Introduction to Thesis

PREDICTING SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE: THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF PERSONALITY AND PERCEIVED CONTROL

By Rachel Cousins B.B.Sc. Hons

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate of Psychology (Clinical) Deakin University October 2001 DEAKIN UNIVERSITY

CANDIDATE DECLARATION

I certify that the thesis entitled:

Predicting Subjective Quality of Life: The Contributions of Personality and Perceived Control submitted for the degree of Doctor of Psychology (Clinical) is the result of my own research, except where otherwise acknowledged, and that this thesis in whole or in part has not be submitted for an award, including a higher degree, to any other university or institution.

Full Name: RACHEL LOUISE COUSINS

Signed: ………………………………….

Date: …………………………………. Preliminary Pages iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would firstly like to acknowledge the support and encouragement of my family and friends. Thank you to my partner, Ashley, the last three years would not have been possible without his love and support. Thank you to my mother for her constant prayers, and thank you to my Grandmother, who frequently has me in her thoughts. Thank you to Alana for her support throughout my tertiary education and for all those lessons in grammar. Thank you also to Garrick for proof reading the final copy. I would also like to thank my classmates and friends who have been a great support over the years, and never seem to tire of listening to me talking about my studies.

This project could not have been undertaken and completed without the guidance of my supervisor, Professor Bob Cummins, whose positivity was a great source of motivation. Thank you.

I would also like to thank the contribution of the Schizophrenia Fellowship of Victoria and all the carers who, despite their burden, found time to participate in the study. Thank you also to the schools involved for providing me with access to participants. To all the participants who completed the questionnaires, thank you for your contribution.

Finally, thank you to all those who over the past ten years have inspired me to study psychology.

Preliminary Pages iv

ABSTRACT

Subjective quality of life is remarkably stable within populations and it has been proposed that this us due to the operation of a homeostatic system. It has been proposed also that central to the operation of such homeostasis, and the key to system stability, is the strong relationship between subjective quality of life and personality. This prompts questions about what other psychological processes are involved in this relationship, and the literature indicates that perceived control has important links to both constructs. Hence, in order to develop further understanding about these relationships, this research primarily examines the relationships between personality, conceptualised as extroversion and neuroticism, perceived control, conceptualised as approach control and avoidant control, and subjective quality of life. Two linked studies are described.

The first examines these relationships in a sample of carers of people with mental illness, in comparison with a sample of people from the general population who do not care for someone with a disability. It was found that carers had significantly lower subjective quality of life, particularly in the domains of health and emotional well-being, significantly lower approach control and extroversion, and significantly higher neuroticism, than the comparison sample. In the carer sample, regression analyses showed that with all variables in the equation, neuroticism, approach control and avoidant control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, whilst extroversion made no significant contribution to the equation. Additionally, neuroticism significantly predicted approach control. In the comparison sample, regression analyses showed that with all variables in the equation, only approach control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, whilst neuroticism, extroversion and avoidant control made no significant contributions to the equation. Additionally, neuroticism significantly predicted approach control. It was concluded that when subjective quality of life homeostasis is being challenged, as in the carer sample, its maintenance becomes more complicated.

The second study examines these relationships in a sample of public secondary school teachers, in comparison with a sample of people from the general population. There were no significant differences between the two samples, therefore the samples Preliminary Pages v were combined. The results of the regression analyses showed that with all variables in the equation, neuroticism and approach control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, whilst avoidant control approached significance and extroversion made no significant contribution to the equation. Additionally, neuroticism significantly predicted avoidant control and extroversion significantly predicted approach control. It was concluded that extroversion and approach control together impact positively on subjective quality of life and neuroticism and avoidant control together impact negatively on subjective quality of life. Moreover, further support was given for the conclusion that when subjective quality of life homeostasis is being challenged its maintenance becomes more complicated.

Overall, there is some support for a model whereby personality, primarily neuroticism, and perceived control, primarily approach control, contribute to subjective quality of life. Furthermore, the three samples used in this research represent different levels of subjective quality of life. The comparison sample in Study One had high normal subjective quality of life, the combined sample in Study Two had normal subjective quality of life and the carer sample in Study One had low normal subjective quality of life. The resultant model of relationships for each of these samples demonstrates that the management of subjective quality of life homeostasis becomes more complicated as it is challenged. Preliminary Pages vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1...... 1

1 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY ONE...... 1 1.1 SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE...... 2 1.1.1 The historical development of life quality research...... 2 1.1.2 Definitions of various indicators of life quality...... 3 1.1.3 The definition and measurement of subjective quality of life...... 5 1.1.4 Conclusion...... 7 1.2 PERSONALITY...... 8 1.2.1 Introduction...... 8 1.2.2 The relationships between extroversion and neuroticism, positive and negative affect, and life quality...... 9 1.2.3 The relationships between personality and other psychological processes that may impact on subjective quality of life...... 11 1.2.4 Conclusion...... 13 1.3 PERCEIVED CONTROL...... 14 1.3.1 Introduction...... 14 1.3.2 Developing a definition of primary and secondary control...... 15 1.3.3 Addressing the interaction between primary and secondary control...... 17 1.3.4 The literature on primary, secondary and relinquished control,and various indicators of well-being...... 20 1.3.5 The measurement of primary, secondary and relinquished control...... 21 1.3.6 Conclusion...... 23 1.4 INTEGRATING PERSONALITY, PERCEIVED CONTROL AND SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE...... 23 1.4.1 Maintaining subjective quality of life...... 23 1.4.2 Rationale for a hypothesised model of personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life...... 25 1.4.3 Focus of the current research...... 27 1.5 SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE: CARERS OF PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS . 28 1.5.1 The historical development of research into carers of people with mental illness...... 28 1.5.2 The impact of the caregiving role on subjective quality of life...... 29 1.5.3 The role of perceived control in coping with the impact of mental illness on the family and maintaining subjective quality of life...... 34 1.5.4 Conclusion...... 37 1.5.5 Focus of the current research...... 37

CHAPTER 2...... 39

2 STUDY ONE: AIMS AND HYPOTHESES...... 39

CHAPTER 3...... 40

3 STUDY ONE: METHOD...... 40

3.1 SAMPLE ...... 40 3.2 PROCEDURE...... 41 3.3 MEASUREMENT TOOLS...... 42 Preliminary Pages vii

CHAPTER 4...... 44

4 STUDY ONE: RESULTS...... 44

4.1 AIM ONE ...... 44 4.2 DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION...... 47 4.3 AIM TWO ...... 51 4.4 AIM THREE ...... 53

CHAPTER 5...... 58

5 STUDY ONE: DISCUSSION...... 58

5.1 AIM ONE ...... 58 5.2 AIM TWO ...... 59 5.3 AIM THREE ...... 63 5.4 SUMMARY ...... 66

CHAPTER 6...... 68

6 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY TWO...... 68 6.1 APPROACH AND AVOIDANT DIMENSIONS OF PERCEIVED CONTROL...... 69 6.1.1 Theoretical support for approach and avoidant control...... 69 6.1.2 Empirical support for approach and avoidant control...... 71 6.1.3 The measurement of approach and avoidant control...... 74 6.1.4 Conclusion...... 76 6.2 PERSONALITY, APPROACH AND AVOIDANT CONTROL AND SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE...... 76 6.2.1 The literature on approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life...... 76 6.2.2 The findings from Study One on approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life...... 78 6.2.3 Personality and approach and avoidant control...... 80 6.2.4 Integrating personality, approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life...81 6.2.5 Focus of the current research...... 82 6.3 SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE IN SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS...... 82 6.3.1 The stressors associated with teaching...... 82 6.3.2 The impact of stress on teachers' subjective quality of life and the role of coping strategies...... 83 6.3.3 Conclusion and focus of the current research...... 85

CHAPTER 7...... 87

7 STUDY TWO: AIMS AND HYPOTHESES...... 87

CHAPTER 8...... 88

8 STUDY TWO: METHOD...... 88

8.1 SAMPLE ...... 88 8.2 PROCEDURE...... 89 8.3 MEASUREMENT TOOLS...... 90 Preliminary Pages viii

CHAPTER 9...... 92

9 STUDY TWO: RESULTS...... 92

9.1 AIM ONE ...... 92 9.2 AIM TWO ...... 97 9.3 AIM THREE...... 100 9.4 ADDITIONAL ANALYSES...... 102

CHAPTER 10...... 105

10 STUDY TWO: DISCUSSION...... 105

10.1 AIM ONE ...... 105 10.2 AIM TWO ...... 106 10.3 AIM THREE...... 107 10.4 ADDITIONAL ANALYSES...... 110 10.5 SUMMARY...... 110

CHAPTER 11...... 112

11 SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS...... 112

12 REFERENCES...... 118

13 APPENDICES...... 129

APPENDIX A: INFORMATION LETTER FOR QUESTIONNAIRE 1...... APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE 1...... APPENDIX C: INFORMATION LETTER FOR QUESTIONNAIRE 2...... APPENDIX D: QUESTIONNAIRE 2...... APPENDIX E: SCALES AND ITEMS OF THE COPING RESPONSES INVENTORY......

Preliminary Pages ix

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: The direct and indirect prediction of subjective quality of life (SQOL) by personality and perceived control...... 25

Figure 2: Hypothesised model of subjective quality of life, personality and perceived control...... 27

Figure 3: Model of the significant relationships among the variables neuroticism, approach control, avoidant control and total subjective quality of life (SQOL) in the carer sample, including standardised regression coefficients and correlations...... 64

Figure 4: Model of the significant relationships among the variables neuroticism, approach control, avoidant control and total subjective quality of life (SQOL) in the carer sample incorporating a latent construct for perceived control...... 65

Figure 5: Model of the significant relationships among the variables neuroticism, approach control and total subjective quality of life (SQOL) in the comparison sample, including standardised regression coefficients...... 65

Figure 6: Model of the significant relationships among the variables, neuroticism, ...... extroversion, approach control, avoidant control, and total subjective quality of life (SQOL), in the combined sample, including standardised regression coefficients and correlations...... 108

Figure 7: Model of the significant relationships among the variables for the comparison sample in Study One, representing high normal subjective quality of life (reproduction of Figure 5)...... 115

Figure 8: Model of the significant relationships among the variables for the combined sample in Study Two, representing normal subjective quality of life (reproduction of Figure 6)...... 116

Figure 9: Model of the significant relationships among the variables for the carer sample, representing low normal subjective quality of life (reproduction of Figure 3)...... 116 Preliminary Pages x

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1: Demographic information...... 41

Table 2: Two factor solution for the Perceived Control Questionnaire, with primary control items (PC) and secondary control items (SC) identified...... 46

Table 5: Multivariate analysis of covariance with group (carer or comparison) as the independent variable, the seven SQOL domains as the dependent variables, and ....neuroticism and extroversion as the covariates...... 53

Table 6: Regression of neuroticism, extroversion, approach control and avoidant control on subjective quality of life in the carer sample...... 54

Table 7: Regression of neuroticism, extroversion, approach control and avoidant control on subjective quality of life in the comparison sample...... 55

Table 8: Regression of neuroticism and extroversion on approach control and avoidant control for the carer sample...... 56

Table 9: Regression of neuroticism and extroversion on approach control and avoidant control for the comparison sample...... 57

Table 10: Background information...... 89

Table 11: Description of the scales in the Coping Response Inventory...... 91

Table 12: Means, standard deviations (SD) and internal consistencies (Alpha) of the Coping Responses Inventory...... 96

Table 13: Factor solution for the eight scales of the Coping Responses Inventory...... 97

Table 15: Regression of neuroticism, extroversion, approach control and avoidant control on subjective quality of life in the combined sample...... 101

Table 16: Regression of neuroticism and extroversion on approach control and avoidant control for the combined sample...... 102

Table 18: Multivariate Analysis of Variance examining the differences between the subgroups, high and low subjective quality of life, for the variables approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion...... 103 CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 1

CHAPTER 1

1 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY ONE The focus of Study One is to develop understanding of how subjective quality of life is maintained. The relevant literature is first reviewed. This begins by tracing the development of the subjective quality of life concept and evidence that this variable is actively maintained. Following this, the psychological processes that may contribute to the maintenance of subjective quality of life are considered. The literature indicates that personality and perceived control are important processes to consider. In particular, the personality characteristics extroversion and neuroticism have been consistently shown in the literature to predict various concepts of subjective life quality. Perceived control is also indicated in the literature to have a predictive relationship with subjective quality of life. Perceived control is conceptualised as involving primary, secondary and relinquished control processes. A model of personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life is then proposed.

The population selected to be the focus of Study One is carers of people with mental illness. Carers make an informative population in which to investigate these three variables, as they are likely to have low subjective quality of life and may be vulnerable to losses in perceived control. Hence, the stress and coping literature on carers is also reviewed. This introductory section of Study One concludes with a brief statement concerning the focus of the current research.

The aims and hypotheses highlight the three parts of the study: 1) an investigation of the factor structure of perceived control, 2) an investigation of the differences between samples of carers of people with mental illness and people from the general population, and 3) an examination of the relationships between personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life. The method section provides information about the characteristics of the two samples, the recruitment procedures and the measurement tools used. The results and discussion sections reflect the three parts of the aims and hypotheses. The results are discussed in comparison with the literature and preliminary conclusions are drawn. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 2

1.1 SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE

1.1.1 The historical development of life quality research The quality of life concept arose from research in America on social indicators. In the 1960’s it became evident that, in order to facilitate broader analyses of the costs and benefits of various programs and policies, there was a need to develop a means for assessing social change beyond that afforded by the economic indexes already monitored (Land, 1999). Influential publications, such as “Toward a Social Report” by the Johnson administration (1969; cited in Land, 1999), addressed major social issues, such as health, income, safety, education etc., and introduced the idea of systematically reporting the state of these issues for the purpose of informing the public. These initial social indicators were objectively measured and reflected normative interest in populations or groups, such as unemployment rates or mortality rates. Then, in the 1970’s the social indicators movement gathered pace. It was at this time the concept of measuring individuals' subjective judgements of their own well-being was introduced in published works such as those by Andrews and Withey (1976), and Campbell, Converse and Rodgers (1976). The movement then slowed in the political climate of the 1980’s in America, but research on subjective quality of life had been launched as the subjective indicator of social change (Land, 1999).

From this point it was recognised that economic growth at the population level was not necessarily the only valid goal of societal progress and that the subjective life quality of populations was also a valid and relevant goal (Shea, 1976). The measurement of social indicators became focused on understanding individuals’ feelings of satisfaction with life-as-a-whole or with a number of relevant areas or domains, such as family, housing etc. It has now become well accepted that both objective variables and subjective variables are important social indicators and a large volume of research around these concepts has now developed (Cummins, 1997a). CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 3

1.1.2 Definitions of various indicators of life quality Definitions of subjective well-being, life satisfaction, subjective quality of life are somewhat confused in the literature. For the purpose of this thesis, the following taxonomy will be adopted.

Subjective well-being is considered to have two components: a cognitive judgement of life satisfaction and an evaluation of affect (Diener, 1998). Measures of subjective well-being usually reflect these two parts. The first part, life satisfaction, can be measured in two ways. It can be measured with one question, which asks the respondent “How do you feel about your life as a whole?” (Andrews & Withey, 1976). Alternatively, it can be measured with a series of questions that gauge the respondent’s satisfaction with a variety of different life domains. However, the unitary approach to measuring life satisfaction is limited, as it yields only a crude measure of perceived well-being that lacks the variety of information about various aspects of life that a domain-based measure of life satisfaction can provide. The domain-based measure of life satisfaction is often referred to in the literature as subjective quality of life and the specific domains measured vary. Extensive argument and evaluation of the life domains that should be included in the measurement of subjective quality of life has been provided by Cummins (1997a) and will be detailed shortly.

The second part of the subjective well-being construct involves an affective evaluation. This evaluation usually comprises a measure of positive and negative emotional feelings. Yet, there are problems with the definition and measurement of positive and negative affect. The debate, over whether positive and negative affect should be viewed as bipolar opposites of the one construct or two independent constructs, is ongoing. Russell and Carroll (1999) give a detailed account of this debate and some steps towards resolution. They propose a circumplex model of positive and negative affect that incorporates six clusters of affect items defined by valence and activation. These include, positive affect/high activation (eg. excited, elated, ebullient) opposed by negative affect/low activation (eg. depressed, bored, lethargic), positive affect/medium activation (eg. happy, pleased, content) opposed by negative affect/medium activation (eg. miserable, unhappy, discontent), and positive affect/low activation (eg. calm, serene, tranquil) CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 4 opposed by negative affect/high activation (eg. tense, nervous, upset). This model highlights a glaring deficiency in the measure of positive and negative affect by the Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule (Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988), which is commonly used when evaluating subjective well-being. This measure evaluates only positive affect/high activation and negative affect/high activation, leaving out the range of low activation emotions that are potentially important when considering subjective well-being. The usefulness of this circumplex model of affect is highlighted by Larsen and Diener (1992), who also point out that those researchers who use the Positive Affect and Negative Affect Schedule may not be investigating the particular emotion concept that they hope to. Hence, whilst the definition of subjective well-being is clear, as life satisfaction plus affect, its operationalisation is complicated.

A further problem with subjective well-being is that it is often confused in the literature with other terms such as psychological well-being and happiness. For example, Friedman (1993) and Francis (1999) both measure subjective well- being but refer to their measured constructs as psychological well-being and happiness respectively. More accurately, psychological well-being is a term used to reflect measures of psychological symptoms such as depression and anxiety, in conjunction with measures of life satisfaction and in some instances positive and negative affect. For example, Lipkus, Dalbert & Seigler (1996) use measures of depression, stress and life satisfaction to reflect psychological well-being. Happiness is a term more accurately used to describe a balance of positive and negative affect. For example, Mroczeck and Kolarz (1998) measure happiness using positive and negative affect, while Costa and McCrae (1980) measure happiness using the difference between positive and negative affect.

In summary, subjective well-being provides a higher order construct than subjective quality of life by incorporating life satisfaction plus positive and negative affect. However, subjective quality of life can provide a construct that is similar to subjective well-being when satisfaction with emotional well-being is included in the life domains, making an additional measure of affect unnecessary. Furthermore, the definition and measurement of positive and negative affect, commonly used in the measurement of subjective well-being, is deficient in the CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 5 range of emotions encompassed as it often only measures positive affect/high activation and negative affect/high activation. Also the construct of subjective well-being is often confused in the literature with psychological well-being and happiness. This makes subjective quality of life a more attractive measure than the popularly used and confused subjective well-being.

To recap the terms used in this thesis:  Subjective well-being will be used to refer to composite measures of life satisfaction and affect.  Subjective quality of life will be used to refer to measures of life satisfaction involving several life domains.  Life satisfaction will be used to refer to measures of life satisfaction derived from one global question.

1.1.3 The definition and measurement of subjective quality of life The definition and measurement of quality of life has been comprehensively developed by Cummins (1997a): Quality of life is both objective and subjective, each axis being the aggregate of seven domains: material well-being, health, productivity, intimacy, safety, community and emotional well-being. Objective domains comprise culturally relevant measures of objective well-being. Subjective domains comprise domain satisfaction weighted by their importance to the individual. (p. 132) This definition is consistent with the Comprehensive Quality of Life Scale (ComQol) also developed by Cummins (1997b) and thus warrants further explanation.

Firstly, this definition highlights an important difference between objective and subjective quality of life. Objective quality of life is measured using sources of information external to the individual. For example, income or physical health. In contrast, subjective quality is measured using the individual as the source of information. For example, the individual may be asked how satisfied they are with their income or health. The degree to which these two constructs are interrelated has long been debated (Andrews & Withey, 1976; Felce & Perry, 1995). But, there appears to be a general consensus that the two are generally unrelated, as CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 6 satisfaction with life is considered a separate and more important indicator of individual welfare (Edgerton, 1990).

Secondly, this definition specifies seven domains, material well-being, health, productivity, intimacy, safety, community and emotional well-being, of which quality of life is the aggregate. These seven domains represent the common areas of life used in the literature to measure quality of life. Four of these domains were shown by Campbell, et al. (1976) to be those rated as the most important of a larger set of domains found most consistently in the literature. Their results showed subjects rated most importance, expressed as a percentage, for Health 91%, Intimacy 89%, Material Well-being 73%, and Productivity 70%. In a review of fifteen key literature sources, Felce and Perry (1995) found these four domains plus emotional well-being to be the most commonly used domains of life quality. Hence, five of the seven domains used in the definition have been consistently used in the literature and are considered important aspects of life.

The two additional domains, safety and place in community, have been included to encompass a broader range of life domains. The domain ‘safety’ is intended to be inclusive of such constructs as security, personal control, privacy, independence, autonomy, competence, knowledge of rights and residential stability. Aspects of this domain are encompassed by Felce and Perry’s (1995) conceptualisation of material well-being, whereby, security is considered to be related to income, stability of tenure and housing. However, it is often included as a separate domain in the literature (Borthwick-Duffy, 1990; Schalock, Kieth, Hoffman & Karan, 1989; Stark & Goldsbury, 1990). The domain ‘place in community’ is intended to be inclusive of the constructs of (objective) social class, education, job status, community integration, community involvement and (subjective) a sense of self-esteem, self-concept and empowerment within the community, in addition to feelings associated with the objective components. Aspects of this domain are encompassed by Felce and Perry’s (1995) conceptualisation of social well-being. However, Cummins (1997a) has specified the two aspects of social well-being, intimacy and place in community, as two separate domains, which is often done in the literature (Borthwick-Duffy, 1990; Schalock, et al., 1989; Stark & Goldsbury, 1990). With these seven domains CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 7 included, the definition and measurement of quality of life effectively covers a broad spectrum of life quality.

Lastly, this definition introduces the notion that subjective quality of life should be measured with reference to the value or importance that the domain has to the relevant individual. This notion, that subjective quality of life refers to the subjective evaluations of various domains weighted by a personal set of values, has been supported theoretically (Felce & Perry, 1995; Cummins, 1997a) and more recently the important role of values has been demonstrated empirically by Oishi, Diener, Suh, and Lucas (1999). These authors found that values mediated the relationship between domain satisfaction and life satisfaction. Using regression analysis they found that the stronger the values of achievement, the stronger the relation between satisfaction with grades and global life satisfaction. Similarly, the stronger the benevolence values are, the stronger the relation between satisfaction with social life and life satisfaction, and the stronger the conformity values, the stronger the association between satisfaction with family and life satisfaction. The appeal of this ‘satisfaction weighted by importance’ definition is obvious. Most people would not value each domain equally and those domains that they do value more will have a greater impact on how satisfied they are with life. Hence, the ComQol provides a score of subjective quality of life for each domain which is the product of item importance by satisfaction, and the seven domains can be summed together to provide an overall score of life satisfaction (Cummins 1997b).

1.1.4 Conclusion Historically, social indicators have been developed to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and policies by using objective and subjective indicators to describe populations and monitor change within them. The definition and measurement of social indicators is complex and can involve a number of terms and concepts. One of these is subjective quality of life conceptualised as the product of seven domains and involving domain satisfaction weighted by importance (Cummins, 1997a, 1997b). This construct is similar in nature to the more popular subjective well-being but does not incorporate some of the problems CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 8 associated with the operationalisation of subjective well-being. In particular it avoids the problems of measuring separately positive and negative emotional feelings.

With subjective quality of life established as a valid and useful social indicator, it then becomes important to better understand this measure by considering the psychological processes that contribute to an individual's satisfaction with different areas of their life. The notion that subjective quality of life is remarkably stable within populations (a point that will be later elaborated) indicates that personality, also a stable psychological process, may play an important role in the maintenance of subjective quality of life.

1.2 PERSONALITY

1.2.1 Introduction There is substantial evidence that subjective well-being is predicted by personality. For the purposes of empirical research, personality refers to “characteristic response tendencies” which are considered to have both “biological and learned components” (Diener, 1998, p. 314). It is thought that around 50 percent of personality variance is attributed to genetic variance and around 30 percent is attributed to environmentally based trait variance (or learned) with the remainder attributable to measurement error (Tellegen, et al., 1988).

The evidence that personality predicts subjective well-being across time and situations has been used to support the causal role in the relationship between personality and subjective well-being (Diener, 1998). This however is questioned by those who argue that subjective well-being is, in fact, a personality trait itself (Lykken & Tellegen, 1996). Evidence from twin studies has suggested that about 80 percent of the stable variance in subjective well-being is heritable (Lykken & Tellegen, 1996). However, the most compelling argument against the notion that subjective well-being is a personality trait is that it is variable in the short-term (Diener, 1996). It has been found that major life events impact on subjective well- being for up to three months, after which subjective well-being returns to a CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 9 baseline measure (Suh, Diener & Fujita, 1996). It is also argued by Diener (1996) that trait explanations of psychological constructs like subjective well-being are not sufficient, because they do not provide any understanding about the process by which traits influence subjective well-being.

However, before examining other psychological processes, it is first necessary to develop a better understanding of the relationship between personality and various constructs of life quality by considering how personality is commonly measured.

1.2.2 The relationships between extroversion and neuroticism, positive and negative affect, and life quality

A popular typology of personality traits is the five-factor model (Goldberg, 1992). These factors are neuroticism, extroversion, openness to experience, agreeableness and conscientiousness, and they have been substantiated extensively in the literature (Costa & McCrae, 1998). Yet, investigations have shown that it is extroversion and neuroticism that provide the most pervasively significant correlations with subjective well-being. Extroversion and subjective well-being correlate positively ranging from .35 to .49; and neuroticism and subjective well- being correlate negatively ranging from -.31 to -.57 (Costa & McCrae, 1980; Francis, 1999; Francis, Brown, Lester & Philipchalk, 1998; Lu & Shih, 1997). Similarly, a few researchers have investigated the relationship between extroversion and neuroticism, and subjective quality of life or life satisfaction. Morrison (1997) did this with a sample of business owners and Heaven (1989) with a sample of adolescents. The correlational results between life satisfaction and extroversion were .31 and .17, and neuroticism were -.44 and -.37, for the two studies respectively (Morrison, 1997; Heaven, 1989).

Furthermore, it is extroversion and neuroticism that have received long standing support in many typological conceptualisations of personality, including Eysenck’s factor analytic research (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985). They are popularly conceptualised in terms of sociability (extroversion) and emotional instability (neuroticism). More specifically extroversion describes a personality CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 10 disposition that reflects sociability, stimulus seeking, dominance, high activity and warmth (Diener, 1998). Neuroticism is a term used to describe a personality disposition that reflects anxiety, pessimism, irritability, bodily complaints and interpersonal sensitivity (Diener, 1998). Hence, it may be concluded that subjective quality of life is associated with sociability and emotional stability.

