Social Support Sample Clauses

Social Support. (8.3): Includes periodic telephone contact, visiting or other social and reassurance services to verify that the individual is not in medical, psychological, or social crisis, or to offset isolation; expenses for activities and supplies required for client participation in rehabilitation programs; therapeutic classes and exercise classes are also provided. Such services shall be provided based on need, as designated in the client’s plan of care. The MSSP has found that isolation and lack of social interaction can seriously impact some clients’ capacity to remain independent. Lack of motivation or incentive or the lack of any meaningful relationships can contribute to diminishing functional capacity and premature institutionalization. These services are often provided by volunteers or through Title III of the Older Americans Act; however, these services may not be available in a particular community and do, infrequently, require purchase. The waiver will be used to purchase friendly visiting only if the service is unavailable in the community or is inadequate as provided under other public or private programs.

Social Support. Contractor must include strategies for helping clients build prosocial protective factors that will enhance the success of family reunification interventions.

Social Support. In addition to coping mechanisms and strategies, social support was also included as a mediating variable in our study. There is substantial evidence to support that the health and wellbeing of individuals are positively affected by the structure of their informal social networks, as well as by the quality and nature of the supportive activities of those networks (Pinquart & Xxxxxxxx, 2000; Yang, 2006). The findings are mixed in terms of how minority caregivers use and benefit from social support. In their 20- year review of caregiving studies, Xxxxxxxx-Anderson, Williams, & Xxxxxx (2002) discovered that minority caregivers used formal services less than their White counterparts and that African American had more diverse informal social support systems. Janevic and Xxxxxxx (2001) reported mixed findings in their review of the literature, with regard to size of support systems between African American and White caregivers. Despite the differences in social support systems across diverse groups, social support is generally seen as a dynamic, multidimensional construct that strongly influences how humans behave and how individuals perform in their social roles (Xxxxx & Xxxx, 1985). Personal resources such as emotional resilience and mastery can also be activated to mitigate the effects of the stressors (Pearlin, 2005). Studies have found that mastery—a sense of personal control—is a strong predictor of both psychological and physical outcomes (Xxxxxxxx et al., 2012; Pearlin et al., 1981; Pudrovska et al., 2005). Longitudinal studies have found that personal mastery can reduce the effects of stress on depression and cardiovascular health outcomes over time (Xxxxxxxx et al., 2007). Considering the evidence that demonstrates that social support is a critical variable that can strongly influence the relationship between appraised stress and health outcomes, it was included in the analysis. Resilience and mastery, however, were not accounted for in this study.

Social Support. Social support is a multidimensional construct defined as the quantitative and qualitative aspects of a network of individuals that provide instrumental, emotional, and informational support to another individual (Bloom, 1982; Nausheen, Gidron, Peveler, & Xxxx-Xxxxxx, 2009). Social support has a positive effect on disease management and well-being (Bloom & Spiegel, 1984; XxXxxxxx, 2004a). Social support plays a central role in alleviating the impact of stress and facilitating coping in the presence of an illness (XxXxxxxx, 2004a). Bourjolly and Xxxxxxxxx (2001) found social support was the most commonly used coping strategy for women with breast cancer. A network of support is shown to influence decisions about treatment and helps validate an individual’s choices (Bloom, 1982). When faced with a new diagnosis such as breast cancer, a system of support can reduce the sense of isolation and ease the fear of uncertainties that accompany the diagnosis and treatment sequence (Bloom, 1982).

Social Support. Definition

Social Support. Support given to people to actively engage in their local community, community asset building, to make friends and sustain relationships. This support is more frequently given away from home.

Social Support. The SAC framework (Lazarus & Xxxxxxx, 1984) describes social support as a resource that can modify the influence of appraisals of caregiving experience and coping ability and potentially modify outcome in terms of carer distress (Xxxxx et al., 2003). Xxxxx et al. (2003) studied carers of people with psychosis and found that coping was associated with social support and concluded that effective coping in caregivers of people with psychosis may improve with support from confidantes. Social support has also been associated with better health and higher life satisfaction in carers of people with psychosis (Xxxxxx & Xxxxxxxxx, 2011). However, carers’ social networks can be negatively affected by their role and can diminish over time (Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, & Xxxxxxxxxxxxx, 1982; Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, Bayer, & Xxxxxxxxx, 1984). Xxxxxxxx et al. (2005) found that carer burden was significantly higher among relatives caring for someone with schizophrenia who reported lower support from their social network and professionals. It is possible that carers who experience posttraumatic stress symptoms may be vulnerable to experiencing reduced social networks. Social support has been shown to be negatively correlated with the development and maintenance of PTSD (e.g., Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, & Xxxxxxxxx, 2000). We know from the cognitive model of PTSD that people with persistent PTSD are likely to avoid social activities (Xxxxxx & Xxxxx, 2000). The “here and now” quality of intrusions may be interpreted as a sign by the individual that they are unable to relate to other people or that their relationships with others have permanently changed for the worse (Xxxxxx & Xxxxx, 2000). Consistent with this, Xxxxxx et al. (2012) found that social support was negatively associated with posttraumatic stress symptoms in mothers of children with type 1 diabetes.

