2018
... 5 ... 6 ... 7 ... 8 1. ... 8 2. ... 10 3. ... 11 4. ... 11 1 1 ... 12 1 ... 12 2 ... 13 3 ... 13 1. ... 13 2. ... 13 3. ... 13 4. 1 ... 13 5. 1 ... 15 6. 1 ... 16 7. 2 ... 17 4 ... 20 1. 1 ... 20 2. 2 ... 23 5 ... 27 1. ABCP ... 27 2. ABCP ... 27 3. ABCP ... 27 4. 1 ... 28 6 ... 28 2 2 ... 29
1 ... 29 2 ... 30 3 ... 30 1. ... 30 2. ... 31 3. ... 31 4. 1 ... 31 5. 2 ... 33 4 ... 35 1. 1 ... 35 2. 2 ... 39 5 ... 42 1. ABCP-19 ... 42 2. SASSV ... 43 3. MBP ... 43 4. 2 ... 44 5. 2 ... 44 6 ... 45 3 3 ... 46 1 ... 46 2 ... 47 3 ... 47 1. ... 47 2. ... 48 3. ... 48 4. ... 48 5. ... 49 6. ... 50 7. ... 51 4 ... 52 1. ... 52
2. ... 52 3. ... 52 4. ... 57 5 ... 61 1. ... 62 2. ... 63 3. MBP ... 63 4. 3 ... 63 6 ... 63 4 ... 65 1. 3 ... 65 2. ... 66 3. ... 67 ... 68 1. ... 68 2. ... 69 ... 70 1 ... 77 2 ... 78 3 ... 79 4 ... 80 5 ... 81 6 ... 84
3 1 2
1) 1 :
(2017) (Assessment of
Belief Conflict for Profession: ABCP) :
36(5) 470-482
2) 2 :
(2018) 37
1) (Model Based Practice) : 1,2) 2) 3,4) 3) 5). 4) 6,7) 1) (2016) : 3(1): 10-16
2) Gail B, Alison S (2012) Using Occupational Therapy Theory in Practice. Wiley, New Jersey 3) (2011) 4) (2014) : 5) (2015) 5: 19-25 6) (2016) 42(4): 499-505 7) Kabat-Zinn J ( ) (2007)
ABCP: Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession
ABCP-A: Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession test-A ABCP-B: Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession test-B ABCP-19: Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession-19 ABCR-14: Assessment of Belief Conflict in Relationship-14 AIC: Akaike’s Information Criterion
AUC: Area Under Curve
BIC: Bayesian Information Criterion
CAOD: Classification and Assessment of Occupational Dysfunction CAIC: Consistent Akaike’s Information Criterion
CFI: Comparative Fit Index CI: Confidence Interval
COSMIN: Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of health Measurement INstruments IRT: Item Response Theory
MBP: Model Based Practice OT: Occupational Therapist
RMSEA: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation SASSV: Self Acceptance Scale Shorted Version SD: Standard Deviation
SRS-18: Stress Response Scale-18 TEA: Trajectory Equifinality Approach TEM: Trajectory Equifinality Model TIF: Test Information Function TLI: Tucker-Lewis Index TRF: Test Response Function
1. 1) 2~4) Occupational Therapist OT 2~14) 7) 8,9) Mosey13,14) OT 5~11) OT 5,6,9,10) 8) 15) Model Based Practice MBP 2,16) MBP OT MBP OT 10,11,16~18) 19~22) 20,21) 19) 22) 23) 17,18) 10) OT 11)
OT OT 85 24,25) 26) OT 27,28) 29~33) 31~33) OT 1 16) OT MBP KJ
Trajectory Equifinality Approach: TEA
MBP OT MBP OT MBP 34~36) 1 2 37) MBP 38~45) 42,43) 20,21,44~46) 44) MBP
20,21,44~46) 47,48) 49~52) 52) 53) 46) 53~71) 72) 62,63) 66,73) MBP MBP 2. OT MBP MBP MBP 3 MBP OT
3. 28 1 29 8 4. 15-47 2016 31 1 2 1 2 3
1 1 1 1) OT 2~4) MBP 2~14) MBP 2,16) MBP OT 5~14) MBP 10,11,16) 20,21) OT 10,17,18) 16) MBP 11) 29~33) 1 74,75) MBP OT 1 16,20,21) 16) MBP OT MBP OT MBP MBP MBP 76)
OT
MBP 34,35)
16) OT
Assessment of Belief Conflict
for Profession test-A test-B ABCP ABCP-A ABCP-B
2 OT MBP 3 1. 1 15-47 4 2. 2 1 OT MBP 2 3. HAD15.8 http://norimune.net/had Mplus7.3 https://www.statmodel.com 77~79) Exametrika 5.3 http://antlers.rd.dnc.ac.jp/~shojima/exmk/jindex.htm 4. 1 1 80,81) 2 1 2 2 1 OT MBP A B 3 1 A A B B
2 A B OT A B 1 A B A B 91 1
A
B
B A2 1
Occupational Therapist : OT Standard Deviation SD
Assessment of Belief Conlict in Relationship-14 ABCR-14
Classification and Assessment of Occupational Dysfunction: CAOD Item
Response Theory : IRT
5. 1
80,81)
37)
80,81)
Item Response Theory IRT IRT
Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of health
Measurement INstruments COSMIN 82)
IRT 80,81) 1 IRT 3 2 OT A B A B A B ( SD) ω A B OT650 A B SD A B ABCR-14 CAOD IRT ω 1 2
80,81) 6. 1 1) 1 A B 2 2) ABCP OT MBP OT MBP 16) ABCP 1 ABCP 1 ~ 6 6 83) 3) (1) 5 OT 2 83) (2) 1 5 E 5 OT ABCP
3 5 ω 3 2 83,84) (3) A B 3 5 12 85) 6 80,81,85) 2 12 A B 7. 2 1) 2 ABCP IRT 2) 139 OT 650 OT OT 3) A B
Assessment of Belief Conflict in Relationship-14 ABCR-14 36)
Classification and Assessment of Occupational Dysfunction
CAOD 86) A B ABCR-14 CAOD MBP 26,27) ABCR-14 CAOD ABCR-14 CAOD 36,86)
7 4) A B A B (1) Standard Deviation SD A B SD 83) (2) 83) 0.2 80,83) A B CAOD ABCR-14 80,83) 0.2 80,83) 80,81) 0.3 80,83) (3) IRT A B 0.7 87,88) IRT 79) 79) 0.2~2.0 4.0 3 IRT 89) EM 90) (4) 2
