Mediating and moderating role of academic self-efficacy in the relationship between student academic support and personal growth initiative

Abstract

The primary goal of the current study was to investigate the mediating and moderating effects of the academic self-efficacy in the relationship between student academic support and personal growth initiative. The Turkish version of the Personal Growth Initiative Scale, the Student Academic Support Scale, and the Academic Self-efficacy Scale were administrated to a sample of 237 university students, between the ages of 18 and 23. The present study showed that academic self-efficacy and student academic support were positively related to personal growth initiative. Regression-based mediation analysis indicated that the effect of student academic support on personal growth initiative was mediated by academic self-efficacy. However, the effect of student academic support on personal growth initiative was not moderated by academic self-efficacy. These findings suggested that the student academic support was both direct and indirect effects on personal growth initiative.

Keywords

Personal growth initiative student academic support academic self-efficacy regression mediating moderating

Personal growth initiative (PGI) recently has emerged as an interesting topic of researches (e.g. Frazier & Kaler, 2006; Moran, Burker, & Schmidt, 2013; Robitschek & Keyes, 2009; Shorey, Little, Snyder, Kluck, & Robitschek, 2007; Yang & Chang, 2014) in the field of educational and developmental psychology, and also it has been seen as a profound contributing factor in successful personal goal fulfillment and human development. The importance of personal growth has been emphasized by some approaches, such as humanistic (Maslow, 1954; Rogers, 1961), psychodynamic (Adler, 1973; Jung, 1992), and positive psychology (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005). According to the humanistic approaches, personal growth emerges from processes involved in self-actualization or the actualizing tendency. Psychodynamic approaches indicated that personal growth linked to “individuation”, “striving for superiority”, and “psychosocial development” (Yang & Chang, 2014). According to the eudaimonic and self-determination theory, PGI is a crucial factor for self-actualization and basic need satisfaction (Robitschek et al., 2012), in which they are related to mental health (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Furthermore, positive psychologists have increasingly pointed to the importance of encouraging personal growth (Seligman et al., 2005). Ryff (1989) stated that the need to actualize oneself and realize one's potentialities has an important effect on personal growth, which is a key component of well-being.

Personal growth is an individuals’ development and change throughout the life span, including both conscious and unconscious processes (Robitschek, 1999), and also it can involve various parts of the self, such as cognitions, behaviors, and/or emotions (Robitschek, 1998). However, according to Robitschek (1998), PGI is active and intentional engagement in the process of self-change and the ability of an individual to work towards self-improvement.

Previous studies found that personal growth was positively affected by stressful life events (Park, 2004), and also it increased well-being (Robitschek & Kashubeck, 1999; Robitschek & Keyes, 2009), optimism, positive affectivity (Shorey et al., 2007), and psychological adjustment (Robitschek, 1999); however, it decreased psychological distress (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). Furthermore, studies have shown that PGI was positively related to internal locus of control, vocational identity, and problem focused coping (Robitschek & Cook, 1999), resilience, and life satisfaction (Yang & Chang, 2014). PGI has buffered impact on social sensitivity, depression, and hostility (Yang & Chang, 2014). Shorey, Little, Snyder, Kluck, and Robitschek (2007) stated that PGI influenced both the setting of clear future-oriented goals and the ways in which individuals strive for and implement these goals. In this context, it can say that PGI is important for mental health and life satisfaction. And also it is one of the most important factors for university students, because it is a necessary component in acquiring new skills, coping with life stressors and in forming and maintaining close relationships (Hendrick, 1995). Examining the literature, it is seen that research with university students PGI has been limited, and there is no study examining the relationships between PGI and student academic support. So the present study was to examine that PGI related to student academic support.

