 0.67 -.01 .82 .76 .85
5b How satisfied are you? 3.48 0.72 .05 .85 .76 .85
6b How satisfied are you? 3.47 0.69 .10 .84 .76 .85
Eigen values 4.29 3.34
% of variance explained 35.73 27.86
α .89 .88
Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.
70
4.1.6 Personal Perceived Control Scale Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was run on the six items of Personal
Perceived Control Scale. All the assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO
measure of sampling adequacy yielded the value of .76 suggesting the good sample size
for factor analysis. Determinant of correlation matrix was .405 > .00001 and Bartlett’s
test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (15, N = 200) = 177.14, p < .001.
As three items (1, 2, and 5) assessed secondary control and the same number of items (3,
4, and 6) assessed primary control in the original scale structure, number of factors was
fixed at two. Two factor solution emerged with only one factor having eigen value
greater than 1, e.i., 2.40 which was greater than random eigen value of 1.24 pointing to
the uni-dimensionality of the scale instead of two dimensions of the scale. Therefore
another analysis was run without fixing the factors. Results of un-rotated factor solution
are presented in Table 4.6 which shows that all items of the scale were highly loaded on
single factor with maximum loading of .75 on item 3 and minimum loading of .41 on
item 4. Total variation explained by the factor was 40.06%. Overall reliability of the
scale was satisfactory.
Table 4.6
Item Characteristics of Personal Perceived Control Scale (N= 200)
Items M SD Factor
Loadings rit α if item deleted
1 When something bad happens to me I remind myself that the situation will improve if I am patient.
3.66 0.65 .64 .42 .63
2 When some thing bad happens to me I remind myself I am better off than many people.
3.56 0.77 .71 .50 .60
3 When some thing bad happens to me I remind myself something good may come of it.
3.40 0.83 .75 .55 .58
4 When some thing bad happens to me I ask others for help or advice. 3.14 1.04 .41 .25 .70
5 When some thing bad happens to me I use my skills to overcome the problem. 3.36 0.82 .63 .40 .63
table continues
71
Table 4.6 (continued)
Items M SD Factor
Loadings rit α if item deleted
6 When some thing bad happens to me I look for different ways to improve the situation. 3.49 0.80 .59 .38 .64
Eigen values 2.40
% of variance explained 40.06
α .67
Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.
The present factor structure of perceived control scale is partly in line with the findings
of Cousins (2001) who found that in his 15 items scale, out of six primary control items
and nine secondary control items all of six primary control items and four secondary
control items were loaded on one factor which he named approach control while five
secondary control items were loaded on the other factor which he named avoidant
control. Approach control included the items that aimed at solution of the problem in
some way while avoidant control included the items that were based on denial or
avoiding the problem. Although Hollway (2003) found a two-factor structure with
primary and secondary control items loading on separate factors, two of the primary
control items (item 5 and item 6) had also factor loading greater than .30 on the
secondary control factor indicating that two processes may possess some complementary
aspects as suggested by Rothbaum et al. (1982). Moreover the idea that both processes
are equally important for the perception of control (Rothbaum, et al., 1982) is supported
by loadings of the items from the two scales on the same factor.
Another argument for the single factor structure for both control strategies is implied in
the findings of Roussi (2002) who concluded that it is more adaptive to discriminate
between controllable and uncontrollable situations and use the control strategies
accordingly, i.e., primary control for controllable situation and secondary control in
uncontrollable situations than indiscriminate use of both strategies. Similarly McCarty et
al. (1999) observed that selection of control strategy is stressor specific and also varies
from culture to culture. The relative adaptive value of two dimensions of control for
controllable and uncontrollable situations has been reported in studies with children
undergoing medical procedures (Weisz, McCabe, & Dennig, 1994), children coping with
72
homesickness (Thurber & Weisz, 1997), elderly people (Wrosch, Schulz, & Heckhausen,
2004), people with Parkinson’s disease (McQuillen, Licht, & Licht, 2003), and cancer
patients (Thompson, Sobolew-Shubin, Galbraith, Schwankovsky, & Cruzen, 1993) with
a general conclusion that secondary control is more adaptive than primary control in
uncontrollable situations. In the present study people were presented with a general
situation “when something bad happens to me” following a particular secondary or
primary control strategy to which they had to respond. Hence it is quite possible that they
had a mixture of controllable and uncontrollable situations in their mind while
responding to each item which resulted in single factor rather than two-factor structure
for the scale. Moreover, with more general situations both primary and secondary
strategies have been reported to be related to subjective well being (Cousins, 2001;
Heeps, 2000; Hollway, 2003; Lake, 2004; Maher & Cummins, 2001; Petito & Cummins,
2000).
Single factor solution of Personal Perceived control scale also seem to point to a
particular coping style of Pakistani women which consists of using primary and
secondary control strategies simultaneously when in face of problems rather than
preferring one strategy over the other.
4.1.7 Generalized Self Efficacy Scale A Principal component analysis was run on the ten items of the originally uni-
dimensional scale. All the assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO measure of
sampling adequacy yielded the value of .91 suggesting the very good sample size for
factor analysis. Determinant of correlation matrix was .007 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test
of sphericity was significant, χ2 (45, N = 200) = 955.38, p < .001.
The analysis was run without fixing the number of factors. Un-rotated factor solution
emerged with only one factor having eigen value greater than 1, e.i., 5.35. Random eigen
value 1.37 was less than the observed value thus confirming the uni-dimensionality of
the scale. Table 4.7 shows that explained variation in the scale scores was 53.47%. All
factor loadings were greater than .30 with highest loading of .79 on items 3, 4, and 8 and
minimum loading of .58 on item 1. Alpha analysis indicated that all items almost equally
contributed to the internal consistency of the scale yielding very good alpha value.
73
Table 4.7
Item Characteristics of Generalized Self Efficacy Scale (N = 200)
Items M SD Factor loadings rit
α if item deleted
1 I can solve most problems if I invest the necessary effort. 3.41 0.77 .58 .51 .90
2 I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on my coping abilities. 3.13 1.01 .72 .64 .89
3 If I am in trouble, I can usually think of a solution. . 3.30 0.88 .79 .73 .89
4 I can usually handle whatever comes my way. 3.21 0.93 .79 .72 .89
5 If someone opposes me, I can find the means and ways to get what I want. 2.91 1.02 .61 .53 .90
6 I am confident that I could deal efficiently with unexpected events. 3.10 0.95 .77 .70 .89
7 I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough. 3.30 0.85 .77 .70 .89
8 Thanks to my resourcefulness, I know how to handle unforeseen situations. 3.09 0.88 .79 .72 .89
9 It is easy for me to stick to my aims and accomplish my goals. 3.27 0.86 .74 .66 .89
10 When I am confronted with a problem, I can usually find several solutions. 3.22 0.83 .70 .62 .89
Eigen value 2.40
% of variance explained 53.47
α .90
Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.
4.1.8 Summary of Psychometric Analysis of Scales From the analyses elaborated in this section it is concluded that Hospital Anxiety and
Depression Scale, Trait well being inventory, Personal Belief in Just World Scale, Scales
of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice, Personal Perceived Control Scale,
Generalized Self Efficacy Scale and Social Support Short Form Questionnaire are
internally consistent reliable measures. All the scales except for Personal Perceived
control scale had similar factor structure in the present sample as reported in earlier
74
studies (for details see chapter 3, section 3.1.2.2). As items of Perceived Control Scale
were highly loaded on single factor instead of two factors, it was decided to use the scale
as single scale instead of two subscales.
4.2 Main Analysis Main analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses described in chapter 2. As a
preliminary analysis, first of all two groups of mothers were compared on study
variables. Descriptive statistics of the two groups are shown in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8
Comparison of Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children on Study Variables
(N = 200)
Mothers of a Down
Syndrome child (n = 100)
Mothers of normal
children (n = 100)
Variables M (SD) M (SD) t
Mother’s age 41.02 (7.37) 36.68 (6.59) 5.40**
Mother’s education 10.50 (3.88) 10.31 (4.00) 0.34
Marital status
Married (n) 89.00 89.00
Widow / divorcee (n) 11.00 11.00 χ2 = 0.00
Number of children 4.07 (1.69) 3.68 (1.71) 1.62
Monthly family income 28.54 (30.02) 28.51 (25.98) 0.01
Age of child (years) 11.09 (3.31) 10.84 (3.39) 0.53
Life satisfaction 3.13 (0.70) 3.25 (0.69) 1.28
Mood level 2.91 (0.72) 3.05 (0.79) 1.24
Anxiety 1.38 (0.64) 1.36 (0.66) 0.22
Depression 0.96 (0.55) 1.01 (0.58) 0.67
Personal BJW 2.83 (0.85) 2.83 (0.84) 0.02
table continues
75
Table 4.8 (continued)
Mothers of a Down
Syndrome child (n = 100)
Mothers of normal
children (n = 100)
Variables M (SD) M (SD) t
Immanent BJ 2.85 (0.81) 2.77 (0.79) 0.69
Ultimate BJ 3.58 (0.51) 3.51 (0.55) 0.87
Self efficacy 3.23 (0.67) 3.16 (0.64) 0.80
Personal Control 3.49 (0.47) 3.38 (0.54) 1.53
SS (A) 3.16 (1.86) 2.66 (1.46) 2.13*
SS (S) 3.40 (0.54) 3.53 (0.56) 1.71
Note. BJW = belief in a just world; BJ = belief in justice; SS (A) = perceived availability
of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
Equality of the variances between two groups of mothers was checked with Levene’s test
for continuous variables (except for marital status all variables were continuous). The
test was conducted to check for the assumption of equality of variances for the t-test. No
significant differences in the variances were found in the groups except for availability of
social support. Corrected t-value assuming inequality of the variances was calculated for
this variable. However, for other variables t-value assuming equality of variances was
used.
The two groups differed in their age, with mothers of a child with Down syndrome being
older than those with normal children. In addition, mothers also differed in terms of
perceived availability of social support with mothers of a child with Down syndrome
perceiving more people supporting them than mothers of normal children.
Pearson product moment correlations were calculated to see how the variables of the
study were related in the sample of mothers of a child with Down syndrome and mothers
of normal children. Although Pearson product moment correlation and regression
analysis are normally used in case of continuous variables, calculating Pearson
correlation between one categorical and one continuous variable and use of regression in
76
case of categorical predictors has also been recommended. The categorical variables
need to be with only two categories and dummy coded (Cohen & Cohen, 1983).
Therefore, before calculating correlations categorical variables were coded. For marital
status married mothers were coded 0 and widowed and divorced mothers were coded 1.
Remaining variables were treated as continuous.
Results from the correlation matrix (Table 4.9) supported hypotheses 1 and 2, 3 and 4.
As stated in these hypotheses personal BJW was positively related to life satisfaction and
mood level and negatively related to depression and anxiety in two groups of mothers.
Hypotheses 5 and 6 were also supported as the belief in ultimate justice was positively
related to life satisfaction and mood level as expected. Hypothesis 7 was not supported as
significant relationship between the belief in ultimate justice and depression was not
observed. Hypothesis 8 was partially supported as the belief in ultimate justice was
negatively related to anxiety in mothers of Down syndrome children only. However,
belief in immanent justice was also positively related to life satisfaction and mood level
in both groups unexpectedly. The belief in immanent justice was unrelated to anxiety and
depression as was assumed.
Some other variables of study were also found to be related to well-being dimensions.
Self-efficacy, perceived control, and perceived satisfaction with social support were
positively related to life satisfaction and mood level in the two groups. These variables
were unrelated to depression and anxiety in both groups. Perceived availability of
support was positively related to life satisfaction and mood level and negatively related
to anxiety and depression in mothers of a child with Down syndrome only. Marital status
was related to depression in the two groups with married mothers as less depressed than
widows/divorced mothers. Marital status was also related to life satisfaction and mood
level in mothers of normal children with married mothers being more satisfied with their
life and having better mood level than widows/divorced mothers. Marital status was
unrelated to anxiety in both groups. Education was negatively related to depression and
anxiety in mothers of a child with Down syndrome only. It was unrelated to life
satisfaction and mood level in both groups of mothers. Number of children was also
related to depression in only mothers of a child with Down syndrome. It was unrelated to
life satisfaction, mood level and anxiety in both groups. Mother’s age, and family
income, and child’s age were unrelated to any of the well-being dimensions in the two
groups.
