Effectiveness of Assertiveness Training

3907 words (16 pages) Essay

30th Nov 2017 Health Reference this

Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a university student. This is not an example of the work produced by our Essay Writing Service. You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UKEssays.com.

CHAPTER – IV

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter deals with analysis and interpretation of data to study the effectiveness of assertiveness training programme on the level of self esteem among adolescents at selected school. The result findings have been tabulated and interpreted according to plan for data analysis. The data collected from 60 samples were grouped and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The results are presented under the following.

ORGANIZATION OF DATA

Section A: Distribution of demographic variables of adolescents

Section B: Distribution of subjects according to level of self esteem among adolescents before and after training programme.

Section C: Comparison of effectiveness of assertive training programme on the level of Self esteem among adolescents in experimental group and wait listed control group.

Section D: Association between the level of self esteem among adolescents with selected demographic variables.

SECTION A

Table No 1: Distribution of subjects according to their demographic variables

(N=60)

S.No

Demographic variables

Experimental group

Wait listed

Control group

Frequency

%

Frequency

%

1.

Age

a .11-13 yrs

b. 13-15yrs

c. 15-17yrs

12

17

1

40

56.7

3.3

10

19

1

33.3

63.3

3.3

2.

Sex

  1. a. Male

b. Female

10

20

33.3

66.7

14

16

46.7

53.3

3.

Religion

a. Hindu

b. Christian

c. Muslim

19

8

3

63.3

26.7

10

15

8

7

50

26.7

23.3

4.

Residency

a. Urban

b. Rural

19

11

63.3

36.7

20

10

66.7

33.3

5.

Type of family

a. Nuclear

b. Joint

23

7

76.7

23.3

20

10

66.7

33.3

6.

Father’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

3

8

9

10

10

26.7

30

33.3

4

10

8

8

13.3

33.3

26.7

26.7

7.

Mother’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

6

9

9

6

20

30

30

20

9

10

6

5

30

33.3

20

16.7

8.

Father’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. coolie

5

7

15

3

16.7

23.3

50

10

3

10

14

3

10

33.3

46.7

10

9.

Mother’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. Housewife

3

10

1

16

10

33.3

3.3

53.3

3

15

1

11

10

50

3.3

36.7

10.

Annual Income

a. 50000-100000

b. 100000-200000

c. 200000 & above

6

13

11

20

43.3

36.7

8

15

7

26.7

50

23.3

Table 1 : Shows that frequency and percentage distribution of demographic variables of experimental and wait listed control group with respect to age, sex, religion, residency, type of family, father’s education, father’s occupation, mother’s education, mother’s occupation and annual income.

  • Regarding Age, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 17 (56.7 %) & in Wait listed Control Group 19 (63.3%) were in the age group of 13-15 years.
  • Regarding Sex, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 20 (66.7 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 16 (53.3%) were females.
  • Regarding Religion, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 19 (63.3 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 15 (50%) were Hindus.
  • Regarding Residency, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 19 (63.3%) & in Wait Listed Control Group 18 (60%) were from urban area.
  • Regarding Type of Family, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 23 (76.7 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 20 (66.7%) were from nuclear family.
  • Regarding Father’s Education, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 10

(33.3 %) were graduates & in Wait Listed Control Group 10 (33.3%) were Primary education level.

  • Regarding Mother’s Education, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 9 (30 %) were Higher Secondary level & in Wait Listed Control Group 10 (33.3%) were Primary education level.
  • Regarding Father’s Occupation, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 15 (50 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 14(46.7%) were business men.
  • Regarding Mother’s Occupation, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 16 (53.3 %) were housewives & in Wait Listed Control Group 15(50%) were working in private sector.
  • Regarding Annual Income of the family, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 13 (43.3 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 15 (50%) were ranged from Rs.100000-200000.

FIG:3 –Distribution of subjects according to their age in both experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:4 – Distribution of subjects according to their Sex in both experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:5 – Distribution of subjects according to their Religion among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:6 –Distribution of subjects in Residency among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:7 –Distribution of subjects in type of family among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:8 –Distribution of subjects in father’s education among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:9 –Distribution of subjects in mother’s education among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:10 –Distribution of subjects in father’s occupation among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:11 –Distribution of subjects in mother’s occupation among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:12 –Distribution of subjects in annual income of the family among experimental and wait listed control group

SECTION B

Table 2: Distribution of subjects according to their level of self esteem before and after

Assertiveness training among adolescents.