Student academic support

Student academic support may be important factor affecting university student PGI level. Maxwell (2001) defines student academic support as “socializing the education". Student academic support includes the interaction of students to each other in academic issues (Kenny & Rice, 1995; Lafreniere & Ledgerwood, 1997; Shaver, Furman, & Buhrmester, 1985). It takes place within the context of courses, one-to-one studying or preparing for exams (Keup & Mullins, 2010). And it is also crucial for the students, especially in terms of academic skill development, career development, academic achievement, and development of efficacy feeling (Smuts, 1996). The perception of student academic support has been found to be positively correlated with interest in school and studying, it may be the case that perception of student academic support plays an important role in the academic achievement of students (Ramirez, Machida, Kline, & Huang, 2014). Student academic support includes the result of academic problems faced by students (e.g. answering of questions about papers, studying together, sharing studying habits, helping with academic difficulties) and academic encouragement (support for reducing exam stress, academically motivating for courses) (Mazer & Thompson, 2011; Thompson, 2008; Thompson & Mazer, 2009). In this context, student academic support may affect university students’ PGI levels as it facilitates the students’ of the participation in academic studies, academic skill development, and career development, increasing achievement, encouragement, and motivation.

Student academic support is quite important for the academic success of students (Thompson, 2008). Student academic support is effective in the formation of new academic expectations and on the academic support system internalized by the individual (Alfaro, Umana-Talor, & Bamaca, 2006; De Berard, Spielmans, & Julka, 2004; Kenny & Rice, 1995; Lafreniere & Ledgerwood, 1997; Thompson, 2008; Tinto, 2005). In this context, student academic support has a quite important place in academic achievement (Giddan, 1988; Mpofu, 2003; Penn-Edwards & Donnison, 2011). According to Tinto (1997), academic success levels of students are positively related to their academic and social communication methods. So student academic support is crucial for students to achieve their goals, and also it may have a positive effect on PGI of the students. Furthermore, one factor that may potentially mediate and moderate the relationship between student academic support and PGI is academic self-efficacy

Academic self-efficacy

Self-efficacy belief is one of the most researched topics in education and psychology, which grounded within social cognitive theory. This theory indicated that interactions among one’s behaviors, personal factors (e.g. cognitions, emotions), and environmental conditions were the important determinants in human achievement and functioning (Bandura, 1986, 1997). Bandura (1986) stated that self-efficacy belief was the individuals’ judgments of his or her performance capability on a particular type of assessment task. And also it affects individuals’ choices of assessment tasks, their effort, and persistence (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). According to Bandura (1988), self-efficacy beliefs have an effect on our choices, effort, struggle against an obstacle or hardship, and resilient level. Furthermore, self-efficacy affects academic achievement, motivation, and learning (Pajares, 1996; Schunk, 1995). Established on the determinations of these studies, it can be concluded that individuals who have a high level of self-efficacy are more potential to attempt challenging tasks, persist longer in them, and exert more effort in the process.

Examining the literature, previous studies discussed the various types of the self-efficacy, such as academic self-efficacy, sexual self-efficacy, and medication self-efficacy. In this study, the effect of academic self-efficacy on university students’ PGI was examined. Academic self-efficacy refers to individuals' beliefs that they can successfully perform given academic tasks at specified levels (Schunk, 1991). Bong and Skaalvik (2003) defined academic self-efficacy as one’s self perceived confidence to successfully perform a particular academic task. Previous studies links academic self-efficacy to persistence (Lent, Brown, & Larkin, 1986; Skinner, Wellborn, & Connell, 1990), the adoption of task and achievement goals (Bong, 2001; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2005), intrinsic motivation (Bandura, 1997; Skaalvik, 1997), academic achievement (Marsh & Yeung, 1997; Pintrich & Schunk, 1996), low anxiety levels (Skaalvik & Rankin, 1996; Zeidner & Schleyer, 1999), and students’ motivation, emotion and achievement (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003). Furthermore, Ferla, Valcke, and Cai (2009) found that students’ academic self-efficacy was the better predictor (and mediator) for academic achievement. This study examined whether academic self-efficacy was a predictor of PGI, because generally individuals with high academic self-efficacy are pro-active with respect to their personal development and are willing to invest a substantial amount of energy in their PGI.