A B 80,81)
10~15 A
B B A IRT
ABCP-A A ABCP-B B
2 SD SD
Test Response Function TRF
Test Information Function TIF
Akaike’s
Information Criterion AIC Consistent Akaike’s Information
Criterion CAIC Bayesian Information Criterion BIC
80,81) –3~3 TRF TRF 80,81) TIF 79) TIF 79) TRF TIF 79) 79)
Comparative Fit Index CFI Tucker-Lewis Index TLI
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation RMSEA CFI
TLI 0.95 RMSEA 0.08 AIC BIC CAIC
80,81)
IRT
4 1 1 2 1. 1 1) 1 90 5 78 4 2) OT5 2 3 33.2 26 ~38 10.6 5 ~16 3) 4 68 10 10 4) 12 1~12 A B 28 1 2
1 A No. α β1 β2 β3 β4 β5 1 5.39 2.92 –0.53 –0.22 0.00 0.44 0.23 ** 0.08 0.46 0.96 –1.94 –1.21 –0.63 0.16 1.16 2 5.06 2.94 –0.21 –0.19 0.37 0.35 0.25 ** 0.17 ** 0.30 0.63 –2.38 –1.38 –0.54 0.47 1.47 3 4.02 1.87 0.34 0.20 0.09 0.48 0.40 ** 0.34 ** 0.55 0.95 –1.38 –0.46 0.65 1.41 2.11 4 4.11 1.92 0.19 –0.27 0.36 0.66 0.44 ** 0.39 ** 0.67 1.21 –1.44 –0.44 0.46 1.38 2.22 5 3.90 1.79 0.47 0.13 0.01 0.47 0.33 ** 0.32 ** 0.58 1.02 –1.44 –0.26 0.70 1.51 2.22 6 4.65 2.23 –0.17 –0.29 0.39 0.55 0.20 ** 0.11 + 0.56 1.12 –1.47 –0.75 –0.11 1.04 1.71 7 3.74 1.61 0.37 0.13 0.07 0.63 0.32 ** 0.29 ** 0.67 1.24 –1.10 –0.14 0.82 1.81 2.22 8 4.67 2.18 0.05 –0.56 0.21 0.67 0.22 ** 0.04 0.60 1.21 –1.58 –0.70 0.07 0.84 1.66 9 5.06 2.72 –0.26 –0.39 0.14 0.63 0.19 ** 0.07 0.59 1.19 –2.02 –1.12 –0.40 0.48 1.47 10 4.89 2.42 –0.12 –0.38 0.38 0.60 0.37 ** 0.21 ** 0.56 1.10 –1.71 –0.90 –0.22 0.74 1.47 11 4.20 1.93 0.22 –0.16 0.36 0.60 0.32 ** 0.13 * 0.59 1.14 –1.30 –0.62 0.31 1.23 2.01 12 3.07 1.15 0.73 0.75 0.00 0.35 0.21 ** 0.16 * 0.44 0.73 –0.53 0.44 1.58 2.02 2.62 13 4.15 1.77 0.41 0.05 0.04 0.59 0.22 ** 0.24 ** 0.63 1.15 –1.25 –0.38 0.56 1.33 1.81 14 4.11 1.69 0.39 –0.12 0.05 0.70 0.30 ** 0.21 ** 0.76 1.30 –1.16 –0.29 0.56 1.36 1.87 15 4.13 1.82 0.31 0.09 0.16 0.72 0.28 ** 0.27 ** 0.76 1.37 –1.28 –0.40 0.46 1.54 1.81 16 4.20 1.76 0.20 –0.32 0.28 0.80 0.28 ** 0.22 ** 0.83 1.50 –1.12 –0.42 0.47 1.28 1.94 17 3.79 1.56 0.40 –0.12 0.04 0.72 0.28 ** 0.17 * 0.77 1.40 –1.04 –0.09 0.75 1.66 2.22 18 4.08 1.73 0.46 –0.04 0.02 0.76 0.29 ** 0.16 * 0.80 1.44 –1.28 –0.29 0.61 1.30 1.94 19 3.86 1.49 0.59 0.06 0.00 0.62 0.19 ** 0.14 * 0.73 1.15 –1.00 –0.04 0.78 1.44 2.02 20 3.69 1.41 0.82 0.76 0.00 0.42 0.25 ** 0.10 0.64 0.92 –0.97 0.06 1.04 1.47 2.02 21 3.17 1.04 0.92 0.80 0.00 0.45 0.23 ** 0.30 ** 0.52 0.89 –0.39 0.46 1.33 1.96 2.37 22 4.60 2.09 –0.14 –0.54 0.17 0.61 0.21 ** 0.16 * 0.63 1.12 –1.33 –0.69 0.05 0.93 1.87 23 4.31 1.98 0.02 –0.27 0.71 0.70 0.26 ** 0.16 * 0.73 1.34 –1.30 –0.62 0.31 1.23 2.01 24 3.65 1.32 0.68 0.30 0.00 0.73 0.20 ** 0.15 * 0.72 1.34 –0.77 0.09 0.98 1.58 2.11 25 4.82 2.32 –0.04 –0.44 0.39 0.43 0.16 * 0.05 0.38 0.81 –1.62 –0.85 –0.08 0.77 1.51 26 4.53 2.17 0.22 –0.09 0.39 0.60 0.24 ** 0.11 0.56 1.16 –1.62 –0.77 0.18 1.06 1.62 27 5.91 3.92 –0.85 0.75 0.00 0.23 0.00 –0.03 0.15 0.40 –2.62 –2.01 –1.44 –0.50 0.46 28 2.76 0.98 0.72 –0.18 0.00 0.43 0.19 ** 0.12 + 0.54 0.88 –0.21 0.70 1.76 2.62 29 4.21 1.91 0.20 –0.33 0.27 0.64 0.22 ** 0.09 0.68 1.22 –1.41 –0.42 0.36 1.32 2.01 30 4.57 2.30 –0.24 –0.29 0.22 0.66 0.20 ** –0.02 0.65 1.20 –1.58 –0.82 –0.06 1.02 2.01 31 4.13 1.83 0.21 –0.24 0.32 0.67 0.29 ** 0.08 0.70 1.29 –1.27 –0.43 0.50 1.33 2.11 32 4.26 2.06 –0.02 –0.18 0.85 0.68 0.24 ** 0.10 0.74 1.34 –1.44 –0.63 0.27 1.35 2.11 33 4.11 1.97 0.03 0.01 0.98 0.73 0.26 ** 0.02 0.77 1.33 –1.35 –0.56 0.42 1.58 2.11 34 4.01 1.66 0.34 –0.19 0.10 0.61 0.26 ** 0.13 + 0.71 1.25 –1.10 –0.29 0.66 1.35 2.11 35 3.83 1.69 0.45 0.52 0.01 0.59 0.23 ** 0.15 * 0.55 1.09 –1.18 –0.29 0.88 1.58 2.11 36 3.79 1.66 0.30 0.14 0.17 0.51 0.15 * 0.01 0.49 1.05 –1.12 –0.24 0.80 1.76 2.22 37 4.85 2.50 –0.15 –0.33 0.38 0.28 0.19 ** 0.17 * 0.30 0.65 –1.81 –0.98 –0.21 0.72 1.62 38 4.37 2.20 0.12 0.07 0.74 0.25 –0.04 –0.08 0.32 0.56 –1.62 –0.83 0.27 1.16 1.94 39 3.86 1.66 0.59 0.26 0.00 0.43 –0.04 –0.08 0.44 0.83 –1.27 –0.15 0.78 1.47 2.10 40 3.55 1.56 0.49 0.31 0.01 0.22 –0.04 –0.05 0.25 0.52 –1.11 –0.01 1.07 1.75 2.62 4.16±1.24 (SD) ARCR-14 CAOD 4.00±1.06 2.95±1.08 3.02±1.09 2.85±1.05 3.44±1.21 2.68±1.06 3.43±1.25 3.89±1.17 3.66±1.23 3.07±1.13 2.11±0.96 2.96±1.19 2.90±1.21 2.97±1.16 2.98±1.22 2.68±1.12 2.91±1.17 2.68±1.19 2.55±1.14 2.10±1.07 3.35±1.25 3.15±1.17 2.48±1.16 3.57±1.25 3.35±1.18 4.91±1.00 1.87±0.89 3.09±1.15 3.44±1.14 2.98±1.15 3.16±1.10 3.04±1.07 2.84±118 2.76±1.07 2.73±1.06 3.67±1.17