Further evidence for the significant relationship between extroversion and neuroticism and subjective quality of life is provided by research on positive and negative affect and life satisfaction. The relationship between these two concepts are frequently reported in the subjective well-being literature as they are the two components of subjective well-being. It has been found repeatedly that extroversion correlates highly with positive affect, ranging from .20 to .63, and that neuroticism correlates highly with negative affect, ranging from .36 to .75 (Costa & McCrae, 1980; Fogarty, et al., 1999; Francis, et al., 1998; Fujita, 1993 unpublished masters thesis provided by the author; Mroczeck & Kolarz, 1998; Wilson, Gullone & Moss, 1998). This finding is not surprising considering the common definition and measurement of extroversion and neuroticism, and positive and negative affect, used in the literature.

The measurement of extroversion and neuroticism is primarily based on the definition given previously. This is in many ways similar to the common definition and measurement of positive and negative affect using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. Here, positive affect refers to an affective disposition that encompasses feelings such as happiness and joy and is often assessed by feelings of interest, excitement, inspiration, enthusiasm and activity; negative affect refers to an affective disposition that encompasses unpleasant emotions such as sadness and is often assessed by subjective distress incorporating anger, fear, guilt and nervousness (Wilson, et al., 1998).

Considering the similarities in definition and measurement, and the high correlations between extroversion and positive affect, and neuroticism and negative affect, it is possible that the personality and affect constructs are measuring similar things. In fact, some authors have concluded that the constructs are interchangeable (Fogarty, et al., 1999) or indistinguishable (Fujita, 1993). This CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 11 casts some doubt on whether positive and negative affect should be considered an outcome variable along with life satisfaction, or a predictive variable such as personality. Hence, investigating the relationship between positive and negative affect and life satisfaction is similar to investigating the relationship between extroversion and neuroticism and life satisfaction. The correlations reported in the literature between life satisfaction and positive affect range from .23 to .52, and life satisfaction and negative affect range from -.36 to -.48 (Brief, Butcher, George & Link, 1993; Cooper, Okamura & Gurka, 1992; Friedman, 1993; Lucas, Diener & Suh, 1996). Similar ranges to those between extroversion and neuroticism and subjective well-being.

In conclusion, it is clear that personality is strongly linked to subjective judgements about quality of life and, because personality is an enduring characteristic and subjective quality of life is more variable, it is likely this role is a predictive one. Furthermore, one approach to simplifying research in this area is to avoid the complicated positive and negative affect component of the subjective well-being construct, so that the relationship between personality and subjective quality of life or life satisfaction can be more clearly understood.

1.2.3 The relationships between personality and other psychological processes that may impact on subjective quality of life The literature in this field introduces numerous psychological processes that may be involved with subjective quality of life. For example, McQuillen, Licht and Licht (2001) found that identity structure predicted life satisfaction. Identity structure refers to the hierarchical ordering of the multiple aspects of one's self-concept (eg husband is a higher level aspect than friend or athlete as the former encompasses the later). In another example, Pavot, Fujita and Diener (1997) found that self-aspect congruence, that is congruence between ideal and real self, was positively correlated with subjective well-being. However, congruence was negatively correlated with neuroticism and when the effects of neuroticism were controlled for, self-aspect congruence did not reliably predict subjective well-being. This finding highlights the importance of identifying psychological processes that make a unique contribution to the variance in subjective quality of life after the effects of personality are removed. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 12

A similar psychological process that has received much attention in the literature is satisfaction with self, which is considered to be a major predictor of life satisfaction (Campbell, 1981; Argyle & Lu, 1990; Diener & Diener, 1995). However, investigating the relationship between how satisfied people are with themselves (self-satisfaction) and how satisfied they are with their life (life satisfaction) is problematic, considering the great deal of overlap between the two ‘satisfaction’ constructs. More information may be provided by reducing the global self-satisfaction construct and investigating three aspects of self- satisfaction, which are self-esteem, optimism and control (Cummins & Nistico, in press).

Self-esteem refers to a sense of self-worth or value, and this construct has been found to have a strong positive correlation with life satisfaction (Boschen, 1996; Hong & Giannakopoulos, 1994; Kwan, Bond & Singelis, 1997; Lucas, et al., 1996). In fact, in some studies the correlation has been so high that Lucas, et al. (1996) tested whether the two constructs were discriminable from each other, and found that they were. Kwan, et al. (1997) agree, and suggest that self-esteem is a useful mediator of the variance in life satisfaction attributed to personality. However, self-esteem is one of the traits that inversely contribute to neuroticism (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985); and the two constructs correlate highly in student samples in both the U.S. (-.69) and Hong Kong (-.63) (Kwan, et al., 1997). Hence, it is likely that if the effects of neuroticism were controlled for, self-esteem may not make a unique contribution to the variance in subjective quality of life.

Optimism refers to a sense of positivity about the future and there is some evidence for a positive relationship between optimism and life satisfaction (Christensen, Parris-Stephens & Townsend, 1998; Lucas, et al., 1996). As with self-esteem, Lucas et al. (1996) tested whether the two constructs were discriminable and found that they were. However, optimism has also been found to correlate highly with neuroticism by Smith, Pope, Rhodewalt and Poulton, (1989), who conclude that it is difficult to distinguish between optimism, measured with the Life Orientation Test, from measures of neuroticism and negative affectivity. Hence, it is again likely that if the effects of neuroticism were CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 13 controlled for, optimism may not make a unique contribution to the variance in subjective life quality.

Finally, control conventionally refers to a sense that one can change the environment in accordance with one’s wishes (this definition will be elaborated later) and this construct has also been found to correlate with life-satisfaction, although generally not as strongly as self-esteem (Boschen, 1996; Christensen, et al., 1998; Schulz & Decker, 1985). There is generally little research in the literature on the association between control and the personality dimensions, extroversion and neuroticism. Still, some studies have shown control correlates positively with extroversion and negatively with neuroticism (Darvill & Johnson, 1991; Morrison, 1997). Although the extent of these relationships is highly variable and likely dependent on the definition and measurement of control used. This issue clearly needs further investigation to identify whether or not control is a psychological process that makes a unique contribution to the variance in subjective quality of life. Furthermore, much of the literature on control and life satisfaction is based on populations with spinal injury (eg. Boschen, 1990; Boschen, 1996) and there is a need for investigation of normal populations to assess whether control plays a role in life satisfaction in the absence of obvious losses of control.

1.2.4 Conclusion There is both theoretical and empirical support for the notion that personality, primarily extroversion and neuroticism, predicts subjective quality of life. There is also theoretical and empirical support for the notion that other psychological processes may have a strong association with subjective quality of life. Yet, it is not clear whether these processes would make a unique contribution to subjective quality of life if the effects of personality were controlled for. In fact, similar to self-aspect congruence, it is likely that self-esteem and optimism will not make a unique contribution. As the relationship between personality and perceived control is not well documented and its ability to make a unique contribution to subjective quality of life unknown, it is the most compelling of these processes for investigation. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 14

1.3 PERCEIVED CONTROL

1.3.1 Introduction A diverse literature suggests a sense of control is important to well-being. Such perceptions of control are defined as “the judgements we each make about the extent to which we can achieve desired outcomes and protect ourselves from the misfortunes of life” (Thompson et al., 1998, p. 584). When making these judgements, individuals will assess and use the control strategies they consider available to them. These control strategies are divided into two processes of perceived control, termed primary and secondary, by Rothbaum, Weisz and Snyder (1982). This two-process model of perceived control provides a basic understanding of the underlying structure of many terms and concepts in the control and coping literature, such as behavioural and cognitive control (see Thompson, 1981), emotion-focused and problem-focused coping (see Folkman, 1984) and learned helplessness (see Rothbaum, et al., 1982).

In fact, it was inadequacies in ideas about uncontrollability in the learned helplessness and locus of control literature that motivated Rothbaum, et al. (1982) to conceptualise two processes of control. They felt that this literature inappropriately considers inward behaviours such as passivity, withdrawal and submissiveness as a result of perceptions of uncontrollability and argued that: the motivation to feel in control may be expressed not only in behaviour that is blatantly controlling but also, subtly, in behaviour that is not. In some cases inward behaviour may reflect a relinquishing of the powerful motive for perceived control. In other cases, however, such behaviour may be initiated and maintained in an effort to sustain perceptions of control. This effort is particularly likely when the inward behaviour helps prevent disappointment, when it leads to a perception of alignment with forces such as chance or powerful others, and when it is accompanied by attempts to derive meaning from a situation. The uncontrollability model does not explain any of these phenomena. (p. 9) What these authors suggest is that an individual may exercise control over an event not only by manipulating the external environment, but also by manipulating their own internal environment; a perception of control that had gone largely ignored in the literature. This is exampled by the earlier definitions of control that focus on ‘changing events’ (Brickman et al., 1982) or ‘behaviours’ (Glass & Carver, 1980) CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 15 and give little consideration of the role that cognitions play in control. When cognitions are acknowledged it becomes evident that passivity, withdrawal and submissiveness may in some circumstances be effective responses that serve to maintain a perception of control and do not necessarily reflect perceived uncontrollability as is suggested by the learned helplessness literature.

1.3.2 Developing a definition of primary and secondary control To include cognitions into the concept of control, Rothbaum, et al. (1982) introduced the concept of primary and secondary control. Primary control is defined as “attempts to change the world to fit in with the self’s needs” (Rothbaum, et al., 1982, p. 8). Secondary control is defined as “attempts to fit in with the world and to ‘flow with the current’” (Rothbaum, et al., 1982, p. 8). Both primary control and secondary control may involve behaviours and cognitions. However, typically primary control is characterised by behaviour which engages the external world, and secondary control is characterised by cognitions within the individual (Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996). Although these definitions are vague, especially that of secondary control, the concepts are sound and subsequent literature has provided clearer definitions. For example, Heckhausen and Schulz (1995) have used the primary and secondary control concepts in a life span theory of control. These authors defined primary and secondary control by the target of the control. Primary control is defined as “bringing the environment into line with one’s wishes … targets the external world and attempts to achieve effects in the immediate environment external to the individual” (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995, p. 286). Secondary control is defined as “bringing the self in line with the environment … targets the self and attempts to bring changes directly within the individual” (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995, p. 286).

Primary and Secondary control can be further understood by considering some examples. In attempting to maintain a perception of control an individual may use primary control strategies, such as asking others for help or advice, developing new skills to deal with the situation, or working hard and investing time into the situation. In attempting to maintain a perception of control an individual may also use secondary control strategies, such as downward social CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 16 comparison (remembering one is better off than others), positive re-interpretation (considering that something good will come of it) and active avoidance (ignoring the event by thinking about other things). The above quotation from Rothbaum, et al. (1982) provides examples of three other secondary control strategies: illusory control (associating with chance), vicarious control (associating with powerful others) and interpretive control (deriving meaning from the event).

Perceived control and the primary and secondary control processes that form this perception are fundamental to coping with difficult circumstances. Authors from the coping literature suggest that perceived control is necessary so that the individual is assured a situation will not become so formidable that it cannot be endured (see Thompson, 1981). Hence, Thompson (1981) defines control as “the belief that one has at one’s disposal a response that can influence the aversiveness of an event” (p. 89). This conceptualisation of control is related to the compensatory function of primary and secondary control that Heckhausen and Schulz (1995), and Schulz and Heckhausen (1996), promote in their life-span theory of control. What these authors suggest is that an individual uses primary and secondary control strategies to compensate for failure experiences. These failure experiences include: “(a) normative developmental failure experiences encountered when individuals attempt to enlarge their competencies, (b) developmental declines characteristic of late life, and (c) non-normative or random negative events” (Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996, p. 710). Furthermore, these compensation mechanisms serve to “maintain, enhance and remediate competencies and motivational resources” that are necessary for successful experiences (Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996, p. 710). Hence, primary and secondary control processes are used to cope with negative experiences or aversive circumstances, and function to maintain a perception of control that will serve to sustain competencies and motivation. Therefore, perceived control can be likened to coping when considered in response to difficult circumstances.

However, perceived control also works in a way that makes it different from coping. Primary and secondary control also have a selective function, where they serve to assist goal selection and channel resources into the selected goals (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995). This selection concept taps into the notion that CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 17 primary and secondary control processes are not used exclusively in response to aversive circumstances. In more subtle ways primary and secondary control may be used to maintain perceived control in the more general negotiation of the environment, to maintain a person-environment fit. Yet, the distinction between selection and compensation is difficult to support as goal selection and resource allocation can also be immediate responses to failure and have a compensatory role. In fact, the notion that primary and secondary control strategies may be used to achieve a person-environment fit encompasses both those circumstances where strategies are used in response to a negative circumstance and where they are simply a part of the general negotiation of the environment.

A more operational definition of control would involve a number of these concepts and definitions. By using Thompson’s (1981) idea that control is a ‘belief’, control is restricted to the realm of perception. By using Heckhausen and Schulz’s (1995) idea that a definition of primary and secondary control should focus on the target of control, the distinction between the two types of control is clearer. By including the aim of control, as person-environment fit, a better understanding of the concept is provided. Hence, primary control may be referred to as ‘the belief that one has at one’s disposal a response that can change the external environment to achieve a person-environment fit’ and secondary control may be referred to as ‘the belief that one has a one’s disposal a response that can change the internal environment to achieve a person-environment fit’.

1.3.3 Addressing the interaction between primary and secondary control Person-environment fit can be likened to the term ‘optimal adaptation’ that Rothbaum, et al. (1982) use to describe the successful coordination of the intertwined primary and secondary control processes. Alternatively, Heckhausen and Schulz (1995) conceive the relationship between primary and secondary control not as two intertwined processes but as one, where primary control has functional primacy over secondary control. They argue that: Because primary control is directed outward, it enables individuals to shape their environment to fit their particular needs and developmental potential. Without engaging the external world, the developmental potential of the organism cannot be realised. As a result, it is both preferred and has greater adaptive value to the CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 18

individual. … (Hence,) the major function of secondary control is to minimise losses in, maintain, and expand existing levels of primary control. (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995, p. 286) There are, however, problems associated with this view of primary and secondary control processes. Just as the learned helplessness theories ignore the adaptive value of cognitions (Rothbaum, et al., 1982), this theory excludes the adaptive value of secondary control in and of itself. It is conceivable that individuals need to shape both themselves and their environment to fit their particular needs and developmental potential, and that without engaging both the internal and external worlds their developmental potential cannot be realised.

Moreover, the adaptive value and preference for primary control over secondary control is likely to be restricted to specific circumstances. For example age, culture and ethnicity provide circumstances in which primary control does not necessarily have primacy over secondary control. Heckhausen and Schulz (1996) point out themselves that after the age of fifty the availability and use of secondary control strategies is greater than that of primary control strategies, and that successful aging is dependent on utilising secondary control strategies. Furthermore, the importance of changing the external environment is bound to Western cultures. Eastern cultures are likely to place more emphasis on accepting the external environment and relying on control strategies that change the internal environment. (Weiz, Rothbaum & Blackburn, 1984). Like culture, studies on ethnicity have shown that primary control does not necessarily have primacy over secondary control. African American HIV-positive male state prison inmates did not show the same association between primary control and decreased distress that white inmates showed. Furthermore, secondary control did not function as a back- up to primary control regardless of ethnicity (Thompson, Collins, Newcomb & Hunt, 1996). Thus, in some life stages, cultures and ethnic backgrounds, secondary control processes may be more adaptive and preferred than primary control processes.

Additionally, it is likely that there are other factors that may influence whether primary or secondary control is preferred. Personality may be one such factor. It is conceivable that some individuals may possess enduring CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 19 characteristics or predispositions that promote their reliance on primary control over secondary and visa versa. Not all individuals will have the intrinsic motivation to always change the environment to achieve a perception of control. Some will be more resigned to accept their environment and change themselves to fit within it. The extroversion and neuroticism dimensions of personality may provide some insight into this hypothesis. For example, Alloy, Abramson and Viscusi (1981) found that negative moods reduce feelings of control. Considering the strong relationship between negative affect and neuroticism, it is possible that this personality dimension will also influence an individual’s perception of control. Likewise, positive affect or extroversion may also influence an individual’s perception of control. However, at this stage, such speculation requires empirical support.

In summary, there is good argument and evidence to suggest that primary control does not necessarily have functional primacy over secondary control. It may therefore be more useful to consider primary and secondary control as two complimentary processes where, in given individuals, circumstances, and environments, one process may be preferred and have greater adaptive value over the other, and that each process may serve to compliment the other to maintain perceived control.

This complimentary interaction between primary and secondary control cannot be considered without acknowledging a third process in perceptions of control, that is, a loss of control. While secondary control does replace much of what was traditionally thought of as perceptions of uncontrollability, the perception of uncontrollability still exists, although it is not always given attention in the literature on primary and secondary control. In fact, there are large segments of society that are at special risk for low feelings of control (Thompson & Spacapan, 1991). When primary or secondary control is perceived not to be available, an individual may relinquish control. That is, they may perceive the event as uncontrollable and abandon the motivation for control (Rothbaum, et al., 1982). Relinquished control is manifested in passivity and helplessness (Skinner, 1996). Examples of relinquished control are where an individual may respond to an event or circumstance by not doing anything, spending time by his/her-self , or CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 20 letting feelings out, maybe by crying or yelling (Thurber & Weisz, 1997). Hence, primary, secondary and relinquished control are important constructs to consider in developing an understanding of perceived control.

Overall, there is a sense that primary and secondary control are closely intertwined and the use of one over the other to achieve a person-environment fit may be dependent upon a number of factors. Furthermore, some individuals may not have the motivation to use primary or secondary control to achieve a person- environment fit and may relinquish control altogether, experiencing a period of perceived uncontrollability and person-environment misfit. Hence, an individual’s perceived control may be maintained by a fluid combination of primary, secondary and relinquished control processes.

1.3.4 The literature on primary, secondary and relinquished control, and various indicators of well-being The literature on primary and secondary control has followed two paths. There is literature, stimulated by Heckhausen and Schulz (1995), which identifies primary and secondary control processes in theories of life span development and there is literature that identifies primary and secondary control processes as useful strategies for coping with stressful or aversive situations or events. It is in this latter path that I am mostly interested.

There are a number of studies by Weisz and collegues that focus on children’s coping using primary, secondary and relinquished control strategies. For example, research has shown that children cope with everyday stress by using primary and secondary control processes (Band & Weisz, 1988). Research has also shown that when children are in stressful situations in which few primary control strategies may be available to them, secondary control is an adaptive coping mechanism. For example, children undergoing treatment for leukemia showed better adjustment if they used secondary control strategies than primary or relinquished control strategies (Weisz, McCabe & Dennig, 1994); children at summer camp showed the most frequent and effective way to cope with homesickness was to use secondary control strategies (Thurber & Weisz, 1997). These findings are congruent with the notion that secondary control is commonly CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 21 used after primary control has failed or, in this case, when it is not available. However, this conclusion has not been supported with adults. For example, Burton and Sistler (1996) found that spousal caregivers of people with dementia used a combination of primary and secondary control in stressful situations. Overall, the evidence shows that primary, secondary and relinquished control strategies are used in aversive or stressful situations.

A broader range of literature shows that an individual’s perception of control is likely to have a significant impact on their subjective life quality. It has been proposed that both primary and secondary control processes are required to maintain a perception of control that is necessary for optimal adaptation (Rothbaum, et al., 1982), successful development (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995), to feel confident that a situation will not become so aversive it cannot be endured (Thompson, 1981), and to achieve a sense of person-environment fit. Thompson and Spacapan (1991) highlight evidence that suggests perceived control: 1) is essential to emotional well-being, 2) can reduce the stress associated with stressful events or situations, 3) contributes to adaptive coping with life stressors, 4) is associated with better health outcomes, 5) promotes better ability to change behaviours, and 6) can lead to improved performance. More specifically, Weisz, Thurber, Sweeney, Proffitt and LeGagnoux (1997) found significant decreases in the symptomatology of children with mild to moderate depressive symptoms when treated with an 8-session primary and secondary control enhancement training program. Also, as highlighted earlier, control has been found to correlate with life satisfaction (Boschen, 1996; Christensen, et al., 1998; Schulz & Decker, 1985). Considering this, the relationship between perceived control and subjective quality of life is likely to be significant.

1.3.5 The measurement of primary, secondary and relinquished control Since the development of the concepts of primary and secondary control is relatively recent, there is no widely accepted tool for their measurement. Some researchers (eg. Band & Weisz, 1988; Burton and Sistler, 1996; Thompson et al., 1996; Weisz et al., 1994) have measured primary and secondary control by obtaining responses about how difficult situations were coped with, and coding CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 22 these responses as reflecting either primary or secondary control, and sometimes relinquished control. The coding system is based on the Rothbaum et al., (1982) model of primary and secondary control (Weisz et al., 1994). In general, primary control coping responses are those that involve attempts to directly interact with the environment so as to modify objective circumstances. Secondary control coping responses are those involving primarily internal responses aimed at attempting to adjust oneself (eg. one’s beliefs, hopes, goal interpretations, attributions) to objective circumstances. Finally, relinquished control consists of the absence of attempts at primary or secondary control (eg. giving up or concluding that there is nothing I can do). Thurber and Weisz (1997) have applied this coding method to an already established coping scale for children. This method of coding coping responses into primary and secondary control has been effective and allows for various sample populations to provide responses that are relevant to their own experiences. However, this also limits the generalisability of the results and the comparison of results from different samples. Furthermore, there may be coding biases, especially as some responses may contain elements of both primary and secondary control making them more difficult to categorise.

A more systematic tool for the measurement of primary and secondary control has been developed Heeps (2000). This questionnaire asks respondents to rate the degree to which they agree with statements that reflect either primary or secondary control. For example, “When I fail to meet a goal: I look for different ways to achieve the goal” (primary control), “When something bad happens that I cannot change, I can see that something good will come of it” (secondary control). The statements were developed by reviewing the variety of types of primary and secondary control described in the current literature. A total of seven primary control items and seventeen secondary control items were developed. This tool is still in the early stages of development and requires further validation and assessment of reliability. Furthermore, the tool does not include any relinquished control items.

Relinquished control has been measured by Thurber and Weisz (1997), who developed the Ways of Coping with Homesickness Questionnaire by taking a well-established questionnaire and coding the items in terms of primary, secondary CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 23 and relinquished control. The items on relinquished control included “I spent time by myself”, “I just let my feelings out, maybe by crying or yelling”, and “I didn’t do anything. Nothing would have helped”. While these items were used with children, their content seems appropriate for the measurement of relinquished control in adults.

1.3.6 Conclusion There is substantial theory and empirical evidence to suggest that perceived control may be directly associated with subjective quality of life. Primary and secondary control processes provide a contemporary conceptualisation of perceived control that has received increasing support in the literature. With the addition of relinquished control there are three control processes that interact with each other to form a perception of control that may impact on an individual’s subjective quality of life.

1.4 INTEGRATING PERSONALITY, PERCEIVED CONTROL AND SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE

1.4.1 Maintaining subjective quality of life The importance of understanding the psychological processes involved with making judgements of life quality is highlighted by the recent proposition that subjective quality of life is held under some kind of homeostatic control (Cummins, 1995, 1998, 2000). This proposition is based on meta-analytic research that has shown life satisfaction data to be consistent both between and within Western populations. The research has converted life satisfaction data from numerous studies to a percentage of scale maximum (%SM), which expresses any Likert scale value as though it had been scored on a scale measured over the range 0 to 100. In examining the distribution of data both between and within various Western populations, it has been consistently found that life satisfaction was negatively skewed and clustered around three quarters of the scale maximum. It was concluded that the average life satisfaction mean score of Western populations is 75 2.5%SM, and that this average is held under homeostatic control. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 24

Further support for the homeostatic model has been found by analysing the changing relationship between population means and variance across 62 studies on both Western and non-Western populations (Cummins, 2000). It was found that as means approach 70%SM, the distribution becomes increasingly leptokurtic, and therefore has lower variance. Then as the population mean values drop below 70%SM, the distribution become increasingly platykurtic as their ranges extend downward, with a consequential increase in variance. These observations were used to reinforce the conclusion that life satisfaction is not free to vary over its theoretical range of 0-100%SM, but is held under homeostatic control which attempts to maintain the life satisfaction of populations above 70%SM.

This homeostatic model compels us to question further how subjective quality of life is maintained above 70%SM. Cummins and Nistico, (in press) suggest that positively biased cognitions regarding aspects of the self may constitute an adaptive mechanism that maintains life satisfaction. The aspects of the self that the authors refer to are self-esteem, optimism and control. Cognitive biases are beliefs based in reality but with a positive bias in favour of the individual, as opposed to delusions that are incongruent with reality. Positive cognitive biases have two essential properties. They are non-specific, in that they refer to nebulous ideas that cannot readily be discerned from reality, and they are empirically unfalsifiable as there is a lack of objective referents with which to compare nebulous personal qualities. Despite the difficulties in empirically validating positive cognitive biases, there is evidence to suggest that they exist in direct relation to enhancing the self, enhancing one’s perception of control and keeping optimistic about the future (see Taylor & Brown, 1988) and that they contribute to life satisfaction (Cummins & Nistico, in press). Hence, perceived control is indicated as an important psychological process involved in maintaining subjective quality of life.

When trying to understand how subjective quality of life is maintained, personality must also be considered, given that it has been consistently shown to correlate strongly with various indicators of life quality. The literature has demonstrated that the two personality dimensions, extroversion and neuroticism, can predict subjective well-being across time and various situations. Hence, the CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 25 same predictive relationship is expected of personality and subjective quality of life. By definition, personality is an enduring characteristic or predisposition and it is this quality that may contribute to the maintenance of subjective quality of life. More specifically, it is an individual’s enduring qualities of sociability and positive affect (ie. extroversion) and the absence of emotional instability and negative affect (ie. neuroticism) that maintain subjective quality of life. Furthermore, it is likely that these enduring personality characteristics will also impact on other psychological processes found to maintain life satisfaction, such as perceived control. The prediction of subjective quality of life by personality and perceived control may occur in either of two ways. Personality may indirectly predict subjective quality of life via perceived control (see Figure 1a), or personality may continue to directly predict subjective quality of life in addition to an indirect prediction through perceived control (see Figure 1b). Given the strength of the relationship between personality and subjective quality of life, I propose the latter model to be more accurate.

Personality

Perceived Control

Perceived SQOL Control SQOL

1(a) Indirect prediction 1(b) Direct and indirect prediction

Figure 1: The direct and indirect prediction of subjective quality of life (SQOL) by personality and perceived control.

1.4.2 Rationale for a hypothesised model of personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life

The three concepts, personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life, depicted in Figure 1, have been selected for investigation for a number of reasons. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 26

Firstly, the definition and measurement of each of these concepts is sound. Subjective quality of life is a concept free from the problems surrounding subjective well-being which incorporates the problematic conceptualisation and measurement of positive and negative affect. Furthermore, the definition and measurement of subjective quality of life has been soundly developed by Cummins (1997a, 1997b) and incorporates the notion that judgements of satisfaction with life domains are weighted by the importance of that particular life domain to the individual. Extroversion and neuroticism are well known dimensions of personality that have long been upheld in the literature in both theory and measurement. Perceived control formed by the interaction of primary, secondary and relinquished control processes is a relatively recent conceptualisation, but it has gained impressive theoretical support and provides a basic understanding of the underlying structure of many terms and concepts in the wider control literature. The measurement of primary, secondary and relinquished control is, however, in the process of development.

