GC UNIVERSITY LAHORE

BELIEF IN A JUST WORLD AND SUBJECTIVE

WELL-BEING IN MOTHERS OF NORMAL AND

DOWN SYNDROME CHILDREN

NAME: IRAM FATIMA

Session 2006-2009

REG. NO. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY

BELIEF IN A JUST WORLD AND SUBJECTIVE

WELL-BEING IN MOTHERS OF NORMAL AND

DOWN SYNDROME CHILDREN

Submitted to the GC University Lahore in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the award of the degree of PhD in Psychology

By

Iram Fatima

Reg. No. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004

Session: 2006-2009

Department of Psychology

GC UNIVERSITY LAHORE

RESEARCH COMPLETION CERTIFICATE

It is certified that the research work contained in this thesis titled “Belief in a just

world and subjective well-being in mothers of normal and Down syndrome children” has

been carried out and completed by Iram Fatima, Reg. No. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004 under my

supervision during her PhD studies in the subject of Psychology.

Dated: _____________

Supervisor

_________________

Prof. Dr. Kausar Suhail

Submitted through

______________________

Prof. Dr. Farah Malik Chairperson Department of Psychology GC University Lahore

__________________

Controller of Examinations GC University Lahore

DECLARATION

I, Iram Fatima, Reg. No. 02-GCU-PhD-Psy-2004, PhD scholar in the subject of

Psychology, session 2006-2009, hereby declare that the matter printed in the thesis “Belief in

a just world and subjective well-being in mothers of normal and Down syndrome children” is

my own work. I have presented a paper based on a part of this thesis with the title “Belief in a

just world and subjective well-being in mothers of Down syndrome children” in ISJR

conference held in Adelaide, Australia. I presented another paper derived from thesis in an

international conference arranged by Deptt of Psychology, GC University Lahore. I have also

submitted an article derived from the thesis and with the title of thesis in “International

Journal of Psychology” for publication. Apart from the above mentioned presentations and

submission the research work contained in the thesis has not been in any form printed,

published and submitted as research work, thesis or publication in any university, research

institution etc. in Pakistan or abroad.

__________________ Signature of Deponent

Date: _______________

i

ABSTRACT

Subjective well being has long been studied in relation to a number of personality and

demographic variables. A comparatively recently identified correlate of subjective well-being is

belief in a just world (BJW). The present study aimed to explore how three dimensions of belief

in a just world, personal belief in a just world, belief in ultimate justice, and belief in immanent

justice relate to trait well-being dimensions and state well-being dimensions in mothers of

normal and Down syndrome children. It further aimed to compare strength of justice beliefs in

two groups of mothers. It was hypothesized that personal belief in a just world and ultimate

belief in justice will be positively related with trait well-being dimensions and negatively related

with state well-being dimensions in mothers of normal and Down syndrome children. Moreover,

these relationships would be stronger for mothers of a Down syndrome child compared to

mothers of normal children. Finally, the associations would persist after taking into account

demographic variables, generalized self efficacy, personal perceived control and perceived

social support. Tryout study was conducted to translate Scales of Belief in Immanent and

Ultimate Justice (Maes, 1998b), Personal Perceived Control Scale (Hollway, 2003), and Social

Support Short Form Questionnaire (Sarason, Sarason, Shearin & Pierce, 1987) into Urdu. Urdu

translations of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Zigmond & Snaith, 1983) by Mumford,

Tareen, Bajwa, Bhatti and Karim (1991), Trait Well-Being Inventory (Dalbert, 1992) by Fatima

(2004), Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, 1999) by Fatima and Khalid (2007),

Generalized Self Efficacy Scale (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) by Tabbasum, Rehman,

Schwarzer, and Jerusalem (2003) were already available. The two versions of all the scales

except for Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were administered on 35 bilingual females to

check the equivalence of Urdu version of the scales with their English version. In main study

mothers of normal and Down syndrome children (n = 100 each) were matched on age of the

child, mothers’ marital status, education level and monthly family income. Interviews were

conducted with mothers using Urdu versions of all the scales. Psychometric properties of the

scales were assessed before running the main analysis and all the scales were found to be

reliable and valid. A set of hierarchical regression analyses revealed that personal belief in a just

world was the strongest predictor of all aspects of well-being as expected in the two groups of

mothers. Belief in ultimate justice was negatively related to anxiety in mothers of a Down

syndrome child while it was positively related to anxiety in mothers of normal children.

Contrary to the expectations, belief in immanent justice was positively related to life satisfaction

and mood level in the two groups of mothers. These relationships persisted after controlling for

ii

demographic and other psychological variables in the study. Moreover, mothers of a Down

syndrome child did not differ from mothers of normal children in strength of BJW. The findings

support the role of personal BJW as a personal resource to enhance the well-being of both

people struggling with difficult conditions of life and those in normal circumstances. The results

were discussed in the context of Pakistani socio-cultural scenario. The findings of this work

have important implications for mental health professionals and researchers.

iii

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Belief in a Just World (BJW) 1 1.1.1 Positive Illusions and BJW 2 1.1.2 Functions of BJW 4 1.1.3 Strategies for Maintaining Belief in a Just World 7 1.1.4 Categorization of BJW 8 1.1.5 BJW as a Buffer or a Personal Resource 11

1.2 Psychological Well-Being 12 1.2.1 Multidimensional Model of Well-Being 13 1.2.2 Subjective Well-Being (SWB) 14

1.3 Common Correlates of SWB and BJW 18 1.3.1 Perceived Control 18 1.3.2 Self-Efficacy 21 1.3.3 Social Support 23 1.3.4 Demographic Variables 24

1.4 Developmental Disabilities in Children 25

1.5 Rationale of the Current Investigation 26

1.6 Objectives of the Study 27

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 28

2.1 SWB of Mothers of Children with Down Syndrome 28

2.2 BJW in Adverse and Non-Adverse Situations 29

2.3 BJW and Well-Being 30

2.4 Other Psychological Resources 36

2.5 Demographic Variables 41

2.6 Hypotheses 44

3 METHOD 46

3.1 Phase 1: Translation and Adaptation of the Scales 46 3.1.1 Step 1 46 3.1.2 Step II 54

iv

3.2 Phase II: Main study 57 3.2.1 Sample 57 3.2.2 Instruments 59 3.2.3 Procedure 59

4 RESULTS 61

4.1 Psychometric Analysis 61 4.1.1 Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale 62 4.1.2 Trait Well-Being Inventory 64 4.1.3 Personal Belief in a Just World Scale 66 4.1.4 Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate justice 67 4.1.5 Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6) 68 4.1.6 Personal Perceived Control Scale 70 4.1.7 Generalized Self Efficacy Scale 72 4.1.8 Summary of Psychometric Analysis of Scales 73

4.2 Main Analysis 74

5 DISCUSSION 90

5.1 Conclusions 104

5.2 Limitations 105

5.3 Implications 106

6 REFERENCES 108

APPENDICES 127

v

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Problematic Items and their Original and Revised Translations 53

Table 3.2 Correlations between Urdu and English Versions of the Scales (N = 35) 55

Table 3.3 Correlations between English Scales (Light face) and their Urdu Versions (Bold face) (N = 35)

56

Table 3.4 Frequency Distribution of Mothers of Normal and Down syndrome Children According to their Demographic Status (n= 100)

59

Table 4.1 Item Characteristics of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (N = 200) 63

Table 4.2 Item Characteristics of the Trait Well-Being Inventory (N = 200) 65

Table 4.3 Item Characteristics of the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (N = 200) 66

Table 4.4 Item Characteristics of Scales of Belief in Ultimate and Immanent Justice. (N = 200)

67

Table 4.5 Item Characteristics of SSQ-6 (N = 200) 69

Table 4.6 Item Characteristics of Personal Perceived Control Scale (N= 200) 70

Table 4.7 Item Characteristics of Generalized Self Efficacy Scale (N = 200) 73

Table 4.8 Comparison of Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children on Study variables (N = 200) 74

Table 4.9 Correlations between Study Variables for Mothers of a Down Syndrome Child (light face) and Mothers of Normal Children (bold face; n = 100 each)

77

Table 4.10 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Life Satisfaction (N = 200)

80

Table 4.11 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Mood level (N = 200)

83

Table 4.12 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Depression (N = 200)

84

Table 4.13 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Anxiety (N = 200)

86

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 Perceived Availability of Support Explaining Life Satisfaction in Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children 82

Figure 4.2 Belief in Ultimate Justice Explaining Anxiety in Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children 88

Figure 4.3 Figural Representation of Results for Main Variables in the Study 89

vii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Informed Consent Form for Pilot Study: Phase I and Main study 128

Appendix B Informed Consent Form for Pilot Study: Phase II 129

Appendix C Demographic Data Sheet 130

Appendix D Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 131

Appendix E Trait Well-Being Inventory 132

Appendix F Personal Belief in a Just World Scale 133

Appendix G Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice 134

Appendix H Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6) 135

Appendix I Personal Perceived Control Scale 136

Appendix J Generalized Self Efficacy Scale 137

Appendix K Permission for Use of Scales 138

1

Chapter 1

1 INTRODUCTION

For a long time, focusing on the psychological problems of human beings, identifying

their factors and finding ways to cure them, psychologists had been ignoring that

humans have strengths and resources that help them not only keep sane but also achieve

heights of growth. These positive traits and virtues help the individual survive in

hardest conditions of life, find the ways to fulfill one’s aims and make the world a

pleasant place to live in for themselves and for others. One such resource that has not

been given due attention in psychology is belief in a just world (BJW). In Pakistan

particularly, this phenomenon has been scarcely investigated. Belief in a just world

(BJW) not only governs one’s level of well-being in normal circumstances but also

serves one in adverse conditions. The current work was carried out to investigate the

relationship between BJW and subjective well-being (SWB) in mothers of a child with

Down syndrome as compared to mothers of normal children taking into account

demographic variables, self efficacy, perceived control and perceived social support.

This chapter discus the theoretical constructs relevant to this study.

1.1 Belief in a Just World (BJW) Justice has always been one of the major concerns for human beings. Children are

formally and informally taught the importance of justice. “Good people are always

rewarded and bad people are always punished” is the main theme of all childhood

stories. This theme remains part and parcel of our thinking all over the life as it makes

the world predictable and meaningful place to live in. However, as the children grow up

cognitively, they develop the ability to see randomness in the world but they have still

the need to find out meaning in this randomness. They learn that bad people are not

always punished and good people do not always get the reward for their good deeds,

yet they tackle with this information either by giving meaning to the injustice, or by

helping the victims or solving the problems.

Despite its importance, subjective aspects of justice have been quite ignored by the

psychologists. Lerner was the first to introduce the justice motive theory (Lerner, 1965,

1975). In his own words

2

Individuals have a need to believe that they live in a world where people

generally get what they deserve. The BJW enables the individual to confront his

physical and social environment as though they were stable and orderly. Without

such a belief it would be difficult for the individual to commit himself to the

pursuit of long-range goals or even to the socially regulated behavior of day-to-

day life. Since the belief that the world is just serves such an important adaptive

function for the individual, people are very reluctant to give up this belief, and

they can be greatly troubled if they encounter evidence that suggests that the

world is not really just or orderly after all (Lerner & Miller, 1978, pp. 1030-

1031).

This motive guides human behavior and thinking. It helps the people to describe the

world as a meaningful place to live which in turn provides the foundation for

meaningful action in the world. It implies making efforts to maintain justice and react

to injustice. BJW is indicative of justice motive. The stronger one’s BJW, the harder

one will try to achieve justice. The more the person makes efforts to maintain or

establish justice, the more the one is sure that justice will be achieved.

The strength of justice motive varies from individual to individual, however. Cognitive

development plays a major role in fostering these beliefs (Maes & Kals, 2002). Positive

emotional orientation in the family is another important factor for the development of

strong BJW (Dalbert, 2001; Sallay & Dalbert, 2004) and development in intact families

fosters stronger beliefs in a just world than development in single parent families

(Sallay & Dalbert, 2004). Once the belief is developed, people are more likely to

preserve their belief even when they experience unfairness by evaluating experiences of

their life as fair (Dalbert & Stoeber, 2006). Since it becomes part of their cognitive

schemata which influences their cognitions and feelings and serves important adaptive

functions for them it is considered one of the positive illusions (Lipkus, Dalbert, &

Siegler, 1996).

1.1.1 Positive Illusions and BJW Over the course of their lives, individuals accumulate experiences about themselves and

the world in which they are living. These experiences are interpreted into personal

theories about the self and social environment. Such theories represent cognitive

schemata. They are source of the knowledge, which serves as an individual’s cognitive

3

filter and influence different aspects of individual’s thought. These schemata are mostly

not based on real life experiences. More often they reflect positively biased descriptions

of the world or the self and are therefore often called positive illusions (Taylor &

Brown, 1988) or positive cognitive biases (Cummins & Nistico, 2002). Most

commonly described positive illusions include positive view of self, illusion of control,

and unrealistic optimism.

It has been suggested that positive illusions or positive cognitive biases are

characteristic of normal thought and they promote various aspects of mental health or

psychological well being, including the ability to engage in pro-social behavior, to be

happy and to live a purposeful life (Taylor & Brown, 1988). Positive illusions are

particularly adaptive in threatening situations when individual’s cognitive processes

filter the negative information conveyed by the situation and distort it in positive

direction. For example, Taylor and Armor (1996) found that positive illusions are

correlated with successful adjustment to stressful circumstances, including extreme

adversity. In the same vein, Erez, Johnson, and Judge (1995) found that those with a

positive disposition tended to use more self-deception, which in turn increased their

subjective well-being. Lightsey (1994) found that people with positive cognitions are

less likely to be distressed in face of negative events.

Positive cognitive biases or positive illusions have been much criticized for their role in

maintaining and promoting psychological well being, as suggested by Taylor and

Brown (1988, 1994). Much of the criticism is based on the notion that it is rational

thought and not the distortion of reality that predicts mental health (Colvin & Block,

1994; Myers & Brewin, 1996). Cummins and Nistico (2002) answer this criticism by

differentiating between delusions and cognitive biases. According to them delusional

beliefs are incongruent with reality and thus fail to be adaptive, while on the other hand

cognitive biases are beliefs based in reality but with a positive bias in favor of the

individual.

BJW has been considered another positive illusion not generally caused by direct

experience of just and unjust experience in life (Dalbert, 2001). On the other hand

people are motivated to protect their belief in justice even when they experience

injustice by denying it in their own world (Lerner, 1980). This notion implies that

people perceive more justice for themselves than for others. Although, a recent study

4

has challenged this claim with the findings that strength of BJW is affected by

knowledge of just and unjust events in the world (Sutton et al., 2008), various adaptive

functions of BJW are becoming popular in researches studying BJW. These functions

are listed below

1.1.2 Functions of BJW People are willing to defend and maintain their BJW even in the presence of obvious

injustices in every-day life (Furnham, 2003; Hafer & Begue, 2005). People face

injustices in two ways: either they observe injustices or they face injustice in their own

lives.

Typical reactions to observed injustices include derogating and blaming the victims and

social exclusion of victims. As such BJW has become a widely discussed motive for

the well-known “blaming the victim” phenomenon. There is large body of empirical

support for this. Lerner and others experimentally demonstrated that the more severe

the undeserved suffering of victims of various injustices, and the less observers were

able to help, the more these observers derogated the victims (for a review, see Lerner &

Miller, 1978; Maes, 1998a). Up to 1990 the Just World research focused exclusively on

observers’ reaction to unfairness. Self report studies showed that BJW measured by

different just world scales (e.g., those of Dalbert, Montada & Schmitt, 1987; Lipkus,

1991; Rubin & Peplau, 1975) correlated with the level of derogation of unemployed

people, victims of Aids or cancer, residents of the third world, and other victim groups

(For a review, see Furnham & Procter, 1989).

People also try to maintain BJW when they face injustices in their own lives. Injustices

in personal life may be of very mild nature, like comparatively difficult assignments,

timely unfairness of teachers, and stressful demands of others, or of severe nature, for

example, unemployment, imprisonment, suffering from a fatal disease, having a

disabled child and lower social status.

Whether observed or experienced injustice is, BJW performs certain adaptive functions

for the people, which enable them to see the world as orderly and stable place to live in.

Despite this it is only in the last decade that focus of the research has been shifted to the

adaptive functions of BJW (Furnham, 2003). Three main functions of BJW have been

identified (Dalbert, 2001).

5

1.1.2.1 Personal contract and obligation to behave fairly BJW is indicative of personal contract, the terms of which are that individual will do

certain things and give up certain things in order to get desired outcome. The concern

with one’s own deserving gets linked to commitment to justice, to the insistence that

others get what they deserve. People recognize that their own ability to deserve what

they want depends on other people. Over the course of their development and in

interaction with their peers, children learn that fairness is the basis for mutual respect

and good social relationships. Those concerned with the fair treatment of others

maintain the social groups while those behaving unfairly exclude themselves from

social unit. Thus, there is strong interdependence between the individual and others.

Others can provide welcome response such as rewards and a sense of belonging, both

of which will be accorded to those who strive for justice, in so doing, show respect for

others and concern for social unit. So the individual is obliged to behave fairly to get

fair rewards. The stronger the BJW, the more compelled the individual feels to strive

for justice. This means that individuals higher in BJW strive to achieve their goals by

just means.

1.1.2.2 Trust in fairness Obligation to behave fairly leads to trust in fairness of others. This trust in fairness has

two aspects. First, high just world believers have the confidence that they will be

treated fairly by others. They are less suspicious of others, less cynical about pro-social

behavior of others (Furnham, 1995), and reveal more trust in others when help is

needed (Dalbert & Braun, 1997). Secondly, persons high in BJW trust that they will not

fall victim to an unforeseeable fate such as a serious traffic accident or robbery. This

trust in fairness has three major consequences.

(A) Investment in the future: People with strong BJW are more likely to behave and

act in particular way which they think will be rewarded tomorrow may be in remote

future as in the case of young prisoners who were reported to reveal less disciplinary

problems if they had strong belief in personal just world. Strong believers were also

surer that they would achieve their goals (Otto & Dalbert, 2005). Similarly high

believers may help others in the times of need with the expectation that they would get

the reward for their deed in the long run (Zuckerman, 1975).

6

(B) Buffer against stress: Because they are confident that they will be treated fairly,

individuals high in BJW feel less threatened and less distressed by the demands of

others (Tomaka & Blascovich, 1994). Thus BJW serves as a buffer protecting mental

health when individuals are under threat.

(C) Better performance: Individuals who maintain a strong BJW feel less threatened

and more challenged by the need to achieve. They feel fewer negative emotions in the

achievement situation, and achieve better results (Tomaka & Blascovich, 1994). This is

also true for school children continuously confronted with demands to achieve higher

(Dalbert & Maes, 2002). Subjects high in BJW expect to be treated fairly by others and

thus believe that they will be asked to perform only those tasks which they are able to

do. This strengthens their confidence in being able to solve the problems and reduces

feelings of threat and distress, thus leading to better results.

1.1.2.3 Interpretation of events of personal life in a meaningful way The third function of BJW is to provide framework, helping individuals to

interpret events of their personal life in a meaningful way. When individuals high in

BJW experience unfairness that cannot be resolved in reality they usually try to

assimilate this experience to their BJW. They either deny the injustice (Furnham, 1991;

Lipkus & Siegler, 1993; Montada, Schmitt, & Dalbert, 1986), or they try to find the

reason for injustice. They make causal attributions to find out meaning to their

seemingly random fate, which leaves positive impact on their adjustment efforts.

Lupfer, Doan, and Houston (1998) reported from an experimental study that strong just

world believers when allowed to find reasons for an event were less distressed than

those who could not find reasons.

Overall the functions of BJW have a variety of consequences and thus impact on

psychological well-being, either directly or mediated by these consequences. Pathways

to psychological well being are expected to be different for those who face common

and mild injustices in every day life, and for those who face such misfortunes with

which they have to cope for a longer period of time.

In everyday life, reducing threats, investment in the future, and higher level of

achievement are common effects of BJW, while in victims of misfortune interpreting

7

the events of life in meaningful way is more common. These various consequences lead

to the common goal, that is, better mental health and psychological well-being.

The proposition that people need to believe in a just world because of its adaptive

functions suggests that people must find ways of coping with evidence of injustice.

Although some of the strategies are implied in the functions, because of their

importance they are delineated separately.

1.1.3 Strategies for Maintaining Belief in a Just World Lerner (1980) discussed nine main strategies people use for dealing with threats to the

belief in a just world. These strategies are grouped in four categories discussed below.

1.1.3.1 Rational strategies The two rational strategies are the primary ways of dealing with injustice. These are

prevention and restitution. Prevention is acting to prevent injustice before it occurs and

restitution is restoring justice to unjust situations. These strategies are referred to as

rational because they involve accepting the presence of injustice.

1.1.3.2 Non-rational strategies They involve refusal to accept the presence of injustice. This is done in four ways. First

of these strategies is denial or withdrawal. It includes both the physical and mental

avoidance of injustice and physical and psychological withdrawal from threats to the

belief in a just world. Other three strategies in non rational category involve

reinterpretation of unjust event. Reinterpretation is done of cause for example blaming

the innocent victims; of character such as derogating the character of victim; or of

outcome, for example, by reasoning that suffering builds character.

1.1.3.3 Protective strategies These are characterized by general ways of thinking about the world. First, people

preserve a belief in a just world by thinking of the world in terms of ultimate justice,

reasoning that justice at least occurs in the long run. Second, people perceive their

environment as consisting of two different worlds: a world where sufferers of unjust

fate reside and one’s own world. This multiple worldview allows one to deal with

threats to one’s need to believe in a just world by denying the injustice in their world.

8

1.1.3.4 Penultimate defense

Finally, Lerner (1980) proposed a penultimate defense in which people claim that they

do not believe in a just world. By holding this belief they actually defend themselves

from threats to the need to believe in a just world.

Of these tactics, irrational strategies have received much research attention in the just

world literature (see Furnham, 2003; Hafer & Begue, 2005). Rational strategies have

been ignored by the researchers to the extent that the just world believers are thought to

be employing only irrational strategies to cope with threat to their need to believe in a

just world (Albee, 1986). It is only in the last decade that protective strategies have got

attention of the researchers. In this reference, Maes (1998b) conducted studies with

ultimate and immanent belief in justice while Dalbert (1999) differentiated personal

BJW from general BJW.

1.1.4 Categorization of BJW Although BJW was perceived as having many facets as it is implied in the strategies to

protect one’s belief in a just world, earlier correlational researches misunderstood it as a

one-dimensional phenomenon (Rubin & Peplau, 1975). However it is just recently that

differentiation between various just world beliefs have got attention of the researchers.

Two important categorizations are discussed below.

1.1.4.1 Personal versus general BJW As it has been said earlier that BJW is the belief that on the whole people get what they

deserve and they deserve what they get. But people see justice in their own

environment differently from the other people’s environment. One’s BJW is more

threatened and thus person is more motivated to preserve one’s BJW when injustice

occurs with oneself than it occurs with others. The more just world research focuses on

the domain of mental health (Dalbert, 2001) the more important is the differentiation

between a general and a more personal BJW. Besides the Lerner’s (1980) earlier

reference to the idea that people have biased perception of justice in their own world

and other people’s world, there are several theoretical and empirical findings within the

BJW literature that highlight the need to differentiate self from others.

Hafer and Olson (1993) examined the relationship between the BJW and women’s

reported discontent, with their own, and other women’s working situations (personal

9

versus group discontent). They found that the BJW was unrelated to personal

discontent but was inversely associated with group discontent. As a possible

explanation for these results, they suggested that their general measure of the BJW

(Rubin & Peplau, 1975) and measure of personal discontent differed in their levels of

specificity. That is, the Just World Scale assessed subjects’ views about the fairness of

the world in general, across many types of situations, whereas personal discontent was

measured in relation only to subjects’ specific job situations.

Distinction between personal and general belief in a just world was also implied in

Furnham and Procter’s construct of multidimensional belief in a just world (Furnham &

Procter, 1989, 1992). According to them, the BJW should be considered a

multidimensional construct that can be examined along two dimensions. The first

dimension is world type, which consists of (a) a just world in which people are always

rewarded for their good actions and punished for bad ones, (b) an unjust world in which

there are bad outcomes for good deeds and good outcomes for bad deeds, and (c) a

random world in which there is no relationship of actions and their outcomes. The

second dimension concerns the areas of control in which people perceive justice. The

areas of control consist of the personal, interpersonal, and political spheres. Based on

these dimensions, a person may perceive the world as fair, unfair, or random in one

sphere of life but not another.

Another study by Dalbert and Yamauchi (1994) hints towards self versus other

distinction. They measured general BJW and justice judgments about the situation of an

unprivileged group in Hawaii and Germany. They observed that the subjects with a

greater BJW and who were more socially similar to the disadvantaged group judged the

disadvantaged group’s situation as more fair. Dalbert and Yamauchi suggested that if

the subjects perceived the people of unprivileged group similar to them they identified

themselves with them and in order to protect their BJW denied the injustice to these

people.

To study this phenomenon more clearly an attempt was made by Lipkus et al. (1996) to

develop a measure to assess BJW for self as distinguished from general or global BJW

and it was hypothesized that personal BJW would be a better predictor for

psychological well being than general BJW. As predicted, the BJW for self most

strongly and consistently predicted decreases in depression and stress, and increases in

10

life satisfaction. Finally, Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, 1999) was

developed to measure the belief that overall events in one’s life are just. It has been

observed that people differentiate the general from personal BJW (e.g., Dalbert, 1999;

Dalbert & Radant, 2004; Fatima & Khalid, 2007) and endorse personal BJW more than

general BJW (Begue, 2002; Cubela & Ivanov, 2000; Cubela, Prorokovic, & Gregov,

1999; Dalbert, 1999).

1.1.4.2 Ultimate and immanent belief in justice Maes (1998b) proposed a differentiation between two variants of general BJW: One is

the tendency to perceive or see justice in the events that have occurred (belief in

immanent justice) and the other is the tendency to believe that forthcoming events will

settle any injustice that occurs (belief in ultimate justice). Maes (1998b) related the

belief in immanent justice to the phenomenon observed by Piaget, in which children

view events as the direct and just payment for previous actions (Piaget as cited in

Gruber & Vonèche, 1977) and belief in ultimate justice to certain religious doctrines, in

which compensation for the present injustice on earth is promised in another world or

within large time frame.

Validity of the distinction between the two beliefs was first worked out in a study on

attitudes towards cancer (Maes, 1998b). Different correlational pattern was observed

for the two beliefs. Belief in ultimate justice was accompanied by a more positive

impression of the cancer patients, personal importance of the religion, the ability to find

meaning in severe illness; expectation that cure is possible, trust in prevention, and

beliefs in personal freedom and control. On the other hand belief in immanent justice

was associated with accusation, blame, and acceptance of sanctions against victims

(Maes, 1998b). In another study using more general measures of belief in immanent

and ultimate justice Maes and Schmitt (1999) reached similar conclusions using a

sample of West Germans and East Germans for a research project “Justice as a problem

within reunified Germany.” They concluded that immanent justice goes along with

tendency to strict and rigorous judgments while ultimate justice correlates with

mildness and understanding. They also observed that immanent justice was associated

with higher sensitivity to the experience of injustice as a victim while ultimate justice

favors the experience of injustice as a favored person or as a neutral observer. Begue

(2002) also observed different pattern of correlation for the two beliefs with religious

11

participation as positively associated with belief in ultimate justice but unrelated with

belief in immanent justice.

Importance of the distinction between the two beliefs has also been demonstrated in the

area of school psychology (Maes & Kals, 2002, 2004). In a study conducted on a large

sample of German students the two facets of the belief measured with school specific

questionnaire were distinguished by means of factor analysis. Results showed that

belief in ultimate justice was able to protect students’ mental well being whereas belief

in immanent justice was associated with more school anxiety, and fear of others.

Similarly, belief in ultimate justice was associated with the perception of solidarity and

learning enjoyment in class, whereas belief in immanent justice was associated with the

experience of rivalry and competition in class (Maes & Kals, 2002). In another study

with school students they observed that belief in ultimate justice went along with more

curiosity while belief in immanent justice was negatively related to curiosity. They also

demonstrated positive relationship of belief in ultimate justice and negative relationship

of belief in immanent justice with life satisfaction (Maes & Kals, 2004).

In nut shell it seems reasonable to classify the general BJW into ultimate and immanent

belief in justice which have different correlates. But unfortunately this distinction has

not gained much attention of the researchers. More popular is the distinction between

general and personal BJW.

Implied in the categorization of justice beliefs is that not all types of beliefs in justice

are beneficial for psychological well-being. Moreover, the distinction between two

dimensions of the general belief in a just world raises doubts about whether personal

belief in a just world is necessarily more adaptive than general one.