No.1 No.12 No.13 No.40 A p=0.01 A ω 0.94 (Standard Deviation SD) Assessment of Belief Conflict in Relationship-14 ABCR-14 , Classification and Assessment Occupational Dysfunction (CAOD), ABCR-14 CAOD ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05, + p <0 .10 α= β1 β5= 91 2
3.29±1.09 2.76±1.10 2.56±0.99
2 B No. (SD) α β1 β2 β3 β4 β5 1 4.19±1.26 5.46 2.93 –0.58 –0.01 0.00 0.41 0.09 0.12 * 0.40 0.80 –1.75 –1.29 –0.66 0.16 1.05 2 4.04±1.12 5.16 2.93 –0.26 –0.22 0.21 0.23 0.20 ** 0.26 ** 0.27 0.56 –2.22 –1.35 –0.55 0.39 1.35 3 3.06±1.12 4.18 1.94 0.16 –0.13 0.58 0.67 0.46 ** 0.43 ** 0.67 1.13 –1.37 –0.54 0.45 1.32 2.10 4 3.17±1.21 4.39 1.96 0.01 –0.45 0.39 0.66 0.57 ** 0.45 ** 0.71 1.21 –1.29 –0.55 0.21 1.17 1.93 5 2.88±1.14 4.02 1.74 0.28 –0.33 0.14 0.74 0.58 ** 0.47 ** 0.83 1.30 –1.22 –0.32 0.63 1.32 2.37 6 3.44±1.27 4.71 2.18 –0.13 –0.53 0.19 0.54 0.34 ** 0.19 ** 0.54 1.02 –1.43 –0.76 0.01 0.81 1.75 7 2.71±1.10 3.81 1.61 0.33 –0.11 0.12 0.70 0.53 ** 0.42 ** 0.73 1.22 –1.07 –0.19 0.81 1.57 2.37 8 3.38±1.27 4.64 2.11 0.04 –0.41 0.43 0.55 0.37 ** 0.26 ** 0.62 1.11 –1.43 –0.66 0.03 0.99 1.57 9 3.93±1.21 5.14 2.73 –0.15 –0.24 0.50 0.55 0.29 ** 0.14 * 0.58 1.11 –1.93 –1.12 –0.44 0.55 1.20 10 3.68±1.20 4.88 2.48 –0.08 –0.25 0.66 0.46 0.31 ** 0.20 ** 0.44 0.91 –1.75 –1.01 –0.19 0.75 1.47 11 2.82±1.09 3.91 1.72 0.23 –0.09 0.37 0.74 0.38 ** 0.29 ** 0.80 1.44 –1.17 –0.30 0.65 1.65 2.21 12 2.00±0.83 2.83 1.17 0.24 –0.96 0.00 0.44 0.26 ** 0.27 ** 0.56 0.82 –0.47 0.53 2.00 13 2.90±1.23 4.13 1.67 0.39 –0.20 0.05 0.69 0.47 ** 0.35 ** 0.72 1.27 –1.13 –0.27 0.54 1.32 1.86 14 2.28±1.12 3.40 1.17 0.87 0.53 0.00 0.64 0.36 ** 0.12 + 0.71 1.21 –0.63 0.36 1.13 1.65 2.37 15 1.71±0.98 2.69 0.73 1.79 4.11 0.00 0.62 0.29 ** 0.18 * 0.63 0.96 0.10 0.96 1.65 2.10 2.22 16 2.44±1.28 3.72 1.16 0.70 –0.03 0.00 0.70 0.49 ** 0.32 ** 0.73 1.25 –0.55 0.16 0.82 1.57 1.93 17 2.91±1.28 4.19 1.63 0.41 –0.34 0.02 0.73 0.38 ** 0.25 ** 0.71 1.32 –1.11 –0.19 0.44 1.32 1.75 18 1.92±1.00 2.92 0.93 1.03 0.85 0.00 0.47 0.30 ** 0.19 ** 0.61 0.85 –0.20 0.67 1.43 2.22 2.62 19 2.61±1.34 3.95 1.27 0.53 –0.50 0.00 0.54 0.33 ** 0.13 * 0.62 0.93 –0.67 0.09 0.55 1.47 1.86 20 2.40±1.17 3.57 1.23 0.57 –0.11 0.00 0.55 0.28 ** 0.16 ** 0.59 1.03 –0.62 0.15 0.92 1.80 2.22 21 2.54±1.26 3.80 1.28 0.49 –0.63 0.00 0.47 0.48 ** 0.46 ** 0.56 0.99 –0.70 0.15 0.62 1.57 2.21 22 2.90±1.12 4.01 1.78 –0.03 –0.41 0.44 0.64 0.29 ** 0.20 ** 0.63 1.13 –1.13 –0.04 0.44 1.80 2.21 23 2.77±1.07 3.84 1.70 0.07 –0.54 0.24 0.59 0.42 ** 0.28 ** 0.61 1.09 –1.13 –0.24 0.63 1.80 2.61 24 2.79±1.14 3.93 1.64 0.11 –0.63 0.12 0.49 0.23 ** 0.17 ** 0.53 0.93 –1.02 –0.35 0.59 1.65 2.61 25 2.84±1.08 3.93 1.76 0.02 –0.49 0.32 0.76 0.41 ** 0.25 ** 0.80 1.45 –1.15 –0.35 0.59 1.65 2.61 26 3.74±1.27 5.01 2.47 –0.36 –0.26 0.06 0.37 0.33 ** 0.27 ** 0.39 0.78 –1.53 –0.95 –0.36 0.64 1.46 27 3.09±1.14 4.23 1.95 0.01 –0.15 0.89 0.50 0.28 ** 0.11 + 0.46 0.86 –1.29 –0.57 0.32 1.43 2.00 28 2.50±1.05 3.56 1.45 0.42 0.06 0.03 0.71 0.52 ** 0.42 ** 0.75 1.32 –0.90 0.02 0.99 1.93 2.37 29 3.59±1.20 4.79 2.38 –0.31 –0.41 0.08 0.20 –0.04 0.00 0.13 0.34 –1.61 –0.83 –0.23 0.79 1.80 30 2.80±1.08 3.88 1.72 0.34 0.34 0.07 0.51 0.37 ** 0.25 ** 0.52 0.90 –1.15 –0.39 0.88 1.46 2.21 31 3.28±1.31 4.59 1.97 0.14 –0.41 0.31 0.38 0.21 ** 0.06 0.43 0.84 –1.29 –0.61 0.18 1.00 1.53 32 3.01±1.13 4.14 1.88 0.23 0.12 0.35 0.75 0.36 ** 0.28 ** 0.78 1.39 –1.29 –0.52 0.51 1.43 1.93 33 2.32±0.96 3.28 1.36 0.42 0.34 0.02 0.64 0.32 ** 0.22 ** 0.74 1.18 –0.77 0.15 1.43 2.21 2.61 34 2.97±1.18 4.25 1.69 0.24 –0.37 0.18 0.72 0.34 ** 0.26 ** 0.81 1.34 –1.04 –0.35 0.38 1.34 1.74 35 3.09±1.28 4.37 1.82 0.27 –0.31 0.17 0.67 0.32 ** 0.19 ** 0.74 1.19 –1.21 –0.44 0.33 1.19 1.65 36 2.70±1.18 3.88 1.53 0.60 0.29 0.00 0.74 0.51 ** 0.43 ** 0.78 1.36 –1.02 –0.13 0.82 1.46 1.93 37 2.39±0.96 3.35 1.43 0.53 0.94 0.00 0.71 0.44 ** 0.35 ** 0.75 1.29 –0.88 0.08 1.40 2.00 2.37 38 2.24±0.96 3.21 1.28 0.54 0.04 0.00 0.47 0.22 ** 0.18 ** 0.51 0.92 –0.71 0.33 1.37 2.00 39 2.71±1.11 3.82 1.59 0.50 0.05 0.01 0.52 0.28 ** 0.20 ** 0.47 0.83 –1.12 –0.14 0.88 1.40 2.36 40 4.18±1.38 5.55 2.80 –0.74 –0.08 0.00 0.40 0.26 ** 0.06 0.34 0.76 –1.49 –1.12 –0.06 0.06 1.02 ABCR-14 CAOD
No.1 No.12 No.13 No.40 B p=0.61 B ω 0.94 (Standard Deviation SD) Assessment of Belief Conflict in Relationship-14 ABCR-14 , Classification and Assessment Occupational Dysfunction (CAOD), ABCR-14 CAOD ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05, + p <0 .10 α= β1 β5= 91 3
