Help Sources 1
COUNSELING CENTER
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND
COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND
STABILITY IN UNIVERSITY
STUDENT HELP SOURCE
Research Report # 8-87
Computer
time for this project has been provided in full through the Computer Science
Center of the University of Maryland.
Help Sources 2
COUNSELING CENTER
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND
COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND
PREFERENCES BY GENDER OVER A
10-YEAR PERIOD
Research Report # 8-87
Rose M. Abler and William E.
Sedlacek
The
stability of university student help source preferences was investigated over a
10-year period. Given the conflicting literature on gender differences in
help source preferences, this variable was included in the analysis. A help
sources questionnaire (Christenson & Magoon, 1974) was administered to 118
incoming f reshmen (44% males; 56% females) in 1976 and 462 incoming freshmen
(39% males; 51% females) in 1986. Data were analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis
one-way analysis of variance (Kruskal & Wallis, 1952). Results
revealed that help sources were consistent over this ten year period. Gender
differences existed in 1976 as well as in 1986.
One of the major forces
confronting Student affairs professionals today is the “intense scrutiny” of
programs and services due to the tight budget situation (Shaffer, 1984, p.
112). No longer can costly programs be implemented to fulfill temporary needs
or passing trends.
To assist student affairs professionals in planning cost-effective programs, researcher have employed various methods to study student needs - for example identifying characteristics of those who utilize counseling services (Sladen, 1982); examining perceptions of the counseling center by those who do and do not use its services (Shueman & Medvene, 1981); and classifying counseling center clients on Clark-Trow subcultures (Sedlacek, Walters, & Valente, 1985). Studying student preferences for sources of help has also provided information to guide the planning of student services (Leong & Sedlacek, 1986). Although such preferences have been studied for over three decades (e.g., Form, 1953; Rust & Davie, 1961; Christensen & Magoon, 1974; Tinsley, Brown, de St. Aubin & Lucek 1984), little is known about the stability of those choices students indicate. Comparing cross- sectional data from various studies can be problematic due to differences in methodology. Yet if such preferences for help sources are to be used in developing student
programs, it is important to assess the consistency
of those preferences. The importance of information provided by help source
preferences would vary considerably, depending on whether such preferences
indicate temporary interests or enduring needs.
There has been continued
debate in the literature as to which variables are a function of help-seeking
behavior. Research on gender differences in help preferences has generated
particularly equivocal data. Same studies have shown no gender differences
(Christensen & Magoon, 1974; Snyder, Hill & Derksen, 1972) whereas
others have demonstrated clear gender effects (Cook et al., 1984; Kramer,Berger
& Miller, 1974; Pliner & Brown, 1985; Tracey et al., 1984).
Given the importance of
assessing stability in student help source preferences and the lack-of
such information in the current literature an investigation of help source
preferences over time was conducted. By controlling the setting, it was
believed that a better assessment of whether students had changed over time was
possible.
Method
A help sources questionnaire
(Christensen & Magoon, 1974) was administered to 118 incoming freshman (44%
males; 56%, females) in 1976. The same questionnaire was administered to 462
incoming freshmen (49% males; 51% females) in 1986. Students were instructed to
assume they
had tried unsuccessfully to solve a problem alone
and were about to seek help. The help sources questionnaire lists 12 help
givers and asks students to rank them, in order of preference, first for an
educational /vocational problem and then for an emotional/social problem.
Demographic information and questions about past counseling experience were
also part of the questionnaire.
Data were analyzed by the
Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance for independent samples
(Kruskal & Wallis, 1952) at the .05 level. Students were classified on the
basis of their year and gender, and their rankings were compared for each type
of problem (educational/vocational and emotional/social). When ties (in student
rankings) were encountered, one of the items in the tie was randomly selected
to be incremented by one.
Table 1 shows the help
source rankings of 1976 and 1986 students for educational/vocational and
emotional/social problems.
1976. In 1976,
males and females reported very similar help source rankings for educational/
vocational problems; the only significant difference pertained to preference
for a
female counselor. Not surprisingly, female students
ranked this help source higher than did male students (H = 8.31). More gender
differences were demonstrated for emotional/social problems. Male students
ranked faculty member (H = 4.94), male counselor (H = 15.07), and clergy (H =
3.84) higher than did female students. Female students ranked female counselor
(H = 3.88), older friend (H = 4.10), and nonstudent friend (H = 7.26) higher than did male students.