1.1.5 BJW as a Buffer or a Personal Resource When people face unjust experiences their BJW is threatened and they try to protect

their belief by assimilating the injustice to their BJW either by denying the adverse

experience or by justifying it. Thus it is assumed that BJW gets particularly activated in

unfair situations and helps the people to maintain their well-being. This theorizing is in

line with the buffer hypothesis which states that BJW is more adaptive for victims of

injustice than for non-victims. Some of the earlier studies have provided support for

this hypothesis (Dalbert, 1998, 2001, 2002, as cited in Dalbert, 2001). On the other

12

hand personal resource hypothesis states that BJW is a resource that is adaptive in all

conditions of life whether unfair or not. It helps people to cope with diverse situations

of life effectively and thus enhance their well-being. More recent studies confirm this

view of BJW as a personal resource (Correia, Kamble & Dalbert, in press; Cubela &

Kvartuc, 2007; Dzuka & Dalbert, 2002). Personal resource hypothesis implies that

strong BJW may initiate different coping strategies in different situations of life but the

consequence is enhanced psychological well-being.

Describing the importance of BJW for well-being in different conditions of life it is

pertinent to discuss the very concept of psychological well-being.

1.2 Psychological Well-Being The concept of psychological well-being has been defined as positive psychological

functioning and experience (Ryff, 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2001). In this sense

psychological well-being may be understood as positive mental health but what defines

positive functioning and what constitutes good life has been a controversial issue.

Nonetheless, different approaches of psychological well-being have been followed by

the researchers in the field of well-being.

Two relatively different but overlapping approaches are eudaimonism and hedonism

(Ryan & Deci, 2001). Eudaimonism focuses on meaningful life and self-actualization,

and defines well-being in terms of the degree to which a person is fully functioning and

hedonism focuses on happiness and defines well-being in terms of pleasure attainment

and pain avoidance.

Keyes, Shmotkin, and Ryff (2002) extended the distinctions between the eudaimonic

and hedonic approaches by renaming them as psychological or multidimensional well-

being and subjective well-being. They used the terms to highlight the fact that

multidimensional well-being does not only mean self-realization. It also includes other

aspects like positive relations with others, and self acceptance, and studies of subjective

well-being include not only happiness (hedonic well-being) but also cognitive

assessment of life satisfaction.

Following Keyes et al.’s distinction between multidimensional well-being and

subjective well-being the review of the two approaches is presented below.

13

1.2.1 Multidimensional Model of Well-Being The concept of psychological well-being is based on philosophical descriptions of a

good person (Ryff, 1989, 1995; Ryff & Keyes, 1995). Well-being is perceived as a sum

of characteristics that should be present in an ideal human being and can be objectively

assessed (Ryff & Singer, 1998). This approach identifies six specific characteristics that

must be present in the individual to be psychologically well. The list includes, self-

acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose

in life, and personal growth. Brief description of each characteristic is given below.

Self-acceptance: It is about recognizing and accepting both good and bad qualities in

one self.

Positive relations with others: Person with positive relations will have trust in others,

empathize with others, help others when it is required, and is capable of having close

relationship with others,

Autonomy: Person with autonomy is master of his or her own self. Person takes one’s

own decisions, rejects the pressures from society, and judges the things by one’s own

standards.

Environmental mastery: Person with high environmental mastery has ability to

manipulate others, can create the environment that suits him, and can make use of

existing opportunities to fulfill his or her needs.

Purpose in life: Person with purpose in life has a sense of directedness, feels there is

meaning to present and past life, holds beliefs that give life purpose and has aims and

objectives for living.

Personal growth: Person with high score on this dimension has feeling of continued

development, sees self as growing and expanding, is open to new experiences, has

sense of realizing his or her potential and sees improvement in self and behavior over

time.

Ryff (1989) and Ryff and Keyes (1995) found that these values have not been

represented in subjective well-being research. Keyes et al. (2002) conducted a study in

America and from factor analysis concluded that subjective well-being and

14

multidimensional well-being were related, but had distinct status. They also found that

strongly existential aspect of multidimensional well-being (i.e., purpose in life and

personal growth) most clearly separated from the affective and cognitive component of

subjective well-being.

1.2.2 Subjective Well-Being (SWB) Studies conducted with reference to subjective well-being (SWB) deal with how and

why people think of their life in positive ways and feel good. So the literature on

subjective well-being includes studies on happiness, life satisfaction, and positive

emotions (Diener, 1984). In recent years the term SWB has been precisely used to refer

to people’s cognitive and affective evaluation of their lives (Diener, 2000; Diener &

Diener, 2000; Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Diener, Suh, & Oishi, 1997; Keyes

et al., 2002). Thus, a person with high SWB is one who is satisfied with life, and

seldom experience negative emotions such as sorrow and rage. On the other hand, a

person with low SWB is one who is dissatisfied with life, experiences little joy and

happiness, and often goes through unpleasant feelings.

1.2.2.1 Components of SWB The cognitive and affective components of SWB have been found to be separable well-

being variables which sometimes move in different directions over time and must be

studied separately to get a complete picture of SWB (Diener, 1984; Diener, Lucas, &

Scollon, 2006; Lucas, Diener, & Suh, 1996; Shmotkin, 2005.).

(A) Affective component of SWB: It is also referred as emotional well-being or

happiness, and is traceable to Bradburn’s (1969) work. Bradburn distinguished between

positive affect and negative affect and defined happiness as the balance between the

two.

Although there have been controversies regarding the independence or interdependence

of positive and negative affect (Diener et al., 1999; Diener & Emons, 1984; War,

Barter, & Brownbridge, 1983), there is no controversy on the fact that high positive

affect and low negative affect lead to happiness. So the researchers adopt basically two

types of measures for measuring the affect as a component of SWB. These measures

can be categorized as measures of positive and negative affect and direct measures of

happiness. Some examples of measures of affect are Affectometer (Kamman & Flett,

15

1983), and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988).

Examples of direct measures of happiness include single item scales like Gurin Scale

(Gurin, Veroff, & Feld, 1960), and Andrews and Withey’s Delighted Terrible Scale

(Andrew & Withey, 1976), and multiple item scales like Subjective Happiness Scale

(Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999) and Mood Level Scale (Dalbert, 1992).

(B) Cognitive aspect of SWB: It is also called life satisfaction. It refers to a

judgmental process, in which individuals assess the quality of their lives on the basis of

their own subjective standards. People compare their perceived conditions of life with

the criterion they have set for themselves, and according to the degree to which the

conditions match their standards they report high or low level of life satisfaction. In this

way life satisfaction is a conscious cognitive judgment of one’s life in which the criteria

for judgment are up to the person (Pavot & Diener, 1993).

Life satisfaction may be more specific (e.g., marital satisfaction, or satisfaction with

one’s car) or general (e.g., satisfaction with life as a whole). With the understanding

that individuals have unique criteria for a good life, have different standards of success

in different areas of life, and they weigh domains of lives in terms of their own values,

global judgment of life is given more importance than satisfaction with specific

domains. A famous measure of global life satisfaction is Satisfaction with Life Scale

(Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). Another comparable measure of life

satisfaction scale is by Dalbert (1992).

Although both affective and cognitive components are based on evaluative appraisals,

the differences in their processes can be easily identified. People may ignore or deny

negative emotional reactions while still recognizing the undesirable factors in their

lives. Moreover a person’s conscious evaluation of his or her life circumstances may

reflect conscious values and goals. In contrast affective reactions may reflect

unconscious motives and the influences of bodily states to a greater extent than do life

satisfaction ratings.

1.2.2.2 Trait Vs State SWB Becker and Dalbert independently (as cited in Dalbert, 1998) pointed out the

importance of differentiation between trait and state well-being. Cognitive and affective

dimensions together are relatively stable and thus make up the trait part of SWB, while

16

transitory moods like depressive and anxiety symptoms can be considered part of state

well-being. Differentiation between trait and state well-being has been demonstrated in

BJW research with a general conclusion that BJW is more strongly related with trait

well-being dimensions than with state well-being (Dalbert, 1998; Correia, Batista, &

Lima, in press).

Overall the concept of SWB, with its more stable affective and cognitive aspects as

well as mood states, is characterized by its subjectivity. It resides within the individual.

Thus SWB approach pays more attention to people’s emotions, and evaluations, and

does not grant complete authority to the external judgments of behavioral experts to

decide on the well-being of people with yard stick of predetermined values in hand as

in multidimensional approach. Therefore present research follows the SWB approach

of psychological well-being on the ground that inherent in the concept of SWB is that

people have diverse values, goals, and strengths and they are to decide whether their

lives are satisfying based on their individual values, goals and life circumstances. If a

person is satisfied with his or her life, he or she probably has the characteristics that he

or she considers important. Oishi, Diener, Suh, and Lucas (1999) found that what made

people happy depended on their values. For students who highly valued achievement,

getting good grades was predictive of their satisfaction, whereas for those who valued

conformity, family harmony was more important to their life satisfaction. Similarly

Oishi and Diener (2001) concluded from their study on Asians and European

Americans that achieving one’s independent goals did not have positive effect on the

well-being of Asians while it enhanced well-being of European Americans. Another

study by Diener and Fujita (1995) showed that people are happier when they have

resources needed to reach their particular goals. Thus SWB comes at least in part from

achieving values and goals that are subjective rather than objective.

1.2.2.3 Causal models of SWB Several models of the dynamics of SWB have been proposed. These models may be

divided into two categories: bottom up model and top down model.

(A) Bottom up model: The major focus of early researches was to identify the bottom

up factors that influence well-being that is, how do external events, situations, and

demographics influence happiness? According to this objectivist or bottom up tradition

happy people are simply those with the most advantages, for example, people with a lot

17

of wealth, good health, a satisfying relationship, and absence of accidents in their lives

(for a review, see Diener, 1984; Diener et al., 1999). However, there is growing body of

literature with the evidence that objective circumstances, demographic variables, and

life events don’t influence people’s well-being to the extent that it is generally thought

(Diener et al., 1999; Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1999). For example, Campbell, Converse,

and Rodgers (1976) found that demographic factors explained less than 20% of

variability in SWB. Andrews and Withey (1976) could only explain 8% by using these

variables. Moreover, on the basis of his review of literature, Argyle (1999) suggested

that environmental factors account for about 15% of the variance in reported SWB.

Therefore gradually researchers turned to cognitive and personality variables to explain

changes in SWB.

(B) Top down model: According to this model structures within the person determine

how events and circumstances are perceived. Global dimensions of personality in

essence determine levels of SWB. Andrews and Withey (1974) reported data that

supported top down approach. In predicting life satisfaction, they found that the type of

domain satisfactions that were used as predictors did not matter and that weighting the

domain did not produce much better predictions. These findings suggest that

satisfaction with the domains may result from rather than cause global life satisfaction.

In support of the idea that personality factors and not situational factors influence SWB,

Magnus and Diener (1991) found that measures of personality predicted life

satisfaction four years later even after controlling for the influence of intervening life

events. Eid and Diener (2004) also concluded that one’s level of well being is

reasonably stable over time.

Different explanations have been offered for the link between personality and

subjective well being. For example Heady and wearing (1989) through dynamic

equilibrium model proposed that people maintain levels of subjective well being that

are determined by their personalities. Their work revealed that as circumstances of life

and levels of SWB are fairly stable over time, it is reasonable to think of each person as

having his or her own normal equilibrium levels of favorable and adverse events and

normal equilibrium levels of SWB. These equilibrium levels are very predictable on the

basis of stable person characteristics. Changes occur in this equilibrium due to unusual

favorable or adverse life events. However, this change is likely to be temporary,

18

because stable personality traits usually ensure that conditions of life and SWB return

to their equilibrium levels. A quite different process is theorized by those who suggest a

person-environment fit is responsible for personality’s influence on SWB. In a test of

this approach Moskowitz and Cote (1995) found that people are happy when they

engage in behaviors that are representative of their personality.

Present research follows the top down model of subjective well-being when predicting

SWB from BJW. Since BJW is assumed to be a relatively stable personality trait it is

expected that it will influence the well-being as is suggested by the top down model.

1.3 Common Correlates of SWB and BJW As the subjective well being has been studied in relation to many other variables, it is

pertinent to include in the study at least some important variables, observed to effect

well-being, on the one hand, and are related with BJW on the other. These variables

include psychological variables, i.e., personal perceived control, generalized self

efficacy, perceived social support and demographic variables like age, marital status,

education, family size, and income. It is important to control these factors in the study

in order to avoid the relationship between BJW and well-being that may result from the

association of these variables with BJW. By controlling these variables it can be

claimed that the observed relationship between BJW and well-being does not owe to

the other factors.

1.3.1 Perceived Control Control theorists initially defined perceived control as the individual’s ability to bring

changes in the external environment to meet one’s requirements (Rothbaum, Weisz, &

Snyder, 1982; Skinner, 1996). However, this definition suggests that an individual is

only able to control an event by manipulating the external environment, and fails to

acknowledge the notion that individuals can control their response to an event by

manipulating their own cognitions. Consequently, Rothbaum et al. (1982) developed

the two process model of primary and secondary perceived control. Primary perceived

control refers to an individual’s efforts to change the external environment to suite their

specific needs. In contrast, secondary perceived control targets the self and attempts to

achieve changes directly within the individual (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Rothbaum

et al., 1982; Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996).

19

Rothbaum et al. (1982) realized that internal behaviors such as passivity, withdrawal

and submissiveness were not always reflective of lack of control, as it is usually

thought. They may in fact be initiated in an effort to maintain sense of control

particularly when they help to avoid negative effects of stressful situations by diverting

attention to more positive things in life, to more achievable goals and to the human

limitation to have control on every thing.

The two process model was initially adopted by the developmental psychologists to

explain the life span theory of control. This theory proposes the construct of control as

the central theme for characterizing human development from infancy to old age

(Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996). According to the theory

early development is characterized by increased ability to exert primary control over

the environment. As the individuals reach the adulthood, levels of both primary and

secondary control increase and in late middle and old age individuals increasingly

resort to secondary control process (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Schulz &

Heckhausen, 1996).

The Theory also postulates that primary control is more adaptive than secondary

control and secondary control plays a compensatory role when primary control

strategies fail (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995, 1999; Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996).

However, the hypotheses of primacy of primary control has been challenged by Gould

(1999) who argues that whether one control is more adaptive or other, is different in

different cultures. He attributes these differences to collectivism in Asian countries and

individualism in western countries as Asians are more likely to make adjustments in

their own self to accommodate other people while westerns are more likely to expect

other people to take responsibility for their self. Although, Thompson, Collins,

Newcomb, and Hunt (1996) found that primary control explained distress as a sample

of HIV-positive prisoners reported less distress after controlling for secondary control,

however, they did not find support for the compensatory role of secondary control as it

was observed to be associated with more distress when primary control was low. They

also found that primary control did not explain distress in African American prisoners.

In the same vein Heeps (2000) concluded from his study that people who were high on

one control and low on other were less psychologically adjusted than people who were

20

average or high on both controls. Overall primacy of primary control has not been

consistently observed in different cultures.

1.3.1.1 Dimensions of control Control strategies, primary or secondary, can be distinguished with reference to

whether they are based on facts or misperceptions and whether they are adaptive or

maladaptive. Heckhausen and Schulz (1995) named these dimensions as “veridical-

illusory” and “functional-dysfunctional” dimensions (p. 286).

(A) Veridical-Illusory dimension: A strategy may be based on actual relation between

cause and effect or it may be based on some biased thinking. An example of veridical

primary control is casting vote to bring change in government and of illusory primary

control is to read magical verses to bring about change in others behaviors. Similarly

example of veridical secondary control is to correctly estimate one’s limitations and

example of illusory secondary control is devaluing unachievable goals.

(B) Functional-dysfunctional dimension: Both primary and secondary control

strategies whether they are veridical or illusory may be functional or dysfunctional.

Veridical controls are functional if they promote both short term and long term control

and dysfunctional if they are effective for short term and ineffective in the long run.

Referring to the veridical primary control strategies, casting vote to bring change in

government is functional and working day and night may help you achieve some short

term goal but is dysfunctional as it exhausts all the energy. Example of veridical and

functional secondary control strategy is to correctly estimate one’s limitations as it

helps to divert attention to more achievable goals and example of veridical and

dysfunctional secondary control strategy is making pessimistic attributions.

Not all the illusory controls are dysfunctional. Effective strategy, even if based on

wrong perceptions, is functional. Illusory primary control strategy of reading magical

verses to bring about change in other’s behavior is dysfunctional but coping with fatal

disease with the belief that it will be cured is functional. Similarly considering the

illusory secondary control, devaluing unachievable goals is functional but increasing

value of unachievable goals is dysfunctional.

Functional-dysfunctional dimension of control is well demonstrated in Cousins’ (2001)

study on carers of mentally ill people and the comparison group. From the factor

21

analysis of primary and secondary control items she found that both primary and

secondary control items were loaded on factor 1 and some secondary control items

were loaded on factor 2. On inspection of items she observed that items loaded by

factor 1 reflect that problem is being addressed and acknowledged, while items loaded

by factor 2 reflect the denial of the problem. Although she was unable to identify the

two factor structure for primary and secondary control but functional and dysfunctional

dimensions were differentiated which she named as approach and avoidant control

respectively.

As it is usually difficult to assess if the control is based on realistic evaluation or is just

illusory, the control is studied as perceived control. Moreover as the psychologists are

always more interested in subjective aspects of human behavior, the role it plays in

human functioning is considered more important than its objectivity.

1.3.2 Self-Efficacy Another related yet distinct concept is self-efficacy. Bandura (1977) defined self-

efficacy as “conviction that one can successfully execute the behavior required to

produce the outcomes” (p. 193). While the perceived primary and secondary control

refers to the efforts to maintain control either by manipulating the environment or

manipulating one’s own cognitions, self-efficacy refers to individual’s confidence in

one’s ability to have a control over different situations of life.

Self-efficacy has been shown to affect many aspects of human behavior, including

motives, feelings, cognitions, and actions (Bandura, 1997). People with strong belief in

their abilities, set their goals high, are less threatened by stresses of life, find ways to

accomplish their goals, and stick to the path they have selected to reach the destination.

Bandura suggests that roots of this important belief lie mainly in social ties.

1.3.2.1 Determinants of self efficacy Bandura (1994, 1997, 2008) discussed in detail how the belief develops despite so

called hardships in life.

(A) Mastery experiences: Successes in life help to build up strong sense of self-

efficacy, and failures weaken it. However, if success is too easy, people are easily

discouraged by even a small failure. Therefore some difficulties in attaining a goal give

the experience of overcoming obstacles through persistent efforts.

22

(B) Vicarious modeling: Observing other people succeed gives the individual

confidence that one has also the ability needed to be successful. However, the influence

of observation depends on how similar the model is to the observer. Models dissimilar

to the observer do not have any impact on their self efficacy

(C) Social persuasion: People who are encouraged by the significant others that they

are capable to produce desired outcome are more likely to put effort to achieve their

aims. However, mere encouragement is not enough to boost self efficacy if the person

does not experience success as result of the efforts that one puts to achieve one’s goal.

(D) Somatic and emotional states: To some extent people also evaluate their efficacy

on the basis of their physical and emotional reactions to stress. People are likely to

interpret their fatigue, and pain as signs of bodily weakness to perform certain tasks.

Similarly bad moods weaken the belief in one’s capabilities.

Since people have different experiences for different tasks and in different areas of life

it is usually thought that people have varying levels of efficacy for various skills.

Although the domain specific approach of self-efficacy is inherent in Bandura’s (1977)

theory, there is growing interest in more global concept of self-efficacy.

1.3.2.2 General Vs domain specific self efficacy There may be as many self-efficacies as many areas of functioning. To predict

performance in particular area self-efficacy in that area is required. For example, Math

self-efficacy is required for performance in math test, but general self-efficacy defined

as individual’s general sense of control over different situations of life (Schwarzer,

1994) aims at a global and stable belief in ones abilities to deal with variety of stressful

situations over a longer period of time, e.g., migration and recovery from illness. It has

been observed that general self-efficacy explains better general outcomes like overall

health, well being and adaptation. Schwarzer, Hahn, and Jerusalem (1993) concluded

from their longitudinal study on East Germany refugees that people with strong general

self-efficacy were more adapted than people with weak general self-efficacy. In the

same vein Shroder, Schwarzer, and Konertz (1998) observed that cardiac patients with

strong general self-efficacy had a better quality of life after six months of cardiac

surgery than those with weak general self-efficacy.

23

1.3.3 Social Support It is well established that human beings are social animals who depend on others not

only to fulfill their physical needs but also for their psychological needs. People derive

satisfaction from their sense of belongingness to the others around. They benefit from

others either indirectly by learning from their experiences or directly when they get

support from them in times of need. Social support has been defined as the individual’s

perception of care, respect, love and help that one gets from others (Cobb, 1976). Two

major characteristics of social support widely described are the social-network and

functional characteristics of social support. Former is concerned with sources of social

support, for example, marital status, the number of friends or relatives, coworkers,

community organizations who are included in the support system, and frequency of

interaction with them (Berkman & Syme, 1979; Mitchell & Trickett, 1980), while the

later is concerned with the type of support that is provided and level of satisfaction with

the support (Sarason, Levine, Basham, & Sarason, 1983; Vaux & Harrison, 1985).

1.3.3.1 Types of social support Social support is often categorized with reference to what functions it performs for

individuals. Four basic types of social support are described below.

(A) Emotional support: The feelings that person gets from others that one is cared for,

that others understand one’s problems, and that one is being attended to and not alone

in stressful situations are all included in emotional support. This type of support helps

the individual feel comfortable in the times of difficulties.

(B) Esteem support: It involves the perception that one gets due respect from others,

that one’s feelings and ideas are accepted as such and the person gets encouragement

for one’s efforts. This type of support helps to build confidence and improve

individual’s self esteem.

(C) Instrumental support: It involves provision of direct help or support that is

provided in terms of money, professional services or goods in times of stress.

(D) Informational support: It involves information, suggestions that are provided to

solve the problems. For example, the advice a sick person receives from physician or a

friend to treat the illness is informational support.

24

1.3.3.2 Models of social support Whether the social support helps the people in time of stress or in every condition of

life has been extensively explored. The two models of social support are described

below.

(A) Direct effect model: According to this model social support fosters well being in

all circumstances of life, including stressful as well as non stressful. It helps people by

giving them a greater sense of belongingness, better self esteem and confidence in their

self to tackle the problems before they occur (Cohen & Wills, 1985).

(B) Buffering model: According to this model social support benefits the individual in

the time of stress only. When there is no stress social support is of little significance.

Individuals with high social support either do not perceive the difficult situation as

stressful or even if they appraise the situation as stressful they bring changes in their

behavior to handle their problems (Cohen & Wills, 1985).

In summary people get support from others in various situations of life from friends,

family and others around. The perception of this support helps them to maintain their

well-being in stressful as well as non stressful situations of life.

1.3.4 Demographic Variables It has already been mentioned in section 1.2.2.1 that demographics have been one of

the earliest interests of the psychologists as factors influencing subjective well-being.

Although their role has not been found to be as influential as the cognitive and

personality variables, there is no doubt that they act as instruments in providing the

person with certain resources that in turn help them to maintain their well-being. For

example, the money, individual earns to get the necessities and luxuries of life, has

become the yardstick for how valuable an individual is. It provides one not only with

the means for living and to achieve one’s goals but also gives the confidence that one

has control on one’s life (Johnson & Krueger, 2006). Similarly, education is not only

source of exposure to broader horizons but it also equips the individual to deal with

problems more effectively, to enhance one’s capabilities and to spend one’s life in more

meaningful way. People do not enjoy their achievements in isolation. It is important to

share one’s life with other people especially with a partner who physically and

emotionally supports one in the long run. There is ample evidence that marriage is an

25

institution which is a source of stable and meaningful family life. It equally benefits

both men and women (Shields & Wooden, 2003). Importance of marital status is even

more important for Pakistani women as marital status is also a source of economic, and

social security for them in addition to physical and emotional support (Nazir, 2001).

Children are considered part and parcel of happy married life. However, bringing them

up also brings its own stresses and anxiety. Especially when children are young and

dependant on parents to fulfill their needs they cause physical and psychological stress

for their mothers who are considered their primary caretakers. However, when they are

adults and get independent and mothers have more time for themselves they become

source of achievement and fulfillment (Shields & Wooden, 2003). If children are born

with some disability their process of getting independent is hindered and is a source of

long-term adjustments in life of their parents, especially mothers.

1.4 Developmental Disabilities in Children Developmental disabilities are the disabilities that affect the child by birth or in early

years of life and are of relatively permanent nature. Mental retardation, cerebral palsy,

autism and various genetic disorders are generally referred to as developmental

disabilities. These disabilities affect the child’s ability to live independently, to take

care of one self, to learn, to communicate with others, to earn money, and to take

decisions.

As compared to other developmental disabilities, prevalence rate of Down syndrome is

very high. Down syndrome has been reported to affect every 800 live births (Hall,

2004). It is a chromosomal disorder that is generally identified by the phenotypic

features and developmental delay. Three types of Down syndrome are trisomy 21

(presence of 47 chromosomes), translocation (number of chromosomes are normal but

the extra chromosome 21 material is attached with chromosome 14 or other

chromosome), and mosaicism (some cells have 46 and some have 47 chromosomes).

Typical features of Down syndrome are abundant neck skin, mouth corners turned

down ward, general hypotonia, flat face, dysplastic ear, epicanthic eye fold, gap

between first and second toes, and protruding tongue (Fried, 1980). Though not all

types of Down syndrome children have these features, especially mosaic cases,

presence of most of these features along with history of developmental delay is clear

indication of Down syndrome. In Pakistan more than ninety percent of the Down

26

syndrome cases are accurately diagnosed with the help of clinical features in early

years of their life (Ahmad, Ghafoor, Samore, & Chattha, 2004). For more precise

diagnosis chromosomal analyses, karyotyping is recommended. Since the test is

expensive and clinical diagnosis is usually accurate, children are rarely referred for

karyotyping in Pakistan.

Children with Down syndrome often have number of behavioral and physical

problems. They are generally mildly to moderately retarded. Their language is delayed.

They use few words and speak less. Their speech is usually unintelligible. The

weakness in communication is observed throughout their life (Buckley, 1993; Dykens,

Hodapp, & Evans, 2006). They have tendency to engage in problematic behavior such

as doing same thing again and again, disobeying orders, talking with one self and

avoiding others (Feeley & Jones, 2006). Because of number of psychological problems

these children need supervision throughout their life.

These children are also likely to suffer from particular health related problems like

congenital heart diseases, hearing problems, intestinal problems such as blocked small

bowl or esophagus, eye related problems, such as cataracts, thyroid dysfunctions, and

dementia. These children are also more likely to suffer from leukemia and to develop

defective spinal cord. They are also more likely to develop chronic respiratory

infections (Hall, 2004). Although multiple health related problems lead to shorter life

expectancy for these children, if they are properly dealt with these children can live a

longer life.

1.5 Rationale of the Current Investigation Being mother of a special child like one with Down syndrome is a challenging and

stressful situation which requires a lot of patience and grit. Children with Down

syndrome were selected because of high prevalence rate of the disorder. Moreover,

quick diagnosis can be made in case of these children because of their specific facial

features and observable developmental delays. As the disorder is usually diagnosed

early, parents of such children are more ready to accept the limitations of their children

than is the case with other forms of developmental disabilities. Like other children main

responsibility of taking care of such children is put on the mothers. Hence, mothers are

more likely than fathers to face all the pressures and stresses that go with the never

ending task of taking care of a child with disability which may result in more negative

27

outcomes in these mothers than fathers (Hastings et al., 2005; Olsson & Hwang, 2001;

Shin, Nhan, Crittenden, Flory, & Ladinsky, 2006). The study was designed to

understand how such a stress of raising a Down syndrome child would be related with

mothers’ BJW and then which among the different variants of BJW would be more

strongly associated with subjective well-being. The inclusion of control group, mothers

of normal children, provided an opportunity to see whether BJW is influenced by life

circumstances or not and whether the relationship between BJW and well-being

dimensions is stronger in mothers of a Down syndrome child than in mothers of normal

children. Although, previous studies have investigated these links comparing people

with and without any trauma in different countries no such attempt has been made so

far in Pakistan.

1.6 Objectives of the Study The study was designed with the following objectives

1. To understand the role of personal BJW, immanent belief in justice and ultimate

belief in justice in SWB of mothers of a child with Down syndrome as compared to

mothers of normal children after controlling for demographics, perceived control,

perceived social support and self efficacy.

2. To compare the two groups of mothers on strength of Personal BJW, belief in

ultimate justice and belief in immanent justice.

28

Chapter 2

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In connection with the objectives of this study this chapter will first explore the studies

that relate with subjective well-being of mothers of special children and more

specifically mothers of children with Down syndrome. Then the studies comparing

BJW in adverse and non-adverse situations will be elaborated following the studies

showing relationship between BJW and SWB. In addition, studies with other

psychological resources and demographic variables expected to be related with

subjective well-being on the one hand and BJW on the other are described.

