Development and Effect of a Smartphone Overdependence Prevention Program for University Students Based on Self-Determination Theory

Myung Soon Kwon; Jeong Soon Yu

doi:10.4040/jkan.2020.50.1.116

Journal List > J Korean Acad Nurs > v.50(1) > 1143162

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kwon and Yu: Development and Effect of a Smartphone Overdependence Prevention Program for University Students Based on Self-Determination Theory

Original Article

J Korean Acad Nurs 2020;50(1):116-131.

Published online: 17 January 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2020.50.1.116

Development and Effect of a Smartphone Overdependence Prevention Program for University Students Based on Self-Determination Theory

Myung Soon Kwon¹, Jeong Soon Yu^2,

¹School of Nursing · Research Institute of Nursing Science, Hallym University, Chuncheon

²School of Nursing, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Korea

Address reprint requests to : Yu, Jeong Soon, School of Nursing, Hallym University, 1 Hallymdaehak-gil, Chuncheon 24252, Korea, Tel: +82-33-248-2719 Fax: +82-33-248-2734 E-mail: jayamush@hotmail.com

Received 28 May 2019 Revised 19 January 2020 Accepted 19 January 2020

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NoDerivs License. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0) If the original work is properly cited and retained without any modification or reproduction, it can be used and re-distributed in any format and medium.

Abstract

Purpose:

This study aimed to develop a smartphone overdependence prevention program for college students based on the self-determination theory (SDT) and evaluate its effectiveness.

Methods:

A non-equivalent control group repeated measures design was used for the study. Participants were 64 university freshmen (experimental group: 29, control group: 35). The developed program consists of eight sessions conducted twice a week. The program was designed to promote autonomy, competence, and relatedness the three elements of the basic psychological needs of self-determination theory. The participants were assessed before the program, immediately after, and 1 and 3 months after the program. Data were collected from April 23 to September 14, 2018 and analyzed by performing a Chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, independent t-test, and repeated measures ANOVA using SPSS/WIN 23.0.

Results:

This study showed improvement in the basic psychological needs (F=3.90, p=.010) in the experimental group compared to the control group. Specifically, competence (F=2.93, p=.035), relatedness (F=2.89, p=.045), and self-regulatory ability (F=3.11, p=.028) improved significantly.

Conclusion

Study findings indicate that the smartphone overdependence prevention program based on the Self-determination theory could be an effective intervention for improving basic psychological needs and self-regulation ability. Therefore, this program could be an efficient strategy for smartphone overdependence prevention in university students.

Keywords: Smartphone, Addictive, Behavior, Personal Autonomy, Universities

REFERENCES

1. Samaha, M, Hawi, NS. Relationships among smartphone addiction, stress, academic performance, and satisfaction with life. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 57:321–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.045.

2. Poushter J, Bishop C, Chwe H. Social media use continues to rise in developing countries but plateaus across developed ones [Internet]. Washington, D.C. : Pew Research Center;2018. [cited 2018 Dec 19]. Available from:. https://www.pewre-search.org/global/2018/06/19/social-media-use-continues-to-rise-in-developing-countries-but-plateaus-across-developed-ones/.

3. National Information Society Agency (NIA). 2016 Digital culture forum policy research report. Daegu: NIA;2016. Dec. Report No.: NIA V-RER-B-16007. p. 251–281.

4. Lee SR, Kim HS. The effect of smartphone overdependence on university life adjustment of university students: Focused on the mediating effect of self-efficacy and the moderating effect of social support. Locality and Globality: Korean Journal of Social Sciences. 2017; 41(2):157–184. https://doi.org/10.33071/ssricb.41.2.201708.157.

5. Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT); National Information Society Agency (NIA). 2018 The survey on smart phone overdependence. Daegu: MSIT; NIA;2018. Dec. Report No.: NIA VI-RSE-C-18060. p. 296.

6. Choi H, Chung KM. Effects of feedback intervention on decrease of smartphone usage of smartphone addiction risk group of college students. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2016; 35(2):365–391.

7. Lee JW, Lee NY. The effect of stress about campus life and college life adaptation on smartphone addiction of college students. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction. 2018; 18(2):303–317. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2018.18.2.303.