2. 2 1) 3 96 454 OT 69.8% 3 55 10 4 15 6 OT 4 91 1 2) 1 2 A 28 B 15 18 A B 9 A 16 B 13 39 3) A B 1 2 A B 0.2 r = 0.20~0.80 ABCR-14 A 10 B 2 CAOD A 30 A B 87 88 175 141 138 279 228 226 454 31.6±7.8 31.3±8.2 31.3±7.9 8.0±6.3 8.0±6.7 8.0±6.5 158 163 321 19 19 38 6 5 11 22 19 41 6 2 8 12 11 23 5 7 12
B 15 A 2 B 2 4) A B 1 2 A B 0.94 IRT A B 5) 1 A 10 2 B 19 3 4 5 3 A 7 10 13 14 15 16 21 B 13 16 17 21 25 34 36 7 10 3 ABCP-A ABCP-B TRF ABCP-A 10.8~57.0 ABCP-B 11.0~57.1
TIF ABCP-A ABCP-B 1.2~2.4
6.1 ABCP-A ABCP-B CLI
1.00 TLI 1.00 RMSEA 0.00
4 ABCP-A ABCP-B CLI 1.00 TLI
1.00 RMSEA 0.00
ABCP-A 0.81~0.53 49.78 ABCP-B 0.86~0.62
50.55
3 ABCP-A ABCP-B
(Standard Deviation SD) Test Response Function TRF Test Information Function TIF Comparative Fit Index
(CFI), Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) , Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) (Akaike’s Information Criterion AIC)
(Consistent Akaike’s Information Criterion CAIC) (Bayesian Information Criterion BIC) 4 ( 91 2 )
(SD) 29.03±7.97 (SD) 28.19±8.63 (SD) –0.07±0.85 (SD) –0.05±0.92 CFI 1.00 CFI 1.00 TLI 1.00 TLI 1.00 RMSEA 0.00 RMSEA 0.00 AIC –957.35 AIC –1121.57 CAIC –5165.23 CAIC –5316.86 BIC –4215.23 BIC –4366.86 ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP-A B 3 4 5 A 7 10 13 14 15 16 21 TRF 10.8~57.0 TIF –1.2~2.4 6.1 ABCP-B A 3 4 5 B 13 16 17 21 25 34 36 TRF 11.0~57.1 TIF – 1.2~2.4 6.1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 得 点 THETA テスト反応関数(TRF) TRF 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 情 報 量 THETA テスト情報関数(TIF) TIF 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 得 点 THETA テスト反応関数(TRF) TRF 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 情 報 量 THETA テスト情報関数(TIF) TIF
4 ABCP-A ABCP-B 91 3 No. α β1 β2 β3 β4 β5 No. α β β β β β 3 0.69 1.39 –1.38 –0.45 0.65 1.41 2.11 3 0.75 1.40 –1.37 –0.54 0.45 1.32 2.10 4 0.76 1.40 –1.44 –0.44 0.46 1.38 2.22 4 0.78 1.44 –1.29 –0.55 0.21 1.17 1.93 5 0.72 1.38 –1.44 –0.25 0.70 1.51 2.22 5 0.86 1.55 –1.21 –0.31 0.63 1.32 2.37 7 0.71 1.46 –1.09 –0.14 0.82 1.81 2.22 13 0.77 1.50 –1.12 –0.27 0.54 1.32 1.86 10 0.56 1.26 –1.70 –0.89 –0.21 0.74 1.47 16 0.77 1.49 –0.55 –0.15 0.82 1.57 1.93 13 0.71 1.45 –1.25 –0.38 0.56 1.33 1.81 17 0.62 1.27 –1.10 –0.19 0.44 1.32 1.75 14 0.81 1.51 –1.16 –0.29 0.56 1.36 1.87 21 0.64 1.27 –0.69 –0.15 0.62 1.57 2.21 15 0.80 1.55 –1.27 –0.39 0.46 1.54 1.81 25 0.75 1.32 –1.14 –0.34 0.59 1.65 2.61 16 0.81 1.51 –1.11 –0.41 0.47 1.28 1.94 34 0.69 1.21 –1.04 –0.34 0.38 1.34 1.74 21 0.54 1.11 –0.39 0.46 1.33 1.94 2.37 36 0.79 1.55 –1.02 –0.12 0.82 1.46 1.93
Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession Test-A Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession Test-B
No. A
CFI=1.00 TLI=1.00 RMSEA=0.00 AIC=–
1053.90 CAIC=–5261.78,BIC=–4311.78 .ω 0.89
p =0.07 α= β1 β5=
No. B
CFI=1.00 TLI=1.00 RMSEA=0.00 AIC=–
1120.35 CAIC=–5315.64 BIC=–4365.64 .ω 0.89 p =0.76 α= β1 β5= 49.78 50.55 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ABCP-A 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ABCP-B
5
1 OT
1 10 ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP
1. ABCP 200 83) OT OT A B ABCP-A No.5 13 21 ABCP-B No.16 17 21 36 ABCP-A ABCP-B MBP 2. ABCP
ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP MBP
ABCR-14 CAOD
ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP-A
ABCP-B OT
80,83) IRT TIF
TRF ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP
80,81)
3. ABCP
IRT
80,81) ABCP +
–
ABCP-A ABCP-B TRF TIF
–1.2~2.4 ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP-A ABCP-B 10 7 2 29,76) ABCP 4. 1 ABCP IRT ABCP web https://sites.google.com/site/kengokohiyama/abcp-testa_testb ABCP 3~5 6 1 OT 3
7 ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP
ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP
2 2 1 1 IRT ABCP-A ABCP-B 91) 2 1 MBP MBP 5~11) MBP 2,16) MBP 10,11,16) MBP 10,16) 20,21) 10) 16~18) MBP 92) MBP 27,74,75) 20,21) 38~45) 42) 43) 41) 39) 18 88 1600 1 42) 20,21)
20,21) 20,21,52) MBP 44~46) MBP MBP MBP 1 ABCP 10 ABCR-14 MBP 36) MBP 1 ABCP MBP 2 MBP MBP 2 MBP 3 1. 2 15-47
4 2. 1 2 1 MBP 2 1 MBP 3. 2 HAD15.8 (http://norimune.net/had)
Mplus7.3 https://www.statmodel.com/ IRT Exametrika 5.3