2.1 SWB of Mothers of Children with Down Syndrome Most of the researches conducted with families of disabled children go in line with the

major work done in psychology in general, i. e., searching for the correlates of negative

outcomes in these families than positive ones. Parents, especially mothers having

children with disabilities have long been considered spending pathetic lives. Therefore,

there are more studies with mothers of special children which focus on stress (Hassal,

Rose, & McDonald, 2005; Keller & Honig, 2004; Margalit & Kleitman, 2006; Shin,

Nhan, Crittenden, Flory, & Ladinsky, 2006; Streisand, Swift, Wickmark, Chen, &

Holmes, 2005) and depression (Eisenhover & Blacher, 2006; Maniar, Fatima &

Hamdani, 2002; Olsson & Hwang, 2001) than positive perceptions (Eisenhower, Baker,

& Blacher, 2005; Hastings, Allen, McDermott, & Still, 2002; Hastings et al., 2005;

Kim, Greenberg, Seltzer, & Krauss, 2003) and life satisfaction (Sloper, Knussen,

Turner, & Cunningham, 1991).

More specifically, in parents of children with Down syndrome it has been observed that

they are more stressed and depressed than those of typically developing children. Scott,

Atkinson, Minton, and Bowman (1997) reported that parents of infants with Down

syndrome had significantly greater depression than those of normal children. Roach,

Orsmond, and Barratt (1999) observed that parents of young children with the

syndrome perceived more child-related and parent-related stress than parents of typical

children. Padeliadu (1998) and Hedov, Anneren, and Wikbald (2002) also found greater

stress in these parents.

29

Although general conclusion of these studies is that parents of children with Down

syndrome go through the stressful conditions, some studies report the positive

experiences of the parents. Hanson (2003) in a qualitative study on children with Down

syndrome and their families observed that though these families faced many challenges

regarding development and capabilities of their special children yet they revealed

positive feelings and experiences. Carr (2005) reported families of older people with

Down syndrome as well adjusted and mothers of adults with Down syndrome were not

significantly different in stress from mothers of typical adults. They were also well

satisfied with their life in general.

Results from these studies suggest that although mothers of special children are more

distressed than those of normal children but there are certain personal resources which

help them cope with stressful conditions and maintain their well-being. These resources

may be as functional for them as for common people. One of the recently identified

personal resources is BJW.

Here follows the review of researches with reference to BJW that is supposed to be

protected particularly in unfair situations and is expected to help in the well-being of

people in normal life situations as well as those struggling with difficult life situations

such as mothers of children with Down syndrome.

2.2 BJW in Adverse and Non-Adverse Situations It has been observed in various researches comparing privileged and less privileged

groups that people maintain their BJW in adverse life situations. For example, Rubin

and Peplau (1973) could not find relationship between social class and scores on a just

world scale. Dzuka (2001) did not find differences in BJW of employed and

unemployed. Similarly, Calhoun, Cann, Tedeschi, and McMillan (1998) concluded

from their study that perceptions of the world as just were not influenced by traumatic

events in life. Females are generally understood to be less privileged than males.

However, O’ Conner, Morrison, McLeod, and Anderson (1996) in a Meta analysis of

33 studies found no significant correlation between BJW and gender. There are other

studies which demonstrate that people in unjust societies maintain quite a high level of

BJW. For example, Furnham (1993) observed that people in India and South Africa

endorsed stronger BJW than people in other countries as America, Britain and

Germany. It seems as if with the help of the belief people in less just countries try to

30

justify the obvious injustices in these societies. However, more recent researches report

that justice beliefs are partly experiential and are effected by very harsh experiences of

life. For example, Dzuka and Dalbert (2007) reported that teachers who faced frequent

violence from their students held weaker belief in personal just world than teachers

who reported less frequent violence. Similarly, employees who were frequently

harassed at the work place held weaker personal BJW than those workers who were

reported not to be frequently harassed (Cubela & Kvartuc, 2007). The issue remains to

be settled that to what extent BJW is an illusion and what type and level of adverse

situations weaken its strength.

2.3 BJW and Well-Being Researches conducted in the area of BJW and well being can be categorized into the

researches that were conducted with general BJW and those clearly discriminating

personal from general BJW and ultimate from immanent belief in justice. Firstly, light

will be thrown upon those studies that were conducted with general BJW, following the

studies discriminating personal from general BJW and lastly the studies with ultimate

and immanent belief in justice as the two dimensions of general BJW will be discussed.

BJW has generally been found to be adaptive for both individuals going through unfair

situations as well as those in every day life settings. Bulman and Wortman (1977)

examined 29 accident victims with spinal cord injuries, and observed a significant

positive relationship between victims’ reports of current happiness and BJW.

Studies conducted with general population also reached the similar conclusions as with

sufferers of difficult life situations. A study on under graduate students confirmed that

students strong in BJW were happier than those with weak BJW (Correia, Vala, &

Aguiar, 2001). Dalbert, Lipkus, Sallay, and Goch (2001) also found positive correlation

between general BJW and cognitive and affective aspects of subjective well-being in

German students of ages 19 to 42. In the same vein Dalbert and Sallay (1996) found

positive associations between just world beliefs and satisfaction with one’s life in

Hungary. Confirming these results studies have also shown an inverse correlation

between BJW and negative emotions. Ritter, Benson, and Snyder (1990) observed a

significant negative relationship between BJW and depressive symptoms in a

representative sample of Irish adults. This relationship remained stable, even when

other effects such as the economic situation or the belief in internal control over one’s

31

life course were controlled for. Schmitt and Maes (as cited in Dalbert, 2001) also

reported a significant negative relationship between depression and general BJW for a

sample of about 2,500 German adults. More recently Correia, Batista, et al. (in press)

concluded from their three experimental studies that priming the just world conditions

caused increase in life satisfaction of students. Some other studies indirectly allude to

importance of belief in just world for psychological well-being. These studies measure

self-defeating behavior, and Type A behavior as indicators of low well-being and

provide evidence that BJW acts as buffer against them. For example, Schill, Beyler,

and Morales (1992) reported that especially men low in BJW showed a strong tendency

toward self-defeating behavior. Another evidence for the health promotion effects of

the BJW was provided by a study exploring Type A behavior considered to be a

predictor of coronary heart diseases. Those who were afraid that justice would not

prevail in the long run proved to be more likely to display Type A behavior (Burke,

1985).

The above mentioned studies provide the evidence for role of BJW in enhancement of

well-being in both victims of injustice and non-victims. But it is only with the help of

comparison studies that it can be demonstrated if BJW is more significantly related

with well-being of victims than of non-victims. In this reference Brown and Grover

(1998) compared the psychological distress of 549 police officers exposed to either

high or low levels of stress. Police officers who were high in BJW showed significantly

less psychological distress than those low in BJW. The results were true for the

subgroups of police officers facing high or low levels of stress. However, Dalbert

(1998) concluded from her study on unemployed women, mothers of a disabled child,

and students that although those who were high in BJW were more satisfied with their

life and displayed a better overall mood level than their counterparts who were low in

BJW, but the relationship between belief in just world and life satisfaction was stronger

for victims than for non-victims. In a different sample of unemployed women, mothers

of a disabled child and female students Dalbert (2001) observed that relationship of

BJW with life satisfaction was significantly stronger for victims than for non-victims.

Moreover, mothers of disabled children had overall better mood than women in other

two groups. In another study Dalbert (as cited in Dalbert, 2001) compared the

relationship between BJW and mental health in a group of German female students and

women who were expecting to lose their jobs. She found that women high in BJW were

32

more satisfied with their life and showed a better overall mood level even after the age

and group membership was controlled before the effect of BJW was analyzed. In

addition, buffering effect of BJW was observed for negative mood state in victim

sample only. In the same vein Dalbert (2002) conducted two experiments to study the

effect of beliefs in a just world as a buffer against anger. Overall, it was concluded that

general BJW functioned as a buffer against anger in an anger arousing situation, but not

in happy, sad or neutral situation.

Despite the evidence for strong relationship between BJW and well-being provided by

above mentioned studies some studies report mixed findings regarding BJW and well-

being relationship. For example, Benson and Ritter (1990) in a study of unemployed

and working adults found a negative relationship between BJW and depressive

symptoms in working adults and positive relationship for unemployed individuals.

Lipkus et al. (1996) reported on two studies with student samples. In the first study they

did not find relationship between BJW and different dimensions of psychological well-

being, but in the second study they observed negative relationship between BJW and

depression, and a positive relationship between BJW and life satisfaction. After

controlling for the big five personality dimensions, especially neuroticism and

extraversion, the BJW’s relationship with depressive symptoms and life satisfaction

were still significant. Dalbert (1998) observed that BJW was positively related to

depression in sample of unemployed women and mothers of mentally retarded children.

Another study conducted by Cheung and Kwok (1996) reported a negative relationship

between BJW and mental health. In their sample of Hong Kong students, BJW was part

of a broader factor reflecting a conservative orientation, and this conservative

orientation proved to correlate positively with hopelessness. Correia, Batista, et al. (in

press) did not observe the role of BJW in mood enhancement.

Overall studies conducted on diverse samples, for example, victims of spinal cord

injuries, unemployed women, women threatened by job security, mothers of disabled

children, working adults, police officers, and school and university students, provide

quite a convincing evidence for strong relationship between BJW and psychological

well-being. This evidence is provided through direct as well as indirect indicators of

well-being, and two studies (Correia, Batista, et al., in press; Dalbert, 2002), which

were experimental in nature, confirm the cause and effect relationship between BJW

33

and well-being. Moreover, comparison studies also provide some support for buffer

hypotheses which states that role of BJW is more pronounced in enhancement of well-

being in those who face adverse situations than those who do not go through such

circumstances.

Line of research that distinguishes between personal BJW from general BJW follows

the assumption that it is personal BJW that is related to well-being rather than general

BJW (Lipkus et al. 1996). This hypothesis has been proved with observations made on

people in every day life settings as well as on individuals going through stressful

conditions of life.

Most of the studies that have been conducted with people in daily life settings included

school, college and university students as participants. The two studies on under

graduate students conducted to distinguish two types of beliefs found that BJW for self

predicted greater life satisfaction and less depression as compared to general BJW

(Lipkus et al. 1996). When the personality dimensions were controlled, BJW for the

self continued to predict life satisfaction but not depression. Again in four questionnaire

and one experimental study with students Dalbert (1999) confirmed that personal BJW

played more central role in predicting the psychological well-being and need to defend

this belief was more pronounced. Similar finding was reported by Cubela et al. (1999)

who carried out the study on university students, and found that level of endorsement of

BJW statements was significantly higher for the personal than general BJW scale, and

personal BJW was especially significant contributor in explaining the variance of life

satisfaction ratings. In another study with students in England Sutton and Douglas

(2005) studied the relationship between BJW for self and psychological health and

concluded that BJW for self explained variation in life satisfaction independently of

BJW for others, locus of control, self esteem and social desirable responses.

Relationship between BJW for self and life satisfaction was also consistently observed

in two studies by Sutton et al. (2008).

Importance of personal BJW has also been evidenced in school psychology. Dalbert

and Maes (2002) observed that school students with strong belief in justice for their self

were less distressed. In the same vein Dalbert and Dzuka (2004) in two studies on

German and Slovakian adolescent students reached the conclusion that personal BJW

more strongly predicted life satisfaction and positive affect than general BJW. Pattern

34

of relationship persisted after controlling for personality dimensions. Similarly Correia

and Dalbert (2007) concluded from their three studies on Portuguese school students

that personal but not general BJW consistently predicted life satisfaction after

controlling for self efficacy and self esteem. Kamble and Dalbert (2008) also reported

from study with school students in India that students strong in personal BJW

experienced less distress at school and less depressive symptoms. Besides various

studies conducted with students, one study conducted in Pakistan reported strong and

direct relationship of personal BJW with life satisfaction and overall mood level in

female college teachers after controlling for general BJW, indicating that teachers with

strong personal BJW were happier and more satisfied with their life than people whose

belief was weaker (Fatima, 2004).

Relatively few studies have been conducted on individuals facing at least apparently

unfair situations to see how personal BJW influences subjective well being in them.

Dalbert and Braun (1997) carried out a study on cancer patients. Cancer patients high in

personal BJW were less depressed and showed a better overall mood level than those

low in personal BJW. The adaptive relationship between personal BJW and different

dimensions of well-being emerged even when controlling for interpersonal trust. Old

age is usually associated with deterioration in physical as well as mental health, and

dependency on others. A study conducted with elderly people living in senior

residences in Slovakia reported that personal BJW was significantly related to life

satisfaction and affect in old people. The relationship persisted even after controlling

for subjective health and social contacts (Dzuka & Dalbert, 2006). Importance of

personal BJW has also been observed for well-being of survivors of natural disasters.

Otto, Boos Dalbert, Schops, and Hoyer (2006) observed in a corelational study that

strong personal BJW was related to less depression, anxiety and general distress in

flood victims in Germany. The associations persisted after age, sex, and other stresses

and losses were taken into account.

Comparison studies have been conducted with personal BJW to demonstrate whether

the belief works more for the victims than non-victims. Violence is generally perceived

as unfair. In this regard Dzuka and Dalbert (2007) observed in their comparative study

on teachers who reported frequent violence from their students and those who did not

report violence from their students that teachers who experienced more violence and

35

had weak personal BJW experienced more negative affect. However personal BJW was

similarly and significantly related to life satisfaction and positive affect in victims and

non victims. Similarly, Correia, Kamble, and Dalbert (in press) reported that students

who are bullied at school, those who bullied them and those who defended the bullied

students equally benefited from personal BJW. Students with strong BJW were less

distressed than week believers. Moreover, this relationship was true in both India and

Portugal. Unemployment is another form of stressful situation as it not only causes

economical dependence on others but also results in reduced confidence and

meaningful life. Dzuka and Dalbert (2002) concluded from their two studies on

unemployed individuals that personal but not general BJW significantly predicted life

satisfaction, positive mood and self esteem after controlling for sex, length of

unemployment, subjective economic condition, and personality dimensions. Personal

BJW was equally adaptive for those who had been unemployed for short period and for

those who were unemployed for longer period. Another study (Cubela & Kvartuc,

2007) observed the relationship between various facets of justice beliefs including

personal BJW and adjustment process in those who reported frequent experience of

harassment at work place and those who rarely or not at all reported harassment at

workplace. It was found that BJW was beneficial for everyone irrespective of whether

they were harassed or not.

Taken collectively, these studies underline that psychological well-being is more

strongly correlated with the personal BJW than with the general BJW, and although the

relationship is valid for victims of injustice as well as people in daily life settings there

is some evidence that BJW is particularly helpful in reducing negative symptoms in

victims of violence.

General BJW can be further classified into ultimate and immanent belief in justice as

suggested by Maes (1998b). One is the tendency to perceive or see justice in the events

that have occurred (belief in immanent justice) and the other is the tendency to believe

that any unjust experience at present will be compensated in future (belief in ultimate

justice). The importance of this distinction has been demonstrated in the area of well-

being with the finding that belief in ultimate justice explains mental health significantly

more than belief in immanent justice. In a study on attitude towards severe illness belief

in ultimate justice was positively associated with ability to find meaning in severe

36

illness, and the hope that one will be treated successfully. Belief in immanent justice

was not related to any of these dimensions (Maes, 1998b). In another study on school

students, Maes and Kals (2002) reported that belief in immanent justice was positively

related to school anxiety and fear of others and belief in ultimate justice was negatively

related to stress. Similarly, another study (Maes & Kals, 2004) showed that belief in

ultimate justice was positively related with students’ satisfaction with their

achievement, with one’s school and with one’s private life. Belief in immanent justice

was also positively related to satisfaction with achievements and with school, but

relationship was significantly weaker for satisfaction with school. Moreover, belief in

immanent justice was negatively related with satisfaction with one’s private life.

Although very few studies have been conducted with immanent and ultimate belief in

justice, the overall conclusion seems to favor the notion that ultimate but not immanent

belief in justice is adaptive.

2.4 Other Psychological Resources This section will describe studies investigating relationship of other psychological

resources with BJW and well-being. Researches on a number of psychological

variables will be discussed here, i.e., perceived control, self efficacy and perceived

social support.

A number of studies point to the adaptive role of perception of control. DeNeve and

Cooper (1998) reported from a meta analyses that sense of control and related concepts,

for example, internal locus of control (Emmons & Diener, 1985) or desire of control

(Burger, 1992) are among the strongest predictors of subjective well being. The

importance of perceived control and locus of control is also supported by studies that

have found these variables to function as moderators of the relation between stressors

and adaptation outcomes. For example, Edge (2002) found Perceived control to be

positively correlated with personal well-being in women diagnosed with breast cancer

as well as in the comparison group. Another study by Misajon and Cummins (2001)

indicated the importance of control with regard to the subjective well being in both

patients of arthritis and normal population.

Studies differentiating primary and secondary control also report the strong relationship

between subjective well-being and the two dimensions of control. Heeps (2000)

37

concluded from his two studies that people who had high levels of both control had

more positive affect and positive thinking than people who were high on one control

and low on the other. Moreover, secondary control played its adaptive role in people

with high as well as low primary control. Petito and Cummins (2000) also observed

that in adolescents both of primary and secondary control strategies benefitted their

subjective quality of life. In the same vein, Maher and Cummins (2001) reported that

subjective quality of life of both young people of ages 18 to 25 years and old people of

ages 65 to 89 years was predicted by both primary and secondary control although

impact of secondary control was marginally significant for elderly people. Another

study conducted on people with the age range of 18 years to 89 years reported the

importance of both primary and secondary control in predicting subjective well-being

(Hollway, 2003). Lake (2004) also reported that primary and secondary control was

positively related to life satisfaction in a large sample of adults. Cousins (2001)

although could not find discrimination between primary and secondary control

concluded that approach control (which included both primary and secondary control

items) predicted subjective quality of life in both caregivers of mentally ill patients and

non-caregivers after controlling for personality. Overall there is convincing evidence

that primary and secondary control strategies predict well-being of young adults as well

as old people. This was true for both forms of control and studies did not reach the

consensus regarding the superiority of one over the other.

Relationship between belief in a just world and control has also been observed in early

researches (Lerner, 1980; Rubin & Peplau, 1973; Zuckerman & Gerbasi, 1977a,

1977b). Important thing to be noted is that all of theses studies were conducted with

scales using items relating to primary control thus ignoring the secondary control which

might be a very important coping strategy when one is not able to change the external

environment.

Another construct similar to perceived control is self-efficacy. Various researches

report that self-efficacy is related to different aspects of psychological well-being for

individuals in different situations, e.g., in heart patients personal efficacy has been

reported to be related to life satisfaction (Waltz & Bandura, 1988). Similar results have

been observed for people with spinal cord injuries (Hampton, 1998; Hampton &

Marshall, 2000), and members of mutual aid organization (Cheung & Sun, 2000). High

38

self-efficacy has been found to be associated with low level of depression in

adolescents (Stewart et al., 2004) and indirectly influencing anxiety through its effect

on self esteem in both adolescents and children (Dahlbeck & Lightsey, 2008). In older

adults also belief in one’s abilities has been found to be negatively related to depression

in both males and females (Holahan, Holahan, & Belk, 1984). Two studies conducted

in Pakistan also identified significant negative relationship between general self-

efficacy and depression in a sample of physically handicapped adolescents (Tabassum

& Rehman, 2005) and in adult hospitalized stroke patients (Nawaz, 2004).

Several studies have shown that self-efficacy contributes to psychological well-being of

both mothers and fathers with children of different ages and problems (e.g., Lam &

Kwok, 2003; Taylor, 2001). In another study, Hastings and Brown (2002) observed that

behavioral problems of children lowered mothers’ self-efficacy which in turn resulted

in depression and anxiety in these mothers. Hassall et al. (2005) observed that parenting

efficacy significantly predicted parental stress in mothers of children with intellectual

disability. Christian (2007) also identified self-efficacy as an important contributor of

satisfaction in these mothers.

In more general population, Maciejewski (2000) concluded from a large scale study

with more than 2000 adults that self-efficacy mediates the relationship between stresses

of life and depression. Luszczynska, Guti rrez-Do a, and Schwarzer (2005) also

reported positive relationship of self-efficacy with life satisfaction in Poland, Turkey

and America, with positive effect in Costa Rica and negative relationship with anxiety

and depression in Costa Rica and Germany.

Although self-efficacy has been vastly reported in research literature as adaptive for

people of all ages and in variety of situations, yet there are few studies which contradict

these findings. For example, in a longitudinal study in which the effects of learned

helplessness, cognitive distortions, self-efficacy and optimism were observed on

depression in cardiac patients, it was found out that although self-efficacy was

significantly correlated with depression it did not predict it. Only optimism seemed to

predict it (Shnek, Irvine, Stewart, & Abbey, 2001). Similarly in another study with

diabetic patients, Connell, Davis, Gallant, and Sharpe (1994) studied the role of social

support, self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and illness threat on depression and found

that outcome expectancies and self-efficacy were not significant predictors of

39

depression. In nut shell self-efficacy has been reported to be an important correlate of

well-being in variety of situations. Despite its reported importance in various studies

some studies which took into account other socio-cognitive variables cast doubt on its

predictive value.

As far as the relationship between BJW and self efficacy is concerned Begue (2005)

concludes from his study that BJW for self performs a stress buffering role in

association with self efficacy. Hafer and Olson (1998) concluded from their study that

although beliefs in a just world were not significantly correlated with total scores on

Paulhus’s measure of locus of control, they were marginally correlated with personal

efficacy scale of the measure.

Perceived social support is another important variable linked with person’s well-being.

It is well established that people who perceive themselves to be supported by others

exhibit more positive mental health than those who perceive themselves as not having

support from others and perceived support has been observed to be more effective than

actual number of people in contact (for a review, see Penninx, Kriegsman, VanEijk,

Boeke, & Deeg, 1996). There are studies which show that people with high stress

benefit more from social support than people with low stress (e.g., Pengilly & Dowd,

2000) while the other studies show importance of social support in all conditions of life

(e.g., Stroebe, Stroebe, Abakoumkin, & Schut, 1996).

Sufferings from chronic or acute physical problems have long been considered

stressful. For example, Connel et al. (1994) observed direct and indirect effects of

perceived availability of social support on depression in diabetic patients. Similarly, in

a sample of heart patients significant relationships of support with positive and negative

moods and life satisfaction were observed after coronary bypass surgery over a period

of one year (King, 1993). Persons with spinal cord injury have also been reported to

benefit from social support by experiencing more satisfaction with life and feeling less

depression (Rintala, Young, Hart, Clearman, & Fuhrer, 1992). In another study effect

of social support from different resources on mental health, mediated by self-care

efficacy, was observed in severe acute respiratory syndrome survivors (Mak, Law,

Woo, Cheung, & Lee, 2009).

40

Social support has also been studied helping the caregivers of people suffering from

various physical and psychological problems. In a study social support positively

predicted life satisfaction and negatively predicted depression in both black and white

family caregivers of patients with dementia (Haley et al., 1996). Mothers are usually

primary caregivers of their children and if their children suffer from some chronic

problems the care-giving job becomes particularly stressful for them. Dunst, Trivette,

and Hamby (1994) also observed role of social support in reducing distress in parents

of special children. Horton and Wallander (2001) observed that both satisfaction with

available support and number of available supporters played their role in dampening the

ill effects of maternal distress. Similarly Feldman, McDonald, Serbin, Stack, Secco,

and Yu (2007) observed that social support mediated and moderated the relationship

between child behavior problems and caregiver depression. In another study social

support inversely predicted depression in mothers of special children, but it failed to

predict anxiety in the same group (Weiss, 2002).

Although there is convincing amount of literature that suggests importance of social

support for well-being in mothers of special children some studies point out that this

relationship is confounded by other variables. Ben-Zur, Duvdavany, and Lury (2005)

found social support to be strongly related to life satisfaction, depression and distress in

mothers of intellectually disabled children but after controlling for personality variables

it no longer predicted any of well-being dimensions. In another study Hassall et al.

(2005) found family support to be related to parenting stress but it did not predict stress

when child’s level of behavior problems, and parenting efficacy were controlled for.

Social support has also been observed to benefit the individuals who are not

particularly prone to stresses. For example, Vella-Brodrick (2005) reported importance

of social support in explaining psychological well-being, in a sample of adult males and

females, after controlling for personality and demographic factors. Similarly social

support predicted subjective well-being and negative affect in a large sample of adults

(Gallagher & Vella-Brodrick, 2006). In another study on prison officers social support

reduced the effects of work stressors on burnout (Roman, Joanna, Jan, & Magdalena,

2008). Relationship with other people has been observed to be related to well being in

people of different races. In a study on black and white women social support was

41

strongly related to life satisfaction and depression in both groups (Griffin, Amodeo,

Clay, Fassler, & Ellis, 2006).

Findings from the studies conducted in Pakistan go in line with studies reported in

other countries. For example, Khan (1996) reported that high anxious students

perceived fewer sources of support available to them as compared to low anxious

students. Similarly Pakistani students with better social support reported more

satisfaction with life and less depression (Malik, 2002). In a large scale survey Suhail

and Chaudhary (2004) also found that social support was related to happiness in adults

from different spheres of life in a major city of Pakistan, Lahore, and its suburbs. In

sum perceived social support has been reported as a strong predictor of various well-

being dimensions in stressful as well as non stressful conditions of life but there are

studies that report that personality (Ben-Zur, Duvdavany, & Lury, 2005) and

environmental factors (Hassall, Rose, & McDonald, 2005) do influence this

relationship at least in mothers of special children.

Although not much work has been done to show how social support is related with

BJW, at least one study demonstrate that BJW is associated with trust in others in time

of need (Dalbert & Braun, 1997).

2.5 Demographic Variables In general demographics have been reported to contribute very little to subjective well-

being (Diener et al. 1999; Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1999). However, there are number of

studies which throw light on relationship between demographic variables and well-

being in mothers of special children and in general population.

In Pakistan less educated mothers of seriously ill children have been reported to be

suffering from more depression than more educated mothers (Iqbal & Siddiqui, 2002).

Similar findings were observed for mothers of emotionally handicapped children

(Naeem, 2001). Education has also been found to be negatively related to anxiety in

women in general (Iqbal, Nadeem, & Fatima, 2004). However, Ben-Zur et al. (2005)

did not find education as predictor of mother’s mental health.

There are also inconsistent findings for age of the children contributing to mothers’

well-being. In this reference, mothers of young children with and without disabilities

42

reported significantly higher levels of stress (Behr & Murphy, 1993). Glidden and

Schoolcraft (2003) in an eleven year follow-up study of intellectually disabled children

observed that depression of mothers was highest at the time of birth of their child. It

significantly reduced by the age of five and again increased by the age of 12. However,

Herman and Marcenko (1997) did not observe association between age of child and

parental stress. Similarly, McConkey, Kennedy, Chang, Jarran, and Schukri (2008)

were not able to find significant relationship of age of the child with maternal well-

being in a study on five to eighteen years old intellectually disabled children.

Besides role of age of children in well-being of mothers there is some evidence that

suggest that mothers with more children face more parenting stress than mothers with

less number of children (Lavee & Sharlin, 1996). Number of children was also

positively associated with anxiety in non-working women in Pakistan (Iqbal et al.,

2004).

Various studies show that life satisfaction is stable over life span (Diener, Lucas, &

Oishi, 2002; Ehrlich & Isaacowitz, 2002; Lucas & Gohm, 2000; Suhail & Chaudhary,

2004), while there are rather inconsistent findings regarding the association between

age and affect. Diener et al. and Lucas and Gohm observed that positive affect declined

with age while Ehrlich and Isaacowitz observed that middle aged people had highest

level of positive affect and younger people had lowest level. Suhail and Chaudhary did

not observe any association between age and happiness in their large scale study in

Pakistan.

More consistent findings have been reported for the effect of marital status. Married

people have been reported to be more happy than unmarried people all over the world

(Diener, Gohm, Suh, & Oishi, 2000; Suhail & Chaudhary, 2004). More specifically

single mothers of special children have been observed to be more distressed than

married mothers (Eisenhower & Blacker, 2006). Mental health of single mothers was

poorer than married mothers in Ireland, Taiwan and Jordan (McConkey et al., 2008).

Similarly, single mothers of intellectually disabled children were more depressed than

mothers living with a partner, however, marital status was not related to depression in

mothers of typically developing children (Olsson & Hwang, 2001).

43

Apart from these factors income and money has been observed to be related with

subjective well-being in various nations of the world (Diener, Diener, & Diener, 1995;

Diener & Oishi, 2000; Suhail & Chaudhary, 2004). More specifically financial

resources have been found to be related to positive perceptions and adaptations in

families of children with disabilities. For example, Mak and Ho (2007) found that

family income significantly predicted positive perceptions in mothers of intellectually

disabled children even after controlling for education, social support and coping styles.

Similarly, Sloper et al. (1991) observed that financial problems, employment of father

and mother were related to life satisfaction of mothers of children with Down

syndrome. However, Olsson and Hwang (2001) did not find relationship between socio

economic status and depression in parents of intellectually disabled children.

