Thesis, PlanB (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Stout, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--Regis University, Denver, Colo., 2006. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on Sept. 7, 2006). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M. Nurs.)--University of Hong Kong, 2006.

Thesis (M. Nurs.)--University of Hong Kong, 2006.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1973. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.), Counseling Psychology--University of Central Oklahoma, 2008. / Two columns to the leaf for text leaves 4-17. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 15-17).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2008. / Title from title screen (site viewed Feb. 17, 2009). PDF text: x, 135 p. : col. ill. ; 630 Kb. UMI publication number: AAT 3326863. Includes bibliographical references. Also available in microfilm and microfiche formats.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Boston University

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Boston University. / I. Problem: To construct a measure of classroom adjustment which would be easily administered and interpreted by the classroom teacher. II. Procedure: A. Two measures were developed; an 86 item Teacher Checklist and a 40 item Parent Rating Scale. 1. Classroom teachers were asked to submit situations which would give evidence of good classroom adjustment. Ten trait categories were established as follows: concentration, cooperation, courtesy, emotional stability, friendliness, health, initiative, responsib- ility, self-confidence and self-reliance. A list of 86 items, to check the child's performance in these trait areas was complied. i.e. "He is wiilling to lead Opening Exercises (initiative)." Any item which could not be objectively observed was discarded. For ease of checking, the 86 items were so arranged as to follow the routine of a normal classroom day. Each child was rated twice on the Checklist. In 12 classrooms, (299 children) the child was rated by his own teacher first, then by a second person. In 4 classrooms (101 children) the child's teacher did both ratings with a lapse of 4 weeks between the two. 2. The Parent Rating Scale again attempted to get evidence on the same ten traits. i.e. "He can shop by himself (Initiative)." The parents were asked to check each item as "Usually, Often or Occasionally." B. Four hundred first grade children who participated in the study were administered the following tests: 1. Otis Quick Scoring J.iental Ability Test. 2. The Teacher Checklist of Adjustment. 3. The Parent Rating Scale was filled out by parents of the children. 4. The Detroit Word Recognition Test and the Boston University Reading Tests were used to measure reading achievement. III. Major Findings and Conclusions: A. Teachers and parents found both measures were easily administered. B. Reliability was established as follows: 1. For the Teacher Checklist a. Correlation between 2 raters was .73. b. Correlation on same rater twice was .97. c. Split half reliability for whole test corrected by Spearman Brown Formula was .96. d. Item analysis revealed significant differences for 81 out of 86 items for high and low scorers. 2. For the Parent Rating Scale· a. Split half correlation on whole.test, corrected by Spearman Brown Formula, was .70. b. Item analysis revealed significant differences on 24 of the 40 items. c. The Parent Rating Scale did not correlate significantly with the Teacher Checklist (.16). C. Relation of Adjustment to Reading Achievement 1. Positive Correlations of .48 and ·57 were found between adjustment and reading achievement. 2. Children were divided on the basis of adjustment scores into three groups--high, middle and low. a. The means of these three groups on the Detroit Word Recognition Test were 25.76, 19.00 and 13.80, respectively. Means on the Boston University Test were 88.3, 52.0 and 40.5, respectively. The differenees in achievement were statistically significant between high and middle as well as between middle and low groups. b. The mean mental age for the high group was 90.5 months, for the middle 82.5 and for the low 80.0. c. The difference in mental age between the high and the middle group was very significant but the difference between the middle and low groups was not significant. d. The mean IQ's were 118, 107 and 105 for high, middle and low groups, respectively. The difference between the high and middle groups was statistically significant but this was not true between the middle and low groups.

This thesis examined the relationship of behavioural self-blame and psychological adjustment to chronic illness and addressed some of the conceptual and methodological inconsistencies found in the existing literature on self-blame by studying different groups of chronically ill patients. Study One comprised a questionnaire study and was designed to mainly examine 1) differences in the levels of self-blame in three different patient groups (i.e. diabetes, heart disease and breast cancer patients), 2) the relationship between perceptions of behavioural risk factors contributing to the patients' illness and level of self-blame and 3) the relationship between self-blame, self-efficacy and psychological adjustment. Findings showed that there are significant differences in the levels of self-blame across the three groups with breast cancer patients showing the least self-blame. These differences were explained in terms of the different levels of perceived lifestyle factors contributing to the cause of illness and its subsequent management in the three groups. Also, self-blame was higher when patients were asked to consider a specific negative event relevant to their illness than when they considered their illness in general. For all three groups, self-blame was correlated to the number of behavioural risk factors patients reported as having contributed to their illness. No relationship was found between self-blame and self-efficacy or psychological adjustment. Study Two looked at the predictors of behavioural self-blame in heart disease patients by testing a theoretical model derived from evidence in the literature. The model included certain person (i.e. gender, age, characterological self-blame, and prior risk) and illness- related characteristics (i.e. type of diagnosis, time since diagnosis, perceived illness consequences, controllability of health behaviours) that had either direct paths to behavioural self-blame or indirect paths through their effect on behavioural causal attributions. The final model -showing gender and characterological self-blame as having both direct and indirect paths to self-blame, and prior risk, diagnosis and consequences as having only indirect paths- fit the data well. Also, behavioural attributions predicted improved health behaviour after the illness. No relationship between behavioural self-blame or causal attributions and psychological adjustment was found. Studies Three and Four addressed criticisms regarding the inconsistent conceptualisation and operation definitions of self-blame, which caution against unfounded generalisations such as the interchangeable use of the terms causality, responsibility and blame or the generalisation of results across different populations. This was done by 1) examining the degree to which self-blame is contingent upon the actual experience of illness, and 2) by comparing 14 negative events rated on dimensions relevant to blame and controllability. Specifically, in Study Three, non-patients were compared to patient counterparts from the previous study to look at differences in levels of self-blame for heart disease. Non-patients were found to have higher levels of self-blame than non-patients and showed no relationship between self-blame and behavioral risk suggesting a different understanding and utility of the concept. In Study Four, non-patients rated 14 negative events on the dimensions of blame, responsibility, control and avoidability. Two dimensional plots showed that while there were many similarities in the way the examined dimensions were applied to the 14 events, illnesses were represented separately from other negative events. Overall, these studies suggest a strong cognitive component in self-blaming patients as opposed to the motivational elements suggested in the literature. Possible explanations and ways to theoretically link the contradictory findings are discussed in the last chapter of the thesis and include the consideration of self-regulation processes and of changes that the self is subject to throughout the course of an illness.