77
Table 4.9
Correlations between Study Variables for Mothers of Down syndrome Child (light face) and Mothers of Normal Children (bold face; n = 100 each)
Variables 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
1 Age of child .34** -.16 .22* .11 -.09 .06 .13 .12 .10 .14 .24* .05 .13 -.03 .05 .05 .52*** -.18 .19 .25* -.08 .09 .08 .03 -.04 .30** .15 .16 -.09 .09 .04 .15
2 Mother’s age .00 .10 .22* .11 .06 .09 -.05 .02 .06 .09 .07 .01 -.04 .09 .03 -.02 .45** .40** .09 -.06 -.06 .02 .04 .08 .04 -.00 -.12 -.02 .20* .12
3 Mother’s education -.10 -.60 *** .42*** -.03 .08 -.23* -.28** -.10 -.06 .01 -.33** .04 .33** -.15 -.08 -.39 *** .37*** .09 .08 -.19 -.17 -.22* -.08 .08 -.30** -.15 .16 -.24*
4 Marital status .02 -.16 -.06 -.11 .19 .24* .03 .02 -.14 -.13 -.04 .12 .02 .31** -.16 -.40*** -.38*** .11 .32** .00 -.27** -.35*** -.18 -.20* -.00 .02
5 Total children -.23* .14 -.07 .11 .21* .15 .09 .08 .29** -.00 -.14 .23* -.06 -.13 -.12 .03 .10 .09 .06 -.04 .10 .08 -.04 .13
6 Family Income .10 .08 -.12 -.18 -.15 -.06 .14 -.15 -.07 .22* -.10 .13 .10 -.02 -.03 -.11 .07 .20 -.17 .02 .13 -.17
7 Life satisfaction .59*** -.28** -.33** .40*** .36*** .73*** .36*** .36*** .28** .55*** .79*** -.35*** -.44*** .34*** .49*** .79*** .42*** .50*** .01 .38***
8 Mood level -.48*** -.47*** .38*** .34** .55*** .27** .33** .24* .37*** -.43*** -.61*** .41*** .35*** .66*** .38*** .31** -.00 .35***
table continues
78
Note. BJW = belief in a just world; BJ = belief in justice; SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Table 4.9 (continued)
Variables 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
9 Anxiety .54*** -.01 -.04 -.36*** .12 -.24* -.28** -.11 .44*** -.08 -.10 -.37*** -.13 .02 -.05 -.08
10 Depression .05 .05 -.30** .04 -.13 -.25* -.15 -.12 -.06 -.31** -.12 -.02 .04 -.15
11 Self efficacy .68*** .33** .47*** .51*** .00 .47*** .56*** .35*** .26* .36*** -.19 .44***
12 Personal control .34** .36*** .53*** .14 .45*** .56*** .34** .65*** -.02 .38*** 13 Personal BJW .31** .35*** .17 .51*** .37*** .58*** .13 .50*** 14 Immanent BJ .25* -.18 .57*** .37*** -.17 .27** 15 Ultimate BJ .08 .31** .09 .51*** 16 SS (A) .12 .18 17 SS (S)
79
To clarify the relationship among possible predictors and criterion variables further, four
hierarchical regression analyses were conducted with life satisfaction, happiness,
depression and anxiety as criterion variables and demographic factors, the just world
beliefs, perceived control, self-efficacy, perceived social support and the interaction
between the psychological variables and membership of one of the two mother groups,
as predictors.
As among the demographics only mothers’ level of education, marital status (dummy
coded: married mothers = 0; widowed or divorced mothers = 1). and total number of
children were significantly correlated with at least one of the well-being dimensions, for
all analyses these variables were entered in the first block along with variable, group
(dummy coded: Mothers of Down syndrome child = 0; mothers of normal children = 1).
Self efficacy, perceived control, perceived availability of support and satisfaction with
support were entered in second block and personal BJW, ultimate BJ and immanent BJ
were entered in the third block. Variables in block 2 and block 3 were entered after
centering, by taking deviations of scores from means following Aiken and West (1991)
to avoid the problem of multicollinearity. Interaction terms of centered variables with
coded variable, group, were entered in the fourth block. Interaction terms were obtained
by multiplying centered variables with coded variable group. Enter method was used for
all the blocks. The purpose of entering the three variants of BJW in block 3 was to get
the contribution of beliefs in a just world in addition to the contribution of demographic
variables and psychological variables in various dimensions of subjective well-being.
Interaction terms were entered in the final block as it is a requirement that the variables
involved in interaction terms are already present in the model before the interaction
terms are entered. B values for interaction terms and the variables not involved in
interaction terms were interpreted from the final block. The independent role of variables
involved in interaction terms were interpreted from the block preceding the final block
(block 3) to determine their significance. In case an interaction term turned out to be
significant, indicating that simple slopes at different levels of moderator are significantly
different from each other, simple slope analysis was conducted to get the simple slopes
or regression weights (Bs) of the independent variable for two groups of mothers
separately.
Formula for simple slope is B1 + B3X whereas B1 is the unstanderdized regression
coefficient B for independent variable, B3 is unstanderdized regression coefficient B for
80
interaction term and X is the value of moderator at which the simple slope or regression
weight is required for the independent variable (Preacher, 2005). In the present case
moderator was group with values of 0 and 1. To get the simple slope or regression
weight for independent variable in the mothers of a child with Down syndrome X was
replaced with 0. By replacing the X with 1 regression weight of independent variable for
mothers of normal children was obtained. By dividing the new regression weight with its
standard error a t-value was obtained the significance of which could be checked which
determined whether the new regression weight or simple slope was significant or not.
Table 4.10
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Life Satisfaction
(N = 200)
Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4
Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β
Constant 2.99 3.00 3.08 3.13
Group 0.14 0.10 .10 0.13 0.09 .10 0.16* 0.07 .11 1.00 0.54 .72
Education 0.01 0.01 .05 0.02 0.01 .09 0.01 0.01 .04 0.00 0.01 .02
Marital status -0.52** 0.16 -.24 -0.47** 0.13 -.21 -0.11 0.12 -.05 -0.12 0.11 -.05
Total children 0.03 0.03 .07 0.00 0.03 .01 -0.01 0.02 -.02 -0.01 0.02 -.02
Self efficacy 0.14 0.08 .13 0.11 0.07 .10 0.12 0.10 .11
Personal Control 0.25* 0.11 .19 -0.01 0.09 -.01 -0.08 0.14 -.06
SS (A) 0.04 0.03 .10 0.03 0.02 .08 0.07 0.03 .17
SS (S) 0.42*** 0.09 .33 0.04 0.08 .03 0.20 0.12 .16
Personal BJW 0.52*** 0.05 .62 0.46 0.06 .55
Ultimate BJ 0.05 0.08 .04 0.07 0.10 .06
Immanent BJ 0.12* 0.05 .14 0.08 0.07 .10
Group × Self Efficacy -0.03 0.14
Group × Personal Control 0.06 0.19
Group × SS (A) -0.09* 0.04
Group × SS (S) -0.25 0.16
Group × Personal BJW 0.12 0.10
Group × Ultimate BJ -0.01 0.16
Group × Immanent BJ 0.03 0.10
∆R2 .06* .29*** .27*** .02
Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = Belief in a just world; BJ = Belief in justice.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
81
Results of regression analysis for life satisfaction as criterion variable are presented in
Table 4.10. Overall the model explained 64% variance in life satisfaction, F (18, 181) =
17.86, p < .001. Demographics in Block 1 explained 6% variance in life satisfaction, F
(4, 195) = 3.30, p = .01. In this block only marital status predicted life satisfaction with
married mothers as more satisfied with their life than widowed or divorced mothers.
When self-efficacy, perceived control and social support were added into the model in
block 2 regression explained additional 29% variance in life satisfaction, Fchange (4, 191)
= 21.43, p < .001. Marital status retained its effect and still predicted life satisfaction.
Besides, satisfaction with perceived support and personal control positively predicted life
satisfaction. Mothers who were more satisfied with support and perceived more control
were more satisfied. When three variants of belief in a just world were entered in block 3
regression explained additional 27% variance in life satisfaction, Fchange (3, 188) = 44.21,
p < .001. In this block group became significant which was not in the previous two
blocks, mothers of normal children were more satisfied with their life than mothers of a
Down syndrome child. Marital status, satisfaction with perceived support and personal
control were no more significant. In addition, the more the mothers believed in a
personal just world and also in an immanent justice, the more they were satisfied with
their life. When interaction terms were included in block 4, the regression explained
additional 2% variance in life satisfaction, Fchange (7, 181) = 1.35, p = .23. Perceived
availability of social support interacted with group to predict life satisfaction indicating
that relationship between availability of support and life satisfaction was significantly
different in the two groups. Therefore, regression weights of availability of social
support were calculated and their significance was checked for the two groups separately
by simple slope analysis using a software “two way unstandardized with simple
slopes.xls” (J. Dawson, personal communication, November, 11, 2008). The results are
depicted in Figure 4.1. The more the mothers of Down syndrome children perceived
social support to be available more they were satisfied with their life, B = .07, p = .03.
However, there was no significant relationship between available support and life
satisfaction in mothers of normal children B = -.02, p = .53.
82
Figure 4.1
Perceived availability of support explaining life satisfaction in mothers of normal and
Down syndrome children
1
2
3
4
5
Low SS (A) High SS (A)
Life
satis
fact
ion
Mothers of Downsyndrome childMothers of normalchildren
These results supported the hypothesis 9. Personal BJW positively predicted life
satisfaction as expected. Contrary to the expectations, belief in immanent justice also
predicted life satisfaction while belief in ultimate justice did not predict life
satisfaction unlike stated in hypothesis 10. The results were true after controlling for
demographics, self-efficacy, personal control and social support as depicted in block
3. The interaction terms of three variants of belief in a just world with group were not
significant, which suggested that relationships of three variants of BJW with life
satisfaction were equally true for the two groups of mothers.
Availability of support
83
Table 4.11
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Mood level (N =
200)
Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4
Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β
Constant 2.95 2.92 2.99 2.96
Group 0.13 0.11 .09 0.14 0.10 .10 0.16* 0.09 .12 0.15 0.71 .10
Education 0.01 0.02 .04 0.02 0.01 .09 0.01 0.01 .10 0.01 0.01 .05
Marital status -0.58** 0.17 -.24 -0.57***0.15 -.23 -0.27* 0.14 -.11 -0.28* 0.14 -.12
Total children -0.01 0.04 -.03 -0.04 0.03 -.08 -0.05 0.03 -.10 -0.04 0.03 -.08
Self efficacy 0.34***0.10 .29 0.31*** 0.09 .27 0.22 0.13 .19
Personal Control 0.08 0.12 .05 -0.11 0.12 -.07 -0.00 0.18 -.00
SS (A) 0.04 0.03 .10 0.04 0.03 .09 0.07 0.03 .14
SS (S) 0.31** 0.10 .22 -0.00 0.10 -.00 0.03 0.15 .02
Personal BJW 0.43*** 0.06 0.47 0.33 0.08 .37
Ultimate BJ -0.05 0.10 -0.04 0.06 0.14 .04
Immanent BJ 0.13* 0.06 0.14 0.08 0.10 .09
Group × Self Efficacy 0.15 0.18
Group × Personal Control -0.22 0.25
Group × SS (A) -0.06 0.06
Group × SS (S) 0.00 0.20
Group × Personal BJW 0.23 0.13
Group × Ultimate BJ -0.24 0.21
Group × Immanent BJ 0.10 0.13
∆R2 .07** .23*** .16*** .03
Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = belief in a just world; BJ = belief in justice.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
As depicted in Table 4.11, the final model explained 48% variance in mood level, F (18,
181) = 9.42, p < .001. Demographics in block1 explained 7% variance in mood level, F
(4, 195) = 3.83, p = .01. Only marital status was related to mood level. Married mothers
had better overall moods than widowed and divorced mothers. When self-efficacy,
personal control and perceived social support were entered in block 2 they explained an
additional 23% variance in the mood level, Fchange (4, 191) = 15.74, p < .001. Marital
status was still significant as in block 1. In addition, mothers who had higher level of self
84
efficacy and were satisfied with perceived support had better moods. When three variants
of belief in a just world were entered in block 3 they explained additional 16% variance
in mood level, Fchange (3, 188) = 18.09, p < .001. The more the mothers believed in a
personal just world and also in an immanent justice the better their mood level was.
Moreover, mothers with higher self efficacy were in better moods as was the case in
previous block. Marital status was still significant to predict mood with married mothers
having better moods than widows or divorced mothers. Satisfaction with perceived
support was no more significant. Interaction terms in block 4 explained additional 3%
variance in mood level, Fchange (7, 181) = 1.24, p = .28. None of the interactions were
significant in the model. Marital status still predicted mood level as in the previous
blocks.
These results supported the hypothesis 11. Personal BJW positively predicted mood level
as expected. Contrary to the expectation, belief in immanent justice predicted mood level
while belief in ultimate justice was not related to mood level unlike stated in hypothesis
12. The results were true after controlling for demographics, self-efficacy, personal
control and social support as depicted in block 3. The interaction terms of three variants
of BJW with group were not significant which indicated that relationships of three
variants of BJW with mood level were equally true for the two groups of mothers.