Demographic variables have not been of much interest for the researchers in the field of

BJW (for reviews, see Furnham, 2003; Furnham & Procter, 1989). Nevertheless, few

studies report rather inconsistent relationship of demographics with BJW. For example

Peplau and Tyler (1975) observed inverse association between age and BJW in men but

no association in women. On the other hand Smith and Green (1984) observed positive

correlation between age and BJW in women but no association in men. More recently

Dalbert (2001) reported curvilinear relationship between age and BJW. She observed

that BJW lost their strength from adolescence to young adulthood. In adulthood and

middle age they were rather stable and after age of 50 there was again increase in

strength of BJW. Smith and Green found low income groups had weaker BJW than

high income groups whereas, Rubin and Peplau (1973) could not find relationship

between social class and BJW.

Reported inconsistencies in the associations of SWB and BJW with demographics may

be due to the differences in cultures in which these studies have been conducted.

Therefore it is important to include them in the study to understand the unique

contribution of BJW in explaining well-being.

Overall, there is convincing evidence that beliefs in just world have an adaptive value

for people in general as well as for people going through stressful conditions of life.

Simultaneously impact of certain psychological and demographic variables on well-

being and how they relate with BJW with reference to various studies has been

reviewed. Therefore, it is pertinent to study all these variables together as potential

44

predictors of SWB in mothers of Down syndrome children, who are generally thought

to be living in more stressful conditions as compared to mothers of normal children, in

order to get a better understanding of contribution of beliefs in a just world after the

other variables are controlled. By comparing these mothers of Down syndrome children

with those of normal it will be possible to examine if the BJW act as buffer to enhance

well-being in stressful conditions or it acts as a personal resource in all conditions of

life. Moreover, by including three dimensions of BJW it will be possible to study their

role independent of each other in explaining well-being which has not been done in any

of the previous studies. In addition, comparison of the two groups with reference to

strength of BJW will throw light on how the BJW is influenced by the stressful

situations of life. However, as the literature review does not provide the conclusive

evidence whether the BJW is weakened or strengthened in response to the adverse

circumstances no hypothesis was formed in this regard. Following hypotheses were

formulated regarding the association of different dimensions of BJW with four aspects

of well-being.

2.6 Hypotheses 1. Personal belief in a just world will be positively related to life satisfaction in

both groups of mothers.

2. Personal belief in a just world will be positively related to mood level in both

groups of mothers.

3. Personal belief in a just world will be negatively related to depression in both

groups of mothers.

4. Personal belief in a just world will be negatively related to anxiety in both

groups of mothers.

5. Belief in ultimate justice will be positively related to life satisfaction in both

groups of mothers.

6. Belief in ultimate justice will be positively related to mood level in both groups

of mothers.

45

7. Belief in ultimate justice will be negatively related to depression in both groups

of mothers.

8. Belief in ultimate justice will be negatively related to anxiety in both groups of

mothers.

9. Personal belief in a just world will positively predict life satisfaction after

controlling for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups

of mothers.

10. Belief in ultimate justice will positively predict life satisfaction after controlling

for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.

11. Personal belief in a just world will positively predict mood level after

controlling for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups

of mothers.

12. Belief in ultimate justice will positively predict mood level after controlling for

demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.

13. Personal belief in a just world will negatively predict depression after

controlling for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups

of mothers.

14. Belief in ultimate justice will negatively predict depression after controlling for

demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.

15. Personal belief in a just world will negatively predict anxiety after controlling

for demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.

16. Belief in ultimate justice will negatively predict anxiety after controlling for

demographics and other psychological variables in both groups of mothers.

17. The expected relationships between BJW and well-being would be stronger in

mothers of a child with Down syndrome than in mothers of normal children.

46

Chapter 3

3 METHOD

This chapter is concerned with the description of methodology employed in phase 1

and phase 11 of the study. The primary objective of the phase 1 was to translate and

adapt the instruments to be used in main investigation, whereas the phase 11 was

conducted to answer the research questions raised in this work.

3.1 Phase 1: Translation and Adaptation of the Scales Phase 1 was conducted in two steps. In step 1 research measures were translated into

Urdu and their content validity was determined, while in step II equivalence of English

and Urdu versions of the research instruments was assessed. Different samples were

taken in both steps. For step I, mothers from different educational backgrounds were

taken to see if the items were clearly understandable by the variety of women with

respect to education, while to assess the equivalence of English and Urdu versions of

the scales in step II highly educated individuals were required who could understand

both English and Urdu languages.

3.1.1 Step 1

3.1.1.1 Sample Mothers of mentally retarded children (N = 14) participated in the study. Age range of

mothers was 26 to 52 years (M = 37.43, SD = 8.49) and their educational years ranged

from 5 to 16 years. Their monthly family income ranged from none to 100,000 rupees

(M = 20714.29, SD = 25052.03). All of them were house wives and had more than one

child including the special one. Age range of their special children was 5 to 16 years (M

= 9.79, SD = 3.31) and among them there were two females and 12 male children.

3.1.1.2 Instruments The study used Urdu versions of the scales mentioned below. In cases where Urdu

translation was not available the instruments were translated into Urdu. The procedure

of translation is described along with the description of the measures that were

translated for the study.

47

3.1.1.2.1 Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)

State well being was measured with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Zigmond

and Snaith (1983) developed the scale to measure depression and anxiety. Seven items

in the scale measure anxiety and seven measure depression. The scale measures state

aspect of anxiety and depression as the person is asked to respond to the statements

according to his or her feelings in the past week. Though, interestingly the scale has the

word “hospital” in its name, it was designed to use with outpatients as well as general

population. Bjelland, Dahl, Haug, and Neckelmann (2002) in their review of the 747

identified papers that had used HADS, found that most factor analyses demonstrated a

two factor solution in good accordance with the HADS subscales for Anxiety (HADS-

A) and Depression (HADS-D). Cronbach’s alpha for HADS-A varied from .68 to .93

and for HADS-D from .67 to .90. Correlations between HADS and other commonly

used questionnaires for measuring anxiety and depression were in the range of .49 to

.83. The HADS has also been used and validated with Pakistanis living in Pakistan and

abroad. Suhail (2000) found HADS reasonably valid to use with native and British

Pakistanis. This study used original English version of the scale, whereas Mumford,

Tareen, Bajwa, Bhatti, and Karim (1991) have reported the equivalence of Urdu

version with the original version in a study on 120 bilingual Pakistani students.

On each item answers are to be given on 4-point scale ranging from zero to three with

the options that are relevant to each item as each item has different response options.

Conventionally the scores on the HADS-A and HADS-D have been calculated as sum

of scores on all items of a scale but in the present study the scale scores were obtained

by averaging the scores across the items. Possible scale scores range from 0 to 3 with

high scores meaning high anxiety and depression. Thus low scores indicated high state

well-being.

3.1.1.2.2 Trait Well-Being Inventory

Trait well-being was assessed with Trait Well-being Inventory (Dalbert, 1992). The

inventory measures cognitive and evaluative aspects of subjective well-being and

consists of Life Satisfaction Scale (seven items) and Mood Level Scale (six items).

Internal reliability of Life Satisfaction Scale has been reported as α = .87, and of Mood

Level Scale as α = .83 (with heterogeneous sample of adults, N = 1101). The two-factor

structure of the inventory was proved by means of latent structural equation modeling

48

(Dalbert, 1992). Each item is to be rated on 6-point Likert-type rating scale, giving the

score of 6 to ‘strongly agree’, 5 to ‘agree’, 4 to ‘slightly agree’, 3 to ‘slightly disagree’,

2 to ‘disagree’, and 1 to ‘strongly disagree’.

The Urdu version of Trait Well-being Inventory (Fatima, 2004) was used in the present

study. Reported alpha reliability of Life Satisfaction Scale was .89 and of Mood level

scale was .74 (Fatima, 2004). Scale scores were obtained by averaging the scores across

the items for each individual. Two negatively stated items of mood level scale were

reverse scored before calculating the scale score for mood level. Possible scale scores

range from 1 to 6 with high scores meaning high endorsement of the construct.

3.1.1.2.3 Personal Belief in a Just World Scale

The Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, 1999) has been developed to assess

the individual’s belief that the world is just for the self. There are total of seven items in

the scale. The scale is reported to have a good level of internal reliability, ranging from

α = .82 to α = .87 (Dalbert, 1999). The Alpha reliability of Urdu version of Personal

Belief in a Just world Scale was reported to be .93 for a sample of female college

teachers and the discriminant validity was also observed in the same sample which

endorsed personal BJW significantly more than the general BJW. Two-factor structure

of the Personal and General Beliefs in a Just world Scales was also confirmed in

principal component analysis with varimax rotation (Fatima & Khalid, 2007).

Each item is to be rated on 6-point Likert-type rating scale, giving the score of 6 to

‘strongly agree’, 5 to ‘agree’, 4 to ‘slightly agree’, 3 to ‘slightly disagree’, 2 ‘to

disagree’, and 1 to ‘strongly disagree’. Scale scores were obtained by averaging the

scores across the items for each individual. Possible scale score ranges from 1 to 6 with

high score meaning strong personal belief in a just world.

3.1.1.2.4 Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice

Beliefs in immanent and ultimate justice were assessed with Scales of Belief in

Immanent and Ultimate Justice (Maes, 1998b). The Scale of Belief in Immanent Justice

(five items) measures the belief that every thing that happens is an expression of justice

and the Scale of Belief in Ultimate Justice (four items) is measure of the belief that

there may be injustice but every injustice is to be resolved and compensated at some

point in the future. Differentiation between two subscales has been confirmed through

49

factor analyses. Alpha reliability of the Scale of Belief in Immanent Justice has been

reported to be .83 and of the Scale of Belief in Ultimate Justice it was .86 (Maes,

1998b). Each item is to be rated on 6-point Likert-type rating scale, giving the score of

5 to ‘strongly agree’, 4 to ‘agree’, 3 to ‘slightly agree’, 2 to ‘slightly disagree’, 1 to

‘disagree’, and 0 to ‘strongly disagree’ Scale score for each scale is obtained by

averaging the scores across the items. Possible scale score ranges from 0 to 5 with high

score meaning high expression of the construct.

Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice were originally meant to assess the

justice beliefs with reference to the severe illnesses. The items which directly alluded to

disease or illness were adapted to use the scales as measures of general beliefs in

immanent and ultimate justice after discussion with two senior psychologists before

translation into Urdu. From Scale of Belief in Immanent Justice, Item “Severe illnesses

are often a punishment for one‘s way of living” was changed into “Misfortunes are

often a punishment for one‘s way of living”. Item “Illness often follows at the heels of

improper living” was changed into “Bad happening often follows at the heels of

improper living”. Item “Hardly anyone becomes seriously ill without having deserved

it” was changed into “Hardly anyone suffers from something bad without having

deserved it”. Item “Many ill persons can only blame themselves for their suffering” was

modified into “If things go wrong one can only blame oneself for one‘s suffering.” Item

“A truly good person will seldom become very ill” was changed to “A truly good

person will seldom face misfortune.” From Scale of Belief in Ultimate Justice Item “In

the long run, the injustice imposed by illness receives appropriate reparation” was

changed to “ In the long run, the injustice imposed by misfortune receives appropriate

reparation” and item “Even terrible illnesses are often compensated for by fortunate

happenstance later in life ” was modified to “Even terrible problems are often

compensated for by fortunate happenstance later in life.”

Adapted Scales of Belief in Ultimate and Immanent Justice were translated into Urdu

following forward and back translation procedures. Five bilinguals (one MPhil and four

MPhil students in Psychology who were also teaching psychology at college level)

were asked to translate items of these questionnaires into Urdu. They were told that it

was a part of PhD project and they should translate the items in a way that could

convey the meaning present in them as clearly as possible. Their independent

translations were then discussed item by item with a PhD bilingual scholar and the

50

most suitable translations, in terms of their resemblance with expression conveyed by

the English items, and in terms of understandability, were selected. The new Urdu text

was given to five other bilinguals (one PhD, two MPhil and two PhD students in

Psychology), who were requested to back translate it into English. Back translations of

each were then evaluated to determine whether the precise meaning of the items in the

original version had been successfully conveyed. All the back translations conveyed the

same meaning as conveyed by the English version of the questionnaire.

3.1.1.2.5 Sarason Social Support Short-Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6)

Sarason, Sarason, Shearin, and Pierce (1987) prepared an abbreviated version of the 27-

item Social Support Questionnaire (Sarason et al., 1983). Six items, each of which has

two parts, are presented. The first part of each item assesses the number of people that

the individual thinks can support him or her when a particular problem occurs. The

individual can indicate up to nine persons who support him or her. In the second part of

each item individual is asked to indicate how much satisfied he or she is with the help

that he or she gets from those people on a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from very

dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (6). Alpha coefficients for SSQ-6 have been reported to

range from .90 to .93 for both number and satisfaction scores.

The questionnaire was translated following the same procedure that was adopted for the

translation of Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice as given in section

1.1.1.2.4.

3.1.1.2.6 Personal Perceived Control Scale

The Personal Perceived Control scale (Hollway, 2003) consists of two subscales. The

Primary Control Scale assesses the strategies to solve the problem directly and

secondary control scale assesses the strategies to bring cognitive changes when there is

a problem. The scale is based on items developed by Cousins (2001). Three items

measure primary and the same number of items assess secondary control. Hollway

(2003) reports the two-factor structure of the six-item Personal Perceived Control Scale

from principal component analysis. In Hollway’s study, though all the secondary

control items were highly loaded on factor 1 (named secondary control) and the

primary control items loaded strongest on factor 2 (named primary control), two items

of primary control items (item 5 and item 6) were also loaded on factor 1 with loadings

greater than .30 on the secondary control factor indicating that two processes may

51

possess some common aspects. Alpha reliabilities of .74 and .87 have been reported for

the Secondary and Primary Control Scales. All items are positively stated and start with

“when some thing bad happens to me.” Each item is to be rated on 11-point rating scale

ranging from strongly disagree (0) to strongly agree (10).

The scale was translated following the same procedure that was adopted for the

translation of Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice as provided in section

1.1.1.2.4.

3.1.1.2.7 Generalized Self Efficacy Scale

Generalized Self-Efficacy scale with ten items (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) assesses

individual’s belief in his or her ability to deal successfully with variety of situations in

general. The scale has been observed to be uni-dimensional in factor analysis.

Cronbach alpha for the scale has been observed to range from .75 to .91. Test retest

reliability coefficient for six months period was found to be .67, for one year it was .75

and .55 and for two years period it was .47 and .63 (for a review, see Scholz, Gutiérrez-

Doña, Sud, & Schwarzer, 2002).

Tabbasum, Rehman, Schwarzer, and Jerusalem (2003) translated this scale into Urdu.

Nawaz (2004) reported alpha reliability of the Urdu version to be .83. Convergent

validity with well being and discriminant validity with depression were also moderate.

All items are positively stated. Each item is to be rated on a 4-point scale, giving the

score of 4 to ‘exactly true’, 3 to ‘mostly true’, 2 to ‘to some extent true’, and 1 to ‘not at

all true’. Scale score is obtained by averaging the scores across the items. Possible scale

score range from 1 to 4 with high score meaning high generalized self efficacy.

3.1.1.2.8 Demographic Data Sheet

Apart from the scales demographic information about mothers’ age (years), education

(years), and marital status (married; widowed/divorced), total number of her children,

her monthly family income (Pakistani rupees in thousands), and age of the child (years)

was also obtained on a data sheet.

3.1.1.3 Procedure Mothers were contacted through the special education schools where their special

children came daily for the training and rehabilitation. All the data were collected

through one to one administration with the mothers. Mothers were called for routine

52

meeting by the school administration and interview by the researcher was considered a

part of the meeting. The study was introduced as an attempt to investigate mothers’

experiences of upbringing their children. Consent to participate in the study was taken

from the mothers (see Appendix A). The instructions about how to respond to the

statements, written on the booklet of the questionnaires, were read to them and they

were encouraged to ask to repeat the item if they could not follow it. The researcher

and the participant sat side by side with the book let of the questionnaires in the hand of

the researcher in a way that interviewee could see and read the items if she wanted to.

Mothers were encouraged to give any comments on items or the response categories

and to report if they had problem in understanding of any of the items. Any comments

or queries were noted down. Average time taken for an administration of questionnaires

was 45 minutes.

3.1.1.4 Results Items which mothers found difficult to understand were identified and noted down.

Overall there were two items from Scales of Belief in Immanent Justice, three from

Mood Level Scale and two from Generalized Self Efficacy Scale that at least one out of

14 participants reported difficulty in understanding. They were discussed with a senior

bilingual psychologist in the light of comments and responses made to these items and

were rephrased as shown in Table 3.1. The two negatively stated items of Mood level

scale as shown in Table 3.1 were rephrased as positively stated items keeping in view

the difficulty of the participants in responding to these items. So the original reverse

scoring method for these items was also changed according to the meaning of the

statements. Apart from these items mothers did not report problem in understanding of

any of the items in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Life satisfaction Scale of

Trait Well Being Inventory, Belief in Ultimate Justice Scale, Personal Belief in a Just

World Scale, Personal Perceived Control Scale and SSQ-6.

Mothers also reported confusion with response categories of six-point Likert type rating

scales for Trait Well Being Inventory, Personal Belief in Just World Scale, and Scales

of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice and Satisfaction Scale of Social Support

Short Form Questionnaire and 11- point rating scale for Personal Perceived Control

Scale. For all these scales, the main problem appeared to be with number of options

available for responding. No problem was reported for categories of 4-point rating scale

53

of Generalized Self Efficacy Scale. Therefore the response categories of the six-point

and ten-point scales were reduced to 4- points, giving the score of 4 to ‘exactly true’, 3

to ‘mostly true’, 2 to ‘to some extent true’, and 1 to ‘not at all true’ for Trait Well Being

Inventory, Personal Belief in Just World Scale, Scales of Belief in Immanent and

Ultimate Justice and Personal Perceived Control Scale. Response categories for

Satisfaction Scale of SSQ-6 were also reduced to four categories with 4 for ‘very

satisfied’, 3 for satisfied’, 2 for ‘dissatisfied’ and 1 for ‘very dissatisfied’.

Table 3.1

Problematic Items and their Original and Revised translations

54

3.1.2 Step II

3.1.2.1 Sample Bilingual females with age range of 21 to 51 years, and with minimum education of 16

years, both married and unmarried (N = 35), participated in the study. Overall 40

females were approached. Participants with minimum education of Masters were

selected to ensure that only bilinguals who understand both English and Urdu are

included in the sample. Two of them refused to participate, while three left at least one

set of questionnaires incomplete. Hence the final sample consisted of 35 participants

for phase II of the tryout study.

3.1.2.2 Instruments English and adapted Urdu versions of the scales/questionnaires already used and

discussed in step 1 were used in the present study except Hospital Anxiety and

Depression Scale which had already been translated into Urdu following standard

procedures (Mumford et al., 1991).

Scores for each participant were calculated by averaging the scores across the items on

each scale. High scores indicated high endorsement of the construct in all scales.

3.1.2.3 Procedure Bilingual females were approached individually at the Department of Psychology,

GCU Lahore, and University of the Punjab. Initially it was decided to administer the

Urdu and English versions of the questionnaires with time gap of at least 24 hours but

as most of the respondents did not agree to give time for the administration of second

questionnaire it was decided to administer the two versions in one sitting. Written

consent was taken before administration of the questionnaires (see Appendix B). They

were told that the study was part of the PhD study and they would be given two sets of

questionnaires one after the other and they might feel some repetition in them but they

had to respond to the two sets independently of what they had responded before. They

were informed that the information derived from them will be kept secret and will be

used for only research purpose. Moreover, they were also told about their right to

withdraw from the study participation at any stage. In that case they were told that any

previous data or record will be destroyed. Half of them were given first the set of Urdu

questionnaires/scales and then the set of English questionnaires/scales and half were

55

given first the set of English version then the set of Urdu version after they had

completed the first one whether Urdu or English. They were encouraged to give any

comments on items or the response categories and to report if they had problem in

understanding any of the items. The time taken to complete each set varied between 30

to 40 minutes.

3.1.2.4 Results Pearson product moment correlations were calculated between Urdu and English

version of the scales/questionnaires and are presented in Table 3.2, which shows that all

the Urdu translations were significantly correlated with their English versions.

Table 3.2

Correlations between Urdu and English Versions of the Scales (N = 35)

Scales r

Trait Well-Being Inventory

Life Satisfaction Scale .82*

Mood Level Scale .64*

Personal Belief in a Just World Scale .78*

Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate justicea

Belief in Ultimate Justice Scale .61*

Belief in Immanent Justice Scale .76*

Personal Perceived Control Scales

Primary Control Scale .65*

Secondary Control Scale .76*

Generalized Self Efficacy Scale .81*

SSQ-6

Satisfaction with Support .92*

Availability of Support .96*

Note. aadapted English version of the scales were administered along with Urdu version

* p < .001.

56

Table 3.3

Correlations between English Scales (Light face) and their Urdu Versions (Bold face) (N = 35)

Mood Level

Personal Belief in a Just World

Belief in ultimate Justice

Belief in immanent

Justice Primary Control

Secondary Control

Self Efficacy

Satisfaction with Support

Availability of Support

Life satisfaction .58*** .73*** .30 .10 .35* .42** .65*** .05 .37 .63*** .74*** .43** .18 .27 .17 .48** .07 .27

Z .34 .20 .82 .53 .52 1.71 1.54 .15 .84 Mood Level .48** -.00 .23 .23 .25 .48* -.05 .43** .50** .36* .23 .46** .31** .69*** .19 .51**

Z .14 1.92 .01 1.32 .32 1.66 .85 .65 Personal Belief in Just World .39** .24 .40* .50** .61*** -.04 .18 .22 .33 .42 .38* .51** -.10 .17

Z 1.02 .59 .09 .87 .92 .51 .06 Belief in ultimate justice .09 .46** .62*** .37* .10 .12 .15 .41 .38 .35* -.06 .32

Z .37 .35 1.73 .08 1.00 1.30 Belief in immanent Justice .24 .36* .37* -.03 .18 .03 .40* .39* .04 .07

Z 1.18 .30 .15 .00 .85 Primary control .62*** .49** .02 .26 .45** .62*** -.02 .48**

Z 1.34 1.11 .27 1.56 Secondary control .52** .20 -.07 .58** .04 .19

Z .60 1.19 1.93 Self Efficacy .09 .45* .08 .54**

Z .09 .51 Satisfaction with Support -.11 -.00

Z 1.15

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

57

Pearson product moment correlations were also calculated for English and Urdu versions

of the scales separately as presented in Table 3.3 and the significance of the difference

between the correlations of the two versions was checked with Z test using the “SteigerD

version 1.0” software (Stoeber, 2000) which is based on procedures described by Steiger

(1980). All the Z values were within the confidence interval of ±1.96 (p > .05) indicating

that bilateral correlations between scores on English versions of the scales/questionnaires

are similar to correlations between scores on the their Urdu version. Overall conclusion

from results in Tables 3.2 and 3.3 is that the Urdu translations of questionnaires/scales are

equivalent to their English versions.

3.2 Phase II: Main study

3.2.1 Sample Data were collected from two groups of mothers: mothers of a child with Down syndrome

and mothers of normal children.

Mothers of a child with Down syndrome (n = 100) were selected from the 10 special

education schools in Lahore which their special child was attending for rehabilitation

purpose. In all there were 28 schools for intellectually disabled children in Lahore. Out of

them four schools had no child with Down syndrome at the time of study, and two refused

to refer to mothers of children enrolled in their schools. From the remaining 22 schools 12

did not have a medical specialist associated with them to diagnose the syndrome. The data

was collected from remaining 10 schools. The total number of enrolled students in these

schools was 879 at the time of study. Out of them there were 168 clinically diagnosed

children with Down syndrome of the age 4 to 16 years. Mothers of all of them were

requested to participate. In all 104 mothers appeared for the interview. Three of them were

excluded as they did not understand Urdu, the national language of Pakistan, and one left

the school without meeting the researcher, thus leaving a total response rate of 59.52%.

3.2.1.1 Including and excluding criteria for mothers of a child with Down syndrome

Including criteria

1. Mother who had a child diagnosed with Down syndrome by a medical practitioner.

58

2. Mothers whose Down syndrome child was of 4–16 years of age.

3. Mothers whose Down syndrome child was getting education in special education

centers.

Excluding criteria

1. Mothers who were not able to come to school either due to physical illness, for

being out of the city or because of some other engagement.

2. Mothers whose Down syndrome children were getting education with normal

children.

3. Those who did not understand Urdu and were not able to answer according to

given response categories.

Another sample of 100 mothers of normal children was included in the study. These

mothers were matched with mothers of Down syndrome children on marital status,

education, and monthly family income. Moreover, they also had a child with the similar

age of that with Down syndrome as given in Table 3.4. The mothers of normal children

were identified and contacted through researcher’s personal acquaintances (who were

informed about the matching criteria for these mothers). Overall 178 mothers were

contacted. Ten of them were excluded as they did not understand Urdu. Four reported

some sort of disability in any of their children, and 64 refused to participate and, thus

leaving 100 mothers with a total response rate of 56.2%, similar to that reported for other

group of mothers.

3.2.1.2 Including and excluding criteria for mothers of normal children

Including criteria

1. Mothers who were matched on the demographic grouping provided in the Table 3.4.

2. Mothers whose children were going to school and attending the classes according to

their chronological age.

Excluding criteria

1. Mothers who had a child with any physical or psychological handicap.

2. Those who did not understand Urdu and were not able to answer according to given

response categories.

59

Table 3.4

Frequency Distribution of Mothers of Normal and Down syndrome Children According to

their Demographic Status (n = 100 each)

Marital status Married Widow/Divorced Monthly Family income (Pakistani rupees in thousands) Age of the

child (years) Education of

mother (years) 0-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 > 100 0-20 21-40 41-60 n 4-8 0-5 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

6-10 7 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 9

11-14 7 4 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 13

15 and above 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3

9-12 0-5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

6-10 10 3 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 17

11-14 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 12

15 and above 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3

13-16 0-5 6 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 9

6-10 9 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 14

11-14 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

15 and above 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 5

n 51 20 8 4 5 1 9 1 1 N = 100

3.2.2 Instruments Instruments translated and adapted in pilot study as detailed in section 3.1.1 and 3.1.2

were used in the main study along with demographic data sheet which enquired about

mother’s age (years), education (years), marital status (married; widowed/ divorced),

monthly family income (Pakistani rupees in thousands), total number of children, and

child’s age (years).

3.2.3 Procedure To collect the data from mothers of Down syndrome children prior permission was

obtained from the administrators of the special education schools. After the permission

was granted the mothers were called on phone or written request was sent to them by

60

school administration to participate in the study. The mothers were asked to come to the

school during the school timings on the given day if they agreed to participate. The

meetings with the mothers of normal children were arranged at the time and place of

convenience of the mothers.

Participants were informed about the study as an attempt to investigate mothers’

experiences of upbringing their children. The consent to participate in the study was also

taken from them (see Appendix A). They were informed that the information derived from

them will be kept confidential and anonymous and will only be used for research purpose.

Moreover, they were also told about their right to withdraw from the study participation at

any stage. In that case they were told that any previous data or record obtained from them

will be destroyed. The instructions about how to respond to the statements, written on the

booklet of the questionnaires, were read to them and they were encouraged to ask to repeat

the item if they could not follow it. The researcher and the participant sat side by side with

the booklet of the questionnaires in the hand of the researcher in a way that participant

could see and read the items if she wanted too. All their queries about the study were

answered after the administration of questionnaires was completed. Time taken for the

administration varied from 30 to 60 minutes.

61

Chapter 4

4 RESULTS

This chapter is divided into two sections. In section 4.1 psychometric analysis of the

scales employed in this study is described. On the basis of results obtained in this

section main analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses for the study as reported

in section 4.2. Analyses were conducted using SPSS Version 13.00.

4.1 Psychometric Analysis Factor and reliability analyses of the scales, translated and adapted in the pilot study,

were conducted on the combined data of the mothers of Down syndrome and normal

children (N = 200) to determine the construct validity and internal consistency of the

scales. Before conducting the factor analyses data were screened to check for the

suitability of the analyses. Firstly, to see if the sample size was sufficient Kaiser-

Myer-Olkin measure (KMO) of sampling adequacy was calculated. Value of KMO

near to zero indicates insufficient sample size for factor analysis and value close to 1

indicates that size of sample is enough for running the factor analysis. Secondly, as

variables in the factor analyses are supposed to correlate with each other even if they

are measuring the different aspects of same thing, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was

conducted to check the existence of minimal strength of required correlation.

Significant value at the Bartlett’s test of sphericity shows variables are fairly

correlated with each other. Thirdly, to check if the variables were not extremely

correlated as the perfect or extreme correlations make the factor analyses

meaningless, determinant of correlation matrix was checked. Value of the

determinant greater than .00001 indicates that variables are not too highly

correlated.

Two criteria were used to confirm the number of factors. Firstly, Kaiser’s (1960)

criterion of retaining as many factors as many eigen value greater than 1 was

employed. Secondly, a parallel analyses criterion (Lautenschlager, 1989) was used.