8. Kwon MS, Lee BY. Relationship among basic psychological needs, smartphone addiction and adaptation to school life in university students. Journal of Korean Public Health Nursing. 2017; 31(3):540–553. https://doi.org/10.5932/JKPHN.2017.31.3.540.

9. Lee SH. The college adaptation and smartphone addiction in university enterents: The mediating effect of interpersonal support relationship. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society. 2019; 20(4):149–159. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2019.20.4.149.

10. Sawyer SM, Afifi RA, Bearinger LH, Blakemore SJ, Dick B, Ezeh AC, et al. Adolescence: A foundation for future health. The Lancet. 2012; 379(9826):1630–1640. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60072-5.

11. Kwon MS, Jin J. Exploring the basic psychological needs necessary for the internalized motivation of university students with smartphone overdependence: Applying a self-determination theory. Journal of Korean Academy of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 2019; 28(1):26–36. https://doi.org/10.12934/jkpmhn.2019.28.1.26.

12. Jin J. Experiences of smartphone addiction among university students. Journal of Digital Convergence. 2017; 15(2):421–429. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2017.15.2.421.

13. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life’s domains. Canadian Psychology/ Psychologie canadienne. 2008; 49(1):14–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/0708-5591.49.1.14.

14. Deci EL, Ryan RM. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry. 2000; 11(4):227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.

15. Kopp CB. Antecedents of self-regulation: A developmental perspective. Developmental Psychology. 1982; 18(2):199–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.18.2.199.

16. Gökçearslan Ş, Mumcu FK, Haşlaman T, Çevik YD. Modelling smartphone addiction: The role of smartphone usage, self-regulation, general self-efficacy and cyberloafing in university students. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 63:639–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.091.

17. Park JH, Park JH. The relationships among interpersonal relationship anxiety, college adjustment, self-control, and smart-phone addiction in nursing students. Journal of the Korean Data & Information Science Society. 2017; 28(1):185–194. https://doi.org/10.7465/jkdi.2017.28.1.185.

18. Jang SH, Ha Y. The effects of self-determination, depression, self-esteem, and impulsivity on smartphone overdependence of college students. Journal of Digital Convergence. 2019; 17(1):269–280. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2019.17.1.269.

19. Boumosleh JM, Jaalouk D. Depression, anxiety, and smart-phone addiction in university students- a cross sectional study. PLoS One. 2017; 12(8):e0182239. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182239.

20. Wu AMS, Cheung VI, Ku L, Hung EPW. Psychological risk factors of addiction to social networking sites among Chinese smartphone users. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. 2013; 2(3):160–166. https://doi.org/10.1556/JBA.2.2013.006.

21. Lan Y, Ding JE, Li W, Li J, Zhang Y, Liu M, et al. A pilot study of a group mindfulness-based cognitive-behavioral intervention for smartphone addiction among university students. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. 2018; 7(4):1171–1176. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.7.2018.103.

22. Jung ES, Son CN. Effects of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy on internet addiction level, anxiety, and stress of college students with Internet addiction. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2011; 30(4):825–843.

23. Yoo HK, Son CN. Effects of ACT on smartphone addiction level, self-control, and anxiety of college students with smartphone addiction. Journal of Digital Convergence. 2016; 14(2):415–426. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2016.14.2.415.

24. Choi EM, Kim MS. The effect of motivational interview oriented and cognitive behavioral group counseling for college students with smartphone addiction. Korean Journal of Counseling. 2016; 17(3):169–185.

25. Bang JH. The effects of smart phone addiction management application on self-regulation and interpersonal relationship ability of university students. Journal of Korea Entertainment Industry Association. 2016; 10(2):323–337. https://doi.org/10.21184/jkeia.2016.04.10.2.323.

26. Lee EH, Park JW. A structural equation model on health be- havior adherence for elders with prehypertension: Based on self-determination theory. Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamentals of Nursing. 2012; 19(3):343–352. https://doi.org/10.7739/jkafn.2012.19.3.343.

27. Seo YM, Choi WH. A predictive model on self care behavior for patients with type 2 diabetes: Based on self-determination theory. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2011; 41(4):491–499. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2011.41.4.491.