Table 4.12 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Depression (N =
200)
Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4
Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β
Constant 1.17 1.15 1.10 1.12
Group 0.05 0.08 .05 0.09 0.08 .08 0.09 0.08 .08 0.08 0.63 .06
Education -0.03* 0.01 -.20 -0.03** 0.01 -.21 -0.03* 0.01 - .18 -0.03* 0.01 -.17
Marital status 0.47*** 0.12 .26 0.52*** 0.12 .29 0.42** 0.13 .24 0.45** 0.13 .25
Total children 0.01 0.03 .02 0.01 0.03 .04 0.02 0.03 .05 0.01 0.03 .03
Self efficacy -0.06 0.08 -.07 -0.06 0.08 - .07 0.06 0.12 .07
Personal control 0.17 0.10 .15 0.22* 0.11 .20 0.24 0.16 .21
SS (A) -0.02 0.02 -.07 -0.02 0.02 - .05 -0.05 0.03 -.15
SS (S) -0.23** 0.08 -.22 -0.13 0.09 - .13 -0.18 0.14 -.18
Personal BJW -0.17** 0.06 - .25 -0.14 0.06 -.21
table continues
85
Table 4.12 (continued)
Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4
Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β
Ultimate BJ 0.04 0.09 .03 -0.14 0.13 -.13
Immanent BJ 0.00 0.06 .00 0.05 0.09 .07
Group × Self Efficacy -0.18 0.16
Group × Personal Control -0.04 0.22
Group × SS (A) 0.08 0.05
Group × SS (S) 0.01 0.18
Group × Personal BJW -0.05 0.11
Group × Ultimate BJ 0.36 0.19
Group × Immanent BJ -0.10 0.11
∆R2 .12*** .06* .04* .05
Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = belief in just world; BJ = belief in justice.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
As depicted in Table 4.12, in depression 26% variance was explained by the model, F
(18, 181) = 3.50, p < .001. Demographics in block 1 explained 12% variance in
depression, F (4, 195) = 6.76, p < .001. More educated and married mothers were less
depressed. Addition of self efficacy, personal control and social support in block 2
explained another 6% variance in depression, Fchange (4, 191) = 3.19, p = .01. Education
and marital status retained their effect and were still significant as in the block 1.
Moreover, satisfaction with perceived support was also significant. Mothers who were
more satisfied with perceived support were less depressed. Additional 4% variance was
explained by three variants of belief in a just world in block 3, Fchange (3, 188) = 2.92, p =
.04. Higher level of education and marital status predicted depression as in block 1 and 2.
Satisfaction with support was no more significant. Personal BJW negatively predicted
depression. The more the mothers believed in a personal just world, the less they were
depressed. Moreover, personal control which was not significant in previous model
positively predicted depression. The more the mothers perceived personal control the
more they were depressed. Entrance of interaction terms in block 4 produced an
additional 5% variance in depression, Fchange (7, 181) = 1.56, p = .15. None of the
interaction terms were significant. Education and marital status were still significant as in
previous blocks.
86
These results supported the hypothesis 13. Personal BJW negatively predicted depression
as expected. belief in immanent justice was not related to depression as was assumed
while belief in ultimate justice failed to predict depression contrary to the assumption as
stated in hypothesis 14. The results were true after controlling for demographics, self-
efficacy, personal control and social support as depicted in block 3. The interaction terms
of three variants of BJW with group were not significant indicating that relationships of
three variants of BJW with depression were equally true for the two groups of mothers.
Table 4.13 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Anxiety (N = 200)
Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = belief in just world; BJ = belief in justice. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4
Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β
Constant 1.87 1.82 1.72 1.72
Group -0.04 0.09 -.03 -0.05 0.09 -.04 -0.04 0.09 -.03 -0.26 0.72 -.20
Education -0.04** 0.01 -.23 -0.04** 0.01 -.22 -0.03 0.01 -.16 -0.02 0.01 -.14
Marital status 0.30* 0.15 .14 0.32* 0.15 .15 0.15 0.15 .07 0.17 0.14 .08
Total children -0.03 0.03 -.07 -0.02 0.03 -.06 -0.02 0.03 -.05 -0.03 0.03 -.07
Self efficacy -0.05 0.09 -.05 -0.04 0.09 -.04 0.07 0.13 .07
Personal Control 0.02 0.12 .01 0.13 0.12 .10 0.16 0.18 .13
SS (A) -0.05 0.03 -.13 -0.04 0.03 -.10 -0.05 0.04 -.14
SS (S) -0.11 0.10 -.10 0.06 0.10 .05 -0.06 0.15 -.05
Personal BJW -0.32***0.07 -.41 -0.25 0.08 -.33
Ultimate BJ 0.03 0.11 .03 -0.29 0.14 -.24
Immanent BJ 0.03 0.07 .04 0.15 0.10 .19
Group × Self Efficacy -0.13 0.18
Group × Personal Control -0.09 0.25
Group × SS (A) 0.04 0.06
Group × SS (S) 0.07 0.21
Group × Personal BJW -0.14 0.13
Group × Ultimate BJ 0.69** 0.21
Group × Immanent BJ -0.24 0.13
∆R2 .07* .03 .10*** .07*
87
Table 4.13 shows that in anxiety 26% variance was explained by the final model, F (18,
181) = 3.59, p < .001. Demographics explained 7% variance in block 1, F (4, 195) =
3.43, p = .01. Married mothers and mothers with more education were less anxious than
less educated and widowed and divorced mothers. Entering self-efficacy, perceived
control and social support in block 2 produced additional 3% variance in anxiety, Fchange
(4, 191) = 1.71, p = .15. Again married mothers and more educated mothers were less
anxious. When three variants of belief in a just world were entered in block 3 they
explained additional 10% variance in anxiety, Fchange (3, 188) = 7.68, p < .001. More the
mothers believed in personal just world the less they were anxious. Marital status and
education were no more significant. When interaction terms were entered in block 4 they
explained additional 7% variance in anxiety, Fchange (7, 181) = 2.35, p = .03. Belief in
ultimate justice interacted with group of mothers to predict anxiety (see Table 4.13).
Therefore simple slope analysis was conducted using “two way unstandardized with
simple slopes.xls” (J. Dawson, personal communication, November, 11, 2008) to
calculate regression weights for ultimate belief in justice for two groups separately.
Results are presented in Figure 4.2. The more the mothers of Down syndrome child
believed in ultimate justice the less they experienced anxiety, B = -.29, p = .04. However
the more the mothers of normal children believed in ultimate justice the more they
experienced anxiety, B = .40, p = .01.
88
Figure 4.2
Belief in ultimate justice explaining anxiety in mothers of normal and Down syndrome
children
These results supported the hypothesis 15. Personal BJW negatively predicted anxiety
as expected. Belief in immanent justice was not related to anxiety as was assumed.
The results were true after controlling for demographics, self-efficacy, personal
control and social support as depicted in block 3. Hypothesis 16 was partially
supported as strong belief in ultimate justice was related to low anxiety in mothers of
a child with Down syndrome. However, unexpectedly it positively predicted anxiety
in mothers of normal children. The interaction terms of personal BJW and belief in
immanent justice with group were not significant which suggested that relationship of
personal BJW and belief in immanent justice with anxiety were equally true for the
two groups of mothers.
Hypothesis 17, that the personal BJW and belief in ultimate justice will be more
positively related to life satisfaction and happiness and more negatively related to
anxiety and depression in mothers of a Down syndrome child than in mothers of
normal children, was not supported in general by the findings. Personal BJW was
equally related with well-being dimensions in the two groups. However, belief in
Belief in ultimate justice
89
ultimate justice was negatively related with anxiety as expected in mothers of a child
with Down syndrome only.
Overall, the results indicate that personal BJW positively predicted life satisfaction
and mood level and negatively predicted anxiety and depression. belief in immanent
justice was also directly related to life satisfaction and mood level. Moreover, belief
in ultimate justice was differently related to anxiety in the two groups of mothers.
Figure 4.3
Figural representation of results for main variables in the study
Personal BJW
Ultimate BJ
Immanent BJ
Group X Personal BJW
Group X Ultimate BJ
Group X Immanent BJ
Life Satisfaction
Mood Level
Depression
Anxiety
90
Chapter 5
5 DISCUSSION
The study was aimed at investigating the role of beliefs in a just world in explaining
different dimensions of SWB in mothers of a child with Down syndrome as compared
to mothers of normal children. It also investigated strength of three dimensions of
BJW in the two groups of mothers. Overall findings suggested the BJW served as
resource for the mothers. The stronger the mothers believed in a personal just world
more they were satisfied with their life, the better mood level, the less depressive
symptoms they revealed and the less anxious they were. The patterns of results
remained true when controlled for demographic factors as mother’s education, marital
status and total number of children and for other psychological resources as self-
efficacy, personal perceived control and perceived social support. In addition two
groups did not significantly differ in strength of three variants of BJW.
The current study was a first attempt to simultaneously investigate the role of personal
BJW along with beliefs in ultimate and immanent justice in explaining different well-
being dimensions. Inclusion of the control variables ensured that relationship between
BJW and well-being did not owe to these variables. Advantage of this strategy was
twofold. First, we were able to know the overall variance explained in well-being by
three important aspects of BJW. Secondly, it was studied how three beliefs were
related with well-being independent of each other and control variables. Overall,
personal BJW along with two dimensions of general BJW, beliefs in ultimate and
immanent justice, explained significant variance in all dimensions of well-being with
more variance explained in life satisfaction (.27) and mood level (.16), than in state
anxiety (.10) and depression (.04). The finding confirms the Becker and Dalbert’s
notion (as cited in Dalbert, 1998) that trait well-being should be differentiated from
state well-being and the two types of SWB should be studied independently in order
to attain the clear understanding of them and the factors which correlate with them
and influence them.
One of the main objectives of the study was to examine if the expected relationship
between BJWs and well being would be similar in the two groups of mothers,
following personal resource hypotheses or BJW would explain more well-being in
91
mothers of a child with Down syndrome, following the buffer hypotheses. In line with
studies conducted with victims of injustice (Dalbert, 2006; Dzuka & Dalbert, 2006;
Otto et al., 2006), with people in everyday life settings (Correia & Dalbert, 2007;
Dalbert, 1999; Dalbert & Maes, 2002; Fatima, 2004; Kamble & Dalbert, 2008; Sutton
& Douglas, 2005; Sutton et al., 2008) and studies comparing victims of injustice with
non-victims (Corriea, Kamble, et al., in press; Cubela & Kvartuc, 2007; Dzuka &
Dalbert, 2002), associations between personal BJW and well-being was found to be
similar in the two groups of mothers indicating that personal BJW was equally
adaptive for both mothers of normal and special children. Personal BJW was not only
directly related with positive stable aspects of well-being but also inversely related
with negative symptoms like depression and anxiety. The findings support the role of
personal BJW as a personal resource which helps people not only in more difficult
situations but also in problems which individuals face in their routine life. More the
people believe in a personal just world, the more positive are their look at their lives,
and more positive are their feelings. The belief serves as positive cognitive bias
(Cummins & Nistico, 2002) which is not entirely based on reality but it provides a
framework for the interpretation of events in their life in congruence with their belief
(Lipkus et al., 1996). The belief may lead to different ways of coping in adverse and
non-adverse situations, but the coping patterns emerging as a result of holding strong
BJW have adaptive value and result in better well-being in every condition.
Individuals living in unfair circumstances may be assimilating unfair experiences to
their BJW thus evaluating negative events as less unfair and those not facing such
conditions and having strong BJW may be trusting more in the fairness of others, and
expecting rewards for their good deeds. What ever the mediators may be the
consequences are same for both groups.
Validity of the construct of BJW has been observed in both western, e.g., America,
Britain, Germany, Canada, Hungry, Hawaii, Croatia and Slovakia (e.g., Cubela &
Kvartuc, 2007; Dalbert & Dzuka, 2004; Dalbert & Sallay, 1996; Dalbert & Yamauchi,
1994; Furnham, 1993; Hafer & Olson, 1993; Sutton & Douglas, 2005; see also
Dalbert, 2001; Furnham, 1989, 2003) and eastern countries, e.g., Pakistan, India and
Portugal (Correia, Kamble, et al., in press; Fatima, 2004; Kamble & Dalbert, 2008).
There is considerable consensus in the research conducted all over the world that
BJW helps people to live a happy and satisfied life whether they live in seemingly
92
more fair conditions or they face obvious injustices. Present study is another attempt
to validate the BJW and well-being relationship in Pakistani society which has already
been observed in other studies. The finding highlights the universality of personal
BJW and clearly demonstrates that the phenomenon is not culture specific. People
may differ in their reasons for believing in the just world, the way it is formed and
developed but as the belief serves purpose for them of explaining the events of life in
meaningful way thus enhancing their well-being they are motivated to maintain their
belief in what ever conditions they are living in.