Secondly, the definition and measurement of these three constructs allows for their relationships to be explored without running the risk of including constructs that are in essence identifying the same phenomena. This problem is likely to be inherent in investigations of the relationship between personality and two of the three dimensions of self-satisfaction, self-esteem and optimism, where there is a strong association between neuroticism and these two dimensions. Hence, subjective quality of life, the personality dimensions of extroversion and neuroticism, and the self-satisfaction dimension of perceived control and the primary, secondary and relinquished control processes associated with it, are ideal variables for the current investigation, as they are likely to be relatively free from confounding overlapping variance.

Finally, there is theory and evidence to suggest that the relationships between these three concepts are meaningful and contribute to the maintenance of life satisfaction. Personality has long been established to predict constructs of life quality. Perceived control has been more recently introduced as an important factor in the maintenance of life satisfaction. It is hypothesised that personality CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 27 will play a dual role in influencing subjective quality of life both directly and indirectly through impacting on perceived control (see Figure 2).

Extroversion Neuroticism

Personality

Perceived Subjective Control Quality of Life

Primary Secondary Relinquished Control Control Control

Figure 2: Hypothesised model of subjective quality of life, personality and perceived control.

1.4.3 Focus of the current research The current study will examine the hypothesised model of relationships, depicted in Figure 2, between the personality dimensions of extroversion and neuroticism, perceived control and the associated processes of primary, secondary and relinquished control and subjective quality of life. The model will be tested on a general population as well as a population of people caring for a relative with a mental illness. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 28

1.5 SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE: CARERS OF PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS

1.5.1 The historical development of research into carers of people with mental illness The process of deinstitutionalisation and the introduction of community focused psychiatric care has placed increasing responsibility on families for the care of people with psychiatric disabilities. In response to this, research on people with a psychiatric disability began to include their families. Initially the research focused on the negative impact the family had on the person with mental illness leading to families being viewed as the cause of mental illness throughout the 1960’s and 1970’s (Yamashita & McNally-Forsyth, 1998).

In an example of this negative view, Brown, Birley and Wing (1972) refer to the following ‘facts’ about the course of Schizophrenia: close emotional ties with family members indicated poor prognosis; patients discharged from hospital to live with family members who were highly emotionally involved with them were more likely to suffer a relapse; a raised level of tension in the home made relapse more likely. With these ‘facts’ about the negative impact of families on people with mental illness in mind, the authors then go on to investigate the relationship between family members' expressed emotion and patient relapse. Expressed emotion was measured by hostility, dissatisfaction, warmth, emotional over-involvement and the number of critical comments. Patient relapse was measured by either, a change from normal to a state of schizophrenia, or a marked exacerbation of persistent schizophrenic symptoms. The authors found that expressed emotion was independently associated with relapse and could not be explained away by the action of any other factor investigated such as age, sex, previous occupational record, length of clinical history, type of illness, etc. Concluding, “the level of relatives’ expressed emotion must be taken into account as one of the factors that cause relapse” (Brown, et al., 1972, p. 254).

While such conclusions did receive some empirical support (such as Vaughn & Leff, 1976), the adoption of these conclusions by clinicians by far outweighed that which would be warranted by the empirical evidence. The research was largely atheoretical, and while the association between high CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 29 expressed emotion and relapse was clearly established, causality was not. Furthermore, there were methodological problems; the most measurable component of expressed emotion was the number of critical comments made by the family member about the patient (Brown, et al., 1972). It is possible that family members have more to be critical about with patients who are not fully recovered and who are therefore more likely to relapse. It is also possible that family members perceived the research interviews as an opportunity to express the problems they perceived in their mentally ill relative.

The notion that families were the causative agents in the development of mental illness inspired a body of research that investigated the impact that mental illness had on the family. Advocacy groups for families of people with a mental illness argued that this high expressed emotion was a direct response to the trauma of caring for a mentally ill relative. This trauma began to be investigated by researchers who referred to it as the ‘burden’ of care, and distinctions were made between objective and subjective burden; objective burden refers to the tangible or observable costs to the family and subjective burden refers to the personal suffering or negative psychological impact on the family member (Maurin & Boyd, 1990; Lefley, 1987a; Webb et al., 1998). Whilst these two concepts are closely associated, as objective burden is likely to contribute to subjective burden, it is the literature on subjective burden that is most relevant to subjective quality of life.

1.5.2 The impact of the caregiving role on subjective quality of life A number of literature reviews have concluded that mental illness produces significant burden and distress in family members (eg. Fadden, Bebbington & Kuipers, 1987; Maurin & Boyd, 1990). The psychological distress of carers, as measured with the General Health Questionnaire is reported to be high. It was reported by Vaddadi, Soosai, Gilleard and Adlard (1997) that 79% of carers had scores indicating a significant level of emotional/psychiatric disorder. Whilst, Barrowclough and Parle (1997) found 57% of carers had significant levels of psychological distress at the time of the patient’s hospital admission and that in 30% of carers this distress remained when the patient was discharged back home. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 30

In a review of the literature by Cummins (2001) on carers of people with a range of severe disabilities, all of the 17 studies analysed reported higher than normal levels of distress in carers. A key theme in these studies was higher than normal levels of anxiety and depression.

The emotional impact of caring for people with mental illness has also been reported descriptively. In a qualitative study conducted in Iceland, Sveinbjarnardottir and Dierckx de Casterle, (1997) found that family members expressed a wide range of emotionally painful and disturbing feelings such as anger, disappointment, fatigue, distress, anxiety and sadness, all of which they found overwhelming at times. Lefley (1987b) adds bewilderment, fear, denial, rage, self-blame, pain, sorrow, empathic suffering and grieving to this list. Moreover, the introduction of mental illness into the family has been described as a traumatic and catastrophic event which primarily gives rise to a powerful grieving process (Baxter & Diehl, 1998; Collings & Seminuik, 1998; Fadden et al., 1987; Lefley, 1987b; Marsh et al., 1996; Winefield, 1998). Family members often experience feelings of grief over the loss of the former personality and the future potential of the individual with mental illness. Along with this grief often comes a significant sense of guilt or self-blame. There are four types of guilt frequently described: 1) guilt associated with the belief that they may have done something to cause the mental illness or that they did not recognised the symptoms and seek help early enough, 2) guilt about having hostile feelings toward the person with the mental illness, even though such feelings may be a legitimate response to provocative or intolerable behaviour, 3) guilt about leaving a loved one in unpleasant surrounds, such as when the person must stay in hospital or other residential services, and 4) guilt about making self-protective life decisions, such as deciding not to care for the person in the family home (Lefley, 1987b).

Clearly the emotional impact of caring for someone with a mental illness is great. So great in fact that many carers experience clinically significant levels of psychological distress, primarily anxiety and depression, as well as a more descriptive range of emotional experiences. There are a variety of elements associated with caregiving that may be a source of this burden and distress. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 31

The burden and distress of caregiving often occurs in the context of permanent shifts in family roles and considerable unanticipated responsibility falling consistently to one carer (Perring, Twigg & Atkin, 1990). It is this individual who often finds themself in a position where the needs and wishes of the person with mental illness are constantly put before the needs of the primary caregiver and other family members (Maurin & Boyd, 1990; Webb et al., 1998). This individual may also feel isolated as they try to cope with the impact of mental illness in the family. In fact social isolation has been found to be widespread among families affected by mental illness. Fadden et al., (1987) suggest “one of the most damaging consequences of living with a relative with a persistent mental illness is the detriment to social and leisure activities” (p. 286). A huge amount of time is taken up by the caring role and carers often find it difficult to leave the house unattended for longer than a few hours at a time (Perring et al., 1990). This makes time for the pursuit of social, leisure and employment activities difficult to find, resulting in increased social isolation. Social isolation may also be a result of the stigma of mental illness (Fadden et al., 1987) and discrimination against individuals with mental illness (Sveinbjarnardottir & Dierckx de Casterle, 1997). The now somewhat historical notion that families are causative agents in the development of mental illness and schizophrenia has left in its wake a stigma that still remains (Ferris & Marshall, 1987). Many families still experience this stigma in their interactions with mental health professionals, encountering a lack of recognition or appreciation from professionals, and this can be the source of a great deal of stress for family members (Winefield, 1998).

Along with these more general problems, carers must cope with the relapsing and remitting nature of mental illness and difficult symptom behaviours. The unpredictability of the episodic characteristics of mental illness are reported to be the most difficult aspect of living with someone with such a condition (Sveinbjarnardottir & Dierckx de Casterle, 1997), as the carer is required to constantly readjust the caring role in response to this unpredictability (Collings & Seminuik, 1998). Difficult symptom behaviours include both positive and negative symptoms. Positive symptoms reflect an excess or distortion of normal functions, such as delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech or disorganised behaviour (American Psychological Association, 1994). Negative symptoms CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 32 reflect a diminution or loss of normal functions, such as affective flattening and avolition (American Psychological Association, 1994). Researchers have found mixed results for the role these symptom types play in contributing to carer burden. Webb et al. (1998) cite research that has found positive symptoms to contribute to burden (eg. Winefield & Harvey, 1993) and others that have found negative symptoms to be most burdensome (eg. Oldridge & Hughes, 1992).

Positive symptoms often result in problematic psychotic and socially unacceptable behaviours. When families are not able to manage these behaviours, the quality of life for all family members declines as they experience overwhelming tension in anticipation of the dreaded behaviours (Swan & Lavitt, 1988). When the individual with mental illness demonstrates these behaviours in the community, it adds to the families sense of social stigma, embarrassment and isolation (Lefley, 1987b). In addition, some individuals display a number of threatening, intimidating and violent behaviours, with which the family carers must deal. Caregiving families with violent members have reported significantly lower adjustment scores than families with nonviolent members (Swan & Lavitt, 1988). Furthermore, Vaddadi et al., (1997) found the type and frequency of abuse experienced positively correlated with relatives' General Health Questionnaire scores, as did the number of types of abuse.

Negative symptoms also appear to be problematic for carers. In interviews with 124 carers, Tucker, Barker and Gergoire (1998) found that depressed or anxious behaviour in the mentally ill person accounted for 43% of the variance in carers' negative scores on the Experience of Caregiving Inventory (Szmukler, Wykes & Parkman, 1998). Furthermore, the resultant tension and anxiety that carers experience in response to negative symptoms is sometimes intensified by the fear that the individual with mental illness may commit suicide (Perring, et al., 1990; Sveinbjarnardottir & Dierckx de Casterle, 1997).

Contrary to this research that suggests symptomatology and behaviour play key roles in the burden experienced by carers, other researchers have found this may not be the case. Szmukler et al., (1998) found that the ability of a wide range of individual characteristics, including features of the illness, symptomatic state CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 33 and social functioning, to predict caregiver distress was poor. These authors suggest that conflicting results have often resulted from an assessment of the person’s symptomatology and behaviour using carer reports, rather than using independent assessments. This may mean that it is carers’ perception of their ill relatives’ disability, rather than actual disability, that impacts on their distress. Alternatively, it may mean that carers have a more accurate picture of their ill relatives’ disability. Still, the notion that carers’ perception of their ill relative’s disability impacts on their distress provides an interesting avenue for reducing the amount of distress carers experience.

Overall, it is clear that there are many negative elements associated with the caregiving role which may have a negative impact on carers’ subjective quality of life. In his review of the literature on carers of people with a range of severe disabilities, Cummins (2001) converted life satisfaction scores from eight studies into %SM and found the mean of the combined data was 615.9%SM, well below the standard score of 752.5%SM. These studies investigated carers of intellectually disabled children or adults and the elderly with dementia, yet from the above discussion similar results would be expected of carers of people with mental illness. Likewise, Browne and Bramston (1996) found that families of young people with intellectual disabilities had significantly lower subjective quality of life, particularly in the domains of health and productivity, than those without offspring with an intellectual disability. Hence, the negative impact of caregiving is likely to be evident regardless of the characteristics of the individuals receiving the care.

It is also important to highlight the positives of caregiving, although little work has been done on this area in the field of mental illness. Marsh et al. (1996) researched evidence for resilience, which refers to “the ability to rebound from adversity and prevail over the circumstances of our lives” (p. 4). The researchers asked 131 close relatives of people with mental illness a series of open-ended questions, which were coded to establish three variables: family resilience, personal resilience and consumer resilience. Family resilience refers to family bonds, family strengths and family growth. Personal resilience refers to personal contributions, improved personal qualities and personal growth. Consumer CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 34 resilience refers to the person with mental illness and their positive personal qualities, recovery, and contributions to the family. Family resilience was reported by 87.8% of participants, personal resilience was reported by 99.2% and consumer resilience by 75.6%. Unfortunately, the research provides no information on these resilience factors in the normal population making interpretation of the findings difficult. However, the research highlights the need to maximise resilience in order to reduce carer burden and distress.

1.5.3 The role of perceived control in coping with the impact of mental illness on the family and maintaining subjective quality of life How families respond and cope with the negative impact of mental illness in the family is vital to identifying how subjective quality of life can be maintained. Coping among carers of people with mental illness has recently gained increased attention in the literature and the effectiveness of various coping strategies in reducing burden and distress has been consistently found (for reviews see Collings & Seminuik, 1998; Maurin & Boyd, 1990).

The theory of stress and coping developed by Lazarus and Folkman (1984) has been advocated as a useful theory to apply to family burden (Maurin & Boyd, 1990). The Lazarus and Folkman (1984) model proposes that the negative effects of stress on health are mediated by the person’s coping style and their cognitive appraisals of the situation (primary appraisal) and of the resources available to them (secondary appraisal). Coping styles are the characteristic strategies an individual uses to handle stress. The model differentiates between two coping styles: problem-focused coping (the process of managing the problem itself) and emotion focused coping (the process of managing one’s emotions associated with the problem). This theory is conceptually similar to the primary and secondary processes of perceived control. Both theories address an individual’s perception of his/her ability to deal with a situation and the strategies he/she uses in response to the situation. Problem-focused coping is in many ways similar to primary control where the problem is clearly being addressed by making changes in the person’s environment. Emotion-focused coping has similarities with secondary control, as managing one’s emotions is a process of making changes within the person’s CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 35 internal environment. Hence, primary and secondary control may be a useful way of investigating how carers cope with the burden of caregiving.

In an investigation of families’ reactions to their relative’s mental illness, by Yamashita and McNally-Forsyth (1998) who analysed qualitative data from two studies (a Canadian and an American sample), four key themes were found to demonstrate a developing sense of control within carers. Firstly, they found that a primary task of family members was the acceptance of the mental illness diagnosis. Family members reported that accepting mental illness, accepting the uncertainty of the situation, understanding their relative’s behaviour as part of the illness, and accepting the relative as he or she is, was a turning point in their caregiving. Furthermore, it is apparent that telling their stories about the illness and the relative’s symptoms, fostered this acceptance of the new reality of mental illness and empowered them to move on with their lives. Secondly, they found once families accepted the illness, they sought information about the illness from a variety of sources. Some family members sought information in books; others talked to knowledgable staff; some sought out other sources of information such as physicians. Thirdly, further acceptance of the illness was signalled by the families' attempt to maintain normalcy in their day to day living. Families indicated that this was an important strategy for dealing with mental illness in the family. Finally, the authors found that families realised how important it was to be open and honest about their relatives’ condition to facilitate acceptance and normalcy. In fact, families found that when they did relate to others in this way they were surprised by the understanding and support they received. This process of responding and coping with mental illness in the family outlined by Yamashita and McNally-Forsyth (1998) demonstrates many primary and secondary control strategies. The first theme, acceptance, is a secondary control process that appears necessary to enable carers to use primary control processes, such as the second and third themes, seeking information about mental illness and maintaining normalcy in their daily lives. The fourth theme, being open and honest about mental illness in the family is also a secondary control process that appears to foster further primary (normalcy) and secondary (acceptance) control. CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 36

Similarly, Stern, Doolan, Staples, Szmukler and Eisler (1999) provide evidence that carers use a range of primary and secondary control strategies, as well as relinquished control, by evaluating narrative constructions about serious mental illness in the family. These authors divided the narratives into two types, those that provided stories of restitution or reparation and those that did not; the latter they describe as being chaotic or frozen stories. The stories of restitution or reparation involved a variety of primary and secondary control themes: making use of resources like support groups (primary control), taking care of oneself (primary control), seeing positives and being amused at times (secondary control; positive re-interpretation) and viewing the mental illness as an occasion for learning and knowing more in spite of the difficulties (secondary control; interpretive control). The stories that were described as being chaotic or frozen involved themes of relinquished control: difficulty making use of resources like support groups, feeling flat and nebulous, hoping to get used to mental illness, and not knowing what more to do or how to go about it.

These qualitative studies highlight the importance of both primary and secondary control in coping with the impact of mental illness in the family. Yet, research of a more quantitative nature has largely ignored secondary control processes and focused only on themes of primary control. For example, in a sample of 225 family members of persons with serious mental illness, Solomon and Draine (1995) measured a wide array of adaptive coping strategies, which they defined as “the application of behavioural strategies to reduce actual or potential stress” (p. 1156). These adaptive coping strategies can be likened to primary control, as behavioural strategies are most likely to achieve change in the person’s external environment. The results found that social support, another form of primary control, explained the largest portion of variance (17%) in adaptive coping. More extensive adaptive coping was associated with membership in a support group for families, a larger social network and more affirming support from social network members. This indicates that primary control is an important strategy for carers of people with mental illness. However, Webb et al. (1998) did not find social support significantly related to subjective burden. In a study of 59 caregivers of patients with schizophrenia, these authors found that burden was related to the inappropriate use of primary control. They found that burden was CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 37 increased in individuals who had a tendency to use problem-focused coping for dealing with negative symptom behaviours and a tendency not to use problem- focused coping for dealing with positive symptom behaviours. Hence, the effectiveness of primary and secondary control may be dependent upon the situation in which it is being applied. Furthermore, an individual’s personality or tendency to use a particular type of control strategy may result in inappropriate control strategies being used and thus hinder the effectiveness of the strategy.

1.5.4 Conclusion In conclusion, it can be seen that the caregiving role may have a negative impact on subjective quality of life. Carers of people with mental illness experience considerable burden and distress. In fact, the introduction of mental illness into the family has often been described as a traumatic and catastrophic event that gives rise to an array of emotionally painful and disturbing feelings including anger, guilt, anxiety, sadness and grief. As carers cope with difficult symptom behaviours and the relapsing and remitting nature of mental illness, they often find themselves in a position where the needs and wishes of the person with mental illness are constantly put before their own. Consequently, carers’ opportunity for work may become limited and their social and leisure activities reduced, which may lead to social isolation. The research on coping with this negative impact of mental illness in the family indicates that both primary and secondary control strategies may be useful in the maintenance of carers' subjective quality of life.

1.5.5 Focus of the current research The current research intends to examine the impact of the caregiving role on the subjective quality of life and perceived control of carers of people with mental illness. These data will be compared with a comparison sample of people who do not care for someone with a disability. In this comparison the effects of personality on the variance in subjective quality of life will be removed to provide a purer understanding of the differences between the two samples in their satisfaction with life. The two samples will also be used to examine the relationships, outlined in the model in Figure 2, between the variables of interest, CHAPTER 1- Study One: Introduction 38 subjective quality of life, perceived control conceptualised as primary, secondary and relinquished control strategies, and personality conceptualised as neuroticism and extroversion. CHAPTER 2 - Study One: Aims and Hypotheses 39

CHAPTER 2

2 STUDY ONE: AIMS AND HYPOTHESES

Aim One: To develop a valid and reliable tool for the measurement of perceived control by examining the factor structure of questionnaire items reported to reflect primary control, secondary control and relinquished control.

Aim Two: To examine the differences in perceived control and subjective quality of life between a sample of carers of people with mental illness and a comparison sample of people who do not care for someone with a disability.

 It is hypothesised that carers of people with mental illness will have lower subjective quality of life and perceived control than people who do not care for someone with a disability, after the effects of personality have been removed.

Aim Three: To examine the relationships between personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life in a sample of carers of people with mental illness and in a comparison sample of people who do not care for someone with a disability.

 It is hypothesised that perceived control will improve the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality and that personality will also predict perceived control. CHAPTER 3 - Study One: Method 40

CHAPTER 3

3 STUDY ONE: METHOD

3.1 Sample The carer sample was recruited from the Schizophrenia Fellowship of Victoria (SFV), an organisation that has provided a variety of services to people with mental illness and their families for the past 21 years. From beginnings in peer support, the organisation has expanded to include face-to-face and telephone contact providing individual information and support, library services and the development and publication of resource materials, and the provision of educational courses. The sample was taken from a total of 178 questionnaires that were voluntarily completed by participants in educational courses and forums run by SFV for relatives of people with mental illness. Forty-five of those were deleted from the subsequent analyses because the respondent had indicated that they were not the primary carer of someone with a psychiatric disability. A further six were deleted due to a significant number of incomplete items. This left a total of 127 questionnaires for the subsequent analyses. Most of the carers (75%) described themselves as the primary carer of someone, usually their child (70%), with a diagnosed mental illness, mostly a psychotic disorder (58%).

The comparison sample was taken from a total of 250 questionnaires that were sent to potential participants randomly selected from a list of individuals who had previously participated in Deakin University research. A total of 139 questionnaires were returned following one reminder letter, a response rate of 56%. Seventeen of those questionnaires were returned but not completed. A further eight of those were deleted from the subsequent analyses because the respondent had indicted that they were the primary carer of someone with a disability. Subsequently, 114 questionnaires were used in the analyses.

Sample demographics are displayed in Table 1 as percentages. The two samples were reasonably comparable on the range of demographic variables examined. The only noticeable differences being in income and location. A greater percentage of the carer sample had an income less than $40,999 and a CHAPTER 3 - Study One: Method 41 greater percentage of the comparison sample had an income greater than $41,000. The carer sample was recruited from metro and regional areas, whilst the comparison sample was only recruited from metro areas.

Table 1: Demographic information. Carer Comparison (n=127) (n=114) Sex Male 31.7% 36.0% Female 68.3% 64.0% Age 20-29 years 0.8% 4.4% 30-39 years 5.6% 9.6% 40-49 years 26.4% 25.4% 50-59 years 44.0% 29.8% >60 years 23.2% 30.7% Income <$10,999 17.9% 11.9% $11,000-$25,999 25.6% 22.0% $26,000-$40,999 24.8% 15.6% $41,000-$55,999 9.4% 14.7% >$56,000 22.2% 35.8% Education Primary educated 4.0% 3.5% Secondary educated 49.6% 55.8% Tertiary educated 46.4% 40.7% Location Metro 49.7% 100% Hume (regional area) 22.0% Gippsland (regional area) 28.4%

3.2 Procedure A letter of information outlining the study and ethical safeguards, and a questionnaire booklet were distributed to all participants in the study. (See Appendix A and B respectively for an example of the information letter and questionnaire given to carers, that received by the comparison sample was virtually identical, minus any specific references to carers, and therefore has not been included). Consent to participate in the study was implied by the voluntary completion of the questionnaire. The carer sample received their questionnaires when they attended an SFV educational course or forum, from the researcher, or a staff member of SFV. They completed their questionnaires prior to partaking in the educational course or forum and returned them to the researcher or to the SFV staff member, who then forwarded them onto the researcher. The comparison CHAPTER 3 - Study One: Method 42 sample received their questionnaires via the mail and returned them directly to the researcher in the prepaid envelope provided. The names and addresses of each participant were kept separate from the questionnaires by assigning a code number that corresponded to their questionnaire. This was necessary to follow-up participants who had not returned their questionnaire within two weeks with a reminder letter, after which no further contact was made.

3.3 Measurement Tools Subjective quality of life was measured using the subjective scale of the Comprehensive Quality of Life Scale developed by Cummins (1997b). A copy of this scale is included in Appendix B. This tool assesses the individual’s satisfaction with seven life domains weighted by the importance he/she places on each of these domains. The seven domains are material well-being, health, productivity, intimacy, safety, place in community and emotional well-being. The aggregate of these domains provides a total subjective quality of life score. Respondents were asked to rate the importance they place on each domain on a ten point Likert scale and how satisfied they are with each domain on an eleven point Likert scale. For example respondents were asked “How important to you is your own happiness?” and “How satisfied are you with your own happiness?” This tool was selected because it has been demonstrated to be valid, reliable and sensitive based on evidence presented in the manual. The tool has good content validity as its development has been based on sound theory and empirical review of the literature. Internal reliability has been shown in numerous studies including Cummins, McCabe, Romeo and Gullone (1994) who reported Cronbach’s alpha for the importance subscales at .65 and for the satisfaction subscale at .73. The tools sensitivity has been demonstrated through the findings reported in the manual of significant differences between various populations, such as those with high and low strength in spiritual beliefs. Furthermore, Cummins et al. (1994) found that each of the seven subjective quality of life domains significantly discriminated between groups classified as either high or low subjective quality of life.

Personality was measured using the extroversion and neuroticism scales of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991). A CHAPTER 3 - Study One: Method 43 copy of these scales is included in Appendix B. Respondents were asked to provide yes/no responses to 12 questions on each scale. An example from the neuroticism scale is “Does your mood often go up and down?” An example from the extroversion scale is “Are you a talkative person?” The scales were selected because they are widely accepted and used personality scales that have been developed over nearly fifty years of personality research and theory development, including extensive factor analytic research by both the scales developers (see Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985) and many others, such as Royce and Powell (1983). The scale manual reports reliability with alpha coefficients for the extroversion scale at .88 for males and .84 for females, and for the neuroticism scale at .84 for males and .80 for females. Reliability has also been tested by Francis et al. (1998) for an Australian sample who reported Cronbach’s alpha on the extroversion scale at .85 and on the neuroticism scale at .80.

Perceived control was measured using a modified version of the primary and secondary control scale developed by Heeps (2000) and relinquished control items taken from Thurber and Weisz, (1997). A copy of the modified scale is included in Appendix B. The original version of the primary and secondary control scale used the same statement, “When something bad happens:” to precede all of the secondary control items and a variety of statements to precede the primary control items. This format may have produced an artificial distinction between the primary and secondary control items. Hence, the primary and secondary control scale was modified by preceding all items with the statement “When something bad happens:” There were a total of 28 items on the Perceived Control scale comprising seven primary control items, 17 secondary control items and four relinquished control items. Respondents were asked to rate the extent to which they agreed with each statement on a 10 point Likert scale. An example of a primary control item is “When something bad happens: I put lots of time into overcoming it.” An example of a secondary control item is “When something bad happens: I can see that something good will come of it.” An example of a relinquished control item is “When something bad happens: I just let my feelings out, maybe by crying or yelling”. While the scale has good face validity and its development has been based on a thorough review of the literature, the reliability of this modified version is unknown. CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 44

CHAPTER 4

4 STUDY ONE: RESULTS

4.1 Aim One To refine the reliability and validity of the tool for the measurement of perceived control for use in the subsequent analyses, a series of factor analyses and other data reduction methods were conducted on the data from the combined carer and comparison samples, totalling 241 people. A combined sample was used in order to ensure generalisability of the results to both samples and to provide an adequate sample size for the analysis. Refer to Appendix B for item numbering and content to inform the following discussion.

The data adequately met the necessary assumptions for testing. The sample size was greater than the criterion of a minimum of five subjects per variable outlined by Tabachnick and Fidell (1996). Twelve missing cases were detected and replaced with the variable mean. The distributions of each of the variables were examined for normality, linearity, and univariate and multivariate outliers. An examination of the skewness and kurtosis statistics indicated six items were not normally distributed, items 8 and 10 being mildly negatively skewed and items 18, 24, 25 and 27 being mildly positively skewed. No transformations were made because of the mild nature of the skewness, because skewness is likely to be meaningful to the data, and because factor analysis is robust to mild violations of normality.

Examination of the scatterplots revealed the data generally met the assumption of linearity. Mahalanobis distance was used to check for multivariate outliers using a cutoff criterion of p<.001, none were found. Twenty-six univariate outliers were recoded using the method outlined by Tabachnick and Fidell (1996) which specifies “assign the outlying case(s) a raw score on the offending variable that is one unit larger (or smaller) than the next most extreme score in the distribution” (p. 69). CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 45

An initial factor analysis extracting Eigenvalues over the value of one was performed on both the original data and the recoded data. No substantial differences were found between the resultant solutions so it was decided to use the original data for the analysis. Similarly, an initial factor analysis extracting Eigenvalues over the value of one was performed on each of the samples. No substantial differences were found between the resultant solutions deeming the combined sample appropriate for the analysis.

Principal components factor analysis with oblique rotation was performed on the 28 items of the control scale for the combined sample of 241. The data met the assumptions of factorability of the correlation matrix. Most items correlated greater than .3 with at least one other item and partial correlations were all low. Items 13, 18 and 22 failed to correlate greater than .3 with at least one other item, however, these items were retained as the correlations were close to .3 and they all represented the relinquished control scale and deleting them would have deleted the whole scale. The Kaiser-Myer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy for each variable was greater than .5 except for item 13. It was therefore decided to delete item 13 from the subsequent analyses. The matrix as a whole was factorable as

2 indicated by a significant result for Bartletts test of sphericity,  (378) =2519.11, p=.000, and a Kaiser-Myer-Olkin score of .87, which was greater than .6.

The initial factor analysis extracted eight factors with Eigenvalues over one. Four factors explained more than 5% of the variance each and altogether accounted for 48.08% of the variance. However, the scree plot clearly indicated that there were only two factors with sufficient difference between them, together accounting for 36.44% of the variance. A second factor analysis was performed extracting two factors. Examination of the factor loadings revealed four items (16, 17, 18 and 19) that loaded greater than .3 on both factors. These items were removed to obtain simple structure and a third factor analysis, extracting two factors, was performed on the remaining 24 items. Examination of the factor loadings revealed a further two items (11 and 12) that loaded greater than .3 on both factors; these items were removed and a fourth factor analysis was performed. The results showed that the two factors were independent (r= .278) and together CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 46 accounted for 36.17% of the variance with Factor 1 accounting for 25.05% and Factor 2 accounting for 11.11%.

Internal consistency for each of the factors was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha. Internal consistency was high for Factor 1 (=.83) and moderate for Factor 2 (=.68). Pearson correlation coefficients for each item for Factor 1 ranged from .37 to .69 and for Factor 2 ranged from .18 to .51. Factor 1 consisted of 12 items that included seven primary control items and five secondary control items. Factor 2 consisted of nine items that included six secondary control items and three relinquished control items. In order to reduce the number of items in the scale and to eliminate some of the items with poor scale reliability, items that loaded on a factor less than .4 were deleted and a final factor analysis was performed. The results of the final factor analysis are displayed in Table 2.

Table 2: Two factor solution for the Perceived Control Questionnaire, with primary control items (PC) and secondary control items (SC) identified. Approach Avoidant Questionnaire Items Control Control 28. I work hard to overcome it (PC) .81 10. I look for different ways to achieve the goal (PC) .79 15. I put lots of time into overcoming it (PC) .72 21. I work out what caused it (PC) .67 26. I learn the skills to overcome it (PC) .67 2. I make an effort to make good things happen (PC) .65 9. I do something vigorous to take my mind off it (SC) .52 3. I remember you can’t always get what you want (SC) .47 8. I remember I am better off than many other people (SC) .46 1. I can see that something good will come of it (SC) .42 25. I ignore it by thinking about other things (SC) .77 27. I tell myself it doesn’t matter (SC) .76 24. I relax and don’t think about it (SC) .76 23. I realise I didn’t need to control it anyway (SC) .59 20. I don’t feel disappointed because I knew it might happen (SC) .54 Correlation between each factor .28 Percent of variance explained 29.80 14.00 Range of item-total correlations .41-.61 .41-.56 Cronbach’s Alpha .82 .73

The resultant factor analysis showed that the two factors were independent (r= .28) and together accounted for 43.80% of the variance with Factor 1 accounting for 29.80% and Factor 2 accounting for 14.00%. Internal consistency CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 47 for each of the factors was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha. Internal consistency was high for Factor 1 (=.82) and for Factor 2 (=.73). Pearson correlation coefficients for each item for Factor 1 ranged from .41 to .61 and for Factor 2 ranged from .41 to .56. The two factors were meaningful and reflected different perceptions of control. Factor 1 consisted of 10 items, six primary control and four secondary control items. It is interesting to note that all of the primary control items loaded first on this factor, indicating a preference for primary control over secondary control. Factor 2 consisted of five secondary control items. Effectively the factor analysis suggests that there is a distinction in the secondary control items, where some are similar to primary control and some are similar to relinquished control. In examining the content of the items, it is evident that the first factor reflects items where the problem is being positively addressed or acknowledged in some way, even if to allow for temporary distraction. For example, item 28 "I work hard to overcome it", item 26 "I learn the skills to overcome it", item 9 "I do something vigorous to take my mind off it", and item 1 "I can see that something good will come of it". This description is less obvious for item 3 "I remember you can't always get what you want" and item 8 "I remember I am better off than many other people", but these items still indicate that the problem is being acknowledged. Therefore, this factor has been termed approach control. The second factor reflects items where the problem is being avoided or disregarded. For example, item 25 “I ignore it by thinking about other things”, item 24 "I relax and don't think about it" and item 20 "I don't feel disappointed because I knew it might happen". Therefore, this factor has been termed avoidant control.

4.2 Descriptive information Descriptive information, including means, standard deviations and bi- variate correlations for each of the variables of interest, were calculated for each sample to inform the subsequent analyses. The variables included, total subjective quality of life, the two variables of perceived control (approach control and avoidant control) and the two personality variables (neuroticism and extroversion). Table 3 displays the means, standard deviations and bi-variate correlations, for the carer and comparison samples. CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 48

Table 3: Means (M), standard deviations (SD) and bi-variate correlations for the variables total subjective quality of life (SQOL), approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion for the carer and the comparison samples. Total Appr Avoid Neuro Extro SQOL Control Control Carer sample (n = 127) Total SQOL -- .42b .33b -.50b .22a Approach Control -- .42b -.26b .19a Avoidant Control -- -.15 .12 Neuroticism -- -.18a Extroversion -- M 68.14 58.11 32.44 5.79 5.84 SD 50.87 14.46 13.90 3.11 3.18 Comparison sample (n = 114) Total SQOL -- .50b .11 -.26b .23a Approach Control -- .12 -.20a .18 Avoidant Control -- .03 -.03 Neuroticism -- -.13 Extroversion -- M 76.58 65.33 36.00 3.34 7.39 SD 25.91 12.34 13.33 2.74 3.12 a p < .05 (2-tailed), b p <.01 (2-tailed)

The mean total quality of life scores displayed in Table 3 are the product of importance scores by satisfaction scores, expressed as a percentage of scale maximum. These scores were used in the subsequent analyses, however, means were also calculated for satisfaction scores only, to be used in comparison with other life satisfaction data and the standard score range of 70-80%SM (Cummins, 2000). The satisfaction only mean for the carer sample was 71.3714.61%SM and for the comparison sample was 80.689.98%SM. Approach control and avoidant control scores are also expressed as a percentage of scale maximum in Table 3. It can be seen that the comparison sample scored higher on total subjective quality of life, approach control and avoidant control than the carer sample. Extroversion and neuroticism scores can be compared with those from the scale’s manual. However, these comparisons are difficult to make as the manual provides separate scores for males and females. The manual reported the mean extroversion score for females at 7.603.27 and males at 6.363.80 and the mean neuroticism score for females at 5.903.14 and males at 4.953.44. The neuroticism and extroversion scores for the carer and comparison samples were compared, using z CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 49 scores, with the scale norms for both males and females separately. The only consistent finding for both male and female norms was that the comparison sample scored significantly lower on neuroticism (p<.001). It should be noted that the means reported for a sample of Australian students by Francis, et al. (1998), are slightly higher for both neuroticism and extroversion than those in the scale's manual.

The correlation matrix in Table 3 displays some interesting relationships between the variables of interest and some notable differences between the two samples in these relationships. In the carer sample, total subjective quality of life correlated strongly with neuroticism, approach control and avoidant control, and moderately with extroversion. In the comparison sample, total subjective quality of life correlated strongly with approach control, moderately with neuroticism and extroversion, and nonsignificantly with avoidant control. The two perceived control variables correlated strongly with each other in the carer sample, but nonsignificantly in the comparison sample. Approach control was moderately correlated with neuroticism and weakly correlated with extroversion in the carer sample. In the comparison sample approach control correlated weakly with neuroticism and nonsignificantly with extroversion.

The data were screened for the subsequent multivariate analyses assessing the differences between the samples and the relationships between the key variables. There were no missing data and group sizes were comparable (carer n=127, comparison n=114). The data for each dependent variable were screened by group. The carer data showed avoidant control was positively skewed and had five univariate outliers; total subjective quality of life had two univariate outliers. The comparison data showed neuroticism was positively skewed and had four univariate outliers; extroversion had two univariate outliers; approach control had two univariate outliers; avoidant control had four univariate outliers; total subjective quality of life had three univariate outliers. No multivariate outliers were found using Mahalanobis distance. Univariate outliers were recoded as before. Resultant data screening showed avoidant control was no longer significantly skewed in the carer sample and neuroticism was now only marginally skewed in the comparison sample. Hence, the recoded data were used for the CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 50 subsequent analyses as multivariate analysis of variance is reported to be extremely sensitive to outliers (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996). Examination of the scatterplots revealed the data met the assumption of linearity. Examination of the correlation matrix revealed that the assumption of multicollinearity and singularity was met.

Initially a multivariate analysis of variance was performed to explore any differences between the two groups, carer and comparison samples, on each of the variables of interest: total subjective quality of life, approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion. Box’s M suggested the data had met the assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices, F(15,224278)=2.34, p=.002, which was not significant at the alpha level of .001 recommended for this test (Coakes and Steed, 1999). The univariate tests for homogeneity of variance for each of the dependant variables indicated that homogeneity of variance had not been violated for the variables avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion. However, for the variables approach control and total subjective quality of life, the Levene’s test of equality of variances was significant, F(1,239)=4.01, p=.046 and F(1,239)=17.57, p=.000 respectively, indicating a more conservative alpha level should be used in the interpretation of findings associated with these variables.

Pillai’s Trace multivariate test of significance revealed there was a significant group difference on one or more of the dependent variables F(1,5)=11.13, p=.000. The univariate tests for each of the dependent variables are displayed in Table 4.

Table 4: Multivariate Analysis of Variance examining the differences between the carer and comparison samples for the variables: total subjective quality of life (SQOL), approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion. Eta Observed F(1,237) Sig. Squared Power Total SQOL 29.19 .000 .11 1.00 Approach Control 12.00 .001 .05 .93 Avoidant Control 2.25 .135 .01 .32 Neuroticism 41.58 .000 .15 1.00 Extroversion 14.40 .000 .06 .97 CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 51

The univariate tests displayed in Table 4 revealed that there were significant main effects on every variable, except avoidant control, even with a more stringent criterion of .01 to account for the violation of assumptions. Examination of the means showed that carers had significantly lower subjective quality of life, approach control and extroversion, and significantly higher neuroticism than the comparison group. Eta squared showed the strength of association between the independent and dependent variables was moderate to large and the power of the test to detect a true difference was high.

4.3 Aim Two A multivariate analysis of covariance was used to test the hypothesis, that carers of people with mental illness will have lower subjective quality of life and perceived control than people who do not care for someone with a disability, after the effects of personality have been removed. The analysis was performed using the carer sample and the comparison sample as the independent variable, group; the dependent variables were total subjective quality of life, approach control and avoidant control; the personality covariates were extroversion and neuroticism.

Further assumptions, required for the use of covariates in multivariate analysis of variance, were tested. The covariates were deemed reliable. However, the data did not meet the assumption of homogeneity of regression for total subjective quality of life. More specifically, the relationship between neuroticism and total subjective quality of life was significantly different between the two samples. However, Maxwell and Delaney (1990) suggest that “the effects of heterogeneity of regression when present will typically be small and in a conservative direction” (p. 419). Hence, it was deemed acceptable to proceed cautiously with the analysis. Box’s M also suggested the data had violated the assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices, F(6,401078)=5.47, p=.000. Furthermore, whilst Levene’s test of equality of variances was non- significant for approach and avoidant control, it was significant for total subjective quality of life, F(1,239)=8.31, p=.004, indicating caution should be taken with interpretation of any significant findings.

CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 52

Pillai’s Trace multivariate test of significance revealed that with effects of neuroticism and extroversion controlled for, there were no significant group differences on a linear combination of the dependent variables F(1,3)=1.91, p=.128. Hence, no further interpretation of these findings was made. Given that the negative impact of caregiving may be more evident on some life domains than others, the possible differences between the two samples on subjective quality of life were further investigated by using each of the seven domains. Hence, a second multivariate analysis of covariance was used to examine the differences between the two groups (carer or comparison) on each of the seven subjective quality of life domains with the effects of personality (extroversion and neuroticism) removed.

The data met the assumption of homogeneity of regression for every domain except safety and emotional wellbeing. Given the conservative impact this is likely to have, the proceeding analyses were, again, cautiously undertaken. Box’s M suggested the data had violated the assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices, F(28,194281)=4.23, p=.000. Furthermore, whilst Levene’s test of equality of variances was non-significant for health, it was significant for each of the remaining six domains, indicating further caution should be taken with interpretation of any significant findings.

Pillai’s Trace multivariate test of significance revealed that with effects of neuroticism and extroversion removed, there were significant differences between the two groups on one or more of the dependent variables F(1,3)=2.22, p=.034. Table 5 displays the results for the univariate tests for each of the dependent variables.

Examination of the univariate tests, displayed in Table 5, revealed that there was a significant main effect of group for the domains health, F(1,237)=4.52, p=.035 and emotional well-being F(1,237)=6.58, p=.011. Examination of the means showed that carers had significantly lower satisfaction with their health and emotional well-being than the comparison group after the effects of personality had been removed. Eta squared showed the strength of association between the independent and dependent variables was small and the power of the test to detect CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 53

a true difference was moderate. Due caution in the acceptance of these differences is noted due to the caveats previously stated.

Table 5: Multivariate analysis of covariance with group (carer or comparison) as the independent variable, the seven SQOL domains as the dependent variables, and neuroticism and extroversion as the covariates. Eta Observed Carer Control F(1,237) Sig. Squared Power Material M 67.52 M 72.71 2.89 .091 .01 .40 Well-being SD 58.39 SD 37.87 M 65.87 M 77.18 Health 4.52 .035 .02 .56 SD 84.87 SD 51.02 M 67.31 M 73.18 Productivity .14 .713 .00 .07 SD 64.00 SD 41.97 M 74.51 M 83.31 Intimacy 3.28 .072 .01 .44 SD 60.86 SD 32.90 M 70.92 M 79.22 Safety 1.10 .295 .01 .18 SD 69.00 SD 36.77 Place in M 64.29 M 70.14 .07 .796 .00 .06 Community SD 84.41 SD 48.23 Emotional M 65.76 M 78.81 6.58 .011 .03 .72 Well-being SD 55.44 SD 34.07

It is interesting to note that each domain mean is lower for the carer sample than the comparison sample, yet each domain standard deviation is higher for the carer sample than the comparison sample. It should also be noted that the large standard deviations are a function of the subjective quality of life measure being a composite of importance scores by satisfaction scores. To examine the impact of these large standard deviations, the same analysis was run using satisfaction scores only. The results showed no substantial differences and the same trends were evident in the data, indicating that the importance by satisfaction scores, despite their large standard deviations, can be interpreted with confidence.

4.4 Aim Three A series of regression analyses were used to test the hypothesis that perceived control will improve the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality, and that personality would predict perceived control. CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 54

The data have already been shown to meet most of the necessary assumptions for testing, including outliers, multicollinearity and singularity, normality and linearity. The sample sizes were adequate and additional assumptions of homoscedasticity and independence of residuals were also examined and met. To test the first part of this hypothesis, a sequential multiple regression was used for each of the two samples, carer and comparison. The dependent variable was total subjective quality of life and the independent variables were entered in two steps, where the two personality variables (neuroticism and extroversion) were entered in the first step and the two perceived control variables (approach control and avoidant control) were entered in the second step. Tables 6 and 7 display the results for each sample, carer and comparison respectively, including the unstandardised regression coefficients (B), the standardised regression coefficients (), squared semipartial correlations (sr2), and R, R2, and adjusted R2 after entry of all independent variables.

Table 6: Regression of neuroticism, extroversion, approach control and avoidant control on subjective quality of life in the carer sample B  t sr2 Neuroticism -2.55 -.48 -6.07c .23 Extroversion .71 .14 1.73 .02 Neuroticism -2.13 -.40 -5.26c .18 Extroversion .45 .09 1.17 .01 Approach Control 2.58 .24 2.91b .07 Avoidant Control 1.54 .16 1.95a .03 R2 Adj. R2 R .37 .35 .61c ap<.05, bp<.01, cp<.001

The results for the carer sample showed after Step 2 with all of the variables in the equation 37% of the variance in carers subjective quality of life was explained, which was highly significant, R=.61, F(4,122)=17.73, p=.000. After Step 1, with neuroticism and extroversion in the equation 27% of the variance in total subjective quality of life was explained, which was significant,

R=.52, Finc(2,124)=22.46, p=.000. Examination of the regression coefficients at Step 1 indicated that only neuroticism significantly predicted total subjective quality of life. At Step 2, approach and avoidant control added to the prediction of subjective quality of life by an additional 10% of the variance, which was a CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 55

significant increase Finc(2,122)=9.81, p=.000. Examination of the regression coefficients at Step 2 indicated that neuroticism, approach control and avoidant control were significant predictors of total subjective quality of life when all variables were entered into the equation together, extroversion made no significant contribution to the equation. The regression coefficients also showed that neuroticism was the strongest predictor followed by approach control and that avoidant control only just reached significance; the value for neuroticism was only marginally reduced from Step 1 to Step 2. The results demonstrate that even when the variance in subjective quality of life attributed to neuroticism is accounted for, approach control and avoidant control still make significant contributions.

Table 7: Regression of neuroticism, extroversion, approach control and avoidant control on subjective quality of life in the comparison sample. B  t sr2 Neuroticism -.93 -.23 -2.57a .06 Extroversion .69 .20 2.18a .04 Neuroticism -.62 -.15 -1.88 .03 Extroversion .46 .13 1.61 .02 Approach Control 3.67 .44 5.21c .20 Avoidant Control .49 .07 .86 .01 R2 Adj. R2 R .30 .27 .55c ap<.05, bp<.01, cp<.001

The results for the comparison sample showed after Step 2 with all of the variables in the equation 30% of the variance in subjective quality of life was explained, which was highly significant, R=.55, F(4,109)=11.50, p=.000. After Step 1, with neuroticism and extroversion in the equation 11% of the variance in total subjective quality of life was explained, which was significant, R=.32,

Finc(2,111)=6.52, p=.002. Examination of the regression coefficients at Step 1 indicated that both neuroticism and extroversion significantly predicted total subjective quality of life. At Step 2, approach and avoidant control added to the prediction of subjective quality of life by an additional 19% of the variance, which was a significant increase Finc(2,109)=14.85, p=.000. Examination of the regression coefficients at Step 2 indicated that only approach control was a significant predictor of total subjective quality of life when all variables were entered into the equation together, neuroticism and extroversion no longer made a CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 56 significant contribution to the equation and avoidant control did not add a significant contribution. The results demonstrate that even when the variance in subjective quality of life attributed to neuroticism and extroversion is accounted for, approach control can still make a significant contribution. To test the second part of the hypothesis, that personality would predict perceived control, two standard multiple regressions were performed for each sample testing the prediction of the personality variables (neuroticism and extroversion) on approach and avoidant control separately. Hence, Table 8 displays the results for the carer sample and Table 9 displays the results for the comparison sample, including the unstandardised regression coefficients (B), the standardised regression coefficients (), squared semipartial correlations (sr2), and R, R2, and adjusted R2.

Table 8: Regression of neuroticism and extroversion on approach control and avoidant control for the carer sample. B  t sr2 Approach Control Neuroticism -.12 -.24 -2.74b .06 Extroversion .07 .15 1.66 .02 R2 Adj. R2 R .09 .08 .30b Avoidant Control Neuroticism -.07 -.14 -1.54 .02 Extroversion .05 .09 1.03 .01 R2 Adj. R2 R .03 .02 .18 ap<.05, bp<.01, cp<.001

The results of the first regression equation for the carer sample showed that together neuroticism and extroversion accounted for 9% of the variance in approach control, which was significant R=.30, F(2,124)=6.11, p=.003. However, examination of the regression coefficients indicated that neuroticism was the only significant predictor, explaining 6% of the variance in approach control. The results of the second regression equation for the carer sample showed that neither neuroticism nor extroversion significantly predicted avoidant control, R=.18, F(2,124)=2.05, p=.133. CHAPTER 4 - Study One: Results 57

Table 9: Regression of neuroticism and extroversion on approach control and avoidant control for the comparison sample. B  t sr2 Approach Control Neuroticism -.09 -.18 -1.97a .03 Extroversion .06 .15 1.67 .02 R2 Adj. R2 R .06 .05 .25a Avoidant Control Neuroticism .02 .03 .31 .00 Extroversion -.01 -.03 -.31 .00 R2 Adj. R2 R .00 -.02 .04 ap<.05, bp<.01, cp<.001

The results of the first regression equation for the comparison sample showed that together neuroticism and extroversion accounted for 6% of the variance in approach control, which was significant R=.25, F(2,109)=3.81, p=.025. However, examination of the regression coefficients indicated that neuroticism was the only significant predictor, just reaching significance and explaining 3% of the variance in approach control. The results of the second regression equation for the comparison sample showed that neither neuroticism nor extroversion significantly predicted avoidant control, R=.04, F(2,109)=.11, p=.897. CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 58

CHAPTER 5

5 STUDY ONE: DISCUSSION

5.1 Aim One The result of the exploratory factor analysis performed on the perceived control scale promotes a reconceptualisation of perceived control and the constructs of primary, secondary and relinquished control. The resultant two- factor structure (see Table 2) included one factor termed approach control that reflected items that addressed the problem in some way, and one factor termed avoidant control that reflected items that avoided the problem. This factor structure did not differentiate between primary, secondary and relinquished control items. Rather, the approach control factor included both primary and secondary control items, and the avoidant control factor included secondary control items and, before the more stringent cut off criterion was used, relinquished control items. Hence, the distinction between primary and secondary control, evident in the original version of the scale developed by Heeps (2000) appears to have been artificially produced by the context in which the items were embedded. In the original scale, all the secondary control items were preceded with the one statement “When something bad happens”, whilst the primary control items were preceded with varying statements. When this artificial distinction was eliminated, by modifying the scale so that all the items were preceded with the same statement “When something bad happens”, the primary and secondary control distinction was no longer evident in the factor structure.

The lack of empirical distinction between primary and secondary control has two important implications for the literature on primary and secondary control. Firstly, the finding supports the notion that the two processes are closely intertwined (Rothbaum et al., 1982); so intertwined indeed, that a distinction could not be found statistically in the factor structure. Hence, the notion that primary control has functional primacy over secondary control (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) is challenged. A clear distinction in the factor structure would be needed to support such a notion of primacy. Similarly, the notion that cognitions (ie. secondary control) as well as behaviour (ie. primary control) play an important CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 59 role in perceived control, and that theories that do not acknowledge this are inadequate (Rothbaum et al., 1982), is supported. Secondly, the finding questions the theoretical relevance of these constructs when conceptualised as coping strategies. Imposing this theoretical distinction on various coping strategies, as has been done by many researchers (eg. Burton & Sistler, 1996; Thompson et al., 1996; Weisz et al., 1994), is problematic if the distinction cannot be empirically supported. Moreover, extreme caution must be taken not to treat all types of secondary control in the same manner. It is clear that some types of secondary control, such as downward social comparison and positive reinterpretation, along with primary control, are used to acknowledge the problem and address it by making changes in the way the problem is perceived, and some types of secondary control, such as cognitive avoidance and self-protective responses, are used to avoid the problem.

Overall, when something bad happens, the current data set indicates that approach and avoidant control appear to be more relevant constructs than primary and secondary control. That is, when an individual is faced with a difficult situation, the key issue appears to be whether they believe they can address the problem or avoid it, not whether they believe they can make changes to their external environment or within their own internal environment to deal with the problem. Further investigation of the coping literature has revealed both theoretical and empirical support for this approach/avoidant distinction (Ebata & Moos, 1991; Roth & Cohen, 1986; Herman-Stahl, Stemmler & Peterson, 1995). A more detailed account of this literature follows in the introduction to Study Two. Hence, the approach and avoidant control factor structure appears to be a valid and reliable distinction between various strategies for maintaining perceived control, for use in the subsequent analyses.

5.2 Aim Two The results did not provide clear support for the hypothesis that carers of people with mental illness will have lower subjective quality of life and perceived control than people who do not care for someone with a disability, after the effects of personality have been removed. However, the findings should be interpreted CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 60 with caution given that the data violated some of the assumptions for testing and there is some doubt over the use of the personality variables as covariates, as will be discussed later. Despite this, subsequent analysis on each of the seven domains of subjective quality of life, revealed that carers had significantly lower satisfaction with their health and emotional well-being than the comparison sample (see Table 5). This finding provided some evidence of lowered subjective quality of life in the carer sample, even after the effects of personality had been removed.