(N=60)

S.No

Level of self esteem

Group

Range of score

Mean

SD

High SE

Low SE

60-80

80-100

20-40

40-60

1.

Before

assertiveness training

Experimental group

       

52.06

7.6

Wait listed control group

       

53.96

3.9

2.

After assertiveness training

Experimental group (post1)

       

79.8

5.7

Experimental group (post 2)

       

74.83

9.03

Wait listed Control group

       

55.13

3.86

Table 2 shows that distribution of subjects according to the level of self esteem before and after assertiveness training among adolescents. In that, mean value of level of self esteem before assertiveness training in experimental group was 52.06 & in control group it was 53.96 and also the mean value of level of self esteem after assertiveness training in experimental group post test 1 and post test 2 was 79.8 & 74.83 , and in control group it was 55.13

FIG 15: Distribution of subjects according to their level of self esteem before and after assertiveness training among adolescents.

SECTION C

Table 3 : Comparison of mean pre test value of level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group and Wait Listed Control Group.

(N=60)

S.NO

Level of self esteem

Group

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Pre test

Experimental group

52.06

7.6

1.213

(NS)

Wait listed Control group

53.96

3.9

NS –Not significant

Table 3 describes that obtained independent ‘t’ value for the mean difference in pre test level of self esteem between experimental and control group is 1.213 and it is not statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is no significant difference exist between level of self esteem among experimental and control group and also shows that both the groups were homogenous before giving assertiveness training.

FIG:16- Comparison of mean pre test value of level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group and Wait Listed Control Group

Table 4 : Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem among adolescents in

Experimental Group and Control Group.(N=60)

S.NO

Level of self esteem

Group

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Post test 1

Experimental group

79.8

5.68

19.640**

Wait listed Control group

55.13

3.86

2.

Post test 2

Experimental group

74.83

9.03

10.982**

Wait listed Control group

55.13

3.86

** Significant at .001 level

Table 4 describes that obtained independent ‘t’ value for the mean difference in post test 1 and post test 2 level of self esteem between experimental and control group is 19.640 & 10.982 and it is statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is significant difference exist between post test 1 and post test 2 level of self esteem among experimental and control group after receiving assertiveness training.

FIG:17 – Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem in both groups

Table 5 : Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group (N=30)

S.NO

Group

Test

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Experimental group

Pre test

Post test 1

52.06

79.8

7.6

5.68

16.181**

Pre test

Post test 2

52.06

74.83

7.6

9.03

10.694**

** Significant at 0.001 level

Table 5 depicts that obtained paired ‘t’ value for the mean difference in Pre, Post test1& Post test 2 level of self esteem in Experimental group is 16.181 & 10.694 and it is statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is significant difference exist between pre and post test level of self esteem among Experimental group after receiving assertiveness training.

FIG:18 – Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group

Table 6 : Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Wait listed Control Group. (N=30)

S.NO

Group

Test

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Wait listed Control group

Pre test

Post test

53.96

55.13

3.9

3.86

1.125

(NS)

Table 6 depicts that obtained paired ‘t’ value for the mean difference in Pre and Post test level of self esteem in Control group is 1.125 and it is not statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is no significant difference exist between pre and post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Wait Listed Control group.

FIG:19- Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents

in Wait Listed Control Group

Table 7 : Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem in different period of time among adolescents in Experimental Group (N=30)

S.NO

Group

Test

MEAN

SD

T value

P value

1.

Experimental Group

Post Test1 Post Test2

79.8

74.83

5.6

9.03

2.43

0.021*

** Significant at .01 level

Table 7 revealed that obtained paired ‘t’ value for the mean difference in post test value of level of self esteem in different period of time (immediate, one month after) among adolescents in Experimental Group is 2.43 and it is statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is significant improvement in level of self esteem among adolescents in different period of time ( immediate, one month after) in experimental group.