28. Cho JH. Effects of a motivation-enhanced weight loss program for women with abdominal obesity: Based on the self-determination theory [dissertation]. Seoul: Korea University;2013. p. 1–126.

29. Ha YS, Choi YH. Effectiveness of the self-determination theory based a motivational interviewing YOU-TURN program for smoking cessation among adolescents. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2015; 45(3):347–356. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2015.45.3.347.

30. Park GR, Kim HS. Effects of a group counseling integration program on self-determination and internet addiction in high school students with tendency to internet addiction. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2011; 41(5):694–703. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2011.41.5.694.

31. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods. 2007; 39(2):175–191.

32. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: Guilford Press;2017. p. 1–756.

33. Williams GC, Patrick H, Niemiec CP, Ryan RM, Deci EL, Lavigne HM. The smoker’s health project: A self-determination theory intervention to facilitate maintenance of tobacco abstinence. Contemporary Clinical Trials. 2011; 32(4):535–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2011.03.002.

34. Mun SY, Lee BS. Effects of an integrated internet addiction prevention program on elementary students’ self-regulation and internet addiction. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2015; 45(2):251–261. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2015.45.2.251.

35. An NY, Kim JH, Jeong DH, Chang MY, Nam SH, Kong JY. Korean assistive technology satisfaction assessment tool development. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy. 2014; 22(2):113–124.

36. Jeon SH, You YD. A study on the research trend and effects of domestic smart-phone addiction program. Journal of Student Guidance. 2017; 37:263–294.

37. Ministry of Government Legislation. The basic youth act [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Gender Equality and Family;2018. [cited 2019 Apr 11]. Available from:. http://www.law.go.kr/LSW//lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=199555&efYd=20180613#0000.

38. Lee MH, Kim AY. Development and construct validation of the basic psychological needs scale for Korean adolescents: Based on the self-determination theory. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology. 2008; 22(4):157–174.

39. Kuhl J, Fuhrmann A. Decomposing self-regulation and self-control: The volitional components inventory. Heck-hausen J, Dweck CS, editors. Motivation and Self-Regulation across the Life Span. New York: Cambridge University Press;1998. p. 15–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527869.003.

40. Yoon YS. A study on self-regulatory ability of adolescents and its relationship with personality, parenting, behavior problems, and life stress [dissertation]. Seoul: Sookmyung Women’s University;2007. p. 1–112.

41. Baker RW, Siryk B. SACQ: Student adaptation to college questionnaire: Manual. Los Angeles (CA): Western Psychological Services;1999. p. 1–79.

42. Lee YJ. The non-residential student’s adaptation to college life and career plans [master’s thesis]. Seoul: Ewha Womans University;1999. p. 1–92.

43. IEMBIO. The manual of Canopy9 RSA. Chuncheon: IEMBIO;2013. 44. Vansteenkiste M, Simons J, Soenens B, Lens W. How to become a persevering exerciser? Providing a clear, future intrinsic goal in an autonomy-supportive way. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2004; 26(2):232–249. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.26.2.232.

45. Webber KH, Tate DF, Ward DS, Bowling JM. Motivation and its relationship to adherence to self-monitoring and weight loss in a 16-week internet behavioral weight loss intervention. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior. 2010; 42(3):161–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2009.03.001.

46. van Deursen AJAM, Bolle CL, Hegner SM, Kommers PAM. Modeling habitual and addictive smartphone behavior: The role of smartphone usage types, emotional intelligence, social stress, self-regulation, age, and gender. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 45:411–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.039.

47. Lee K, Kim M. Effects of a rational emotive behavior therapy counseling program on self-efficacy and adjustment to college life for nursing freshmen. The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education. 2018; 24(4):443–452. https://doi.org/10.5977/jkasne.2018.24.4.443.

48. Hong SH, Kim DR. The relationship between internet addiction level and autonomic nervous system function in college students. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society. 2014; 16(3):1699–1714.

Figure 1.

Flow chart of the study.

Figure 2.

Average trend of the groups and post hoc test on the effect analysis.

Table 1.

