279 The Professional Counselor | Volume 14, Issue 3 Table 2 Pearson Correlation Among Relationship Satisfaction, Mindfulness, and Well-Being at Baseline, Week 4, and Week 8 Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. Relationship Satisfaction -- 2. Mindfulness 0.15 -- 3. Well-Being .71* .53* -- 4. Relationship Satisfaction (Wk. 4) -- 5. Mindfulness (Wk. 4) .09 -- 6. Well-Being (Wk. 4) .61* .27 -- 7. Relationship Satisfaction (Wk. 8) -- 8. Mindfulness (Wk. 8) .52* -- 9. Well-Being (Wk. 8) .84* .59* -- *p < .01. Research Question 1 In answering RQ1, a one-way RM-ANOVA examined if there were significant changes in participants’ relationship satisfaction throughout the MBSP intervention program. The independence assumption was met because the study design measured each participant’s response only once at the time of the study. The normality assumption was shown to be violated, as the p-value for the ShapiroWilk normality test at Week 4 was statistically significant (Shapiro-Wilk = .88, p < .001). The sphericity assumption was met because Mauchly’s test of sphericity was not found to be statistically significant, 2 (2, N = 24) = 4.39, = .111. No significant change over time was found, F(2, 46) = 1.74, p = .187. Therefore, H1 was rejected, as data analysis failed to demonstrate a statistically significant change in pre- and post-intervention of the MBSP group intervention on relationship satisfaction. See Table 3. Table 3 One-Way Repeated Measures ANOVA for Changes of Relationship Satisfaction Scores Over Time (RQ1) Source Measure SS df MS F p Partial Eta Squared Time Sphericity Assumed 52.78 2.00 26.39 1.74 0.19 0.07 Greenhouse-Geisser 52.78 1.69 31.16 1.74 0.19 0.07 Huynh-Feldt 52.78 1.81 29.10 1.74 0.19 0.07 Lower-bound 52.78 1.00 52.78 1.74 0.20 0.07 Error Sphericity Assumed 697.89 46.00 15.17 Greenhouse-Geisser 697.89 38.96 17.92 Huynh-Feldt 697.89 41.72 16.73 Lower-bound 697.89 23.00 30.34
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDU5MTM1