Discussion and Policy Recommendations

Discussion and Policy Recommendations

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-7452-1.ch004

Abstract

This chapter encapsulates discussion of research findings and their relevant policy conclusions and recommendations. Thus, it is suggested that there was no statistically significant relationship between the age of respondents and their subjective wellbeing. This finding contradicts the results of an early study conducted by Fluegel. Results of the current study also revealed there was no statistically significant relationship between gender and the subjective wellbeing of respondents. Similarly, the results also demonstrate there was no statistically significant relationship between gross income and the subjective wellbeing of respondents. It is suggested that these results coincide with a study conducted by Gaynor. Results of the other independent variables are also discussed in this chapter. These include self-efficacy, social support, resilience, spirituality, and leisure participation. These results are compared and contrasted from the qualitative results in identifying meaningful patterns, similarities, and variances.
Chapter Preview
Top

Restatement Of The Research Objective

Invariably, this study had one primary and particular objective. This objective embodies the implementation of a mixed methods concurrent research design geared at examining the factors that influence the subjective wellbeing of informal caregivers. These factors include self-efficacy, spirituality, social support, resilience, and leisure participation. The major gap in the research literature this study was designed to address was the paucity of empirical studies regarding issues of emotional episodes, financial stress, ill health, and an increased risk of mortality experienced by informal caregivers (Cohen et al., 2002; Haley et al., 2003; Robinson, 1983). To address the research question, the researchers developed testable statistical hypotheses. These null hypotheses were used to examine the relationships between subjective wellbeing and the predictor variables so defined in previous chapters.

In addition, the researcher analyzed the qualitative segment of the instrument using the following categories as suggested by Creswell (2007):

  • Codes on topics that readers would expect to find based on the past literature and common sense.

  • Codes that are surprising and were not anticipated at the beginning of the study.

  • Codes that are unusual and that are, in and of themselves, of conceptual interest to readers.

  • Codes that address a larger theoretical perspective in the research.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset