Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research 

About: Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research is an academic journal published by Psi Chi, the International Honor Society in Psychology. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Personality & Mental health. It has an ISSN identifier of 2164-8204. It is also open access. Over the lifetime, 587 publications have been published receiving 2040 citations.

Body Image Perceptions: Do Gender Differences Exist?

Abstract: Despite the large volume of research on body image, few studies have directly compared body image perceptions of men and women. Do men and women experience body image dissatisfaction in the same ways? Do similar factors predict negative body image perceptions in men and women? Is body image dissatisfaction associated with the same consequences regardless of gender? This study investigated these questions. One hundred ninety-seven undergraduate students completed an online survey that assessed their body image experiences and self-perceptions (i.e., body esteem, body mass index, self-esteem, sociocultural and situational factors, and body image perceptions in sexual contexts). Data analysis compared the responses of male and female participants. Several gender differences were found; body dissatisfaction was more common and felt more strongly in women, yet men were also clearly affected by body dissatisfaction.

Rethinking and updating demographic questions: Guidance to improve descriptions of research samples.

Abstract: In this editorial, we encourage authors to rethink and update the demographic questions they use in their research surveys. We argue that this is important for ethical and professional reasons (i.e., inclusion and advancing diversity) and also for research integrity reasons (i.e., accurately describing samples for the purposes of clarity, which impacts generalization of findings and possible replication of findings). We give information about the 5 most commonly used demographic questions in survey research (i.e., gender identity, age, ethnicity and race, education, and location) and other additional demographic questions often found in research (i.e., questions about children, disability, employment, relationship status, religion, sexual orientation, and social class). We list questions and answer choices that we selected after reviewing the research literature, and we include our additional, more inclusive answer choices and coding categories. These modified questions better reflect the complexity of respondents’ identities and provide clarity as to how to assess those identities. In this editorial, we will encourage authors to rethink and update the demographic questions they use in their research surveys. We argue that this is important for ethical and professional reasons (i.e., inclusion and advancing diversity) and also for research integrity reasons (i.e., accurately describing samples for the purposes of clarity, which impacts generalization of findings and possible replication of findings). Researchers often collect demographic infor­ mation in research surveys for two reasons. The first reason concerns collecting information to answer their research questions, which can involve analyzing demographic information to determine whether identity is causing an individual to do a specific thing (i.e., independent variable) or if something is causing an individual to adopt a certain identity (i.e., dependent variable; Abdelal, Herrera, Johnston, & McDermott, 2009). It should be noted that identity can explain why people behave in certain ways, but just because someone has a certain identity does not mean that the person will act in a certain way (Abdelal et al., 2009). The second reason researchers collect demographic information is to accurately describe their sample. It is important to accurately describe a sample for the following reasons. First, by doing this, authors can determine if the participants they wanted to recruit responded to the survey and if those who responded comprehensively represent the popula­ tion the researchers wanted to study. Second, it is important for researchers to describe their samples so readers are better able to account for similarities and differences across studies. Third, by describing their sample, other researchers will have a better chance of replicating the original findings. Finally, if readers know more about the sample, they will know whether the findings are specific to that one sample or if they can be generalized to a larger

Relationships Between Academic Motivation, Self-Efficacy, and Academic Procrastination

Abstract: Academic procrastination can be a substantive problem for some students (Steel, 2007), and the reasons for and functions of task postponement have gained a great deal of research attention over the last 10 years. However, little research has examined academic motivation and self-efficacy as unique predictors of procrastination. We hypothesized that academic motivation and self-efficacy together would have a strong negative relationship to academic procrastination among college students, with academic motivation having a stronger relationship than self-efficacy. A sample of 101 undergraduate students (36.6% men, 63.4% women; M = 20.76, SD = 2.54, years of age) at a Northeastern public liberal arts university participated in the present study. Significant negative correlations of medium to large effect sizes between academic procrastination and 3 types of intrinsic, 1 type of extrinsic academic motivation, and general self-efficacy were shown. In a hierarchical regression model, academic motivation predicted academic procrastination, R 2 change = .33, F(7, 93) = 6.54, p < .001, but self-efficacy did not make a unique contribution to the model beyond the variance accounted for by academic motivation, R 2 change = .022, F(1, 92) = 3.09, p = .082.

Obstacles to Success for the Nontraditional Student in Higher Education

Abstract: COPYRIGHT 2014 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 19, NO. 4/ISSN 2164-8204) *Faculty mentor Attrition rates for nontraditional students are higher than for traditional college students, which can be partly attributed to difficulty for nontraditional students with immersing themselves in the academic environment (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011). Retention and success rates for college and university students at 2and 4-year institutions are positively correlated with the level of student engagement (Wyatt, 2011). According to The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), student engagement is the amount of time and effort devoted by students to their educational pursuits, in addition to the amount of resources institutions use to coordinate programs of study and other activities that prior research has shown to cultivate learning (What is student engagement?, n.d.). In 2006, the NSSE presented its annual report, and although the report had encouraging results for the overall student population, nontraditional students were less likely to have participated in engaging activities such as “community service, foreign language study, a culminating senior experience, research with faculty, and co-curricular activities” (Engaged learning, 2006, p. 13). The report also stated that part-time students who worked were less likely to interact with faculty and less involved in active and collaborative learning and enriching educational experiences compared to other students (Engaged learning, 2006). In 2012, the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance reported to the U.S. Department of Education that there is an inconsistency in defining nontraditional students (Pathways to success, 2012). According to this report, nontraditional students have customarily been defined using age, generally 25 and older, background characteristics such as culture, employment, and family, and at-risk-characteristics that may decrease the chance of degree completion. The 2012 report streamlined the definition of nontraditional student as any student who does not fit the template of a traditional full-time student aged 18 to 24 years. As reported by Wyatt (2011), students who are ABSTRACT. Retention and success rates for college and university students at 2and 4-year institutions have been positively correlated with level of student engagement in their academic environment. For the nontraditional cohort of students, or those students who are 25 years of age and older and who may have family and/or employment obligations in addition to their educational pursuits, attrition rates are at higher levels than for traditional college students. This exploratory research sought to identify the obstacles identified by nontraditional students that prohibit successful academic outcomes. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 10 nontraditional students at a small private college in New Jersey. Feelings of isolation, inattention to nontraditional student needs, administrative inflexibility in special circumstances, and the lack of a nontraditional student organization and liaison were identified as obstacles that continue to persist for nontraditional students’ academic success and engagement in their academic environment. Obstacles to Success for the Nontraditional Student in Higher Education