1986. A somewhat similar pattern
was demonstrated by 1986 students. For educational/vocational problems, male
students ranked ma1e counselor (H = 8.96) and physician (H = 14.33) higher than
did female students. Female students ranked female counselor (H = 12.23) higher
than did male students. Again larger gender differences were demonstrated
for emotional/social concerns. Male students ranked
faculty member (H = 28.21), faculty advisor (H = 5.13), and male counselor (H =
18.81) higher than did female students. Female students ranked female counselor
(H = 10.88) and student friend (H = 6.98) higher than did male students.
Given that gender differences existed in both 1976 and 1986, particularly for emotional/social problems, gender was not collapsed across year for analyses conducted to determine stability in help source preferences over time. 1976 males were compared to 1986 males, and 1976 females were compared
Males. For educational/vocational
problems, the only change indicated for male students was that 1976 males
ranked clergy higher than did 1986 males (H = 6.93). For emotional/social
problems, 1976 males ranked physician (H = 4.81) higher and clergy (H = 10.29)
higher than did 1986 males. 1986 males ranked nonstudent friend (H = 7.51)
higher than did 1976 males.
Females.
No significant changes in the help sources were demonstrated for females
between 1976 and 1986. This was true whether the problem was
educational/vocational or emotional/social.
The results indicate that preferences for help sources remained relatively stable over time. Given that the help source preferences are widely used to design student services (see Leong & Sedlacek, 1986), this information is encouraging in light of the need for cost-effective program planning. If help source preferences indicate that a particular program is needed, justifying the costs involved is much easier since it can be demonstrated that the program will be effective on a long term basis.
It is also interesting to note the clear gender differences in help source preferences for emotional/social problems in both 1976 and 1986. For example, preference for a female counselor was more apparent in both groups of female
students. Also, for emotional/social problems male students were more likely to turn in a member of the campus community than were female students; female counselor was the only campus representative ranked higher for females than males. Outreach groups aimed at helping female students adjust to campus life may more effectively meet their goal by using female counselors as leaders.
Help Sources 9
References
Christensen, K, & Magoon, T. (1974). Perceived hierarchy of help-giving sources for two categories of student problems. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 21, 311-314.
Cook, E., Park, W., Williams, G., Webb, M., Nicholson, B., Schneider, D., & Bassman, S. (1984). Students’ perceptions of personal problems, appropriate help sources, and general attitudes about counseling. Journal of Student Personnel., 25, 139-144.
Form, A. (1953). Users and nonusers of counseling services. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 32, 209-213.
Kramer, H., Berger, F., & Miller, C. (1974) Student concerns and sources of assistance. Journal of College Student Personnel, 15, 389-393.
Kruskal, W. & Wallis, W. (1952). Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. Journal of American Statistical Association, 47, 583-621.
Leong, F., & Sedlacek, W. (1986). A comparison between international and U.S. students’ preferences for help sources. Journal of College Student Personnel, 27, 426, 430.
Pliner, J., & Brown, D. (1985). Projection of reactions to stress and preferences for helpers among students from four ethnic groups. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 147-151.
Rust, R., & Davie, J. (1961). The personal problems of college students. Mental Hygiene, 45, 247-257.
Sedlacek, W., Walters, P., & Valente, J. (1985). Differences between counseling clients and nonclients on Clark-Trow subcultures. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 319-322.
Shaffer, R. (1984). Critical dimensions of student affairs in the decades ahead. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 112-114.
Shueman, S., & Medvene, A. (1981). Student perceptions of appropriateness of presenting problems: What’s happened to attitudes in 20 years? Journal of College Student Personnel, 22, 264-269.
Sladen, V. (1982). Effects of race and socioeconomic status on the perceptions of process variables in counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 560-566.
Snyder, J., Hill, C., & Derksen, T. (1972). Why some students do not use university counseling facilities. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 19, 263-268.
Tinsley, H., Brown, M., de St. Aubin, T., & Lucek, J. (1984). Relation between expectancies for a helping relationship and tendency to seek help from a campus help provider. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 149-160.
