For the first aim, bivariate correlations were produced to examine the relationships among the psychosocial variables of interest from data collected at baseline. On , the correlations among self-efficacy, self-esteem, empowerment, social support, stress, depression, and loneliness are shown. All correlations were statistically significant (p = .01, two-tailed) and in the anticipated direction. For example, self-esteem is positively associated with social support (r = .414), empowerment (r = .354), and self-efficacy (r = .566). Alternatively, psychosocial outcomes such as stress, loneliness, and depression were negatively associated with positive outcomes such as self-esteem, social support, empowerment, and self-efficacy. The highest absolute correlations are found between loneliness and stress (r = .716), depression and stress (r = .708), depression and loneliness (r = .701), and social support and loneliness (r = −.646).
Correlations Among Psychosocial Measures
For the second aim, repeated-measures analysis of variance was conducted to evaluate the effects of the computerized intervention on changes in the seven psychosocial outcomes of interest. The models tested included the dependent variable of scale scores for the SES (self-esteem), the PRQ (social support), Chronic Illness Empowerment Scale (CIES; empowerment), Self-Efficacy Scale (Sherer et al., 1982
), CES-D (depression), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale (version 3), and PSS (stress) (Cohen et al.) scales, one within-subjects factor of time (i.e., baseline measurement to the 3-month measurement, at the conclusion of the computer intervention) and one between-subjects factor of membership in the intervention or control groups. The means and standard deviations for all scale scores found for both time periods are presented in .
Baseline and 3-month Means for Psychosocial Measures (N = 100)
After assurance that ANOVA assumptions were met (e.g., normality, homogeneity of variance), the results for the ANOVAs indicate that significant Time × Treatment interactions exist for self-esteem, F(1,98) = 5.97, p = .016, social support, F(1,98) = 4.43, p = .038, and empowerment, F(1,98) = 6.06, p = .016, thereby suggesting that the group’s scores changed differently across time. An examination of the means and standard deviations in shows that for all three psychosocial outcomes the intervention group improved across time; for example, social support increased from 79.05 at baseline to 83.46 at 3 months, whereas the control groups either improved very little or decreased. These results suggest that the intervention had an appreciable effect on self-esteem, social support, and empowerment within the sample.
The results for the other psychosocial outcomes of interest are less clear (see ). ANOVA results for depression, loneliness, and stress show that significant main effects for time only are evident, suggesting that the groups together changed significantly across time, but did not differ statistically. For depression, F(1,98) = 5.00, p = .028, results of the ANOVA and descriptive statistics indicate that both groups became less depressed over time, although subjects in the treatment group showed a much greater change (i.e., treatment group declined by 3.02; control declined by 1.22). Likewise, both loneliness, F(1,98) = 6.51, p = .012, and stress, F(1,98) = 8.44, p = .005, yield main effects for time, but do not indicate statistical differences between groups despite greater improvements made among the participants of the intervention when examining descriptive statistics. These findings suggest that cautious optimism is warranted in conclusions that the computer intervention had effects on depression, loneliness, and stress.
ANOVA Results for Effect of Intervention on Psychosocial Measures