An examination of the differences between the two samples without the removal of the effects of personality, however, showed that carers had significantly lower total subjective quality of life and approach control than the comparison sample, as well as significantly lower extroversion and significantly higher neuroticism (see Table 4). Not only did the two samples differ on their scores for the personality variables. But, a difference was found, when testing the assumptions for the covariate analysis, in the strength of the relationship between neuroticism and subjective quality of life between the two groups. The regression of neuroticism onto subjective quality of life was stronger in the carer sample than the comparison sample. These factors together may have acted to mask differences between the two samples when personality was used as a covariate. A point that will be reiterated.

These findings of lowered subjective quality of life in the carer sample show some consistencies with the literature. The mean total subjective quality of life (satisfaction only) score for the carer sample was 71.37%SM. Whilst this value is not as low as the 615.9%SM found for carers of people with a range of severe disabilities (Cummins, 2001), it is still notably low, and borders on the range in which life satisfaction is proposed to be no longer held under homeostatic control (Cummins, 2000). Alternatively, the mean total subjective quality of life (satisfaction only) score for the comparison sample was 80.68%SM which is just within the normative range of 70-80%SM identified in the scale's manual and by Cummins' (1995, 1998, 2000) extensive research. Furthermore, the data provided support for the notion that carers' homeostatic control of subjective quality of life was being challenged (Cummins, 2000). There was a trend in the data where the means for the subjective quality of life domains were consistently found to be CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 61 lower in the carer sample than the comparison sample, and also the standard deviations were consistently greater. This demonstrates the increase in variance that is reported to be an indicator of subjective quality of life being held under homeostatic control. As samples approach 70%SM, increasing numbers of individual values represent homeostatic failure, that is below 70%SM, hence increased variance is evident in these samples.

Overall, there is support for the conclusion that the caregiving role has a negative impact on carers’ subjective quality of life. The finding that the impact of the caregiving role is most prominent on health and emotional well-being, even though these differences were marginally significant, is consistent with research that has concluded caring for someone with a mental illness has a substantial negative emotional impact (Sveinbjarnardottir & Dierckx de Casterle, 1997; Lefley, 1987b) and that carers experience significant levels of distress when measured by the General Health Questionnaire (Vaddadi, et al., 1997; Barrowclough & Parle, 1997). Clearly, health and emotional well-being are two important areas that must be addressed when trying to improve the subjective quality of life of carers of people with mental illness.

Some interesting conclusions about the impact of caregiving can also be drawn from the findings for the two variables of perceived control (approach and avoidant control).

First, the inability of the analysis to detect a difference between the samples in avoidant control, either with or without the effects of personality removed (see Tables 5 and 4 respectively), suggests that carers are comparable to the comparison sample in their use of this form of control. Avoidant control is a complex variable to understand. It is positively correlated with subjective quality of life, indicating that it does have a positive function and may be assumed to be lower in samples with low subjective quality of life. However, it might be expected that the immoderate use of avoidant control when confronted with difficult or problematic situations may have a negative impact on subjective quality of life, as the problem is not being addressed in any way. Hence, there may be an optimal level of avoidant control that is strongly dependent upon given CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 62 circumstances. Moreover, the finding that carers have similar levels of avoidant control as the comparison sample does not necessarily mean that they have optimal use of avoidant control for the circumstances of caregiving.

Second, the analysis was also unable to detect a difference between the two samples on approach control, with the variance attributed to personality removed (see Table 5). A difference that was evident before the variance attributed to personality was removed (see Table 4). The mere fact that the carers sampled had contacted an organisation seeking support and assistance, suggests the use of approach control over and above that of carers who have not had contact with such organisations. Hence, a difference in approach control, with the variance attributed to personality removed, may have been evident if a sample of carers who had not had contact with such supportive organisations was used. However, it is more likely that the difference between the two samples in approach control was masked by the problems associated with using personality as a covariate and that the experience of caregiving does limit carers' approach control.

It could be concluded that the differences in personality suggest that the experience of caring for someone with a mental illness may increase carers’ emotional instability (neuroticism) and decrease their sociability (extroversion). The validity of this conclusion is supported by the notion that 30% of personality is environmentally based or learned (Tellegen et al., 1988). Whilst, this learned component is generally considered to occur in childhood, it does indicate a more variable aspect of adult personality as compared to the genetic component. It thus seems likely that the experience of caregiving may have a negative effect on carers' personality, increasing their emotional instability and limiting their sociability. This conclusion is also consistent with the literature that highlights caregiver burden and distress (eg. Fadden, et al., 1987; Maurin & Boyd, 1990).

Such a conclusion, however, is limited by a notable difference between the mean score for neuroticism reported for the comparison sample in this study, and that reported in the scale’s manual (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991) and in another Australian sample (Francis, et al., 1998). The comparison sample scored significantly lower on the neuroticism scale. This, along with their subjective CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 63 quality of life score of 80.68%SM, suggests that the comparison sample may not be an accurate ‘normal population’. It is possible that the comparison sample, which consisted of individuals who have previously volunteered to participate in Deakin University student research, may be more emotionally stable than the general population. Hence, the difference between the two samples may be due to this, and not the impact of the caregiving role. Yet, given that comparisons have not been made with a sample of Australian adults, the conclusion that caregiving impacts on carers' personality has some merit. This is true especially when the difference between the two samples in the relationship between neuroticism and subjective quality of life is also considered.

These findings again highlight that the use of the personality variables as covariates in this analysis was problematic. Not only did the personality variables violate the assumptions for testing and differ from the scale's norms. But, if personality is susceptible to environmentally induced change, then removing the variance in subjective quality of life and perceived control attributed to personality may also be removing valid variance in subjective quality of life attributed to the differential life experience of each sample.

In summary, the results showed that carers' experienced lower subjective quality of life, approach control and extroversion, and greater neuroticism, than the comparison sample. These results are consistent with the literature, regardless of the doubt over the comparison sample's representativeness of the general population, and highlight the negative impact of caring for someone with a mental illness.

5.3 Aim Three The regression analyses enabled the examination of the relationships between the relevant concepts, personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life. The results of the regressions for both the carer sample (see Tables 6 and 8) and comparison sample (See Tables 7 and 9) provided support for the hypothesis that perceived control will improve the prediction of subjective quality CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 64 of life beyond that afforded by personality, and that personality will predict perceived control.

In the carer sample, the regression analysis showed that with all variables in the equation, neuroticism, approach control and avoidant control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, whilst extroversion made no significant contribution to the equation. This equation accounted for 37% of the variance in carers' subjective quality of life. Additionally, neuroticism was found to significantly predict approach control, and approach and avoidant control correlated highly with each other. By incorporating these significant relationships between the variables into a model (see Figure 3), a better understanding of the carer data is provided.

Neuroticism

-.24 -.40

.24 TotalApproach SQOL Control .42 .16 Avoidant Control

This model demonstrates that, in the carer sample, neuroticism predicts subjective quality of life, both directly and indirectly via approach control. If a latent construct for perceived control is introduced to describe the relationship between approach and avoidant control (see Figure 4), the model becomes similar to that initially proposed (see Figure 2). This model differs from the original model in that the variables approach and avoidant control have replaced the variables primary, secondary and relinquished control, and the variable extroversion has been excluded as it failed to produce any significant relationships, making the latent construct of personality unnecessary.

CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 65

Neuroticism

Perceived Total SQOL Control

ApproachAvoidant Control Figure 4: Model of the significant relationships among the variables neuroticism, approach control, avoidant control and total subjective quality of life (SQOL) in the carer sample incorporating a latent construct for perceived control.

In the comparison sample, the regression analysis showed that with all variables in the equation, only approach control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, whilst neuroticism, extroversion and avoidant control made no significant contributions to the equation. This equation accounted for 30% of the variance in the comparison sample's subjective quality of life. Additionally, neuroticism significantly predicted approach control. A model of these significant relationships is displayed in Figure 5.

Neuroticism

-.18

Approach Control .44

Total SQOL

It is also interesting to compare these findings with the literature. The correlations reported in the empirical studies reviewed previously ranged from -.31 to -.57 between measures of subjective well-being and neuroticism, and from .17 to .49 for extroversion (Costa & McCrae, 1980; Francis, 1999; Francis, et al., CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 66

1998; Heaven, 1989; Lu & Shih, 1997; Morrison, 1997). The bi-variate correlations in the carer sample were -.50 for subjective quality of life and neuroticism, and .22 for subjective quality of life and extroversion. The bi-variate correlations in the comparison sample were -.26 for subjective quality of life and neuroticism, and .23 for subjective quality of life and extroversion. These correlations are all within the ranges reported in the literature. However, the differences in the relationships between neuroticism and subjective quality of life reported for the two samples in this study, highlight the importance of considering the nature of the sample when reviewing these relationships in the literature. This is because the nature of the sample may have a significant impact on the results.

Overall, it is apparent that the relationships between the variables personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life, differ between the two samples. This difference suggests that when homeostasis is challenged, as in the carer sample, the maintenance of subjective quality of life becomes more complicated. This is clearly demonstrated by comparing the complexity of the models developed for each sample. Still, both samples provide support for the hypothesis that perceived control will improve the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality, and that personality will predict perceived control. However, it is important to note that this applies only to the personality variable, neuroticism, and the perceived control variable, approach control.

5.4 Summary Some important conclusions can be drawn from the differences between the two samples and the relationships between the key variables. It is apparent that higher levels of neuroticism have a substantial negative impact on subjective quality of life. In the carer sample, where the neuroticism scores were significantly higher than those of the comparison sample, neuroticism had a strong direct negative impact on subjective quality of life as well as an indirect impact through approach control. In the comparison sample, neuroticism had only an indirect impact on subjective quality of life, through approach control. Considering that the comparison sample had unusually low neuroticism scores CHAPTER 5 - Study One: Discussion 67 when compared to the scale's norms, it is possible that the findings for the carer sample, whose neuroticism scores resembled those in the scales' manual, may also apply to a broader range of the population. Alternatively, the well documented burden and distress of caregiving may have resulted in a change in carers' personality. More specifically, the circumstances of caregiving have resulted in increased emotional instability or negative affectivity, which has impacted negatively on subjective quality of life both directly, and indirectly through reducing their approach control.

Another effect of caregiving appears to be the use of both approach control and avoidant control to maintain subjective quality of life. In the carer sample, which had significantly lower approach control than the comparison sample, approach and avoidant control correlated strongly with each other and both made an additional contribution to the variance in subjective quality of life after the effects of personality had been removed. In the comparison sample only approach control made an additional contribution to the variance in subjective quality of life additional to personality. The ability of approach and avoidant control to predict subjective quality of life in the carer sample demonstrates the importance of both of these constructs when considering the maintenance of subjective quality of life.

Overall, there is preliminary support for the model of personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life depicted in Figure 2. This indicates that personality and perceived control may be important processes to consider when trying to understand how subjective quality of life is maintained, or held under homeostatic control. However, given the differences between the carer and comparison samples, this model may be dependent upon characteristics of the sample and the notion that when homeostasis is being challenged the maintenance of subjective quality of life becomes more complicated. Therefore, the model needs to be substantiated by testing it on other populations. CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 68

CHAPTER 6

6 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY TWO The focus of Study Two is to provide further support for the model of relationships between personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life, whereby personality predicts subjective quality of life both directly and indirectly via perceived control (See Figure 2). The findings from Study One prompted a reconceptualisation of perceived control as being reflected by dimensions of approach and avoidant control, rather than primary, secondary and relinquished control. Hence, Study Two begins with a review of the literature on approach and avoidant control, outlining the theoretical and empirical support for these dimensions and their measurement. This is followed by a brief review of the literature on the relationships between personality, approach and avoidant control, and subjective quality of life. The population selected to be the focus of Study Two is secondary school teachers. Teachers make an interesting population to study as there are a number of stressors reported to be associated with teaching, which may negatively impact on their subjective quality of life and perceived control. Hence, the stress and coping literature on teachers is also reviewed. This introductory section of Study Two concludes with a brief statement concerning the focus of the current research.

As in Study One, the aims and hypotheses highlight the three parts of the study: 1) an investigation of the factor structure of perceived control, 2) an investigation of the differences between a sample of secondary school teachers and a sample from the general population, and 3) an examination of the relationships between personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life. The method section provides information about the characteristics of the two samples, the recruitment procedures and the measurement tools used. The results and discussion sections are also divided into the three parts reflected in the aims and hypotheses. These results are discussed in comparison with the literature and the findings of Study One. CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 69

6.1 APPROACH AND AVOIDANT DIMENSIONS OF PERCEIVED CONTROL The results of the exploratory factor analysis on the perceived control scale in Study One introduced the notion of two dimensions of control which were termed approach and avoidant. The approach control factor reflected items where the problem was being addressed or acknowledged in some way. Alternatively, the avoidant control factor reflected items where the problem was being avoided or disregarded altogether. This finding prompted a re-evaluation of the literature. As previously outlined the concepts of control and coping are relatively similar when considered in the context of difficult, problematic or stressful situations. However, it is in the stress and coping literature that the terms approach and avoidance are mostly found. This literature demonstrates further theoretical and empirical support for the approach and avoidant dimensions of perceived control found in Study One.

6.1.1 Theoretical support for approach and avoidant control Some of the theoretical antecedents of coping concepts have been briefly outlined by Moos and Schaefer (1993), who used them to develop a model of stress and coping. These antecedent theories included evolutionary theory and behavioural adaptation, psychoanalytic concepts and personal growth, developmental life cycle theories and research on coping with life crises and transitions. Yet, it is primarily the behavioural adaptation and psychoanalytic concepts that provide an informative basis for understanding approach and avoidant control.

Theories of behavioural adaptation traditionally posited that goal directed behavioural problem-solving activities enhance individual and species survival (Moos & Schaefer, 1993). This notion is fundamental to approach control. In Study One, items reflecting goal directed problem solving activities, such as "I work hard to overcome it" and "I look for different ways to achieve the goal" loaded most strongly on the approach control factor. Yet, the more recent development of cognitive-behavioural theory has highlighted the role of cognition in effective adaptation (Moos & Schaefer, 1993). Cognitive-behavioural theory merges behaviour theory with cognitive theory. Cognitive theory states that CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 70 dysfunctional or negative thinking about the self, experiential events, and the future, accounts for disordered affect and behaviour, and that realistic or positive thinking can promote positive change in affect and behaviour (Beck, 1997). This cognitive element of coping is reflected in the items that loaded least strongly on the approach control factor, such as "I remember I am better off than many other people" and "I can see that something good will come of it". Hence, cognitive- behavioural theory provides a sound basis for approach control.

Psychoanalytic concepts also provide understanding to the cognitive element of approach and avoidant control. Freud introduced the notion of ego processes that serve to resolve conflict between an individual's impulses and the constraints of external reality (Moos & Schaefer, 1993). These ego processes are primarily self-protective cognitive defence mechanisms (though they may be expressed behaviourally) that can be likened to both approach and avoidant control. Vaillant, Bond and Vaillant (1986) have developed a hierarchy of three levels of ego defences. At the bottom of the hierarchy are immature defences, such as projection and unrealistic fantasy. Next are neurotic defences, such as repression and reaction formation. At the top of the hierarchy are mature defences, such as suppression and realistic anticipation. An examination of the approach control items in the factor analysis performed in Study One shows that these items resemble mature defences. For example, "I do something vigorous to take my mind off it" may be a form of suppression and "I remember you can't always get what you want" a form of realistic anticipation. An examination of the avoidant control items in the factor analysis shows that these items may resemble immature and neurotic defences. For example, "I tell myself it doesn't matter" can be likened to unrealistic fantasy and "I ignore it by thinking about other things" may resemble repression. Hence, psychoanalytic theory also informs the approach and avoidant dimensions of control.

These cognitive-behavioural and psychoanalytic theories demonstrate that approach and avoidant control is a complex mix of goal directed behavioural problem-solving activities, cognitive appraisals of the self, events and the future, and a range of defence strategies. Yet, whilst these theories highlight important differences in coping, clear theoretical support for the division of coping strategies CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 71 into approach and avoidant dimensions has not been provided. It is apparent that these dimensions have been established more from an apparent coherence in the literature than from any true theoretical basis. Basically, the approach and avoidant dimensions represent an attractive division of coping with stress into two basic orientations, either toward or away from threat (Roth & Cohen, 1986). This can be likened to the well-known fight or flight response to anxiety provoking situations and appears to represent a basic human instinct. However, support for the approach and avoidant division of control is grounded more in empirical research than theory.

6.1.2 Empirical support for approach and avoidant control Many researchers have employed exploratory factor analysis to explore the structure of coping strategies without dictating any theoretical distinction. A number of researchers have conducted an exploratory factor analysis on the 12 subscales of the COPE inventory developed by Carver, Scheier and Weintraub (1989). Carver et al. (1989) and Finset and Andersson (2000) conducted the analysis on a sample of undergraduate students; Phelps and Jarvis (1994) conducted the analysis on a community sample of adolescents. Each of these studies found four similar, although not always identical, factors. These factors reflected: 1) behavioural coping subscales such as active coping and planning, 2) cognitive coping subscales such as acceptance and positive reinterpretation, 3) socio-emotional coping subscales such as seeking social support and focus on and venting of emotions, and 4) avoidant coping subscales such as denial and behavioural disengagement. The first three factors are forms of approach control with the last clearly being avoidant control.

The notion that the first three factors are forms of approach control was supported by Finset and Andersson (2000) who found, in a sample of people with acquired brain injury, the first three factors loaded together on one higher level factor that reflected approach control. Similarly, a two factor structure has been supported by Herman-Stahl, Stemmler and Petersen (1995) who conducted an exploratory factor analysis on 18 different coping strategies in a community sample of adolescents and found two factors that reflected approach and avoidant CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 72 control. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses by different authors on these same coping strategies in a group of adolescents found three factors which resembled cognitive approach coping, behavioural approach coping and avoidance coping (Gomez & Gomez, submitted for publication; cited in Gomez, Holmberg, Bounds, Fullarton & Gomez, 1999).

In summary, there has been some exploratory factor analytic support for the approach and avoidant conceptualisation of control. Yet, none of these studies have demonstrated the division in a sample of adults.

Confirmatory factor analysis has also been used to test the approach and avoidant dimensions of coping. This procedure tests the goodness of fit of theoretically constructed dimensions. A detailed study on children's coping by Ayers, Sandler, West and Roosa (1996), used this technique to compare the goodness of fit of three different models of coping. They used the same set of 10 coping strategies to reflect three different models of coping, a problem-focused and emotion-focused model (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984), an approach and avoidant model (Billings and Moos, 1981) and a four-factor model developed by the authors themselves.

The problem-focused and emotion-focused model tested by Ayers et al. (1996) involved dividing the strategies into two groups, those that focus on managing the problem itself (problem-focused) and those that focus on managing the emotions associated with the problem (emotion-focused). Goodness of fit indices showed that this model did not adequately fit the data. The likely problem with this model is that it considers all emotion-focused coping strategies to be the same. In fact, it is apparent that there is an important distinction between two different types of emotion-focused strategies, those that are used to address the problem and those that are used to avoid it. This is similar to the findings in Study One where the exploratory factor analysis divided secondary control strategies into two groups.

The approach and avoidant model tested by Ayers et al. (1996) also involved dividing the strategies into two groups, those that reflect cognitive or CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 73 behavioural attempts to understand or resolve the problem (approach) and cognitive or behavioural attempts to avoid the problem (avoidant). Goodness of fit indices showed that this model also did not adequately fit the data. One reason may have been the inappropriate classification of avoidant strategies. Whilst cognitive avoidance and avoidant actions are clearly avoidant strategies, distraction strategies such as distracting actions and physical release of emotions are not. These later strategies may provide temporary relief from the problem before it is addressed; they do not necessarily mean that the problem will be avoided in the long term. This is supported by the finding in Study One that the item "I do something vigorous to take my mind off it" loaded on the approach control factor. However, it is important to note that Billings and Moos (1981) do not make this distinction in their construction of approach and avoidant coping.

Finally, the four factor model of coping developed and tested by Ayers et al. (2000) consisted of active coping strategies, distraction strategies, support seeking strategies and avoidance strategies. The data adequately fit the model. This model is attractive. It clearly identifies avoidant coping strategies as only those that totally avoid the problem and it includes both cognitive and behavioural attempts to deal directly with the problem in the active coping factor. These two aspects are consistent with the findings in Study One. Hence, Ayers et al. (2001) do provide some confirmatory factor analytic support for the approach and avoidant dimensions, but they found that approach control fits the data better when divided into subcategories.

Confirmatory factor analysis has also been used by Anshel, Williams and Williams (2000) to test a different four-factor model of coping that combines the emotion-focused and problem-focused model with the approach and avoidant coping model. These authors divided coping strategies into approach-emotion, approach-problem, avoidant-emotion and avoidant-problem and tested the model on a sample of athletes from the USA and Australia who were coping with acute stress in competitive sport. The results showed only moderate goodness of fit indices which did not provide clear support for the model, either in the combined sample or when the two samples were treated separately. Yet, the low correlations between the four dimensions do indicate the independence of these dimensions. CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 74

The inability of the analysis to confirm the model may be a result of the notion that when faced with difficult situations, the key issue appears to be whether the individual can address the problem or avoid it, and not whether they use emotion- focused or problem-focused methods to do this.

Lastly, Sorlie and Sexton (2001) used a sample of adult surgical patients to conduct a confirmatory factor analysis on the Ways of Coping Questionnaire, developed and refined by Folkman and Lazarus (1985). The confirmatory factor analysis showed adequate goodness of fit for two factors, one active coping factor consisting of goal oriented coping and seeking support and one passive coping factor consisting of wishful thinking, avoidance and thinking it over. These two factors can be likened to approach and avoidant control.

Overall, there appears to be adequate exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic research to support the approach and avoidant dimensions of control or coping. However, there is some suggestion, both theoretically and empirically, that approach control may be more meaningful if divided into subcategories. The literature providing empirical support for approach and avoidant control also gives examples of how these dimensions are commonly measured.

6.1.3 The measurement of approach and avoidant control Typically, the measurement of approach and avoidant dimensions of coping is done by creating these distinctions in general coping scales that have been designed to measure the entire spectrum of coping responses such as the COPE inventory (Carver et al. (1989). Alternatively, some researchers select specific scales from broader coping inventories to reflect the dimensions. For example, Gomez, (1997) selected the 'focus on solving the problem' factor and the 'ignore the problem' factor from the Adolescent Coping Scale (Frydenberg & Lewis, 1993) to reflect approach and avoidant coping respectively. There appears to be few coping scales that have been purposefully constructed to reflect the approach and avoidant dimensions of adult coping, which is what makes the Coping Responses Inventory (Moos, 1993) appealing.

CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 75

Moos and colleagues constructed the Coping Responses Inventory by giving detailed consideration of how people cope with a broad range of life crises and transitions, and by classifying these into theoretically derived categories or coping dimensions (Moos, 1993). A classification system was established, which considered the focus of the coping strategy as approach or avoidant, and the method of the coping strategy as cognitive or behavioural. Hence, coping strategies could have either an approach focus using cognitive or behavioural methods or an avoidant focus using either cognitive or behavioural methods. The authors then undertook a process of refinement that used both conceptual and empirical criteria.

The resultant 48-item Coping Responses Inventory consists of eight subscales. Approach coping consists of two cognitive scales, logical analysis and positive reappraisal, and two behavioural scales, problem solving and seeking guidance/support. Avoidant coping consists of the cognitive scales, cognitive avoidance and acceptance or resignation, and the behavioural scales, seeking alternative rewards and emotional discharge. Each of the eight subscales showed sound internal reliability with alpha coefficients ranging from .58 to .71. Whilst internal reliability has not been shown for the approach and avoidant dimensions, intercorrelations among the subscales show that the approach scales and the avoidant scales do cluster together, with the exception of one subscale (seeking alternative rewards) which appears to correlate more strongly with the approach scales. It is likely that seeking alternative rewards is a form of approach coping as it acknowledges that there is a problem and seeks to deal with the negative consequences of that problem by balancing it with other positive experiences. Unfortunately, the items and subscales of the Coping Responses Inventory have not been subject to factor analysis and compelling statistical confirmation of the approach and avoidant distinction has not been provided. Yet, the theoretical basis is attractive. The approach/avoidant and cognitive/behavioural dimensions represent basic orientations either toward or away from threat when in stressful situations, and encompass cognitive-behavioural theory that recognises the role of behaviours and cognitions in adaptive functioning. CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 76

6.1.4 Conclusion In conclusion, there is some theoretical and empirical support for the dimensions of approach and avoidant control. This is largely provided by exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic research and within this literature there is some suggestion that approach control may be better conceptualised if divided into subcategories. There is also a clear need to further investigate these concepts in adult samples. Further support for the approach and avoidant dimensions of control can be gained by examining how these dimensions relate to concepts of adjustment and well-being.

6.2 PERSONALITY, APPROACH AND AVOIDANT CONTROL AND SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE

6.2.1 The literature on approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life Approach and avoidant coping strategies, like primary and secondary control processes, function to maintain a perception of control. Therefore, the theory and evidence outlined in the introduction to Study One, which suggests that the relationship between perceived control and subjective quality of life is likely to be significant, also applies to approach and avoidant control. Theoretically, perceived control is necessary for optimal adaptation (Rothbaum, et al., 1982), successful development (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) and to feel confident that a situation will not become so aversive it cannot be endured (Thompson, 1981). These are all concepts that can be likened to subjective quality of life. Furthermore, empirical research has shown that perceived control has been found to correlate with life satisfaction (Boschen, 1996; Chistensen, et al., 1998; Schulz & Decker, 1985).

There appears to be no specific research on approach and avoidant control and concepts of subjective quality of life or life satisfaction. Yet, Moos (1997) has concluded, from his own extensive research on approach and avoidant coping responses among adults and youth, that "individuals who rely more on approach and less on avoidance coping tend to experience better health and well-being" (p. 58). However, this conclusion was drawn from literature that focuses mainly on CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 77 depression. Some examples of this research follow. Billings and Moos (1984) investigated coping strategies among adults entering treatment for depression and found that approach coping was associated with less severe dysfunction and avoidant coping was associated with greater dysfunction. Dysfunction was conceptualised in terms of depression, physical symptoms, such as headaches and trembling, and lack of self-confidence. Similarly, Ebata and Moos (1991) found that depressed adolescents, as well as those with conduct disorder, used significantly more avoidance coping than those with rheumatic disease or healthy adolescents. Finally, in a sample of adults residing in the community, Holahan and Moos (1990) found that stable psychological functioning, measured with a depression scale only, was predicted by approach coping. However avoidant coping was not assessed in this study. Clearly these studies demonstrate that depression is associated with low approach coping and high avoidant coping.

The relationship between depression and approach and avoidant coping has also been supported by other researchers. Herman-Stahl et al., (1995) researched coping and depression amongst a community sample of adolescents. The authors used a median split method to form four groups, approachers (high approach coping, low avoidant coping), avoiders (low approach coping, high avoidant coping), high generic copers (high on both approach and avoidant coping) and low generic copers (low on both approach and avoidant coping). The results showed that avoiders reported significantly higher levels of depressive symptoms than all other groups and approachers reported significantly fewer symptoms of depression than all other groups. Furthermore, high generic copers reported significantly fewer depressive symptoms than the low generic copers, indicating the usefulness of avoidant control in conjunction with approach control.

