In
te
r
n
ation
a
l Jou
rn
al
o
f E
v
al
u
a
t
i
on
a
n
d
R
e
se
arc
h
in
Ed
u
c
ation
(
IJERE
)
V
o
l.7,
N
o.3,
S
eptem
b
er
2
01
8
,
pp. 236~
2
4
3
IS
S
N
: 2252-
88
22
D
O
I
: 10.
1
1
591
/i
jere
.v7.i
3
.
137
76
236
Jou
rn
a
l
h
o
me
pa
ge
:
ht
tp:
//i
a
e
score
.
com
/
j
o
u
r
na
l
s
/
i
n
d
e
x
.
p
hp/IJ
ERE
/
Logo Counselin
g for Low Spi
ritu
al
S
elf-Esteem Among
C
o
llege Stude
nts
Jac
ob
D
aan
En
g
e
l
1
, Lob
b
y
L
oe
km
on
o
2
,
1
F
a
cu
lt
y of Th
e
o
l
og
y, S
at
ya W
acana Ch
ristian
Univ
ersit
y
, Ind
ones
ia
2
Facu
lt
y of Teach
er Trainin
g an
d
Edu
cati
o
n
,
S
atya W
acan
a Chrsi
t
i
an
U
n
i
vers
ity
, ind
on
esia
Art
i
cl
e In
fo
ABSTRACT
A
r
tic
le hist
o
r
y
:
Re
ce
i
v
e
d
Ju
n
9
,
2018
Re
vise
d A
ug
8
, 2018
Ac
ce
p
t
ed
Au
g
1
1
,
2
018
T
he
p
u
r
p
o
se
o
f
this
r
e
s
ear
ch
w
a
s
t
o
exam
i
n
e
lo
go
c
ounse
lin
g
m
o
de
l
in
i
mpr
o
vin
g
l
ow
s
p
i
r
itua
l
s
e
l
f-e
s
tee
m
p
rob
l
em
f
or
c
o
lleg
e
s
tu
d
en
ts
.
Th
is
r
ese
a
rc
h
use
d
d
esc
r
ipt
i
v
e
m
etho
d
a
nd
qua
si
-
e
x
p
er
i
m
ent
m
e
th
od
w
i
t
h
a
non-
eq
ui
va
len
t
p
re-
t
e
s
t-p
o
s
t
-tes
t
co
ntr
o
l
grou
p
de
sign.
The
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
t
h
e
n
a
n
a
l
y
z
e
d
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
s
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
t
h
e
pra
c
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
gn
ific
ance
.
The
resu
lt
show
e
d
t
h
a
t
log
o
c
o
u
n
se
lin
g
m
ode
l
cou
l
d
im
pro
v
e
low
sp
iri
t
ua
l
self-
e
st
eem
a
m
ong
c
o
lle
ge
s
tu
de
nts,
i
ndi
ca
te
d
by
s
tat
i
sti
cal
s
i
gni
fi
ca
n
c
e
o
f
t
c
o
unt
(
4
3
.
8
51)
>
t
table
(2
.
1
4
4
)
a
nd
N-
ga
i
n
o
f
t
h
e
e
x
perim
e
n
t
al
g
ro
up
(
0.75)
>
N-
gai
n
of
t
he
c
o
ntr
o
l
gro
u
p
(
0
.
1
5
)
a
n
d
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
o
f
p
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
a
t
t
i
t
u
d
e
,
b
e
h
a
v
i
o
r
and
val
u
e
c
h
a
nge
s.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
nda
tio
n
a
l
so
g
i
v
e
n
f
or
r
e
l
a
t
ed
a
ge
nc
ies
t
o
implem
e
n
t
l
ogo
co
u
n
se
li
n
g
m
odel
i
n
t
ra
i
n
i
ng
pro
g
ram
and
for
fur
the
r
re
se
arc
h
by
related
ex
pe
rts
in
t
he f
i
e
ld.
K
eyw
ord
:
C
o
ll
eg
e st
ud
e
n
t
s
Lo
go c
o
u
n
se
li
ng
Lo
go c
o
u
n
se
li
ng m
ode
l
Low
spir
it
ua
l self-es
t
eem
Co
pyri
gh
t © 2
018 In
stit
u
t
e
of Advanced
En
gi
neeri
n
g
an
d
Scien
ce.
All
rights
res
e
rv
ed.
Corres
pon
d
i
n
g
Au
th
or:
Jaco
b
D
a
a
n
Engel,
F
a
cult
y
o
f
T
he
ol
ogy,
S
a
t
y
a
Waca
na C
hris
ti
a
n
U
ni
v
e
rsit
y,
52-
60 D
i
po
ne
g
o
r
o
S
tre
e
t, S
id
ore
j
o,
S
alatiga
50
7
11,
Ind
one
sia.
Em
ail:
j
a
co
p.d
a
an@s
ta
ff.u
ks
w
.
e
d
u
1.
I
N
TR
OD
U
C
TI
O
N
Ove
r
t
he
p
a
s
t
deca
des,
s
el
f-e
s
t
e
em
h
a
s
e
m
e
r
g
ed
a
s
a
n
i
m
por
t
a
n
t
to
ol
f
o
r
und
e
r
st
an
din
g
h
u
m
a
n
beha
v
i
or
a
n
d
t
re
at
ing
ne
ga
ti
ve
t
ho
u
g
h
t
s,
s
elf-d
o
u
b
t
,
and
self-h
a
t
r
e
d
[
1
].
B
asica
lly,
self-
e
s
t
eem
i
s
how
con
f
ide
n
t
a
pe
rson
t
o
t
h
i
nk
a
nd
c
o
p
e
w
i
t
h
t
he
c
hal
l
e
n
ges
of
l
if
e.
S
el
f-e
s
t
e
em
h
a
s
b
ec
om
e
a
very
i
mp
orta
nt
attr
ib
u
t
e
for
i
d
ent
i
f
y
i
ng
the
a
d
ap
t
i
ve
ness
o
f
a
p
erso
n
t
o
t
he
i
nc
rea
s
i
n
g
l
y
c
o
m
p
le
x
a
nd
c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
in
g
w
o
r
l
d
[2]
.
P
e
opl
e
m
a
y
b
u
i
l
d
h
ea
l
t
hy
o
r
low
se
lf-es
t
e
e
m
.
H
ea
l
t
hy
se
l
f-es
t
ee
m
is
w
hen
pe
op
l
e
c
an
a
sse
ss
an
d
k
n
o
w
them
se
lves
a
c
c
ura
t
e
l
y
a
n
d
s
til
l
ac
ce
p
t
a
nd
v
al
ue
t
he
mse
l
ves
com
p
l
e
t
e
l
y
[
1
]
.
A
t
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
t
i
m
e
,
l
o
w
s
e
l
f
-
estee
m
p
eo
p
l
e
ju
d
g
e
t
h
e
i
r
ca
p
a
bi
l
i
t
y
a
nd
va
l
u
es
o
r
v
i
rt
ues
ske
p
t
i
ca
ll
y.
P
eop
l
e
w
h
o
ha
ve
l
ow
s
e
l
f-e
s
t
e
e
m
w
il
l
overe
mp
ha
si
z
e
the
i
r
w
ea
knes
s
es a
nd de
fic
i
t
s
a
nd un
de
rest
im
ate
t
he
ir
s
tre
n
g
t
hs
a
n
d
a
sse
t
s
[3].
M
a
n
y
c
o
l
l
eg
e
s
t
u
d
e
nt
s
f
acing
a
h
i
ghly
st
re
ssf
ul
p
ro
c
e
ss
w
h
e
n
t
r
an
si
tio
ning
i
nt
o
co
ll
eg
e
li
f
e
[
4
]
.
No
t
to
m
e
n
ti
on
v
i
ol
e
n
ce,
a
lc
o
h
o
l
a
nd
dru
g
s
a
bus
e,
s
ex
ual
ha
rassme
n
t
a
n
d
s
ocia
l
press
u
re
h
a
ppe
n
i
n
g
ma
de
stude
n
t
s
m
o
r
e
v
u
l
ne
rab
l
e
to
l
ow
s
el
f-e
s
t
e
e
m
p
r
oble
m
[
5].
L
o
w
se
l
f-est
eem
h
as
b
een
c
om
monl
y
a
s
s
o
cia
t
e
d
w
ith
c
li
nic
a
l
di
sorders,
s
uc
h
a
s
d
e
p
re
ssion,
e
a
t
i
n
g
dis
o
rder
s,
su
bsta
nce
a
buse,
a
nd
psyc
h
o
sis
[
3
,6].
I
n
add
i
tio
n,
s
om
e
stu
d
i
es
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
tha
t
l
ow
s
elf-
es
teem
f
or
e
s
ee
a
n
t
i
s
o
c
i
a
l
b
eha
v
ior,
i
nte
r
persona
l
vi
o
l
ence
,
depre
ssi
on,
a
n
d
a
n
x
i
e
t
y
[
7][8
]
.
T
here
fore
,
i
t
i
s
imp
o
r
t
a
n
t
t
o
a
ddress
a
nd
a
c
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
ge
w
h
a
t
is low
s
e
l
f-e
stee
m
and,
m
ore
i
m
porta
nt
l
y
,
how
to ide
n
ti
fy a
nd t
r
ea
t low
se
l
f-es
t
ee
m.
Num
e
r
ous
s
tudie
s
h
a
d
b
een
c
on
d
u
cte
d
t
o
t
r
ea
t
l
o
w
sel
f
-
e
steem
a
s
a
c
og
ni
t
i
v
e
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
[
3,6,
9
–
11].
These
t
r
eatm
e
nt
s
co
ns
ide
r
ed
a
s
co
gn
i
tive
be
hav
i
or
t
her
a
p
y
(CBT)
p
ro
gra
m
a
nd
base
d
o
n
F
en
nel’
s
c
o
g
n
it
iv
e
c
o
n
cept
u
ali
zat
io
n
of
l
o
w
s
elf
-
est
e
e
m
[
1
2
]
.
Th
e
s
e
l
o
w
self
-est
ee
m
t
r
e
a
t
ment
s
me
nti
o
n
e
d
on
l
y
f
o
c
u
s
ed
o
n
ho
w
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
IJERE
I
S
S
N
:
2252-
88
22
L
ogo C
o
unse
l
i
ng f
o
r L
o
w
S
p
i
ri
tu
a
l
Sel
f
-Es
t
e
e
m
Am
ong C
o
lle
ge S
t
ude
n
t
s (
J
aco
b
D
a
a
n
E
nge
l)
23
7
to
m
od
ify
e
x
te
rnal
s
t
i
mul
i
an
d
be
ha
v
i
ors,
b
ut
n
o
t
a
ddr
ess
i
ng
h
o
w
t
h
e
c
lie
n
t
s
t
h
in
k
and
f
e
e
l
a
t
th
e
co
re
o
f
t
h
ei
r
sel
v
es. CBT a
d
d
resse
s ca
use
-
and-
effec
t
rela
t
i
onsh
i
p w
ith
c
o
g
n
i
t
ion
with
out
a
dd
ress
in
g
cli
e
n
t
’s f
re
e
wil
l
. CB
T
bel
i
e
v
es
t
ha
t
h
u
ma
n
be
ing
s
d
o
n
o
t
ha
ve
free
w
ill
an
d
ar
e
i
n
flue
nce
d
j
us
t
by
t
h
e
co
g
n
i
t
i
v
e
p
r
o
cesse
s
a
ppe
al
e
d
to
e
xter
na
l
s
t
i
m
uli
[1
3].