According to the criterion random eigen values are obtained and averaged for a

number of random data sets with given number of variables and sample size. It is

assumed that meaningful components extracted from actual sample data should have

62

larger eigen values than averaged eigen values for random data with same sample

size and number of variables. Therefore as many factors are to be retained as many

random eigen values are less than observed eigen values. In the present study

random eigen values were calculated using a software Raneigen version 2.0

(Enzmann, 2003) as described by Enzmann (1997). Item was kept in the scale if it

was theoretically relevant to the particular scale, and if it had factor loading greater

than .30 on that scale. Cronbach alpha was calculated to determine the internal

consistency of the sub-scales. Item total correlations (rit) were also obtained for the

subscales and validity of the following measures was assessed by the procedures

mentioned above.

4.1.1 Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was performed on 14 items of

the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. The data were examined to check for

assumptions for factor analysis. KMO yielded the value of .83 suggesting the good

sample size for factor analysis. Determinant of correlation matrix, .03, was

sufficiently greater than .00001 suggesting that multicollinearity was not the

problem. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (91, N = 200) = 681.25, p <

.001, showing that variables were sufficiently correlated.

As originally the scale consists of two sub-scales, anxiety (Items 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13)

and depression (Items 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14), the number of factors was fixed at two

before running the analysis. Three eigen values greater than 1 emerged, i.e., 4.33,

1.56, and 1.12. To confirm the two factor structure random eigen values were

calculated. For the present scale first random eigen value 1.47 was less than first

calculated value 4.33 and the second random eigen value 1.36 was also less than the

calculated value 1.56 but the remaining random eigen values were greater than

observed values thus justifying the two factor structure.

Looking at the factor loadings of the items in the varimax rotated component matrix

it can be observed that items of the original anxiety subscale were better explained

by the second factor (named anxiety) except for item 7 (“I can sit at ease and feel

relaxed”) which was better explained by factor 1 (Table 4.1). However it was

decided to retain the item in the Anxiety Scale because of its relevance to the

63

anxiety symptoms. Moreover it had factor loading greater than .30 on the factor

named anxiety and the removal of the item from that scale reduced the alpha from

.74 to .71. All items of depression scale showed higher loadings on factor 1 (named

depression). Item 2 was most heavily loaded on factor 1 (factor loading = .78), while

item 5 was most typical of factor 2 (factor loading = .68). Total variance explained

by the two factors was 42.11% with more than two third of the variance in the total

scale scores explained by the first factor (Depression). Cronbach alpha was also

calculated for the two scales separately and the two scales were found to be

adequately internally consistent (Table 4.1).

Table 4.1

Item Characteristics of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (N = 200)

Factor loadings

Items M SD Factor 1 (Depression)

Factor 2 (Anxiety) rit

α if item deleted

1 I feel tense or wound up. 1.78 1.01 .39 .51 .49 .70

3 I get a sort of frightened feeling as if something awful is about to happen. 1.38 1.06 .26 .58 .48 .70

5 Worrying thoughts go through my mind. 1.31 1.03 .09 .68 .48 .70

7 I can sit at ease and feel relaxed. 1.08 0.94 .50 .37 .42 .71

9 I get a sort of frightened feeling like butterflies in the stomach. 0.96 0.91 .37 .58 .54 .69

11 I feel restless as if I have to be on the move. 1.78 1.01 -.18 .57 .25 .75

13 I get sudden feelings of panic. 1.03 1.03 .18 .63 .50 .69

2 I still enjoy the things I used to enjoy. 1.22 1.00 .78 .05 .58 .66

4 I can laugh and see the funny side of things. 0.69 0.78 .73 .21 .57 .67

6 I feel cheerful. 0.59 0.77 .47 .34 .44 .70

8 I feel as if I am slowed down. 1.33 0.89 .38 .37 .37 .71

10 I have lost interest in my appearance. 1.32 0.92 .38 .28 .34 .72

table continues

64

Table 4.1(continued)

Factor loadings

Items M SD Factor 1 (Depression)

Factor 2 (Anxiety) rit

α if item deleted

12 I look forward with enjoyment to things. 0.81 1.01 .76 -.23 .48 .69

14 I can enjoy a good book or radio or TV program. 0.90 1.06 .47 .25 .36 .72

Eigen values 4.33 1.56

% of variance explained 30.95 11.16

α .73 .74

Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.

4.1.2 Trait Well-Being Inventory Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was performed on 13 items of

the Trait Well-Being Inventory. Data were examined for assumptions for factor

analysis. KMO value of .93 pointed to the adequacy of sample size. Determinant of

correlation matrix, .001 > .00001 suggested that variables were not very highly

correlated. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (78, N = 200) = 1323.08,

p<.001, showing that variables were fairly correlated.

As in original scale items 1 to 7 measured life satisfaction and items 8 to 13

measured mood level, number of factors was fixed at two. Three eigen values

greater than 1 emerged i.e., 6.47, 1.20, and 1.02. To confirm the two factor structure

random eigen values were calculated. First random eigen value 1.48 was less than

first calculated value 6.47 and the second random eigen value 1.33 was greater than

the observed value 1.20 thus justifying only one factor, but looking at the factor

loadings of the items in the varimax rotated component matrix in Table 4.2 a two

factor structure can be clearly observed as items 1 to 7 were highly loaded on factor

1 (life satisfaction) and items 8 to 13 were better explained by factor 2 (mood level).

On factor 1 most heavily loaded items were item 3 and 4 with factor loading of .77

and on factor 2 most heavily loaded item was item 10 with factor loading of .82.

Total variance explained by the two factors was 59.02% with more than two third of

65

the variance explained by factor 1 (life satisfaction). Cronbach alpha was calculated

for the two sub-scales separately and their reliabilities were quite good.

Table 4.2

Item Characteristics of the Trait Well-Being Inventory (N = 200)

Factor loadings

Items M SD Factor 1 (Life satisfaction)

Factor 2 (Mood level) rit

α if item deleted

1 When I look back on my life so far I am satisfied. 3.27 0.88 .65 .24 .60 .86

2 I think that time will bring some more interesting and pleasant experiences. 3.41 0.80 .63 .14 .50 .87

3 I am satisfied with my life. 3.16 0.95 .77 .32 .75 .84

4 When I think back on my life so far, I have achieved much of what I aspired to do. 3.00 1.02 .77 .23 .72 .85

5 I believe that much of what I hope for will be fulfilled. 3.36 0.83 .66 .30 .61 .86

6 I am satisfied with my situation. 3.20 0.91 .72 .39 .74 .85

7 My life could hardly be happier than it is. 2.90 1.02 .66 .38 .67 .86

8 I usually feel fairly happy. 2.99 0.98 .35 .74 .72 .83

9 I generally tend to look at the bright side of life. 3.33 0.89 .34 .40 .42 .88

10 I am mostly in really high spirits. 2.89 0.98 .19 .82 .71 .83

11 I usually feel as if I could burst with joy. 2.64 1.06 .22 .77 .66 .84

12 I consider my self to be a happy person. 3.03 0.98 .32 .78 .75 .82

13 I am as happy as most people. 2.98 1.03 .35 .71 .68 .84

Eigen values 6.47 1.20

% of variance explained 49.76 9.26

α .87 .86

Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.

66

4.1.3 Personal Belief in a Just World Scale A Principal component analysis was run on seven items of the scale. As before the

data were examined to check for assumptions for factor analysis. All the

assumptions were met as KMO statistic was .89 suggesting the good sample size.

Determinant of correlation matrix was .018 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity

was significant, χ2 (21, N = 200) = 782.78, p < .001.

Un-rotated factor solution emerged with one factor having eigen value greater than

1, e.i., 4.45. Random eigen value 1.27 was less than the observed value thus

confirming the uni-dimensionality of the scale. As shown in Table 4.3 all items had

greater than .30 loading on the factor with highest loading of .84 on item 7. Total

variation explained by the factor was 63.61%. The alpha analysis indicated that all

items were significantly important for the scale as deletion of most of the items

decreased alpha of the scale. Overall reliability of the scale was considerably high.

Table 4.3

Item Characteristics of the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (N = 200)

Items M SD Factor

loadings rit α if item deleted

1 I am usually treated fairly. 2.68 1.02 .82 .74 .89

2 I believe that most of the things that happen in my life are fair. 2.75 1.01 .82 .74 .89

3 I believe that I usually get what I deserve. 3.12 0.99 .75 .66 .90

4 I think that important decisions that are made concerning me are usually just. 2.78 1.08 .82 .74 .89

5 In my life injustice is the exception rather than the rule. 2.95 1.04 .75 .66 .89

6 I believe that, by and large, I deserve what happens to me. 2.74 1.12 .77 .69 .89

7 Overall events in my life are just. 2.77 1.04 .84 .77 .88

Eigen values 4.45

% of variance explained 63.61

α .90

Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.

67

4.1.4 Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate justice Principal Component analysis with varimax rotation was run on the nine items. All the

assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO measure of sampling adequacy

yielded the value of .79 suggesting the good sample size. Determinant of correlation

matrix was .104 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (36, N =

200) = 442.49, p < .001.

Items 1 to 4 assessed ultimate belief in justice and items 5 to 9 assessed immanent belief

in justice. Number of the factors was fixed at two. Two eigen values greater than 1

emerged, i.e., 3.11 and 1.71. Random eigen values 1.34 and 1.22 were less than observed

values thus confirming the two factor structure. Looking at the factor loadings in the

varimax solution in Table 4.4 it can be seen that items 1 to 4 were highly loaded on

factor 2 which can be labeled as belief in ultimate justice and items 5 to 9 were highly

loaded on factor 1 which can be labeled as belief in immanent justice. Maximum factor

loading was .81 on item 9 in factor 1 and the same on items 2 and 3 on factor 2. Total

percentage of the variance explained by the two factors was 53.6. Alphas for the two

sub-scales were found to be satisfactory.

Table 4.4

Item Characteristics of Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice (N = 200)

Factor loadings Items M SD Factor 1

(Ultimate BJ) Factor 2

(Immanent BJ)rit

α if item deleted

1 Even terrible problems are often compensated for by fortunate happenstance later in life. 3.31 0.90 .18 .55 .38 .73

2 Even amidst the worse suffering, one should not lose faith that justice will prevail and set things right. 3.78 0.55 .02 .81 .56 .61

3 Even persons who suffer from severe misfortune can expect that, in the end, something good will happen to balance everything out.

3.69 0.64 .07 .81 .55 .60

4 In the long run, the injustices imposed by misfortune receive appropriate reparation. 3.40 0.78 .20 .73 .54 .60

table continues

68

Table 4.4 (continued)

Factor loadings

Items M SD Factor 1

(Ultimate BJ) Factor 2

(Immanent BJ) rit α if item deleted

5 Bad happening often follows at the heels of improper living. 3.20 0.98 .35 .17 .24 .79

6 If things go wrong one can only blame oneself for ones suffering. 3.10 1.02 .74 .18 .59 .68

7 A truly good person will seldom face misfortune. 2.66 1.22 .70 .20 .54 .70

8 Hardly any one suffers from something bad without having deserved it. 2.50 1.20 .80 .03 .61 .67

9 Misfortunes are often punishment for ones way of living. 2.59 1.21 .81 -.01 .60 .67

Eigen values 3.11 1.71

% of variance explained 34.60 19.00

α .75 .70

Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold. BJ = belief in justice.

4.1.5 Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6) Principal Component analysis with varimax rotation was run on the 12 items. All the

assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO measure of sampling adequacy

yielded the value of .79 suggesting the good sample size. Determinant of correlation

matrix was .001 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (66, N =

200) = 619.21, p < .001.

Items 1a to 6a assessed perceived availability of social support and items 1b to 6b

assessed satisfaction with social support. Number of the factors was fixed at two. Two

eigen values greater than 1 emerged, i.e., 4.29 and 3.34. Random eigen values 1.42 and

1.31 were less than observed values thus confirming the two factor structure. Looking at

the factor loadings in the varimax solution in Table 4.5 it can be seen that items 1a to 6a

were highly loaded on factor 1 which can be labeled as availability of support and items

1b to 6b were highly loaded on factor 2 which can be labeled as satisfaction with

support. Maximum factor loading was .89 on item 6a in factor 1 and .84 on item 6b on

69

factor 2. Total percentage of the variance explained by the two factors was 63.60. Alphas

for the two sub-scales were found to be satisfactory.

Table 4.5

Item Characteristics of SSQ-6 (N = 200)

Factor loadings

Items M SD

Factor 1 (Availability of support)

Factor 2 (Satisfaction with support) rit

α if item deleted

1a Who can you really count on to be dependable when you need help? 3.68 2.40 .83 .09 .70 .87

2a Who can you really count on to help you feel more relaxed when you are under pressure or tense? 2.45 1.90 .81 .05 .72 .86

3a Who accepts you totally, including both your worst and your best points? 3.42 2.48 .66 .03 .60 .89

4a Who can you really count on to care about you, regardless of what is happening to you? 2.84 2.03 .81 .07 .74 .86

5a Who can you really count on to help you feel better when you are feeling generally down-in-the-dumps? 2.34 1.85 .84 .02 .72 .86

6a Who can you count on to console you when you are very upset? 2.72 1.94 .89 .02 .76 .86

1b How satisfied are you? 3.47 0.63 .06 .67 .63 .87

2b How satisfied are you? 3.37 0.74 .04 .73 .65 .87

3b How satisfied are you? 3.43 0.74 .02 .75 .62 .87

4b How satisfied are you? 3.53 0.67 -.01 .82 .76 .85

5b How satisfied are you? 3.48 0.72 .05 .85 .76 .85

6b How satisfied are you? 3.47 0.69 .10 .84 .76 .85

Eigen values 4.29 3.34

% of variance explained 35.73 27.86

α .89 .88

Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.

70

4.1.6 Personal Perceived Control Scale Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was run on the six items of Personal

Perceived Control Scale. All the assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO

measure of sampling adequacy yielded the value of .76 suggesting the good sample size

for factor analysis. Determinant of correlation matrix was .405 > .00001 and Bartlett’s

test of sphericity was significant, χ2 (15, N = 200) = 177.14, p < .001.

As three items (1, 2, and 5) assessed secondary control and the same number of items (3,

4, and 6) assessed primary control in the original scale structure, number of factors was

fixed at two. Two factor solution emerged with only one factor having eigen value

greater than 1, e.i., 2.40 which was greater than random eigen value of 1.24 pointing to

the uni-dimensionality of the scale instead of two dimensions of the scale. Therefore

another analysis was run without fixing the factors. Results of un-rotated factor solution

are presented in Table 4.6 which shows that all items of the scale were highly loaded on

single factor with maximum loading of .75 on item 3 and minimum loading of .41 on

item 4. Total variation explained by the factor was 40.06%. Overall reliability of the

scale was satisfactory.

Table 4.6

Item Characteristics of Personal Perceived Control Scale (N= 200)

Items M SD Factor

Loadings rit α if item deleted

1 When something bad happens to me I remind myself that the situation will improve if I am patient.

3.66 0.65 .64 .42 .63

2 When some thing bad happens to me I remind myself I am better off than many people.

3.56 0.77 .71 .50 .60

3 When some thing bad happens to me I remind myself something good may come of it.

3.40 0.83 .75 .55 .58

4 When some thing bad happens to me I ask others for help or advice. 3.14 1.04 .41 .25 .70

5 When some thing bad happens to me I use my skills to overcome the problem. 3.36 0.82 .63 .40 .63

table continues

71

Table 4.6 (continued)

Items M SD Factor

Loadings rit α if item deleted

6 When some thing bad happens to me I look for different ways to improve the situation. 3.49 0.80 .59 .38 .64

Eigen values 2.40

% of variance explained 40.06

α .67

Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.

The present factor structure of perceived control scale is partly in line with the findings

of Cousins (2001) who found that in his 15 items scale, out of six primary control items

and nine secondary control items all of six primary control items and four secondary

control items were loaded on one factor which he named approach control while five

secondary control items were loaded on the other factor which he named avoidant

control. Approach control included the items that aimed at solution of the problem in

some way while avoidant control included the items that were based on denial or

avoiding the problem. Although Hollway (2003) found a two-factor structure with

primary and secondary control items loading on separate factors, two of the primary

control items (item 5 and item 6) had also factor loading greater than .30 on the

secondary control factor indicating that two processes may possess some complementary

aspects as suggested by Rothbaum et al. (1982). Moreover the idea that both processes

are equally important for the perception of control (Rothbaum, et al., 1982) is supported

by loadings of the items from the two scales on the same factor.

Another argument for the single factor structure for both control strategies is implied in

the findings of Roussi (2002) who concluded that it is more adaptive to discriminate

between controllable and uncontrollable situations and use the control strategies

accordingly, i.e., primary control for controllable situation and secondary control in

uncontrollable situations than indiscriminate use of both strategies. Similarly McCarty et

al. (1999) observed that selection of control strategy is stressor specific and also varies

from culture to culture. The relative adaptive value of two dimensions of control for

controllable and uncontrollable situations has been reported in studies with children

undergoing medical procedures (Weisz, McCabe, & Dennig, 1994), children coping with

72

homesickness (Thurber & Weisz, 1997), elderly people (Wrosch, Schulz, & Heckhausen,

2004), people with Parkinson’s disease (McQuillen, Licht, & Licht, 2003), and cancer

patients (Thompson, Sobolew-Shubin, Galbraith, Schwankovsky, & Cruzen, 1993) with

a general conclusion that secondary control is more adaptive than primary control in

uncontrollable situations. In the present study people were presented with a general

situation “when something bad happens to me” following a particular secondary or

primary control strategy to which they had to respond. Hence it is quite possible that they

had a mixture of controllable and uncontrollable situations in their mind while

responding to each item which resulted in single factor rather than two-factor structure

for the scale. Moreover, with more general situations both primary and secondary

strategies have been reported to be related to subjective well being (Cousins, 2001;

Heeps, 2000; Hollway, 2003; Lake, 2004; Maher & Cummins, 2001; Petito & Cummins,

2000).

Single factor solution of Personal Perceived control scale also seem to point to a

particular coping style of Pakistani women which consists of using primary and

secondary control strategies simultaneously when in face of problems rather than

preferring one strategy over the other.

4.1.7 Generalized Self Efficacy Scale A Principal component analysis was run on the ten items of the originally uni-

dimensional scale. All the assumptions for factor analysis were met as KMO measure of

sampling adequacy yielded the value of .91 suggesting the very good sample size for

factor analysis. Determinant of correlation matrix was .007 > .00001 and Bartlett’s test

of sphericity was significant, χ2 (45, N = 200) = 955.38, p < .001.

The analysis was run without fixing the number of factors. Un-rotated factor solution

emerged with only one factor having eigen value greater than 1, e.i., 5.35. Random eigen

value 1.37 was less than the observed value thus confirming the uni-dimensionality of

the scale. Table 4.7 shows that explained variation in the scale scores was 53.47%. All

factor loadings were greater than .30 with highest loading of .79 on items 3, 4, and 8 and

minimum loading of .58 on item 1. Alpha analysis indicated that all items almost equally

contributed to the internal consistency of the scale yielding very good alpha value.

73

Table 4.7

Item Characteristics of Generalized Self Efficacy Scale (N = 200)

Items M SD Factor loadings rit

α if item deleted

1 I can solve most problems if I invest the necessary effort. 3.41 0.77 .58 .51 .90

2 I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on my coping abilities. 3.13 1.01 .72 .64 .89

3 If I am in trouble, I can usually think of a solution. . 3.30 0.88 .79 .73 .89

4 I can usually handle whatever comes my way. 3.21 0.93 .79 .72 .89

5 If someone opposes me, I can find the means and ways to get what I want. 2.91 1.02 .61 .53 .90

6 I am confident that I could deal efficiently with unexpected events. 3.10 0.95 .77 .70 .89

7 I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough. 3.30 0.85 .77 .70 .89

8 Thanks to my resourcefulness, I know how to handle unforeseen situations. 3.09 0.88 .79 .72 .89

9 It is easy for me to stick to my aims and accomplish my goals. 3.27 0.86 .74 .66 .89

10 When I am confronted with a problem, I can usually find several solutions. 3.22 0.83 .70 .62 .89

Eigen value 2.40

% of variance explained 53.47

α .90

Note. Loadings of the items retained in the factor are expressed in bold.

4.1.8 Summary of Psychometric Analysis of Scales From the analyses elaborated in this section it is concluded that Hospital Anxiety and

Depression Scale, Trait well being inventory, Personal Belief in Just World Scale, Scales

of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice, Personal Perceived Control Scale,

Generalized Self Efficacy Scale and Social Support Short Form Questionnaire are

internally consistent reliable measures. All the scales except for Personal Perceived

control scale had similar factor structure in the present sample as reported in earlier

74

studies (for details see chapter 3, section 3.1.2.2). As items of Perceived Control Scale

were highly loaded on single factor instead of two factors, it was decided to use the scale

as single scale instead of two subscales.

4.2 Main Analysis Main analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses described in chapter 2. As a

preliminary analysis, first of all two groups of mothers were compared on study

variables. Descriptive statistics of the two groups are shown in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8

Comparison of Mothers of Normal and Down Syndrome Children on Study Variables

(N = 200)

Mothers of a Down

Syndrome child (n = 100)

Mothers of normal

children (n = 100)

Variables M (SD) M (SD) t

Mother’s age 41.02 (7.37) 36.68 (6.59) 5.40**

Mother’s education 10.50 (3.88) 10.31 (4.00) 0.34

Marital status

Married (n) 89.00 89.00

Widow / divorcee (n) 11.00 11.00 χ2 = 0.00

Number of children 4.07 (1.69) 3.68 (1.71) 1.62

Monthly family income 28.54 (30.02) 28.51 (25.98) 0.01

Age of child (years) 11.09 (3.31) 10.84 (3.39) 0.53

Life satisfaction 3.13 (0.70) 3.25 (0.69) 1.28

Mood level 2.91 (0.72) 3.05 (0.79) 1.24

Anxiety 1.38 (0.64) 1.36 (0.66) 0.22

Depression 0.96 (0.55) 1.01 (0.58) 0.67

Personal BJW 2.83 (0.85) 2.83 (0.84) 0.02

table continues

75

Table 4.8 (continued)

Mothers of a Down

Syndrome child (n = 100)

Mothers of normal

children (n = 100)

Variables M (SD) M (SD) t

Immanent BJ 2.85 (0.81) 2.77 (0.79) 0.69

Ultimate BJ 3.58 (0.51) 3.51 (0.55) 0.87

Self efficacy 3.23 (0.67) 3.16 (0.64) 0.80

Personal Control 3.49 (0.47) 3.38 (0.54) 1.53

SS (A) 3.16 (1.86) 2.66 (1.46) 2.13*

SS (S) 3.40 (0.54) 3.53 (0.56) 1.71

Note. BJW = belief in a just world; BJ = belief in justice; SS (A) = perceived availability

of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support.

*p < .05. **p < .01.

Equality of the variances between two groups of mothers was checked with Levene’s test

for continuous variables (except for marital status all variables were continuous). The

test was conducted to check for the assumption of equality of variances for the t-test. No

significant differences in the variances were found in the groups except for availability of

social support. Corrected t-value assuming inequality of the variances was calculated for

this variable. However, for other variables t-value assuming equality of variances was

used.

The two groups differed in their age, with mothers of a child with Down syndrome being

older than those with normal children. In addition, mothers also differed in terms of

perceived availability of social support with mothers of a child with Down syndrome

perceiving more people supporting them than mothers of normal children.

Pearson product moment correlations were calculated to see how the variables of the

study were related in the sample of mothers of a child with Down syndrome and mothers

of normal children. Although Pearson product moment correlation and regression

analysis are normally used in case of continuous variables, calculating Pearson

correlation between one categorical and one continuous variable and use of regression in

76

case of categorical predictors has also been recommended. The categorical variables

need to be with only two categories and dummy coded (Cohen & Cohen, 1983).

Therefore, before calculating correlations categorical variables were coded. For marital

status married mothers were coded 0 and widowed and divorced mothers were coded 1.

Remaining variables were treated as continuous.

Results from the correlation matrix (Table 4.9) supported hypotheses 1 and 2, 3 and 4.

As stated in these hypotheses personal BJW was positively related to life satisfaction and

mood level and negatively related to depression and anxiety in two groups of mothers.

Hypotheses 5 and 6 were also supported as the belief in ultimate justice was positively

related to life satisfaction and mood level as expected. Hypothesis 7 was not supported as

significant relationship between the belief in ultimate justice and depression was not

observed. Hypothesis 8 was partially supported as the belief in ultimate justice was

negatively related to anxiety in mothers of Down syndrome children only. However,

belief in immanent justice was also positively related to life satisfaction and mood level

in both groups unexpectedly. The belief in immanent justice was unrelated to anxiety and

depression as was assumed.

Some other variables of study were also found to be related to well-being dimensions.

Self-efficacy, perceived control, and perceived satisfaction with social support were

positively related to life satisfaction and mood level in the two groups. These variables

were unrelated to depression and anxiety in both groups. Perceived availability of

support was positively related to life satisfaction and mood level and negatively related

to anxiety and depression in mothers of a child with Down syndrome only. Marital status

was related to depression in the two groups with married mothers as less depressed than

widows/divorced mothers. Marital status was also related to life satisfaction and mood

level in mothers of normal children with married mothers being more satisfied with their

life and having better mood level than widows/divorced mothers. Marital status was

unrelated to anxiety in both groups. Education was negatively related to depression and

anxiety in mothers of a child with Down syndrome only. It was unrelated to life

satisfaction and mood level in both groups of mothers. Number of children was also

related to depression in only mothers of a child with Down syndrome. It was unrelated to

life satisfaction, mood level and anxiety in both groups. Mother’s age, and family

income, and child’s age were unrelated to any of the well-being dimensions in the two

groups.

77

Table 4.9

Correlations between Study Variables for Mothers of Down syndrome Child (light face) and Mothers of Normal Children (bold face; n = 100 each)

Variables 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

1 Age of child .34** -.16 .22* .11 -.09 .06 .13 .12 .10 .14 .24* .05 .13 -.03 .05 .05 .52*** -.18 .19 .25* -.08 .09 .08 .03 -.04 .30** .15 .16 -.09 .09 .04 .15

2 Mother’s age .00 .10 .22* .11 .06 .09 -.05 .02 .06 .09 .07 .01 -.04 .09 .03 -.02 .45** .40** .09 -.06 -.06 .02 .04 .08 .04 -.00 -.12 -.02 .20* .12

3 Mother’s education -.10 -.60 *** .42*** -.03 .08 -.23* -.28** -.10 -.06 .01 -.33** .04 .33** -.15 -.08 -.39 *** .37*** .09 .08 -.19 -.17 -.22* -.08 .08 -.30** -.15 .16 -.24*

4 Marital status .02 -.16 -.06 -.11 .19 .24* .03 .02 -.14 -.13 -.04 .12 .02 .31** -.16 -.40*** -.38*** .11 .32** .00 -.27** -.35*** -.18 -.20* -.00 .02

5 Total children -.23* .14 -.07 .11 .21* .15 .09 .08 .29** -.00 -.14 .23* -.06 -.13 -.12 .03 .10 .09 .06 -.04 .10 .08 -.04 .13

6 Family Income .10 .08 -.12 -.18 -.15 -.06 .14 -.15 -.07 .22* -.10 .13 .10 -.02 -.03 -.11 .07 .20 -.17 .02 .13 -.17

7 Life satisfaction .59*** -.28** -.33** .40*** .36*** .73*** .36*** .36*** .28** .55*** .79*** -.35*** -.44*** .34*** .49*** .79*** .42*** .50*** .01 .38***

8 Mood level -.48*** -.47*** .38*** .34** .55*** .27** .33** .24* .37*** -.43*** -.61*** .41*** .35*** .66*** .38*** .31** -.00 .35***

table continues

78

Note. BJW = belief in a just world; BJ = belief in justice; SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 4.9 (continued)

Variables 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

9 Anxiety .54*** -.01 -.04 -.36*** .12 -.24* -.28** -.11 .44*** -.08 -.10 -.37*** -.13 .02 -.05 -.08

10 Depression .05 .05 -.30** .04 -.13 -.25* -.15 -.12 -.06 -.31** -.12 -.02 .04 -.15

11 Self efficacy .68*** .33** .47*** .51*** .00 .47*** .56*** .35*** .26* .36*** -.19 .44***

12 Personal control .34** .36*** .53*** .14 .45*** .56*** .34** .65*** -.02 .38*** 13 Personal BJW .31** .35*** .17 .51*** .37*** .58*** .13 .50*** 14 Immanent BJ .25* -.18 .57*** .37*** -.17 .27** 15 Ultimate BJ .08 .31** .09 .51*** 16 SS (A) .12 .18 17 SS (S)

79

To clarify the relationship among possible predictors and criterion variables further, four

hierarchical regression analyses were conducted with life satisfaction, happiness,

depression and anxiety as criterion variables and demographic factors, the just world

beliefs, perceived control, self-efficacy, perceived social support and the interaction

between the psychological variables and membership of one of the two mother groups,

as predictors.