http://antlers.rd.dnc.ac.jp/~shojima/exmk/jindex.htm SPSS Statistics 23 https://www-01.ibm.com/software/jp/marketplace/spss/stat.html 77~79) 4. 1 1) MBP 2) MBP OT 16) 1 40 MBP 1 6 6 3) MBP
ABCR-14 CAOD 4 36,86) ABCR-14 CAOD
1 26,27)
4) 1 80 320 OT 5) 1 83) (1) 83) p 0.05 83) (2) IRT 80,81) 1 80,81) 80,81) ABCR-14 CAOD 80) 0.2 80,81) (3) 78,79) 20 82) 1 CFI, TLI, RMSEA 1 80,81) (4) 0.7 87,88)
(5)
ABCR-14 58 36) ABCR-14
58 58 ROC
Area Under Curve AUC 0.7
83) 5. 2 1) MBP 2) 2 1 MBP
38,93) Self Acceptance Scale Shorted Version SASSV
SASSV 5 25 SASSV 38,43) SASSV 5 1 5 3) 2 104 500 OT 4) 2 1 SASSV MBP 38) 41) 42) SASSV 5
(1) SASSV p 0.05 83) (2) SASSV IRT 1 80,81) (3) SASSV 83) 0.2 83) (4) 5 94) OT 27) 10 38~45) 78,79)
CFI TLI RMSEA 1 80,81)
95 Confidence Interval CI
79)
AIC BIC 80,81)
5 2 95 1 4 1. 1 1) 226 70.6 4
4 2 95 1 2) 17 3) 5 IRT ABCR-14 CAOD 21 19 Assessment of
Belief Conflict for Profession-19 ABCP-19
1
2
88
151
138
211
226
362
31.3±8.2
30.2±7.2
8.0±6.7
7.6±6.1
163
285
19
10
5
12
19
26
2
6
11
7
7
16
5 2 1 ABCP-19
Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession-19 ABCR-19 No.1 No.19
Standard Deviation SD Assessment of Belief Conflict in Relationship-14 ABCR-14 ,
Classification and Assessment of Occupational Dysfunction CAOD ** p < 0.01 α= β1 β5= 95 3
No. (SD) p α β1 β2 β3 β4 β5 1 3.06±1.12 4.18 1.94 0.58 0.46 ** 0.43 ** 0.67 1.13 –1.37 –0.54 0.45 1.32 2.10 2 3.17±1.21 4.39 1.96 0.39 0.57 ** 0.45 ** 0.66 1.21 –1.29 –0.55 0.21 1.17 1.93 3 2.88±1.14 4.02 1.74 0.14 0.58 ** 0.47 ** 0.74 1.30 –1.21 –0.31 0.63 1.32 2.37 4 2.71±1.10 3.81 1.61 0.12 0.53 ** 0.42 ** 0.70 1.22 –1.06 –0.19 0.81 1.57 2.37 5 3.38±1.27 4.64 2.11 0.43 0.37 ** 0.26 ** 0.55 1.11 –1.43 –0.66 0.03 0.99 1.57 6 2.82±1.09 3.91 1.72 0.37 0.38 ** 0.29 ** 0.74 1.44 –1.16 –0.29 0.65 1.65 2.21 7 2.90±1.23 4.13 1.67 0.05 0.47 ** 0.35 ** 0.69 1.27 –1.12 –0.27 0.54 1.32 1.86 8 2.44±1.28 3.72 1.16 0.00 0.49 ** 0.32 ** 0.70 1.25 –0.55 0.15 0.82 1.57 1.93 9 2.91±1.28 4.19 1.63 0.02 0.38 ** 0.25 ** 0.73 1.32 –1.10 –0.19 0.44 1.32 1.75 10 2.54±1.26 3.80 1.28 0.00 0.48 ** 0.46 ** 0.47 0.99 –0.69 0.15 0.62 1.57 2.21 11 2.77±1.07 3.84 1.70 0.24 0.42 ** 0.28 ** 0.59 1.09 –1.12 –0.24 0.63 1.80 2.61 12 2.84±1.08 3.93 1.76 0.32 0.41 ** 0.25 ** 0.76 1.45 –1.14 –0.34 0.59 1.65 2.61 13 2.50±1.05 3.56 1.45 0.03 0.52 ** 0.42 ** 0.71 1.32 –0.89 0.02 0.99 1.93 2.37 14 2.80±1.08 3.88 1.72 0.07 0.37 ** 0.25 ** 0.51 0.90 –1.14 –0.39 0.88 1.46 2.21 15 3.01±1.13 4.14 1.88 0.35 0.36 ** 0.28 ** 0.75 1.39 –1.28 –0.51 0.51 1.43 1.93 16 2.32±0.96 3.28 1.36 0.02 0.32 ** 0.22 ** 0.64 1.18 –0.77 0.14 1.43 2.21 2.61 17 2.97±1.18 4.25 1.69 0.18 0.34 ** 0.26 ** 0.72 1.34 –1.04 –0.34 0.38 1.34 1.74 18 2.70±1.18 3.88 1.53 0.00 0.51 ** 0.43 ** 0.74 1.36 –1.02 –0.12 0.82 1.46 1.93 19 2.39±0.96 3.35 1.43 0.00 0.44 ** 0.35 ** 0.71 1.29 –0.88 0.07 1.40 2.00 2.37 ABCR–14 CAOD
4) ABCP-19 ABCP-19
43.47 6 ABCP-19
CFI = 1.00 TLI = 1.00 RMSEA = 0.00
6 ABCP-19 5) ABCP-19 ABCP-19 0.87 6) ABCP-19 0.98 0.76 AUC 0.77 ABCP-19 40 ROC 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
7 ABCP-19 ROC 2. 2 1) 362 72.4 4 2) ABCP-19 6 ABCP-19 10 3) ABCP-19 6 ABCP-19 IRT ABCP-19 0.87 4) ABCP-19 6 ABCP-19
6 2 ABCP-19
Assessment of Belief Conflict for Profession-19 ABCP-19
Standard Deviation SD α= β1 β5= 95 4 No. SD p α β1 β2 β3 β4 β5 1 3.13(±1.07) 4.20 2.06 0.35 0.58 1.05 –1.57 –0.60 0.40 1.33 2.07 2 3.23(±1.08) 4.34 2.19 0.38 0.56 1.22 –1.67 –0.75 0.30 1.09 2.29 3 2.96(±0.99) 3.95 1.97 0.02 0.66 1.25 –1.52 –0.54 0.70 1.52 2.29 4 2.74(±1.04) 3.78 1.71 0.04 0.70 1.29 –1.25 –0.17 0.78 1.62 2.77 5 3.33(±1.12) 4.45 2.21 0.66 0.65 1.20 –1.57 –0.76 0.11 1.14 1.96 6 2.92(±1.06) 3.98 1.86 0.48 0.74 1.40 –1.28 –0.43 0.59 1.52 2.54 7 2.76(±1.06) 3.82 1.70 0.18 0.70 1.35 –1.15 –0.26 0.77 1.65 2.39 8 3.09(±1.06) 4.15 2.03 0.21 0.66 1.32 –1.54 –0.53 0.37 1.37 2.54 9 2.58(±1.23) 3.81 1.35 0.00 0.70 1.29 –0.78 0.03 0.80 1.44 2.13 10 2.88(±1.14) 4.02 1.74 0.00 0.63 1.18 –1.34 –0.23 0.62 1.37 2.01 11 2.98(±1.01) 3.99 1.96 0.62 0.74 1.42 –1.48 –0.48 0.52 1.65 2.29 12 2.53(±0.93) 3.47 1.60 0.00 0.79 1.48 –1.12 –0.05 1.24 2.10 2.54 13 2.79(±0.90) 3.69 1.89 0.00 0.63 1.13 –1.48 –0.39 0.97 1.92 2.40 14 2.86(±1.01) 3.87 1.84 0.04 0.78 1.44 –1.46 –0.30 0.71 1.55 2.54 15 2.47(±0.96) 3.43 1.50 0.04 0.72 1.37 –0.99 0.07 1.11 2.01 16 2.89(±1.10) 3.99 1.79 0.22 0.66 1.34 –1.23 –0.35 0.58 1.48 2.40 17 2.78(±1.00) 3.78 1.77 0.17 0.75 1.42 –1.29 –0.27 0.79 1.70 2.54 18 2.75(±1.03) 3.78 1.72 0.00 0.79 1.49 –1.28 –0.21 0.82 1.73 2.20 19 2.63(±0.95) 3.57 1.68 0.00 0.78 1.46 –1.30 –0.13 1.14 1.92 2.14