Besi
des
t
h
e
pro
b
l
e
m
i
n
i
t
s
fo
u
n
d
a
ti
o
n
,
t
h
e
eff
ect
i
v
e
n
e
ss
of
C
BT
f
o
r
l
o
w
s
el
f-e
s
t
e
em
has
yet
to
b
e
system
atically
e
va
lu
ate
d
[
14]
a
n
d
i
t
se
em
s
that
C
BT
’s
e
ffec
t
i
ve
nes
s
h
as
b
ee
n
de
cli
n
in
g
ac
cord
in
g t
o
a
re
c
e
n
t
me
ta-a
n
a
ly
sis r
e
sea
r
ch
[
1
5
].
Au
th
o
r
s
su
sp
ect
ed
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
r
e
was
so
me
m
i
s
ma
t
c
h
conc
ep
t
i
n
t
h
e
C
B
T
-b
ased
l
o
w
s
e
l
f
-
e
s
t
e
em
trea
t
m
en
ts.
Som
e
r
esea
rche
rs
h
ad
a
rgu
e
d
t
h
a
t
l
ow
s
e
l
f-estee
m
wa
s
a
d
e
ep
er
p
ro
b
l
em
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
t
o
sp
i
r
i
t
ua
li
t
y
[4,1
6].
The
u
nder
l
yi
n
g
c
ore
o
f
h
uma
n
it
y,
a
s
H
o
l
l
ow
a
y
[17]
s
aid,
i
s
m
e
a
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
pur
pose
w
h
i
c
h
in
t
e
grate
d
i
n
spirit
ua
li
t
y
.
Sp
iri
t
ua
l
ity
i
s
fr
eque
n
t
l
y
h
i
ghl
ig
h
ted
w
i
th
a
t
t
ri
bu
tes
o
f
l
ov
e
,
j
o
y
,
com
p
a
ssi
on,
ca
rin
g
,
a
w
e,
w
on
der
and
m
y
s
t
ery,
b
ea
u
t
y
an
d
c
r
ea
t
i
v
i
t
y
[
1
7
].
T
h
en,
in
a
s
tud
y
o
f
10
5
s
o
cia
l
w
ork
gra
dua
te
stude
n
t
s,
it
w
a
s
fo
u
nd
th
at
s
pir
i
t
u
a
l
w
e
ll-b
e
ing
w
a
s
rela
t
e
d
t
o
h
igh
e
r
s
e
l
f
-est
e
e
m
[
16].
P
e
d
e
rs
en
[
1
8
]
f
oun
d
tha
t
a
m
o
n
g
1
3
4
u
nder
g
r
a
d
u
a
t
es,
t
h
ose
w
i
t
h
a
s
tron
ger
or
c
entra
l
s
p
i
ri
tua
l
i
de
n
t
i
t
y
h
a
d
high
e
r
s
elf-e
s
t
e
em
.
These
s
t
ud
i
e
s
a
r
e
c
o
n
f
irm
i
ng
t
he
a
u
t
h
o
rs’
sup
p
o
sit
i
on
t
h
a
t
l
ow
se
lf-estee
m
is
a
p
r
o
b
l
em
a
t
t
h
e
s
p
iri
t
ual
l
e
vel
.
Thu
s
,
it
i
s
a
n
e
c
e
s
s
ary
at
t
e
mpt
t
o
t
reat
l
o
w
s
el
f-e
st
e
e
m
wi
th
s
pi
r
i
t
u
a
l
a
nd
hum
an
is
t
i
c
a
p
p
r
oa
ches.
O
n
e
o
f
t
h
e
w
e
ll-k
n
o
w
n
sp
i
ri
tua
l
a
n
d
hum
a
n
i
s
t
i
c-ba
se
d a
ppr
oac
h
is l
o
g
o
the
r
a
p
y
d
e
v
el
ope
d
b
y
V
ict
o
r
Fra
nkl
[
19,2
0
]
.
I
n
t
h
i
s
a
r
t
i
cle
,
a
ut
h
o
r
s
e
xa
m
i
ne
d
low
se
lf-
e
s
t
e
e
m
pro
b
lem
from
Vi
ct
o
r
F
ra
n
k
l
’s
l
ogo
t
h
era
py
perspe
c
tive
as
a
n
a
p
pr
oach
t
o
unde
rs
tan
d
i
ng
h
uma
n
f
rom
t
h
e
sp
ir
it
ua
l
a
s
pe
ct
t
ha
t
r
e
flec
ts
t
he
n
ee
d
t
o
r
ea
ch
the m
e
a
n
ing o
f
l
ife
. The
g
oa
l of
l
og
oth
e
ra
py
i
s
to
e
xp
res
s
a
wi
l
l
t
o be m
ea
ni
ngf
u
l
i
n ac
h
i
e
v
in
g t
h
e m
e
a
n
ing o
f
life.
A
lth
o
u
g
h
lo
g
o
t
h
era
p
y
ca
n
be
u
se
d
i
n
w
ide
ran
g
e
of
i
s
s
ues
of
m
e
a
n
i
ng
o
f
li
fe
[
21
,2
2],
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
a
l
m
ost
no
rese
arc
h
i
n
a
p
p
l
y
i
ng
l
o
g
o
t
hera
py
f
or
l
ow
s
e
l
f-este
e
m
.
T
he
a
ut
h
o
rs
a
ppl
y
li
te
ra
t
u
re
s
t
udy
a
p
p
r
o
a
ch
t
o
an
a
l
y
ze
the
c
o
re
p
ro
b
l
em
o
f
low
sel
f
-
e
steem
a
nd
de
vel
o
ped
a
ne
w
m
o
de
l
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
lo
got
he
ra
py
w
h
i
c
h
yie
l
ds
l
o
g
o
c
o
un
seli
ng
.
Log
o
c
oun
sel
i
n
g
p
r
ov
i
d
es
c
ou
nse
l
o
r
s
w
i
th
t
h
e
m
ea
n
i
n
g
o
f
l
i
f
e
co
un
sel
i
n
g
for
trea
tin
g
low
se
l
f
-
estee
m
.
Then,
we
e
xam
i
ne
t
he
e
ffect
i
v
ene
s
s
o
f
l
o
g
o
c
o
u
n
se
li
n
g
t
o
trea
t
low
sp
iri
t
ua
l
self-
e
s
t
eem
a
mon
g
col
l
e
g
e
stude
n
t
s
w
i
th
i
n
d
ica
t
o
r
s
of
s
ta
tis
ti
c
a
l
si
g
n
i
fica
nc
e a
n
d pra
c
t
i
cal
s
ig
n
i
fica
nc
e.
1.1
Low
Sp
i
r
itual S
e
lf-
E
ste
e
m
Lim
ana
l
yze
d
f
ac
t
o
r
s
c
aus
i
n
g
l
ow
s
p
i
r
i
t
u
a
l
s
elf-
es
teem
m
o
r
e
bro
a
d
ly
t
ha
n
Br
an
den’
s
a
p
pr
oach
[
23
]
.
Th
e
c
a
u
s
a
l
f
act
o
r
s
of
l
o
w
s
piri
tu
a
l
s
e
l
f-e
st
eem
a
re
n
eg
a
tiv
e
l
i
fe
e
xpe
rie
n
ce
,
negat
i
v
e
c
ore
be
lie
fs,
negat
i
ve
self-a
ssum
p
tio
ns,
e
x
pec
t
at
i
o
n
bia
s
,
ne
ga
ti
ve
s
el
f-e
v
a
l
ua
t
i
o
n
,
a
nd
s
e
l
f-d
i
st
ru
st
[
1
][23
]
,
e
x
pl
ai
n
e
d
a
s
[
24
,2
5]:
(1)
N
e
ga
tive
li
fe
e
x
p
e
r
ie
nce
of
t
he
p
as
t
i
s
t
he
i
na
bi
l
i
t
y
t
o
ad
dre
ss
prob
l
e
m
s
a
nd
e
v
e
n
t
s
t
ha
t
ha
ve
o
c
c
ur
red
once
or
m
any
t
i
m
e
s.
I
t
is
h
ar
mful
a
n
d
i
t
bri
ngs
a
b
a
d
p
r
e
c
e
d
en
t
t
o
o
n
e
'
s
th
i
nki
ng
a
b
il
it
y.
(
2)
N
e
g
ati
v
e
c
o
re
b
e
li
ef
i
s
t
h
e
i
n
ab
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
a
n
ind
i
vi
du
al
t
o
see
hi
msel
f
a
s
a
r
e
su
lt
o
f
pas
t
n
egat
i
v
e
e
x
pe
rie
n
ce
s
;
(
3)
I
n
l
i
n
e
w
i
t
h
nega
t
i
ve
c
ore
bel
i
e
f
s,
a
n
in
d
i
vi
d
u
al
o
f
t
e
n
t
ries
t
o
de
ve
lo
p
neg
a
t
ive
a
ssu
m
p
tio
ns,
w
h
ic
h
he
t
h
i
n
k
s,
w
i
l
l
he
lp
him
pr
ot
e
c
t
h
i
m
se
lf
f
r
o
m
ba
d
e
f
fe
ct
s;
(
4)
E
x
p
e
c
ta
t
i
o
n
b
ia
s
is
t
he
i
nab
i
lit
y
t
o
f
ac
e
ne
ga
t
i
ve
f
e
e
l
i
n
gs
t
h
a
t
overe
s
t
im
a
t
e
t
h
e
p
o
ss
ibi
l
i
tie
s
of
b
a
d
th
i
ng
s
to
h
ap
pe
n;
(5)
N
eg
at
ive
se
lf-e
va
l
u
a
tio
n
i
s
t
he
i
nab
i
lit
y
t
o
de
a
l w
i
t
h
the
fe
el
i
ng
of
s
elf-
bla
m
e
an
d
self-
c
ri
tica
l
s
u
c
h
a
s
"
I'm
use
l
e
s
s",
"stu
p
id",
"
I
ne
ver
le
arn,
"
and
"e
veryt
h
ing
i
s
des
t
roye
d”
;
(6)
S
e
l
f-d
ist
r
ust i
s
the
i
na
bi
l
ity to
un
derst
a
n
d
t
h
e
e
m
pt
y an
d
m
e
a
n
in
gle
ss l
i
fe
w
hic
h
h
ap
pe
ns
for a
lo
ng
ti
m
e
.
The
s
e
s
i
x
ca
u
s
at
i
v
e
fac
t
or
s
wil
l
m
ake
im
pac
t
s
o
n
t
he
s
ix
p
i
llar
s
of
s
e
l
f-es
t
ee
m
[26
]
,
i.e.
s
e
l
f-
awa
r
ene
s
s,
s
elf-a
c
c
e
pt
ance
,
se
l
f
-
d
eter
mi
nat
i
o
n
,
l
i
fe
p
ur
p
o
se
,
s
elf-respons
ibi
lity,
a
nd
sel
f-int
egr
ity.