Belief in ultimate justice was positively related to life satisfaction and mood level in
both groups of mothers and negatively related to anxiety in mothers of a child with
Down syndrome as expected following findings of Maes (1998b), and Maes and Kals
(2002, 2004). However, after controlling for other variables regression analyses
revealed that belief in ultimate justice negatively predicted anxiety for mothers of
Down syndrome children while it positively predicted anxiety in mothers of normal
children. It appears that the belief of getting justice in the long run helped in reducing
anxiety in mothers of a child with Down syndrome. It is understandable that by
believing in ultimate justice they accept that this wrong happening is not necessarily a
punishment and may be compensated at some time in future. Moreover, Down
syndrome is an enduring condition and parents have to learn to live with that. In such
a situation when immediate solutions to the problems are not expected and achieved, a
hope for some kind of compensation even in remote future can be gratifying.
The approach of expecting justice in the long run is inherent in Muslim thought. Islam
has belief in life after death as its one of basic tenets. There are many verses in Quran
which throw light on promise of justice in life hereafter, for example, “And others are
made to await for Allah’s Decree, whether He will punish them or will forgive them.
And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise” (al-Quran 8:106). Another verse states “The
sovereignty on that Day will be that of Allah (the One Who has no partners). He will
judge between them. So those who believed and did righteous good deeds will be in
Gardens of delight” (al-Quran 22:56). Similarly in another verse Allah says “And We
place the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul will be treated
unjustly at all. And if there is (any deed even) the weight of a mustard seed, We will
bring it forth. And sufficient are We to take account” (al-Quran 21:47). There are
93
several verses in Al-Quran which indicate that this world is a temporary place of
residence which has no spiritual or real significance, such as, “Every soul shall have a
taste of death: and only on the Day of Judgment shall you be paid your full
recompense. Only he who is saved far from the fire and admitted to the garden will
have attained the object (of life): for the life of this world is but goods and chattels of
deception"(al-Quran 3:185).
Religious beliefs of some women also helped them accept the disorder of their child
more willingly. For example, a few mothers in the present study after or before the
interview, made statements like “God has given me the opportunity to take care of
this innocent angel like child so that he may help me to get the mercy of God”; “This
child is source of reward in the life hereafter for me”; “Since this child is born our
business is prospering”. Although we did not calculate the correlations between
beliefs and this type of statements, as they were rather informal, it is speculated that
these types of thinking emerge from the belief that wrong happenings are
compensated which in turn may be the result of holding strong religious beliefs
regarding life after death, and getting rewards of good deeds hereafter. However, the
question remains that why the strong ultimate belief in justice was accompanied with
more anxiety in mothers of normal children. It may be assumed that mothers of
normal children may not be facing the problems that could not be resolved like
problems associated with having a child with Down syndrome. Therefore, holding the
belief that problems will be compensated at some point in future and at the same time
facing or seeing unjust happenings that could be undone but were not worked upon
initiated the anxiety in mothers of normal children. As currently no research is
available to throw light on belief in ultimate justice and anxiety relationship in these
groups care must be taken in interpreting these results. Moreover, further studies need
to be conducted in future to clarify these links.
Belief in immanent justice was also related to life satisfaction and mood level and the
relationship persisted after controlling for demographics, social support, self efficacy
and personal control in both groups of mothers, although the relationships were not as
strong as the relationships of personal BJW with life satisfaction and mood level.
These findings are in contrast to the observations made by Maes (1998b), and Maes
and Kals (2002, 2004) who found that belief in ultimate justice and not belief in
94
immanent justice enhanced well-being. One reason may be that for the mothers in
Pakistan day-to-day existence may be so challenging that they are actually more
interested in justice in the here and now than in the future. These results seem to be
meaningful in the light of overall uncertainty and insecurity present in all spheres of
life in Pakistan which prevent one from relying on expected justice in the future. In
such circumstances it is the belief that every one gets what one deserves that helps
and not the belief that wrong happenings will be compensated in the future.
It should also be noted that very few studies have been conducted with beliefs in
ultimate and immanent justice as two dimensions of BJW showing the adaptive value
of belief in ultimate justice (Maes, 1998; Maes & Kals, 2002, 2004). Even these
studies have been conducted in countries with economical, political and social
stabilities. In more advanced countries holding belief in ultimate justice might be
more beneficial as people do receive compensations for wrong happenings in reality
but in country like Pakistan holding such a belief might not be as adaptive as people
seldom watch other people getting justice. Here the belief that what ever is happening
is just might be more effective.
The present study failed to show the adaptive value of both belief in ultimate and
belief in immanent justice for depression in both groups of mothers. Inconsistent
findings have been reported previously with general BJW with reference to its
relationship with depression. For example, Benson and Ritter (1990) in a study of
unemployed and working adults found a negative relationship between BJW and
depressive symptoms in working adults and positive relationship for unemployed
individuals. Dalbert (1998) observed positive relationship between depression and
BJW in victim sample. She also found no relationship of BJW with negative affect in
victim and non-victim samples. Lipkus et al. (1996) in the first study did not find
relationship between BJW and different dimensions of psychological well-being, but
in the second study they observed negative relationship between BJW and depression.
Dzuka and Dalbert (2002) also reported inconsistent findings regarding the role of
general BJW in their two studies. In study one the stronger the long-term unemployed
individuals had general BJW the more worried they were. In contrast study two
showed that stronger the long-term unemployed had general BJW the less frequently
they experienced negative affect. Dalbert (1998, 2001) suggested that mixed findings
95
regarding the belief in a just world and depression relationship may be due to the
different coping strategies that are initiated as a result of holding justice beliefs. These
coping strategies may be cognitive in nature. Lupfer, Doan, and Houstan (1998)
concluded from their study that those who strongly believed in general just world
were more distressed than those who believed less strongly after observing fair and
unfair events, if they were prevented from making causal attributions. In the same
vein Dalbert (2001) observed that unemployed individuals who were strong in their
BJW and could not justify their unemployment were more depressed than those strong
believers who could find reasons for their undue suffering. Dalbert (2006) discusses
in detail that long term undue sufferings may put the person in situation of “existential
doubts” (p. 45) which lead to the depression if the existential doubts are not resolved.
Overall, personal BJW appears to be more adaptive than any other predictor in the
study. Phenomenon regarding beliefs in ultimate and immanent justice and well-being
relationship is more complex and needs to be studied with longitudinal and
experimental designs to untangle the complex relationships.
Another important finding was that mothers of a child with Down syndrome did not
differ from mothers of normal children in strength of justice beliefs. The finding is in
line with Lerner (1980) who suggested that people protect their belief in justice even
when they experience injustice by denying the injustice in their own world as the
mothers of a child with Down syndrome particularly did in the present study by
holding the similar level of justice beliefs as held by mothers of normal children. This
finding is also supported by the researches comparing privileged with non-privileged
groups. For example Rubin and Peplau (1973) could not find relationship between
social class and scores on a just world scale. Dzuka (2001) did not find differences in
BJW of employed and unemployed. Similarly Calhoun, Cann, Tedeschi, and
McMillan (1998) concluded from their study that perceptions of the world as just
were not influenced by traumatic events in life. Similarly O’ Conner, Morrison,
McLeod, & Anderson (1996) in a Meta analysis of 33 studies found no significant
correlation between BJW and gender.
People’s use of different referent groups may also explain these similarities in
strength of justice beliefs in the two groups. Although the two groups differ from each
other with reference to presence of one special or only normal children at home, but
96
when people assess the fair and unfair conditions in their life they compare
themselves to those who are more similar to them. For example, mothers of children
with Down syndrome might have compared themselves with mothers of other special
children who might be suffering from more severe problems and mothers with only
typically growing children might have compared themselves with mothers of other
normal children while assessing their just and unjust situations. Comparing oneself
with different reference groups to assess one’s situation has gained much attention in
social psychology researches in general (e.g., Steg, Buunk, & Rothengatter, 2008) but
the issue has not been much explored in BJW research (see Cubela, 2004).
In addition to the analyses to test the hypotheses of the study the two groups were also
compared on criterion and control variables. First of all analysis with t-test did not
show differences between the two groups of mothers on any of the subjective well-
being dimensions. But regression analyses which took into account socio
demographic and cognitive variables revealed that mothers of normal children were
more satisfied with their life than mothers of a child with Down syndrome pointing to
the role of other variables in life satisfaction. Down syndrome is a disorder that is not
curable but the afflicted ones can be rehabilitated. Parents have to accept that their
child will never come up to the level of typically developing children. Therefore it is
difficult to cope with the situation if the person is not equipped with resources that
dampen the debilitating effects of having a child with life-long disability.
However, the two groups did not differ on mood level, anxiety and depression.
Controlling for other variables also did not change the situation. It should be
acknowledged that a child with Down syndrome has a number of positive
characteristics besides characteristics associated with disability. In many regards,
child with Down syndrome may be similar to typically developing child and typically
developing children may also have number of problems (Behr & Murphy, 1993). For
example, a child with Down syndrome may be very loving and disciplined besides
having other syndrome specific problems and a normal child may be more
manipulating, throwing tamper tantrums and involved in activities not approved by
the parents thus resulting in insignificant difference in feelings of two groups of
mothers.
97
The findings can also be explained with reference to adaptation theories of subjective
well-being, which in general state that people adapt to positive and negative
experiences of life thus maintaining their level of subjective well-being at a particular
point. One such theory is theory of hedonic treadmill (Brickman & Campbell, 1971)
according to which good and bad events effect people’s feeling and evaluations of life
temporarily but soon people get habituated to these life events and come back to
neutral point of hedonism. In this reference Brickman, Coates, and Janoff-Bulman
(1978) observed that people were very happy immediately after winning the lotteries
but few days later they returned to the neutral level of happiness. Similarly, people
with spinal cord injuries were extremely unhappy after the accident but returned to
their previous level after few days. Another related theory is set point theory (Diener
& Diener, 1995) which states that individual differ in their set points of subjective
well-being to a great extent based on their genetically determined personality
characteristics. Studies conducted with twins reared together and apart demonstrate
that stability in SWB is largely determined by the genetics. Tellegen et al. (1988) studied
identical and fraternal twins who were brought up together in the same home and
those who were brought up in different homes. They observed that identical twins,
grown up in different homes, were more similar in their SWB than the fraternal twins
who shared the same environment after birth. They further estimated that heredity
explained 40 % variance in positive emotions, 55 % variance in negative emotions
and 48 % variance in general well-being. In line with above mentioned studies, Heady
and Wearing (1989) proposed the dynamic equilibrium model. According to the
model, people maintain levels of subjective well being that are determined by their
personalities. Each person has his or her own normal equilibrium level of SWB that is
based on stable personality characteristics. Changes may occur in this equilibrium due
to adverse life events. However, these changes are likely to be temporary due to stable
personality traits. In this regard it has been demonstrated that people come back to
their set point even after very negative life events. For example, Silver (1980)
observed that even after becoming paralyzed people are able to adapt successfully.
Suh, Diener, and Fugita (1996) also demonstrated that people adapt vey quickly to
good and bad events of their life. Mehnert, Krauss, Nadler, and Boyd (1990)
supported the adaptation model by the findings that individuals who got disabled in
later life were less satisfied with their life than those who got disabled in their early
life. It is very probable that diagnosis of Down syndrome of the child had affected the
98
mother’s SWB but with the passage of time they returned to their equilibrium level
because of their personality characteristics and also by natural adaptive tendencies of
human beings. This interpretation is further strengthened by the findings in the
present study that the two groups did not differ in generalized self efficacy, perceived
control and justice beliefs.
The only difference in the two groups with reference to the psychological resources
was regarding the perceived availability of social support with mothers of a child with
Down syndrome perceiving more people supporting them than mothers of normal
children. There is some evidence that mothers of special children required and sought
more support to tackle with needs of their special children than fathers as the fathers
are not primarily responsible to take care of children (Spangenberg & Theron, 2001).
It is quite understandable that mothers of special children could realize the importance
of social support more than mothers of normal children because of burden of taking
care of a child with disability, although, sources of social support may be different in
individualistic cultures, where state institutions are responsible for care of their
citizens, and in collectivistic society like Pakistan, where family is responsible to
fulfill the needs of the individual. It is possible that family as well as friends were
offering more support to these mothers because of their realization of the burden of
the mothers.
Although the focus of this work was not to assess relationship between marital status
and justice beliefs, it was observed that married mothers of normal children endorsed
stronger belief in a personal just world and ultimate justice than their unmarried
counterparts. Direction of the relationships was same in mothers of a child with Down
syndrome but insignificant. The findings partly seem to be in line with the studies
which claim that justice beliefs to some extent are based on real experiences like
experiences of violence (Dzuka & Dalbert, 2007), harassment at work place (Cubela
& Kvartuc, 2007), and long-term unemployment (Cubela, 2004), but if the reasoning
of strength of justice beliefs depending on real experiences is true than the
relationship between justice beliefs and marital status should be even stronger in
mothers of children with Down syndrome as divorced and widowed mothers of
children with Down syndrome go through more problems than married mothers who
could get support from their husbands. In addition, it will not be reasonable to draw
99
any conclusion from the present findings as they might be the result of sampling error.
It should be noted that number of mothers in widow and divorced group (n = 11) was
much smaller than mothers in married group (n = 89) in both mothers of a child with
Down syndrome and mothers of normal children.