5) SASSV 7 SASSV 17 6) SASSV 7 SASSV IRT 9 0.2~2.0 3 4 7 12 14 15 19 20 23 2 0.2 4 12 SASSV 0.69 7 SASSV
Self Acceptance Scale Shorted Version SASSV No.1 6 11 16 21 2
7 12 17 22 3 8 13 18 23 4 9
14 19 24 5 10 15 20 25
α= β1 β5=
7)
8 CFI = 1.00 TLI = 1.00 RMSEA = 0.00
CFI = 1.00 TLI = 1.00 RMSEA = 0.00
AIC 2874.15 2797.77 BIC 2901.39 2832.54 No. α β1 β2 β3 β4 1 3.67 0.86 4.54 2.81 0.00 0.66 –3.07 –1.47 –0.47 1.29 0.48 2 3.75 0.97 4.72 2.78 0.00 0.62 –2.91 –1.31 –0.48 0.88 0.54 3 3.29 0.91 4.20 2.38 0.05 0.16 –2.40 –0.80 0.14 1.50 0.37 4 3.26 0.91 4.17 2.34 0.02 0.02 –2.04 –0.80 0.15 1.67 –0.10 5 2.91 0.99 3.90 1.92 0.20 0.82 –1.75 –0.62 0.71 2.29 0.59 6 2.88 0.90 3.78 1.98 0.76 0.68 –1.94 –0.52 0.87 2.26 0.46 7 3.11 1.14 4.24 1.97 0.00 0.17 –1.53 –0.40 0.20 1.24 0.42 8 3.03 1.04 4.08 1.99 0.03 0.72 –1.76 –0.58 0.41 1.90 0.50 9 2.92 0.99 3.91 1.93 0.01 0.48 –1.88 –0.31 0.51 1.90 0.34 10 2.61 0.99 3.60 1.62 0.04 0.54 –1.25 –0.15 0.92 2.51 0.38 11 3.45 0.80 4.26 2.65 0.23 0.71 –3.13 –1.50 0.02 1.79 0.52 12 3.32 0.93 4.25 2.39 0.01 0.01 –2.04 –0.85 0.06 1.53 –0.15 13 3.17 0.90 4.08 2.27 0.14 0.63 –2.37 –0.87 0.32 1.99 0.46 14 3.18 1.01 4.19 2.18 0.00 0.06 –2.04 –0.53 0.17 1.46 0.38 15 3.18 1.01 4.19 2.17 0.03 0.15 –1.87 –0.60 0.21 1.41 0.36 16 3.79 1.09 4.88 2.70 0.00 0.44 –2.07 –1.17 –0.44 0.56 0.48 17 3.26 0.92 4.18 2.35 0.29 0.81 –2.53 –1.09 0.29 1.85 0.47 18 3.10 0.90 4.00 2.20 0.45 0.94 –2.48 –0.91 0.56 2.31 0.55 19 3.04 1.01 4.05 2.04 0.03 0.05 –1.78 –0.44 0.36 1.53 0.34 20 2.35 0.92 3.27 1.43 0.00 0.02 –0.96 0.26 1.18 2.49 2.39 21 3.17 0.91 4.08 2.25 0.04 0.78 –2.45 –0.90 0.29 2.21 0.45 22 3.46 0.83 4.30 2.63 0.00 0.53 –2.30 –1.35 –0.17 1.92 0.49 23 3.58 0.94 4.52 2.65 0.00 0.10 –2.41 –1.11 –0.20 1.02 0.30 24 2.99 0.97 3.96 2.01 0.02 0.22 –1.98 –0.43 0.53 1.54 0.30 25 2.83 0.91 3.75 1.92 0.53 0.52 –1.65 –0.46 0.79 2.33 0.45
SASSV 0.43 95%CI [–0.12; 0.99] –0.85 95%CI [–1.51; – 0.19] –0.47 95%CI [–0.90; –0.05] 0.51 95%CI [–0.26; 1.30] –0.17 95%CI [–0.71; 0.36] –0.07 95%CI [–0.71; 0.36] 0.18 95%CI [–0.46; 0.83] 8
Comparative Fit Index =1.00 Tucker-Lewis Index =1.00 Root Mean Square Error of Approximation =0.00 Akaike’s Information Criterion =2797.77 Bayesian Information
Criterion =2832.54 95% 0 95 2 5 2 1 ABCP-19 2 ABCP-19 SASSV MBP 1. ABCP-19 ABCP-19
ABCP-19 ABCP-19 MBP ABCP-19 IRT 80,81) ABCP-19 MBP 1 MBP 2 ABCP-19 1 2 OT ABCP-19 ABCP-19 80,81) 2. SASSV SASSV IRT SASSV 2 2 3 2 SASSV 3. MBP 2 MBP SASSV 38,39) MBP MBP
39) OT OT 28) MBP MBP 4. 2 MBP 1 19 ABCP-19 6 MBP MBP ABCP-19 MBP MBP 1 5. 2 OT MBP 1 2 MBP MBP MBP 2 3 2 MBP
6 2 MBP MBP MBP ABCP-19 MBP MBP
3 3 1 1 IRT ABCP-A ABCP-B 91) 2 ABCP-19 MBP 95) 3 1 2 96) 96) OT MBP 11,17,18) MBP OT 5~11) MBP 10,17,18,92) MBP 2 MBP 95) 42) MBP 95) 20,21,44~46,52) 47,48) 47,48,97) 20,21)
20,21) 52) 20,21,52) 53) 46) 60~65) 62,63,97) MBP OT MBP 2 3 1. 3 15-47 2016-31 2
2. ABBABB ABBABB A1 B1 B2 A2 B3 B4 96) 54~57) TEA98~100) 101) 1 ABCP-A ABCP-B 9 9 3 ABBABB A A1 A2 B B1~B4 ABBABB A1 B1 B2 A2 B3 B4 3. ABCP Exametrika5.4 RStudioVer1.0.153 https://www.rstudio.com 4. 4 ABCR-14
Stress Response Scale-18 SRS-18 102)
3
3 1
A
B
B
A
B
B
1 2 OT 3 OT 3 1 2 54~57) 20,21) 16,29~33) 3 1 2 OT 5. 3 97) 103) 8 4 1 60 8 2 1 8 8
8 6. 1) 2) TEA TEA 98~100) TEA
Trajectory Equifinality Model
TEM 98~100) TEM KJ KJ 2 KJ TEM TEM 98~100) TEM ω ω 99) TEM 99) 1 2 10 3 4 2 10 5 6 4 7 4525 8 2
TEM 2 99) 101) KJ 101) 7. 1) ABBABB 2)
1 IRT ABCP-A ABCP-B
ABCP ABCP ω 3 7 91) ABCP 91) –3 3 0 0 91) ABBABB A A1 A2 16 ABCP-A 18 ABCP-B B B1 B4 ABCP-A ABCP-B 1 2
TRF TIF ABCP-A ABCP-B 79)
ABCP
Tukey 104)
4 1. OT2 2 1 5 9 9 2. 8 95.0 3. 1) KJ 10 12 4 34 3 36 15 37 15 33 13 27 6
10 KJ | CD | | …
2) TEA 3 10 10 [ ]
10 TEM [ 0 0 0 0 1 ] 1 1 [ 1 0 ] 0 0 1 [ [ ] [ 0
3) - 11 100 80 3 60% 4 40% 4 11 - a b c d e 60% 80% 40% 40% 60% 60% 80% 60% 40% 80% 40% 100% ●
4. 1) ABCP
11 IRT
ABCP-A ABCP-B CFI = 1.00 TLI = 1.00 RMSEA = 0.00
11 3 ABCP
Test Response Function: TRF Test Information Function: TIF Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker
Lewis Index (TLI) , Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) (Akaike’s Information Criterion AIC)
(Consistent Akaike’s Information Criterion CAIC) (Bayesian Information Criterion BIC)