The
impa
ct
s
of
t
h
o
se
c
ausa
l
fa
ctors
a
r
e
ne
g
a
ti
ve
s
e
l
f-
awa
r
ene
s
s,
n
e
ga
ti
ve
s
e
l
f-ac
ce
p
t
a
n
ce,
n
ega
t
i
v
e
se
lf-
deter
m
ination,
n
egative
lif
e
pur
pose,
n
egative
self-res
p
onsibil
it
y
a
nd
ne
ga
ti
ve
s
e
l
f-i
n
te
gri
t
y
[
2
7
].
T
he
se
l
ow
sp
i
r
i
t
ua
l
sel
f
-e
ste
e
m
prob
lem
s
a
re
v
i
s
ua
lize
d
in F
i
gur
e 1.
1.2
Log
o
th
er
a
p
y
L
o
g
o
t
hera
py
g
e
nera
lly
c
a
n
b
e
descr
i
b
e
d
a
s
p
syc
h
o
l
og
y
t
h
a
t
rec
o
gniz
e
s
s
p
irit
ua
l
d
i
m
e
ns
ion
i
n
h
um
an
bes
i
des
p
h
ys
ic
a
l
a
n
d
p
syc
h
ia
t
r
ic
a
spe
c
t
[
2
8
].
T
he
m
ai
n
p
h
il
oso
p
hi
ca
l
found
a
t
i
o
ns
o
f
l
o
g
o
t
h
e
r
ap
y
a
r
e
freed
o
m
of
w
i
l
l,
w
ill
o
f
m
eani
n
g,
a
n
d
m
ea
n
i
n
g
o
f
li
fe
w
i
t
h
eac
h
so
urce
of
m
e
a
ni
n
g
[
2
8
]
.
L
o
g
o
t
hera
p
y
p
r
o
vi
de
d
cou
n
se
l
o
rs
w
it
h
thr
ee
t
e
ch
n
i
que
s
an
d
ea
c
h
t
ec
hn
ique
acc
ompa
n
i
e
d
by
an
a
p
p
r
o
ac
h.
T
he
y
ar
e
pa
ra
do
x
i
ca
l
in
t
e
nti
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
he
a
p
p
r
o
ac
h
o
f
s
e
l
f-de
t
a
c
h
m
e
nt,
de
-re
flec
ti
on
w
i
t
h
se
lf-tr
a
n
s
c
e
nde
nc
e
a
p
pr
oach
a
n
d
S
oc
rat
i
c
dia
l
og
u
e
w
i
t
h t
h
e
appr
oa
ch o
f
self-
a
w
a
r
e
ness
[28].
The
ho
l
i
st
i
c
v
i
e
w
o
f
l
og
oth
e
rapy
ca
n
be seen in F
i
gur
e
2.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
SSN: 2252-
8822
IJERE
V
ol
.
7,
N
o.
3,
S
eptem
b
er
20
18 :
2
3
6
– 243
23
8
F
i
gur
e 1.
D
e
s
c
r
ip
tio
n
of l
ow
s
pi
r
i
t
u
a
l
se
l
f-es
t
e
e
m
p
roblem
il
l
u
stra
ti
ng t
h
e
c
a
u
sa
l fa
ct
ors a
nd t
h
e
i
m
pac
t
s
of i
t
F
i
gure
2. F
ra
n
k
l’s
log
o
t
her
a
p
y
m
odel o
n
l
y p
r
ovide
s
t
h
ree
t
echn
i
que
s
and
a
ppr
oac
h
es
1.3
Log
o
C
ou
n
s
e
l
in
g
S
ee
n
from
t
he
p
e
r
spec
ti
ve
o
f
l
o
g
o
t
h
era
p
y,
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
nee
d
g
a
p
s
f
o
r
l
o
w
s
e
l
f
-
e
s
t
e
e
m
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
s
.
T
h
e
r
e
are
si
x
pro
b
le
m
s
a
rise
f
r
o
m
the
di
scu
s
si
on
o
f
cau
sa
tiv
e
f
ac
t
o
rs
a
n
d
i
m
p
ac
ts
o
f
lo
w
self-
e
steem
,
w
h
il
e
lo
got
her
a
p
y
i
n
the
per
s
pec
t
iv
e
of
F
ra
nk
l
o
n
l
y
pro
v
i
de
s
t
h
re
e
te
c
h
n
i
q
u
es
a
nd
a
p
proa
che
s
.
A
u
thor
s
de
ve
l
ope
d
lo
go
co
un
sel
i
ng
h
ypo
the
t
ic
m
odel
for
tre
a
t
i
ng
low
sel
f
-e
ste
e
m
.
P
u
rposes
o
f
lo
go
c
o
u
n
se
lin
g
i
s
t
o
ov
e
r
com
e
t
h
e
cau
sati
v
e
f
ac
t
o
rs
o
f
l
o
w
se
l
f
-est
ee
m
a
n
d
t
h
e
a
c
hi
ev
e
m
en
t
t
a
rge
t
s
of
l
o
g
o
c
o
u
n
se
l
i
n
g
i
s
t
o
s
tre
ngt
he
n
s
i
x
pi
llar
s
o
f
se
lf-
e
steem
.
Log
o
c
ou
nse
l
in
g
s
u
p
p
le
me
n
t
one
a
dd
i
tio
n
a
l
s
ess
i
on
f
o
cu
si
ng
o
n
m
e
a
ni
ng
orie
nta
t
io
n.
The
ul
tim
ate
g
o
al
a
n
d
t
arge
t
of
t
he
l
o
g
o
c
ouns
e
l
i
ng
mo
de
l
i
s
t
o
g
ai
n
a
h
e
al
th
y
se
lf
-est
ee
m
as
w
ell
as
t
h
e
di
sc
o
v
ery
o
f
mea
nin
g
a
nd
pur
pose
in l
ife.
Lo
go
co
u
n
se
lin
g
mode
l
i
s show
n in F
ig
u
r
e
3.
L
o
go
c
o
un
se
l
i
ng
m
ode
l
c
o
nsis
ted
o
f
s
e
v
en
s
ession
s,
w
ith
eac
h
s
e
s
sio
n
usi
n
g
a
dif
f
e
re
nt
t
ec
hni
qu
e.
S
e
ssio
n
1
use
d
s
e
l
f-e
x
p
l
ora
t
i
o
n
tec
h
ni
q
u
e
for
cl
ie
nt
t
o
ex
pl
ore
h
er
r
e
l
a
tio
ns
hi
ps,
m
i
nd
se
ts,
em
oti
o
ns,
beha
v
i
ors,
a
n
d
expe
rie
n
ce
s.
S
essi
o
n
2
u
se
d
se
lf-a
cce
p
t
a
n
c
e
t
e
c
h
n
i
que
t
o
bri
n
g
t
h
e
c
l
ien
t
t
o
a
c
c
e
p
t
h
i
s
o
r
her
self,
visua
l
p
hysi
q
ue,
cha
r
ac
ters,
hurt
ex
pe
rie
n
ce
,
sk
il
l
s
,
a
n
d
t
a
l
en
t.
S
essio
n
3
u
s
e
d
a
se
lf-
d
eta
c
h
me
nt
tech
n
i
q
u
e
t
o
h
e
l
p
t
h
e
c
lie
n
t
m
a
k
i
n
g
di
st
a
n
ce
wit
h
h
e
r
p
rob
l
em
s
sym
p
tom
s
a
nd
f
ears.
S
e
ssi
on
4
u
sed
self
-
transce
nde
nce
te
ch
n
i
que
f
or
t
he
c
l
i
e
n
t
t
o
s
e
e
herse
l
f
be
yo
nd
a
n
d
foc
u
s
t
o
w
a
r
d
s
val
u
e
s
a
nd
m
ean
i
n
g
s
.
S
e
ssi
o
n
5
use
d
b
e
h
a
v
i
o
r
m
odi
fica
ti
o
n
t
e
c
h
n
i
que
t
o
hel
p
c
l
i
e
n
t
id
ent
i
f
y
i
n
g
h
er
self
not
b
a
s
ed
o
n
a
si
tua
t
io
n,
b
u
t
s
he
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
IJERE
I
S
S
N
:
2252-
88
22
L
ogo C
o
unse
l
i
ng f
o
r L
o
w
S
p
i
ri
tu
a
l
Sel
f
-Es
t
e
e
m
Am
ong C
o
lle
ge S
t
ude
n
t
s (
J
aco
b
D
a
a
n
E
nge
l)
23
9
cou
l
d c
o
n
t
r
o
l
h
e
r att
itu
de
t
ow
ard the
sam
e
s
itua
t
io
n. Se
s
si
o
n
6
u
se
d
a
sel
f
-
i
nt
eg
ri
t
y
t
echn
i
q
u
e
t
o
li
st
e
n
and
a
sk
pro
voca
tive
q
u
e
st
i
o
ns.
F
i
na
lly
,
session
7
use
d
me
anin
g r
eal
iza
t
i
on
tec
h
n
i
q
u
e
to he
l
p
cl
ien
t
fi
n
di
n
g
m
eani
ng.
F
i
gure
3.
L
og
o
coun
se
li
ng m
o
del a
s
a
l
o
got
h
e
r
a
py de
vel
o
p
m
e
n
t
fo
r
trea
ti
ng l
o
w
sp
irit
ua
l se
l
f-es
t
ee
m
2.
RESEARCH
M
ETH
O
D
We
c
h
o
se
d
es
cr
i
p
ti
ve
m
et
ho
d
[2
9]
a
nd
q
u
a
si-e
x
p
erim
en
t
me
tho
d
w
i
th
a
n
o
n
-eq
u
i
va
le
nt
p
r
e
-tes
t-
pos
t
-
t
e
st
c
o
n
tr
ol gr
oup des
i
g
n
[
30]
to de
scri
be an
d
a
nal
y
ze
f
a
c
t
s
a
nd
c
h
a
ra
ct
e
r
i
s
ti
cs
a
cc
urat
e
l
y
.
T
h
e
c
rite
ri
a
o
f
the
ac
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
su
lts
w
i
l
l
be
d
esc
r
ibe
d
a
s
st
a
tis
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
an
c
e
a
n
d
p
r
ac
ti
c
a
l
s
ig
ni
fi
ca
n
c
e
[29
,
30
].
W
e
cho
s
e
3
0
S
a
t
ya
W
ac
ana
Chri
stia
n
Un
ivers
i
t
y
s
tu
de
nts
as
p
a
r
tic
ip
a
n
ts,
15
ind
i
vi
dua
l
s
w
e
r
e
in
a
n
e
xper
i
m
e
nta
l
gro
up
a
n
d
15
i
nd
i
v
i
d
ual
s
w
e
r
e
i
n
a
c
o
n
tro
l
g
rou
p
.
The
a
u
th
ors
e
n
g
a
g
ed
i
n col
l
a
bora
t
i
o
n thr
oug
h
a part
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
w
ith
t
hre
e
g
u
i
danc
e
an
d
c
o
u
n
se
lin
g
e
x
perts
as
w
e
ll
a
s
t
w
o
c
ou
ns
e
l
i
ng
p
r
acti
tio
ne
rs
i
n
mode
l
v
a
l
i
da
ti
on
tes
t
.