As among the demographics only mothers’ level of education, marital status (dummy

coded: married mothers = 0; widowed or divorced mothers = 1). and total number of

children were significantly correlated with at least one of the well-being dimensions, for

all analyses these variables were entered in the first block along with variable, group

(dummy coded: Mothers of Down syndrome child = 0; mothers of normal children = 1).

Self efficacy, perceived control, perceived availability of support and satisfaction with

support were entered in second block and personal BJW, ultimate BJ and immanent BJ

were entered in the third block. Variables in block 2 and block 3 were entered after

centering, by taking deviations of scores from means following Aiken and West (1991)

to avoid the problem of multicollinearity. Interaction terms of centered variables with

coded variable, group, were entered in the fourth block. Interaction terms were obtained

by multiplying centered variables with coded variable group. Enter method was used for

all the blocks. The purpose of entering the three variants of BJW in block 3 was to get

the contribution of beliefs in a just world in addition to the contribution of demographic

variables and psychological variables in various dimensions of subjective well-being.

Interaction terms were entered in the final block as it is a requirement that the variables

involved in interaction terms are already present in the model before the interaction

terms are entered. B values for interaction terms and the variables not involved in

interaction terms were interpreted from the final block. The independent role of variables

involved in interaction terms were interpreted from the block preceding the final block

(block 3) to determine their significance. In case an interaction term turned out to be

significant, indicating that simple slopes at different levels of moderator are significantly

different from each other, simple slope analysis was conducted to get the simple slopes

or regression weights (Bs) of the independent variable for two groups of mothers

separately.

Formula for simple slope is B1 + B3X whereas B1 is the unstanderdized regression

coefficient B for independent variable, B3 is unstanderdized regression coefficient B for

80

interaction term and X is the value of moderator at which the simple slope or regression

weight is required for the independent variable (Preacher, 2005). In the present case

moderator was group with values of 0 and 1. To get the simple slope or regression

weight for independent variable in the mothers of a child with Down syndrome X was

replaced with 0. By replacing the X with 1 regression weight of independent variable for

mothers of normal children was obtained. By dividing the new regression weight with its

standard error a t-value was obtained the significance of which could be checked which

determined whether the new regression weight or simple slope was significant or not.

Table 4.10

Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Life Satisfaction

(N = 200)

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β

Constant 2.99 3.00 3.08 3.13

Group 0.14 0.10 .10 0.13 0.09 .10 0.16* 0.07 .11 1.00 0.54 .72

Education 0.01 0.01 .05 0.02 0.01 .09 0.01 0.01 .04 0.00 0.01 .02

Marital status -0.52** 0.16 -.24 -0.47** 0.13 -.21 -0.11 0.12 -.05 -0.12 0.11 -.05

Total children 0.03 0.03 .07 0.00 0.03 .01 -0.01 0.02 -.02 -0.01 0.02 -.02

Self efficacy 0.14 0.08 .13 0.11 0.07 .10 0.12 0.10 .11

Personal Control 0.25* 0.11 .19 -0.01 0.09 -.01 -0.08 0.14 -.06

SS (A) 0.04 0.03 .10 0.03 0.02 .08 0.07 0.03 .17

SS (S) 0.42*** 0.09 .33 0.04 0.08 .03 0.20 0.12 .16

Personal BJW 0.52*** 0.05 .62 0.46 0.06 .55

Ultimate BJ 0.05 0.08 .04 0.07 0.10 .06

Immanent BJ 0.12* 0.05 .14 0.08 0.07 .10

Group × Self Efficacy -0.03 0.14

Group × Personal Control 0.06 0.19

Group × SS (A) -0.09* 0.04

Group × SS (S) -0.25 0.16

Group × Personal BJW 0.12 0.10

Group × Ultimate BJ -0.01 0.16

Group × Immanent BJ 0.03 0.10

∆R2 .06* .29*** .27*** .02

Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = Belief in a just world; BJ = Belief in justice.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

81

Results of regression analysis for life satisfaction as criterion variable are presented in

Table 4.10. Overall the model explained 64% variance in life satisfaction, F (18, 181) =

17.86, p < .001. Demographics in Block 1 explained 6% variance in life satisfaction, F

(4, 195) = 3.30, p = .01. In this block only marital status predicted life satisfaction with

married mothers as more satisfied with their life than widowed or divorced mothers.

When self-efficacy, perceived control and social support were added into the model in

block 2 regression explained additional 29% variance in life satisfaction, Fchange (4, 191)

= 21.43, p < .001. Marital status retained its effect and still predicted life satisfaction.

Besides, satisfaction with perceived support and personal control positively predicted life

satisfaction. Mothers who were more satisfied with support and perceived more control

were more satisfied. When three variants of belief in a just world were entered in block 3

regression explained additional 27% variance in life satisfaction, Fchange (3, 188) = 44.21,

p < .001. In this block group became significant which was not in the previous two

blocks, mothers of normal children were more satisfied with their life than mothers of a

Down syndrome child. Marital status, satisfaction with perceived support and personal

control were no more significant. In addition, the more the mothers believed in a

personal just world and also in an immanent justice, the more they were satisfied with

their life. When interaction terms were included in block 4, the regression explained

additional 2% variance in life satisfaction, Fchange (7, 181) = 1.35, p = .23. Perceived

availability of social support interacted with group to predict life satisfaction indicating

that relationship between availability of support and life satisfaction was significantly

different in the two groups. Therefore, regression weights of availability of social

support were calculated and their significance was checked for the two groups separately

by simple slope analysis using a software “two way unstandardized with simple

slopes.xls” (J. Dawson, personal communication, November, 11, 2008). The results are

depicted in Figure 4.1. The more the mothers of Down syndrome children perceived

social support to be available more they were satisfied with their life, B = .07, p = .03.

However, there was no significant relationship between available support and life

satisfaction in mothers of normal children B = -.02, p = .53.

82

Figure 4.1

Perceived availability of support explaining life satisfaction in mothers of normal and

Down syndrome children

1

2

3

4

5

Low SS (A) High SS (A)

Life

satis

fact

ion

Mothers of Downsyndrome childMothers of normalchildren

These results supported the hypothesis 9. Personal BJW positively predicted life

satisfaction as expected. Contrary to the expectations, belief in immanent justice also

predicted life satisfaction while belief in ultimate justice did not predict life

satisfaction unlike stated in hypothesis 10. The results were true after controlling for

demographics, self-efficacy, personal control and social support as depicted in block

3. The interaction terms of three variants of belief in a just world with group were not

significant, which suggested that relationships of three variants of BJW with life

satisfaction were equally true for the two groups of mothers.

Availability of support

83

Table 4.11

Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Mood level (N =

200)

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β

Constant 2.95 2.92 2.99 2.96

Group 0.13 0.11 .09 0.14 0.10 .10 0.16* 0.09 .12 0.15 0.71 .10

Education 0.01 0.02 .04 0.02 0.01 .09 0.01 0.01 .10 0.01 0.01 .05

Marital status -0.58** 0.17 -.24 -0.57***0.15 -.23 -0.27* 0.14 -.11 -0.28* 0.14 -.12

Total children -0.01 0.04 -.03 -0.04 0.03 -.08 -0.05 0.03 -.10 -0.04 0.03 -.08

Self efficacy 0.34***0.10 .29 0.31*** 0.09 .27 0.22 0.13 .19

Personal Control 0.08 0.12 .05 -0.11 0.12 -.07 -0.00 0.18 -.00

SS (A) 0.04 0.03 .10 0.04 0.03 .09 0.07 0.03 .14

SS (S) 0.31** 0.10 .22 -0.00 0.10 -.00 0.03 0.15 .02

Personal BJW 0.43*** 0.06 0.47 0.33 0.08 .37

Ultimate BJ -0.05 0.10 -0.04 0.06 0.14 .04

Immanent BJ 0.13* 0.06 0.14 0.08 0.10 .09

Group × Self Efficacy 0.15 0.18

Group × Personal Control -0.22 0.25

Group × SS (A) -0.06 0.06

Group × SS (S) 0.00 0.20

Group × Personal BJW 0.23 0.13

Group × Ultimate BJ -0.24 0.21

Group × Immanent BJ 0.10 0.13

∆R2 .07** .23*** .16*** .03

Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = belief in a just world; BJ = belief in justice.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

As depicted in Table 4.11, the final model explained 48% variance in mood level, F (18,

181) = 9.42, p < .001. Demographics in block1 explained 7% variance in mood level, F

(4, 195) = 3.83, p = .01. Only marital status was related to mood level. Married mothers

had better overall moods than widowed and divorced mothers. When self-efficacy,

personal control and perceived social support were entered in block 2 they explained an

additional 23% variance in the mood level, Fchange (4, 191) = 15.74, p < .001. Marital

status was still significant as in block 1. In addition, mothers who had higher level of self

84

efficacy and were satisfied with perceived support had better moods. When three variants

of belief in a just world were entered in block 3 they explained additional 16% variance

in mood level, Fchange (3, 188) = 18.09, p < .001. The more the mothers believed in a

personal just world and also in an immanent justice the better their mood level was.

Moreover, mothers with higher self efficacy were in better moods as was the case in

previous block. Marital status was still significant to predict mood with married mothers

having better moods than widows or divorced mothers. Satisfaction with perceived

support was no more significant. Interaction terms in block 4 explained additional 3%

variance in mood level, Fchange (7, 181) = 1.24, p = .28. None of the interactions were

significant in the model. Marital status still predicted mood level as in the previous

blocks.

These results supported the hypothesis 11. Personal BJW positively predicted mood level

as expected. Contrary to the expectation, belief in immanent justice predicted mood level

while belief in ultimate justice was not related to mood level unlike stated in hypothesis

12. The results were true after controlling for demographics, self-efficacy, personal

control and social support as depicted in block 3. The interaction terms of three variants

of BJW with group were not significant which indicated that relationships of three

variants of BJW with mood level were equally true for the two groups of mothers.

Table 4.12 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Depression (N =

200)

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β

Constant 1.17 1.15 1.10 1.12

Group 0.05 0.08 .05 0.09 0.08 .08 0.09 0.08 .08 0.08 0.63 .06

Education -0.03* 0.01 -.20 -0.03** 0.01 -.21 -0.03* 0.01 - .18 -0.03* 0.01 -.17

Marital status 0.47*** 0.12 .26 0.52*** 0.12 .29 0.42** 0.13 .24 0.45** 0.13 .25

Total children 0.01 0.03 .02 0.01 0.03 .04 0.02 0.03 .05 0.01 0.03 .03

Self efficacy -0.06 0.08 -.07 -0.06 0.08 - .07 0.06 0.12 .07

Personal control 0.17 0.10 .15 0.22* 0.11 .20 0.24 0.16 .21

SS (A) -0.02 0.02 -.07 -0.02 0.02 - .05 -0.05 0.03 -.15

SS (S) -0.23** 0.08 -.22 -0.13 0.09 - .13 -0.18 0.14 -.18

Personal BJW -0.17** 0.06 - .25 -0.14 0.06 -.21

table continues

85

Table 4.12 (continued)

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β

Ultimate BJ 0.04 0.09 .03 -0.14 0.13 -.13

Immanent BJ 0.00 0.06 .00 0.05 0.09 .07

Group × Self Efficacy -0.18 0.16

Group × Personal Control -0.04 0.22

Group × SS (A) 0.08 0.05

Group × SS (S) 0.01 0.18

Group × Personal BJW -0.05 0.11

Group × Ultimate BJ 0.36 0.19

Group × Immanent BJ -0.10 0.11

∆R2 .12*** .06* .04* .05

Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = belief in just world; BJ = belief in justice.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

As depicted in Table 4.12, in depression 26% variance was explained by the model, F

(18, 181) = 3.50, p < .001. Demographics in block 1 explained 12% variance in

depression, F (4, 195) = 6.76, p < .001. More educated and married mothers were less

depressed. Addition of self efficacy, personal control and social support in block 2

explained another 6% variance in depression, Fchange (4, 191) = 3.19, p = .01. Education

and marital status retained their effect and were still significant as in the block 1.

Moreover, satisfaction with perceived support was also significant. Mothers who were

more satisfied with perceived support were less depressed. Additional 4% variance was

explained by three variants of belief in a just world in block 3, Fchange (3, 188) = 2.92, p =

.04. Higher level of education and marital status predicted depression as in block 1 and 2.

Satisfaction with support was no more significant. Personal BJW negatively predicted

depression. The more the mothers believed in a personal just world, the less they were

depressed. Moreover, personal control which was not significant in previous model

positively predicted depression. The more the mothers perceived personal control the

more they were depressed. Entrance of interaction terms in block 4 produced an

additional 5% variance in depression, Fchange (7, 181) = 1.56, p = .15. None of the

interaction terms were significant. Education and marital status were still significant as in

previous blocks.

86

These results supported the hypothesis 13. Personal BJW negatively predicted depression

as expected. belief in immanent justice was not related to depression as was assumed

while belief in ultimate justice failed to predict depression contrary to the assumption as

stated in hypothesis 14. The results were true after controlling for demographics, self-

efficacy, personal control and social support as depicted in block 3. The interaction terms

of three variants of BJW with group were not significant indicating that relationships of

three variants of BJW with depression were equally true for the two groups of mothers.

Table 4.13 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Anxiety (N = 200)

Note. SS (A) = perceived availability of social support; SS (S) = satisfaction with social support; BJW = belief in just world; BJ = belief in justice. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

Predictors B SE β B SE β B SE β B SE β

Constant 1.87 1.82 1.72 1.72

Group -0.04 0.09 -.03 -0.05 0.09 -.04 -0.04 0.09 -.03 -0.26 0.72 -.20

Education -0.04** 0.01 -.23 -0.04** 0.01 -.22 -0.03 0.01 -.16 -0.02 0.01 -.14

Marital status 0.30* 0.15 .14 0.32* 0.15 .15 0.15 0.15 .07 0.17 0.14 .08

Total children -0.03 0.03 -.07 -0.02 0.03 -.06 -0.02 0.03 -.05 -0.03 0.03 -.07

Self efficacy -0.05 0.09 -.05 -0.04 0.09 -.04 0.07 0.13 .07

Personal Control 0.02 0.12 .01 0.13 0.12 .10 0.16 0.18 .13

SS (A) -0.05 0.03 -.13 -0.04 0.03 -.10 -0.05 0.04 -.14

SS (S) -0.11 0.10 -.10 0.06 0.10 .05 -0.06 0.15 -.05

Personal BJW -0.32***0.07 -.41 -0.25 0.08 -.33

Ultimate BJ 0.03 0.11 .03 -0.29 0.14 -.24

Immanent BJ 0.03 0.07 .04 0.15 0.10 .19

Group × Self Efficacy -0.13 0.18

Group × Personal Control -0.09 0.25

Group × SS (A) 0.04 0.06

Group × SS (S) 0.07 0.21

Group × Personal BJW -0.14 0.13

Group × Ultimate BJ 0.69** 0.21

Group × Immanent BJ -0.24 0.13

∆R2 .07* .03 .10*** .07*

87

Table 4.13 shows that in anxiety 26% variance was explained by the final model, F (18,

181) = 3.59, p < .001. Demographics explained 7% variance in block 1, F (4, 195) =

3.43, p = .01. Married mothers and mothers with more education were less anxious than

less educated and widowed and divorced mothers. Entering self-efficacy, perceived

control and social support in block 2 produced additional 3% variance in anxiety, Fchange

(4, 191) = 1.71, p = .15. Again married mothers and more educated mothers were less

anxious. When three variants of belief in a just world were entered in block 3 they

explained additional 10% variance in anxiety, Fchange (3, 188) = 7.68, p < .001. More the

mothers believed in personal just world the less they were anxious. Marital status and

education were no more significant. When interaction terms were entered in block 4 they

explained additional 7% variance in anxiety, Fchange (7, 181) = 2.35, p = .03. Belief in

ultimate justice interacted with group of mothers to predict anxiety (see Table 4.13).

Therefore simple slope analysis was conducted using “two way unstandardized with

simple slopes.xls” (J. Dawson, personal communication, November, 11, 2008) to

calculate regression weights for ultimate belief in justice for two groups separately.

Results are presented in Figure 4.2. The more the mothers of Down syndrome child

believed in ultimate justice the less they experienced anxiety, B = -.29, p = .04. However

the more the mothers of normal children believed in ultimate justice the more they

experienced anxiety, B = .40, p = .01.

88

Figure 4.2

Belief in ultimate justice explaining anxiety in mothers of normal and Down syndrome

children

These results supported the hypothesis 15. Personal BJW negatively predicted anxiety

as expected. Belief in immanent justice was not related to anxiety as was assumed.

The results were true after controlling for demographics, self-efficacy, personal

control and social support as depicted in block 3. Hypothesis 16 was partially

supported as strong belief in ultimate justice was related to low anxiety in mothers of

a child with Down syndrome. However, unexpectedly it positively predicted anxiety

in mothers of normal children. The interaction terms of personal BJW and belief in

immanent justice with group were not significant which suggested that relationship of

personal BJW and belief in immanent justice with anxiety were equally true for the

two groups of mothers.

Hypothesis 17, that the personal BJW and belief in ultimate justice will be more

positively related to life satisfaction and happiness and more negatively related to

anxiety and depression in mothers of a Down syndrome child than in mothers of

normal children, was not supported in general by the findings. Personal BJW was

equally related with well-being dimensions in the two groups. However, belief in

Belief in ultimate justice

89

ultimate justice was negatively related with anxiety as expected in mothers of a child

with Down syndrome only.

Overall, the results indicate that personal BJW positively predicted life satisfaction

and mood level and negatively predicted anxiety and depression. belief in immanent

justice was also directly related to life satisfaction and mood level. Moreover, belief

in ultimate justice was differently related to anxiety in the two groups of mothers.

Figure 4.3

Figural representation of results for main variables in the study

Personal BJW

Ultimate BJ

Immanent BJ

Group X Personal BJW

Group X Ultimate BJ

Group X Immanent BJ

Life Satisfaction

Mood Level

Depression

Anxiety

90

Chapter 5

5 DISCUSSION

The study was aimed at investigating the role of beliefs in a just world in explaining

different dimensions of SWB in mothers of a child with Down syndrome as compared

to mothers of normal children. It also investigated strength of three dimensions of

BJW in the two groups of mothers. Overall findings suggested the BJW served as

resource for the mothers. The stronger the mothers believed in a personal just world

more they were satisfied with their life, the better mood level, the less depressive

symptoms they revealed and the less anxious they were. The patterns of results

remained true when controlled for demographic factors as mother’s education, marital

status and total number of children and for other psychological resources as self-

efficacy, personal perceived control and perceived social support. In addition two

groups did not significantly differ in strength of three variants of BJW.

The current study was a first attempt to simultaneously investigate the role of personal

BJW along with beliefs in ultimate and immanent justice in explaining different well-

being dimensions. Inclusion of the control variables ensured that relationship between

BJW and well-being did not owe to these variables. Advantage of this strategy was

twofold. First, we were able to know the overall variance explained in well-being by

three important aspects of BJW. Secondly, it was studied how three beliefs were

related with well-being independent of each other and control variables. Overall,

personal BJW along with two dimensions of general BJW, beliefs in ultimate and

immanent justice, explained significant variance in all dimensions of well-being with

more variance explained in life satisfaction (.27) and mood level (.16), than in state

anxiety (.10) and depression (.04). The finding confirms the Becker and Dalbert’s

notion (as cited in Dalbert, 1998) that trait well-being should be differentiated from

state well-being and the two types of SWB should be studied independently in order

to attain the clear understanding of them and the factors which correlate with them

and influence them.

One of the main objectives of the study was to examine if the expected relationship

between BJWs and well being would be similar in the two groups of mothers,

following personal resource hypotheses or BJW would explain more well-being in

91

mothers of a child with Down syndrome, following the buffer hypotheses. In line with

studies conducted with victims of injustice (Dalbert, 2006; Dzuka & Dalbert, 2006;

Otto et al., 2006), with people in everyday life settings (Correia & Dalbert, 2007;

Dalbert, 1999; Dalbert & Maes, 2002; Fatima, 2004; Kamble & Dalbert, 2008; Sutton

& Douglas, 2005; Sutton et al., 2008) and studies comparing victims of injustice with

non-victims (Corriea, Kamble, et al., in press; Cubela & Kvartuc, 2007; Dzuka &

Dalbert, 2002), associations between personal BJW and well-being was found to be

similar in the two groups of mothers indicating that personal BJW was equally

adaptive for both mothers of normal and special children. Personal BJW was not only

directly related with positive stable aspects of well-being but also inversely related

with negative symptoms like depression and anxiety. The findings support the role of

personal BJW as a personal resource which helps people not only in more difficult

situations but also in problems which individuals face in their routine life. More the

people believe in a personal just world, the more positive are their look at their lives,

and more positive are their feelings. The belief serves as positive cognitive bias

(Cummins & Nistico, 2002) which is not entirely based on reality but it provides a

framework for the interpretation of events in their life in congruence with their belief

(Lipkus et al., 1996). The belief may lead to different ways of coping in adverse and

non-adverse situations, but the coping patterns emerging as a result of holding strong

BJW have adaptive value and result in better well-being in every condition.

Individuals living in unfair circumstances may be assimilating unfair experiences to

their BJW thus evaluating negative events as less unfair and those not facing such

conditions and having strong BJW may be trusting more in the fairness of others, and

expecting rewards for their good deeds. What ever the mediators may be the

consequences are same for both groups.

Validity of the construct of BJW has been observed in both western, e.g., America,

Britain, Germany, Canada, Hungry, Hawaii, Croatia and Slovakia (e.g., Cubela &

Kvartuc, 2007; Dalbert & Dzuka, 2004; Dalbert & Sallay, 1996; Dalbert & Yamauchi,

1994; Furnham, 1993; Hafer & Olson, 1993; Sutton & Douglas, 2005; see also

Dalbert, 2001; Furnham, 1989, 2003) and eastern countries, e.g., Pakistan, India and

Portugal (Correia, Kamble, et al., in press; Fatima, 2004; Kamble & Dalbert, 2008).

There is considerable consensus in the research conducted all over the world that

BJW helps people to live a happy and satisfied life whether they live in seemingly

92

more fair conditions or they face obvious injustices. Present study is another attempt

to validate the BJW and well-being relationship in Pakistani society which has already

been observed in other studies. The finding highlights the universality of personal

BJW and clearly demonstrates that the phenomenon is not culture specific. People

may differ in their reasons for believing in the just world, the way it is formed and

developed but as the belief serves purpose for them of explaining the events of life in

meaningful way thus enhancing their well-being they are motivated to maintain their

belief in what ever conditions they are living in.

Belief in ultimate justice was positively related to life satisfaction and mood level in

both groups of mothers and negatively related to anxiety in mothers of a child with

Down syndrome as expected following findings of Maes (1998b), and Maes and Kals

(2002, 2004). However, after controlling for other variables regression analyses

revealed that belief in ultimate justice negatively predicted anxiety for mothers of

Down syndrome children while it positively predicted anxiety in mothers of normal

children. It appears that the belief of getting justice in the long run helped in reducing

anxiety in mothers of a child with Down syndrome. It is understandable that by

believing in ultimate justice they accept that this wrong happening is not necessarily a

punishment and may be compensated at some time in future. Moreover, Down

syndrome is an enduring condition and parents have to learn to live with that. In such

a situation when immediate solutions to the problems are not expected and achieved, a

hope for some kind of compensation even in remote future can be gratifying.

The approach of expecting justice in the long run is inherent in Muslim thought. Islam

has belief in life after death as its one of basic tenets. There are many verses in Quran

which throw light on promise of justice in life hereafter, for example, “And others are

made to await for Allah’s Decree, whether He will punish them or will forgive them.

And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise” (al-Quran 8:106). Another verse states “The

sovereignty on that Day will be that of Allah (the One Who has no partners). He will

judge between them. So those who believed and did righteous good deeds will be in

Gardens of delight” (al-Quran 22:56). Similarly in another verse Allah says “And We

place the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul will be treated

unjustly at all. And if there is (any deed even) the weight of a mustard seed, We will

bring it forth. And sufficient are We to take account” (al-Quran 21:47). There are

93

several verses in Al-Quran which indicate that this world is a temporary place of

residence which has no spiritual or real significance, such as, “Every soul shall have a

taste of death: and only on the Day of Judgment shall you be paid your full

recompense. Only he who is saved far from the fire and admitted to the garden will

have attained the object (of life): for the life of this world is but goods and chattels of

deception"(al-Quran 3:185).

Religious beliefs of some women also helped them accept the disorder of their child

more willingly. For example, a few mothers in the present study after or before the

interview, made statements like “God has given me the opportunity to take care of

this innocent angel like child so that he may help me to get the mercy of God”; “This

child is source of reward in the life hereafter for me”; “Since this child is born our

business is prospering”. Although we did not calculate the correlations between

beliefs and this type of statements, as they were rather informal, it is speculated that

these types of thinking emerge from the belief that wrong happenings are

compensated which in turn may be the result of holding strong religious beliefs

regarding life after death, and getting rewards of good deeds hereafter. However, the

question remains that why the strong ultimate belief in justice was accompanied with

more anxiety in mothers of normal children. It may be assumed that mothers of

normal children may not be facing the problems that could not be resolved like

problems associated with having a child with Down syndrome. Therefore, holding the

belief that problems will be compensated at some point in future and at the same time

facing or seeing unjust happenings that could be undone but were not worked upon

initiated the anxiety in mothers of normal children. As currently no research is

available to throw light on belief in ultimate justice and anxiety relationship in these

groups care must be taken in interpreting these results. Moreover, further studies need

to be conducted in future to clarify these links.

Belief in immanent justice was also related to life satisfaction and mood level and the

relationship persisted after controlling for demographics, social support, self efficacy

and personal control in both groups of mothers, although the relationships were not as

strong as the relationships of personal BJW with life satisfaction and mood level.

These findings are in contrast to the observations made by Maes (1998b), and Maes

and Kals (2002, 2004) who found that belief in ultimate justice and not belief in

94

immanent justice enhanced well-being. One reason may be that for the mothers in

Pakistan day-to-day existence may be so challenging that they are actually more

interested in justice in the here and now than in the future. These results seem to be

meaningful in the light of overall uncertainty and insecurity present in all spheres of

life in Pakistan which prevent one from relying on expected justice in the future. In

such circumstances it is the belief that every one gets what one deserves that helps

and not the belief that wrong happenings will be compensated in the future.

It should also be noted that very few studies have been conducted with beliefs in

ultimate and immanent justice as two dimensions of BJW showing the adaptive value

of belief in ultimate justice (Maes, 1998; Maes & Kals, 2002, 2004). Even these

studies have been conducted in countries with economical, political and social

stabilities. In more advanced countries holding belief in ultimate justice might be

more beneficial as people do receive compensations for wrong happenings in reality

but in country like Pakistan holding such a belief might not be as adaptive as people

seldom watch other people getting justice. Here the belief that what ever is happening

is just might be more effective.

The present study failed to show the adaptive value of both belief in ultimate and

belief in immanent justice for depression in both groups of mothers. Inconsistent

findings have been reported previously with general BJW with reference to its

relationship with depression. For example, Benson and Ritter (1990) in a study of

unemployed and working adults found a negative relationship between BJW and

depressive symptoms in working adults and positive relationship for unemployed

individuals. Dalbert (1998) observed positive relationship between depression and

BJW in victim sample. She also found no relationship of BJW with negative affect in

victim and non-victim samples. Lipkus et al. (1996) in the first study did not find

relationship between BJW and different dimensions of psychological well-being, but

in the second study they observed negative relationship between BJW and depression.

Dzuka and Dalbert (2002) also reported inconsistent findings regarding the role of

general BJW in their two studies. In study one the stronger the long-term unemployed

individuals had general BJW the more worried they were. In contrast study two

showed that stronger the long-term unemployed had general BJW the less frequently

they experienced negative affect. Dalbert (1998, 2001) suggested that mixed findings

95

regarding the belief in a just world and depression relationship may be due to the

different coping strategies that are initiated as a result of holding justice beliefs. These

coping strategies may be cognitive in nature. Lupfer, Doan, and Houstan (1998)

concluded from their study that those who strongly believed in general just world

were more distressed than those who believed less strongly after observing fair and

unfair events, if they were prevented from making causal attributions. In the same

vein Dalbert (2001) observed that unemployed individuals who were strong in their

BJW and could not justify their unemployment were more depressed than those strong

believers who could find reasons for their undue suffering. Dalbert (2006) discusses

in detail that long term undue sufferings may put the person in situation of “existential

doubts” (p. 45) which lead to the depression if the existential doubts are not resolved.

Overall, personal BJW appears to be more adaptive than any other predictor in the

study. Phenomenon regarding beliefs in ultimate and immanent justice and well-being

relationship is more complex and needs to be studied with longitudinal and

experimental designs to untangle the complex relationships.