FIG: 20 – Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem in different period of time among adolescents in Experimental Group

SECTION D:

Table no: 8- Association between post-test level of self esteem among adolescents with demographic variables in Experimental Group & Wait listed control group (N=60)

S.NO

Demographic variables

Experimental group

Wait listed control group

Frequency

P value

Frequency

P value

1.

Age

a .11-13 yrs

b. 13-15yrs

c. 15-17yrs

12

17

1

0.263

(NS)

10

19

1

0.668

(NS)

2.

Sex

  1. a. Male

b. Female

10

20

0.595

(NS)

14

16

0.314

(NS)

3.

Religion

a. Hindu

b. Muslim

c. Christian

19

8

3

0.395

(NS)

15

8

7

0.064

(NS)

4.

Residency

a. Urban

b. Rural

19

11

0.172

(NS)

20

10

0.514

(NS)

5.

Type of family

a. Nuclear

b. Joint

23

7

0.260

(NS)

20

10

0.374

(NS)

6.

Father’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

3

8

9

10

0.388

(NS)

4

10

8

8

0.17

(NS)

7.

Mother’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

6

9

9

6

0.512

(NS)

9

10

6

5

0.632

(NS)

8.

Father’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. coolie

5

7

15

3

0.406

(NS)

3

10

14

3

0.415

(NS)

9.

Mother’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. Housewife

3

10

1

16

0.12

(NS)

3

15

1

11

0.334

(NS)

10.

Annual Income

a. 50000-100000

b. 100000-200000

c. 200000 & above

6

13

11

0.075

(NS)

8

15

7

0.527

(NS)

* Significant at 0.01 level

NS – Not significant

Table 8 reveals that the calculated chi square test value for level of self esteem with demographic variables such as age, sex, religion, residency, type of family, father’s education, father’s occupation and annual income in experimental group.

Find out how UKEssays.com can help you!

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

View our services

It also shows that there is no significant association exist between the level of self esteem with demographic variables such as age, sex, religion, residency, type of family, father’s education, father’s occupation, annual income and academic performance in wait listed control group.

CHAPTER – IV

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter deals with analysis and interpretation of data to study the effectiveness of assertiveness training programme on the level of self esteem among adolescents at selected school. The result findings have been tabulated and interpreted according to plan for data analysis. The data collected from 60 samples were grouped and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The results are presented under the following.

ORGANIZATION OF DATA

Section A: Distribution of demographic variables of adolescents

Section B: Distribution of subjects according to level of self esteem among adolescents before and after training programme.

Section C: Comparison of effectiveness of assertive training programme on the level of Self esteem among adolescents in experimental group and wait listed control group.

Section D: Association between the level of self esteem among adolescents with selected demographic variables.

SECTION A

Table No 1: Distribution of subjects according to their demographic variables

(N=60)

S.No

Demographic variables

Experimental group

Wait listed

Control group

Frequency

%

Frequency

%

1.

Age

a .11-13 yrs

b. 13-15yrs

c. 15-17yrs

12

17

1

40

56.7

3.3

10

19

1

33.3

63.3

3.3

2.

Sex

  1. a. Male

b. Female

10

20

33.3

66.7

14

16

46.7

53.3

3.

Religion

a. Hindu

b. Christian

c. Muslim

19

8

3

63.3

26.7

10

15

8

7

50

26.7

23.3

4.

Residency

a. Urban

b. Rural

19

11

63.3

36.7

20

10

66.7

33.3

5.

Type of family

a. Nuclear

b. Joint

23

7

76.7

23.3

20

10

66.7

33.3

6.

Father’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

3

8

9

10

10

26.7

30

33.3

4

10

8

8

13.3

33.3

26.7

26.7

7.

Mother’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

6

9

9

6

20

30

30

20

9

10

6

5

30

33.3

20

16.7

8.

Father’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. coolie

5

7

15

3

16.7

23.3

50

10

3

10

14

3

10

33.3

46.7

10

9.

Mother’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. Housewife

3

10

1

16

10

33.3

3.3

53.3

3

15

1

11

10

50

3.3

36.7

10.