The
re
se
ar
ch
w
ill
co
nd
uc
t
i
n
t
e
r
v
iew
s
,
obs
er
v
a
t
i
o
n
s,
que
sti
o
nna
i
re
s,
a
nd
f
ocu
s
g
ro
up
disc
uss
i
o
n
s
(
F
G
D
)
t
o
gat
h
er
q
ua
l
i
ta
t
i
ve
a
n
d
qua
n
t
i
t
a
t
i
v
e
da
t
a
.
We
u
se
i
n
t
er
v
i
e
w
s
to
o
b
ta
i
n
a
g
ener
a
l
ove
rv
iew
o
f
t
he
p
ro
blem
s.
Q
u
est
i
onna
ires w
ere
distr
i
b
u
t
e
d
u
s
i
ng a sem
a
nt
ic d
iffere
nti
a
l s
c
a
l
e
,
b
i
po
lar
c
h
ara
c
t
e
ri
st
i
c
s
(t
wo
o
pp
osing
pol
e
end
s
,
neg
a
t
i
v
e
-
pos
it
ive
)
w
ith
a
r
a
nge
o
f
0
–
1
0
.
A
n
o
b
s
erva
tio
n
w
as
a
n
e
x
a
m
ina
t
i
o
n
proc
ess
t
o
w
a
r
d
s
a
rese
arc
h
s
ubje
c
t
an
d
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
ed
i
n
a
struc
t
ur
ed
m
anner
[3
1
]
.
The
goa
l
o
f
F
G
D
w
as
t
o
d
i
sc
uss
a
nd
c
a
r
r
y
o
n
a
dia
l
og
t
o
g
e
t
he
r,
t
o
pro
duce
a
p
i
ec
e
o
f
i
n
f
orm
a
ti
on
d
i
r
ec
tl
y
fro
m
vari
o
u
s
v
i
ew
s
[3
1].
Q
u
es
ti
onna
i
r
e
s
w
ere
dep
l
oye
d
to
g
a
t
he
r
s
t
at
is
tica
l
s
ign
i
fica
nce
d
a
ta.
Inter
v
i
e
w
s
,
o
bs
er
vat
i
o
n
s
,
and
F
G
D
w
e
re
d
ep
l
oye
d
t
o
g
a
t
her
p
r
a
c
ti
ca
l
si
gni
fi
ca
n
c
e
dat
a
.
D
a
ta
g
a
t
he
re
d
in
t
his
rese
arc
h
w
ere
qua
li
ta
t
i
ve
a
n
d
q
ua
n
t
i
t
ati
v
e
data
.
Qu
a
l
i
t
a
t
ive
da
t
a
w
er
e
used
i
n
no
n-sta
t
i
s
tica
l
a
na
lys
i
s
t
o
t
es
t
t
h
e
fe
asi
b
il
i
t
y
of
t
he
l
o
g
o
c
o
u
n
se
l
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l.
Q
ua
n
tita
t
i
v
e
da
ta
w
er
e
use
d
i
n
st
a
t
i
s
t
i
ca
l
ana
l
ys
is
t
o
te
st
t
he
i
nstr
u
m
en
t
sc
ale
i
n
d
eve
l
op
m
e
n
t
pr
o
b
le
ms
a
nd
to
m
ea
su
r
e
t
he
i
m
p
ac
t
of
t
he
mode
l.
T
he
t
e
c
hn
i
que
s
to
a
n
a
lyze
t
he
i
ns
trume
n
t
sc
a
l
e
a
n
d
t
h
e
u
sefu
lne
ss
of
t
h
e
m
od
e
l
w
ere
v
a
l
i
di
t
y
a
nd
relia
bi
l
ity
t
es
ts,
norm
a
li
t
y
a
n
d
h
omo
g
e
n
e
i
ty
t
es
ts,
aver
a
g
e
dif
fer
e
n
t
i
a
l
tes
t
s,
a
n
d
e
mpha
s
i
s
of
a
vera
ge
di
ffe
re
nt
ia
l tes
t
s.
3.
RESULT
S
A
N
D
DISCU
SSIO
N
F
r
om
t
he
que
sti
o
nna
ire
s
d
is
t
r
i
b
u
t
ed
t
o
the
pa
rt
ici
p
a
n
t
s
t
o
me
as
ure
low
sp
iritua
l
s
el
f-
esteem
i
n
3
0
stude
n
t
p
art
i
ci
pan
t
s w
i
th 5
1
v
a
lida
t
e
d
que
st
i
on i
t
em
s.
w
e obta
i
ned
fo
llow
i
ng
resu
lts.
N
o
r
m
a
l
it
y
tes
t
s
h
o
w
e
d
tha
t
a
ll
da
t
a
w
er
e
norm
a
l
l
y
d
i
s
t
ri
bu
t
e
d
f
or
e
x
p
e
r
ime
n
t
a
n
d
c
o
ntr
o
l
gr
ou
p,
in
dic
a
t
e
d by a
l
l t
h
e sig
n
i
f
ica
n
t
va
lue
s
be
i
n
g
bi
g
ger t
h
a
n
0.
05,
w
he
ther for t
he
K
o
lm
ogor
o
v
-Sm
i
rn
ov
te
s
t
or
the
Sh
a
p
iro-W
i
lk
test
,
so
t
hat
Ho
w
as
a
cc
ep
t
e
d
a
n
d
H
1
w
a
s
r
e
j
e
c
t
e
d
,
w
h
i
c
h
m
e
a
n
s
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
d
a
t
a
w
a
s
norm
a
l.
H
om
o
g
ene
i
ty
t
e
s
t
(see
A
ppe
n
d
i
x
)
show
e
d
t
ha
t
a
l
l
data
w
e
r
e
h
omoge
n
o
u
s
f
or
e
x
p
e
r
ime
n
t
a
nd
c
ontro
l
gro
up,
i
nd
ica
t
e
d
b
y
a
si
gn
ific
a
n
t
va
lue
(
Le
vene
S
i
g
)
be
i
ng
bi
g
g
er
t
ha
n
0.0
5
,
so
t
hat
Ho
w
as
a
cce
pt
e
d
a
nd
H
1
w
a
s
rejec
t
ed, w
hic
h
m
ea
ns the
d
ata ha
s the
sa
me va
r
iance
or
hom
oge
nou
s.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
SSN: 2252-
8822
IJERE
V
ol
.
7,
N
o.
3,
S
eptem
b
er
20
18 :
2
3
6
– 243
24
0
A
further
sta
t
ist
i
cal
t
e
s
t
w
a
s
c
ond
uc
t
e
d
b
y
l
oo
k
i
ng
at
t
he
a
ver
age
pre-te
st
a
n
d
p
os
t-tes
t
r
esul
ts
a
nd
com
p
ari
ng
t
h
e
two
a
v
er
ages
u
sing
a
t-
t
e
st.
Avera
g
e
of
p
re
t
e
st
a
n
d
p
o
s
t
t
e
s
t
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
c
o
m
e
t
h
e
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
w
h
et
her
t
h
e
a
p
proa
c
h
o
f
log
o
c
ou
nse
l
in
g
m
o
del
c
o
u
l
d
impr
ove
l
ow
s
p
i
ri
t
u
al
s
el
f
-
est
e
e
m
p
rob
l
em.
Th
e
r
e
sul
t
s
a
r
e
s
h
o
w
n
i
n
Ta
b
l
e
1
.
Ta
ble
1.
A
ver
a
ge
P
re-test a
n
d
P
o
st-test Re
su
lt
s
for
Exper
i
m
e
nt
a
n
d C
o
nt
r
o
l
G
r
oup
N
o
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
ons
and
D
e
ve
l
opm
e
n
t
Sourc
e
Da
t
a
A
ve
r
a
g
e
(Me
a
n
)
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
De
via
t
i
o
n
N -
G
a
in
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
P
re
-
t
e
s
t
34.
15
4
.
5
1
0.
43
1
S
e
lf-Awa
re
n
e
ss
Post-te
s
t
83.
70
2
.
4
8
C
ontr
o
l
Pre
-
te
st
42.
67
4
.
8
5
0.
03
Post-te
s
t
46.
11
5
.
9
7
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
P
re
-
t
e
s
t
32.
07
3
.
6
6
0.
44
2
S
e
lf-
A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
P
ost-te
st
84.
37
1
.
4
2
C
ontr
o
l
Pre
-
te
st
43.
03
6
.
3
6
0.
06
Post-te
s
t
49.
93
4
.
2
9
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
P
re
-
t
e
s
t
30.
67
4
.
9
5
0.
45
3
Se
lf-
A
sse
rti
v
e
n
e
s
s
P
ost-te
st
85.
00
2
.
9
0
C
ontr
o
l
Pre
-
te
st
45.
17
6
.
0
1
-
2
.
3
8
Post-te
s
t
44.
92
4
.
2
6
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
P
re
-
t
e
s
t
32.
38
3
.
1
2
0.
43
4
L
i
fe
Purpose
P
ost-te
st
82.
76
1
.
8
2
C
ontr
o
l
Pre
-
te
st
42.
28
6
.
1
9
0.
02
Post-te
s
t
44.
00
6
.
4
2
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
P
re
-
t
e
s
t
32.
08
4
.
6
2
0.
42
5
Se
lf
-Re
s
ponsibili
ty
Post-te
s
t
82.
17
1
.
6
2
C
ontr
o
l
Pre
-
te
st
45.
62
3
.
5
1
0.
03
Post-te
s
t
48.
67
6
.
5
8
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
P
re
-
t
e
s
t
34.
26
4
.
0
4
0.
42
6
Se
lf-
I
nte
g
r
i
t
y
Post-te
s
t
82.
33
1
.
4
5
C
ontr
o
l
Pre
-
te
st
43.
23
2
.
3
9
0.
07
Post-te
s
t
50.
20
3
.
5
4
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
P
re
-
t
e
s
t
166.
07
23.
59
0
.
7
5
7
Me
a
n
i
n
g
of
L
ife
P
ost-te
st
452.
27
14.
89
C
ontr
o
l
Pre
-
te
st
205.
93
18.
60
0
.
1
5
Post-te
s
t
251.
80
12.
71
Tab
l
e
1
sh
ow
e
d
a
s
i
g
nif
i
c
a
n
t
i
nc
rea
s
e
i
n
t
h
e
a
vera
ge
p
re-
t
e
s
t
a
nd
pos
t
-
t
e
s
t
r
e
s
ul
ts
o
f
the
e
xpe
r
i
m
e
nt
gro
up
re
la
ted
t
o
t
he
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
o
f
low
sp
iri
t
ua
l
sel
f
-e
st
e
e
m
,
w
h
i
l
e
the
r
e
wasn’t
a
ny
sig
n
i
fica
n
t
i
nc
rea
s
e
in
t
he
ave
r
age
pre
-
test
a
nd
post-
te
st
r
esu
l
ts
o
f
t
h
e
co
n
t
ro
l
gro
up.