Present study

While previous studies showed that PGI was affected by various variables, such as well-being (Robitschek & Keyes, 2009; Shorey et al., 2007), psychological adjustment (Robitschek, 1999), psychological distress (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004), stressful life events (Park, 2004), self-inferiority, social sensitivity, internet addiction, depression, and hostility (Yang & Chang, 2014), there is no research evaluating the roles of academic self-efficacy and student academic support on PGI especially among the university students. Expanding from past research, this study attempted to bridge the gap in the literature by providing a detailed evaluation of the predictive ability of the academic self-efficacy and student academic support on PGI, and also the current study sought the mediating and moderating effects of academic self-efficacy on the relationship between student academic support and PGI. In this context, the present study had three main research objectives.

Research objective 1

Linking student academic support to PGI

I investigated the relationships between student academic support and PGI. Such a link can be derived from an integration of PGI and health sciences, which both state that individuals who pro-active organisms acting on their personal growth (Cobb, 1976; Frazier & Kaler, 2006; House, Landis, & Umberson, 1988; Luke & Kiweewa, 2010; Moran et al., 2013; Robitschek, 1998). I hypothesized that student academic support would play a crucial role in contributing to pro-active exploration for increasing PGI. Previous studies found links between PGI and psychological adjustment (Robitschek, 1999), well-being (Robitschek & Keyes, 2009), vocational identity and problem focused coping (Robitschek & Cook, 1999), and resilience (Yang & Chang, 2014), all of which would be positively related to PGI. Thus, student academic support may be positive predictors of PGI.

Research objective 2

Mediational model

Academic self-efficacy was conceptualized as mediating or intervening mechanisms on the pathway from academic support to PGI, because previous researchers (e.g. Sharma & Rani, 2013) found that individuals who higher self-efficacy had higher PGI than individuals who lower self-efficacy. A possible interpretation of this finding would be that high academic self-efficacy directly affects PGI. In actuality, high academic self-efficacy involves factors that can enhance PGI, such as academic motivation (Pajares, 1996; Schunk, 1995), persistence (Lent et al., 1986; Skinner et al., 1990), the adoption of task and achievement goals (Bong, 2001; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2005), intrinsic motivation (Bandura, 1997; Skaalvik, 1997), academic achievement (Marsh & Yeung, 1997; Pintrich & Schunk, 1996), all of which may facilitate the student academic support, and hence the student academic support affects the university students’ PGI. Academic self-efficacy may not have a direct effect on PGI, but only a mediating effect by facilitating other things that do directly affect PGI. Consequently, I hypothesized that academic self-efficacy would be a unique predictor of PGI. Combining our expectations under research objectives 1 and 2, the pathway from student academic support to PGI was hypothesized to be mediated by academic self-efficacy. That is, academic self-efficacy was hypothesized to function as an intervening mechanism between student academic support and PGI.

Research objective 3

Moderation model

Although individuals with high student academic support can be related to various factors academic skill development, career development, and development of efficacy feeling (Smuts, 1996), academic success of students (Thompson, 2008), academic achievement (Giddan, 1988; Mpofu, 2003; Penn-Edwards & Donnison, 2011; Smuts, 1996; Thompson, 2008), all of which may not activate the university students’ PGI when there is an unexpectedly weak or inconsistent relationship between student academic support and PGI. Furthermore, because individuals with high student academic support may not have some personality traits, such as persistence (Lent et al., 1986; Skinner et al., 1990), intrinsic motivation (Bandura, 1997; Skaalvik, 1997), the relationship between student academic support and PGI may weak. However, interaction between student academic support and academic self-efficacy can be activated by the positive effect of the student academic support on the university students’ PGI, because individuals with high academic self-efficacy have higher persistence (Lent et al., 1986; Skinner et al., 1990), the adoption of task and achievement goals (Bong, 2001; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2005), intrinsic motivation (Bandura, 1997; Skaalvik, 1997), academic achievement (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996; Marsh & Yeung, 1997), and low anxiety levels (Skaalvik & Rankin, 1996; Zeidner & Schleyer, 1999). In this context, student academic support and academic self-efficacy interaction may change the relationship between student academic support and PGI. Thus, one of the main objectives of this study was to determine whether the relationship between academic support and PGI was moderated by academic self-efficacy.

