Running Head: MEDIATION CRITIQUE 1

Critique of Quantitative Research Methods Articles – Mediation

Rob LeSueur
EDRS 821 – Fall 2017

Umucu, E., Lee, B., Jia-Rung Wu, Fong Chan, Blake, J., Brooks, J., & Catalano, D. (2016). Self-

efficacy as a mediator for the relationship between secure attachment style and

employment status in individuals with spinal cord injuries. Journal of Vocational

Rehabilitation, 45, 97–106. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-160814

Umucu and his colleagues' (2016) study sought to evaluate the relationship between

secure adult attachment, self-efficacy, and employment. The study also aimed to determine any

mediating effects of self-efficacy on the other variables relationship among adults with spinal

cord injuries. The authors used a quantitative correlationaldescriptive design to examine these

effects.

Sample

The participants in this study were 190 people with spinal cord injuries from six

providences in Canada. Participants had to be working age as defined by the authors as 25 to 54

years old. The mean age was 41.5 years. The sample was predominantly married, white men and

had at least a high school education.

Measures

The study used the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale (MSES) to measure self-efficacy. This

scale has 16 items divided across two subscales, daily activities (9 items) and social functioning

(7 items). The scale uses a seven-point Likert-type scale for each item. Prior reliability and

current reliability statistics were reported for the scale. The subscale scores were summed for use

in the analysis.

To measure attachment, the study used two of the three subscales of the Adult
MEDIATION CRITIQUE 2

Attachment Scale (AAS). The full AAS has three subscales with six items each. The subscales

are Depend, Anxiety, and Close. The authors combined Depend and Close subscales to form a

scale on secure attachment. Prior reliability and current reliability statistics were reported for the

scale and new computed scale for the study.

The final collected information from the participants was their employment status. This

was classified along the dichotomous categories of employed and unemployed. The employed

category included participants that had either part-time or full-time employment. The

unemployed category included unemployed participants, as well as retired participants.

Results

The authors used both correlation analysis and mediation analysis to answer their

research questions. For the correlation analysis, all three variables were compared to each other.

All three were positively correlated with the other variables with statistical significance.

To test mediation of the effects of secure attachment on employment status by self-

efficacy, the authors used a simple mediation model. Because of the dichotomous nature of the

dependent variable (employment status), the paths in the model between secure attachment to

employment status and self-efficacy to employment were estimated using logistic regression

equations. The path between secure attachment and self-efficacy was estimated using an ordinary

least-squares regression equation.

The analysis showed that self-efficacy fully mediated the relationship between secure

attachment and employment status. The odds ratios for the logistic regressions should that the

odds of being employed were higher for participants with higher levels of secure attachment and

higher levels of self-efficacy. The authors used bootstrapping to determine that the indirect effect

was statistically significant.

MEDIATION CRITIQUE 3

Critique

The article provided clear theory behind the model that they were hypothesizing. They

laid the article out clearly, so that it was easy to understand what they were doing at each step

and the reasoning behind most of the steps in the process. The only step that was not clearly

explained was the exclusion of the Anxiety subscale of the AAS, but could be inferred from the

description of the three subscales that it was inverse to the other two subscales that were used.

The limitations that were present in the article were discussed by the authors with several

potential solutions to improve future studies on the topic.

The most interesting finding is the extent that self-efficacy mediates the relationship

between secure attachment and employment status. The conceptual links between both the

independent variable and the moderating variable to the dependent variable are logical and

obvious. The surprising piece is how much self-efficacy skills influence the relationship between

secure attachment and self-efficacy. This is an important finding as it is often hard to intervene

on someone’s attachment in adulthood because it is built over time and has so many connections

to childhood events, but self-efficacy can be improved through skill training. This means that

people with poor secure attachment can be taught self-efficacy skills to increase the

employability. It would be interesting to see if the findings of this study extend to a population

that is less active in self-advocacy than the sample. It would also be interesting to see if the

findings were similar in other disability categories, as all categories are underemployed.

Nice job! Clearly and concisely presented. 20/20