T
h
i
s
r
esu
l
t
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
t
e
c
hni
que
a
nd
appr
oa
ch
u
se
d
i
n
l
ogo
c
o
uns
el
i
ng
mo
d
e
l
co
ul
d
im
p
r
ove
t
he
l
ow
s
p
iri
t
ua
l
se
l
f
-
e
steem
p
rob
l
em
i
n
col
l
e
g
e
stude
n
t
s.
We
u
se
d
diffe
r
e
n
t
i
a
l
t
es
t
o
f
a
vera
ges
t
o
c
om
par
e
w
hether
t
her
e
was
a
d
i
ffe
r
enc
e
b
etw
e
e
n
c
o
n
tro
l
gro
up
a
nd
e
x
p
e
rim
e
nt
g
r
o
u
p
.
The
h
y
p
o
t
he
s
e
s
ar
e
H
0
:
Th
ere
i
s
n
o
d
i
f
f
eren
c
e
o
f
l
o
w
s
pi
ri
tu
al
s
el
f-e
st
e
e
m
deve
l
opm
en
t
dime
nsi
o
n
be
t
w
ee
n
stu
d
e
n
t
s
f
o
l
low
i
n
g
t
he
l
o
g
o
c
o
uns
e
l
in
g
in
t
e
rv
e
n
ti
on
w
it
h
stu
d
e
n
t
s
n
ot
fo
l
l
ow
i
n
g
t
h
e
pro
g
ra
m,
a
nd
H
1
:
There
is
a
d
iffe
renc
e
of
l
ow
s
p
i
ri
tua
l
s
e
l
f-es
tee
m
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
me
n
t
d
i
me
nsio
n
betw
ee
n
s
t
u
d
e
n
ts
f
ol
l
o
w
i
ng
t
h
e
l
ogo
c
o
u
n
s
e
l
i
n
g
in
terve
n
ti
on
w
i
t
h
stud
e
n
t
s
n
ot
f
oll
o
win
g
th
e
p
r
og
ra
m.
T
e
s
t
i
n
g
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
i
s
i
f
α
<
(
si
g
val
u
e)
t
he
n
H
0
w
i
l
l
b
e
a
c
c
e
p
t
e
d
a
n
d
i
f
α
>
(
si
g
val
u
e)
t
he
n
H
1
w
il
l
be
a
cce
pte
d
.
The
resul
t
s
ar
e show
n
i
n
T
a
b
l
e
2
.
Tabl
e 2
.
R
e
c
a
pi
tul
a
tion
o
f
Di
ff
ere
n
ti
al
Tes
t
R
e
su
lt
s of
Pre
-
t
e
s
t
an
d
Po
s
t
-t
est
Av
e
r
ag
e of
E
x
p
er
i
m
en
t a
n
d
Co
nt
rol
Gro
u
p
N
o
D
ime
n
sio
n
s a
n
d
D
e
ve
l
opm
e
n
t
G
r
ou
p
Mea
n
d
f
t c
o
u
n
t
t
t
a
bl
e
S
i
g
(2
-
t
a
i
l
e
d)
1
S
e
lf-Awa
r
e
n
e
ss
P
re
-post
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
49.
557
8
26.
645
2
.
306
0
.
000
Pre
-
post
C
ontr
o
l
-
3
.
4
4
4
-
1.
14
4
2.
306
0
.
286
2
S
e
lf-A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
Pre
-
post
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
52.
300
8
45.
892
2
.
306
0
.
000
Pre
-
post
C
ontr
o
l
-
6
.
8
9
1
-
2.
26
2
2.
306
0
.
054
3
Se
lf-
A
sse
rti
v
e
n
e
s
s
Pre
-
post
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
54.
333
7
24.
608
2
.
365
0
.
000
Pre
-
post
C
ontr
o
l
0.
249
0.
107
2
.
365
0
.
917
4
L
i
fe
Purpose
Pre
-
post
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
50.
384
6
37.
157
2
.
447
0
.
000
Pre
-
post
C
ontr
o
l
-
1
.
7
1
4
0
.
407
2
.
447
0
.
698
5
Se
lf
-Re
s
ponsibili
ty
P
re
-post
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
50.
083
7
23.
782
2
.
365
0
.
000
Pre
-
post
C
ontr
o
l
-
3
.
0
4
3
-
1.
13
3
2.
365
0
.
295
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
IJERE
I
S
S
N
:
2252-
88
22
L
ogo C
o
unse
l
i
ng f
o
r L
o
w
S
p
i
ri
tu
a
l
Sel
f
-Es
t
e
e
m
Am
ong C
o
lle
ge S
t
ude
n
t
s (
J
aco
b
D
a
a
n
E
nge
l)
24
1
N
o
D
ime
n
sio
n
s a
n
d
D
e
ve
l
opm
e
n
t
G
r
ou
p
Mea
n
d
f
t c
o
u
n
t
t
t
a
bl
e
S
i
g
(2
-
t
a
i
l
e
d)
6
Se
lf-
I
nte
g
r
i
t
y
P
re
-post
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
48.
069
9
33.
906
2
.
262
0
.
000
Pre
-
post
C
ontr
o
l
-
6
.
9
6
8
-
4.
96
2
2.
262
0
.
051
7
Me
a
n
i
n
g
of
L
ife
Pre
-
post
E
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
Pre
-
post
C
ontr
o
l
259.
00
0
-
4
5
.
60
0
14
43.
851
-
8
.5
46
2.
144
2.
144
0.
000
0.
051
Tabl
e
2
re
v
eale
d
t
h
e
v
alu
e
o
f
t
c
o
unt
>
t
table
o
r
ca
n
be
s
een
t
ha
t
the
val
u
e
of
α
=
0
.05
>
sig
(0.
0
0
0
)
,
wh
i
c
h
mean
s
th
at
H
1
i
s
ac
c
e
pt
ed
a
nd
H
0
i
s
r
e
ject
e
d
.
T
h
is
i
nd
ica
t
ed
t
ha
t
l
o
g
o
c
o
u
n
s
el
i
n
g
m
ode
l
c
o
ul
d
i
m
p
rove
low
sp
iri
t
ua
l
se
lf-e
s
t
e
e
m
prob
l
e
m
s
in
col
l
e
g
e
st
ude
n
t
s.
3.1.
D
i
s
c
u
ssio
n
Thro
ug
h
t
h
e
l
o
g
o
c
ou
nse
l
i
n
g
i
n
t
e
rve
n
t
i
on
pr
o
g
ram
and
sta
tis
t
i
c
a
l
t
e
st
r
e
s
u
lts,
t
h
e
i
m
p
r
ove
me
nt
o
f
low
sp
iri
t
ua
l
se
lf-e
s
t
e
e
m
prob
l
e
m
s
w
ere desc
ribe
d a
nd ana
l
yz
ed
as fol
low
s
.
a.
S
elf-Aware
ne
ss
Thr
o
u
g
h
the
s
e
lf-ex
p
l
ora
t
i
o
n
tec
hni
que,
th
er
e
w
a
s
a
n
i
n
c
re
ase
i
n
self
-awareness
from
a
pre-test
ave
r
age
of 34.
15
% to bec
om
e
83.7
0
%
in t
h
e
pos
t
-
t
e
st
i
n
T
a
ble
1
a
nd
s
i
m
ilar
l
y i
n
T
a
b
l
e
2,
a
s
the v
a
l
ue
o
f t
count
(26.645
)
>
t
table
(2.
306)
f
o
r
s
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
.
F
o
r
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
,
t
h
e
cl
ie
nt
s
w
e
re
a
ble
t
o
e
m
p
ow
er
them
se
lves
t
hr
oug
h
a
n
a
tt
it
u
d
e
c
h
an
ge
a
nd
m
ora
l
s
up
p
o
rt.
C
h
a
nge
s
i
n
a
tt
i
t
u
d
e
va
l
u
es
w
as
s
ee
n
wh
en
t
he
clie
n
t
s
c
a
n
s
ha
r
e
w
it
h
e
a
c
h
o
t
h
e
r
,
pr
ov
i
d
e
s
u
p
p
o
rt,
an
d
gi
ve
m
o
tiva
t
io
n,
s
o
the
o
t
her
c
lie
n
t
s
ca
n
ar
i
s
e
fr
om
bad
c
o
nd
i
tio
ns
a
nd
l
o
o
k
a
t
the
fu
ture
e
n
t
h
u
s
i
astic
a
l
l
y
.
S
e
l
f-ex
pl
o
r
at
ion
t
e
c
hni
qu
e
h
a
d
b
e
en
r
e
s
e
a
rc
hed
fo
r
incre
a
s
i
ng
t
h
e se
l
f-aw
a
rene
ss
o
f
cl
ie
nts
w
i
th
t
erm
i
na
l c
a
nce
r
[
32
]
.
b. S
elf-A
cceptan
c
e
Thr
o
u
g
h
t
h
e
se
lf-a
cce
p
t
a
n
ce
t
e
c
hni
que
i
n
th
e
pro
g
ra
m,
t
he
re
w
as
a
n
in
c
r
ea
se
i
n
sel
f-a
cce
p
t
an
ce
s
een
from
a
ve
rage
p
re-
t
e
s
t
sc
ore
of
3
2.
07%
t
o
be
com
e
84.
37%
i
n
t
h
e
p
o
s
t
-
t
e
s
t
a
s
s
h
o
w
n
i
n
T
a
b
l
e
1
a
n
d
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
l
y
i
n
T
a
b
le
2
t
h
e
v
a
l
u
e
o
f
t
cou
n
t
(
45.892)
>
t
table
(
2
.
3
06)
f
or
s
t
a
tist
i
ca
l
sign
ifica
n
ce.
F
or
p
ra
ct
i
c
al
s
i
g
ni
fica
nce,
c
ha
n
ge
o
f
beha
v
i
or
w
as
s
een
w
he
n
t
h
e
r
e
w
a
s
a
big
m
i
r
r
or
i
n
fron
t
of
t
he
c
l
i
e
n
t
s
,
t
h
e
y
c
o
u
l
d
r
e
v
e
a
l
t
h
e
i
r
f
e
e
l
i
n
g
s
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
ei
r
st
re
ngt
hs
a
n
d
we
a
k
n
e
sses.
Th
e
cl
i
e
nt
s
e
v
en
a
sk
ed
t
h
e
mse
l
v
es
a
ga
in
a
nd
a
g
a
i
n
a
b
o
u
t
the
i
r
fea
r
a
n
d
t
he
n
h
a
d
t
h
e
p
o
w
e
r
t
o
c
o
n
q
u
e
r
i
t
.
T
h
e
c
l
i
e
n
t
s
c
o
u
l
d
a
c
c
e
p
t
s
o
m
e
t
h
i
n
g
t
he
y
di
sl
ike
ab
ou
t
t
h
em
sel
v
es.
Th
e
r
e
sul
t
s
are
in
lin
e
w
i
t
h
r
e
s
e
a
rc
h
i
n
m
ilitar
y
p
ers
o
n
n
el
s
u
ffe
r
i
n
g
f
rom
PTS
D
r
egardi
ng
the
i
r
sel
f-a
cce
pt
a
n
ce
[
3
3
]
an
d
in dr
ug
ad
d
i
cts
[34].
c.