Method

Participants

Data were collected from a sample of 237 university students who ranged in age from 18 to 23 years (M ¼ 20.13, SD ¼ .58). Of the participants, 58% were female. The study group of this research was formed by the participants who were studying in Sakarya. Researchers administered the self-report measures to the students in the classroom environment. All the participants participated in the study voluntarily, and also they were informed about the purpose of the study before completing of measures. The data collection and its analysis were done anonymously. Participants completed the instruments approximately in 20 min.

Measures

The Turkish Version of the PGI Scale

The scale was developed by Robitschek (1998) and adapted into Turkish by Akın and Anlı (2011). The results of exploratory factor analysis showed that the nine items loaded on one factor. In the adaptation study, the result of the confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the total variance explained was 37%, and factor loadings ranged from .48 to .70. Fit index values of the model were root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .05, normed fit index (NFI) = .96, comparative fit index (CFI) = .98, incremental fit index (IFI) = .98, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = .97, adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) = .94. Cronbach's alpha for the adaptation study sample was .78; however, it was .88 in the current sample. The scale is a nine-item scale with responses rated on a six-point Likert-type scale (0 = definitely disagree and 5 = definitely agree). Scores are calculated by summing the responses to the items, with higher scores indicative of higher levels of PGI.

The Student Academic Support Scale (SASS)

SASS was developed by Mazer and Thompson (2011) and adapted into Turkish by Arslan and Akın (2014). In the adaptation study, the results of confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that this scale yielded four factors (informational support, esteem support, motivational support, venting support), as original form and that the model was well fit (χ²= 246.07, DF = 80, RMSEA = .08, CFI = .99, IFI = .99, GFI = .94, AGFI = .91, SRMR = .04). Internal consistency coefficients of subscales varied between .81 and .91. However, they were .83–.94 in the current sample. The scale is a 15-item scale with responses rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = never and 5 = always). Scores are calculated by summing the responses to the items, with higher scores indicative of higher levels of SASS.

The Academic Self-efficacy Scale

The scale was developed by Jerusalem and Schwarzer (1981) and adapted into Turkish by Yılmaz, Gürçay, and Ekici (2007). In the adaptation study, the results of exploratory factor analysis indicated that factor loadings of the items were between .50 and .82. These items account for 45% of total variance. The Cronbach's alpha reliability value of the scale was found to be .79; however, it was .66 in the current sample. Flynn, Schroeder, and Sakakibara (1994) stated that a Cronbach’s alpha of .60 and above was considered an acceptable reliability level for judging a scale. The scale is a seven-item scale with responses rated on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = definitely disagree and 5 = definitely agree). Scores are calculated by summing the responses to the items, with higher scores indicative of higher levels of academic self-efficacy.

Data analysis

In order to determine the factors that contribute to the PGI, the regression analysis was done to determine whether student academic support significantly predicted PGI. Furthermore, in this study, the simple mediation model was tested with regression-based mediation analysis, which is a statistical method used to help answer the question as to how some causal agent X transmits its effect on Y. What is the mechanism by which X influences Y? (Hayes, 2013). According to Hayes (2013), when researchers seek to determine whether a certain variable is related to the size of one variable’s effect on another, a moderation analysis is the proper analytical strategy. The effect of X on Y is moderated by M if its size, sign, or strength depends on M. In that case, M is said to be a moderator of X’s effect on Y. Thus, the SPSS version of the PROCESS was used to determine mediating and moderating effect of academic self-efficacy on the relationships between student academic support and PGI.

Results

Table 1 presented the means, standard deviations of the variables, and their inter-correlations. As shown in Table 1, academic self-efficacy and student academic support positively related to PGI.
Table 1.
Descriptive statistics and correlations.

Variables 1 2 3

Personal Growth Initiative 1

Student Academic Support .26 1

Academic Self-efficacy .39 .05 1

M .12 .01 .01

SD .81 1.00 1.00

**
p < .01.

Mediating role of academic self-efficacy

As shown in Table 2, regression analysis showed that student academic support significantly predicted PGI (Coeff. = .13, 95% CI: .07–.20; p < .01).
Table 2.
Regression coefficients, standard errors and significance tests for the Regression Model.