Help Sources 11
Tracey, T., Sherry, P., Bauer, G., Robins, T., Todaro, L., & Briggs, S. (1984). Help seeking as a function of student characteristics and program description: A logit-linear analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 54-62.
|
Table 1: Help Source Rankings for
Educational/Vocational and Emotional/Social Problems by Sex and Year |
||||||||
|
|
Educational/Vocational |
Emotional/Social |
||||||
|
|
Male |
Female |
Male |
Female |
||||
|
|
1976 |
1986 |
1976 |
1986 |
1976 |
1986 |
1976 |
1986 |
|
Faculty Member |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
9 |
|
Mean Rank |
5.21 |
5.16 |
5.55 |
5.58 |
7.84 |
7.35 |
8.9 |
8.6 |
|
S.D. |
2.49 |
2.72 |
2.66 |
2.53 |
2.73 |
2.56 |
2.23 |
2.19 |
|
Faculty Advisor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
4 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
|
Mean Rank |
4.71 |
4.96 |
4.8 |
4.59 |
7.63 |
7.46 |
8 |
8.07 |
|
S.D. |
2.64 |
2.91 |
2.8 |
2.49 |
2.42 |
2.44 |
2.23 |
2.05 |
|
Parents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
|
Mean Rank |
3.72 |
3.44 |
3.2 |
3.2 |
4.02 |
4.05 |
3.78 |
3.79 |
|
S.D. |
2.64 |
2.82 |
2.41 |
2.62 |
3.26 |
3.15 |
2.6 |
2.91 |
|
Relative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
8 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
|
Mean Rank |
6.64 |
6.36 |
6.89 |
6.33 |
6.54 |
6.03 |
6.05 |
5.77 |
|
S.D. |
2.91 |
2.95 |
3.01 |
2.82 |
3.45 |
2.96 |
3 |
2.89 |
|
Male Counselor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
3 |
5 |
7 |
7 |
4 |
5 |
7 |
7 |
|
Mean Rank |
4.6 |
5.13 |
5.52 |
5.85 |
5.12 |
5.68 |
6.92 |
6.7 |
|
S.D. |
2.52 |
2.45 |
2.53 |
2.42 |
2.41 |
2.38 |
2.4 |
2.16 |
|
Female Counselor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
7 |
7 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
Mean Rank |
6 |
5.87 |
4.53 |
5.05 |
6.47 |
6.38 |
5.52 |
5.62 |
|
S.D. |
2.74 |
2.41 |
2.31 |
2.32 |
2.54 |
2.49 |
2.54 |
2.14 |
|
Older Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
5 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
Mean Rank |
4.75 |
4.67 |
4.85 |
4.63 |
4.35 |
3.68 |
3.31 |
3.1 |
|
S.D. |
2.24 |
2.5 |
2.22 |
2.49 |
2.63 |
2.38 |
1.9 |
1.7 |
|
Student Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
Mean Rank |
4.23 |
4.24 |
4.39 |
4.33 |
3.94 |
3.4 |
3.24 |
2.27 |
|
S.D. |
3.05 |
2.37 |
2.74 |
2.5 |
3.12 |
2.5 |
2.54 |
1.91 |
|
Nonstudent Friend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
9 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
|
Mean Rank |
6.65 |
6.32 |
7 |
6.42 |
6.13 |
4.82 |
4.49 |
4.27 |
|
S.D. |
3.05 |
2.76 |
2.35 |
2.82 |
3.22 |
3.02 |
2.35 |
2.57 |
|
Psychiatrist |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
12 |
11 |
11 |
10 |
11 |
10 |
9 |
10 |
|
Mean Rank |
10.43 |
10.29 |
10.51 |
10.35 |
8.45 |
8.77 |
8.71 |
9.04 |
|
S.D. |
1.98 |
1.84 |
1.26 |
1.49 |
3.64 |
3.11 |
3.11 |
2.46 |
|
Physician |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
11 |
10 |
12 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
11 |
11 |
|
Mean Rank |
10.31 |
10.24 |
10.54 |
10.77 |
8.92 |
9.97 |
9.33 |
9.87 |
|
S.D. |
136 |
1.55 |
1.79 |
1.09 |
2.98 |
2.21 |
2.77 |
2.15 |
|
Clergyman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank |
10 |
12 |
10 |
12 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
|
Mean Rank |
10.15 |
10.65 |
10.12 |
10.78 |
8.15 |
9.92 |
9.39 |
10.28 |
|
S.D. |
1.85 |
2.05 |
2.71 |
1.81 |
3.8 |
2.77 |
3.08 |
2.4 |