Practitioner Interview (3.3) Paddy Steinfort

Loading...

来自 University of Pennsylvania 的课程

Positive Psychology: Character, Grit and Research Methods

493 个评分

Explore Related Videos

At Coursera, you will find the best lectures in the world. Here are some of our personalized recommendations for you

University of Pennsylvania

Positive Psychology: Character, Grit and Research Methods

493 个评分

课程 3（共 5 门，Specialization Foundations of Positive Psychology ）

Learners discover how apply to research methods to their study of Positive Psychology. In this course, we study with Dr. Angela Duckworth and Dr. Claire Robertson-Kraft. Through an exploration their work "True Grit" and interviews with researchers and practitioners, you develop a research hypothesis and learn how to understand the difference between internal and external validity. You also begin to understand and apply the strengths and weaknesses associated with different types of measurements and evaluation designs. You then interpret the results in an empirical study. Suggested prerequisites: Positive Psychology: Martin E. P. Seligman’s Visionary Science and Positive Psychology: Applications and Interventions.

从本节课中

Analyzing Data

Inferential Statistics13:58

Angela Duckworth: 3.3 Correlation1:16

Angela Duckworth: 3.3 Effect Size1:57

Angela Duckworth: 3.3 Growth Mindset1:39

Practitioner Interview (3.3) Paddy Steinfort4:59

与讲师见面

Claire Robertson-Kraft, Ph.D.
Director, ImpactED
Positive Psychology Center and Fels Insititute of Government
Angela Duckworth, Ph.D.
Christopher H. Browne Distinguished Professor of Psychology
Positive Psychology Center

So when we took the data at the the end of the session,

having not touched it right to the end, we ran a number of statistical methods on it

to find out the answers to the questions that we had asked.

And the hypothesis, I guess, the answers we wanted to find around

did mental toughness have any correlation with performance in this area, so

specifically, did grit correlate with performance?

Did optimism correlate with performance?

And then, secondly, could we change those measures?

Could we actually improve them just by this short intervention?

And, thirdly, if we did change them, could we change the consistency levels and

the performance levels of the athletes in question?

And when we dug into the data and ran the statistical methods that we needed to find

those answers, the data gave us great insights.

And it turns out that the hypothesis, I guess, the gut intuition that I followed,

and which took me to the United States, and now working in pro sports over here,

was actually, well, at least, in this case, it turned out to be true.

There was a correlation, a very strong correlation, between grit and

the level of consistency in performance of the athletes in question.

And the same goes for optimism, but specifically one element of that scale and

we'll talk about that in a second.

We also found that the training was effective in improving optimism.

It was a little bit of a mixed result though on the grit scale.

And that was quite an interesting finding because I guess it was one of the first

questions I asked Angela, could you train this?

We're still working on this now and Angela and

her team are still doing some great work in this area.

What this experiment showed,

at least, in this individual instance I'm talking about,

was that those who already had high grit, there wasn't a lot of movement to be had.

You could teach them and they were a little bit like, yeah I get it,

I already do that.

But for those who are low in grit, we did show a shift.

So across the entire group, the results were mixed.

But if we split it,

we did find that the lower end of the scale were able to improve somewhat.

The coolest part from my point of view,

as a practitioner, as someone who gets paid to improve athletes' performance,

was that we found that by delivering this program, and when we controlled

it by comparing it to athletes who didn't receive it in the same team,

same age group, same level of performance, those who received the intervention

were more consistent in the following year and did improve slightly.

The biggest change was consistency though, and particularly for young,

developing athletes.

I'm sure a lot of coaches, if anyone out there is a coach or a teacher, often in

a performance instance, that's really the key to getting long-term improvement.

If we can get consistency, the next thing is huge levels of improvement.

So in one year we're able to show that, in one season, from one season to the next.

And that was the most exciting part of, I guess for me, the findings that we had.

One of the ways that the hypothesis shifted a little bit was,

as I said, the grit work, the grit measures, sorry, showed that

the lower end of the scale can improve, but the upper end maybe not so much.

So that shifted the way we approached it.

And we're also a little bit more specific going forward.

So I've done this work now with an NFL team, a college football team,

discussed program design with an NBA squad.

And, as I said, I'm now employed with a major league baseball team doing it with

more than 180 professional baseballers across all sorts of minor league and

major league levels.

Is that we're now a little more specific about some of the work around

goal setting, and particularly using some of Angela's research, and

moreover some of Gabriele Oettingen's research,

I hope I pronounced that right, on what they call the WOOP method.

So being up and actually being more specific, but

also more realistic with the way we set goals at the start of the program, and

then basically just holding the athletes to that.

That became a much bigger component in the program.

Still delivering a lot of the resilience and optimism stuff.

But by doing this analysis, by testing the hypothesis, we're able

to be really specific about that, and find out that, okay, if we tweak this here and

tweak this here, the programs can be even more effective going forward.

So as a practitioner, there's nothing better than, obviously,

getting results at first, but even more being able to say, okay, we can get even

better results if we add this, and if we take that out and if we just tweak this.

So it was one of the most beneficial, it was quite some hard work.

A lot of numbers and a lot of deep statistics.

But with great help from people like Angela and people like Claire and also

the entire team, reaching out to other researchers, it made it easy, and I guess

in a way fun, to actually get through that process and find some practical results.

And make me better at my job, but more importantly,

help the groups that I'm working with improve their resilience,

their mental toughness and the results they can achieve with that.

探索我们的目录

免费加入并获得个性化推荐、更新和优惠。

Coursera 致力于普及全世界最好的教育，它与全球一流大学和机构合作提供在线课程。

© 2019 Coursera Inc. 保留所有权利。

通过 App Store 下载

通过 Google Play 获取