Predictor Coeff. SE P F R ²

Constant 32.64 1.84 < .001

Student Academic Support .13 .03 < .001 16.25 .06

As shown in Figure 1 and Table 3, the result of the mediation analysis showed that student academic support did not predict academic self-efficacy (Coeff. = .01, 95% CI: − .02–.05; p > .05), whereas it significantly predicted PGI (Coeff. = .12, 95% CI: .05–.19; p < .01). Academic self-efficacy significantly predicted PGI (Coeff. = .70, 95% CI: .42–.97; p < .01), and also it decreased the effect of student academic support on PGI (from .13 to .12). Finally, the relationship between student academic support and PGI was partially mediated by academic self-efficacy.
Figure 1.
Model of the Mediational Role of Academic Self-efficacy.

Table 3.
Mediational model coefficients.

Predictors Consequent

Academic Self-efficacy
Personal Growth Initiative

Coeff. SE p Coeff. SE P

Student Academic Support a .01 .01 .44 c′ .12 .03 <.001

Academic Self-efficacy − − − b .70 .11 <.001

Constant i ₁ 19.63 1.02 <.001 i ₂ 18.89 2.76 <.001

R²= 0.0027 R²= 0.21

F(1, 123) = 0.598, p = .44 F(2, 222) = 29.508, p = .000

Moderating role of academic self-efficacy on student academic support and PGI relationships

According to the results of the moderation analysis, as shown in Table 4 and Figure 2, both student academic support (Coeff. = .13, 95% CI: .05–.20; p < .01) and academic self-efficacy (Coeff. = .69, 95% CI: .41–.97; p < .01) significantly predicted PGI. However, the interaction of the academic self-efficacy and student academic support did not significantly predicted PGI (Coeff. = .02, 95% CI: − .00–.04; p > .05). Finally, the relationship between student academic support and PGI was not significantly moderated by academic self-efficacy.
Table 4.
Moderational model coefficients.

Coeff. SE p

Intercept i ₁ 39.88 .34 <.001

Student Academic Support b ₁ .13 .04 <.001

Academic Self-efficacy b ₂ .69 .14 <.001

Student Academic Support X Academic Self-efficacy b ₃ .02 0.01 .12

R²= 0.22, MSE = 25.372

F(3, 221) = 17.411, p < .001

Figure 2.
Moderational model.

Discussion

The main aim of the present study was to examine the relationships between student academic support and PGI, and between academic self-efficacy and PGI in university students. Consistent with this hypothesis, the results confirmed that student academic support and academic self-efficacy significantly correlated with PGI, and also these variables predicted PGI levels.

Academic self-efficacy positively predicted PGI. According to the finding of previous studies, when students who had a high academic self-efficacy level, encountered difficulty or experience demoralization in a task, they did not give up the goals, and they displayed persistence (Lent et al., 1986; Skinner et al., 1990), the adoption of task and achievement goals (Bong, 2001; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2005), and motivation (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003). So this study found that PGI is related to the academic self-efficacy. However, academic self-efficacy has not had moderating effect on the relationship between student academic support and PGI.

The findings showed that student academic support positively predicted PGI. According to the previous studies, student academic support was an important component in acquiring new skills, coping with life stressors and in forming and maintaining close relationships, and also it influences academic skill development, career development, academic achievement, development of efficacy feeling, communication skill development and establishing bilateral relationships (Smuts, 1996). However, because of the mediating effect of the academic self-efficacy, the impact of the student academic support on PGI was decreased.

The present study found that academic self-efficacy has had a partial mediating effect on the pathway from student academic support to PGI. The possible interpretation of this finding would be that high academic self-efficacy involved factors that can enhance PGI, such as academic motivation (Pajares, 1996; Schunk, 1995), persistence (Lent et al., 1986; Skinner et al., 1990), the adoption of task and achievement goals (Bong, 2001; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2005), intrinsic motivation (Bandura, 1997; Skaalvik, 1997), academic achievement (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996; Marsh & Yeung, 1997), all of which might facilitate the student academic support, and hence the student academic support affected the university students’ PGI. Academic self-efficacy might not have a direct effect on PGI, but only a mediating effect by facilitating other things that did directly affect PGI.

