University of Melbourne African Americans On Transition to Adulthood Paper

/in /by

You need to be aware of in formulating your research question. To provide you with a dataset suitable for this project we have permission to use open access data from the Emerging Adulthood Measured at Multiple Institutions 2: The Next Generation (EAMMi2) study (Grahe, Chalk, Alvarez, Faas, Hermann & McFall, 2018) available from the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/te54b/).This study used self-report measures to examine markers of emerging adulthood and related constructs (e.g., somatic health, mindfulness, disability identity, subjective well-being, and beliefs about marriage, etc.) as well as demographic variables (e.g., gender, level of educational attainment, etc.) across 32 academic institutions in the US. From this dataset, you will utilise just those variables relevant to your chosen research question.

With this in mind, you will need to limit your research question to the variables and participant demographics listed below.

Research question constraints

List of the variables you can choose from and the corresponding surveys used to measure each one.

Category Variable

Measured By
(Survey Name)

Emerging Adulthood

Role Transition

Markers of Emerging Adulthood (MOA).

Items Derived from Arnett, 1997, 2001.

Subscales as determined by Fosse and Toyokawa (2016).

Already scored for you in the datafile.

Normative Compliance

Relational Maturity

Independence

Experimentation/possibilities

Inventory of Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood- Short Form (IDEA-8) (Baggio, Iglesias, Studer, & Gmel, 2015).

Already scored for you in the datafile.

Negativity/instability

Identity exploration

Feeling “in-between”

Subjective Well-being

Total subjective well-being score

Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) Diener, et al (1985).

Mindfulness

Total mindfulness score

Mindful

Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS)

Brown & Ryan (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (84), 822-848.

Belonging

Total belonging score

Need to Belong Scale (NTBS)

Leary, M. R., Kelly, K. M., Cottrell, C. A., & Schreindorfer, L. S. (2013). Individual differences in the need to belong: Mapping the nomological network. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(6), 610-624.

Self-efficacy

Total self-efficacy score

General Self-efficacy Scale (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995)

Perceived social support

Total perceived social support score

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet & Farley, 1988)

Social Media Use Scale

Maintaining existing connections

Most items were adapted from Yang and Brown (2013, 2015)

Yang, C.-c., & Brown, B. B. (2013). Motives for using Facebook, patterns of Facebook activities, and late adolescents’ social adjustment to college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 403-416. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9836-x

Yang, C.-c., & Brown, B. B. (2015). Factors involved in associations between Facebook use and college adjustment: Social competence, perceived usefulness, and use patterns. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 245-253. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.015

Scoring information:

  1. Maintaining existing connections
  • Avoid drifting apart from people I know
  • Find out what my friends are planning to do tonight or this weekend
  • Keep in touch with friends
  • Let friends know what I’ve been up to
  • Reconnect with people I used to know

2. Making new connections

  • Find out more about someone I’ve just met
  • Check out someone I might want to know better
  • Make new friends
  • Get in touch with someone I met at social events

3. Information

  • Get different kinds of information
  • Share different kinds of information

Construct Scoring: Subscale scores will be obtained by adding together all items for each subscale as listed above. No items need to be reverse coded.

Making new connections

Information

Narcissism

Total Narcissism Score

Narcissistic Personality Inventory-13

Gentile, B., Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., & Campbell, W. K. (2013). A test of two brief measures of grandiose narcissism: The Narcissistic Personality Inventory–13 and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory-16. Psychological Assessment, 25(4), 1120–1136.

LA- leadership/authority subscale

GE-grandiose exhibitionism subscale

EE-entitlement/exploitativeness subscale

Interpersonal Exploitativeness

Total interpersonal exploitativeness score

Interpersonal Exploitativeness Scale (IES). Brunell, A. B., Davis, M. S., Schley, D. R., Eng, A. L., van Dulmen, M. H. M., Wester, K. L., & Flannery, D. J. (2013). A new measure of interpersonal exploitativeness. Frontiers in Psychology, 4.

Disability Identity

Disability and intrapersonal empowerment (15 items)

Personal Opinions Questionnaire (POQ); Bolton, B., & Brookings, J. (1998). Development of a measure of intrapersonal empowerment. Rehabilitation Psychology, 43(2), 131-142. doi:10.1037/0090-5550.43.2.131

Disability type

Health Somatic Symptoms

Total health score

The Patient Health Questionnaire. Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., & Lowe, B. (2010). The patient health questionnaire somatic, anxiety, and depressive symptoms scale: a systematic review. General Hospital Psychiatry, 32, 345-359. Doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.03.006

*Note, only 13 items from the PHQ-15 have been used in this research.

Perceived Stress

Total perceived stress score

Perceived stress scale. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385-396.

Marriage

Central identities

This item can be used in multiple ways. Any of the four responses (each response is a percentage when, added to the other three percentages, equals 100%) can be used as a continuous variable ranging from 0 to 100. This strategy has been used for measuring “marital centrality” by using the percentage assigned to “marriage” as an isolated variable. See: Willoughby, B. J., Hall, S. S., & Goff, S. (2015). Marriage matters but how much? Marital centrality among young adults. The Journal of Psychology, 149, 796-817.

Marital Salience

This item measures the perceived importance of getting married. This is a single item that was adapted from a longer scale (the item was used for the sake of brevity given the length of the overall EAMMI survey). For use of full scale, see: Willoughby, B. J., Hall, S. S., & Goff, S. (2015). Marriage matters but how much? Marital centrality among young adults. The Journal of Psychology, 149, 796-817.

Marital Timing

This item simply captures the age at which one thinks people should marry. Besides age, response options include “never” and “age has no effect on marriage.” See similar item in: Willoughby, B. J., Hall, S. S., & Goff, S. (2015). Marriage matters but how much? Marital centrality among young adults. The Journal of Psychology, 149, 796-817.

Marital Permanence

This item measures the perceived inherent permanence of marriage. This is a single item that was adapted from a longer scale. See: Willoughby, B. J., Hall, S. S., & Goff, S. (2015). Marriage matters but how much? Marital centrality among young adults. The Journal of Psychology, 149, 796-817.

Demographic variables

Gender

–

Level of educational attainment

–

Siblings

–

Ethnicity

–

Current household income

–

you must have:

  • At least one emerging adulthood variable
  • At least one of the other variables (e.g., disability identity, narcissism, self-efficacy, etc)

Using these variables, the analysis that you conduct must contain:

  • At least two independent/predictor variables.
  • Only one dependent variable
< a href="/order">