China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Why is there lack of growth in character virtues? An insight into business students across British business schools
Published in David Carr, Cultivating Moral Character and Virtue in Professional Practice, 2018
Yan Huo, Kristján Kristjánsson
The survey consisted of four sections: Responses to six ethical dilemmas. In each dilemma, participants were asked to choose between two courses of action and offered six possible justifications, two of which were virtue ethical, two deontological and two consequentialist. Participants were asked to select, in rank order, the three justifications that most closely matched their reasoning.Participants’ views of their own character strengths. This comprised a list of 24 strengths from the Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) (Peterson & Seligman, 2004) from which respondents were asked to identify six that ‘best describe the sort of person you are’.A set of demographic questions, as well as a series of questions about study environment for final-year students, and workplace environment for professional practitioners (based partly on Eurofound, 2012).Participants’ views of the character of the ‘ideal’ practitioner of their profession. This comprised the list of the 24 VIA-IS character strengths, presented again, with regard to which participants were asked to choose the six that would make an ideal business-and-finance professional agent.
A pilot feasibility study of a randomized controlled trial of goal setting using the values in action inventory of strengths following brain injury
Published in Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 2022
Jessica Wainman-Lefley, Nicola Goudie, Meghann Richardson, Jonathan Evans
The Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) is a central tool of PP, and is a reliable measure designed to identify individuals’ profile of Character Strengths (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Character Strengths are positive human traits considered to transcend cultures, and research has shown the identification and development of Character Strengths can lead to improvements in enjoyment and engagement of activities (Seligman et al., 2009). It is argued that there are 24 Character Strengths that fall within six value categories: Wisdom (curiosity, creativity), Courage (bravery, honesty), Humanity (love, kindness), Temperance (forgiveness, humility), Justice (leadership, teamwork), and Transcendence (gratitude, hope). The VIA-IS is not presently utilized during goal-setting in rehabilitation services after BI, however other evidence from this field has indicated that when it is used within positive psychology interventions following BI, participants experience improved wellbeing (Cullen et al., 2018; Karagiorgou et al., 2018). We speculate that if goals are closely linked to personal values, they may be considered more personally meaningful and as a result, better remembered. This in turn may increase engagement with the rehabilitation process.
Use of Occupation-Based Outcome Measure and Strength-Based Self-Report with Persons with Substance Use Disorders: A Prospective Cohort Study
Published in Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 2021
Jeffrey Sargent, Kristin Valdes
A systematic review reported limited research pertaining to occupational therapy’s role in the treatment of substance use, as well as methodological issues with available research (Rojo-Mota et al., 2017). Amorelli’s narrative review (2016) reported similar results concerning methodological flaws, but also stated the need for outcome measures with psychometric data to be used in research. In a systematic review by D’Amico et al. (2018) on the current evidence for occupational therapy interventions in mental health, the authors cited the need for increased reporting of and use of occupation-based outcome measures. While the need for increased psychometric validation of occupational therapy outcomes measures is clear, there currently exists evidence from clients with mental health disorders to support the use of client centered outcomes. There are validated outcome measures that have been used with the mental health population that could potentially be used with individuals with SUD. The Occupational Circumstances Assessment Interview and Rating Scale (OCAIRS) determines how various factors such as roles, habits, and values affect occupational participation (Forsyth et al., 2005; Haglund & Henriksson, 1994). The Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS-P) was developed by Peterson and Seligman (2004) to determine the client’s character strengths to help people recognize their strengths and build on them.
Inching Closer to the Structure (Structures?) of Character Strengths and Virtues
Published in Journal of Personality Assessment, 2022
Feraco and colleagues aim CFA at two possible problems with previous examinations of the structure of character strengths, using a 120-item revised version of the Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS). First, Feraco and colleagues tested and found evidence that the individual strength subscales are unidimensional, which helps rule out a possible reason why the “24 into 6” structure has not often been supported. If any of the individual strength subscales measured more than one content area, then there already would be more than the 24 theorized content areas, causing worse fit of the model. For example showing that items for the Kindness subscale all hang together and do not instead divide into two clusters measuring agreeableness and altruism Second, they modeled the survey data as ordinal rather than continuous providing a more accurate analysis. A common rating format for assessment items is from 1 to 7. Responding to such ratings is an ordinal operation in which people simply may indicate that an item that is rated 5 is higher in the rating order than an item rated 2, for example. Usually they are not able to indicate a fully continuous choice. Imagine someone reads two items and feels a strong 2, then a tepid 5. On a continuous scale, they might select 2.44872 and 4.57264. They might feel the reverse for the next items, a tepid 2 that feels more like a 1.58214 and a strong 5 that feels like a 5.44311. The numerical gap between 2 and 5 might mask greatly varying psychological distinctions from item to item, even for the same person from item to item. Further, the mathematical 3-point gap is assumed to be the same whether someone is choosing 2 and 5 or 4 and 7. Assumptions that ordinal data have all the properties of truly continuous data are extremely common in psychological research, but can produce errors of all types, from false positives to false negatives and even flipping the direction of estimated relationships among variables (Liddell & Kruschke, 2018).