S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 6 - 1 S p r i n g 2 0 2 0 2 9 Martin Brestovanský Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations between the variables 1 2 3 4 5 N M SD 1. Saluto-N - 354 56,88 7,734 2. Pathologic-N -,334*** - 354 36,29 7,200 3. Self-report ,404*** -,310*** - 346 3,02 0,481 4. Peer-report ,284** -,230*** ,241*** - 313 2,78 0,715 5. Teacher-rep ,296*** -,153* ,177** ,292*** - 219 3,00 0,455 6. EEE ,365*** -,208** ,241*** ,156 ,184 178 20,96 3,870 *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001, Pearson Correlations the prediction increases to 25%: R2 =.255, F(2, 169)=28.95, p<0.001. The model grows further if the gender selection is defined. For girls, the prediction of prosocial behaviour and EEE to salutogenic noo-dynamics increased to 30%: R2 =.325, F(2, 81)=19.46, p<0.001. 3.3 Method (the 2nd study) 3.3.1 Participants Participants in the sample were part of the same longitudinal research project described above. In this study, we examined those adolescents who participated in the third (T3) and fourth (T4) wave of the study (T3: N=366, 45.9% female, 74% urban, Mage = 13.75; SD = 0.55; T4: N=290, 42.8% female, 73.4% urban, Mage = 14.63; SD = 0.56). Students were 8th/9th graders from 22/20 primary schools in western Slovakia. 3.3.2 Procedure Students were recruited through a cooperation between researchers and teachers participating in the longitudinal study. For T3: 13 teachers implemented the ethical education program with a total of 190 students. The rest of students (n=176, nine schools) was included as a control group. For T4: 11 teachers implemented the ethical education program with a total of 131 students. The rest of students (n=159, nine schools) was included as a control group). The battery of questionnaires was administered in classrooms by researcher. It took approximately 40 minutes to complete. Students experiencing the ethical education program in T3 achieved significantly higher score in motiva - tion subscale of meaning in life scale (t=2.049, p<0.05) and had tendencies to achieve higher score in motivation and affective subscales of meaning in life scale in T4 (t=1.848, p=0.066; t=1.838, p<0.067). 3.3.3 Measures Ethical Education Evaluation (EEE). 7-item questionnaire (see above). Prosocial Behavior Scale (PROS-8). Our scale consists 4 prosocial items, and 4 aggressive behavior items, which was inspired by Caprara et al. (2015) who used with the same logic three items (consoling, helping, and sharing) to sufficiently
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=