TLI 1.00 TLI 1.00 CFI 1.00 CFI 1.00 RMSEA 0.00 RMSEA 0.00 AIC –1456.49 AIC –1304.72 CAIC –3568.52 CAIC –3176.75 BIC –2732.52 BIC –2435.75 ABCP-A ABCP-B 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 得 点 THETA テスト反応関数(TRF) TRF 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 情 報 量 THETA テスト情報関数(TIF) TIF 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 得 点 THETA テスト反応関数(TRF) TRF 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 -3.2 -1.6 0 1.6 3.2 情 報 量 THETA テスト情報関数(TIF) TIF
2) ABCP 12 ABCP 12 ABCP -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5
3) 12 ABCP 12 ABBABB A A1 A2 B B1~B4 ABBABB A1 B1 B2 A2 B3 B4 ** p < 0.01 T P –0.28 0.23 23.44 –1.23 0.23 A2 0.12 0.32 20.00 0.38 0.71 B1 0.94 0.32 20.00 2.96 0.01 ** B2 0.09 0.32 20.00 0.28 0.78 B 0.29 0.32 20.00 0.90 0.38 B 0.06 0.32 20.00 0.20 0.84 0.02 0.14 0.25 0.50
4) 13 0.05 A1-B1 0.1 B1-B2 B4-B1 13 ABBABB ABBABB Tukey A A1 A2 B B1~B4 ABBABB A1 B1 B2 A2 B3 B4 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 5 3 2 MBP
Z
P
A1–A2
0.12
0.32
0.38
1.00
A1–B1
0.94
0.32
2.96
0.03 *
A1–B2
0.09
0.32
0.28
1.00
A1–A3
0.29
0.32
0.90
0.95
A1–B4
0.06
0.32
0.20
1.00
A2–B1
0.82
0.32
2.58
0.10
A2–B2
–0.03
0.32
–0.10
1.00
A2–B3
0.16
0.32
0.51
1.00
A2–B4
–0.05
0.32
–0.18
1.00
B1–B2
–0.85
0.32
–2.67
0.07 .
B1–B3
–0.65
0.32
–2.06
0.31
B1–B4
–0.88
0.32
–2.75
0.06 .
B2–B3
0.20
0.32
0.61
0.99
B2–B3
–0.02
0.32
–0.08
1.00
B3–B4
–0.22
0.32
–0.69
0.98
1. 10 80% 60~65) 54~57) 20,21,27,28) 10 54~56) 12 A1-B1 54~56)
2. 27,28) 20,21) 3. MBP MBP 10,17,18,92) MBP OT MBP α 29,76) 4. 3 8 4 54~57) 1 1 2 1 α 6
MBP 1
4 1. 3 OT MBP 1 3 3 1 OT 91) 2 MBP ABCP-19 MBP 91) 3 MBP 1 2 ABCP-A ABCP-B 91) 2 91) 2 80) ABCP IRT 2 MBP MBP 95) 95) 3
51) α 49,50) OT MBP MBP 29,76) 2. OT 2 29,76)
1 ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP
91) 2 ABCP-19 MBP MBP 95) OT 1 3 MBP α 20 60 150 OT PT ST 5 24 105,106) 1 365 300
20 OT MBP 3 MBP α 3. 1 2 OT OT MBP 3 1 MBP
1. OT MBP 3 1 OT 2 MBP MBP 3 1 2
1 ABCP-A ABCP-B ABCP
2 ABCP-19 3 MBP MBP α 29,76) MBP 95) 29~33) 3 MBP 91,95) 3 54~57,73) MBP
2. 3 2 5 α 3 5 2
1) World Federation of Occupational Therapists (2004) Definition of Occupational Therapy. http://www.wfot.org/AboutUs/About Occupational Therapy/Definition of Occupational Therapy.aspx. [Accessed January 25, 2018]
2) Gail B, Alison S (2012) Using Occupational Therapy Theory in Practice. Wiley, New Jersey
3) Rosalie B ,Kay W, Menks F ,Susan D, Julia V ( ) (2003)
6 : 4) Kielhofner G ( ) (2014) . 5) (1994) 13(1) 18-23 6) (2003) : OT 37(7) 691-695 7) (1995) 23(4) 293-298 8) (1995) OT 29(4) 263-268 9) (2001) 21 1(1) 11-15 10) (2013) : OT OT 47(7) 602-607 11) (2007) : 3(1) 53-62
12) Reed K (1984) Understanding theory: The first step in learning about research. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 38(10): 677-682
13) Mosey AC (1992) Applied Scientific inquiry in the Health Professionals: An
Epistemological Orientation. American Journal of occupational Therapy 46(11): 1047-1048 14) Mosey AC (1973) An alternative: the bio psychosocial model. American Journal of
occupational Therapy 28(3): 137-140 15) (2013) COPM GAS OT 47(4) 373-377 16) (2016) : 3(1) 10-16 17) (2012) : 1992 Core Ethics 8 245-256 18) (2013) α :
19) (2004) α 20) (2011) 21) (2014) : 22) (2005) : 23) (2008) (EBM) 2 177-189 24) (2014) : 17 27-29 25) (2013) 29 : 180 26) (2014) 2.0 33(3) 249-258
27) Kyougoku M, Teraoka M (2015) The influence of belief conflict on stress and burnout syndrome in healthcare workers: using structural equation modeling in a cross-sectional study. PeerJ PrePrints 3: e809v1
28) (2017)
29 28
29) Almost J, Wolff AC, Stewart-Pyne A, McCormick LG, Strachan D (2016) Managing and mitigating conflict in healthcare teams: an integrative review. Journal of Advanced Nursing 72(7): 1490-1505
30) Chou LP, Li CY, Hu SC (2014) Job stress and burnout in hospital employees Comparisons of different medical professions in a regional hospital in Taiwan. BMJ Open 4(2): doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004185
31) Ramsay MA (2001) Conflict in the health care workplace. Proceedings (Baylor University Medical Center) 14(2): 138-139
32) Ilhan MN, Durukan E, Taner E, Maral I, Bumin MA (2008) Burnout and its correlates among nursing staff questionnaire survey. Journal of Advanced Nursing 61(1): 100-106 33) Ulich B, Crider NM (2017) Using Teams to Improve Outcomes and Performance.
