Dataset Information

Reducing negative affect and increasing rapport improve interracial mentorship outcomes.

ABSTRACT: Research suggests that interracial mentoring relationships are strained by negative affect and low rapport. As such, it stands to reason that strategies that decrease negative affect and increase rapport should improve these relationships. However, previous research has not tested this possibility. In video-chats (Studies 1 and 2) and face-to-face meetings (Study 3), we manipulated the degree of mutual self-disclosure between mentees and mentors, a strategy that has been shown to reduce negative affect and increase rapport. We then measured negative affect and rapport as mediators, and mentee performance (quality of speech delivered; Studies 1 and 3) and mentor performance (warmth and helpfulness; Studies 2 and 3) as key outcomes. Results revealed that increased self-disclosure decreased negative affect and increased rapport for both mentees and mentors. Among mentees, decreased negative affect predicted better performance (Studies 1 and 3). Among mentors, increased rapport predicted warmer feedback (Studies 2 and 3). These effects remained significant when we meta-analyzed data across studies (Study 4), and also revealed the relationship of rapport to more helpful feedback. Findings suggest that affect and rapport are key features in facilitating positive outcomes in interracial mentoring relationships.

SUBMITTER: Leitner JB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5884483 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reducing negative affect and increasing rapport improve interracial mentorship outcomes.

Leitner Jordan B JB Ayduk Özlem Ö Boykin C Malik CM Mendoza-Denton Rodolfo R

PloS one 20180404 4

Research suggests that interracial mentoring relationships are strained by negative affect and low rapport. As such, it stands to reason that strategies that decrease negative affect and increase rapport should improve these relationships. However, previous research has not tested this possibility. In video-chats (Studies 1 and 2) and face-to-face meetings (Study 3), we manipulated the degree of mutual self-disclosure between mentees and mentors, a strategy that has been shown to reduce negative ...[more]

PMID: 29617368

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients receiving in-center hemodialysis experience disproportionate morbidity and incur high healthcare-related costs. Much of this cost stems from potentially avoidable hospitalizations. Peer mentorship has been used effectively to improve outcomes for patients with complex chronic diseases. We propose testing the efficacy of peer mentorship on hospitalization rates among patients receiving hemodialysis.MethodsThis is a multicenter parallel group randomized controlled pragmatic trial of patients treated at hemodialysis facilities in Bronx, NY and Nashville, TN. The study has two phases. Phase 1 will enroll and train 16 hemodialysis patients (10 in Bronx, NY and 6 in Nashville TN) to be mentors using a program focused on enhancing self-efficacy, dialysis self-management and autonomy-supportive communication skills. Phase 2 will enroll 200 high risk adults receiving hemodialysis (140 in Bronx, NY and 60 in Nashville, TN), half of whom will be randomized to intervention and half to usual care. Intervention participants are assigned to weekly telephone calls with trained mentors (see Phase 1) for a 3-month period. The primary outcome of Phase 1 will be engagement of mentors with training and change in knowledge scores and autonomy skills from pre- to post-training. The primary outcome of Phase 2 will be the composite count of ED visits and hospitalizations at the end of study follow-up in patient participants assigned to intervention as compared to those assigned to usual care. Secondary outcomes for Phase 2 include the change over the trial period in validated survey scores measuring perception of social support and self-efficacy, and dialysis adherence metrics, among intervention participants as compared to usual care participants.DiscussionThe PEER-HD study will test the feasibility and efficacy of a pragmatic peer-mentorship program designed for patients receiving hemodialysis on ED visit and hospitalization rates. If effective, peer-mentorship holds promise as a scalable patient-centered intervention to decrease hospital resource utilization, and by extension morbidity and cost, for patients receiving maintenance in-center hemodialysis.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03595748 ; 7/23/2018.Trial sponsorNational Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease (NIDDK) 5R18DK118471.FundingFunding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease: R18DK118471.Study statusThis is an ongoing study and not complete. We are still collecting data for observational follow-up on participants.Related articlesNo related articles for this study have been submitted to any journal. The study sponsor and funders had no role in the design, analysis or interpretation of this data. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a peer mentorship intervention to improve self-management of osteoarthritis (OA).DesignSix-month parallel group non-blinded randomised feasibility trial.SettingOne secondary care and one primary care UK National Health Service Trust.ParticipantsFifty adults aged ≥55 years old with hip and/or knee OA.InterventionsParticipants were allocated 1:1 to the intervention or control group using an online randomisation service. Intervention group participants received usual care (information resources) and up to eight community-based self-management support sessions delivered by a peer mentor (trained volunteer with hip and/or knee OA). Control group participants received usual care only.Outcome measuresKey feasibility outcomes were participant and peer mentor recruitment and attrition, intervention completion and the sample size required for a definitive RCT. Based on these feasibility outcomes, four success criteria for proceeding to a definitive RCT were prespecified. Patient-reported outcomes were collected via questionnaires at baseline, 8 weeks and 6 months.ResultsNinety-six individuals were screened, 65 were eligible and 50 were randomised (25 per group). Of the 24 participants who commenced the intervention, 20 completed it. Four participants did not complete the 6-month questionnaire. Twenty-one individuals were eligible for the peer mentor role, 15 were trained and 5 withdrew prior to being matched with a participant. No intervention-related harms occurred. Allowing for 20% attrition, the sample size required for a definitive RCT was calculated as 170 participants. The intervention group showed improvements in self-management compared with the control group.ConclusionsThe feasibility outcomes achieved the prespecified criteria for proceeding to an RCT. The exploratory analyses suggest peer mentorship may improve OA self-management. An RCT of the OA peer mentorship intervention is therefore warranted with minor modifications to the intervention and trial procedures.Trial registration numberISRCTN:50675542.

Project description:BackgroundStrengthening the quality of laboratory diagnostics is a key part of building global health capacity. In 2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Southeast European Center for Surveillance and Control of Infectious Diseases (SECID), WHO European Regional Office (WHO EURO) and American Public Health Laboratories (APHL) collaborated to address laboratory quality training needs in Southeast Europe. Together, they developed a quality assurance (QA) mentorship program for six national laboratories (Laboratories A-E) in five countries utilizing APHL international consultants. The primary goal of the mentorship program was to help laboratories become recognized by WHO as National Influenza Centers (NICs). The program aimed to do this by strengthening influenza laboratory capacity by implementing quality management systems (QMS) action steps. After 1 year, we evaluated participants' progress by the proportion of QMS action steps they had successfully implemented, as well as the value of mentorship as perceived by laboratory mentees, mentors, and primary program stakeholders from SECID and WHO EURO.MethodsTo understand perceived value we used the qualitative method of semi-structured interviews, applying grounded theory to the thematic analysis.ResultsMentees showed clear progress, having completed 32 to 68% [median: 62%] of planned QMS action steps in their laboratories. In regards to the perceived value of the program, we found strong evidence that laboratory mentorship enhances laboratory quality improvement by promoting accountability to QMS implementation, raising awareness of the importance of QMS, and fostering collaborative problem solving.ConclusionIn conclusion, we found that significant accomplishments can be achieved when QA programs provide dedicated technical mentorship for QMS implementation. Since the start of the mentoring, Laboratory "B" has achieved NIC recognition by WHO, while two other labs made substantial progress and are scheduled for recognition in 2018. In the future, we recommend that mentorship is more inclusive of laboratory directors, and that programs evaluate the amount of staff time needed for mentorship activities, including lab-based assessments and mentoring.

Dataset Information

Reducing negative affect and increasing rapport improve interracial mentorship outcomes.

Publications

Reducing negative affect and increasing rapport improve interracial mentorship outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets