The Professional Counselor | Volume 14, Issue 3 280 Research Question 2 In answering RQ2, a one-way RM-ANOVA examined whether participants’ mindfulness scores significantly changed throughout the MBSP intervention program. The normality assumption was shown to be violated because the p-value for the Shapiro-Wilk normality test at week 8 was statistically significant (Shapiro-Wilk = .82, p < .001). The sphericity assumption was found to be met because the sphericity statistic was not found to be statistically significant, 2 (2, N = 24) = .78, = .676. Because of the non-normal data, a Friedman test (a non-parametric version of a one-way ANOVA) was implemented. The Friedman test results showed no significant change in mindfulness scores 2 (2, N = 24) = 5.32, = .069. Therefore, H2 was rejected, as data analysis failed to demonstrate a statistically significant change in pre- and post-intervention of the MBSP group intervention on mindfulness (traits). Research Question 3 In answering RQ3, a one-way RM-ANOVA examined whether participants’ overall well-being scores significantly changed throughout the MBSP intervention program. The normality assumption was met because the p-values for overall well-being scores for each time period were greater than .05. The sphericity assumption was found to be met because the sphericity statistic was found to be statistically significant 2 (2, N =24) = 6.41, = .041. The Greenhouse-Geisser correction was implemented due to the sphericity assumption violation. The one-way ANOVA results found no significant change over time, (1.60, 36.72) = 2.63, = .096. Therefore, H3 was rejected, as data analysis failed to demonstrate a statistically significant change in pre- and post-intervention of the MBSP program for overall well-being. See Table 4. Table 4 One-Way Repeated Measures ANOVA for Changes of Overall Well-Being Scores Over Time (RQ3) Source Measure SS df MS F p Partial Eta Squared Time Sphericity Assumed 3.05 2.00 1.52 2.63 0.08 0.10 Greenhouse-Geisser 3.05 1.60 1.91 2.63 0.10 0.10 Huynh-Feldt 3.05 1.70 1.80 2.63 0.09 0.10 Lower-bound 3.05 1.00 3.05 2.63 0.12 0.10 Error Sphericity Assumed 26.68 46.00 0.58 Greenhouse-Geisser 26.68 36.72 0.73 Huynh-Feldt 26.68 39.02 0.68 Lower-bound 26.68 23.00 1.16 A Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the bivariate relationships between relationship satisfaction, mindfulness, and well-being. Well-being was shown to be positively associated with relationship satisfaction (r (22) =.71, p < .001) and mindfulness (r (22) = .53, p = .007). At Week 4 of the intervention, well-being was positively associated with relationship satisfaction (r (22) =.61, p =.002). At Week 8 of the intervention, well-being was shown to be positively associated with relationship satisfaction (r (22) =.84, p < .001) and mindfulness (r (22) = .59, p =.003). Mindfulness was positively associated with relationship satisfaction (r (22) = .52, p = .009). See Table 2.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDU5MTM1