It was also observed that belief in immanent justice was stronger in less educated
mothers than in more educated mothers in both groups. Earliest form of justice belief
emerges in the children in the form of immanent justice (Piaget as cited in Gruber &
Vonèche, 1977) and as the child matures cognitively belief changes into more
reasonable belief in a just world which takes into account some randomness in the
world as well (Dalbert, 2001). Thus, people believe that there might be some
injustices in the world; in general they get what they deserve. As the education has
been observed to play its role in cognitive development (Piaget as cited in Gruber &
Vonèche, 1977) it may be hypothesized that educated mothers were more likely to
rationalize the logic of not receiving immanent and readily available justice in all
situations of life. So it might be the reason for negative association between education
and immanent belief in justice. But then the question remains why high level of
education did not accompany high level of ultimate belief in justice and personal BJW
which is supposed to improve with cognitive maturity. It seems as if the overall
education system in Pakistan has not been able to inculcate the belief in ultimate
justice and personal BJW in people who go through the system. Although people do
retain quite a reasonable level of ultimate belief in justice and personal BJW but the
formal education does not seem to play any role in it.
A number of psychological and demographic resources were also included in the
study to demonstrate the unique contribution of justice beliefs after these variables
had explained their variance in different dimensions of SWB. It was important to
control these factors as they have been reported to be related with both BJW and
various well-being dimensions. Without controlling these factors there was a
possibility that ability of BJW to explain well-being could be attributed to its
correlation with these other factors. The findings with reference to these variables are
also worth discussing.
Personal perceived control was positively related to life satisfaction and mood level in
both groups of mothers in line with the studies of Cousins (2001), Heeps (2000),
100
Hollway (2003), Lake (2004), Maher and Cummins (2001), and Petito and Cummins
(2000). However, it positively predicted life satisfaction after controlling for
demographics and psychological variables but after controlling for beliefs in a just
world it no longer predicted life satisfaction and even positively predicted depression
which was not related to perceived control in zero order correlations. The findings
show that when attempts to control are not accompanied with the beliefs in one self
(self-efficacy), justice and perceptions that one has support available from others, they
are no longer beneficial and even they may accompany depression. None of the
studies that have been mentioned above took into account social support, efficacy and
justice beliefs. Moreover it is also not known if the present findings are also true for
men in the country or they are specific to women. Hence caution must be exercised
while generalizing from these findings.
Self-efficacy was observed to be related to two dimensions of trait well-being (mood
level and life satisfaction) in both mothers of normal children and in mothers of a
Down syndrome child in line with Cheung and Sun (2000), Christian (2007),
Hampton (1998), Hampton and Marshall (2000), Luszczynska et al. (2005) and Waltz
and Bandura (1988). However it only predicted mood level with mothers perceiving
more self-efficacy having better mood in general. Unlike studies that report negative
association of self-efficacy with depression (Hastings & Brown, 2002; Holahan et al.,
1984; Luszczynska et al., 2005; Maciejewski, 2000; Stewart et al., 2004) and anxiety
(Dahlbeck & Lightsey, 2008; Hastings & Brown, 2002; Luszczynska et al., 2005), the
present study reported no significant association of self-efficacy with two dimensions
of state well-being (depression and anxiety). Findings of the present study are also
contrary to what has been reported in studies conducted in Pakistan (Nawaz, 2004;
Tabassum & Rehman, 2005) where self-efficacy was found to be negatively
associated with depression. The results might be more particular to the women in
Pakistan as none of these studies report the associations in relation to gender. This
finding highlights an important situation of typical Pakistani women, who are usually
not in control of their lives. On the contrary those who try to rely on their abilities
may be in conflict with the social norms, thus self-efficacy may not help them with
their state well-being at least.
101
Although self-efficacy and perceived control were moderately correlated in the two
groups of mothers showing that the two constructs might be somewhat related, yet the
regression analyses clearly revealed their discriminant validity as self-efficacy and
perceived control differentially predicted well-being dimensions with high perceived
control accompanying high level of depression and high self-efficacy accompanying
better overall mood after controlling other variables.
Perceived availability of support was positively related to trait well-being (life
satisfaction and mood level) and negatively related to state well-being (anxiety and
depression) in mothers of a child with Down syndrome but unrelated to all
dimensions of well-being in mothers of normal children as depicted in correlation
matrix. Mothers of Down syndrome children also perceived more social support
available as compared to mothers of normal children as revealed by the t-test.
Regression analyses revealed that higher perceived availability of social support
accompanied more life satisfaction in mothers of Down syndrome children but not in
mothers of normal children after controlling for other variables in the model in
support of buffering model which states that perceived social support helps in times of
stress only (Cohen & Wills, 1985). Moreover, the availability of support was found to
predict only life satisfaction and not stable and transitory moods in mothers of a child
with Down syndrome. This alludes to the independence of cognitive and affective
components of subjective well-being which has been well discussed in the subjective
well-being literature (Diener, 1984; Diener, Lucas, & Scollon, 2006; Lucas, Diener, &
Suh, 1996; Shmotkin, 2005).
It could also be speculated that beliefs in a just world influenced perceived
availability of support which in turn predicted life satisfaction in mothers of a child
with Down syndrome as BJW has been theorized to enhance and protect well-being of
individuals by producing trust in the fairness of others in times of stress (Dalbert,
2001). However, insignificant correlations between three dimensions of belief in a
just world and perceived availability of social support in both groups of mothers in the
present study did not confirm the speculation that perceived availability of support
mediates the relationship between BJW and life satisfaction.
Satisfaction with the support was positively related to life satisfaction and overall
mood level in both groups of mothers but it did not predict any of the well being
102
dimensions after other variables in the model had been accounted for. The finding that
it is the number of supporting people that predict life satisfaction and not how
satisfied the person is with the support may imply that when people name the people
who provide them support they are usually satisfied with them, so it does not remain
the issue if they are satisfied with the support or not.
Among the demographic variables mother’s marital status, education and total
number of her children were related to at least one of the well-being dimensions. Zero
order correlations showed that in both groups of mothers, married mothers were less
depressed than widowed or divorced mothers. Married mothers of normal children
were also more satisfied and had better mood than previously married mothers of
normal children. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that depression and mood
level were predicted by marital status with married mothers being less depressed and
in better overall mood level than mothers who had lost their spouses. This relationship
was true after controlling for demographic and psychological variables in the model.
The finding is in line with number of researches that report better well-being of
married than unmarried mothers (e.g., Eisenhower & Blacker, 2006; McConkey et al.,
2008; Nazir, 2001; Olsson & Hwang, 2001). Surprisingly, married mothers were no
more satisfied with their life than widow or divorced mothers unlike findings of other
researches (e.g., Diener et al., 2000). This may be due to the use of different measures
of life satisfaction and control variables in different studies. Moreover, small number
of widowed and divorced mothers as compared to married mothers prevent from
generalizing the results.
Zero order correlations also revealed that education was negatively related to anxiety
and depression in mothers of Down syndrome children only. In hierarchical
regression analyses, only depression was predicted by education. More Educated
mothers were less depressed than less educated ones as expected. Ability to take
decisions, having confidence in one’s self and exposure to more choices are just few
well-known benefits of education which equip the person to handle a variety of
situations in a better way thus making them less vulnerable to negative affect.
However, role of education in reducing depression in women is more evident in the
countries like Pakistan where education is not yet easily available (Iqbal & Siddiqui,
103
2002; Naeem, 2001) than in developed countries where availability of education is no
more an issue (Ben-Zur et al., 2005).
Age of the child was unrelated to any of the well-being dimensions in the present
study. Results are in contrast to the findings of Behr and Murphy (1993), and Glidden
and Schoolcraft (2003) who observed lower level of well-being in mothers of young
children than in mothers of older children, but in line with Herman & Marcenko
(1997) and McConkey et al. (2008) who did not find significant relationship of age of
the child with maternal well-being in mothers of mentally retarded children. It should
be noted that children in the present study were all school going. Very young children
might have more negative effect on their mothers’ mental health than school going
children who are less dependent on their mothers than younger children thus mothers
are less stressed and have more time for them.
The present study did not reveal any association of monthly family income with
subjective well-being in the two groups of mothers unlike many previous studies
(Diener et al., 1995; Diener & Oishi, 2000; Sloper et al., 1991; Mak & Ho, 2007).
Diener and Oishi suggested that culture may be a factor in influence of income on
happiness as they themselves observed that some very poor people in Latino America
were not that unhappy as they were expected. It seems as people of different countries
derive happiness from different sources. Another reason for the present finding may
be that while reporting family income very poor people probably did not report the
financial help they get from different sources besides their own regular income. For
example, a house maid who earned only 4000 rupees monthly might not have
included in her income the financial support from her employer or some one else to
educate her children, to pay the household bills or to fulfill other requirements which
dampened the ill effects of poverty. However, study is also contrary to the findings of
Suhail and Chaudhary (2004) who observed positive relationship between family
income and SWB in large scale study in Pakistan. The results from the present study
may be more specific to the women who are usually not the main bread-winners in
Pakistan. Non-working women may be more interested and affected by what they get
from their husbands to spend than by what a family earns overall.
The two groups of mothers differed in age with mothers of a child with Down
syndrome being older than mothers of normal children. However, age of the mother
104
was found to be unrelated with any of the well-being dimensions in the two groups.
Low association between age and life satisfaction is in line with Ehrlich and
Isaacowitz (2002), Diener, Lucas, and Oishi (2002), Lucas and Gohm (2000), and
Suhail and Chaudhary (2004) suggesting that life satisfaction is a stable construct. But
there are rather inconsistent findings regarding the association between age and affect.
Diener et al. and Lucas and Gohm observed that positive affect declined with age
while Ehrlich and Isaacowitz observed that middle aged people had the highest level
of positive affect and younger people had the lowest level. The present findings are
also in line with Suhail and Chaudhary (2004) who did not observe a significant
association between happiness and age in their large scale study in Pakistan.
Total number of a mother’s living children was positively related to depression in
mothers of a child with Down syndrome. It is quite understandable that taking care of
a child with special needs and many other children at home puts a lot of stress on
mothers. There is some evidence that suggests that mothers with more children face
more parenting stress than mothers with less number of children (Lavee & Sharlin,
1996). Another study conducted in Pakistan demonstrated that number of children
was positively related with anxiety in non-working mothers (Iqbal et al., 2004).
However number of children did not predict any of the well-being dimensions after
other variables in the model had explained variance in SWB which indicates that
more children are not solely responsible for problems of mothers, rather it is absence
or presence of number of objective and subjective resources that matters. Moreover, it
is equally important that how many hours a woman spends at home, i.e., whether she
is working or non-working.
5.1 Conclusions BJW has been theorized for being adaptive for victims of injustice in particular,
implying buffer hypothesis. However, very few comparison studies have been
conducted for a clear test of this assumption. Results of most of these studies are
mixed. Present study attempted to explore the role of three dimensions of BJW in
explaining well-being of mothers of Down syndrome and normal children. Overall,
the results support the personal resource hypothesis instead of buffer hypothesis.
Personal BJW explained well-being of both mothers of a Down syndrome child and
those of normal children. The belief in immanent justice was related with trait well-
105
being dimensions overall but it was unrelated with negative state well-being. Belief in
ultimate justice, however buffered to reduce anxiety of mothers of a Down syndrome
child. But the belief was positively related with anxiety of mothers of normal
children. Stronger the belief in ultimate justice was more the mothers of normal
children experienced anxiety. Moreover, in line with BJW theory it was observed that
people maintain their BJW even in un-favourable conditions of life and whatever the
mediators may be for BJW and well-being relationship the consequences are same for
all those who hold strong beliefs in justice.
5.2 Limitations Before generalizing the results of the study some light must be thrown on limitations
of the study.
1. The main limitation of the study is its cross-sectional design which prevents
from drawing causal inferences. From studies with such designs we can only conclude
if the variables are related to each other or not. To determine the cause and effect
relationships, especially the direction of associations, longitudinal and experimental
designs are recommended.
2. Another limitation of the study is that no claim can be made about the mothers
of normal children being representative of general population of mothers as they were
not randomly selected. However, an attempt was made to match them to mothers of a
child with Down syndrome on important demographics to rule out differential effect
of these variables in these groups. The relevant demographics were also controlled
statistically to control for their main effects.
3. There is a possibility that participant’s self-presentational concerns could have
influenced their responses.
4. The study focused on only subjective aspects of well-being while ignoring
other important aspects of psychological well-being e.g. personal growth, purpose in
life, self acceptance and positive relations with others. There is a possibility that
ultimate belief in justice that has not been found to be related to three of the four
subjective well-being dimensions may be related to other aspects of psychological
well-being. Future researches may throw light on these associations.
106
5. Another potentially important limitation of the work is that with inferential
statistical tests conducted with alpha = .05 criteria for rejection of the null hypothesis,
there is a potential for Type 1 error. In short with so many tests conducted, it is
inevitable that at least one test would return a statistically significant value by chance
alone. Although this does not seem to be a problem for the key results that the
personal BJW and the belief in immanent justice were related to well-being, which
replicate across the criterion variables but it is appropriate to regard with suspicion the
interaction of group with the belief in ultimate justice which occurs across just one
criterion variable.
5.3 Implications 1. The study is important in the respect that it was the first one in which ultimate
and immanent beliefs in justice were studied along with personal belief in just world.
Previously either the studies have been conducted discriminating general from
personal belief in just world or belief in immanent from belief in ultimate justice. The
present research with rather unexpected findings regarding beliefs in immanent and
ultimate justice differentially predicting different well-being dimensions in victims
and non-victims is an important addition to the just world literature. Findings need to
be replicated with experimental and longitudinal designs.
2. The research also generates the hypotheses for future studies regarding the
differential attributional styles of those with strong and weak belief in a just world in
victims of injustice and people in every-day life settings.
3. The findings also have implications for mental health professionals to take
help of belief systems of individuals when trying to help them out. Professionals can
help parents discover their own strengths, to find what works for them. Belief in
ultimate justice can be particularly strengthened in mothers of special children.
Mental health professionals can induce that belief by incorporating religious
philosophy into psychotherapy.
4. So far just world theory has not been applied to research on mental health of
mothers of special children with the exception of two studies by Dalbert (1998; as
cited in Dalbert, 2001) which were conducted with general belief in a just world as
predictor of subjective well-being. In addition these studies did not include control
107
variables in the model. Pattern of results from the present study, which included three
important dimensions of belief in a just world and a number of control variables,
makes it worthwhile to follow this line of research. Future researches studying the
conditions impacting psychological well being of parents of special children should
take into account the importance of BJW as a resource enabling the mothers to
maintain their well-being.
108
6 REFERENCES
Ahmad, I., Ghafoor, T., Samoor, N. A., & Chattha, M. N. (2005). Down syndrome: Clinical and cytogenetic analysis. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Pakistan, 15, 426-429.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. London: Sage.
Albee, G. W. (1986). Toward a just society: Lessons from observations on the primary prevention of psychopathology. American Psychologist, 41, 891-898.
Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: America’s perception of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.
Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1974). Developing measures of perceived life quality: Results from several national surveys. Social Indicators Research, 1, 1-26.
Argyle, M. (1999). Causes and correlates of happiness. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 353-373). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. Retrieved March 16, 2009, from http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/BanEncy.html
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2008). An agentic perspective on positive psychology. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.). Positive psychology: Exploring the best in people (Vol. 1, pp. 167-196). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Company.
Begue, L. (2002). Beliefs in justice and faith in people: Just world, religiosity and interpersonal trust. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 375-382.
Begue, L. (2005). Self esteem regulation in threatening social comparison: The roles of belief in a just world and self-efficacy. Social Behaviour and Personality, 33(1), 69-76.
Behr, S. K., & Murphy, D. L. (1993). Research progress and promise. The role of perceptions in cognitive adaptation to disability. In A. P. Turnbull, J. A. Patterson, S. K. Behr, D. L. Murphy, J. G. Marquis, & M. J. Blue-Banning (Eds.). Cognitive coping, families and disability (pp. 151-163). Brooks: Baltimore.
Benson, D. E., & Ritter, C. (1990). Belief in a just world, job loss and depression. Sociological Focus, 23, 49-63.
Ben-Zur, H., Duvdevany, I., & Lury, L. (2005). Associations of social support and hardiness with mental health among mothers of adult children with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 54-62.
109
Berkman, L. F., & Syme, S. L. (1979). Social networks, host resistance and mortality: A nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. American Journal of Epidemiology 109: 186-204.
Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.
Bjelland, I., Dahl, A. A., Haug, T. T., & Neckelmann, D. (2002). The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: An updated literature review. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 52, 69-77.
Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In Appley (Ed.), Adaptation-Level Theory. New York: Academic Press.
Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 917-927.
Brown, J., & Grover, J. (1998). The role of moderating variables between stressor exposure and being distresses in a sample of serving police officers. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 181-185.
Buckley, S. J. (1993). Language development in children with Down syndrome - Reasons for optimism. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 1, 3-9.
Bulman, R. J., & Wortman, C. B. (1977). Attributions of blame and coping in the real world: Severe accident victims react to their lot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 351-363.
Burger, J. M. (1992). Desire for control: Personality, social, and clinical perspectives. New York: Plenum Press.
Burke, R. J. (1985). Beliefs and fears underlying Type A behavior. Journal of General Psychology, 112, 133-145.
Calhoun, L. G., Cann, A., Tedeschi, R. G., & McMillan, G. (1998). Traumatic events and generational differences in assumptions about a just world. The Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 789-791.
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Carr, J. (2005). Families of 30-35-year olds with Down's syndrome. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18, 75-84.
Cheung, C., & Kwok, S. (1996). Conservative orientation as a determinant of hopelessness. Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 333-347.
Cheung, S. K., & Sun, S. Y. K. (2000). Effects of self-efficacy and social support on the mental health conditions of mutual-aid organization members. Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 413-422.
110
Christian, J. L. (2007). Factors that predict satisfaction or burnout in parents of children with moderate to severe mental retardation. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 68(4-A), 1323. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from psycINFO data base.
Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 38, 300-314.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, C. (1983). Applied regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support and buffering. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357.
Connel, C. M., Davis, W. K., Gallant, M. P., & Sharpe, P. A. (1994). Impact of social support, social cognitive variables, and perceived threat on depression among adults with diabetes. Health Psychology, 13, 263-273.
Colvin, C. R., & Block, J. (1994). Do positive illusions foster mental health? An examination of the Taylor and Brown formulation. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 3-20.
Correia, I., Batista, M. T., & Lima, M. L. (in press) Does the belief in a just world bring happiness? Causal relationships among belief in a just world, life satisfaction and mood. Australian Journal of Psychology.
Correia, I., & Dalber, C. (2007). Belief in a just world, justice concerns, and well-being at Portuguese schools. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 111, 421–437.
Correia, I., Kamble, S. V., & Dalbert, C. (in press). Belief in a just world and well-Being of bullies, victims and defenders: A study with Portuguese and Indian students. Anxiety, Stress & Coping.
Correia, I., Vala, J., & Aguiar, P. (2001, August). Are strong believers in a just world happier than low believers in a just world. Paper presented at the tenth European Developmental Conference, Uppsala, Sweden.
Cousins, R. (2001). Predicting subjective quality of life: The contributions of personality and perceived control. Ph D desertation, Deakin University, Australia.
Cubela, V. (2004). Belief in a just world and young adults’ way of coping with unemployment and the job search. In C. Dalbert & H. Sally (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp.189-214). London: Routledge.
Cubela, V., & Ivanov, L. (2000). Vjerovanja u (ne)pravedan svijet i centralnost pravde: Relacije s osjecajem koherentnosti i generaliziranim ocekivanjima u pogledu buducnosti (Beliefs in a (un) just world and the centrality of justice: Their relations to the sense of coherence and generalized future expectancies, Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru, 39, 33-51.
Cubela, V., Kvartuc, T. (2007). Effects of mobbing on justice beliefs and adjustment. European Psychologist, 12, 261-271.
111
Cubela, V., Prorokovic, A., & Gregov, Lj. (1999). Neki tipovi valjanosti i pouzdanosti dviju skala vjerovanja u pravedan svijet (Some aspects of validity and reliability of two belief in a just world scales), Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru, 38, 133-148
Cummins, R. A., & Nistico, H. (2002). Maintaining life satisfaction: The role of positive cognitive bias. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 37-69.
Dahlbeck, D. T., & Lightsey Jr, O. R. (2008). Generalized self-efficacy, coping, and self-esteem as predictors of psychological adjustment among children with disabilities or chronic illnesses. Children's Health Care, 37, 293–315.
Dalbert, C. (1992). Subjektives Wohlbefinden junger Erwachsener: Theoretische und empirische Analysen der Struktur und Stabilität [Subjective well-being of young adults: Theoretical and empirical analyses of structure and stability]. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 13, 207-220.
Dalbert, C. (1998). Belief in a just world, well-being, and coping with an unjust fate. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 87-105). New York: Plenum Press.
Dalbert, C. (1999). The world is more just for me than generally: About the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale’s validity. Social Justice Research, 12, 79-98.
Dalbert, C. (2001). The justice motive as a personal resource: Dealing with challenges and critical life events. New York: Plenum Press.
Dalbert, C. (2002). Beliefs in a just world as a buffer against anger. Social Justice Research, 15, 123-145.
Dalbert, C. (2006). Justice concerns and mental health during unemployment. In T. Kieselbach, A. H. Winefield, C. Boyd, & S. Anderson (Eds.), Unemployment and health. International and interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 35-50). Melbourn: Australian Academic Press.
Dalbert, C., & Braun, A. (1997) Coping with cancer: A study with adult cancer patients. University of Tubingen, Unpublished data.
Dalbert, C. & Dzuka, J. (2004). Belief in a just world, personality, and well being of adolescents. In C. Dalbert & H. Sally (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp.101-116). London: Routledge.
Dalbert, C., Lipkus, I. M., Sallay, H., & Goch, I. (2001) A just and an unjust world: Structure and validity of different world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 561-577.
Dalbert, C., & Maes, J. (2002). Belief in a just world as a personal resource in school. In M. Ross, & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 365-381). Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dalbert, C., Montada, L., & Schmitt, M. (1987). Glaube an eine gerechte Welt als Motiv: Validierungskorrelate zweier Skalen [The belief in a just world as motive: Validity correlates of two scales]. Psychologische Beiträge, 29, 596-615.
112
Dalbert, C., & Radant, M. (2004). Parenting and young adolescents’ belief in a just world. In C. Dalbert & H. Sallay (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp. 11-25). London: Routledge.
Dalbert, C., & Sallay, H. K. (1996). The belief in a just world: Construct in Hungary. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 27, 293-314.
Dalbert, C., & Stoeber, J. (2006). The belief in a just world and domain-specific beliefs about justice at school and in the family: A longitudinal study with adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 200-207.
Dalbert, C., & Yamauchi, L. (1994). Belief in a just world and attitudes toward immigrants and foreign workers: A cultural comparison between Hawaii and Germany. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1612-1626.
DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analyses of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197-229
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being. The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55, 34-43.
Diener, E., & Diener, C. (1996). Most people are happy. Psychological Science, 7, 181-185.
Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653-663.
Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting subjective well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 851-864.
Diener, E., & Diener, R. B. (2000). New directions in subjective well-being. Retrieved February 17, 2003, from http://s.psych.uiuc.edu/~ediener/hottopic/NEW-DIRECTIONS.html
Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1984). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1105-1117.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.
Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1995). Resources, personal striving, and subjective well-being: A nomothetic and ideographic approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 926-935.
Diener, E., Gohm, C. L., Suh, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Similarity of the relations between marital status and subjective well-being across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 419-436.
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In C.R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), The hand book of positive psychology. (pp. 63-73). NewYork: Oxford University Press.
113
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well being. American Psychologist, 51, 305-314.
Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Money and happiness: Income and subjective well-being across nations. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 185-218). Cambrige, M. A: MIT Press.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276-302.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., & Oishi, S. (1997). Recent findings on subjective well-being. Retrieved February 17, 2003, from http://s.psych.uiuc.edu/~ediener/hottopic/paper1.html
Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Hamby, D. W. (1994). Measuring social support in families with young children with disabilities. In C. J. Dunst, C. M. Trivette, & A. G. Deal (Eds.), Supporting and strengthening families, Vol. 1: Methods, strategies and practices (pp. 152-160). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Dykens, E. M., Hodapp, R. M., & Evans, D. W. (2006). Profiles and development of adaptive behavior in children with Down syndrome. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 9, 45-50.
Dzuka, J. (2001). A Slovak youth’s belief in a just world. Psychologia a pata psychologia dietata, 36, 225-239. Abstract retrieved June 21, 2004, from www.elis.sk/ppd/ppd301.htm
Dzuka, J., & Dalbert, C. (2002). Mental health and personality of Slovak unemployed adolescents: The impact of belief in a just world. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 732-757.
Dzuka, J., & Dalbert, C. (2006). The belief in just world and subjective well being in old age. Aging and Mental Health, 10, 439-444.
Dzuka, J., & Dalbert, C. (2007). Student violence against teachers: Teachers’ well-being and the belief in a just world. European Psychologist, 12, 253-260.
Edge, L. (2002, November). Quality of life & body image in women diagnosed with breast cancer. Paper presented in 4th Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Australia. Abstract retrieved April 6, 2005, from http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/Conferences/abstracts_papers/index.htm
Ehrlich, B. S., & Isaacowitz, D. M. (2002). Does subjective well-being increase with age? Perspectives in Psychology, 5, 20-26.