The present study results were consistent with the positive psychology. According to the positive psychologist, pro-active individuals have higher PGI (Frazier & Kaler, 2006; Luke & Kiweewa, 2010; Moran et al., 2013; Park, 2004; Robitschek, 1998; Seligman et al., 2005). In this context, individuals with high academic self-efficacy are more successful, persistence, and intrinsic motivation, making positive changes in their life, and tend to change negative situations.

The present study findings are encouraging continuous investigation on how academic self-efficacy and student academic support influence university students’ PGI. However, there are several limitations in our study. First, our sample consisted of university students, limiting the generalizability of our findings to other populations. Second, only self-report assessments were employed and there was a lack of other data. And also the data collection method (survey) did not allow for a causal inference between academic self-efficacy and PGI, and student academic support and PGI. Moreover, initiative investigators should consider experimental or prospective designs. Third, the cross sectional and correlational nature of the present study did not allow us to draw strong causal relationships among variables. However, despite the limitations listed above, in the present study, we have added the literature on the relationship between academic self-efficacy and PGI. Academic self-efficacy and student academic support were found to play a critical role in the prediction of PGI, as they had direct effects on PGI, and also the student academic support had indirect effects on PGI through the mediators of academic self-efficacy.

In the light of the present study findings, I can say that university students’ PGI is an important contributing factor in human development, well-being, self-improvement, psychological adjustment, vocational identity, resilience, and life satisfaction, in which these factors protect the psychological health. And also higher PGI decrease depression level. Thus, the future researches should explore other variables affecting the university students’ PGI level, and they should develop psychoeducational programs increasing academic self-efficacy and PGI. These programs may increase human development, resilience and well being, while these programs decrease hopelessness depression level in university students. Furthermore, further researchers about the present study topic should do so that the present study findings will be confirmed.

Variables	1	2	3
Personal Growth Initiative	1
Student Academic Support	.26**	1
Academic Self-efficacy	.39**	.05	1
M	.12	.01	.01
SD	.81	1.00	1.00

Predictor	Coeff.	SE	P	F	R ²
Constant	32.64	1.84	< .001
Student Academic Support	.13	.03	< .001	16.25	.06

Predictors	Consequent
Student Academic Support	a	.01	.01	.44	c′	.12	.03	<.001
Academic Self-efficacy	−	−	−	b	.70	.11	<.001
Constant	i ₁	19.63	1.02	<.001	i ₂	18.89	2.76	<.001
	R²= 0.0027		R²= 0.21
F(1, 123) = 0.598, p = .44	F(2, 222) = 29.508, p = .000

	Coeff.	SE	p
Intercept	i ₁	39.88	.34	<.001
Student Academic Support	b ₁	.13	.04	<.001
Academic Self-efficacy	b ₂	.69	.14	<.001
Student Academic Support X Academic Self-efficacy	b ₃	.02	0.01	.12
	R²= 0.22, MSE = 25.372
F(3, 221) = 17.411, p < .001

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interest

None declared.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Adler, A. (1973). The man and his work: Triumph over the inferiority complex (4th ed., H. Ogler, Trans.). London, UK: Sidgwick&Jackson. (Original work published 1932).

Akın

Anlı

(2011) Adaptation of the Personal Growth Initiative Scale to Turkish: The study of validity and reliability. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education 7(1): 42–49.

(2006) The influence of academic support on Latino adolescents’ academic motivation. Family Relations 55: 279–291.

Arslan

Akın

(2014) Turkish Version of Student Academic Support Scale: The study of validity and reliability. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (H. U. Journal of Education) 29(3): 01–07.

Bandura

(1986) Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura

(1988) Organisational applications of Social Cognitive Theory. Australian Journal of Management 13(2): 275–302.

Bandura

(1997) Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, New York, NY: WH Freeman and Company.

Bong

(2001) Between- and within-domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: Self-efficacy, task-value, and achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology 93: 23–34.

Bong

Skaalvik

E. M.

(2003) Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review 15: 1–40.

10.