S
elf-Asse
rtiven
ess
Th
rou
g
h
th
e
sel
f-d
et
a
c
h
m
ent
t
e
chn
i
qu
e
,
t
h
e
re
w
as
a
n
i
n
cre
a
se
i
n
s
e
l
f
-
as
sert
i
v
en
ess
f
r
om
a
p
re
-t
est
ave
r
age
of
3
0.67
%
t
o
b
ec
om
e
85.
0
0
%
i
n
t
h
e
pos
t-tes
t
i
n
T
a
ble
1
an
d
as
i
n
Tab
l
e
2
t
h
e
val
u
e
of
t
cou
n
t
(24.608)
>
t
ta
b
l
e
(
2
.3
6
5
)
f
o
r
s
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
.
F
o
r
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
,
t
h
e
cli
e
nt
s
were
a
b
l
e
t
o
b
eh
a
v
e
a
n
d
ac
t
b
a
sed
on
t
he
s
ta
n
d
a
r
ds,
a
s
p
i
ra
ti
ons,
g
o
al
s,
o
r
va
lu
e
s
o
f
othe
r
peo
p
le
.
Thi
s
w
a
s
c
o
n
fi
rmed
w
h
e
n
t
h
ey
c
oul
d
i
m
p
r
ov
e
them
se
lves
b
y
th
ink
i
ng
i
n
a
n
e
w
pe
rspec
t
i
v
e
.
S
elf-detac
hme
n
t
ha
d
bee
n
u
sed
to
i
ncrease
self
-ass
ertive
n
ess
in
a
fri
c
a
n
a
me
ri
ca
n
ch
i
l
d
r
en
[
35].
d. Life
Purpose
Thr
o
u
g
h
se
l
f
-
t
r
a
nsce
nde
nce
te
chn
i
qu
e
in
t
he
p
ro
gr
am
,
there
w
a
s
a
n
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
n
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
o
f
l
i
f
e
f
r
o
m
a
pre-
t
e
s
t
a
ver
a
ge
o
f
3
2
.
3
8%
t
o
bec
o
m
e
8
2
.
76%
i
n
t
h
e
po
st-tes
t
i
n
T
a
b
le
1
a
n
d
s
im
ila
r
l
y
f
ound
i
n
Tab
l
e
2
wher
e
the
va
lu
e
of
t
count
(
37.157
)
>
t
table
(2
.
4
4
7
)
f
o
r
s
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
.
F
o
r
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
,
t
h
e
cl
i
e
nt
s
w
e
r
e
a
ble
to
d
eve
l
op
a
se
t
of
s
e
l
f-
com
m
i
t
me
nt
v
a
l
ue
s
b
y
d
oi
ng
v
ari
o
us
r
ea
l
act
iv
i
t
i
e
s
to
r
eac
h
th
e
i
r
life
pur
pose.
T
his
w
a
s
prove
n
from
a
w
a
re
ness
t
o
d
o
ac
ti
vi
ties
based
on
t
h
e
i
r
i
n
tere
s
t
s,
n
o
t
j
ust
se
par
a
t
e
them
se
lves
f
r
o
m
interna
l
a
n
d
e
x
t
e
rna
l
c
o
n
d
iti
o
n
s,
b
u
t
h
a
v
e
the
a
b
ili
ty
t
o
rea
c
h
a
nd
fi
nd
m
eanin
g
o
u
t
s
ide
o
f
t
h
e
m
s
e
l
v
e
s
. By i
n
v
o
lvi
n
g
th
ems
e
l
v
e
s
i
n
act
iv
i
t
i
e
s t
h
a
t
e
voke
sp
i
r
i
t
i
n
l
o
v
e
a
nd a
jo
b, or
fa
cin
g
a
s
it
u
a
tio
n
w
i
th
the
pro
p
er
a
t
t
i
t
u
de,
cou
n
se
l
i
ng
ca
n
ex
te
n
d
them
se
l
v
es
i
n
fac
i
n
g
dys
func
t
i
o
n
a
nd
c
o
mpl
i
ca
te
d
be
hav
i
or
patterns,
hyp
er-inten
tion,
and
hyper-ref
l
exion.
T
hese
r
esults
a
r
e
i
n
l
i
ne
w
it
h
resea
r
ch
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
ed
i
n
stre
ng
t
h
-
base
d
cou
n
se
li
ng t
h
a
t
self-
transce
nde
nce
ab
l
e
to hel
p
t
he
cl
i
en
t t
o
d
isco
ve
r his or
her
purpos
e
of l
ife
[33
]
.
e.
S
elf-R
e
sponsib
ility
Thr
o
u
g
h
t
h
e
be
ha
v
i
or
m
od
i
f
ica
t
io
n
tec
h
nique
i
n
t
h
e
pr
ogram
,
the
re
w
as
a
n
i
n
cre
a
se
i
n
s
e
lf
-
respo
n
s
i
b
ili
t
y
f
r
o
m
a
pre
-
test
a
vera
ge
o
f
3
2
.08
%
t
o
bec
o
me
82.
1
7
%
in
t
h
e
p
o
s
t-tes
t
i
n
T
a
ble
1
an
d
the
r
e
s
ul
t
s
in
T
a
b
le
2
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
va
lue
of
t
cou
n
t
(23.782)
>
t
t
a
bl
e
(
2
.
3
65
)
f
or
s
tat
i
s
tica
l
s
i
g
n
i
ficanc
e
.
For
pra
c
tic
al
s
ig
nific
a
nce
,
com
m
itm
en
t
o
f
c
lie
nts
t
o
h
a
v
e
r
e
spo
n
si
ble
hus
ba
nds
a
n
d
fo
r
t
h
em
sel
v
e
s
t
o
be
com
e
r
esp
ons
ible
w
iv
es
a
nd
mo
t
h
ers
in
t
ak
i
n
g
c
a
r
e
o
f
c
hi
l
d
re
n
an
d
hu
sb
an
ds,
wa
s
an
a
t
t
it
ud
e
va
lue
.
C
ha
n
g
in
g
a
n
a
tti
tu
de
v
a
l
ue
o
c
c
urs
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
SSN: 2252-
8822
IJERE
V
ol
.
7,
N
o.
3,
S
eptem
b
er
20
18 :
2
3
6
– 243
24
2
when
c
l
i
en
ts
f
elt
use
f
ul
f
or
o
t
h
er
p
e
o
ple
a
nd
t
h
em
sel
v
es
b
y
th
i
n
k
i
ng
p
o
s
iti
vel
y
,
be
in
g
h
o
n
es
t,
a
nd
ha
vi
ng
p
r
op
e
r
a
t
tit
ud
e
s
.
R
e
spo
n
s
i
b
ilit
y
wa
s
re
l
a
t
e
d
wi
th
s
el
f-c
on
t
r
o
l
towa
rds
c
h
o
i
ce
s
an
d
act
i
o
n
s
i
n
re
ach
i
ng
a
li
fe
pur
pose,
h
a
v
i
n
g
ha
pp
i
n
e
ss,
a
nd
va
l
u
es.
The
s
e
re
sul
t
s
a
r
e
in
l
in
e
w
i
th
r
ese
a
rc
h
a
b
o
u
t
pa
ssi
on
a
c
tiv
it
i
e
s
a
nd
t
h
e
sustaina
bility of
i
t
s
uppor
ted
by self-responsibi
lity through b
eha
v
i
o
r
m
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
on [3
6].
f.
S
elf-Integri
t
y
Thr
o
u
g
h
th
e
s
e
lf-i
nte
g
r
ity
t
e
c
hn
i
que
i
n
the
progra
m
,
ther
e
w
a
s
a
n
i
ncre
ase
in
s
el
f-i
n
te
gri
t
y
from
a
pre-
t
e
st
a
ver
a
g
e
o
f
34.2
6
%
to
b
ecom
e
8
2.33
%
in
t
he
p
o
s
t-t
e
st
i
n
Ta
ble
1
and
a
l
s
o
s
e
en
i
n
Ta
b
l
e
5
wi
th
t
h
e
val
u
e
of
t
c
o
unt
(
33.906)
>
t
table
(2.262)
f
or
s
t
a
t
i
s
t
ic
al
s
i
g
n
i
fica
nc
e.
T
he
c
lie
n
t
s
co
u
l
d
a
c
c
e
ss
t
h
eir
a
bi
l
ities
a
n
d
de
ve
lo
p
the
i
r
sel
f
-c
o
n
fi
dence
to
d
isc
o
ver
m
e
a
n
ing
a
nd
t
h
eir
li
fe
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
.
T
he
c
lie
nt
s
sh
ow
ed
t
he
ir
c
o
g
n
i
t
i
ve
a
b
i
l
i
tie
s,
us
i
n
g
l
o
gi
c
to
r
eve
a
l
t
h
e
i
r
a
t
t
i
t
u
d
e
i
n
te
gr
ity.
The
c
lie
n
t
s
rea
l
i
z
e
d
t
h
e
y
w
e
r
e
d
i
s
t
a
n
t
f
r
o
m
G
o
d
,
h
a
d
b
a
d
rela
tio
ns
hips
w
i
t
h
o
t
her
s
,
an
d
w
e
re
g
ratefu
l
to
r
eturn
t
o
t
he
r
ight
p
a
t
h
a
nd
be
c
l
o
se
r
to
G
od
a
s
w
ell
as
h
a
v
e
harm
on
io
us
r
e
l
at
ion
s
h
i
ps
w
it
h
o
t
h
e
rs,
e
s
pe
cial
l
y
t
he
i
r
f
a
m
i
lie
s
a
n
d
c
l
o
s
e
f
r
i
e
n
d
s
.
T
h
e
s
e
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
a
r
e
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
wi
t
h
f
ind
i
ng
s of
g
eri
a
t
r
i
c
l
ogot
h
e
rap
y
fo
r l
a
t
e
-l
i
f
e
d
e
p
r
e
s
si
on
[
37].
g
.
M
e
a
ni
n
g
o
f
Li
fe
Thr
o
u
g
h
a
m
e
a
n
in
g
orie
n
t
a
tion
t
e
c
h
n
i
que
i
n
t
h
e
pr
ogram
,
the
m
e
a
n
i
ng
of
l
i
f
e
dim
e
ns
i
on
i
n
cre
a
sed
f
r
o
m
a
p
re
-t
est
av
e
r
ag
e
o
f
16
6.
07
to
b
ecom
e
4
5
2
.
2
7
i
n
t
h
e
p
o
s
t-te
st,
as
r
e
v
e
a
le
d
i
n
T
a
b
l
e
1
a
n
d
sim
i
l
a
r
l
y
in
Tab
l
e
5
the
va
lue
o
f
t
c
o
unt
(
43
.
8
5
1
)
>
t
ta
b
l
e
(2.144)
f
or
s
tat
i
st
ica
l
s
ig
n
i
fica
nc
e.
F
or
p
rac
t
ic
a
l
s
ign
i
fica
nce
,
t
he
c
lie
n
t
s
h
a
d
l
earn
e
d
how
t
o
res
p
ect
l
i
f
e
,
r
e
s
p
e
ct
ed
t
h
e
i
r
a
bi
lit
i
e
s
a
s
a
b
les
s
in
g,
a
nd
f
r
e
e
d
t
he
ms
elve
s
fr
om
unf
ulf
i
l
l
e
d
nee
d
s.