The Contents of the Smartphone Overdependence Prevention Program Based on Self-Determination Theory

Phase	Session	ns Objects	Contents	BPN	Activities
Making	1st	Understanding meanings and	•Orientation	R, A	•Large group activity
relation-		purposes of the program,	•Making relationships		- Divide group by type
ships		and establishing intimacy and		A, C	•Self introduction in group
		trust among participants.			- Make group rules.
				C, R	•Sharing and encouraging
Motivation	2nd	Understanding my behaviour	•Understanding my personality	A, C, R	•Summing up last session and icebreaking
and rein-		pattern and identifying	type.	A	•Understand my personality type
forcement		strengths and weakness and	•Discovering and enhancing	A	•My Smart phone chronicle
		discovering strengths.	strengths.		- Check my usage pattern of smartphone
				C	•Enhance strengths.
				C, R	•Sharing and encouraging
	3rd	Understanding the correct	•Identifying advantages and	A, C, R	•Summing up last session and icebreaking
		usage of smartphones and	disadvantages of smartphone	A, C	•Discussing and presenting advantages and
		identifying advantages and	•Understanding the correct		disadvantages of smartphone
		disadvantages.	usage of smartphone.	C	•Smartphone literacy
				A, C, R	•Planning and making promotional posters
					for correct use of smartphones by Group
				C, R	•Sharing and encouraging
Plan	4th	Exploring and practicing	•Looking at myself using	A, C, R	•Summing up last session and icebreaking
execution		alternative activity for correct	smartphone	A	•Look at myself using smartphone,
		usage of smartphone.	•Exploring alternative behaviour	C	•Identify functional or dysfunctional usage
			of smart phone and making		pattern of smartphone and control the
			action plan.		pattern.
				C	•Explore and plan alternative activity.
				C, R	•Sharing and encouraging
	5th	Checking and modifying	•Checking implementation	A, C, R	•Summing up last session and icebreaking
		alternative activity for correct	alternative behaviour	A	•Check alternative activity implementation.
		usage of smartphone.	•Reinforcing alternative activity.		- Recognition of success and barriers factors.
				C	•Reinforce alternative activity
					- Looking for ways to strengthen alternative
					activities through game activities.
				C, R	•Sharing and encouraging
	6th	Make and implement strategy	•Design my future	A, C, R	•Summing up last session and icebreaking
		for smart daily life.	•Prioritizing my daily life	A	•Design my future
			•DIY (do it yourself) planning	A	•Prioritize my daily life
				C	•Determine important things using priority
					and make action plans.
				C, R	•Sharing and encouraging
Assesment	7th	Check and reassess myself.	•Discovering changes in my life.	A, C, R	•Summing up last session and icebreaking
and			•Reconstruction of smartphone	C	• Discover changes in my life.
wrapping			usage.		- Sharing control experience-commendation
up					and encouragement
				A	•Reconstruction of smartphone usage
				C, R	•Sharing and encouraging
	8th	Conform determination for	•Future determination	A, C, R	•Summing up last session and icebreaking
		correct usage of smartphone	•Wrapping up the program.	A, C, R	•Promise to others by declaring their
		and implement plan.			willingness to practice in the future.
				A, C	•Promise to myself by writing a letter to me
					of my future will to practice.
				R	•Wrap up program and smart awards.

BPN=Basic psychological needs; A=Autonomy; C=Competence; R=Relatedness.

Table 2.

Homogeneity Test of Characteristics of Subjects & Measured Variables (N=64)