Using longitudinal data Herman-Stahl et al., (1995) grouped their participants into another seven groups. The first four groups resembled those whose coping styles were stable across time: approachers, avoiders, high generic copers, low generic copers. Three additional groups were created for those whose coping styles changed across time: change positive (subjects who changed from avoiders to approachers), change negative (subjects who changed from approachers to avoiders), and flexible copers (subjects who did not reveal rigid CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 78 adherence to a single mode of coping). Consistent with the above results, adolescents who changed from approach to avoidant coping demonstrated a significant increase in their level of depression and adolescents who changed from avoidant to approach coping reported significant decreases in depression. Interestingly, subjects classified as flexible copers also demonstrated a significant decrease in depression, again indicating the usefulness of both approach and avoidant control. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution as their depression scores still remained higher than those classified as approachers.

Departing from this sole focus on depression, Finset and Andersson (2000) found, in a sample of patients with acquired brain injury, that low approach coping was associated with apathy and high avoidant coping was associated with depression. These results, unlike the others, indicate the differential effect of the two coping dimensions, suggesting that it is the avoidant dimension that is more closely associated with depression.

Overall, the specific literature on approach and avoidant coping focuses mainly on depression, providing little clear support for the relationship of approach and avoidant control and concepts of subjective well-being or life quality. However, the research does provide sound evidence of a strong association between approach and avoidant coping and depression. Therefore, it is likely that there will also be a significant relationship between approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life, as individuals who are more depressed are also likely to be less satisfied with their lives. Moreover, there is both theoretical and empirical support, outlined in the introduction to Study One, that general concepts of perceived control are associated with concepts of subjective well-being or life quality. The findings in Study One provide further support to this conclusion.

6.2.2 The findings from Study One on approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life The relationship between approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life has already been supported in Study One. In the sample of carers of people with mental illness, approach and avoidant control significantly correlated CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 79 with subjective quality of life (.42 and .33 respectively). In the comparison sample, drawn from the general population, only approach control significantly correlated with subjective quality of life (.50). These differential results for the two samples raise the notion that the relative usefulness of approach and avoidant control may be dependent on the situation. Carers, who are presumably faced with more stressors, may need both approach and avoidant control to maintain their subjective quality of life; the comparison sample, with presumably less stressors, needs only approach control.

Such a hypothesis is supported by Roth and Cohen (1986). These authors suggest that approach coping is preferable when the situation is controllable, the source of stress is known or the outcome measures are long-term. Avoidant coping is considered preferable when emotional resources are limited, the source of the stress is not clear, the situation is uncontrollable or outcome measures are immediate. This is based on the notion that there are costs and benefits to both approach and avoidant coping and that the usefulness of these strategies is dependent upon the context in which they are used. However, Roth and Cohen's (1986) description of the costs and benefits indicate that approach coping is associated with more benefits, such as appropriate action and ventilation of affect, and fewer costs, such as increased distress. Alternatively, avoidant coping is associated with fewer benefits, such as stress reduction, and more costs, such as interference with appropriate action and emotional numbness.

Hence, it appears from the findings in Study One and from Roth and Cohen's (1986) conceptualisation of the costs and benefits, that approach control may be predominantly useful in maintaining subjective quality of life and avoidant control may be useful only to a certain extent and only in certain circumstances, such as when faced with more stressors of an unpredictable nature. While it is true that differing circumstances influence the use of approach and avoidant control, other factors, such as an individual's personality, are also likely to be involved. CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 80

6.2.3 Personality and approach and avoidant control There appears to be little specific research in the literature on the relationships between extroversion and neuroticism, and approach and avoidant control or coping. Still, it has been demonstrated in one study on adolescents' coping styles by Gomez, et al. (1999), that neuroticism significantly correlated with avoidance coping and extroversion significantly correlated with cognitive and behavioural approach coping. Furthermore, extroversion significantly predicted cognitive and behavioural approach coping, and both neuroticism and extroversion significantly predicted avoidance coping. Likewise, there is evidence, in the results reported on the predictors of coping in adult surgical patients by Sorlie and Sexton (2001), that extroversion predicted active (approach) coping and both neuroticism and extroversion predicted passive (avoidant) coping. Hence, the relationship between extroversion and neuroticism, and approach and avoidant control has been established but requires further investigation. A number of studies have also supported the relationship between personality and coping in more general terms.

There are two studies that have investigated the relationship between different personality dimensions and approach and avoidant control or coping. Gomez (1997) investigated the personality dimensions locus of control and Type A behaviour pattern and Carver et al. (1989) investigated a number of dimensions, some more reflective of personality than others. One of the personality dimensions both studies used was internal/external locus of control, i.e. whether or not the individual believes that life's events are either under one's own control or the result of external factors. Gomez (1997) found that this personality dimension significantly related to both approach and avoidant coping, whilst Carver et al. (1989) found it significantly correlated to only one of the approach COPE scales. It seems that an internal locus of control is virtually identical to approach coping and the belief that one can address the problem, making the separate measurement of these two concepts somewhat redundant. Another personality dimension used by both studies was a Type A behaviour pattern, characterised by competitive- achievement striving, time urgency, hostility-aggression and impatience. Whilst Gomez (1997) found this personality dimension was not significantly related to either approach or avoidant coping, Carver et al. (1989) found a significant CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 81 relationship between two of the approach COPE scales and one of the avoidant COPE scales. Whilst the Type A behaviour pattern provides interesting information, it is not as well established and investigated as the neuroticism and extroversion personality dimensions. Trait anxiety is in many ways similar to neuroticism and Carver et al. (1989) found a number of significant relationships between this and a number of the COPE scales, indicating the importance of investigating the personality dimension of neuroticism when considering approach and avoidant control.

Other studies have shown that extroversion and neuroticism have significant relationships with various coping strategies. For example, neuroticism and extroversion, along with openness to experience and conscientiousness, significantly predicted daily coping strategy use in adult males (David & Suls, 1999). Similarly, neuroticism and extroversion significantly predicted a range of seven coping strategies used in response to job stress by electricians working at power plant construction sites in the United States (Mayes, Johnson & Sadri, 2000). In adolescents, extroversion was shown to have a direct positive effect on problem and emotion-focused coping, while neuroticism had a direct positive effect on avoidance coping (Kardum & Krapic, 2001). However, in undergraduate university students coping with exam stress, neuroticism correlated positively and significantly with emotion-focused coping (Halamandaris & Power, 1999). Overall, these studies demonstrate more generally the direct effect of personality on coping, which can be likened to perceived control.

6.2.4 Integrating personality, approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life The proposed relationships between personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life outlined in the introduction still apply for approach and avoidant control. Personality has long been established to predict constructs of life quality. Personality is also likely to predict subjective quality of life indirectly through its influence on other psychological processes that have been reported to maintain subjective quality of life, such as perceived control. Furthermore, support for these relationships has been provided in Study One. In the carer sample, the personality variable, neuroticism, was found to significantly predict CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 82 subjective quality of life both directly and indirectly via approach control. In the comparison sample neuroticism indirectly predicted subjective quality of life through approach control. Interestingly, the other personality variable measured, extroversion, was not significantly related to either approach or avoidant control or subjective quality of life; nor did avoidant control have a significant relationship with personality in either of the samples. This suggests that the personality variable neuroticism and approach control are most relevant to the maintenance of subjective quality of life.

6.2.5 Focus of the current research The literature on approach and avoidant coping is lacking in its support of these dimensions of perceived control in adults and in the relationship with subjective quality of life, or life satisfaction constructs, and personality. Still, the theory and findings of Study One demonstrated that there are important relationships between personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life that are useful to understand how subjective quality of life is maintained. More specifically, it appears neuroticism and approach control, and to a lesser degree avoidant control, are theoretically and conceptually sound ways of understanding and investigating these relationships. Consistent with Study One, it is hypothesised in Study Two that personality will play a dual role in influencing subjective quality of life both directly and indirectly through perceived control. Study Two aims to support this hypothesis with a different group, a sample of secondary school teachers.

6.3 SUBJECTIVE QUALITY OF LIFE IN SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS

6.3.1 The stressors associated with teaching Considerable emphasis has been placed on teacher stress and burnout in Australia over the last 10 years. Like the 'burden of care' that is associated with carers of people with mental illness, the 'cost of caring' is associated with teachers. Although teachers may not experience the significant trauma related to having mental illness in the family, they are considered to experience numerous stressors. CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 83

Some of these stressors consistently highlighted in the literature are excessive workloads and lack of resources, inadequate salary and limited career prospects, student misbehaviour, difficult interactions with parents, poor professional relationships with colleagues and demands of the broader educational context (Churchill, Williamson & Grady, 1996, 1997; Griffith, Steptoe & Cropley, 1999; Hart & Conn, 1996; Punch & Tuetteman, 1996; Sarros & Sarros, 1990).

It is on the demands of the broader educational context that Churchill et al., (1996, 1997) have focused their research. These authors have identified change within the educational environment in the 1990's to be characterised by unpredictability and dynamic complexity. In extensive interviews with primary and secondary school teachers from Tasmanian and South Australian schools, they found that the educational changes teachers saw as having the greatest impact on their working lives included systemic cuts to education funding, the introduction of national curricula, increased accountability requirements, new models for assessing and reporting on students' work and social-justice policy initiatives. Teachers also reported that these educational changes had resulted in an unwelcome intensification of their work and an unwanted shift in the focus of their work. Overall, they had negative feelings about those changes that affected the organisational domain of their work.

Clearly, teachers face significant amounts of stress in their work lives and this stress has been related to burnout (Pierce and Molloy, 1990; Sarros & Sarros, 1990), psychological distress (Punch & Tuetteman, 1996) and low quality of work life (Churchill, et al., 1996; Hart & Conn, 1996).

6.3.2 The impact of stress on teachers' subjective quality of life and the role of coping strategies Burnout is defined as physical and emotional exhaustion, detachment and cynicism towards the people with whom one works and a loss of personal accomplishment (Sarros & Sarros, 1990). It has been shown by Sarros and Sarros (1990) that, when compared with Canadian and American samples, Australian teachers demonstrated relatively low to moderate levels of emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation burnout, but high levels of personal accomplishment CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 84 burnout. Furthermore, these authors consider burnout to be the result of unsuccessful attempts to cope with the stressors associated with their work. This is supported by Pierce and Molloy (1990) who found that higher levels of burnout in teachers, from both government and non-government schools in Victoria, were associated with a number of variables, the most relevant of which was the more frequent use of regressive (ie. avoidant) coping strategies. Hence, burnout, particularly loss of personal accomplishment, has been associated with teachers' ability to cope with workplace stressors.

Psychological distress has also been related to workplace stressors in a sample of West Australian secondary school teachers (Punch & Tuetteman, 1996). Distress was measured using the General Health Questionnaire and it was found to correlate positively and significantly to four key stressors: 1) inadequate access to facilities, 2) the intrusion of school work into out of hours time, 3) student misbehaviour and 4) excessive society expectations. Additionally, these authors found that two types of support, colleaguial support and praise and recognition, the seeking of which would be considered approach control strategies, were negatively and significantly correlated to psychological distress. Furthermore, using contingency table analysis the authors showed that support ameliorates the distress teachers experience as a result of the four identified stressors. Hence, like burnout, psychological distress is also associated with a failure to cope with stressors. Furthermore, burnout and psychological distress indicate that teachers' subjective quality of life may also be low.

Quality of work life is the measure used in the teaching literature that is most similar to subjective quality of life. It is defined as "the judgements that teachers make about the extent to which their work is satisfying and meeting their needs" (Hart & Conn, 1996, p. 26). In an investigation of teachers' satisfaction with key aspects of their work lives, Churchill et al. (1996) found that whilst teachers were relatively satisfied with their relationships, they were dissatisfied with areas where they were subject to the regulations and expectations of the education system, and with their capacity to exert some degree of influence over educational and social matters which affect their work. It is apparent from these findings that the circumstances of teachers' work may limit their opportunity to use CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 85 approach control strategies, which may then impact negatively on their subjective quality of life. The relevance of approach control strategies in maintaining quality of work life has been highlighted by Hart and Conn (1996). These authors not only identify the negative factors or stressors that are associated with quality of work life, but also a range of positive factors, such as curriculum consultation, effective school policies, feedback, goal congruence and participative decision- making, which are conceptually related to approach control strategies.

Few studies appear to have specifically examined the use of approach and avoidant control strategies by teachers. However, Griffith, Steptoe and Cropley (1999) have investigated the effects of coping on stress in a sample of teachers in London. Coping was measured with a selection of items from the COPE inventory that reflect the four coping strategies: active planning, seeking social support, suppression of competing activities, and behavioural and mental disengagement. The results showed that disengagement and suppression significantly predicted work stress independently of age, gender, class size, occupational grade and negative affectivity. Clearly, disengagement is an avoidant control strategy and thus it is not surprising that it was related to stress. However, suppression of competing activities is measured with items focusing on preventing distraction and concentrating on the problem and appears to be an approach control strategy. Therefore, it is surprising that it is related to stress. It is possible that preventing distraction and concentrating on the problem may exclude the use of any cognitive approach control strategies, such as positive reinterpretation and distraction, and that without cognitive strategies approach control may not be as useful. Unfortunately, the authors do not include cognitive approach control strategies in their study.

6.3.3 Conclusion and focus of the current research Overall, it is apparent that teachers face a variety of stressors within an inherently complex and unstable educational environment within which they must learn to cope in order to maintain their subjective quality of life. This will probably require the use of both approach and avoidant control strategies. Given CHAPTER 6 - Study Two: Introduction 86 the ongoing workplace stressors associated with teaching, and the need to cope with these stressors, teachers make an interesting population to investigate.

This second study will continue to examine the relationships between subjective quality of life, perceived control conceptualised as approach and avoidant control strategies, and personality conceptualised as neuroticism and extroversion. The study aims to explore the factor structure of a different set of coping strategies representing perceived control and to test the finding from the first study, that personality predicts subjective quality of life both directly and indirectly through perceived control.

CHAPTER 7 - Study Two: Aims and Hypotheses 87

CHAPTER 7

7 STUDY TWO: AIMS AND HYPOTHESES

Aim One: To develop a valid and reliable tool for the measurement of perceived control by examining the factor structure of the Coping Response Inventory, which was developed to reflect approach and avoidant coping.

Aim Two: To examine differences in personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life between a sample of secondary school teachers and a comparison sample of people from the general population.

 It is hypothesised that secondary school teachers will have lower subjective quality of life and perceived control than people from the general population, after the effects of personality have been removed.

Aim Three: To examine the relationships between personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life in a sample of secondary school teachers and in a comparison sample of people from the general population.

 It is hypothesised that perceived control will improve the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality and that personality will predict perceived control. CHAPTER 8 - Study Two: Method 88

CHAPTER 8

8 STUDY TWO: METHOD

8.1 Sample The teacher sample was recruited from a total of 170 questionnaires sent to nine public Secondary Colleges in the Eastern metropolitan region of Melbourne, Australia. A total of 85 questionnaires were voluntarily completed by qualified secondary school teachers following one reminder letter, a response rate of 50%. Most of these teachers were employed full time (93.7%) and had worked an average of 20 years in the field.

The comparison sample was taken from a total of 150 questionnaires that were sent to potential participants that were recruited via a word of mouth method, who also primarily lived in the Eastern suburbs of metropolitan Melbourne. A total of 88 questionnaires were returned following one reminder letter, a response rate of 58%. One of those questionnaires was returned but not sufficiently completed. Subsequently, 87 questionnaires were used in the analyses. Most of these participants worked in the business sector (32.9%), a number worked in education (18.8%) mainly as primary school teachers, in special education settings or as childcare workers. The remaining participants were spread across the government and health sectors, the retail/service and labour industry, and participants who fulfilled home duties, were students or retired.

Background information is displayed in Table 10 as percentages. The two samples were reasonably comparable on the range of demographic variables examined. However, the comparison sample was generally younger in age and more evenly distributed across the income categories than the teacher sample. There were notable differences between the samples in two of the areas of difficulty identified. (Note: percentages do not sum to 100% as they represent the percentage of people who identified each area as one of their three areas of difficulty). A greater percentage of the teacher sample identified difficulty with time management and work than the comparison sample. Furthermore, the teacher CHAPTER 8 - Study Two: Method 89 sample showed significantly greater frequency of difficulties overall than the comparison sample, t=2.40, p=.018.

Table 10: Background information. Teacher Comparison (n=85) (n=87) Sex Male 42.4% 39.1% Female 57.6% 60.9% Age <20 years 0.0% 3.5% 20-29 years 21.2% 42.4% 30-39 years 10.6% 12.9% 40-49 years 35.3% 7.1% 50-59 years 30.6% 20.0% >60 years 2.4% 14.1% Income <$10,999 0.0% 12.8% $11,000-$25,999 3.5% 15.1% $26,000-$40,999 14.1% 15.1% $41,000-$55,999 37.6% 20.9% >$56,000 44.7% 36.0% Areas of difficulty Time management 78.82% 62.07% Motivation 30.59% 36.78% Interpersonal relationships 29.41% 29.89% Work 48.24% 36.78% Health 40.00% 49.43% Finances 31.76% 42.53% Safety 1.18% 4.60% Other 15.29% 20.69% Frequency of difficulty Meana 48.00 39.56 Standard Deviation 19.49 17.18 ap<.05

8.2 Procedure A letter of information outlining the study and ethical safeguards, together with a questionnaire booklet, were distributed to all participants in the study (See Appendix C and D respectively). Consent to participate in the study was implied by the voluntary completion of the questionnaire. The teacher sample received their questionnaires from the assistant principal at the school in which they worked and returned them directly to the researcher in the prepaid envelope provided. The comparison sample received their questionnaires via the mail and returned them directly to the researcher in the prepaid envelope provided. The names and CHAPTER 8 - Study Two: Method 90 addresses of each participant were kept separate from the questionnaires by assigning a code number that corresponded to their questionnaire. This was necessary to follow-up participants who had not returned their questionnaire within two weeks with a reminder letter, after which no further contact was made.

8.3 Measurement Tools Subjective quality of life was measured using the subjective scale of the Comprehensive Quality of Life Scale developed by Cummins (1997b) as detailed in Study One. A copy of this scale is included in Appendix D. It was decided that only the satisfaction scores would be used in this study as it has become apparent that the practice of using satisfaction scores weighted by importance scores is statistically problematic (see Evans, 1991; Trauer & Mackinnon, in press). This was also evidenced by the inflated standard deviations in the total and domain subjective quality of life scores used in Study One. Furthermore, it is possible that respondents cognitively make value judgements when completing the satisfaction questions.

Personality was measured using the extroversion and neuroticism scales of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991) as detailed in Study One. A copy of this scale is included in Appendix D.

Perceived control was measured using the Coping Responses Inventory -Adult form (Moos, 1993). A copy of the scale is included in Appendix D. Some minor modifications were made to the introduction to the scale. The original version asked respondents to identify one problem and complete the questionnaire with this problem in mind. In order to make the responses more indicative of perceived control this part was deleted and respondents were prompted to think of three aspects of their lives that they have difficulties or problems with, following which they rated the frequency of these difficulties on a 10 point Likert scale. The respondents then indicated the extent to which they used each of the 48 items of the Coping Responses Inventory on a 4 point Likert scale anchored with: No Not at all, Yes Once or Twice, Yes Sometimes, and Yes Fairly Often. This was consistent with the original version of the scale. These 48 items have been grouped CHAPTER 8 - Study Two: Method 91 into 8 subscales. A description of these scales, as outlined in the manual, is provided in Table 11, and the items which comprise these scales are provided in Appendix E.

Table 11: Description of the scales in the Coping Response Inventory Scale Description Approach Coping 1. Logical Analysis Cognitive attempts to understand and prepare mentally for a stressor and its consequences 2. Positive Reappraisal Cognitive attempts to construe and restructure a problem in a positive way while still accepting the reality of the situation 3. Seeking Guidance & Behavioural attempts to seek information, guidance, or Support support 4. Problem Solving Behavioural attempts to take action to deal directly with the problem Avoidant Coping 5. Cognitive Avoidance Cognitive attempts to avoid thinking realistically about a problem 6. Acceptance or Resignation Cognitive attempts to react to the problem by accepting it

7. Seeking Alternative Behavioural attempts to get involved in substitute activities Rewards and create new sources of satisfaction 8. Emotional Discharge Behavioural attempts to reduce tension by expressing negative feelings Reproduced from Moos (1993) p. 15.

The scale's manual reports reliability with alpha coefficients for males and females for each of these scales, as well as means and standard deviations. The alpha coefficients range from .61 to .74 for males and .58 to .71 for females. The manual also reports data to show that the eight scales are moderately stable over time, with the average correlation of the eight scales for males and females respectively, .45 and.43 at a 12 month follow-up. CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 92

CHAPTER 9

9 STUDY TWO: RESULTS

9.1 Aim One In order to explore the factor structure of the Coping Responses Inventory (Moos, 1993) and to refine the reliability and validity of the perceived control variables used in the following analyses, a series of factor analyses and other data reduction methods were conducted on the data from the combined teacher and comparison samples, totalling 172 people. As in Study One a combined sample was used in order to ensure generalisability of the results to both samples and to provide a larger sample size for the factor analyses. Refer to Appendix D or E for item numbering and content to inform the following discussion.

The data did not adequately meet all of the necessary assumptions for testing. The sample size was less than the criterion of a minimum of five subjects per variable outlined by Tabachnick and Fidell (1996). The distributions of each of the variables were examined for normality, linearity and univariate and multivariate outliers. Thirteen missing cases were detected and replaced with the variable mean. An examination of the skewness and kurtosis statistics indicated five items were not normally distributed, item 17 being mildly negatively skewed and items 19, 24, 45 and 46 being mildly positively skewed. No transformations were made because of the mild nature of the skewness, because skewness is likely to be meaningful to the data, and because factor analysis is robust to mild violations of normality. Examination of the scatterplots revealed the data generally met the assumption of linearity. Mahalanobis distance was used to check for multivariate outliers using a cutoff criterion of p<.001. None were found. Univariate outliers were detected. However, these were not recoded. As the scale only had four points this would have reduced the variance in the distributions considerably. In order to create a factorable correlation matrix and to reduce the sample size needed for the factor analysis Items 7, 17, 21, 39, 40, 48, were deleted as they failed to correlate greater than .3 with any other item. CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 93

A principal components factor analysis with oblique rotation was performed on the 42 items, extracting eight factors to represent the number of scales in the Coping Responses Inventory. All items correlated greater than .3 with at least one other item and partial correlations were all low. Inspection of the Anti-Image correlation matrix revealed that the measure of sampling adequacy was greater than the acceptable level of .5 for all of the items. The Kaiser-Myer- Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was greater than .6 at .71. Bartlett's test of

2 sphericity was significant  (861)=2304.92, p=.000. The eight factors together explained 47.36% of the variance. Only two of these factors explained more than 5% of the variance and the scree plot indicated two clear factors. However, six of these factors did explain more than 4% of the variance and although the scree plot indicated two clear factors, there was a distinction evident in the plot for six factors. In an attempt to support the theoretical construct of the original tool, it was decided to conduct a six-factor solution as well as a two-factor solution.

A second factor analysis on the 42 items was conducted extracting two factors. Together the two factors accounted for only 24.81% of the variance and examination of the communalities for each of the items revealed that the variance accounted for by the two factors was low in most of the items. Examination of the factor loadings revealed items 24, 3, 19, 38 did not load greater than .3 on either factor and item 23 loaded greater than .3 on both factors. These items were deleted to create simple structure and a third factor analysis was completed.

In the final analysis the two factors together accounted for 26.55%, with Factor 1 accounting for 14.55% and Factor 2 accounting for 10.23%. The two factors were independent, correlating -.05, and internal consistency was high for each factor with Cronbach's Alpha for Factor 1 at .84 and for Factor 2 at .80. Factor 1 consisted of 25 items that consistently reflected the items from the four approach coping scales in the Coping Responses Inventory. However there were three items (15, 31 and 47) from the avoidant coping scale, selecting alternative rewards, that loaded on this factor. This result was expected as it was already highlighted that this scale did not really reflect avoidant coping. Item 16 "Did you take a chance and do something risky?", from the emotional discharge scale, also loaded on this factor. This item clearly does not reflect emotional discharge, but is CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 94 more similar to seeking alternative rewards. Factor 2 consisted of 12 items that consistently reflected items from three avoidant coping scales, cognitive avoidance, acceptance or resignation and emotional discharge. Given that the two factors only accounted for a relatively small amount of the variance and the communalities for most of the items were low, the decision to try and find a six factor solution was further supported.

A factor analysis on the 42 items was performed extracting six factors. Together the six factors accounted for 43.53% of the variance and examination of the communalities for each of the items revealed that the variance the six factors accounted for was reasonable for most of the items. Examination of the factor loadings revealed items 1, 25, 41, 45, 37, 8, 18, 27, 36, 32, loaded greater than .3 on more than one factor and item 44 loaded did not load greater than .3 on any factor. These items were deleted to create simple structure and a second factor analysis extracting six factors was performed. Examination of the factor loading again revealed that a number of items loaded on more than one factor. Items 22, 43, 35, 9, 4, 19, loaded greater than .3 on more than one factor and item 31 loaded did not load greater than .3 on any factor. These items were deleted and a third factor analysis extracting six factors was conducted on the remaining 24 items. The factor loadings showed item 33 loaded greater than .3 on more than one factor, it was deleted and a final factor analysis extracting six factors was conducted. Simple structure was obtained.

Together the six factors accounted for 53.71% of the variance. The six factors were independent of each other with the highest correlation being between Factor 1 and Factor 5 at -.23. Factor 1 consisted of five items that explained 16.32% of the variance and showed internal consistency (=.68). All of these items were from the positive reappraisal scale of the Coping Responses Inventory. Factor 2 consisted of six items that explained 13.59% of the variance and showed internal consistency (=.75). Three of these items were from the acceptance or resignation scale, and three were from the cognitive avoidance scale, overall the items clearly represented avoidant control. Factor 3 consisted of two items that explained 6.51% of the variance and showed internal consistency (=.62). Both of CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 95 these items were from the seeking guidance and support scale. Factor 4 consisted of three items that explained 6.16% of the variance and showed internal consistency (=.54). All of these items were from the problem solving scale. Factor 5 consisted of five items that explained 5.76% of the variance and showed internal consistency (=.65). Three of these items were from the seeking alternative rewards scale and the fourth item was item 16 "Did you take a chance and do something risky?" labelled on the emotional discharge scale but clearly not reflecting emotional discharge. Factor 6 consisted of three items that explained 5.37% of the variance and showed internal consistency (=.62). Two of these items were from the seeking alternative rewards scale (item 46 "Did you lose hope that things would ever be the same?" and item 38 "Did you expect the worse possible outcome?) and one was from the emotional discharge scale (item 24 "Did you keep away from people in general?). The content of these items revealed that the scale reflected acceptance and resignation in a very negative sense, whereas the acceptance and resignation items in Factor 2 had a more positive sense (eg item 6 "Did you feel that time would make a difference-that the only thing to do was wait?").