T
he
re
w
as
pos
iti
ve
s
elf-e
s
t
e
em
,
i
n
t
e
r
m
s
o
f
s
e
l
f
-
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
,
i
ndiv
i
dual
ac
t
i
vities,
a
nd
self-eval
u
ati
o
n
evaluated
as
s
how
ing
positive
improvement
s
throu
g
h
a
p
o
sitive
w
ay
o
f
thi
nki
n
g
t
o
w
a
r
ds
t
hem
s
el
ve
s
a
n
d
other
peopl
e
.
T
hese
r
esul
ts
a
re
i
n
l
i
ne
w
ith
r
esearc
h
c
o
nducted
i
n
c
a
ncer
s
u
r
vivo
r
s
t
hat
mea
n
i
ng
of
life
c
a
n
be
a
si
gnifi
c
a
nt
f
actor fo
r
physical and
s
o
c
i
a
l
fun
c
t
i
on
i
ng [3
8].
4.
CONCL
U
S
ION
Th
e
l
o
w
sp
i
r
i
t
u
al
s
elf
-
es
t
eem
p
ro
bl
e
m
s
ha
p
p
e
ni
ng
a
mon
g
c
o
l
l
e
g
e
st
ud
ent
s
w
e
r
e
c
a
u
s
e
d
b
y
t
h
ei
r
ina
b
ili
t
y
t
o kno
w
the
i
r purp
o
se
a
nd
m
e
a
n
i
n
g of li
f
e
.
The pur
pos
e
a
n
d
m
ean
in
g of li
f
e ac
t
u
a
lly ca
n
be fo
u
nd i
n
the
i
r
dai
l
y
life,
b
ut
p
h
y
s
i
ca
l
,
s
oc
i
a
l
,
a
nd
s
e
x
ua
l
pre
ssu
r
e
m
a
k
e
s
i
t
d
i
ffi
cu
lt
.
Log
o
co
un
selin
g
w
as
d
ev
elop
e
d
t
o
hel
p
t
he
c
lie
nt
s
t
o
g
a
i
n
he
a
l
th
y
sel
f
-
e
stee
m
and
also
d
i
s
co
ver
t
h
ei
r
p
u
r
po
se
a
nd
m
ea
n
i
ng
o
f
l
i
f
e
.
Logo
c
o
un
seli
ng
c
onsi
s
t
s
o
f
s
e
v
e
n
s
e
ss
io
ns
t
o
ov
erc
o
me
t
h
e
c
au
sal
f
a
c
t
o
r
s
of
l
ow
s
pir
itua
l
s
elf-
es
teem
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
and
stre
ng
the
n
t
he
s
ix
p
illars
o
f se
l
f-es
t
ee
m.
Th
e
st
at
i
s
t
i
cal
s
ig
ni
fi
c
a
n
t
l
eve
l
i
s
high
,
f
r
om
t
h
e
r
e
c
a
p
it
u
l
at
i
o
n
of
a
ver
a
g
e
d
iffe
rent
ia
l
te
st
s
t
h
e
va
l
u
e
of
t
he
v
a
l
ue
o
f
e
xper
i
m
e
nta
l
g
ro
u
p
t
co
unt
(
43.
851)
>
t
table
(2.144)
.
N-
gai
n
o
f
e
xper
i
m
e
nta
l
g
r
o
u
p
(
0.75)
>
N-
g
a
i
n
con
t
ro
l
grou
p
(0.15).
Th
is
r
esults
i
nd
i
c
a
t
ed
t
hat
the
use
o
f
l
o
g
o
c
ounse
lin
g
progra
m
h
a
d
g
i
v
e
n
g
o
od
res
u
l
t
i
n
the a
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
d
yna
mic
beha
v
i
or
c
ha
ng
e
s
.
Th
is
m
ode
l
i
s
r
e
c
om
me
nded
for
co
un
sel
o
rs,
socia
l
w
orker
s
,
a
nd
o
t
h
e
r
r
el
at
ed
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
befor
e
i
mplem
e
nt
i
n
g
t
h
is
m
o
d
e
l
,
the
rele
va
nt
a
g
e
nc
ies
sh
ou
ld
f
o
l
l
ow
a
s
pec
i
a
l
t
ra
i
n
i
n
g
pro
g
ra
m.
O
pera
t
i
o
n
al
t
r
a
i
n
i
ng
gui
d
e
s
h
a
v
e
b
een
d
ev
el
op
ed
b
a
s
ed
o
n
th
e
re
se
arc
h
r
e
s
ul
t
s
.
Further
res
e
arch
i
s
recomm
ended
for
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s
i
n
t
h
e
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
f
i
e
l
d
t
o
b
e
t
t
e
r
e
q
u
i
p
t
h
i
s
m
o
d
e
l
,
e
s
pec
i
a
l
l
y
h
ow
t
o
o
v
e
r
com
e
t
he
b
a
rrier
b
e
t
w
e
en
cou
n
se
l
o
rs a
nd
c
o
lle
ge
st
u
den
t
s v
i
a in
for
m
a
t
i
on te
c
h
no
log
y
[
3
9
]
.
ACKNOW
LEDG
E
MEN
T
S
Th
is r
esea
rch w
a
s sup
por
te
d in p
a
r
t
by
g
ra
nt
s
f
r
o
m
Di
r
e
k
to
ra
t
J
e
n
dera
l
P
e
nd
idi
k
a
n
P
e
r
gurua
n Ti
n
g
g
i
(DIKTI
)
of
Republic
I
ndones
i
a
.
REFE
RENCES
[1]
Ak
ht
e
r
A
. Re
l
ation
s
h
i
p
betw
een S
u
b
s
t
an
c
e
Use
a
nd
S
e
lf
-Estee
m.
Int
J Sci
En
gi
neeeri
n
g
Res
0
13
;
4
:1
–
7
.
[2
]
Bran
den
N. Po
w
er o
f
Self
-
E
st
eem.
Barnes & No
b
le Boo
k
s
;
1
9
9
2
.
[3]
Wh
elan
A
,
H
a
ywo
o
d
P
,
S
cott
G.
L
o
w
s
e
l
f
-
esteem
:
g
ro
up
c
o
g
n
i
ti
ve
b
eh
avio
ur
t
h
e
rapy.
B
r
J L
e
ar
n
Di
sa
b
i
l
20
07
;35
:
1
2
5
–
3
0
.
d
o
i:1
0.
1
1
1
1
/j.
146
8-31
56
.
2
0
0
6
.
00
41
8.
x
.
[4]
Hay
m
an
J
W,
K
u
r
pi
us
S
R,
B
e
f
ort
C,
N
i
c
po
n
M
F
,
H
u
ll-Bl
anks
E
,
S
o
llenb
erger
S
,
e
t
a
l
.
S
p
i
r
itu
a
li
ty
A
m
ong
C
oll
e
ge
F
r
esh
m
en
:
Relati
ons
h
i
ps
t
o
S
e
lf
-Esteem
,
Bo
dy
I
m
a
ge
,
an
d
S
t
ress.
C
ou
ns
V
alu
e
s
2
0
0
7
;5
2:
55–7
0.
do
i:
10.
10
02/j.
2161-0
0
7
X
.
2
00
7.tb0
0
0
87.
x.
[5]
Engel JD. N
ilai
Dasar Logo
K
on
se
ling
.
Y
og
y
a
ka
rta
:
P
T
Ka
n
i
s
i
u
s
;
20
14
.
[6
]
Mc
Ma
n
u
s
F
,
W
a
ite
P
,
S
ha
fr
a
n
R
.
Co
gn
it
iv
e
-
Be
h
a
vior
T
h
e
ra
py
f
or
L
ow
S
elf
-
Es
teem:
A
Case
E
xam
p
l
e
.
Cog
n
Behav
P
r
act
2
009
;1
6:
26
6–7
5
.
doi:
1
0
.
10
16
/
j
.
c
bpra.
2
0
0
8
.
1
2.
0
07.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
IJERE
I
S
S
N
:
2252-
88
22
L
ogo C
o
unse
l
i
ng f
o
r L
o
w
S
p
i
ri
tu
a
l
Sel
f
-Es
t
e
e
m
Am
ong C
o
lle
ge S
t
ude
n
t
s (
J
aco
b
D
a
a
n
E
nge
l)
24
3
[7]
S
o
w
i
sl
o
JF,
Orth
U
.
Does
L
o
w
S
elf
-
E
s
t
eem
P
redi
ct
D
epres
s
ion
a
nd
A
n
x
i
e
ty
?
A
M
e
ta-An
a
ly
sis
o
f
L
on
git
udinal
Stud
i
e
s.
Psychol Bull
2
0
12;13
9:
2
1
3–
40.
doi:
10.
1037
/a00
28
93
1.
[8]
Yo
un
g
S,
C
ashwel
l
C,
S
hch
e
rbako
v
a
J
.
T
h
e
M
o
d
erat
ing
Relatio
nship
o
f
S
p
i
ri
tuality
o
n
Ne
gat
i
ve
L
i
f
e
E
v
ent
s
a
nd
P
s
y
c
hol
ogical
A
d
j
u
s
tm
ent.
C
ouns
V
alu
e
s
2
0
0
0
;
4
5
:
49
.
d
o
i:1
0.
1
002/
j.
2
161
-00
7
X.
2
0
00
.
t
b
0
0
182.
x
.
[9]
Hal
l
P
L,
T
arrier
N
.
T
h
e
co
gn
itive-b
ehav
io
ural
t
reatm
e
n
t
o
f
low
self-es
t
eem
i
n
ps
ycho
ti
c
patien
t
s:
A
p
ilo
t
s
t
udy.
Behav
Res
T
h
er 2
00
3;4
1
:
3
1
7
–
3
2
.
d
o
i
:
1
0
.
10
16/S
0
0
0
5
-
79
67(0
2
)0
00
13-
X.
[10]
C
hat
t
erton
L,
H
all
PL
,
Tarr
i
e
r
N.
C
ogn
itive
therapy
f
o
r
l
o
w
s
e
lf
-es
t
eem
i
n
t
h
e
treat
men
t
o
f
d
e
press
i
o
n
i
n
an
o
l
d
er
adu
l
t
.
Beh
a
v Co
gn
Ps
ychot
her
2
0
0
7
;
3
5
:
365
–9.
doi
:10.
1
017
/S
1
35246
58
07
00
360
8.
[11]
C
ajanding
R
JM
.
The
E
ffectiv
eness
of
a
N
urse-Led
C
ognitive–
Behav
i
oral
T
herap
y
on
th
e
Q
u
al
ity
o
f
Lif
e
,
S
e
lf-
Esteem
a
nd
Mo
od
A
mong
F
ilipi
n
o
Pat
i
ents
L
ivi
n
g
Wi
th
H
ear
t
F
a
i
l
u
re:
a
Ran
domi
zed
C
ontrolled
T
r
ial
.
A
ppl
N
urs
Res
2
0
1
6
;
3
1
:
86
–
9
3.
d
o
i
:1
0
.