Cobb

(1976) Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine 38(5): 300–314.

(2004) Predictors of academic achievement and retention among college freshmen: A longitudinal study. College Student Journal 38(1): 66–80.

(2000) The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11: 227–268.

(2009) Academic self-efficacy and academic self-concept: Reconsidering structural relationships. Learning and Individual Differences 19(4): 499–505. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.05.004 .

14.

Flynn

Schroeder

Sakakibara

(1994) A framework for quality management research and an associated measurement instrument. Journal of Operations Management 11: 339–366. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/S0272-6963(97)90004-8.

15.

Frazier

P. A.

Kaler

M. E.

(2006) Assessing the validity of self-reported stress-related growth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 74: 859–869. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.74.5.859.

16.

Giddan

N. S.

(1988) Community and social support for college students, Springfield, IL: C. C.Thomas.

17.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

18.

Hendrick

S. S.

(1995) Close relationships: What couple therapists can learn, Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

19.

House

J. S.

Landis

K. R.

Umberson

(1988) Social relationships and health. Science 241: 540–545. DOI: 10.1126/science.3399889.

20.

Jung, C. G. (1992). Psychological types or the psychology of individuation (H. G. Baynes, Trans.). In G. Adler (Ed.), The collected works of Carl Jung (Vol. 6, par. 757). London, UK: Routledge & Kagan Paul. (Original work published 1921).

21.

Kenny

M. E.

Rice

K. G.

(1995) Attachment to parents and adjustments in late adolescent college students: Current status, applications, and future considerations. The Counseling Psychologist 23(3): 433–456.

22.

Keup, J. R., & Mullins, E. (2010). Findings from national survey of peer leadership experinces and outcomes. Concurent session presented at the 29th Annual Conference on The First-Year Experince, Denver, February.

23.

Lafreniere

K. D.

Ledgerwood

D. M.

(1997) Influences of leaving home, perceived family support, and gender of the transition to university. Guidance & Counseling 12(4): 14–18.

24.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

Larkin

K. C.

(1986) Self-efficacy in the prediction of academic performance and perceived career options. Journal of Counselling Psychology 33: 265–269.

25.

Luke

Kiweewa

J. M.

(2010) Personal growth and awareness of counseling trainees in an experiential group. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work 35(4): 365–388. DOI: 10.1080/01933922.2010.514976.

26.

Marsh

H. W.

Yeung

A. S.

(1997) Causal effects of academic self-concept on academic achievement: Structural equation models of longitudinal data. Journal of Educational Psychology 89: 41–54.

27.

Maslow

A. H.

(1954) Motivation and personality, New York, NY: Harper & Row.

28.

Maxwell

(2001) Peer tutoring: An overview, history and research on program effectiveness. Journal of the National Tutoring Association 1(1): 8–18.

29.

Mazer

J. P.

Thompson

(2011) The validity of the Student Academic Support Scale: Associations with social support and relational closeness. Communication Reports 24(2): 74–85.

30.

Moran

Burker

E. J.

Schmidt

(2013) Posttraumatic growth and posttraumatic stress disorder in veterans. Journal of Rehabilitation 79: 34–43.

31.

Mpofu

(2003) Enhancing social acceptance of early adolescents with physical disabilities: Effects of role salience, peer interaction, and academic support interventions. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 50(4): 435–454.

32.

Pajares

(1996) Self-efficacy believes in academic settings. Review of Educational Research 66(4): 543–578.

33.

Park

C. L.

(2004) The notion of growth following stressful life experiences: Problems and prospects. Psychological Inquiry 15: 67–76.

34.

Penn-Edwards

Donnison

(2011) Engaging with higher education academic support: A first year student teacher transition model. European Journal of Education 46(4): 566–580.

35.

Pintrich

Schunk

(1996) Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

36.

Ramirez

Machida

S. K.

Kline

Huang

(2014) Low-income Hispanic and Latino high school students’ perceptions of parent and peer academic support. Contemporary School Psychology 18: 214–221. DOI: 10.1007/s40688-014-0037-3.

37.

Robitschek

(1998) Personal growth initiative: The construct and its measure. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 30: 183–198.