Characteristics	Categories	Exp. (n=29)	Cont. (n=35)	χ² or t	p
Characteristics	Categories	n (%)/M±SD	n (%)/M±SD	χ² or t	p
Gender	Male	9 (31.0)	4 (11.4)	3.77	.052
	Female	20 (69.0)	31 (88.6)
Age (yr)		19.2±1.10	19.1±0.45	0.40	.694
Department	Social science and Humanities	10 (34.5)	10 (28.6)	0.31	.858
	Nature science	10 (34.5)	14 (40.0)
	Biomedical science	9 (31.0)	11 (31.4)
Satisfaction with college life^†	Very satisfied	4 (13.7)	5 (14.3)	0.89	>.999
	Satisfied	19 (65.6)	22 (62.8)
	Average	6 (20.7)	7 (20.0)
	Unsatisfied	0 (0.0)	1 (2.9)
Satisfaction with family life^†	Very satisfied	14 (48.3)	13 (37.1)	1.78	.725
	Satisfied	11 (37.9)	17 (48.6)
	Average	4 (13.8)	4 (11.4)
	Unsatisfied	0 (0.0)	1 (2.9)
Time of first use	Below elementary school	6 (20.7)	8 (22.9)	0.00	.835
	Over middle school	23 (79.3)	27 (77.1)
Usage motivation^†	Latest trend	17 (58.7)	10 (28.6)	6.57	.062
	Information searching such as news	2 (6.9)	2 (5.7)
	Relation with people	9 (31.0)	21 (60.0)
	Others	1 (3.4)	2 (5.7)
Mainly used function of smartphone^††	Voice call	2 (6.9)	2 (5.7)
	SMS	1 (3.4)	0 (0.0)
	Entertainment function (gaming, hobby etc.)	3 (10.3)	4 (11.4)
	Web searching	3 (10.3)	8 (22.9)
	Playing music, movie and youtube	18 (62.1)	20 (57.1)
	SNS (kakao talk etc.)	22 (75.9)	30 (85.7)
Daily smartphone using time (hours)^†	1≤~<3	12 (41.4)	10 (28.6)	2.08	.365
	3≤~<6	14 (48.3)	23 (65.7)
	≥6	3 (10.3)	2 (5.7)
Monthly phone bill (KRW)^†	<40,000	7 (24.2)	9 (25.7)	2.34	.599
	40,000≤~<80,000	17 (58.6)	23 (65.7)
	≥80,000	3 (10.3)	3 (8.6)
	Others (don’t know)	2 (6.9)	0 (0.0)
Satisfaction of smartphone usage^††	Information searching	20 (69.0)	30 (85.7)
	Networking through SNS	18 (62.1)	19 (54.3)
	Relieve stress	13 (44.8)	11 (31.4)
	Others (Financial effect, use for learning)	4 (13.8)	6 (17.1)
Dissatisfaction of smartphone usage^††	High smartphone bill	6 (20.7)	6 (17.1)
	Decreased health	18 (62.1)	18 (51.4)
	Decreased academic achievement	12 (41.4)	22 (62.9)
	Etc (including conflict with parents)	5 (17.2)	7 (20.0)
Health status^††	Sleep deprived.	12 (60.0)	7 (33.3)
	Loss of vision/Dry eye	14 (70.0)	16 (76.2)
	Headache·Memory loss	6 (30.0)	6 (28.6)
	Etc (including decreased physical condition)	1 (5.0)	2 (9.5)
The importance of smartphone in daily life^†	Indispensable	5 (17.2)	6 (17.1)	1.32	.766
	Relative importance	13 (44.9)	19 (54.3)
	Normal	5 (17.2)	3 (8.6)
	A little	6 (20.7)	7 (20.0)
Education experience about smartphone (or	Yes	16 (55.2)	26 (74.3)	2.57	.109
Internet)	No	13 (44.8)	9 (25.7)
Self diagnosis (whether or not recognize the addiction by oneself)	Yes No	13 (44.8) 16 (55.2)	12 (34.3) 23 (65.7)	0.74	.390
addiction by oneself)	No	16 (55.2)	23 (65.7)
Smartphone overdependence		22.17±5.20 2	21.10±3.94	0.85	.398
	Self-control failure	8.07±2.10	7.91±1.58	0.34	.738
	Salience	6.97±2.03	6.57±1.46	0.90	.370
	Serious consequences	7.14±2.31	6.71±2.31	0.73	.468
Basic psychological needs		84.72±5.96 8	83.91±9.35	0.40	.688
	Autonomy	28.79±3.09 2	27.77±4.41	1.09	.282
	Competence	26.45±3.18 2	26.23±3.34	0.27	.790
	Relatedness	29.48±3.33 2	29.91±3.64	-0.49	.626
Self-regulatory ability		65.03±9.17 6	66.31±9.09	-0.56	.579
Adaptation to college life		89.55±10.46 8	89.89±11.94	-0.12	.907
Stress index		2.66±1.26	2.57±1.27	0.26	.793

Cont.=Control group; Exp.=Experimental group; M=Mean; SD=Standard deviation.