Another important finding was that mothers of a child with Down syndrome did not

differ from mothers of normal children in strength of justice beliefs. The finding is in

line with Lerner (1980) who suggested that people protect their belief in justice even

when they experience injustice by denying the injustice in their own world as the

mothers of a child with Down syndrome particularly did in the present study by

holding the similar level of justice beliefs as held by mothers of normal children. This

finding is also supported by the researches comparing privileged with non-privileged

groups. For example Rubin and Peplau (1973) could not find relationship between

social class and scores on a just world scale. Dzuka (2001) did not find differences in

BJW of employed and unemployed. Similarly Calhoun, Cann, Tedeschi, and

McMillan (1998) concluded from their study that perceptions of the world as just

were not influenced by traumatic events in life. Similarly O’ Conner, Morrison,

McLeod, & Anderson (1996) in a Meta analysis of 33 studies found no significant

correlation between BJW and gender.

People’s use of different referent groups may also explain these similarities in

strength of justice beliefs in the two groups. Although the two groups differ from each

other with reference to presence of one special or only normal children at home, but

96

when people assess the fair and unfair conditions in their life they compare

themselves to those who are more similar to them. For example, mothers of children

with Down syndrome might have compared themselves with mothers of other special

children who might be suffering from more severe problems and mothers with only

typically growing children might have compared themselves with mothers of other

normal children while assessing their just and unjust situations. Comparing oneself

with different reference groups to assess one’s situation has gained much attention in

social psychology researches in general (e.g., Steg, Buunk, & Rothengatter, 2008) but

the issue has not been much explored in BJW research (see Cubela, 2004).

In addition to the analyses to test the hypotheses of the study the two groups were also

compared on criterion and control variables. First of all analysis with t-test did not

show differences between the two groups of mothers on any of the subjective well-

being dimensions. But regression analyses which took into account socio

demographic and cognitive variables revealed that mothers of normal children were

more satisfied with their life than mothers of a child with Down syndrome pointing to

the role of other variables in life satisfaction. Down syndrome is a disorder that is not

curable but the afflicted ones can be rehabilitated. Parents have to accept that their

child will never come up to the level of typically developing children. Therefore it is

difficult to cope with the situation if the person is not equipped with resources that

dampen the debilitating effects of having a child with life-long disability.

However, the two groups did not differ on mood level, anxiety and depression.

Controlling for other variables also did not change the situation. It should be

acknowledged that a child with Down syndrome has a number of positive

characteristics besides characteristics associated with disability. In many regards,

child with Down syndrome may be similar to typically developing child and typically

developing children may also have number of problems (Behr & Murphy, 1993). For

example, a child with Down syndrome may be very loving and disciplined besides

having other syndrome specific problems and a normal child may be more

manipulating, throwing tamper tantrums and involved in activities not approved by

the parents thus resulting in insignificant difference in feelings of two groups of

mothers.

97

The findings can also be explained with reference to adaptation theories of subjective

well-being, which in general state that people adapt to positive and negative

experiences of life thus maintaining their level of subjective well-being at a particular

point. One such theory is theory of hedonic treadmill (Brickman & Campbell, 1971)

according to which good and bad events effect people’s feeling and evaluations of life

temporarily but soon people get habituated to these life events and come back to

neutral point of hedonism. In this reference Brickman, Coates, and Janoff-Bulman

(1978) observed that people were very happy immediately after winning the lotteries

but few days later they returned to the neutral level of happiness. Similarly, people

with spinal cord injuries were extremely unhappy after the accident but returned to

their previous level after few days. Another related theory is set point theory (Diener

& Diener, 1995) which states that individual differ in their set points of subjective

well-being to a great extent based on their genetically determined personality

characteristics. Studies conducted with twins reared together and apart demonstrate

that stability in SWB is largely determined by the genetics. Tellegen et al. (1988) studied

identical and fraternal twins who were brought up together in the same home and

those who were brought up in different homes. They observed that identical twins,

grown up in different homes, were more similar in their SWB than the fraternal twins

who shared the same environment after birth. They further estimated that heredity

explained 40 % variance in positive emotions, 55 % variance in negative emotions

and 48 % variance in general well-being. In line with above mentioned studies, Heady

and Wearing (1989) proposed the dynamic equilibrium model. According to the

model, people maintain levels of subjective well being that are determined by their

personalities. Each person has his or her own normal equilibrium level of SWB that is

based on stable personality characteristics. Changes may occur in this equilibrium due

to adverse life events. However, these changes are likely to be temporary due to stable

personality traits. In this regard it has been demonstrated that people come back to

their set point even after very negative life events. For example, Silver (1980)

observed that even after becoming paralyzed people are able to adapt successfully.

Suh, Diener, and Fugita (1996) also demonstrated that people adapt vey quickly to

good and bad events of their life. Mehnert, Krauss, Nadler, and Boyd (1990)

supported the adaptation model by the findings that individuals who got disabled in

later life were less satisfied with their life than those who got disabled in their early

life. It is very probable that diagnosis of Down syndrome of the child had affected the

98

mother’s SWB but with the passage of time they returned to their equilibrium level

because of their personality characteristics and also by natural adaptive tendencies of

human beings. This interpretation is further strengthened by the findings in the

present study that the two groups did not differ in generalized self efficacy, perceived

control and justice beliefs.

The only difference in the two groups with reference to the psychological resources

was regarding the perceived availability of social support with mothers of a child with

Down syndrome perceiving more people supporting them than mothers of normal

children. There is some evidence that mothers of special children required and sought

more support to tackle with needs of their special children than fathers as the fathers

are not primarily responsible to take care of children (Spangenberg & Theron, 2001).

It is quite understandable that mothers of special children could realize the importance

of social support more than mothers of normal children because of burden of taking

care of a child with disability, although, sources of social support may be different in

individualistic cultures, where state institutions are responsible for care of their

citizens, and in collectivistic society like Pakistan, where family is responsible to

fulfill the needs of the individual. It is possible that family as well as friends were

offering more support to these mothers because of their realization of the burden of

the mothers.

Although the focus of this work was not to assess relationship between marital status

and justice beliefs, it was observed that married mothers of normal children endorsed

stronger belief in a personal just world and ultimate justice than their unmarried

counterparts. Direction of the relationships was same in mothers of a child with Down

syndrome but insignificant. The findings partly seem to be in line with the studies

which claim that justice beliefs to some extent are based on real experiences like

experiences of violence (Dzuka & Dalbert, 2007), harassment at work place (Cubela

& Kvartuc, 2007), and long-term unemployment (Cubela, 2004), but if the reasoning

of strength of justice beliefs depending on real experiences is true than the

relationship between justice beliefs and marital status should be even stronger in

mothers of children with Down syndrome as divorced and widowed mothers of

children with Down syndrome go through more problems than married mothers who

could get support from their husbands. In addition, it will not be reasonable to draw

99

any conclusion from the present findings as they might be the result of sampling error.

It should be noted that number of mothers in widow and divorced group (n = 11) was

much smaller than mothers in married group (n = 89) in both mothers of a child with

Down syndrome and mothers of normal children.

It was also observed that belief in immanent justice was stronger in less educated

mothers than in more educated mothers in both groups. Earliest form of justice belief

emerges in the children in the form of immanent justice (Piaget as cited in Gruber &

Vonèche, 1977) and as the child matures cognitively belief changes into more

reasonable belief in a just world which takes into account some randomness in the

world as well (Dalbert, 2001). Thus, people believe that there might be some

injustices in the world; in general they get what they deserve. As the education has

been observed to play its role in cognitive development (Piaget as cited in Gruber &

Vonèche, 1977) it may be hypothesized that educated mothers were more likely to

rationalize the logic of not receiving immanent and readily available justice in all

situations of life. So it might be the reason for negative association between education

and immanent belief in justice. But then the question remains why high level of

education did not accompany high level of ultimate belief in justice and personal BJW

which is supposed to improve with cognitive maturity. It seems as if the overall

education system in Pakistan has not been able to inculcate the belief in ultimate

justice and personal BJW in people who go through the system. Although people do

retain quite a reasonable level of ultimate belief in justice and personal BJW but the

formal education does not seem to play any role in it.

A number of psychological and demographic resources were also included in the

study to demonstrate the unique contribution of justice beliefs after these variables

had explained their variance in different dimensions of SWB. It was important to

control these factors as they have been reported to be related with both BJW and

various well-being dimensions. Without controlling these factors there was a

possibility that ability of BJW to explain well-being could be attributed to its

correlation with these other factors. The findings with reference to these variables are

also worth discussing.

Personal perceived control was positively related to life satisfaction and mood level in

both groups of mothers in line with the studies of Cousins (2001), Heeps (2000),

100

Hollway (2003), Lake (2004), Maher and Cummins (2001), and Petito and Cummins

(2000). However, it positively predicted life satisfaction after controlling for

demographics and psychological variables but after controlling for beliefs in a just

world it no longer predicted life satisfaction and even positively predicted depression

which was not related to perceived control in zero order correlations. The findings

show that when attempts to control are not accompanied with the beliefs in one self

(self-efficacy), justice and perceptions that one has support available from others, they

are no longer beneficial and even they may accompany depression. None of the

studies that have been mentioned above took into account social support, efficacy and

justice beliefs. Moreover it is also not known if the present findings are also true for

men in the country or they are specific to women. Hence caution must be exercised

while generalizing from these findings.

Self-efficacy was observed to be related to two dimensions of trait well-being (mood

level and life satisfaction) in both mothers of normal children and in mothers of a

Down syndrome child in line with Cheung and Sun (2000), Christian (2007),

Hampton (1998), Hampton and Marshall (2000), Luszczynska et al. (2005) and Waltz

and Bandura (1988). However it only predicted mood level with mothers perceiving

more self-efficacy having better mood in general. Unlike studies that report negative

association of self-efficacy with depression (Hastings & Brown, 2002; Holahan et al.,

1984; Luszczynska et al., 2005; Maciejewski, 2000; Stewart et al., 2004) and anxiety

(Dahlbeck & Lightsey, 2008; Hastings & Brown, 2002; Luszczynska et al., 2005), the

present study reported no significant association of self-efficacy with two dimensions

of state well-being (depression and anxiety). Findings of the present study are also

contrary to what has been reported in studies conducted in Pakistan (Nawaz, 2004;

Tabassum & Rehman, 2005) where self-efficacy was found to be negatively

associated with depression. The results might be more particular to the women in

Pakistan as none of these studies report the associations in relation to gender. This

finding highlights an important situation of typical Pakistani women, who are usually

not in control of their lives. On the contrary those who try to rely on their abilities

may be in conflict with the social norms, thus self-efficacy may not help them with

their state well-being at least.

101

Although self-efficacy and perceived control were moderately correlated in the two

groups of mothers showing that the two constructs might be somewhat related, yet the

regression analyses clearly revealed their discriminant validity as self-efficacy and

perceived control differentially predicted well-being dimensions with high perceived

control accompanying high level of depression and high self-efficacy accompanying

better overall mood after controlling other variables.

Perceived availability of support was positively related to trait well-being (life

satisfaction and mood level) and negatively related to state well-being (anxiety and

depression) in mothers of a child with Down syndrome but unrelated to all

dimensions of well-being in mothers of normal children as depicted in correlation

matrix. Mothers of Down syndrome children also perceived more social support

available as compared to mothers of normal children as revealed by the t-test.

Regression analyses revealed that higher perceived availability of social support

accompanied more life satisfaction in mothers of Down syndrome children but not in

mothers of normal children after controlling for other variables in the model in

support of buffering model which states that perceived social support helps in times of

stress only (Cohen & Wills, 1985). Moreover, the availability of support was found to

predict only life satisfaction and not stable and transitory moods in mothers of a child

with Down syndrome. This alludes to the independence of cognitive and affective

components of subjective well-being which has been well discussed in the subjective

well-being literature (Diener, 1984; Diener, Lucas, & Scollon, 2006; Lucas, Diener, &

Suh, 1996; Shmotkin, 2005).

It could also be speculated that beliefs in a just world influenced perceived

availability of support which in turn predicted life satisfaction in mothers of a child

with Down syndrome as BJW has been theorized to enhance and protect well-being of

individuals by producing trust in the fairness of others in times of stress (Dalbert,

2001). However, insignificant correlations between three dimensions of belief in a

just world and perceived availability of social support in both groups of mothers in the

present study did not confirm the speculation that perceived availability of support

mediates the relationship between BJW and life satisfaction.

Satisfaction with the support was positively related to life satisfaction and overall

mood level in both groups of mothers but it did not predict any of the well being

102

dimensions after other variables in the model had been accounted for. The finding that

it is the number of supporting people that predict life satisfaction and not how

satisfied the person is with the support may imply that when people name the people

who provide them support they are usually satisfied with them, so it does not remain

the issue if they are satisfied with the support or not.

Among the demographic variables mother’s marital status, education and total

number of her children were related to at least one of the well-being dimensions. Zero

order correlations showed that in both groups of mothers, married mothers were less

depressed than widowed or divorced mothers. Married mothers of normal children

were also more satisfied and had better mood than previously married mothers of

normal children. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that depression and mood

level were predicted by marital status with married mothers being less depressed and

in better overall mood level than mothers who had lost their spouses. This relationship

was true after controlling for demographic and psychological variables in the model.

The finding is in line with number of researches that report better well-being of

married than unmarried mothers (e.g., Eisenhower & Blacker, 2006; McConkey et al.,

2008; Nazir, 2001; Olsson & Hwang, 2001). Surprisingly, married mothers were no

more satisfied with their life than widow or divorced mothers unlike findings of other

researches (e.g., Diener et al., 2000). This may be due to the use of different measures

of life satisfaction and control variables in different studies. Moreover, small number

of widowed and divorced mothers as compared to married mothers prevent from

generalizing the results.

Zero order correlations also revealed that education was negatively related to anxiety

and depression in mothers of Down syndrome children only. In hierarchical

regression analyses, only depression was predicted by education. More Educated

mothers were less depressed than less educated ones as expected. Ability to take

decisions, having confidence in one’s self and exposure to more choices are just few

well-known benefits of education which equip the person to handle a variety of

situations in a better way thus making them less vulnerable to negative affect.

However, role of education in reducing depression in women is more evident in the

countries like Pakistan where education is not yet easily available (Iqbal & Siddiqui,

103

2002; Naeem, 2001) than in developed countries where availability of education is no

more an issue (Ben-Zur et al., 2005).

Age of the child was unrelated to any of the well-being dimensions in the present

study. Results are in contrast to the findings of Behr and Murphy (1993), and Glidden

and Schoolcraft (2003) who observed lower level of well-being in mothers of young

children than in mothers of older children, but in line with Herman & Marcenko

(1997) and McConkey et al. (2008) who did not find significant relationship of age of

the child with maternal well-being in mothers of mentally retarded children. It should

be noted that children in the present study were all school going. Very young children

might have more negative effect on their mothers’ mental health than school going

children who are less dependent on their mothers than younger children thus mothers

are less stressed and have more time for them.

The present study did not reveal any association of monthly family income with

subjective well-being in the two groups of mothers unlike many previous studies

(Diener et al., 1995; Diener & Oishi, 2000; Sloper et al., 1991; Mak & Ho, 2007).

Diener and Oishi suggested that culture may be a factor in influence of income on

happiness as they themselves observed that some very poor people in Latino America

were not that unhappy as they were expected. It seems as people of different countries

derive happiness from different sources. Another reason for the present finding may

be that while reporting family income very poor people probably did not report the

financial help they get from different sources besides their own regular income. For

example, a house maid who earned only 4000 rupees monthly might not have

included in her income the financial support from her employer or some one else to

educate her children, to pay the household bills or to fulfill other requirements which

dampened the ill effects of poverty. However, study is also contrary to the findings of

Suhail and Chaudhary (2004) who observed positive relationship between family

income and SWB in large scale study in Pakistan. The results from the present study

may be more specific to the women who are usually not the main bread-winners in

Pakistan. Non-working women may be more interested and affected by what they get

from their husbands to spend than by what a family earns overall.

The two groups of mothers differed in age with mothers of a child with Down

syndrome being older than mothers of normal children. However, age of the mother

104

was found to be unrelated with any of the well-being dimensions in the two groups.

Low association between age and life satisfaction is in line with Ehrlich and

Isaacowitz (2002), Diener, Lucas, and Oishi (2002), Lucas and Gohm (2000), and

Suhail and Chaudhary (2004) suggesting that life satisfaction is a stable construct. But

there are rather inconsistent findings regarding the association between age and affect.

Diener et al. and Lucas and Gohm observed that positive affect declined with age

while Ehrlich and Isaacowitz observed that middle aged people had the highest level

of positive affect and younger people had the lowest level. The present findings are

also in line with Suhail and Chaudhary (2004) who did not observe a significant

association between happiness and age in their large scale study in Pakistan.

Total number of a mother’s living children was positively related to depression in

mothers of a child with Down syndrome. It is quite understandable that taking care of

a child with special needs and many other children at home puts a lot of stress on

mothers. There is some evidence that suggests that mothers with more children face

more parenting stress than mothers with less number of children (Lavee & Sharlin,

1996). Another study conducted in Pakistan demonstrated that number of children

was positively related with anxiety in non-working mothers (Iqbal et al., 2004).

However number of children did not predict any of the well-being dimensions after

other variables in the model had explained variance in SWB which indicates that

more children are not solely responsible for problems of mothers, rather it is absence

or presence of number of objective and subjective resources that matters. Moreover, it

is equally important that how many hours a woman spends at home, i.e., whether she

is working or non-working.

5.1 Conclusions BJW has been theorized for being adaptive for victims of injustice in particular,

implying buffer hypothesis. However, very few comparison studies have been

conducted for a clear test of this assumption. Results of most of these studies are

mixed. Present study attempted to explore the role of three dimensions of BJW in

explaining well-being of mothers of Down syndrome and normal children. Overall,

the results support the personal resource hypothesis instead of buffer hypothesis.

Personal BJW explained well-being of both mothers of a Down syndrome child and

those of normal children. The belief in immanent justice was related with trait well-

105

being dimensions overall but it was unrelated with negative state well-being. Belief in

ultimate justice, however buffered to reduce anxiety of mothers of a Down syndrome

child. But the belief was positively related with anxiety of mothers of normal

children. Stronger the belief in ultimate justice was more the mothers of normal

children experienced anxiety. Moreover, in line with BJW theory it was observed that

people maintain their BJW even in un-favourable conditions of life and whatever the

mediators may be for BJW and well-being relationship the consequences are same for

all those who hold strong beliefs in justice.

5.2 Limitations Before generalizing the results of the study some light must be thrown on limitations

of the study.

1. The main limitation of the study is its cross-sectional design which prevents

from drawing causal inferences. From studies with such designs we can only conclude

if the variables are related to each other or not. To determine the cause and effect

relationships, especially the direction of associations, longitudinal and experimental

designs are recommended.

2. Another limitation of the study is that no claim can be made about the mothers

of normal children being representative of general population of mothers as they were

not randomly selected. However, an attempt was made to match them to mothers of a

child with Down syndrome on important demographics to rule out differential effect

of these variables in these groups. The relevant demographics were also controlled

statistically to control for their main effects.

3. There is a possibility that participant’s self-presentational concerns could have

influenced their responses.

4. The study focused on only subjective aspects of well-being while ignoring

other important aspects of psychological well-being e.g. personal growth, purpose in

life, self acceptance and positive relations with others. There is a possibility that

ultimate belief in justice that has not been found to be related to three of the four

subjective well-being dimensions may be related to other aspects of psychological

well-being. Future researches may throw light on these associations.

106

5. Another potentially important limitation of the work is that with inferential

statistical tests conducted with alpha = .05 criteria for rejection of the null hypothesis,

there is a potential for Type 1 error. In short with so many tests conducted, it is

inevitable that at least one test would return a statistically significant value by chance

alone. Although this does not seem to be a problem for the key results that the

personal BJW and the belief in immanent justice were related to well-being, which

replicate across the criterion variables but it is appropriate to regard with suspicion the

interaction of group with the belief in ultimate justice which occurs across just one

criterion variable.

5.3 Implications 1. The study is important in the respect that it was the first one in which ultimate

and immanent beliefs in justice were studied along with personal belief in just world.

Previously either the studies have been conducted discriminating general from

personal belief in just world or belief in immanent from belief in ultimate justice. The

present research with rather unexpected findings regarding beliefs in immanent and

ultimate justice differentially predicting different well-being dimensions in victims

and non-victims is an important addition to the just world literature. Findings need to

be replicated with experimental and longitudinal designs.

2. The research also generates the hypotheses for future studies regarding the

differential attributional styles of those with strong and weak belief in a just world in

victims of injustice and people in every-day life settings.

3. The findings also have implications for mental health professionals to take

help of belief systems of individuals when trying to help them out. Professionals can

help parents discover their own strengths, to find what works for them. Belief in

ultimate justice can be particularly strengthened in mothers of special children.

Mental health professionals can induce that belief by incorporating religious

philosophy into psychotherapy.

4. So far just world theory has not been applied to research on mental health of

mothers of special children with the exception of two studies by Dalbert (1998; as

cited in Dalbert, 2001) which were conducted with general belief in a just world as

predictor of subjective well-being. In addition these studies did not include control

107

variables in the model. Pattern of results from the present study, which included three

important dimensions of belief in a just world and a number of control variables,

makes it worthwhile to follow this line of research. Future researches studying the

conditions impacting psychological well being of parents of special children should

take into account the importance of BJW as a resource enabling the mothers to

maintain their well-being.

108

6 REFERENCES

Ahmad, I., Ghafoor, T., Samoor, N. A., & Chattha, M. N. (2005). Down syndrome: Clinical and cytogenetic analysis. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Pakistan, 15, 426-429.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. London: Sage.

Albee, G. W. (1986). Toward a just society: Lessons from observations on the primary prevention of psychopathology. American Psychologist, 41, 891-898.

Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: America’s perception of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.

Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1974). Developing measures of perceived life quality: Results from several national surveys. Social Indicators Research, 1, 1-26.

Argyle, M. (1999). Causes and correlates of happiness. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 353-373). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. Retrieved March 16, 2009, from http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/BanEncy.html

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bandura, A. (2008). An agentic perspective on positive psychology. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.). Positive psychology: Exploring the best in people (Vol. 1, pp. 167-196). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Company.

Begue, L. (2002). Beliefs in justice and faith in people: Just world, religiosity and interpersonal trust. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 375-382.

Begue, L. (2005). Self esteem regulation in threatening social comparison: The roles of belief in a just world and self-efficacy. Social Behaviour and Personality, 33(1), 69-76.

Behr, S. K., & Murphy, D. L. (1993). Research progress and promise. The role of perceptions in cognitive adaptation to disability. In A. P. Turnbull, J. A. Patterson, S. K. Behr, D. L. Murphy, J. G. Marquis, & M. J. Blue-Banning (Eds.). Cognitive coping, families and disability (pp. 151-163). Brooks: Baltimore.

Benson, D. E., & Ritter, C. (1990). Belief in a just world, job loss and depression. Sociological Focus, 23, 49-63.

Ben-Zur, H., Duvdevany, I., & Lury, L. (2005). Associations of social support and hardiness with mental health among mothers of adult children with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 54-62.

109

Berkman, L. F., & Syme, S. L. (1979). Social networks, host resistance and mortality: A nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. American Journal of Epidemiology 109: 186-204.

Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.

Bjelland, I., Dahl, A. A., Haug, T. T., & Neckelmann, D. (2002). The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: An updated literature review. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 52, 69-77.

Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In Appley (Ed.), Adaptation-Level Theory. New York: Academic Press.

Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 917-927.

Brown, J., & Grover, J. (1998). The role of moderating variables between stressor exposure and being distresses in a sample of serving police officers. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 181-185.

Buckley, S. J. (1993). Language development in children with Down syndrome - Reasons for optimism. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 1, 3-9.

Bulman, R. J., & Wortman, C. B. (1977). Attributions of blame and coping in the real world: Severe accident victims react to their lot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 351-363.

Burger, J. M. (1992). Desire for control: Personality, social, and clinical perspectives. New York: Plenum Press.

Burke, R. J. (1985). Beliefs and fears underlying Type A behavior. Journal of General Psychology, 112, 133-145.

Calhoun, L. G., Cann, A., Tedeschi, R. G., & McMillan, G. (1998). Traumatic events and generational differences in assumptions about a just world. The Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 789-791.

Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.

Carr, J. (2005). Families of 30-35-year olds with Down's syndrome. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18, 75-84.

Cheung, C., & Kwok, S. (1996). Conservative orientation as a determinant of hopelessness. Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 333-347.

Cheung, S. K., & Sun, S. Y. K. (2000). Effects of self-efficacy and social support on the mental health conditions of mutual-aid organization members. Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 413-422.

110

Christian, J. L. (2007). Factors that predict satisfaction or burnout in parents of children with moderate to severe mental retardation. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 68(4-A), 1323. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from psycINFO data base.

Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 38, 300-314.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, C. (1983). Applied regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support and buffering. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357.

Connel, C. M., Davis, W. K., Gallant, M. P., & Sharpe, P. A. (1994). Impact of social support, social cognitive variables, and perceived threat on depression among adults with diabetes. Health Psychology, 13, 263-273.

Colvin, C. R., & Block, J. (1994). Do positive illusions foster mental health? An examination of the Taylor and Brown formulation. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 3-20.

Correia, I., Batista, M. T., & Lima, M. L. (in press) Does the belief in a just world bring happiness? Causal relationships among belief in a just world, life satisfaction and mood. Australian Journal of Psychology.

Correia, I., & Dalber, C. (2007). Belief in a just world, justice concerns, and well-being at Portuguese schools. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 111, 421–437.

Correia, I., Kamble, S. V., & Dalbert, C. (in press). Belief in a just world and well-Being of bullies, victims and defenders: A study with Portuguese and Indian students. Anxiety, Stress & Coping.

Correia, I., Vala, J., & Aguiar, P. (2001, August). Are strong believers in a just world happier than low believers in a just world. Paper presented at the tenth European Developmental Conference, Uppsala, Sweden.

Cousins, R. (2001). Predicting subjective quality of life: The contributions of personality and perceived control. Ph D desertation, Deakin University, Australia.

Cubela, V. (2004). Belief in a just world and young adults’ way of coping with unemployment and the job search. In C. Dalbert & H. Sally (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp.189-214). London: Routledge.

Cubela, V., & Ivanov, L. (2000). Vjerovanja u (ne)pravedan svijet i centralnost pravde: Relacije s osjecajem koherentnosti i generaliziranim ocekivanjima u pogledu buducnosti (Beliefs in a (un) just world and the centrality of justice: Their relations to the sense of coherence and generalized future expectancies, Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru, 39, 33-51.

Cubela, V., Kvartuc, T. (2007). Effects of mobbing on justice beliefs and adjustment. European Psychologist, 12, 261-271.

111

Cubela, V., Prorokovic, A., & Gregov, Lj. (1999). Neki tipovi valjanosti i pouzdanosti dviju skala vjerovanja u pravedan svijet (Some aspects of validity and reliability of two belief in a just world scales), Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru, 38, 133-148

Cummins, R. A., & Nistico, H. (2002). Maintaining life satisfaction: The role of positive cognitive bias. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 37-69.

Dahlbeck, D. T., & Lightsey Jr, O. R. (2008). Generalized self-efficacy, coping, and self-esteem as predictors of psychological adjustment among children with disabilities or chronic illnesses. Children's Health Care, 37, 293–315.

Dalbert, C. (1992). Subjektives Wohlbefinden junger Erwachsener: Theoretische und empirische Analysen der Struktur und Stabilität [Subjective well-being of young adults: Theoretical and empirical analyses of structure and stability]. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 13, 207-220.

Dalbert, C. (1998). Belief in a just world, well-being, and coping with an unjust fate. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 87-105). New York: Plenum Press.

Dalbert, C. (1999). The world is more just for me than generally: About the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale’s validity. Social Justice Research, 12, 79-98.

Dalbert, C. (2001). The justice motive as a personal resource: Dealing with challenges and critical life events. New York: Plenum Press.

Dalbert, C. (2002). Beliefs in a just world as a buffer against anger. Social Justice Research, 15, 123-145.

Dalbert, C. (2006). Justice concerns and mental health during unemployment. In T. Kieselbach, A. H. Winefield, C. Boyd, & S. Anderson (Eds.), Unemployment and health. International and interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 35-50). Melbourn: Australian Academic Press.

Dalbert, C., & Braun, A. (1997) Coping with cancer: A study with adult cancer patients. University of Tubingen, Unpublished data.

Dalbert, C. & Dzuka, J. (2004). Belief in a just world, personality, and well being of adolescents. In C. Dalbert & H. Sally (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp.101-116). London: Routledge.

Dalbert, C., Lipkus, I. M., Sallay, H., & Goch, I. (2001) A just and an unjust world: Structure and validity of different world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 561-577.

Dalbert, C., & Maes, J. (2002). Belief in a just world as a personal resource in school. In M. Ross, & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 365-381). Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dalbert, C., Montada, L., & Schmitt, M. (1987). Glaube an eine gerechte Welt als Motiv: Validierungskorrelate zweier Skalen [The belief in a just world as motive: Validity correlates of two scales]. Psychologische Beiträge, 29, 596-615.