38.

Robitschek

(1999) Further validation of the Personal Growth Initiative Scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 31: 197–210.

39.

Robitschek

Cook

S. W.

(1999) The influence of personal growth initiative and coping styles on career exploration and vocational identity. Journal of Vocational Behaviour 54: 127–141.

40.

Robitschek

Kashubeck

(1999) A structural model of parental alcoholism, family functioning, and psychological health: The mediating effects of hardiness and personal growth orientation. Journal of Counseling Psychology 46: 159–172.

41.

Robitschek

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2009) Keyes’ model of mental health with personal growth initiative as a parsimonious predictor. Journal of Counseling Psychology 56: 321–329.

42.

Robitschek

Ashton

M. W.

Spering

C. C.

Geiger

Byers

Schotts

G. C.

Thoen

M. A.

(2012) Development and psychometric evaluation of the personal growth initiative scale e II. Journal of Counseling Psychology 59: 274–287.

43.

Rogers

(1961) On becoming a person, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

44.

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.

45.

Schunk

D. H.

(1991) Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist 26: 207–231.

46.

Schunk

D. H.

(1995) Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In: Maddux

J. E.

(eds) Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and applications, New York, NY: Plenum, pp. 281–303.

47.

Seligman

M. E. P.

Steen

T. A.

Park

Peterson

(2005) Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist 60: 410–421. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410.

48.

Sharma

H. L.

Rani

(2013) Relationship of personal growth ınitiative with self-efficacy among university postgraduate students. Journal of Education and Practice 4(16): 125–135.

49.

Shaver

Furman

Buhrmester

(1985) Transition to college: Network changes, social skills, and loneliness. In: Duck

S. W.

Perlman

(eds) Understanding personal relationships: An interdisciplinary approach, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 193–220.

50.

Shorey

H. S.

Little

T. D.

Snyder

C. R.

Kluck

Robitschek

(2007) Hope and personal growth initiative: A comparison of positive, future oriented constructs. Personality and Individual Differences 43: 1917–1926. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid. 2007.06.011.

51.

Skaalvik

E. M.

(1997) Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology 89: 71–81.

52.

Skaalvik, E. M. & Rankin, R. J. (1996, April). Self-concept and self-efficacy: Conceptual analysis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

53.

Skaalvik

E. M.

(2005) Self-concept, motivational orientation, and help-seeking behavior in mathematics: A study of adults returning to high school. Social Psychology of Education 8: 285–302.

54.

Skinner

E. A.

Wellborn

Connell

(1990) What it takes to do well in school and whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control and children’s engagement and achievement in school. Journal of Educational Psychology 82: 22–32.

55.

Smuts

K. B.

(1996) The role of student leaders in supplemental instruction. South African Journal of Higher Education 16(3): 225–231.

56.

Tedeschi

R. G.

Calhoun

L. G.

(2004) Posttraumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and empirical evidence. Psychological Inquiry 15: 1–19.

57.

Thompson

(2008) How college freshmen communicate student academic support: A grounded theory study. Communication Education 57(1): 123–144.

58.

Thompson

Mazer

J. P.

(2009) College student ratings of student academic support: Frequency, importance, and modes of communication. Communication Education 58(3): 433–458.

59.

Tinto

(1997) Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. Journal of Higher Education 68(6): 599–623.

60.

Tinto

(2005) Reflections on retention and persistence: Institutional actions on behalf of student persistence. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation, and Development 2(1): 89–97.

61.

Yang

Chang

E. C.

(2014) Examining the structure, reliability, and validity of the Chinese Personal Growth Initiative Scale–II: Evidence for the importance of intentional self-change among Chinese. Journal of Personality Assessment 96(5): 559–566. DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2014.886256.

62.

Yılmaz

Gürçay

Ekici

(2007) Adaptation of the Academic Self-efficacy Scale to Turkish. Hacettepe University Journal of Education 33: 253–259.

63.

Zeidner

Schleyer

E. J.

(1999) The effects of educational context on individual differences variables, self-perceptions of giftedness, and school attitudes in gifted adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 28: 687–703.