This study investigated to what degree lesson-to-lesson variability in teachers' goal clarification and process feedback explains variability in secondary students’ motivational correlates. Students (N=570, 24 classes) completed questionnaires at six occasions. Multilevel regression analyses showed that relations between perceived process feedback and experienced need satisfaction (i.e., competence, autonomy and relatedness) were conditional on perceived goal clarification. No such interaction effects between process feedback and goal clarification were found for need frustration (i.e., experiencing failure, feeling pushed to achieve goals, feeling rejected). In general, when students perceived more process feedback or goal clarification, students experienced more competence, autonomy and relatedness satisfaction. Yet, when perceiving very high levels of process feedback, additional benefits of goal clarification were no longer present (and vice versa). In lessons in which students perceived goals to be less clear, they experienced more need frustration. No associations were found between process feedback and need frustration.
DOCUMENT
Occupational stress can cause all kinds of health problems. Resilience interventions that help employees deal with and adapt to adverse events can prevent these negative consequences. Due to advances in sensor technology and smartphone applications, relatively unobtrusive self-monitoring of resilience-related outcomes is possible. With models that can recognize intra-individual changes in these outcomes and relate them to causal factors within the employee’s own context, an automated resilience intervention that gives personalized, just-in-time feedback can be developed. The Wearables and app-based resilience Modelling in employees (WearMe) project aims to develop such models. A cyclical conceptual framework based on existing theories of stress and resilience is presented, as the basis for the WearMe project. The included concepts are operationalized and measured using sleep tracking (Fitbit Charge 2), heart rate variability measurements (Elite HRV + Polar H7) and Ecological Momentary Assessment (mobile app), administered in the morning (7 questions) and evening (12 questions). The first (ongoing) study within the WearMe project investigates the feasibility of the developed measurement cycle and explores the development of such models in social studies students that are on their first major internship. Analyses will target the development of both within-subject (n=1) models, as well as between-subjects models. The first results will be shared at the Health By Tech 2019 conference in Groningen. If successful, future work will focus on further developing these models and eventually exploring the effectiveness of the envisioned personalized resilience system.
DOCUMENT
A large, recently published, inter-laboratory study by the ReAct group has shown that there is considerable variability in DNA recovery that exists between forensic laboratories. The presence of this inter-laboratory variability presents issues when one laboratory wishes to carry out an evaluation and needs to use the data produced by another laboratory. One option proposed by the ReAct group is for laboratories to carry out a calibration exercise so that appropriate adjustments between laboratories can be made. This will address some issues, but leave others unanswered, such as how to make use of the decades of transfer and persistence data that has already been published. In this work we present a method to utilise data produced in other laboratories (whether it provides DNA amounts or a probability of transfer) that takes into account inter-laboratory variability within an evaluation. This will allow evaluations to continue, without calibration data, and ensures that the strength of findings is appropriately represented. In this paper we discuss complicating factors with the various ways in which previous data has been reported, and their limitations in supporting probability assignments when carrying out an evaluation. We show that a combination of producing calibration information for new data (as suggested by the ReAct group) and development of strategies where calibration data is not available will provide the best way forward in the field of evaluations given activities.
DOCUMENT