Nephrology Nursing Journal 44(2): 141-151
34) (2009)
24(3) 219-232
27(3) 139-150
36) Kyougoku M, Teraoka M, Masuda N, Oomura M, Abe Y (2015) Develop of the Assessment of Belief Conflict in Relationship-14 (ABCR-14). PLoS ONE 10(8): doi:
10.1371/journal.pone.0129349 37) (2005) 41 49-60 38) (1994) 42(1) 86-94 39) (1999) 47(3) 317-327 40) (2013) (2) : 12 195-206 41) (2006) α : 3 339-348 42) (2015) 5 19-25 43) (2006) 5 33-45
44) Wang Z, Liu H, Wu Y, Chang S, Wang L (2017) Associations between occupational stress, burnout and well-being among manufacturing workers: mediating roles of psychological capital and self-esteem. BMC Psychiatry 17(1): doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1533-6
45) Paulsson DU, Edlund B, Stenhammar C, Westerling R (2017) Psychosocial vulnerability underlying four common unhealthy behaviors in 15-16-year-old Swedish adolescents: a cross-sectional study. BMC Psychol 5(1): doi: 10.1186/s40359-017-0209-9
46) Wei XU, Yuyang Z, Zhongfang FU (2017) Relationships between dispositional mindfulness, self-acceptance, perceived stress, and psychological symptoms in advanced
gastrointestinal cancer patients. Psychooncology 26(12): doi: 10.1002/pon.4437
47) (2016) 42 499-505 48) Kabat-Zinn J ( ) (2007) 49) (2015) 34(5) 530-540 50) (2017) 4(1) 31-36 51) (2014) α 52) (2018)
53) Luca L, Marco L, Valentina C, Fabrizio D (2017) Dimensions of Mindfulness and Their Relations with Psychological Well-Being and Neuroticism. Mindfulness 8(3): 664-676
54) (2015) : 30(11) 1523-1531 55) (2017) : OT 51(3) 244-247 56) (2017) (MBOT) 32(1) 129-137 57) (2016) : 3(1) 26-32 58) (2013) 84(2) 93-102 59) (2012) 42(3) 671-676
60) Hrdison ME, Roll SC (2016) Mindfulness Interventions in Physical Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review. American Journal of occupational Therapy 70(3): doi:
10.5014/ajot.2016.018069
61) Piersol CV, Canton K, Connor SE, Giller I, Lipman S, Sager S (2017) Effctiveness of Interventions for Caregivers of People with Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Majour Neurocognitive Disorders: A Systematic Review. American Journal of occupational Therapy 71(5): doi: 10.5014/ajot.2017.027581
62) (2016) 42(3) 677-680
63) (2016) 42(3) 648-653
64) Qing QL, Zong KZ, Xiu JY, Fan CK, Xiao JS, Cui YF (2018) Mindfulness and sleep quality in adolescents: Analysis of rumination as a mediator and self-control as a moderator. Personality and Individual Differences 122: 171-176, 2017.
65) Beattie J, Hall H, Biro MA, East C, Lau R (2017) Effects of mindfulness on maternal stress, depressive symptoms and awareness of present moment experience: A pilot randomised trial. Midwifery 50: doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2017.04.006
66) Lina R, Linda L, Eva BJ, Walter O (2017) Prevalence of mind and body exercise (MBE) in relation to demographics, self-rated health, and purchases of prescribed psychotropic drugs and analgesics. PLoS ONE 12(9):doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184635
67) Shimon B, Raymond P, Preston A, Tracy L, Simpson D, Richard J (2017) Is mindfulness research methodology improving over time? A systematic review. PLoS ONE 12(10): doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187298
68) Luken M, Sammons A (2016) Systematic Review of Mindfulness practice for Reducing Job Burnout. American Journal of occupational Therapy 70(2): doi: 10.5014/ajot.2016.016956 69) Simon B, Raymond P, Richard J, Bruce E, David J, Tracy L (2017) Mindfulness-based
interventions for psychiatric disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review 59: doi10.1016/j.cpr.2017.10.011
70) Taehwan P, Maryanne RS, Cynthia RG (2013) Mindfulness: a systematic review of instruments to measure an emergent patient-reported outcome. Quality of Life Research 22(10): 2639-2659
71) Vindholmen S, Højgaard R, Espenes GA, Seiler S (2013) Return to work after vocational rehabilitation: does mindfulness matter? . Psychology Research and Behavior
Management 7: doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S56013
72) Pereira JA, Barkham M, Kellett S, Saxon D (2017) The Role of Resilience and Mindfulness in Effective Practice: A Practice-Based Feasibility Study. Administration and Policy Ment Health 44(5): doi: 10.1007/s10488-016-0747-0
73) Nicholas T, Van D, Marieke K, David R (2018) Mind the Hype: A Critical Evaluation and Prescriptive Agenda for Research on Mindfulness and Meditation. Perspective on
Psychological Science 13(1): doi:10.1177/1745691617709589
74) (2015) 75) (2014) 9(2) 93-100 76) (2016) : 77) (2016) HAD 1 59-73
78) Muthén B, Asparouhov T (2002) Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: Multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus. Mplus web notes 4: 1-22
79) (2014) M-plus R
81) (2014) R
82) (2015) 41(3) 107-116
83) (2006) pp63-78
84) Yaghmaei F (2003) Content validity and its estimation. Journal of Medical Education 3(1): 25-27
85) (2012)
- 13 49-57
86) Teraoka M, Kyougoku M (2015) Development of the Final Version of the Classification and Assessment of Occupational Dysfunction Scale. PLoS ONE 10(8): doi:
10.1371/journal.pone.0134695
87) (2002) Cronbach The
Japanese Journal of Psychology 73(3): 227-233
88) (2011) :
McDonald ω 7(1) 37-50
89) (2015) : (3
5 ) 25(1) 23-35
90) Bock R, Aitkin M (1981) Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika 46(4): 443-459
91) (2017) (Assessment of Belief Conflict
for Profession: ABCP) : 36(5) 470-482
92) Grady A (1987) Nationally speaking: Research: Its role in enhancing the professional image. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 41(6): 347-349
93) (1989) (SASSV) 14 59-65 94) (2014) : 33(4) 324-336 95) (2018) 37 96) (2016) : . 97) (2016) : 4 98) (2012) TEM :
99) (2006) 12 65-75 100) (2012) TEM 25 95-107 101) (2010) : 102) (1997)
SRS-18 The Japanese Society of Behavioral Medicine
4(1): 22-29
103) (2016) MBSR MBCT 16(4) 450-455
104) (2012) :
MCMC
105) (2016) ( )
https://www.nurse.or.jp/home/statistics/index.html [Accessed November 12, 2017]
106) (2016)
2
6