Social Support. As part of the Weight Management Support Inventory (WMSI), overall frequency of socially supportive behaviors and overall helpfulness of socially supportive behaviors were individually assessed, as reported in Table 2. Frequency and helpfulness were also assessed as sub-scores in the four types of socially supportive behaviors: emotional, instrumental, informational, and appraisal, as described respectively in Table 3 and Table 4. All WMSI measures are reported on a scale of 1-5, with higher scores reflecting higher frequency or helpfulness or socially supportive behaviors.

Social Support. If social support increased with one unit, likelihood of preferring being supported by a coach individually decreased with 30.1% (χ2(1) = 20.938, p < .001), while the likelihood of preferring being supported by friends and family increased with 39.3% (χ2(1) = 9.423, p = .002). We found no significant relationships between social support and being supported by a coach in a group, by a coach via an app or internet, working independently via an app or internet, having contact with CVD patients via an app or internet, or being self-supportive, without a coach, app/internet or family/friends. To check the relative importance of the predictors, we conducted multivariate logistic regressions with all demographic variables included. These analyses showed that all demographic variables were only significantly predictive for the preference of being self-supportive (χ2(7) = 25.476, p = .001), supported by a coach individually (χ2(7) = 45.185, p < .001), by a coach via an app or internet (χ2(7) = 31.665, p < .001), and by friends and family (χ2(7) = 14.813, p = .038). Men (p = .005), with a higher age (p = .017) and a middle income (compared to a low income; p = .037) were most likely to be self-supportive. This is in line with the univariate analyses, only with the addition of a middle income. Young- er patients (p < .001) with a lower level of social support (p < .001) were most likely to prefer support by a coach individually. Patients with a higher level of social support (p = .014) were most likely to prefer support by family and friends. Women (p = .001) with a younger age (p = .010) were most likely to prefer support by a coach via an app or internet. These results are all in line with the univari- ate analyses. All results of the multivariate logistic regressions can be found in Appendix 1. Chapter 3 Self- 136 43 χ2(1) = Exp(B) χ2(1) = 39 54 86 χ2(2) = 42 67 70 χ2(2) = Exp(B) χ2(1) = supportive (31.7%) (18.7%) 12.802, = 1.029 11.468, (29.1%) (27.6%) (26.3%) .390, p = (28.4%) (24.1%) (30.0%) 2.405, = 1.165 3.625, p < p= .823 p = p = .057 .001** .001** .300 Coach in 85 60 χ2(1) = Exp(B) χ2(1) = 20 46 78 χ2(2) = 33 66 46 χ2(2) = Exp(B) χ2(1) = a group (19.8%) (26.1%) 3.434, = .982 5.168, (14.9%) (23.5%) (23.9%) 4.820, p (22.3%) (23.7%) (19.7%) 1.191, p = .955 .311, p = p = = .090 = .551 p = .577 .064 .023* Coach 72 67 χ2(1) = Exp(B) χ2(1) = 27 42 69 χ2(2) = 37 55 47 χ2(2) = Exp(B) χ2(1) = individually (16.8%) (29.0%) 13,715, = .960 25.557, (20.1%) (21.4%) (21.1%)...

Social Support. The 7-item social support scale was specifically developed for the original study. It measures students perceived social support following an incident of SH as victims or perpetrators. This 5-point Likert scale (1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Agree, 4. Strongly agree, 5. Not applicable ‘N/A’) include questions that examine different levels of social support systems for students such as family, tribe, and friends. (Cronbach’s alpha= 0.76). To understand potential influences of social support sources on bystander intentions, study team decided to investigate social support correlation with the outcomes of interest by support type (familial, friends, tribal) as dichotomous variables, except for tribal, where due to the high answer rates of ‘N/A’, this option was not recoded as missing. The three items used are: “If I experienced sexual harassment on campus, I could rely on my family for help”, “If I experienced sexual harassment on campus, I could rely on my friends for help”, and “If I experienced sexual harassment on campus, I could rely on members of my tribe for help.”