Eid, M., & Diener, E. (2004). Global judgments of subjective well-being: Situational variability and long-term stability. Social Indicators Research, 65, 245-277.
Eisenhower, A. S., Baker, B. L., & Blacher, J. (2005). Preschool children with intellectual disability: syndrome specificity, behavior problems, and maternal well being. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 657-671.
114
Eisenhower, A. S., & Blacher, J. (2006). Mothers of young adults with intellectual disability: multiple roles, ethnicity and well being. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50, 905-916.
Emmons, R. A., & Diener, E. (1985). Personality correlates of subjective well being. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 11, 89-97.
Enzmann, D. (1997). Raneigen: A program to determine the parallel analysis criteria for the number of principal components. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 232.
Enzmann, D. (2003). RanEigen version 2.0 [Computer software]. Retrieved June 17, 2009, from http://www2.jura.uni-hamburg.de/instkrim/kriminologie/mitarbeiter/enzmann/software/pacrit.zip
Erez, A., Johnson, D. E., & Judge, T. A. (1995). Self-deception as a mediator of the relationship between dispositions and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 597-612.
Fatima, I. (2004). Beliefs in a just world and psychological well being. Unpublished M.Phil thesis, University of Punjab, Pakistan.
Fatima, I., & Khalid, R. (2007). Some aspects of reliability and validity of Beliefs in a Just World Questionnaire. Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 5, 15-24.
Feeley, K. M., & Jones, E. A. (2006). Addressing challenging behaviour in children with Down syndrome: The use of applied behaviour analysis for assessment and intervention. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 11, 64-77.
Feldman, M., McDonald, L., Serbin, L., Stack, D., Secco, M. L., & Yu, C. T. (2007). Predictors of depressive symptoms in primary caregivers of young children with or at risk for developmental delay. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 51, 606–619.
Fried, K. (1980). A score based on eight signs in the diagnosis of Down syndrome in the new born. Journal of Mental Deficiencies Research, 24, 181-185.
Furnham, A. (1993). Just world beliefs in twelve societies. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 317-329.
Furnham, A. (1995). The just world, charitable giving and attitudes to disability. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 577-583.
Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 795-817.
Furnham, A., & Proctor, E. (1989). Belief in a just world: Review and critique of the individual difference literature. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 365-384.
Furnham, A., & Proctor, E. (1992). Sphere specific just world beliefs and attitudes to Aids. Human Relations, 45, 265-280.
115
Gallagher, E., & Vella-Brodrick, D. (2006, November). Social support and emotional intelligence as predictors of subjective well-being. Paper presented at the 8th Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Deakin University, Australia.
Glidden, L. M., & Schoolcraft, S. A. (2003). Depression: Its trajectory and correlates in mothers rearing children with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 47, 250-263.
Gould, S. J. (1999). A critique of Heckhausen and Schulz’s (1995) life span theory of control from a cross cultural perspective. Psychological Review, 106, 597-604.
Griffin, M. L., Amodeo, M., Clay, C., Fassler, I., & Ellis, M. A. (2006). Racial differences in social support: Kin versus friends. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76, 374-380.
Gruber, H. E., & Vonèche, J. J. (Eds.). (1977). The essential Piaget. New York: Basic Books.
Gurin, G., Veroff, J., & Feld, S. (1960). American’s view their mental health. New York: Basic Books.
Hafer, C. L., & Olson, J. M. (1993). Beliefs in a just world, discontent, and assertive actions by working women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 30-38.
Hafer, C. L., & Olson, J. M. (1998). Individual differences in the belief in a Just world and responses to personal misfortune. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimization and belief in a just world (pp. 65-86). New York: Plenum Press.
Hafer, C. L. & Bègue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, development, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128-167.
Haley, W. E., Roth, D. L., Coleton, M. I., Ford, G. R., West, C. A. C., Collins, R. P., & Isobe, T. L. (1996). Appraisal, coping, and social support as mediators of well-being in black and white family caregivers of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 121-129.
Hall, J. G. (2004). Chromosomal clinical abnormalities. In R. E. Behrman, R. M. Kliegman, & H. B. Jenson (Eds.), Nelson textbook of pediatrics (pp. 383-391). Philedelphia: WB Saunders.
Hampton, N. Z. (1998, April). Enhancing the quality of life of people with spinal cord injuries. Paper presented at the World Conference of American Counseling Association. Indianapolis, IN.
Hampton, N. Z., & Marshall, A. (2000). Culture, Gender, Self-Efficacy, and Life Satisfaction: A comparison between Americans and Chinese People with Spinal Cord Injuries. Journal of Rehabilitation, 66, 21-28.
Hanson, M. J. (2003). Twenty-five years after early intervention: a follow-up of children with Down syndrome and their families. Infants and Young Children, 16, 354-366.
116
Hassall, R., Rose, J., & McDonald, J. (2005). Parenting stress in mothers of children with an intellectual disability: The effects of parental cognitions in relation to child characteristics and family support. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 405-418.
Hastings, R. P., Allen, R., McDermott, K., & Still, D. (2002). Factors related to positive perceptions in mothers of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 15, 269-275.
Hastings, R. P., & Brown, T. (2002). Behavior Problems of Children with Autism, Parental Self-Efficacy, and Mental Health. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 107, 222-232.
Hastings, R. P., Kovshof, H., Ward, N. J., Epinosa, F. D., Brown, T., & Remington, B. (2005). System analysis of stress and positive perceptions in mothers and fathers of pre-school children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35, 635-644.
Heady, B., & Wearing, A. (1989). Personality, life events, and subjective well-being: Toward a dynamic equilibrium model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 731-739.
Heckhausen, J. & Schulz, R. (1995). A life span theory of control. Psychological Review, 102, 284-304.
Heckhausen, J. & Schulz, R. (1999). The primacy of primary control is a human universal: A reply to Gould’s (1999) critique of the life span theory of control. Psychological Review, 106, 605-304.
Hedov, G., Anneren, G., & Wikbald, K. (2002). Swedish parents of children with Down’s syndrome. Parental stress and sense of coherence in relation to employment rate and time spent in child care. Scandinavion Journal of Caring Sciences, 16, 424.
Heeps, L. J. (2000). The role of primary/secondary control in positive psychological adjustment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Deakin University, Australia.
Herman, S. E., & Marcenko, M. O. (1997). Perceptions of services and resources as mediators of depression among parents of children with developmental disabilities. Mental Retardation, 35, 458-467.
Holahan, C. K., Holahan, C. J., & Belk, S. S. (1984). Adjustment in Aging: The roles of life stress, hassles, and self-efficacy. Health Psychology, 3, 315-328.
Hollway, J. (2003). The relationship of perceived control to neighbourhood wellbeing. Unpublished Honours dissertation, Deakin University, Australia.
Horton, T. V., & Wallander, J. L. (2001). Hope and social support as resilience factors against psychological distress of mothers who care for children with chronic physical conditions. Rehabilitation Psychology, 46, 382-399.
117
Iqbal, A., Nadeem, R., & Fatima, N. (2004). Anxiety in non-working women with reference to their education, family system and number of children. Pakistan Journal of Medical Science, 20, 345-348.
Iqbal, A., & Siddiqui, K. S. (2002). Depression among parents of children with acute Leukomia. Journal of Ayub Medical College, 14. Retrieved December 19, 2008, from www.ayubmed.edu.pk/JAMC/PAST/14-2/index.htm.
Johnson, W., & Krueger, R. F. (2006). How money buy happiness: Genetic and environmental processes linking finances and life satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 680-691.
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
Kamble, S. V., & Dalbert, C. (2008, August). Belief in a just world and well being. Paper presented at the 12th Biennial Conference of International Society for Justice Research, Adelaide, Australia.
Keller, D., & Honig, A. S. (2004). Maternal and paternal stress in families with school aged children with disabilities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74, 337-348.
Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002) Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007-1022.
Khan, S. (1996). Moderator variables in vulnerability to anxiety: Social support and resilience. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Karachi, Pakistan.
Kim, H. W., Greenberg, J. S., Seltzrer, M. M., Krauss, M. W. (2003). The role of coping in maintaining the psychological well being of mothers of adults with intellectual disability and mental illness. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 47, 313-327.
King, K. B. (1993). Social support and long-term recovery from coronary artery surgery: Effects on patients and spouses. Health Psychology, 12, 56-63.
Lake, L. B. (2004). Volunteerism and perceived control as predictors of subjective well-being. Post graduate diploma thesis, Deakin University.
Lam, D. B, & Kwok, S. Y. C. L. (2003). Stresses and mental health of fathers with younger children in Hong Kong: Implications for social work practices. Daniel Fu Keung Wong Internnaional Social Work, 46, 103-120.
Lerner, M. J. (1965). Evaluation of performance as a function of performer’s reward and attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 355-360.
Lerner, M. J. (1975). The justice motive in social behavior: Introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 1-19.
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.
118
Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030-1051.
Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989). A comparison of alternatives to conducting Monte Carlo analyses for determining parallel analysis criteria. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 365-395.
Lavee, Y., & Sharlin, S. (1996). The effect of parenting stress on marital quality. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 114-135.
Lightsey, O. W. (1994). Thinking positive as a stress buffer: The role of positive automatic cognitions in depression and happiness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41, 325-334.
Lipkus, I. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1171-1178.
Lipkus, I. M., Dalbert, C., & Siegler, I. C. (1996). The importance of distinguishing the belief in a just world for self versus for others: Implications for psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 666-677.
Lipkus, I. M., & Siegler, I. C. (1993). The belief in a just world and perceptions of discrimination. Journal of Psychology, 127, 465-474.
Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. M. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 616-628.
Lucas, R. E., & Gohm, C. L. (2000). Age and sex differences in subjective well-being across cultures. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 291-318). Cambridge, M. A: MIT Press.
Lupfer, M. B., Doan, K., & Houston, D.A. (1998). Explaining unfair and fair outcomes: The therapeutic value of attributional analysis. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 495-511.
Luszczynska, A., Guti rrez-Do a, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General self-efficacy in various domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 80-89.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137-155.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. (1999). Changes in attractiveness of elected, rejected, and precluded alternatives. A comparison of happy and unhappy individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 988-1007.
Maciejewski, P. K. (2000). Self-efficacy as a mediator between stressful life events and depressive symptoms: Differences based on history of prior depression. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 373-378.
119
Maes. J. (1998a). Eight stages in the development of belief in a just world. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 163-186). New York: Plenum Press.
Maes. J. (1998b). Immanent justice and ultimate justice: two ways of believing in justice. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 9-40). New York: Plenum Press.
Maes, J., & Kals, E. (2002). Justice beliefs in school: Distinguishing ultimate and immanent justice. Social Justice Research, 15, 227-244.
Maes, J., & Kals, E. (2004). Two facets of the belief in a just world and achievement behaviour at school. In C. Dalbert and H. Sallay (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adult hood: origins and consequences (pp. 208-235). London: Routledge.
Maes, J. & Schmitt, M. (1999). More on ultimate and imminent justice: Results from the research project “justice as a problem within reunified Germany”. Social Justice Research, 12, 65-78.
Magnus, K., & Diener, E. (1991). A longitudinal analysis of personality, life events, and subjective well-being. Paper presented at the 63rd annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association.
Maher, E., & Cummins, R. A. (2001). Subjective quality of life, perceived control, and dispositional optimism among older people. Australian Journal on Aging, 20, 139-146.
Mak, W. W. S., & Ho, G. S. M. (2007). Caregiving perceptions of Chinese mothers of children with intellectual disability in Hong Kong. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 20, 145-156.
Mak, W. W. S., Law, R. W., Woo, J., Cheung, F. M., & Lee, D. (2009). Social support and psychological adjustment to SARS: The mediating role of self-care self-efficacy. Psychology & Health, 24, 161-174
Malik, A. A. (2002). The study of social support as determining factor in depressed and non-depressed as measured by an indigenously developed social support scale. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Karachi, Pakistan.
Maniar, S., Fatima, S., Hamdani, A. (2002). Mothers of special children and depression. Pakistan Journal of Psychology, 33. Abstract retrieved April 9, 2009, from http://www.uok.edu.pk/research_institutes/icp/images/abstracts.pdf
Margalit, M., & Kleitman, T. (2006). Mothers' stress, resilience and early intervention. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 21, 269-283.
McCarty, C. A., Weisz, J. R., Wanitromanee, K., Eastman, K. L., Suwanlert, S., Chaiyasit, W., & Band, E. B. (1999). Culture, coping and context: Primary and Secondary Control among Thai and American youth. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 809-818.
120
McConkey, R., Kennedy, M. T., Chang, M. Y., Jarrah, S., Shukri, R. (2008). The impact on mothers of bringing up a child with intellectual disabilities: A cross cultural study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 65-74.
McQuillen, A. D., Licht, M. H., & Licht, B. G. (2003). Contributions of disease severity and perceptions of primary and secondary control to the prediction of psychosocial adjustment to Parkinson’s disease. Health Psychology, 22, 504-512.