The two-factor solution indicated that there were approach and avoidant factors within the data. The six-factor solution indicated some support for the scales of the Coping Response Inventory. However, neither of these factor solutions appeared to provide valid and reliable factors to use in the subsequent analyses. Therefore, it was decided to construct scores for each of the eight scales of the Coping Responses Inventory and use these in a factor analysis extracting two factors to reflect approach and avoidant control. The advantages of this are that there would be more variability in the variables than the four point scales of the individual items, and there would be less variables in the analysis making the sample size adequate.

Hence, scores for each of the eight scales of the Coping Responses Inventory were computed in accordance with the manual by scoring them on a scale of 0 to 3 and adding the relevant items together. Cronbach's Alpha was calculated to assess the internal consistency for each scale before conducting the CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 96 factor analysis. Internal consistencies, means and standard deviations are displayed in Table 12 for comparison with the scale's manual.

Table 12: Means, standard deviations (SD) and internal consistencies (Alpha) of the Coping Responses Inventory Scale Mean SD Alpha Approach Coping Logical Analysis 12.20 2.86 .63 Positive Reappraisal 11.55 3.35 .71 Seeking Guidance & Support 9.15 3.20 .58 Problem Solving 12.34 2.81 .65 Avoidant Coping Cognitive Avoidance 6.56 3.62 .71 Acceptance or Resignation 6.01 3.23 .52 Seeking Alternative Rewards 9.22 3.27 .62 Emotional Discharge 5.72 2.67 .39

These results are generally comparable to those in the scale's manual. The means for the each of the approach coping scales were marginally higher than in the manual and those for the avoidant coping scales were comparable for cognitive avoidance, marginally lower acceptance or resignation, marginally higher for emotional discharge and substantially higher for seeking alternative rewards. Internal consistency was comparable with that in the scale's manual with the exception of emotional discharge, which was somewhat low. However, internal consistency is acceptable for all of the scales according to Boyle (1991) who argues that the optimal range for internal consistency is between .3 and .7.

A principal components factor analysis with oblique rotation was performed on the eight scales extracting two factors. The data adequately met all the necessary assumptions for testing. The sample size was adequate. The distributions of each of the variables were examined and normality and linearity was evident. No multivariate outliers were detected using Mahalanobis distance and a cutoff criterion of p<.001. Univariate outliers were detected. However, these were not recoded into the distribution. The correlation matrix was deemed factorable. Each variable correlated greater than .3 with at least one other variable. Inspection of the Anti-Image correlation matrix revealed that the measure of CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 97 sampling adequacy was greater than the acceptable level of .5 for all of the items. The Kaiser-Myer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was greater than .6 at .72.

2 Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant  (28)=360.36, p=.000. Communalities appeared sufficient.

The two factors together explained 58.60% of the variance. The first factor accounted for 33.79% and the second factor accounted for 24.81%. Examination of the scree plot indicated that two factors fit the data best. Examination of the factor loadings revealed that the variable, seeking alternative rewards, loaded most strongly on the first factor but also greater than .3 on the second factor. It was deleted and the analysis re-run. Table 13 displays the resultant factor structure.

Table 13: Factor solution for the eight scales of the Coping Responses Inventory. Scale Approach Avoidant Control Control Logical Analysis .80 Positive Reappraisal .80 Problem Solving .77 Seeking Guidance & Support .64 Cognitive Avoidance .86 Acceptance or Resignation .79 Emotional Discharge .69 Correlation between each factor -.04 Percent of Variance explained 34.34 26.29 Range of item-total correlations .20-.42 .16-.40 Cronbach's Alpha .75 .69

The resultant factor analysis showed that the two factors were independent (r=-.04) and together accounted for 60.62% of the variance with Factor 1 accounting for 34.34% and Factor 2 accounting for 26.29%. Internal consistency for each of the factors was adequate. The two factors were meaningful and reflected approach and avoidant control.

9.2 Aim Two To begin, a multivariate analysis of variance was used to examine differences between the sample of teachers and the comparison sample on all of CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 98 the variables, subjective quality of life, approach control, avoidant control, extroversion and neuroticism. The data for each dependent variable were screened by group in preparation for the subsequent analyses. There were no missing data and the group sizes were comparable (teacher sample n=85, comparison sample n=87). Examination of the skewness and kurtosis statistics revealed that the data were normally distributed. Univariate outliers were detected and recoded by "assigning the outlying case a raw score on the offending variable that is one unit larger (or smaller) than the next most extreme score" as multivariate analysis of variance is reported to be extremely sensitive to outliers (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996, p. 69). In the teacher sample one outlying case was recoded on the subjective quality of life variable, two on approach control and one on avoidant control. In the comparison sample two outlying cases were recoded on the subjective quality of life variable, one on neuroticism and one on avoidant control. One multivariate outlier were detected using Mahalanobis distance and a criterion cutoff p<.001, this case was deleted from the analysis, reducing the comparison sample to n=86. Examination of the correlation matrix revealed that the assumption of multicollinearity and singularity was met. Box's M suggested that the data had met the assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices. F(15,114961)=8.16, p=.928, which was non-significant. The univariate tests for homogeneity of variance indicated that this assumption had not been violated for any of the dependent variables.

Pillai's Trace multivariate test of significance revealed there was no significant group difference on one or more of the dependent variables F(5,165)=.58, p=.713. Hence, no further investigation of these findings was made, as the two samples did not differ on any of the variables of interest. Accordingly, the hypothesis that secondary school teachers will have lower subjective quality of life and perceived control than people from the general population, after the effects of personality have been removed could not be supported and it was deemed unnecessary to proceed with the analysis of covariance. Furthermore, there were problems evident in Study One where the use of the personality covariates appeared to mask important differences between the two samples in subjective quality of life and perceived control. CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 99

The two samples were combined to examine the relationships between the variables and to compare the means and correlations to those reported in the scales' manuals and in Study One. Table 14 displays the means, standard deviations and bi-variate correlations for the variables subjective quality of life, approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion for the combined teacher and comparison sample to inform the subsequent analyses.

Table 14: Means (M), standard deviations (SD) and bi-variate correlations for the variables subjective quality of life (SQOL), approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion for the combined sample (n=171). Total Appr Avoid Neuro Extro SQOL Control Control Total SQOL -- .38b -.25b -.44b .24b Approach Control -- -.08 -.08 .19a Avoidant Control -- .30b -.08 Neuroticism -- -.27b Extroversion -- M 76.49 45.02 22.14 4.82 7.15 SD 11.60 8.92 8.83 3.49 3.59 a p < .05 (2-tailed), b p <.01 (2-tailed)

The mean subjective quality of life score (76.49%SM) was within the standard score range of 70-80%SM (Cummins 2000). Approach and avoidant control scores are also expressed as a percentage of scale maximum. It can be seen that approach control (45.02%SM) is used more than avoidant control (22.14%SM). It is also interesting to note that these scores are lower than those in Study One for both the carer sample (approach control 58.11%SM and avoidant control 32.44%SM) and the comparison sample (approach control 65.33%SM and avoidant control 36.00%SM). The extroversion (7.15) and neuroticism (4.82) means are comparable with those in the scale's manual, which reported the mean extroversion score for females at 7.60 and for males at 6.36 and the mean neuroticism score for females at 5.90 and males at 4.95. Again, z scores were calculated to assess the differences between the sample and both the male and female norms separately. No significant differences with both the male and female norms were found. These results are more consistent with the scale's norms than those in the comparison sample in Study One. CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 100

The correlation matrix in Table 14 displays some interesting relationships between the variables of interest and some notable differences between these relationships and those found in Study One. Subjective quality of life correlates significantly with all of the variables, neuroticism, extroversion, approach control and avoidant control. Consistent with Study One the strongest correlations are between subjective quality of life and neuroticism and approach control. Extroversion showed a weak positive relationship with approach control and neuroticism showed a moderate relationship with avoidant control. Interestingly, avoidant control appeared to be relating to the other variables differently from Study One. It correlated significantly and negatively with subjective quality of life and positively with neuroticism, which is opposite to the non-significant correlations in Study One. Furthermore avoidant control and approach control correlate very weakly. This indicates that this measure of avoidant control is quite different to that used in Study One.

9.3 Aim Three A series of regression analyses were used to test the hypothesis that perceived control will improve the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality, and that personality would predict perceived control. The data have already been shown to meet most of the necessary assumptions for testing, including outliers, multicollinearity and singularity, normality and linearity. The sample sizes were adequate and additional assumptions of homoscedasticity and independence of residuals were also examined and met.

To test the first part of this hypothesis, a sequential multiple regression was used for the combined sample. The dependent variable was total subjective quality of life and the independent variables were entered in two steps, where the two personality variables (neuroticism and extroversion) were entered in the first step and the two perceived control variables (approach control and avoidant control) were entered in the second step. Tables 15 displays the results, including the unstandardised regression coefficients (B), the standardised regression coefficients (), squared semipartial correlations (sr2), and R, R2, and adjusted R2 after entry of all independent variables. CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 101

Table 15: Regression of neuroticism, extroversion, approach control and avoidant control on subjective quality of life in the combined sample B  t sr2 Neuroticism -1.04 -.40 -5.66c .16 Extroversion .29 .13 1.77 .02 Neuroticism -.92 -.36 -5.18c .14 Extroversion .16 .07 1.00 .01 Approach Control 1.31 .33 5.05c .13 Avoidant Control -.44 -.12 -1.76 .02 R2 Adj. R2 R .33 .31 .57c ap<.05, bp<.01, cp<.001

The results for the combined sample showed after Step 2 with all of the variables in the equation 33% of the variance in subjective quality of life was explained, which was highly significant, R=.57, F(4,166)=20.14, p=.000. After Step 1, with neuroticism and extroversion in the equation 21% of the variance in subjective quality of life was explained, which was significant, R=.45,

Finc(2,168)=21.86, p=.000. Examination of the regression coefficients at Step 1 indicated that only neuroticism significantly predicted total subjective quality of life. At Step 2, approach and avoidant control added to the prediction of subjective quality by an additional 12% of the variance, which was a significant increase Finc(2,166)=14.82, p=.000. Examination of the regression coefficients at Step 2 indicated that neuroticism and approach were the only significant predictors of subjective quality of life when all the variables were entered into the equation together, with avoidant control approaching significance and extroversion making no significant contribution to the equation. The results demonstrate that even when the variance in subjective quality of life attributed to neuroticism is accounted for, approach control can still make a significant contribution.

To test the second part of the hypothesis, that personality would predict perceived control, two standard multiple regressions were performed for the combined sample testing the prediction of the personality variables (neuroticism and extroversion) on approach and avoidant control separately. Hence, Table 16 CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 102 displays the results including the unstandardised regression coefficients (B), the standardised regression coefficients (), squared semipartial correlations (sr2), and R, R2, and adjusted R2.

Table 16: Regression of neuroticism and extroversion on approach control and avoidant control for the combined sample. B  t sr2 Approach Control Neuroticism -.02 -.04 -.46 .00 Extroversion .10 .18 2.28a .03 R2 Adj. R2 R .04 .03 .19a Avoidant Control Neuroticism .21 .29 3.85c .08 Extroversion -.03 -.00 -.05 .00 R2 Adj. R2 R .09 .08 .30c ap<.05, bp<.01, cp<.001

The results of the first regression equation showed that together neuroticism and extroversion accounted for 4% of the variance in approach control, which was significant R=.19, F(2,168)=3.23, p=.042. However, examination of the regression coefficients indicated that extroversion was the only significant predictor explaining 3% of the variance in approach control. The results of the second regression equation showed that together neuroticism and extroversion accounted for 9% of the variance in avoidant control, which was significant, R=.30, F(2,168)=8.04, p=.000. However, examination of the regression coefficients indicated that neuroticism was the only significant predictor explaining 8% of the variance in avoidant control.

9.4 Additional analyses The same analyses for Aim Two and Three were re-run on the sample divided into two subgroups, those with low subjective quality of life, less than 70%SM, and those with high subjective quality of life, greater than 70%SM. Table 17 displays the means, standard deviations and bi-variate correlations for the variables subjective quality of life, approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 103 and extroversion for the two subgroups, high and low subjective quality of life, to inform the subsequent analyses.

Table 17: Means, standard deviations and bi-variate correlations for the variables subjective quality of life (SQOL), approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion for the two subgroups, high and low subjective quality of life. Total Appr Avoid Neuro Extro SQOL Control Control High SQOL (n = 125) Total SQOL -- .19a -.19a -.30b .12 Approach Control -- .03 .06 .10 Avoidant Control -- .18a -.04 Neuroticism -- -.22a Extroversion -- M 82.13 46.99 21.04 4.09 7.66 SD 7.18 9.08 8.21 3.39 3.81 Low SQOL (n = 46) Total SQOL -- .25 -.22 -.24 .08 Approach Control -- -.19 -.06 .24 Avoidant Control -- .48b -.08 Neuroticism -- -.17 Extroversion -- M 61.16 39.65 25.11 6.83 5.78 SD 7.44 6.37 10.05 2.95 3.81 a p < .05 (2-tailed), b p <.01 (2-tailed)

A multivariate analysis of variance was used to examine any differences between the two subgroups approach control avoidant control, extroversion and neuroticism. Box's M suggested that the data had met the assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices. F(10,34143)=1.64, p=.089, which is non-significant. The univariate tests for homogeneity of variance indicated that this assumption had not been violated for any of the dependent variables. Pillai's Trace multivariate test of significance revealed there was a significant group difference on one or more of the dependent variables F(4,166)=11.95, p=.000. The univariate tests for each of the dependent variables are displayed in Table 18.

Table 18: Multivariate Analysis of Variance examining the differences between the subgroups, high and low subjective quality of life for the variables approach control, avoidant control, neuroticism and extroversion. Eta Observed F(1,169) Sig. Squared Power Approach Control 21.18 .000 .11 1.00 CHAPTER 9 - Study Two: Results 104

Avoidant Control 5.10 .025 .03 .61 Neuroticism 23.43 .000 .12 1.00 Extroversion 8.13 .005 .05 .81

The univariate tests displayed in Table 18 revealed that there were significant main effects on every variable. Examination of the means reported in Table 17 showed that those with high subjective quality of life had significantly higher approach control and extroversion and significantly lower neuroticism and avoidant control than those with low subjective quality of life. Eta squared showed the strength of association between the independent and dependent variables was moderate to large and the power of the test to detect a true difference was high.

A series of regression analyses were used to examine the relationships between the variables for each group, high and low subjective quality of life. However, the results were mostly non-significant and therefore will not be reported in detail. The results for the high subjective quality of life group showed that neuroticism and approach control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, however only 15% of the variance in subjective quality of life was accounted for. The results for the low subjective quality of life group showed that neuroticism significantly predicted avoidant control, accounting for 23% of the variance in avoidant control.

However, some interesting trends in the data between the two groups can be found by examining the correlation matrix in Table 17. In the low subjective quality of life group the correlation between approach and avoidant control is stronger, and these variables correlate marginally stronger with subjective quality of life, than in the high subjective quality of life group. Furthermore, in the low subjective quality of life group extroversion correlates marginally stronger with approach control and neuroticism correlates much stronger with avoidant control than in the high subjective quality of life group. CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 105

CHAPTER 10

10 STUDY TWO: DISCUSSION

10.1 Aim One The result of the exploratory factor analyses performed on the Coping Responses Inventory (Moos, 1993) showed clear support for the approach and avoidant distinction and some support for the subscales. The approach and avoidant distinction was supported by two-factor solutions for both the 48 items and for the eight subscales of the Coping Responses Inventory. These two-factor solutions demonstrated a distinction in the types of strategies people use to cope with their difficulties, in that they either approach or acknowledge the problem in some way, or they avoid or ignore the problem. These two factors are consistent with the literature (Ebata & Moos, 1991; Herman-Stahl et al., 1995; Roth & Cohen, 1996) and with the findings from Study One.

A six-factor solution was also found, which provided some support for the subscales of the Coping Responses Inventory. Three clear factors were evident for positive reappraisal, problem solving, and seeking guidance/support. Cognitive avoidance and acceptance or resignation items, with a positive slant, combined to make an avoidant control factor. Seeking alternative rewards made another factor with the inclusion of one emotional discharge item, which seems better placed with these items. The last factor was made up of acceptance and resignation items with a negative slant, and one emotional discharge item. Interestingly, all of the items in the logical analysis scale were eliminated in the data reduction process. These items consistently loaded on a number of the factors, perhaps suggesting that logical analysis must occur in conjunction with all different types of control or coping. This six-factor solution also suggests that there are important distinctions between different types of approach control and one type of avoidant control, which is consistent with the factor analytic literature on the COPE inventory (Carver et al., 1989; Finset & Andersson, 2000; Phelps & Jarvis, 1994). Yet, given that there were only two or three items in many of the factors they were not adequate to use in the subsequent analysis. CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 106

The two-factor solution for the eight subscales was used in the subsequent analyses (see Table 13), as it did not contain some of the methodological problems evident in the two-factor solution for the 48 items; such as an inadequate sample size, low communalities, and a low percentage of variance explained by the two- factor solution. Furthermore, each of the eight subscales of the Coping Responses Inventory had good internal reliability and the means were comparable to those published in the scale's manual (see Table 12). The approach control factor included the subscales: logical analysis, positive reappraisal, problem solving and seeking guidance/support. The avoidant control factor included the subscales: cognitive avoidance, acceptance or resignation, and emotional discharge. The factor, seeking alternative rewards, was not included in the final factor solution as it loaded on both factors, although most strongly on the approach control factor, which is in contrast to its inclusion in the avoidant coping scale of the Coping Responses Inventory. The items in the seeking alternative rewards subscale represent getting on with life, which although it does not specifically address the specific difficulties it does perhaps acknowledge their existence and the need to overcome them by having positive experiences. Overall, the approach and avoidant control scales based on scores for each subscale of the Coping Responses Inventory appear to be valid and reliable scales, that highlight an important distinction between various strategies for maintaining perceived control, to use in the subsequent analyses.

10.2 Aim Two The results did not show any differences between the teacher and comparison samples on any of the variables of interest, subjective quality of life, approach and avoidant coping, or extroversion and neuroticism. These results suggest that the stressors that are reported to be associated with teaching (Churchill, Williamson & Grady, 1996, 1997; Griffith, Steptoe & Cropley, 1999; Hart & Conn, 1996; Punch & Tuetteman, 1996; Sarros & Sarros, 1990) are not impacting negatively on teachers' subjective quality of life. Alternatively, teachers' use of approach and avoidant control may be buffering the impact of stress on subjective quality of life, as coping has been shown to be related to stress (Griffith et al., 1999), burnout (Pierce & Molloy, 1990) and psychological distress CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 107

(Punch & Tuetteman, 1996) in teachers. However, teachers' scores on approach and avoidant coping did not differ from the comparison sample. It could be concluded that Australian teachers do not experience any greater workplace stress than that of the general population. However, the finding that teachers experienced a significantly greater frequency of difficulties and greater difficulty in the areas of time management and work does not support this conclusion (see Table 10). Overall, it appears that teachers' workplace stressors may not be significant enough to defeat the homeostatic maintenance of their subjective quality of life or to promote a change in their perceived control. Yet, it should be highlighted that this conclusion is based on a small sample of teachers in Eastern metropolitan Melbourne, and it is possible that there is response bias in the results whereby only those teachers who were less stressed had the time and motivation to participate in the research.

10.3 Aim Three Given that there were no significant differences between the two samples on any of the variables of interest, the samples were combined to investigate the relationships between the variables, subjective quality of life, approach and avoidant control, and extroversion and neuroticism. The mean scores for each of these variables (see Table 14) were consistent with population norms found in the literature and the scales' manuals. The mean total subjective quality of life (satisfaction only) score was 76.49%SM which is within the normative range of 70-80%SM identified in the scales manual and by Cummins' (1995, 1998, 2000) extensive research. The extroversion (7.15) and neuroticism (4.82) means were comparable with those in the scale's manual, which reported the mean extroversion score for females at 7.60 and for males at 6.36 and the mean neuroticism score for females at 5.90 and males at 4.95. Overall, these results appear to be more indicative of a normal population than those in Study One, increasing the generalisability of the analysis of the relationships between the variables.

As in Study One, regression analyses were used to examine the relationships between the relevant concepts (see Tables 15 and 16). Consistent with Study One the results provide support for the hypothesis that perceived CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 108 control will improve the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality, and that personality will predict perceived control.

The results of the regression analyses showed that with all variables in the equation, neuroticism and approach control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, whilst avoidant control approached significance and extroversion made no significant contribution to the equation. This equation accounted for 33% of the variance in the subjective quality of life of the combined sample. Additionally, neuroticism significantly predicted avoidant control and extroversion marginally but significantly predicted approach control, and extroversion and neuroticism significantly correlated with each other. By incorporating these relationships into a model (see Figure 6) a better understanding of the data for Study Two is provided and comparisons can be made with Study One.

-.27

.29 .18 -.36

Avoidant Approach Control control -.12.33 Neuroticism Extroversion

Total SQOL

Figure 6: Model of the significant relationships among the variables, neuroticism, extroversion, approach control, avoidant control, and total subjective quality of life (SQOL), in the combined sample, including standardised regression coefficients and correlations.

In some ways this model represents a mix of the models in Study One for the carer and comparison samples. In Study Two neuroticism predicted subjective quality of life directly and possibly indirectly via avoidant control, although avoidant control was only approaching significance in its prediction of subjective quality of life with all other variables in the equation. This is similar to the carer CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 109 sample in Study One except approach control, rather than avoidant control, played the mediating role. Additionally, in Study Two extroversion indirectly predicted subjective quality of life via approach control. This is similar to the comparison sample in Study One except extroversion rather than neuroticism predicted subjective quality of life indirectly via approach control.

A key reason for these differences is probably the different measure of approach and avoidant control used, which, unlike Study One, has resulted in avoidant control relating negatively with all other variables except neuroticism, and it not being significantly correlated with approach control. This finding does not support the conclusion from Study One and the literature (Roth & Cohen, 1986) that avoidant control is a beneficial coping strategy, and that when individuals are faced with more stressors, both approach and avoidant control are useful in maintaining their subjective quality of life. Importantly, any statement in this regard is likely to be dependent on exactly how avoidant control is measured.

Essentially the results for Study Two show that neuroticism and avoidant control together have a negative impact on subjective quality of life, whilst extroversion and approach control together have a positive impact on subjective quality of life. This conclusion is intuitively sound and is supported by the literature and the findings of Study One that has shown neuroticism to significantly and negatively correlate with subjective well-being, and extroversion to significantly and positively correlate with subjective well-being (Costa & McCrae, 1980; Francis, 1999; Francis et al., 1998; Lu & Shih, 1997). Unfortunately, there is little literature to support the conclusions regarding the relationships between approach and avoidant control and subjective quality of life. However, it has been shown that depression is associated with low approach coping, and that high avoidant coping is related to increased dysfunction and depression, which can be assumed to be indicative of low satisfaction with life (Billings & Moos, 1984; Ebata & Moos, 1991; Finset & Andersson; Herman-Stahl et al., 1995; Holahan & Moos, 1990). Such findings are generally consistent with the proposed model. It is concluded that perceived control improves the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality, with the most significant variables being neuroticism and approach control. CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 110

10.4 Additional analyses The additional analyses, applied after separating the sample into groups representing high subjective quality of life (greater than 70%SM) and low subjective quality of life (less than 70%SM), provided some interesting information about the differences between the groups on the personality and perceived control variables (see Table 17). Those with high subjective quality of life had significantly higher approach control and extroversion and significantly lower neuroticism and avoidant control than those with low subjective quality of life. This provides further support for the notion that neuroticism and avoidant control together have a negative impact on subjective quality of life, whilst extroversion and approach control together have a positive impact on subjective quality of life. Unfortunately, the regression analyses provided few significant relationships. This may have been due to low subject numbers and the reduced range of variance in subjective quality of life, resulting from the creation of high and low subgroups within the sample, which attenuated the correlations. However, the low subjective quality of life group did show trends consistent with the pattern that approach and avoidant control correlated stronger with each other and with subjective quality of life, and that extroversion correlated stronger with approach control and neuroticism correlated stronger with avoidant control, than in the high subjective quality of life group. This provides some support for the conclusion in Study One, that when homeostasis is challenged the maintenance of subjective quality of life becomes more complicated.

10.5 Summary Some important conclusions can be drawn from the findings of Study Two.

Firstly, the approach and avoidant dimensions of perceived control have been supported as a valuable way to understand the structure of the Coping Responses Inventory, both in terms of its items and its subscales, and the way people deal with their problems and difficulties in general. There is some suggestion that approach control could be meaningful if divided into subscales reflecting positive reappraisal, problem solving and seeking guidance/support. CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 111

However, it appears that it fits the data best if these subscales are considered to reflect one factor, approach control, which can be used in contrast to the second factor, avoidant control.

Secondly, the analyses demonstrated no significant differences between the teacher and comparison samples. This suggests that the stressors reported in the literature to be associated with teaching are not significant enough to impact negatively on teachers' subjective quality of life, or to promote change in their approach and avoidant control. However, it should be highlighted that this conclusion is based on a small sample of teachers in Eastern metropolitan Melbourne.

Thirdly, the results of the analyses examining relationships within the combined teacher and comparison sample, supported the conclusion that neuroticism and avoidant control together impact negatively on subjective quality of life, and extroversion and approach control together impact positively on subjective quality of life. The finding that those with high subjective quality of life had significantly higher approach control and extroversion, and significantly lower neuroticism and avoidant control than those with low subjective quality of life, further supported this conclusion. Still, it is important to note that neuroticism and approach control were the strongest predictors of subjective quality of life. Furthermore, there was some indication that when homeostasis is challenged the maintenance of subjective quality of life becomes more complicated. The generalisability of these results is supported by mean scores which closely resembled the population norms in the scales' manuals.

Overall, there is continuing support for the model of personality, perceived control and subjective quality of life depicted in Figure 2. This may help to explain how subjective quality of life is maintained, or held under homeostatic control. However, the support is preliminary and, given the differences between the samples used in Study One and Study Two, requires further substantiation. Inclusion of latent constructs for the personality and perceived control variables, tested via structural equation modelling, may be an important next step. CHAPTER 10 - Study Two: Discussion 112 CHAPTER 11 - Conclusions 113

CHAPTER 11

11 SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Both studies offer some support for a model of subjective quality of life maintenance that involves personality and perceived control. The model under consideration proposes that personality plays a dual role in contributing to subjective quality of life, both directly, and indirectly through perceived control. Fundamental to this model is the hypothesis that perceived control will improve the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality, and that personality will predict perceived control.

Personality was selected for investigation as it has been consistently shown in the literature to have a significant relationship with subjective quality of life, which may help to understand homeostasis. Personality was measured using the dimensions of extroversion and neuroticism, which were interpreted to reflect enduring characteristics of emotional instability and sociability, respectively. Perceived control was selected for investigation as it was indicated in the literature to potentially be an important psychological process that may play a role in the relationship between personality and subjective quality of life. Perceived control was conceptualised, following the findings of the factor analytic research in this thesis, in terms of approach and avoidant dimensions.

The aim of this thesis was to develop a better understanding of these three key variables by: 1) investigating the factor structure of perceived control, 2) investigating the differences between the general population and those whose subjective quality of life and perceived control may be challenged, and 3) examining the relationships between the variables.

It has been concluded that perceived control is best understood by dividing it into approach and avoidant dimensions rather than the initially proposed primary, secondary and relinquished control strategies. The factor analyses performed on the two different control and coping scales in Study One and Study Two have supported this conclusion. Approach control reflects addressing or CHAPTER 11 - Conclusions 114 acknowledging the problem in some way and may involve strategies such as positive reappraisal, problem solving and seeking guidance/support. Avoidant control reflects avoiding or disregarding the problem and may involve strategies such as cognitive avoidance, acceptance or resignation and emotional discharge.

Interestingly, in Study One, the measure of avoidant control appeared to be an adaptive coping strategy as it correlated positively with subjective quality of life, and negatively with neuroticism. However, in Study Two it appeared to be a maladaptive coping strategy as it correlated negatively with subjective quality of life, and positively with neuroticism. This highlights the significant impact that measurement can have on the understanding of various concepts and more specifically, the complexity of measuring avoidant control.

Overall, the Coping Responses Inventory (Moos, 1993) used in Study Two, was developed for the purpose of identifying the use of approach and avoidant strategies and it appears to be a reasonably valid and reliable tool. With the exception of the seeking alternative rewards subscale, which loaded on both approach and avoidant dimensions and thus was excluded from these analyses. Hence, the approach and avoidant dimensions provided a meaningful understanding of perceived control, which was used in the subsequent analyses of differences between samples and of relationships among variables.

Some interesting conclusions were drawn from the differences that were evident between the carer and comparison samples investigated in Study One. It was indicated from the results that caring for someone with a mental illness impacts negatively on caregivers' subjective quality of life, particularly on their satisfaction with their health and emotional well-being. The carer sample also had significantly higher neuroticism scores and significantly lower extroversion scores than the comparison sample. This suggests that the negative impact of caring for someone with a mental illness is not only evident in subjective quality of life, but also in differences in carers' personality characteristics, resulting in higher emotional instability and decreased sociability. Furthermore, there was some indication that carers had less approach control than the comparison sample, signifying that carers' belief that they can address their difficulties may be more CHAPTER 11 - Conclusions 115 limited. However, there is some question over the representativeness of the comparison sample in Study One, as their subjective quality of life scores were placed on the upper end of the normative range and their neuroticism scores were significantly lower than those in the scale's manual. It is possible that people who are interested in participating in university research are more satisfied with their lives and have less emotional instability than those from the general population, highlighting that some caution should be taken in considering these conclusions.

Whilst there were differences between the two samples used in Study One, there were no differences between the teacher and comparison samples in Study Two on any of the subjective quality of life, personality or perceived control variables. However, the background information revealed that a greater percentage of the teacher sample identified difficulties with time management and work than the comparison sample, and that teachers showed a significantly greater frequency of difficulties. Hence, it was concluded that these workplace stressors were not significant enough to defeat the homeostatic maintenance of teachers' subjective quality of life or to promote change in their perceived control. However, it should again be highlighted that this conclusion is based on a small sample of teachers in a relatively affluent area of metropolitan Melbourne.

The most consistent results across both studies in the analyses of relationships amongst the variables, were that perceived control improved the prediction of subjective quality of life beyond that afforded by personality, and that personality predicted perceived control. This finding was concordant with the proposed model. However, it was predominantly based on the personality variable neuroticism, which negatively contributed to subjective quality of life, and the perceived control variable approach control, which made a positive contribution.

Some further conclusions, about the maintenance of subjective quality of life, can also be drawn from the findings in Study One and Study Two by comparing the model of relationships developed for each sample within these studies. The three samples used in this research represent three groups of people with differing levels of subjective quality of life, high normal, normal and low normal. The developing complexity of the models for these groups as they move CHAPTER 11 - Conclusions 116 from high normal, to normal, to low normal demonstrates that the management of subjective quality of life homeostasis becomes more complicated as it is challenged.

The comparison sample in Study One represents a group of people with high normal subjective quality of life (80.68%SM). The model of relationships between the variables developed for this group is reproduced in Figure 7. This model was based on the regression equation which found that with all of the variables in the equation, only approach control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, accounting for 30% of the variance in subjective of quality life.

Neuroticism

-.18

Approach Control .44

Total SQOL

Figure 7: Model of the significant relationships among the variables for the comparison sample in Study One, representing high normal subjective quality of life (reproduction of Figure 5).

The combined sample in Study Two represents a group of people with normal subjective quality of life (76.49%SM). The model of relationships between the variables developed for this group is reproduced in Figure 8. This model was based on the regression equation which found that with all of the variables in the equation, neuroticism and approach control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, accounting for 33% of the variance in subjective of quality life. CHAPTER 11 - Conclusions 117

-.27

Neuroticism Extroversion

.29 .18 -.36 ApproachAvoidant Controlcontrol -.12.33 Total SQOL

Figure 8: Model of the significant relationships among the variables for the combined sample in Study Two, representing normal subjective quality of life (reproduction of Figure 6).

The carer sample in Study One represents a group of people with low normal subjective quality of life (71.37%SM). The model of relationships between the variables developed for this group is reproduced in Figure 9. This model was based on the regression equation which found that with all of the variables in the equation, neuroticism, approach control and avoidant control significantly predicted subjective quality of life, accounting for 37% of the variance in subjective of quality life.

Neuroticism

-.24 -.40

.24 TotalApproach SQOL Control .42 .16 Avoidant Control

Figure 9: Model of the significant relationships among the variables for the carer sample, representing low normal subjective quality of life (reproduction of Figure 3). CHAPTER 11 - Conclusions 118

Hence, it can be seen that as the samples move from a homeostatic position of over-exuberance, to normal, to one of avoiding depression, the personality and perceived control variables account for more of the variance in subjective quality of life, and the number of variables that significantly predict it increase. This indicates that, as the management of subjective quality of life becomes more difficult, individuals must draw on more processes to maintain their subjective quality of life. Furthermore, these processes become more important to the maintenance of subjective quality of life. However, it should be highlighted that different measures of perceived control were used in the two studies, limiting the interpretation of these findings somewhat. Nevertheless, the patterns evident do demonstrate that when subjective quality of life homeostasis is being challenged the maintenance of it becomes more complicated.

In conclusion, it is clear from the literature and the findings outlined in this thesis, that perceived control is an important psychological processes to consider when investigating the relationship between personality and subjective quality of life, and when trying to understand how subjective quality of life is maintained. In particular, neuroticism and approach control are indicated as the most important variables, as they have been shown to predict subjective quality of life consistently across the samples investigated. In addition, there is compelling evidence to suggest that subjective quality of life homeostasis becomes more complicated as it is challenged. Further investigation is needed to support these conclusions. It is apparent that the workings of the homeostatic system of subjective quality of life, can be most effectively revealed by studying samples who have a severely challenged homeostatic system.

References 119

12 REFERENCES

Alloy, L. B., Abramson, L. Y., & Viscusi, D. (1981). Induced mood and the illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1129-1140.

American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social Indicators of Well-being: Americans’ Perceptions of Life Quality. NY: Plenum Press.

Anshel, M. H., Williams, L. R. T., & Williams, S. M. (2000). Coping style following acute stress in competitive sport. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 751-773.

Argyle, M., & Lu, L. (1990). The happiness of extraverts. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1011-1017.

Ayers, T. S., Sandler, I. N., West, S. G., Roosa, M. W. (1996). A dispositional and situational assessment of children's coping: Testing alternative models of coping. Journal of Personality, 64, 926-958.

Band, E. B., & Weiz, J. R. (1988). How to feel better when it feels bad: Children’s perspectives on coping with everyday stress. Developmental Psychology, 24, 247-253.

Barrowclough, C., & Parle, M. (1997). Appraisal, psychological adjustment and expressed emotion in relatives of patients suffering from schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry, 171, 26-30.

Baxter, E. A., & Diehl, S. (1998). Emotional stages: Consumers and family members recovering from the trauma of mental illness. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 21, 349-355.

Beck, A. T. (1997). The past and future of cognitive therapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research,6, 276-284.

Billings, A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1981). The role of coping responses in attenuating the impact of stressful life events. Journal of Behavioural Medicine, 4, 139-157.

Billings, A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1981). Coping, stress, and social resources among adults with unipolar depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 877-891.

Borthwick-Duffy, S. A. (1990). Quality of life of persons with severe or profound mental retardation. In R. Schalock (Ed.), Quality of Life: Perspectives and Issues. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation. References 120

Boschen, K. A. (1996). Life satisfaction, housing satisfaction, and locus of control: A comparison between spinal cord injured and non-disabled individuals. Canadian Journal of Rehabilitation, 4, 75-85.

Boschen, K. A. (1996). Correlates of life satisfaction, residential satisfaction and locus of control among adults with spinal cord injuries. Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin, 39, 230-243.

Boyle, G. J. (1991). Does item homogeneity indicate internal consistency or item redundancy in psychometric scales? Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 291-294.

Brickman, P., Rabinowitz, V. C., Karuza, J., Jr., Coates, D., Cohn, E., & Kidder, L. (1982). Models of helping and coping. American Psychologist, 37, 368-384.

Brief, A. P., Butcher, A. H., George, J. M., & Link, K. E. (1993). Integrating bottom-up and top-down theories of subjective well-being: The case of health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 646-653.

Brown, G., Birley, J., & Wing, J. (1972). Influence of family life of the course of schizophrenia disorders: a replication. British Journal of Psychiatry, 121, 241-258.

Browne, G., & Bramston, P. (1996). Quality of life in the families of young people with intellectual disabilities. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 5, 120-130.

Burton, C. A., & Sistler, A. B. (1996). A note on whether spousal caregivers try to control their environment or themselves. The Journal of Psychology, 421- 427.

Campbell, A. (1981). The sense of well-being in America. NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W.L. (1976). The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations and Satisfactions. NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267-286.

Christensen, K. A., Parris-Stephens, M A., & Townsend, A. L. (1998). Mastery in women’s multiple roles and well-being: Adult daughters providing care to impaired parents. Health Psychology, 17, 163-171. References 121

Churchill, R., Williamson, J., & Grady, N. (1996). The quality of teachers' work lives: Perspectives of teachers and their principals. Leading and Managing, 2, 1-15.

Churchill, R., Williamson, J., & Grady, N. (1996). Educational change and the new realities of teachers' work lives. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 25, 141-158.

Coakes, S. J., & Steed, L. G. (1999). SPSS: Analysis without Anguish. NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Collings, S. C. D., & Seminiuk, D. H. (1998). The caring role. In S. E. Romans (Ed.), Folding Back the Shadows (pp. 115-130). New Zealand: University of Otago Press.

Cooper, H., Okamura, L., & Gurka, V. (1992). Social activity and subjective well- being. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 573-583.

Costa Jr., P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of Extroversion and Neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 668-678.

Costa Jr., P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1998). Trait theories of personality. In D. F. Barone, M. Hersen & V. B. Van Hasselt (Eds.), Advanced Personality (pp. 103-121). NY: Plenum Press.

Cummins, R. A. (1995). On the trail of the gold standard for subjective well- being. Social Indicators Research, 35, 179-200.

Cummins, R. A. (1997a). Assessing quality of life. In R. J. Brown (Ed.) Assessing Quality Of Life For People With Psychiatric Disabilities (pp. 116-150). Cheltenham, England: Stanley Thornes (Publishers).

Cummins, R. A. (1997b). Comprehensive Quality Of Life Scale – Adult (5th ed.). School of Psychology, Deakin University, Melbourne.

Cummins, R. A. (1998). The second approximation to an international standard for life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 43, 307-334.

Cummins, R. A. (2000). Normative life satisfaction: Measurement issues and a homeostatic model. In B. Zumbo (Ed.), Methodological Developments and Issues in Quality of Life Research. Amsterdam: Kluwar.

Cummins, R. A. (2001). The subjective well-being of people caring for a severely disabled family member at home: A review. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 26, 83-100.

Cummins, R. A., & Nistico, H. (in press). Maintaining life satisfaction: The role of positive cognitive bias. Journal of Happiness Studies. References 122

Cummins, R. A., McCabe, M. P., Romeo, Y., & Gullone, E. (1994). The Comprehensive Quality of Life Scale (ComQol): Instrument development and psychometric evaluation on college staff and students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 372-382.

Darvill, T. J., & Johnson, R. C. (1991). Optimism and perceived control of life events as related to personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 951-954.

David, J P., & Suls, J. (1999). Coping efforts in daily life: Role of big five traits and problem appraisals. Journal of Personality, 67, 265-293.

Diener, E. (1996). Traits can be powerful, but are not enough: Lessons from subjective well-being. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 389-399.

Diener, E. (1998). Subjective well-being and personality. In D. F. Barone, M. Hersen & V. B. Van Hasselt (Eds.), Advanced Personality (pp. 311-334). NY: Plenum Press.

Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653-663.

Ebata, A. T., & Moos, R. H. (1991). Coping and adjustment in distressed and healthy adolescents. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 12, 33-54.

Edgerton, R. B. (1990). Quality of life from a longitudinal research perspective. In R. L. Schalock (Ed.), Quality of life: Perspectives and Issues. (pp. 149- 160) Washington DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

Evans, M. G. (1991). The problem of analysing multiplicative composites. American Psychologist, 46, 6-15.

Eysenck, H., & Eysenck, M. (1985). Personality and Individual Differences: A Natural Science Approach. NY: Plenum Press.

Eysenck, H., & Eysenck, S. (1991). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Scales. London: Hodder & Stoughton.

Fadden, G., Bebbington, P., & Kuipers, L. (1987). The burden of care: The impact of functional psychiatric illness on the patient’s family. British Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 285-292.

Felce, D., & Perry, J. (1995). Quality of life: Its definition and measurement. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 16, 51-74.

Ferris, P. A., & Marshall, C. A. (1987). A model project for families of the chronically mentally ill. Social Work, 32, 110-114. References 123

Finset, A., & Andersson, S. (2000). Coping strategies in patients with acquired brain injury: relationships between coping, apathy, depression and lesion location. Brain Injury, 14, 887-905.

Fogarty, G. J., Machin, M. A., Albion, M. J., Sutherland, L. F., Lalor, G. I., & Revitt, S. (1999). Predicting occupational strain and job satisfaction: The role of stress, coping, personality, and affectivity variables. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 54, 429-452.

Folkman, S. (1984). Personal control and stress and coping processes: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 839-852.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: A study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 150-170.

Francis, L. J. (1999). Happiness is a thing called stable extroversion: a further examination of the relationship between the Oxford Happiness Inventory and Eysenck’s dimensional model of personality and gender. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 5-11.

Francis, L. J., Brown, L. B., Lester, D. & Philipchalk, R. (1998). Happiness as stable extroversion: A cross-cultural examination of the reliability and validity of the Oxford Happiness Inventory among students in the U.K., U.S.A., Australia, and Canada. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 167-171.

Friedman, M. M. (1993). Social support sources and psychological well-being in older women with heart disease. Research in Nursing and Health, 16, 405- 413.

Frydenberg, E., & Lewis, R. (1993). Adolescent coping scale: Administrator's manual. Melbourne: ACER.

Fujita, F. (1993). An investigation of the relation between extroversion, neuroticism, positive affect, and negative affect. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Illinios. Copy provided by author.

Glass, D. C., & Carver, C. S. (1980). Helplessness and the coronary-prone personality. In J. Garber & M. E. P. Seligman (Eds.), Human helplessness: Theory and applications (pp. 223-243). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.

Gomez, R. (1997). Locus of control and type A behaviour pattern as predictors of coping styles among adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 391-398. References 124

Gomez, R., Holmberg, K., Bounds, J., Fullarton, C., & Gomez, A. (1999). Neuroticism and extraversion as predictors of coping styles during adolescence. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 3-17.

Griffith, J., Steptoe, A., & Cropley, M. (1999). An investigation of coping strategies associated with job stress in teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 517-531.

Halamandaris, K. F., & Power, K. G. (1999). Individual differences, social support and coping with the examination stress: A study of the psychosocial and academic adjustment of first year home students. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 665-685.

Hart, P., & Conn, M. (1996). Stress, morale and teachers. Independent Education, 26, 26-27.

Heaven, P. C. L. (1989). Extroversion, neuroticism and satisfaction with life among adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 489-492.

Heckhausen, J., & Schulz, R. (1995). A life-span theory of control. Psychological Review, 102, 284-304.

Heeps, L. (2000). The role of primary/secondary control in positive psychological adjustment. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Deakin University.

Herman-Stahl, M. A., Stemmler, M., & Petersen, A. C. (1995). Approach and avoidant coping: implications for adolescent mental health. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 649-666.

Holahan, C. J., & Moos, R. H. (1990). Life stressors, resistance factors, and improved psychological functioning: an extension of the stress resistance paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 909-917.

Hong, S. M., & Giannakopoulos, E. (1994). The relationship of satisfaction with life to personality characteristics. The Journal of Psychology, 128, 547- 558.

Kardum, I., & Krapic, N. (2001). Personality traits, stressful life events, and coping styles in early adolescence. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 503-515.

Kwan, V. S. Y., Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural explanations for life satisfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1038-1051.

Land, K. C. (1999). Social Indicators. In E. F. Borgatta & R. V. Montgomery (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Sociology (Rev. ed.). NY: Macmillan, forthcoming. References 125

Larsen, R. J., & Diener, E. (1992). Promises and problems with the circumplex model of emotion. In M. S. Clarke (Ed.) Structural Bases of Emotional Behaviour (pp.25-59). London: Sage.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal and Coping. New York: Springer.

Lefley, H. P. (1987a). Impact of mental illness in families of mental health professionals. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175, 613-619.

Lefley, H. P. (1987b). The family’s response to mental illness in a relative. New Directions for Mental Health Services, 34, 3-21.

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.

Lu, L., & Shih, J. B. (1997). Personality and happiness: Is mental health a mediator? Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 249-256.

Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 616-628.

Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological Science, 7, 186-189.

Marsh, D. T., Lefley, H.P., Evans-Rhodes, D., Doerzbacher, B. M., LaBarbera, L., & Paluzzi, J. E. (1996). The family experience of mental illness: Evidence for resilience. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 20, 3-12.

Maurin, J. T., & Boyd, C. B. (1990). Burden of mental illness on the family: A critical review. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 4, 99-107.

Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (1990). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model of comparison perspective. California: Wadsworth Publishing Co.

Mayes, B. R., Johnson, T. W., & Sadri, G. (2000). Personality, job level, job stressors, and their interaction as predictors of coping behaviour. Psychological Reports, 87, 61-81.

McQuillen, A. D., Licht, M. H., & Licht, B. G. (2001). Identity structure and life satisfaction in later life. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23, 62-72.

Moos, R. H. (1993). Coping Responses Inventory (CRI-Adult Form): Professional Manual. Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. References 126

Moos, R. H. (1993). Assessing approach and avoidance coping skills and their determinants and outcomes. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 59-64.

Moos, R., & Schaefer, J. (1993). Coping resources and processes: Current concepts and measures. In L. Goldberher & S. Breznitz (Eds.), Handbook of stress: Theoretical and clinical aspects (Second Edition, pp. 234-257). Sydney: The Free Press.

Morrison, K. A. (1997). Personality correlates of the five-factor model for a sample of business owners/managers: Associations with scores on self- monitoring, type A behaviour, locus of control, and subjective well-being. Psychological Reports, 80, 255-272.

Mroczek, D. K., & Kolarz, C. M. (1998). The effect of age on positive and negative affect: A developmental perspective on happiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 133-1349.

Oishi, S., Diener, E., Suh, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Value as a moderator in subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 67, 157-184.

Pavot, W., Fujita, F. and Diener, E. (1997). The relation between self-aspect congruence, personality and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 183-191.

Perring, C., Twigg, J., & Atkin, K. (1990). Families Caring for People Diagnosed as Mentally Ill: The literature re-examined. London: HMSO.

Phelps, S. B., & Jarvis, P. A. (1994). Coping in adolescence: Empirical evidence for a theoretically based approach to assessing coping. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23, 359-372.

Pierce, C. M. B. (1990). Psychological and biographical differences between secondary school teachers experiencing high and low levels of burnout. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 37-51.

Punch, K. F., & Tuetteman, E. (1996). Reducing teacher stress: The effects of support in the work environment. Research in Education, 56, 63-72.

Russell, J. A., & Carroll, J. M. (1999). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 3-30.

Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J., & Snyder, 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.

Roth, S., & Cohen, L. J. (1986). Approach, avoidance, and coping with stress. American Psychologist, 41, 813-819. References 127

Royce, J. R., & Powell, A. (1983). Theory of Personality and Individual Differences: Factors, Systems and Processes. Englewood Cliff: Prentice- Hall.

Sarros, A. M., & Sarros, J. C. (1990). How burned out are out teachers? A cross- cultural study. Australian Journal of Education, 34, 145-158.

Schalock, R. L., Keith, K. D., Hoffman, K., & Karan, O. C. (1989). Quality of life: its measurement and use. Mental Retardation, 27, 25-31.

Schulz, R., & Decker, S. (1985). Long-term adjustment to physical disability: The role of social support, perceived control and self-blame. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1162-1172.

Schulz, R., & Heckhausen, J. (1996). A life span model of successful aging. American Psychologist, 51, 702-714.

Shea, W. R (1976). Introduction: the quest for a high quality of life. In W.R. Shea, and J. King-Farlow (Eds.), Values and the Quality of Life. NY: Science History Publications.

Skinner, E. A. (1996). A guide to constructs of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 549-570.

Smith, T. W., Pope, M. K., Rhodewalt, F., & Poulton, J. L. (1989). Optimism, neuroticism, coping, and symptom reports: An alternative interpretation of the Life Orientation Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 640-648.

Solomon, P., & Draine, J. (1995). Adaptive coping among family members of persons with serious mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 46, 1156-1160.

Solomon, P., Draine, J., Mannion, E., & Meisel, M. (1996). Impact of brief family psychoeducation on self-efficacy. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 22, 41-50.

Sorlie, T., & Sexton, H. C. (2001). The factor structure of "The Ways of Coping Questionnaire" and the process of coping in surgical patients. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 961-975.

Sorlie, T., & Sexton, H. C. (2001). Predictors of the process of coping in surgical patients. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 947-960.

Stark, J. A., & Goldsbury, T. (1990). Quality of life from childhood to adulthood. In R. Schalock (Ed.), Quality of Life: Perspectives and Issues. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

Stern, S., Doolan, M., Staples, E., Szmukler, G. L. & Eisler, I, (1999). Disruption and reconstruction: Narrative insights into the experience of family members caring for a relative diagnosed with serious mental illness. Family Process, 38, 353-369. References 128

Suh, E., Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1996). Events and subjective well-being: Only recent events matter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 7091-1102.

Sveinbjarnardottir, E., & Dierckx de Casterle, B. (1997). Mental illness in the family: An emotional experience. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 18, 45- 56.

Swan, R. W., & Lavitt, M. (1988). Patterns of adjustment to violence in families of the mentally ill. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 3, 42-54.

Szmukler, G. I., Wykes, T., & Parkman, S. (1998). Caregiving and the impact on carers of a community mental health service. British Journal of Psychiatry, 173, 399-403.

Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using Multivariate Statistics (Third Edition). NY: Harper Collins College Publishers.

Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being. A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193-210.

Tellegen, A., Lykken, D. T., Bouchard, Jr., T. J., Wilcox, K. J., Segal, N. L., & Rich, S. (1988). Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1031-1039.

Thompson, S. C. (1981). Will it hurt less if I can control it? A complex answer to a simple question. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 89-101.

Thompson, S. C., & Spacapan, S. (1991). Perceptions of control in vulnerable populations. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 1-21.

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., Thomas, C., Rickabaugh, C., Tantamjarik, P., Otsuki, T., Pan, D., Garcia, B., & Sinar, E. (1998). Primary and secondary control over age- related changes in physical appearance. Journal of Personality, 66, 583- 605.

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.

Trauer, T., & Mackinnon, A. (in press). Why are we weighting? The role of importance ratings in quality of life measurement. Quality of Life Research. References 129

Tucker, C., Barker, A., & Gregoire, A. (1998). Living with schizophrenia: caring for a person with severe mental illness. Social Psychiatry Epidemiology, 33, 305-309.

Vaddadi, K. S., Soosai, E., Gilleard, C. J., & Adlard, S. (1997). Mental illness, physical abuse and burden of care on relatives; a study of acute psychiatric admission patients. Acta Psychiatra Scandinavia, 95, 313-317.

Vaillant, G. E., Bond, M., & Vaillant, C. O. (1986). An empirically validated hierarchy of defense mechanisms. Archives of General Psychiatry, 43, 786-794.

Vaughn, C., & Leff, J. (1976). The influence of family and social factors on the course of psychiatric illness. British Journal of Psychiatry, 129, 125-137.

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.

Webb, C., Pfeiffer, M., Meuser, K. T., Gladis, M., Mensch, E., DeGirolamo, J., & Levinson, D. F. (1998). Burden and well-being of caregivers for the severely mentally ill: the role of coping style and social support. Schizophrenia Research, 34, 169-180.

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.

Weisz, J. R., Rothbaum, F. M., & Blackburn, T. C. (1984). Standing out and standing in. The psychology of control in America and Japan. American Psychologist, 39, 955-969.

Weisz, J. R., Thurber, C. A., Sweeney, L., Proffitt, V. D., & LeGagnoux, G. L. (1997). Brief treatment of mild to moderate child depression using primary and secondary control enhancement training. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 703-707.

Wilson, K., Gullone, E., & Moss, S. (1998). The youth version of the positive and negative affect schedule: A psychometric validation. Behaviour Change, 15, 187-193.

Winefield, H. R. (1998). Coping strategies for people who care for a relative with chronic mental illness. Psychological Reports, 83, 453-454.

Yamashita, M., & McNally-Forsyth, D. (1998). Family coping with mental illness: An aggregate from two studies, Canada and United States. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 4, 1-8. Appendices 130

13 APPENDICES

Appendix A: Information Letter for Questionnaire 1

Appendix B: Questionnaire 1

Appendix C: Information Letter for Questionnaire 2

Appendix D: Questionnaire 2

Appendix E: Scales and Items of the Coping Responses Inventory