1
0
1
6
/j.
ap
nr.
2
01
6
.
0
1
.
002
.
[12
]
F
enn
e
ll
M
J
V
.
Lo
w
S
e
lf
-Est
eem:
A
Cogni
ti
ve
P
erspectiv
e.
B
e
hav
Co
gn
P
s
y
ch
oth
e
r
199
7;
25:1
–25.
do
i:
10.
10
17/S
1352
46
580
00
15
368
.
[13]
S
l
i
f
e
B
D,
W
il
li
a
m
s
RN
.
W
h
a
t
’
s
b
ehind
the
researc
h
?
:
D
i
s
cov
eri
n
g
h
i
d
d
en
a
s
s
ump
t
i
ons
i
n
t
h
e
b
e
h
a
vi
oral
s
cien
ce
s
.
S
a
ge
P
u
b
licati
ons;
19
95
.
[14
]
W
a
i
te
P
,
McM
a
n
u
s
F,
S
haf
r
an
R
.
Co
gn
i
t
i
v
e
be
h
a
vi
our
t
herapy
f
o
r
l
o
w
s
elf
-
es
teem
:
A
p
r
eliminary
ran
dom
i
zed
control
l
ed
t
r
i
al
i
n
a
primary
car
e
setting.
J
B
ehav
T
her
Exp
P
s
ych
i
at
ry
2
01
2;
43:
10
49
–57.
do
i:
10.
10
16/j.
jbtep.
201
2.
04.
006.
[1
5]
J
oh
nse
n
T
J,
F
rib
o
r
g
O.
T
he
E
ffe
c
t
s
o
f
C
og
ni
t
i
v
e
B
e
h
a
v
io
ra
l
T
h
e
rapy as
a
n
A
n
ti
-Dep
ress
ive Treatm
e
n
t
i
s
F
a
lling
:
A
M
e
ta-An
a
ly
si
s.
P
s
y
ch
ol
B
ull
2
0
1
5
;
142
:2
90.
doi:10
.
10
37
/b
u
l
000
0
0
5
0.
[16
]
K
am
ya
H
A
.
H
a
r
d
i
n
e
ss
a
nd
s
p
i
ritu
al
w
ell
-
bein
g
am
ong
s
ocial
work
s
t
uden
t
s.
J
S
oc
W
ork
E
duc
2
0
0
0
;
36
:2
31
–4
0
.
do
i:
10.
10
80/
10
4
3
77
97.
199
8.
10778
93
7.
[17
]
H
o
l
l
o
way
M.
S
piritu
a
l
it
y.
I
nt
E
ncycl
S
o
c
Behav
S
c
i
201
5
;
23
:2
85–90
.
d
o
i
:10.
1
016/B9
78
-0-08
-
09
7
0
86-8
.
28
09
3-8
.
[18]
P
ederse
n DM. C
haracteri
s
t
i
cs rel
at
ed t
o centra
lity of
spir
it
ua
l
se
lf
-
i
dentity.
Percept
Mot Skil
l
s
199
8
;
87:1359–68.
[1
9]
F
ran
k
l VE
. Man
’
s
S
earch
f
or
M
ean
ing
.
S
i
m
o
n
a
nd
Sch
us
t
e
r;
1
985.
d
o
i
:1
0
.
1
0
8
0
/
1
0
503
30
09
03
527
39
3.
[20]
F
rankl VE
. Man’s Search f
or
Ultima
t
e
M
ean
ing 1976:
190.
[2
1]
E
sp
in
g
A
.
A
u
t
oe
thn
o
g
r
a
p
hy
a
s
L
o
go
th
e
r
a
p
y:
A
n
Ex
iste
n
t
ia
l
A
nalys
i
s
of
M
eani
ngf
u
l
S
oc
i
a
l
S
c
ience
Inq
u
i
r
y
A
m
b
e
r
Esp
i
ng Texas C
h
ri
s
t
ian
Univer
si
t
y
.
J
Bord Educ R
e
s
2
01
1
;
9:
59–
6
7
.
[22
]
S
mit
h
A
J
.
L
og
o
t
herapy
t
o
Treat
S
ub
s
t
ance
Ab
us
e
as
a
R
es
ult
o
f
M
i
lit
ary-
R
elat
ed
P
TS
D.
J
M
il
G
o
v
C
o
u
n
s
20
13
;1:
6
1
–
7
4
.
[2
3]
Lim
L
, Sau
lsman
L, Na
t
h
a
n P
. I
mpro
vin
g
Sel
f
-
E
st
eem
2
00
5
.
[24
]
E
ro
l
RY,
Ort
h
U
.
S
e
lf
-esteem
d
evel
op
m
e
n
t
f
ro
m
age
14
t
o
30
y
ears:
a
l
o
ngitu
di
nal
stud
y
.
J Per
s
Soc Psycho
l
20
11
;10
1
:
6
0
7
–
1
9.
doi:
10.
10
37
/a
00
24
29
9.
[25
]
H
as
nain
N
,
F
a
raz
B,
A
d
l
akh
a
P
.
S
e
lf
-Esteem
A
n
d
H
ap
pi
nes
s
O
f
Ch
ildren
And
Mot
h
ers
Of
D
ifferent
P
arental
Au
th
orit
y
.
I
n
t
J
H
um
an
it
S
oc
S
tud
20
13
;1
:
1
–
6
.
[26
]
B
rand
en
N
.
N
a
than
iel
Bran
den
’
s
S
e
lf
-E
s
t
e
e
m
Every
D
a
y:
R
efl
e
c
tio
ns
o
n
S
e
lf
-Es
t
eem
a
nd
S
p
iri
t
ual
i
t
y
.
Si
m
o
n
an
d
S
c
hu
ster;
19
98
.
[27
]
R
am
iro
M
T
,
T
e
va
I
,
Berm
údez
M
P
,
B
uel
a
-Cas
al
G
.
S
o
cial
s
up
p
ort
,
s
elf
-
es
teem
a
nd
d
epres
s
i
o
n
:
R
elati
onsh
i
p
with
ris
k
f
o
r
s
exu
a
ll
y
t
r
ansmitt
ed
i
nf
ecti
o
n
s
/
H
IV
t
rans
miss
io
n
.
I
n
t J Clin Heal Psychol
2
013
;1
3
:
18
1–
8
.
do
i:
10.
10
16/S
1697
-26
00(1
3
)7
00
22-X
.
[28
]
F
rank
l
VE.
O
n
t
h
e
t
h
e
ory
an
d
the
r
ap
y
of
m
ental
d
i
s
o
rd
ers:
An
i
n
t
ro
du
c
t
io
n
to
l
og
oth
e
ra
py
a
n
d
e
xiste
n
tia
l
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
.
New
Yo
rk
:
Brun
n
e
r-Rou
tled
g
e;
2
0
0
4
.
d
o
i
:
10.
43
24/9
7
8
020
30
05
897.
[29
]
N
azi
r
M
.
R
esearch
M
eth
ods.
B
ogo
r:
G
ha
li
a
Ind
o
n
e
si
a;
2
009.
[30]
H
eppne
r
P
P
,
W
a
m
pold B
E,
D
enni
s
M.
K
ivli
ghan
J.
Resea
r
ch
Desig
n
i
n
Co
un
seli
n
g
.
Cen
gag
e L
e
arni
ng
;
20
07
.
[31
]
S
ug
iyo
no.
Q
uantit
a
t
i
v
e
Res
earc
h
M
eth
o
d
s
.
Ban
dung
:
Alf
a
b
e
ta
;
2012.
[
3
2
]
K
a
n
g
K
-
A
,
I
m
J
-
I
,
K
i
m
H
-
S
,
K
i
m
S
-
J
,
S
o
n
g
M
-
K
,
S
i
m
S
.
T
h
e
E
ff
ec
t
o
f
L
o
gotherap
y
o
n
the
S
u
ff
erin
g
,
F
i
nding
M
eani
ng,
a
n
d
S
pi
rit
u
a
l
W
ell
-
bein
g
of
A
dol
escen
ts
w
it
h
Term
in
a
l
Cancer.
J
K
o
rean
A
c
a
d
Chi
l
d
H
eal
N
u
r
s
20
09
;15
:
1
36.
d
o
i
:
10.
40
94/j
k
achn
.
2
009
.
1
5
.
2.
13
6.
[33
]
S
mit
h
E
J.
T
he
S
treng
t
h
-
Based
Co
un
sel
i
ng
M
o
d
e
l.
Cou
ns
P
sych
ol
2
0
0
6
;
3
4
:1
3–
79.
doi:
10.
11
77
/0
01100
00
05
277
01
8.
[34
]
R
os
dian
a,
M
u
r
ti
B
,
Wijay
a
M
,
S
u
wart
o.
T
h
e
s
u
p
po
rt
t
o
im
p
r
o
ve
s
el
f
-
e
fficacy
a
nd
h
ealin
g
o
f
d
ru
g
ad
di
ct.
Int
J
Public Hea
l
Sci
20
1
6
;
5:
35
9–
66.
[35
]
G
reen
e I. Ho
w
t
o
Imp
r
ov
e S
e
lf
-E
s
t
e
e
m
in The
A
f
r
ican
Am
e
ri
c
a
n
C
hild
.
Sa
n D
i
e
g
o:
Baily
A
ve; 20
03.
[36
]
L
af
reni
ère
M
A
K
,
B
él
ang
e
r
J
J
,
Sed
i
k
i
des
C,
V
a
l
lerand
R
J.
S
e
lf
-e
steem
a
nd
p
assi
on
f
or
act
ivities.
Pe
rs In
div
i
d
Dif
20
11
;51
:
5
4
1
–4.
do
i
:
10.
10
16
/j.
p
ai
d.
2
0
1
1
.
0
4.
0
17.
[37
]
M
org
a
n
J
H
.
Late-Lif
e
Dep
r
e
s
sion
a
n
d
t
he
C
ou
n
s
el
in
g
A
g
en
da:
E
x
p
l
o
ri
ng
Geriatric
Lo
got
herap
y
a
s
a
Treatm
e
n
t
Mo
dali
t
y
. I
n
t
J Ps
ycho
l
R
e
s
2
011;
6:9
4
–
1
0
1
.
[38
]
J
im
H
S,
A
n
d
ersen
BL.
M
eani
n
g
i
n
l
if
e
m
e
dia
t
es
t
he
r
elat
ion
sh
ip
b
etw
een
s
o
c
ial
an
d
p
hys
ical
f
unctio
ni
ng
an
d
di
s
t
ress in cancer s
u
rvi
v
or
s.
Br
J
Hea
l
t
h
Psych
o
l
200
7;
12
:36
3
–
81.
d
oi:10
.
1
348/1
3
5
9
1
070
6X
12
827
8.
[3
9]
O
bi
M
C,
O
ye
N
D,
M
oh
d
TN
,
Be
r
n
ic
e
A.
T
h
e
I
mp
a
c
t
o
f
IC
T
on
C
areer
C
oun
sel
i
n
g
S
erv
i
ces :
A
case
St
ud
y
o
f
Ni
gerian
S
econ
d
ary
S
c
ho
ols.
Int J
Eval
Res
Educ
201
2;
1:
1–1
5
.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.