Mehnert, T., Krauss, H. H., Nadler, R., and Boyd, M. (1990). Correlates of life satisfaction in those with disabling conditions. Rehabilitation Psychology, 35, 3-17.
Misajon, R., & Cummins, R. A. (2001, November). Living with arthritis: Subjective Quality of Life and Control. Paper presented in 3rd Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Australia. Abstract retrieved April 6, 2005, from http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/Conferences/abstracts_papers/index.htm
Mitchell, R. E., & Trickett, E. J. (1980). Social networks as mediators of social support: An analysis of the effects and determinants of social networks. Community and Mental Health Journal, 16, 27–44.
Montada, L., Schmitt, M., & Dalbert, C. (1986). Thinking about justice and dealing with one’s own privileges. In H. W. Bierhoff, J. Greenberg, & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Justice in social relations (pp. 125-143). New York: Plenum Press.
Moskowitz, D. S., & Cote, S. (1995). Do interpersonal traits predict affect? A comparison of three models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 915-924.
Mumford, D. B., Tareen, I. A. K., Bajwa, M. A. Z., Bhatti, M. R., & Karim, R. (1991). Translation and evaluation of an Urdu version of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinanca, 83, 81-85.
Myers, L. B., & Brewin, C. R. (1996). Illusions of well being and repressive coping style. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 443-457.
Naeem, F. (2001). Vulnerability to depression in mothers of emotionally handicapped children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Bahria University Islamabad, Pakistan.
Nawaz, N. (2004). Effects of depression on self-efficacy of stroke patients. Unpublished M. Phil thesis, Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad, Pakistan.
Nazir, S. (2001). Psychological reaction to divorce of divorced women and their children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Karachi, Pakistan.
O’ Conner, W. E., Morrison, T. G., McLeod, L. D., & Anderson, D. (1996). A meta-analytic review of the relationship between gender and belief in a just world. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 141-148.
Oishi, S., & Diener, E. (2001). Goals, culture, and subjective well–being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1674-1682.
Oishi, S., Diener, E., Suh, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Value as a moderator in subjective well–being. Journal of Personality, 67, 157-184.
121
Olsson, M. B., & Hwang, C. P. (2001). Depression in mothers and fathers of children with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 45, 535-543.
Otto, K., Boos, A., Dalbert, C., Schops., & Hoyer, J. (2006). Post traumatic symptoms, depression, and anxiety of flood victims: The impact of the belief in a just world. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1075-1084.
Otto, K., & Dalbert, C. (2005). Belief in a just world and its functions for young prisoners. Journal of Research in Personality, 39, 559-573.
Padeliadu, S. (1998). Time demands and experienced stress in Greek mothers of children with Down’s syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 42, 144-153.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164-172.
Pengilly, J. W., & Dowd, E. T. (2000). Hardiness and social support as moderators of stress. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 813-820.
Penninx, B. W. J. H., Kriegsman, D. M. W., Van Eijk, J. T. M., Boeke, A. J. P., & Deeg, D. J. H. (1996). Differential effect of social support on the course of chronic disease: A criteria-based literature study. Families, Systems, & Health, 14, 223-244.
Petito, F., & Cummins, R. A. (2000). Quality of life in adolescence: The role of perceived control, parenting style and social support, Behavioral change, 17, 196-207.
Preacher, K. (2005). A primer on interaction effects in multiple linear regression. Retrieved March 16, 2009, from http://www.people.ku.edu/~preacher/interact/interactions.htm
Rintala, D. H., Young, M. E., Hart, K. A., Clearman, R. R., & Fuhrer, M. J. (1992). Social support and the well-being of persons with spinal cord injury living in community. Rehabilitation Psychology, 37, 155-163.
Ritter, C., Benson, D, E., & Snyder, C. (1990). Belief in a just world and depression. Sociological Perspectives, 33, 235-252.
Roach, M. A., Orsmond, G. I., & Barratt, M. S. (1999). Mothers and fathers of children with Down syndrome: Parental stress and involvement in childcare. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 104, 422-436.
Roman, C., Joanna, K., Jan, S., & Magdalena, K. (2008). Burnout predictors among prison officers: The moderating effect of temperamental endurance. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 666-672.
Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J.R., & Snyder, S. S. (1982). Changing the world and changing the self: A two-process model of perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 5-37.
Roussi, P. (2002). Discriminative facility in perceptions of control and its relation to psychological distress. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 15, 179-191.
122
Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1973). Belief in a just world. And reactions to another’s lot: A study of participants in the national draft lottery. Journal of Social Issues, 29, 73-93.
Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just world. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65-89.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is every thing, or is it? Exploration on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069-1081.
Ryff, C. D. (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 99-104.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719-727.
Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (1998). The contours of positive health. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 1-28.
Sallay, H., & Dalbert, C. (2004). The development of the belief in a just world: The impact of being raised in a one-parent or an intact family. In C. Dalbert & H. Sallay (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp. 26-42). London: Routledge.
Sarason, I. G., Levine, H. M., Basham, R. B., & Sarason, B. R. (1983). Assessing social support: The Social Support Questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 127-139.
Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., Shearin, E. N., & Pierce G. R. (1987). A brief measure of social support: Practical and theoretical implications. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 497-510.
Schill, T., Beyler, J., & Morales, J. (1992). The role of just world belief and anger issues in self-defeating personality. Psychological Reports, 70, 595-598.
Scholz, U., Gutiérrez-Doña, B., Sud, S., & Schwarzer, R. (2002). Is perceived self-efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18, 242-251.
Schröder, K. E. E., Schwarzer, R., & Konertz, W. (1998). Coping as a mediator in recovery from cardiac surgery. Psychology and Health, 13, 83-97.
Schulz, R., & Heckhausen, J. (1996). A life span model of successful aging. American Psychologist, 51, 702-714.
Schwarzer, R. (1994). Optimism, vulnerability, and self-beliefs as health-related cognitions: A systematic overview. Psychology and Health: An International Journal, 9, 161-180.
123
Schwarzer, R., Hahn, A., & Jerusalem, M. (1993). Negative affect in East German migrants: Longitudinal effects of unemployment and social support. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 6, 57-69.
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.
Scott, B. S., Atkinson, L., Minton, H. L., & Bowman, T. (1997). Psychological distress of parents of infants with Down syndrome. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 102, 161–171.
Shields, M., & Wooden, M. (2003, February). Marriage, children and subjective well-being. Paper presented at the eighth Australian Institute of Family Studies Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved July 16, 2005, from http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/hilda/conf-p01.pdf.
Shin, J., Nhan, N. V., Crittenden, K. S., Flory, H. M., & Ladinsky, J. (2006). Parenting stress of mothers and fathers of young children with cognitive delays in Vietnam. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50, 748-760.
Shmotkin, D. (2005). Happiness in the face of adversity: Reformulating the dynamic and modular bases of subjective well being. Review of General Psychology, 9, 291-325.
Shnek, Z. M., Irvine, J., Stewart, D., & Abbey, S. (2001). Psychological factors and depressive symptoms in Ischemic heart disease. Health Psychology, 20, 141-145.
Silver, R. L. (1980). Coping with an undesirable life event: A study of early reactions to physical disability. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Northwestern University.
Skinner, E. A. (1996). A guide to constructs of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 549-570.
Sloper, P., Knussen, C., Turner, S., & Cunningham, C. (1991). Factors related to stress and satisfaction with life in families of children with Down’s syndrome. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32, 655-676.
Smith, K. B., & Green, D. N. (1984). Individual correlates of the belief in a just world. Psychological Reports, 54, 435-438.
Spangenberg, J. J., & Theron, J. C. (2001). Stress and coping in parents of children with Down syndrome. Studia Psychologica, 43, 41-48.
Steg, L., Buunk, A. P., & Rothengatter, T. (Eds.). (2008). Applied social psychology. Understanding and managing social problems. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245-251.
124
Stewart, S. M., Kennard, B. D., Lee, P. W. H., Hughes, C. W., Mayes, T. L., Emslie, G. J., & Lewinsohn, P. M. (2004). A cross-cultural investigation of cognitions and depressive symptoms in adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113, 248-257.
Stoeber, J. (2000). SteigerD (computer software). Halle, Germany: Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg.
Streisand, R., Swift, E., Wickmark, T., Chen, R., & Holmes, C. S. (2005). Pediartic parenting stress among parents of children with type 1 diabetes: The role of self-efficacy, responsibility, and fear. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 30, 513-521.
Suh, E., Diener, E., & Fugita, F. (1996). Events and subjective well-being: Only recent events matter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1091-1102.
Suhail, K. (2000). Reliability analysis of the HAD scale across different cultural and ethnic groups. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 27, 118-123.
Suhail, K., & Chaudhry, H. R. (2004). Predictors of subjective well being in eastern Muslim culture. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 359-376.
Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2005). Justice for all, or just for me? More evidence of the importance of the self-other distinction in just-world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 637–645.
Sutton, R. M., Douglas, K. M., Wilkin, K., Elder, T. J., Cole, J. M., & Stathi, S. (2008). Justice for whom, Exactly? Beliefs in justice for the self and various others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 528–541.
Tabassum, U., & Rehman, G. (2005). The Relationship between self-efficacy and depression in physically handicapped children. Journal of Pakistan Psychiatric Society, 2, 37-40. Retrieved July 16, 2005, from http://www.jpps.com.pk/display_articles.asp?d=94&p=art
Tabbasum, U., Rehman, G., Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (2003). Urdu adaptation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale. Retrieved July 16, 2005, from http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~health/urdu.htm
Taylor, L. C. (2001). Work Attitudes, Employment Barriers, and Mental Health Symptoms in a Sample of Rural Welfare Recipients, American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(3), 444 - 463
Taylor, S. E., & Armor, D. A. (1996). Positive illusions and coping with adversity. Journal of Personality, 64, 873-898.
Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. (1988). Illusions and well-being: A social psychological perspective of mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193-210.
Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1994). Positive illusions and well being revisited: Separating fact from fiction. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 21-27.
125
Tellegen, A., Lykken, D., Bouchard, T. J., Wilcox, K. J., Segal, N., & Rich, S. (1988). Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1031-1039.
Thompson, S. C., Collins, M. A., Newcomb, M. D., & Hunt, W. (1996). On fighting versus accepting stressful circumstances: Primary and secondary control among HIV-positive men in prison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1307-1317.
Thompson, S. C., Sobolew-Shubin, A., Galbraith, M. E., Schwankovsky, L., & Cruzen, D. (1993). Maintaining perceptions of control: Finding perceived control in Low-control circumstances. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 293-304.
Thurber, C. A., & Weisz, J. R. (1997). “You can try or you can just give up”: The impact of perceived control and coping style on childhood homesickness. Developmental Psychology, 33, 508-517.
Tomaka, J., & Blascovich, J. (1994). Effects of justice beliefs on cognitive appraisals of and subjective, physiological, and behavioral responses to potential stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 732-740.
Vaux, A., & Harrison, D. (1985). Support network characteristics associated with support satisfaction and perceived support. American Journal of Community Psychology 13, 245-268.
Vella-Brodrick, D. (2005, November). Comparison of sociodemographic, personality and social support variables as predictors of quality of life. Paper presented at the 7th Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Deakin University, Australia.
Waltz, M., & Bandura, B. (1988). Subjective health, intimacy, and perceived self-efficacy after heart attack: Predicting life quality five years afterward. Social Indicators Research, 20(3), 303-332.
War, P., Barter, J., & Brownbridge, G. (1983). On the independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 644-651.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 1063-1070.
Weisz, J. R., McCabe, M. A., & Dennig, M. D. (1994). Primary and secondary control among children undergoing medical procedures: Adjustment as a function of coping style. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 324-332.
Weiss, M. J. (2002). Hardiness and social support as predictors of stress in mothers of typical children, children with autism, and children with mental retardation. Autism, 6, 115-130.
Wrosch, C., Schulz, R., & Heckhausen, J. (2004). Health stresses and depressive symptomatology in the elderly: A control-process approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 17-20.
126
Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983). The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinanca, 67, 361–370.
Zuckerman, M. (1975). Belief in a just world and altruistic behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 972-976.
Zuckerman, M., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1977a). Dimensions of the I-E Scale and their relationship to other personality measures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37, 159-175.
Zuckerman, M., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1977b). Belief in internal control or belief in a just world: Use and misuse of I-E Scale in prediction of attitudes and behavior. Journal of Psychology, 45, 356-378.
127
APPENDICES
128
Appendix A
Consent Form for the Pilot Study: Phase I and Main Study
129
Appendix B
Consent Form for the Pilot Study: Phase II
130
Appendix C
Demographic Data Sheet
131
Appendix D
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)
132
Appendix E
Trait Well-Being Inventory
133
Appendix F
Personal Belief in a Just World Scale
134
Appendix G
Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice
135
Appendix H
Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6)
136
Appendix I
Personal Perceived Control Scale
137
Appendix J
Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale
138
Appendix K
Permissions to Use Scales