Journal Articles
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915
Browse
3 results
Search Results
Item Factors affecting employee use of work-life balance initiatives(New Zealand Psychological Society, 2007) Smith J; Gardner DHThe study examines work-life balance (WLB) using a sample of 153 employees in a large New Zealand organisation. Analysis of company policies identified sixteen WLB initiatives currently being offered. Employees were surveyed to determine the extent of their awareness and use of currently offered initiatives. Factors influencing WLB initiative use and employee outcomes for initiative use were investigated. Female employees and younger employees used more WLB initiatives while employees reporting higher levels of management support and supervisor support, and perceiving fewer career damage and time demands also used more WLB initiatives. No support was found for the role of coworker support on WLB initiative use. Initiative use was related to reduced work-to-family conflict. Work-to-family conflict, family-to-work conflict, and commitment to the organisation were related to intention to turnover. The results highlight the importance of workplace culture in enabling an environment that is supportive of WLB and consequently use of initiatives that are offered by the organisation.Item Maximising potential: The psychological effects of the youth development programme project K(New Zealand Psychological Society, 2017) Furness K; Williams MN; Veale JF; Gardner DHProject K is a positive youth development programme targeting 13-15 year old students with low self-efficacy. It involves three components: wilderness adventure, community challenge and individual mentoring. This longitudinal study aimed to investigate changes in self-efficacy, resilience, connectedness and wellbeing in students participating in Project K. Eighty students (59% male) were recruited from five secondary schools across the North Island of New Zealand for a quasi-experimental study. Participants displaying delinquent behaviour, self-harm, suicidal ideation, or an eating disorder were excluded. Over 14 months, six waves of measurement were completed by Project K participants (n = 49), while four waves of measurement were completed by a control group (n = 31). Analyses using multilevel models showed that completion of Project K had substantial positive effects on selfefficacy, resilience, and wellbeing, although the effect on connectedness was not significant. We conclude that Project K appears to be an effective positive youth development programme for adolescents with low self-efficacy.Item Errors, feedback, learning and performance(Australian Academic Press, 2009) Gardner DH; Wood RThe value of feedback about errors when learning a novel computer-based task was explored in two studies. The first study examined the optimal level of information to be provided in feedback about errors. The second study examined whether framing errors positively as opportunities to learn (which encourages error tolerance) or negatively as hindrances to learning (which encourages error avoidance) facilitated learning and performance. Both studies used a computer-based simulation of a management decision-making task. In the first study there were three feedback conditions: outcome feedback alone, outcome feedback plus error signal feedback, and outcome feedback plus corrective feedback. Corrective feedback produced better performance than error signal and outcome feedback but learning did not differ across the three conditions. Corrective feedback also facilitated the use of systematic exploration which was positively associated with performance and learning. Learners' self-efficacy moderated the effects of error feedback: learners with high self-efficacy showed high levels of performance in all conditions but for those with low self-efficacy, detailed corrective feedback was essential for learning. The second study explored the effects of positive vs. negative error framing and corrective vs. signal error feedback in a 2 x 2 design. Positive error framing produced more unsystematic exploration and worse performance than negative error framing. Positive error framing helped those with low self-efficacy but for those with higher self-efficacy it was of more value to frame errors negatively. The implications of the interactions between error framing, error feedback and learner characteristics are discussed along with implications for the study of error management, a positive error framing technique.
