Objective: The present study aimed at investigating the relationship between attachment styles and\rself-efficacy in blind and non-blind female high school students in Tehran.\rMethods: The statistical population consisted of all female students studying in grades one or two\rin Tehran girl’s high schools, in the academic year 2014. The study design was causal-comparative,\rconducted on 120 subjects consisting of 60 blind girls selected through convenient sampling\rmethod and 60 non-blind girls selected through randomized clustering sampling method. Data were\rcollected through two questionnaires of attachment styles of Collins and Read (1990) (RAAS) and\rself-efficacy scale (SEQ-C) of Muris. To analyze the data, descriptive (mean and standard deviation)\rand inferential statistics (multivariate analysis of variance) were used.\rResults: The study results indicated a significant difference between blind and non-blind students’\refficacy and attachment styles. Avoidance attachment style as well as emotional, social, and public\refficacy of these two groups revealed no significant difference. Moreover, the results indicated a\rsignificant difference between anxiety attachment style and emotional, social, and public efficacy of\rthese two groups (P>0.05). Finally, a significant difference was observed between secure attachment\rstyle and emotional, social, and general efficacy of blind and non-blind students.\rConclusion: The blind and non-blind students are significantly different with regard to anxiety and\rsecure attachment styles. However, their emotional, social, and academic self- efficacy seems to be\rthe same. Although there was a significant difference between blind and non-blind students with\rregard to attachment styles, a significant association was seen between different dimensions of selfefficacy\rof blind and non-blind students (P<0.05).
CITATION STYLE
Alsadat Makkiyan, R., Malekitabar, M., & Farahbakhsh, K. (2016). Attachment Styles and Self-Efficacy in Blind and Non-blind Female High School Students. Practice in Clinical Psychology, 4(4), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.jpcp.4.4.237
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.