112

Dalbert, C., & Radant, M. (2004). Parenting and young adolescents’ belief in a just world. In C. Dalbert & H. Sallay (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp. 11-25). London: Routledge.

Dalbert, C., & Sallay, H. K. (1996). The belief in a just world: Construct in Hungary. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 27, 293-314.

Dalbert, C., & Stoeber, J. (2006). The belief in a just world and domain-specific beliefs about justice at school and in the family: A longitudinal study with adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 200-207.

Dalbert, C., & Yamauchi, L. (1994). Belief in a just world and attitudes toward immigrants and foreign workers: A cultural comparison between Hawaii and Germany. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1612-1626.

DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analyses of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197-229

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575.

Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being. The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55, 34-43.

Diener, E., & Diener, C. (1996). Most people are happy. Psychological Science, 7, 181-185.

Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653-663.

Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting subjective well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 851-864.

Diener, E., & Diener, R. B. (2000). New directions in subjective well-being. Retrieved February 17, 2003, from http://s.psych.uiuc.edu/~ediener/hottopic/NEW-DIRECTIONS.html

Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1984). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1105-1117.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.

Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1995). Resources, personal striving, and subjective well-being: A nomothetic and ideographic approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 926-935.

Diener, E., Gohm, C. L., Suh, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Similarity of the relations between marital status and subjective well-being across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 419-436.

Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In C.R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), The hand book of positive psychology. (pp. 63-73). NewYork: Oxford University Press.

113

Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well being. American Psychologist, 51, 305-314.

Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Money and happiness: Income and subjective well-being across nations. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 185-218). Cambrige, M. A: MIT Press.

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276-302.

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., & Oishi, S. (1997). Recent findings on subjective well-being. Retrieved February 17, 2003, from http://s.psych.uiuc.edu/~ediener/hottopic/paper1.html

Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Hamby, D. W. (1994). Measuring social support in families with young children with disabilities. In C. J. Dunst, C. M. Trivette, & A. G. Deal (Eds.), Supporting and strengthening families, Vol. 1: Methods, strategies and practices (pp. 152-160). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Dykens, E. M., Hodapp, R. M., & Evans, D. W. (2006). Profiles and development of adaptive behavior in children with Down syndrome. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 9, 45-50.

Dzuka, J. (2001). A Slovak youth’s belief in a just world. Psychologia a pata psychologia dietata, 36, 225-239. Abstract retrieved June 21, 2004, from www.elis.sk/ppd/ppd301.htm

Dzuka, J., & Dalbert, C. (2002). Mental health and personality of Slovak unemployed adolescents: The impact of belief in a just world. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 732-757.

Dzuka, J., & Dalbert, C. (2006). The belief in just world and subjective well being in old age. Aging and Mental Health, 10, 439-444.

Dzuka, J., & Dalbert, C. (2007). Student violence against teachers: Teachers’ well-being and the belief in a just world. European Psychologist, 12, 253-260.

Edge, L. (2002, November). Quality of life & body image in women diagnosed with breast cancer. Paper presented in 4th Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Australia. Abstract retrieved April 6, 2005, from http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/Conferences/abstracts_papers/index.htm

Ehrlich, B. S., & Isaacowitz, D. M. (2002). Does subjective well-being increase with age? Perspectives in Psychology, 5, 20-26.

Eid, M., & Diener, E. (2004). Global judgments of subjective well-being: Situational variability and long-term stability. Social Indicators Research, 65, 245-277.

Eisenhower, A. S., Baker, B. L., & Blacher, J. (2005). Preschool children with intellectual disability: syndrome specificity, behavior problems, and maternal well being. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 657-671.

114

Eisenhower, A. S., & Blacher, J. (2006). Mothers of young adults with intellectual disability: multiple roles, ethnicity and well being. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50, 905-916.

Emmons, R. A., & Diener, E. (1985). Personality correlates of subjective well being. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 11, 89-97.

Enzmann, D. (1997). Raneigen: A program to determine the parallel analysis criteria for the number of principal components. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 232.

Enzmann, D. (2003). RanEigen version 2.0 [Computer software]. Retrieved June 17, 2009, from http://www2.jura.uni-hamburg.de/instkrim/kriminologie/mitarbeiter/enzmann/software/pacrit.zip

Erez, A., Johnson, D. E., & Judge, T. A. (1995). Self-deception as a mediator of the relationship between dispositions and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 597-612.

Fatima, I. (2004). Beliefs in a just world and psychological well being. Unpublished M.Phil thesis, University of Punjab, Pakistan.

Fatima, I., & Khalid, R. (2007). Some aspects of reliability and validity of Beliefs in a Just World Questionnaire. Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 5, 15-24.

Feeley, K. M., & Jones, E. A. (2006). Addressing challenging behaviour in children with Down syndrome: The use of applied behaviour analysis for assessment and intervention. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 11, 64-77.

Feldman, M., McDonald, L., Serbin, L., Stack, D., Secco, M. L., & Yu, C. T. (2007). Predictors of depressive symptoms in primary caregivers of young children with or at risk for developmental delay. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 51, 606–619.

Fried, K. (1980). A score based on eight signs in the diagnosis of Down syndrome in the new born. Journal of Mental Deficiencies Research, 24, 181-185.

Furnham, A. (1993). Just world beliefs in twelve societies. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 317-329.

Furnham, A. (1995). The just world, charitable giving and attitudes to disability. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 577-583.

Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 795-817.

Furnham, A., & Proctor, E. (1989). Belief in a just world: Review and critique of the individual difference literature. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 365-384.

Furnham, A., & Proctor, E. (1992). Sphere specific just world beliefs and attitudes to Aids. Human Relations, 45, 265-280.

115

Gallagher, E., & Vella-Brodrick, D. (2006, November). Social support and emotional intelligence as predictors of subjective well-being. Paper presented at the 8th Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Deakin University, Australia.

Glidden, L. M., & Schoolcraft, S. A. (2003). Depression: Its trajectory and correlates in mothers rearing children with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 47, 250-263.

Gould, S. J. (1999). A critique of Heckhausen and Schulz’s (1995) life span theory of control from a cross cultural perspective. Psychological Review, 106, 597-604.

Griffin, M. L., Amodeo, M., Clay, C., Fassler, I., & Ellis, M. A. (2006). Racial differences in social support: Kin versus friends. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76, 374-380.

Gruber, H. E., & Vonèche, J. J. (Eds.). (1977). The essential Piaget. New York: Basic Books.

Gurin, G., Veroff, J., & Feld, S. (1960). American’s view their mental health. New York: Basic Books.

Hafer, C. L., & Olson, J. M. (1993). Beliefs in a just world, discontent, and assertive actions by working women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 30-38.

Hafer, C. L., & Olson, J. M. (1998). Individual differences in the belief in a Just world and responses to personal misfortune. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimization and belief in a just world (pp. 65-86). New York: Plenum Press.

Hafer, C. L. & Bègue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, development, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128-167.

Haley, W. E., Roth, D. L., Coleton, M. I., Ford, G. R., West, C. A. C., Collins, R. P., & Isobe, T. L. (1996). Appraisal, coping, and social support as mediators of well-being in black and white family caregivers of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 121-129.

Hall, J. G. (2004). Chromosomal clinical abnormalities. In R. E. Behrman, R. M. Kliegman, & H. B. Jenson (Eds.), Nelson textbook of pediatrics (pp. 383-391). Philedelphia: WB Saunders.

Hampton, N. Z. (1998, April). Enhancing the quality of life of people with spinal cord injuries. Paper presented at the World Conference of American Counseling Association. Indianapolis, IN.

Hampton, N. Z., & Marshall, A. (2000). Culture, Gender, Self-Efficacy, and Life Satisfaction: A comparison between Americans and Chinese People with Spinal Cord Injuries. Journal of Rehabilitation, 66, 21-28.

Hanson, M. J. (2003). Twenty-five years after early intervention: a follow-up of children with Down syndrome and their families. Infants and Young Children, 16, 354-366.

116

Hassall, R., Rose, J., & McDonald, J. (2005). Parenting stress in mothers of children with an intellectual disability: The effects of parental cognitions in relation to child characteristics and family support. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 405-418.

Hastings, R. P., Allen, R., McDermott, K., & Still, D. (2002). Factors related to positive perceptions in mothers of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 15, 269-275.

Hastings, R. P., & Brown, T. (2002). Behavior Problems of Children with Autism, Parental Self-Efficacy, and Mental Health. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 107, 222-232.

Hastings, R. P., Kovshof, H., Ward, N. J., Epinosa, F. D., Brown, T., & Remington, B. (2005). System analysis of stress and positive perceptions in mothers and fathers of pre-school children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35, 635-644.

Heady, B., & Wearing, A. (1989). Personality, life events, and subjective well-being: Toward a dynamic equilibrium model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 731-739.

Heckhausen, J. & Schulz, R. (1995). A life span theory of control. Psychological Review, 102, 284-304.

Heckhausen, J. & Schulz, R. (1999). The primacy of primary control is a human universal: A reply to Gould’s (1999) critique of the life span theory of control. Psychological Review, 106, 605-304.

Hedov, G., Anneren, G., & Wikbald, K. (2002). Swedish parents of children with Down’s syndrome. Parental stress and sense of coherence in relation to employment rate and time spent in child care. Scandinavion Journal of Caring Sciences, 16, 424.

Heeps, L. J. (2000). The role of primary/secondary control in positive psychological adjustment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Deakin University, Australia.

Herman, S. E., & Marcenko, M. O. (1997). Perceptions of services and resources as mediators of depression among parents of children with developmental disabilities. Mental Retardation, 35, 458-467.

Holahan, C. K., Holahan, C. J., & Belk, S. S. (1984). Adjustment in Aging: The roles of life stress, hassles, and self-efficacy. Health Psychology, 3, 315-328.

Hollway, J. (2003). The relationship of perceived control to neighbourhood wellbeing. Unpublished Honours dissertation, Deakin University, Australia.

Horton, T. V., & Wallander, J. L. (2001). Hope and social support as resilience factors against psychological distress of mothers who care for children with chronic physical conditions. Rehabilitation Psychology, 46, 382-399.

117

Iqbal, A., Nadeem, R., & Fatima, N. (2004). Anxiety in non-working women with reference to their education, family system and number of children. Pakistan Journal of Medical Science, 20, 345-348.

Iqbal, A., & Siddiqui, K. S. (2002). Depression among parents of children with acute Leukomia. Journal of Ayub Medical College, 14. Retrieved December 19, 2008, from www.ayubmed.edu.pk/JAMC/PAST/14-2/index.htm.

Johnson, W., & Krueger, R. F. (2006). How money buy happiness: Genetic and environmental processes linking finances and life satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 680-691.

Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.

Kamble, S. V., & Dalbert, C. (2008, August). Belief in a just world and well being. Paper presented at the 12th Biennial Conference of International Society for Justice Research, Adelaide, Australia.

Keller, D., & Honig, A. S. (2004). Maternal and paternal stress in families with school aged children with disabilities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74, 337-348.

Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002) Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007-1022.

Khan, S. (1996). Moderator variables in vulnerability to anxiety: Social support and resilience. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Karachi, Pakistan.

Kim, H. W., Greenberg, J. S., Seltzrer, M. M., Krauss, M. W. (2003). The role of coping in maintaining the psychological well being of mothers of adults with intellectual disability and mental illness. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 47, 313-327.

King, K. B. (1993). Social support and long-term recovery from coronary artery surgery: Effects on patients and spouses. Health Psychology, 12, 56-63.

Lake, L. B. (2004). Volunteerism and perceived control as predictors of subjective well-being. Post graduate diploma thesis, Deakin University.

Lam, D. B, & Kwok, S. Y. C. L. (2003). Stresses and mental health of fathers with younger children in Hong Kong: Implications for social work practices. Daniel Fu Keung Wong Internnaional Social Work, 46, 103-120.

Lerner, M. J. (1965). Evaluation of performance as a function of performer’s reward and attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 355-360.

Lerner, M. J. (1975). The justice motive in social behavior: Introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 1-19.

Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.

118

Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030-1051.

Lautenschlager, G. J. (1989). A comparison of alternatives to conducting Monte Carlo analyses for determining parallel analysis criteria. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 365-395.

Lavee, Y., & Sharlin, S. (1996). The effect of parenting stress on marital quality. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 114-135.

Lightsey, O. W. (1994). Thinking positive as a stress buffer: The role of positive automatic cognitions in depression and happiness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41, 325-334.

Lipkus, I. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1171-1178.

Lipkus, I. M., Dalbert, C., & Siegler, I. C. (1996). The importance of distinguishing the belief in a just world for self versus for others: Implications for psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 666-677.

Lipkus, I. M., & Siegler, I. C. (1993). The belief in a just world and perceptions of discrimination. Journal of Psychology, 127, 465-474.

Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. M. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 616-628.

Lucas, R. E., & Gohm, C. L. (2000). Age and sex differences in subjective well-being across cultures. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 291-318). Cambridge, M. A: MIT Press.

Lupfer, M. B., Doan, K., & Houston, D.A. (1998). Explaining unfair and fair outcomes: The therapeutic value of attributional analysis. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 495-511.

Luszczynska, A., Guti rrez-Do a, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General self-efficacy in various domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 80-89.

Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137-155.

Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. (1999). Changes in attractiveness of elected, rejected, and precluded alternatives. A comparison of happy and unhappy individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 988-1007.

Maciejewski, P. K. (2000). Self-efficacy as a mediator between stressful life events and depressive symptoms: Differences based on history of prior depression. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 373-378.

119

Maes. J. (1998a). Eight stages in the development of belief in a just world. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 163-186). New York: Plenum Press.

Maes. J. (1998b). Immanent justice and ultimate justice: two ways of believing in justice. In L. Montada, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 9-40). New York: Plenum Press.

Maes, J., & Kals, E. (2002). Justice beliefs in school: Distinguishing ultimate and immanent justice. Social Justice Research, 15, 227-244.

Maes, J., & Kals, E. (2004). Two facets of the belief in a just world and achievement behaviour at school. In C. Dalbert and H. Sallay (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adult hood: origins and consequences (pp. 208-235). London: Routledge.

Maes, J. & Schmitt, M. (1999). More on ultimate and imminent justice: Results from the research project “justice as a problem within reunified Germany”. Social Justice Research, 12, 65-78.

Magnus, K., & Diener, E. (1991). A longitudinal analysis of personality, life events, and subjective well-being. Paper presented at the 63rd annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association.

Maher, E., & Cummins, R. A. (2001). Subjective quality of life, perceived control, and dispositional optimism among older people. Australian Journal on Aging, 20, 139-146.

Mak, W. W. S., & Ho, G. S. M. (2007). Caregiving perceptions of Chinese mothers of children with intellectual disability in Hong Kong. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 20, 145-156.

Mak, W. W. S., Law, R. W., Woo, J., Cheung, F. M., & Lee, D. (2009). Social support and psychological adjustment to SARS: The mediating role of self-care self-efficacy. Psychology & Health, 24, 161-174

Malik, A. A. (2002). The study of social support as determining factor in depressed and non-depressed as measured by an indigenously developed social support scale. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Karachi, Pakistan.

Maniar, S., Fatima, S., Hamdani, A. (2002). Mothers of special children and depression. Pakistan Journal of Psychology, 33. Abstract retrieved April 9, 2009, from http://www.uok.edu.pk/research_institutes/icp/images/abstracts.pdf

Margalit, M., & Kleitman, T. (2006). Mothers' stress, resilience and early intervention. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 21, 269-283.

McCarty, C. A., Weisz, J. R., Wanitromanee, K., Eastman, K. L., Suwanlert, S., Chaiyasit, W., & Band, E. B. (1999). Culture, coping and context: Primary and Secondary Control among Thai and American youth. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 809-818.

120

McConkey, R., Kennedy, M. T., Chang, M. Y., Jarrah, S., Shukri, R. (2008). The impact on mothers of bringing up a child with intellectual disabilities: A cross cultural study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 65-74.

McQuillen, A. D., Licht, M. H., & Licht, B. G. (2003). Contributions of disease severity and perceptions of primary and secondary control to the prediction of psychosocial adjustment to Parkinson’s disease. Health Psychology, 22, 504-512.

Mehnert, T., Krauss, H. H., Nadler, R., and Boyd, M. (1990). Correlates of life satisfaction in those with disabling conditions. Rehabilitation Psychology, 35, 3-17.

Misajon, R., & Cummins, R. A. (2001, November). Living with arthritis: Subjective Quality of Life and Control. Paper presented in 3rd Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Australia. Abstract retrieved April 6, 2005, from http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/Conferences/abstracts_papers/index.htm

Mitchell, R. E., & Trickett, E. J. (1980). Social networks as mediators of social support: An analysis of the effects and determinants of social networks. Community and Mental Health Journal, 16, 27–44.

Montada, L., Schmitt, M., & Dalbert, C. (1986). Thinking about justice and dealing with one’s own privileges. In H. W. Bierhoff, J. Greenberg, & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Justice in social relations (pp. 125-143). New York: Plenum Press.

Moskowitz, D. S., & Cote, S. (1995). Do interpersonal traits predict affect? A comparison of three models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 915-924.

Mumford, D. B., Tareen, I. A. K., Bajwa, M. A. Z., Bhatti, M. R., & Karim, R. (1991). Translation and evaluation of an Urdu version of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinanca, 83, 81-85.

Myers, L. B., & Brewin, C. R. (1996). Illusions of well being and repressive coping style. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 443-457.

Naeem, F. (2001). Vulnerability to depression in mothers of emotionally handicapped children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Bahria University Islamabad, Pakistan.

Nawaz, N. (2004). Effects of depression on self-efficacy of stroke patients. Unpublished M. Phil thesis, Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad, Pakistan.

Nazir, S. (2001). Psychological reaction to divorce of divorced women and their children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Karachi, Pakistan.

O’ Conner, W. E., Morrison, T. G., McLeod, L. D., & Anderson, D. (1996). A meta-analytic review of the relationship between gender and belief in a just world. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 141-148.

Oishi, S., & Diener, E. (2001). Goals, culture, and subjective well–being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1674-1682.

Oishi, S., Diener, E., Suh, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Value as a moderator in subjective well–being. Journal of Personality, 67, 157-184.

121

Olsson, M. B., & Hwang, C. P. (2001). Depression in mothers and fathers of children with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 45, 535-543.

Otto, K., Boos, A., Dalbert, C., Schops., & Hoyer, J. (2006). Post traumatic symptoms, depression, and anxiety of flood victims: The impact of the belief in a just world. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1075-1084.

Otto, K., & Dalbert, C. (2005). Belief in a just world and its functions for young prisoners. Journal of Research in Personality, 39, 559-573.

Padeliadu, S. (1998). Time demands and experienced stress in Greek mothers of children with Down’s syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 42, 144-153.

Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164-172.

Pengilly, J. W., & Dowd, E. T. (2000). Hardiness and social support as moderators of stress. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 813-820.

Penninx, B. W. J. H., Kriegsman, D. M. W., Van Eijk, J. T. M., Boeke, A. J. P., & Deeg, D. J. H. (1996). Differential effect of social support on the course of chronic disease: A criteria-based literature study. Families, Systems, & Health, 14, 223-244.

Petito, F., & Cummins, R. A. (2000). Quality of life in adolescence: The role of perceived control, parenting style and social support, Behavioral change, 17, 196-207.

Preacher, K. (2005). A primer on interaction effects in multiple linear regression. Retrieved March 16, 2009, from http://www.people.ku.edu/~preacher/interact/interactions.htm

Rintala, D. H., Young, M. E., Hart, K. A., Clearman, R. R., & Fuhrer, M. J. (1992). Social support and the well-being of persons with spinal cord injury living in community. Rehabilitation Psychology, 37, 155-163.

Ritter, C., Benson, D, E., & Snyder, C. (1990). Belief in a just world and depression. Sociological Perspectives, 33, 235-252.

Roach, M. A., Orsmond, G. I., & Barratt, M. S. (1999). Mothers and fathers of children with Down syndrome: Parental stress and involvement in childcare. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 104, 422-436.

Roman, C., Joanna, K., Jan, S., & Magdalena, K. (2008). Burnout predictors among prison officers: The moderating effect of temperamental endurance. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 666-672.

Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J.R., & Snyder, S. S. (1982). Changing the world and changing the self: A two-process model of perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 5-37.

Roussi, P. (2002). Discriminative facility in perceptions of control and its relation to psychological distress. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 15, 179-191.

122

Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1973). Belief in a just world. And reactions to another’s lot: A study of participants in the national draft lottery. Journal of Social Issues, 29, 73-93.

Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just world. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65-89.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is every thing, or is it? Exploration on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069-1081.

Ryff, C. D. (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 99-104.

Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719-727.

Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (1998). The contours of positive health. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 1-28.

Sallay, H., & Dalbert, C. (2004). The development of the belief in a just world: The impact of being raised in a one-parent or an intact family. In C. Dalbert & H. Sallay (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp. 26-42). London: Routledge.

Sarason, I. G., Levine, H. M., Basham, R. B., & Sarason, B. R. (1983). Assessing social support: The Social Support Questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 127-139.

Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., Shearin, E. N., & Pierce G. R. (1987). A brief measure of social support: Practical and theoretical implications. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 497-510.

Schill, T., Beyler, J., & Morales, J. (1992). The role of just world belief and anger issues in self-defeating personality. Psychological Reports, 70, 595-598.

Scholz, U., Gutiérrez-Doña, B., Sud, S., & Schwarzer, R. (2002). Is perceived self-efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18, 242-251.

Schröder, K. E. E., Schwarzer, R., & Konertz, W. (1998). Coping as a mediator in recovery from cardiac surgery. Psychology and Health, 13, 83-97.

Schulz, R., & Heckhausen, J. (1996). A life span model of successful aging. American Psychologist, 51, 702-714.

Schwarzer, R. (1994). Optimism, vulnerability, and self-beliefs as health-related cognitions: A systematic overview. Psychology and Health: An International Journal, 9, 161-180.

123

Schwarzer, R., Hahn, A., & Jerusalem, M. (1993). Negative affect in East German migrants: Longitudinal effects of unemployment and social support. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 6, 57-69.

Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.

Scott, B. S., Atkinson, L., Minton, H. L., & Bowman, T. (1997). Psychological distress of parents of infants with Down syndrome. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 102, 161–171.

Shields, M., & Wooden, M. (2003, February). Marriage, children and subjective well-being. Paper presented at the eighth Australian Institute of Family Studies Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved July 16, 2005, from http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/hilda/conf-p01.pdf.

Shin, J., Nhan, N. V., Crittenden, K. S., Flory, H. M., & Ladinsky, J. (2006). Parenting stress of mothers and fathers of young children with cognitive delays in Vietnam. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50, 748-760.

Shmotkin, D. (2005). Happiness in the face of adversity: Reformulating the dynamic and modular bases of subjective well being. Review of General Psychology, 9, 291-325.

Shnek, Z. M., Irvine, J., Stewart, D., & Abbey, S. (2001). Psychological factors and depressive symptoms in Ischemic heart disease. Health Psychology, 20, 141-145.

Silver, R. L. (1980). Coping with an undesirable life event: A study of early reactions to physical disability. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Northwestern University.

Skinner, E. A. (1996). A guide to constructs of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 549-570.

Sloper, P., Knussen, C., Turner, S., & Cunningham, C. (1991). Factors related to stress and satisfaction with life in families of children with Down’s syndrome. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32, 655-676.

Smith, K. B., & Green, D. N. (1984). Individual correlates of the belief in a just world. Psychological Reports, 54, 435-438.

Spangenberg, J. J., & Theron, J. C. (2001). Stress and coping in parents of children with Down syndrome. Studia Psychologica, 43, 41-48.

Steg, L., Buunk, A. P., & Rothengatter, T. (Eds.). (2008). Applied social psychology. Understanding and managing social problems. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245-251.

124

Stewart, S. M., Kennard, B. D., Lee, P. W. H., Hughes, C. W., Mayes, T. L., Emslie, G. J., & Lewinsohn, P. M. (2004). A cross-cultural investigation of cognitions and depressive symptoms in adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113, 248-257.

Stoeber, J. (2000). SteigerD (computer software). Halle, Germany: Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg.

Streisand, R., Swift, E., Wickmark, T., Chen, R., & Holmes, C. S. (2005). Pediartic parenting stress among parents of children with type 1 diabetes: The role of self-efficacy, responsibility, and fear. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 30, 513-521.

Suh, E., Diener, E., & Fugita, F. (1996). Events and subjective well-being: Only recent events matter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1091-1102.

Suhail, K. (2000). Reliability analysis of the HAD scale across different cultural and ethnic groups. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 27, 118-123.

Suhail, K., & Chaudhry, H. R. (2004). Predictors of subjective well being in eastern Muslim culture. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 359-376.

Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2005). Justice for all, or just for me? More evidence of the importance of the self-other distinction in just-world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 637–645.

Sutton, R. M., Douglas, K. M., Wilkin, K., Elder, T. J., Cole, J. M., & Stathi, S. (2008). Justice for whom, Exactly? Beliefs in justice for the self and various others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 528–541.

Tabassum, U., & Rehman, G. (2005). The Relationship between self-efficacy and depression in physically handicapped children. Journal of Pakistan Psychiatric Society, 2, 37-40. Retrieved July 16, 2005, from http://www.jpps.com.pk/display_articles.asp?d=94&p=art

Tabbasum, U., Rehman, G., Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (2003). Urdu adaptation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale. Retrieved July 16, 2005, from http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~health/urdu.htm

Taylor, L. C. (2001). Work Attitudes, Employment Barriers, and Mental Health Symptoms in a Sample of Rural Welfare Recipients, American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(3), 444 - 463

Taylor, S. E., & Armor, D. A. (1996). Positive illusions and coping with adversity. Journal of Personality, 64, 873-898.

Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. (1988). Illusions and well-being: A social psychological perspective of mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193-210.

Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1994). Positive illusions and well being revisited: Separating fact from fiction. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 21-27.

125

Tellegen, A., Lykken, D., Bouchard, T. J., Wilcox, K. J., Segal, N., & Rich, S. (1988). Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1031-1039.

Thompson, S. C., Collins, M. A., Newcomb, M. D., & Hunt, W. (1996). On fighting versus accepting stressful circumstances: Primary and secondary control among HIV-positive men in prison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1307-1317.

Thompson, S. C., Sobolew-Shubin, A., Galbraith, M. E., Schwankovsky, L., & Cruzen, D. (1993). Maintaining perceptions of control: Finding perceived control in Low-control circumstances. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 293-304.

Thurber, C. A., & Weisz, J. R. (1997). “You can try or you can just give up”: The impact of perceived control and coping style on childhood homesickness. Developmental Psychology, 33, 508-517.

Tomaka, J., & Blascovich, J. (1994). Effects of justice beliefs on cognitive appraisals of and subjective, physiological, and behavioral responses to potential stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 732-740.

Vaux, A., & Harrison, D. (1985). Support network characteristics associated with support satisfaction and perceived support. American Journal of Community Psychology 13, 245-268.

Vella-Brodrick, D. (2005, November). Comparison of sociodemographic, personality and social support variables as predictors of quality of life. Paper presented at the 7th Australian Conference on Quality of Life, Deakin University, Australia.

Waltz, M., & Bandura, B. (1988). Subjective health, intimacy, and perceived self-efficacy after heart attack: Predicting life quality five years afterward. Social Indicators Research, 20(3), 303-332.

War, P., Barter, J., & Brownbridge, G. (1983). On the independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 644-651.

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 1063-1070.

Weisz, J. R., McCabe, M. A., & Dennig, M. D. (1994). Primary and secondary control among children undergoing medical procedures: Adjustment as a function of coping style. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 324-332.

Weiss, M. J. (2002). Hardiness and social support as predictors of stress in mothers of typical children, children with autism, and children with mental retardation. Autism, 6, 115-130.

Wrosch, C., Schulz, R., & Heckhausen, J. (2004). Health stresses and depressive symptomatology in the elderly: A control-process approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 17-20.

126

Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983). The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinanca, 67, 361–370.

Zuckerman, M. (1975). Belief in a just world and altruistic behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 972-976.

Zuckerman, M., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1977a). Dimensions of the I-E Scale and their relationship to other personality measures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37, 159-175.

Zuckerman, M., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1977b). Belief in internal control or belief in a just world: Use and misuse of I-E Scale in prediction of attitudes and behavior. Journal of Psychology, 45, 356-378.

127

APPENDICES

128

Appendix A

Consent Form for the Pilot Study: Phase I and Main Study

129

Appendix B

Consent Form for the Pilot Study: Phase II

130

Appendix C

Demographic Data Sheet

131

Appendix D

Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)

132

Appendix E

Trait Well-Being Inventory

133

Appendix F

Personal Belief in a Just World Scale

134

Appendix G

Scales of Belief in Immanent and Ultimate Justice

135

Appendix H

Social Support Short Form Questionnaire (SSQ-6)

136

Appendix I

Personal Perceived Control Scale

137

Appendix J

Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale

138

Appendix K

Permissions to Use Scales