^† Fisher's exact test,

^†† multiple response.

Table 3.

Effects of the Smartphone Overdependence Prevention Program (N=64

Variable	Group	T0	T1	T2	T3	Source	F	p
Variable	Group	M±SD	M±SD	M±SD	M±SD	Source	F	p
Smartphone	Exp. (n=29)	22.17±5.20	19.66±4.54	18.52±4.97	18.31±4.30	G	0.42	.518
overdependence	Cont. (n=35)	21.20±3.94	20.54±4.65	20.14±4.58	19.31±4.30	T	12.60	<.001
						G*T	2.43	.076
Self-control failure	Exp. (n=29)	8.07±2.10	6.90±2.23	6.17±1.93	6.24±1.79	G	0.38	.540
	Cont. (n=35)	7.91±1.58	6.97±1.87	6.86±1.63	6.54±1.67	T	20.00	<.001
						G*T	1.21	.306
Salience	Exp. (n=29)	6.97±2.03	5.86±1.62	5.62±1.82	5.48±1.57	G	0.60	.441
	Cont. (n=35)	6.57±1.46	6.23±1.55	6.26±1.92	5.97±1.69	T	10.26	<.001
						G*T	2.64	.059
Serious consequences	Exp. (n=29)	7.14±2.31	6.90±1.99	6.72±2.10	6.59±2.21	G	0.08	.780
	Cont. (n=35)	6.71±2.31	7.34±1.95	6.97±1.81	6.80±2.08	T	1.06	.357
						G*T	1.20	.308
Basic psychological needs	Exp. (n=29)	84.72±5.98	87.48±7.64	86.52±7.79	85.52±7.73	G	1.73	.193
	Cont. (n=35)	83.91±9.35	82.14±8.91	83.31±9.70	85.23±8.48	T	0.54	.657
						G*T	3.90	.010
Autonomy	Exp. (n=29)	28.79±3.09	29.66±3.77	29.45±3.34	29.41±3.60	G	3.41	.070
	Cont. (n=35)	27.77±4.41	27.11±3.92	28.09±4.37	28.26±4.01	T	0.84	.472
						G*T	1.35	.260
Competence	Exp. (n=29)	26.45±3.18	27.83±3.07	27.07±3.75	26.55±3.22	G	1.66	.202
	Cont. (n=35)	26.23±3.34	25.94±3.53	25.49±3.95	26.23±4.03	T	1.25	.295
						G*T	2.93	.035
Relatedness	Exp. (n=29)	29.48±3.33	30.00±3.65	30.00±3.26	29.55±3.05	G	0.22	.883
	Cont. (n=35)	29.91±3.64	29.09±3.90	29.74±4.11	30.74±3.24	T	0.95	.408
						G*T	2.89	.045
Self-regulatory ability	Exp. (n=29)	65.03±9.17	70.55±11.24	68.52±13.09	68.10±10.72	G	0.17	.682
	Cont. (n=35)	66.31±9.09	67.11±9.72	66.20±9.62	68.77±9.16	T	4.76	.003
						G*T	3.11	.028
Adaptation to college life	Exp. (n=29)	89.55±10.46	89.31±13.37	89.24±12.74	91.97±12.45	G	0.08	.785
	Cont. (n=35)	89.89±11.94	86.71±11.25	88.71±11.24	91.86±11.58	T	4.31	.008
						G*T	0.66	.562
Stress index	Exp. (n=29)	2.66±1.26	2.79±0.90	3.14±1.06	3.03±1.30	G	0.00	.993
	Cont. (n=35)	2.57±1.27	2.91±1.63	3.03±1.15	3.11±1.45	T	2.53	.059
						G*T	0.17	.916

Cont.=Control group; Exp.=Experimental group; G=Group; M=Mean; SD=Standard deviation; T=Time; T0=Pretest; T1=Posttest; T2=1 month Follow up test after T1 test; T3=3 month Follow up test after T1 test.

TOOLS

Similar articles