Annual Income

a. 50000-100000

b. 100000-200000

c. 200000 & above

6

13

11

20

43.3

36.7

8

15

7

26.7

50

23.3

Table 1 : Shows that frequency and percentage distribution of demographic variables of experimental and wait listed control group with respect to age, sex, religion, residency, type of family, father’s education, father’s occupation, mother’s education, mother’s occupation and annual income.

  • Regarding Age, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 17 (56.7 %) & in Wait listed Control Group 19 (63.3%) were in the age group of 13-15 years.
  • Regarding Sex, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 20 (66.7 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 16 (53.3%) were females.
  • Regarding Religion, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 19 (63.3 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 15 (50%) were Hindus.
  • Regarding Residency, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 19 (63.3%) & in Wait Listed Control Group 18 (60%) were from urban area.
  • Regarding Type of Family, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 23 (76.7 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 20 (66.7%) were from nuclear family.
  • Regarding Father’s Education, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 10

(33.3 %) were graduates & in Wait Listed Control Group 10 (33.3%) were Primary education level.

  • Regarding Mother’s Education, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 9 (30 %) were Higher Secondary level & in Wait Listed Control Group 10 (33.3%) were Primary education level.
  • Regarding Father’s Occupation, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 15 (50 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 14(46.7%) were business men.
  • Regarding Mother’s Occupation, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 16 (53.3 %) were housewives & in Wait Listed Control Group 15(50%) were working in private sector.
  • Regarding Annual Income of the family, majority of the subjects in Experimental Group 13 (43.3 %) & in Wait Listed Control Group 15 (50%) were ranged from Rs.100000-200000.

FIG:3 –Distribution of subjects according to their age in both experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:4 – Distribution of subjects according to their Sex in both experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:5 – Distribution of subjects according to their Religion among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:6 –Distribution of subjects in Residency among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:7 –Distribution of subjects in type of family among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:8 –Distribution of subjects in father’s education among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:9 –Distribution of subjects in mother’s education among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:10 –Distribution of subjects in father’s occupation among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:11 –Distribution of subjects in mother’s occupation among experimental and wait listed control group

FIG:12 –Distribution of subjects in annual income of the family among experimental and wait listed control group

SECTION B

Table 2: Distribution of subjects according to their level of self esteem before and after

Assertiveness training among adolescents.

(N=60)

S.No

Level of self esteem

Group

Range of score

Mean

SD

High SE

Low SE

60-80

80-100

20-40

40-60

1.

Before

assertiveness training

Experimental group

       

52.06

7.6

Wait listed control group

       

53.96

3.9

2.

After assertiveness training

Experimental group (post1)

       

79.8

5.7

Experimental group (post 2)

       

74.83

9.03

Wait listed Control group

       

55.13

3.86

Table 2 shows that distribution of subjects according to the level of self esteem before and after assertiveness training among adolescents. In that, mean value of level of self esteem before assertiveness training in experimental group was 52.06 & in control group it was 53.96 and also the mean value of level of self esteem after assertiveness training in experimental group post test 1 and post test 2 was 79.8 & 74.83 , and in control group it was 55.13

FIG 15: Distribution of subjects according to their level of self esteem before and after assertiveness training among adolescents.

SECTION C

Table 3 : Comparison of mean pre test value of level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group and Wait Listed Control Group.

(N=60)

S.NO

Level of self esteem

Group

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Pre test

Experimental group

52.06

7.6

1.213

(NS)

Wait listed Control group

53.96

3.9

NS –Not significant

Table 3 describes that obtained independent ‘t’ value for the mean difference in pre test level of self esteem between experimental and control group is 1.213 and it is not statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is no significant difference exist between level of self esteem among experimental and control group and also shows that both the groups were homogenous before giving assertiveness training.

FIG:16- Comparison of mean pre test value of level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group and Wait Listed Control Group

Table 4 : Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem among adolescents in

Experimental Group and Control Group.(N=60)

S.NO

Level of self esteem

Group

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Post test 1

Experimental group

79.8

5.68

19.640**

Wait listed Control group

55.13

3.86

2.

Post test 2

Experimental group

74.83

9.03

10.982**

Wait listed Control group

55.13

3.86

** Significant at .001 level

Table 4 describes that obtained independent ‘t’ value for the mean difference in post test 1 and post test 2 level of self esteem between experimental and control group is 19.640 & 10.982 and it is statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is significant difference exist between post test 1 and post test 2 level of self esteem among experimental and control group after receiving assertiveness training.

FIG:17 – Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem in both groups

Table 5 : Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group (N=30)

S.NO

Group

Test

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Experimental group

Pre test

Post test 1

52.06

79.8

7.6

5.68

16.181**

Pre test

Post test 2

52.06

74.83

7.6

9.03

10.694**

** Significant at 0.001 level

Table 5 depicts that obtained paired ‘t’ value for the mean difference in Pre, Post test1& Post test 2 level of self esteem in Experimental group is 16.181 & 10.694 and it is statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is significant difference exist between pre and post test level of self esteem among Experimental group after receiving assertiveness training.

FIG:18 – Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Experimental Group

Table 6 : Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Wait listed Control Group. (N=30)

S.NO

Group

Test

Mean

SD

‘t’ value

1.

Wait listed Control group

Pre test

Post test

53.96

55.13

3.9

3.86

1.125

(NS)

Table 6 depicts that obtained paired ‘t’ value for the mean difference in Pre and Post test level of self esteem in Control group is 1.125 and it is not statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is no significant difference exist between pre and post test level of self esteem among adolescents in Wait Listed Control group.

FIG:19- Comparison of mean Pre and Post test level of self esteem among adolescents

in Wait Listed Control Group

Table 7 : Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem in different period of time among adolescents in Experimental Group (N=30)

S.NO

Group

Test

MEAN

SD

T value

P value

1.

Experimental Group

Post Test1 Post Test2

79.8

74.83

5.6

9.03

2.43

0.021*

** Significant at .01 level

Table 7 revealed that obtained paired ‘t’ value for the mean difference in post test value of level of self esteem in different period of time (immediate, one month after) among adolescents in Experimental Group is 2.43 and it is statistically significant at 0.05 level, hence there is significant improvement in level of self esteem among adolescents in different period of time ( immediate, one month after) in experimental group.

FIG: 20 – Comparison of mean post test value of level of self esteem in different period of time among adolescents in Experimental Group

SECTION D:

Table no: 8- Association between post-test level of self esteem among adolescents with demographic variables in Experimental Group & Wait listed control group (N=60)

S.NO

Demographic variables

Experimental group

Wait listed control group

Frequency

P value

Frequency

P value

1.

Age

a .11-13 yrs

b. 13-15yrs

c. 15-17yrs

12

17

1

0.263

(NS)

10

19

1

0.668

(NS)

2.

Sex

  1. a. Male

b. Female

10

20

0.595

(NS)

14

16

0.314

(NS)

3.

Religion

a. Hindu

b. Muslim

c. Christian

19

8

3

0.395

(NS)

15

8

7

0.064

(NS)

4.

Residency

a. Urban

b. Rural

19

11

0.172

(NS)

20

10

0.514

(NS)

5.

Type of family

a. Nuclear

b. Joint

23

7

0.260

(NS)

20

10

0.374

(NS)

6.

Father’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

3

8

9

10

0.388

(NS)

4

10

8

8

0.17

(NS)

7.

Mother’s education

a. Illiterate

b. Primary

c. Higher secondary

d. Graduate

6

9

9

6

0.512

(NS)

9

10

6

5

0.632

(NS)

8.

Father’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. coolie

5

7

15

3

0.406

(NS)

3

10

14

3

0.415

(NS)

9.

Mother’s occupation

a. Government sector

b. Private sector

c. Business

d. Housewife

3

10

1

16

0.12

(NS)

3

15

1

11

0.334

(NS)

10.

Annual Income

a. 50000-100000

b. 100000-200000

c. 200000 & above

6

13

11

0.075

(NS)

8

15

7

0.527

(NS)

* Significant at 0.01 level

NS – Not significant

Table 8 reveals that the calculated chi square test value for level of self esteem with demographic variables such as age, sex, religion, residency, type of family, father’s education, father’s occupation and annual income in experimental group.

It also shows that there is no significant association exist between the level of self esteem with demographic variables such as age, sex, religion, residency, type of family, father’s education, father’s occupation, annual income and academic performance in wait listed control group.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on the UKDiss.com website then please: