Post on 06-Oct-2020
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 447
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
The determination of self-esteem, self-efficacy and achievement
motivation measures in predicting women’s quality of life
Maryam Razaviyayn, Zahra padash, Dr Azam Moradi
MA in Clinical Psychology
M. A, In family counseling, Department of Psychology, University of Isfahan, Iran.
Faculty member, department of Psychology, Shahrekord Payame Noor University
Abstract The aim of the present study was to determine the measure of self-esteem, self-efficacy and
achievement motivation variables in predicting women’s quality of life in Isfahan. Method:
The research samples included 160 female citizens of Isfahan who referred to 5 selected
public libraries of Isfahan in 2010. In order to assess the quality of life the World Health
Organization’s Quality Of Life brief questionnaire, to measure up self-esteem the
Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale, to assess the self-efficacy Schwarzer and Jerusalem self-
efficacy scale, to assess achievement motivation, Hermens’ achievement motivation
questionnaire and to calculate demographic features a researcher-made questionnaire have
been applied. The data were analyzed through descriptive statistics and stepwise regression
analysis. The results of stepwise regression analysis proved that the self-esteem can
significantly predict the participants’ quality of life (P=0.00) and adding achievement
motivation variable to self-esteem can significantly increase the prediction power of women’s
quality of life in Isfahan (P=0.002), however adding the variable of self-efficacy to the self-
esteem and achievement motivation cannot significantly increase the prediction power of the
participants’quality of life.The variables of self-esteem and achievement motivation play an
important role in explaining women’s quality of life in Isfahan.
Key words: Quality of life, self-esteem, self-efficacy, achievement motivation, women,
Isfahan
Introduction:
World Health Organization considers “health” as a state wherein a person is healthy
regarding psychological, affective and social aspects and there cannot be observed any kind
of disease and psychoneurosis (cited from Saxena and Oconnell, 2002). The above definition
implies that in order to assess the health, just the traditional indices of the rate of “mortality”
and “morbidity” should not be taken into account, otherwise it is the quality of life which
should be (Saxena and Oconnell, 2002).
The history of the concept of quality of life dated back to Aristotle’s in that era Aristotle has
assumed “good life” and “doing the tasks well” as the synonym of happiness. But he has
stated explicitly that not only the happiness has different meanings for various people, but
also it will not have the same meaning for a person in different situations. After all, at that
time the happiness or living happily was assumed as the equivalent of what is now called the
quality of life. However the term “quality of life” has not been used since twentieth century.
Gradually the researchers understood that the quality of life can be one of the significant
consequences while assessing health, as WHO’s definition of health stresses it (Fayers and
Machin, 2000).
According to WHO’s definition, the quality of life is the people’s comprehension from their
condition in life based on culture, the value system wherein they live, their goals and
expectations, standards and priorities. Therefore, the quality of life is a solely a mental issue
and is not observable by the others, it is founded on the person’s understanding from various
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 448
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
aspects of life (Bonomi, Patrick, Bushnell and Martin, 2000; WHOQOL, 1996). In this
definition the quality of life is a pervasive concept which is affected by physical health,
personal growth, psychological states, independency level, social relationships, and
communication with prominent institutions of environment and it is based on the person’s
impression. In fact the quality of life is a range including objective and subjective aspects
interacting with each other. From another view quality of life is a dynamic concept, since the
values and self-assessments may change in the passage of time reacting to the life’s events
and experiences as well as health condition. Moreover every domain of quality of life can
affect outstandingly on other domains (Newa Chek and Taylor, 1992). So it is a complex and
multiple issue (Leu, 1985).
Quality of life theory constitutes apt features with mediator variables (vulnerabilities) (Denny
and Frisch, 1981; Frisch and McCord, 1987) which can increase the probability of
unhappiness and low satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) from the life. Supportive factors or
“immunities” against dissatisfaction include opposite factors to vulnerabilities or risk factors.
The studies have proved the proposed “vulnerabilities” in quality of life theory (e.g. Diener,
Diener, Tamir, Kim-Prieto, and Scollon, 2003; Barlow, 2002; Seligman, 2002; Snyder and
Lopez, 2002; Clark and Beck, 1999; cited from Frisch, 2006).
In quality of life theory among personal apt features of dissatisfaction from the life or
vulnerabilities are low self-esteem and low self-efficacy (Frisch, 2006 :33) and the feeling of
laggardness and stagnancy in valuable domains of life (Frisch, 2007:18) and not actually
having the achievement motivation.
Self-esteem is the degree of value a person considers for himself (Weare, 2000)
Self-efficacy includes the person’s strict belief to successfully perform the required specific
behavior to get to the interested result (Bandura, 1997).
The achievement motivation is defined as the personal attempt to get to the goals in his/her
social milieu (Elliot and Church, 1997).
It was such proposed that the self-esteem, skill, the feeling of control and self-efficacy are
important adjusting and predicting factors in life quality (Hansson, Middelboe, Mernider,
Bjarnason, 1999; Barry and Zissis, 1997; Kentros, Terkelson Hull, Smith and Goodman,
1997).
Self-esteem is within the most significant aspects of personality and it determines behavioral
features (Sadrossadat, 2000) as well as human’s development, as most of the specialists
assume it an important and basic factor in affective and social adjustment (Lee, 1994).
Judge, Locke and Durham (1997) agree that the people who believe in their ability to call up
the needed motivation, cognitive sources and required actions in order to exercise general
control on the life events, i.e. their self-efficacy is high, are more satisfied with their life
comparing to those who don’t believe such. Numerous researchers have understood that self-
efficacy relates to a wide range of clinical issues such as phobias, addiction, depression,
social skills, assertiveness and tenseness, etc (Pajares, 2002).
Wiegand and Geller (2004) believe that positive psychology has ignored the role of positive
reinforcement and the elements such as achievement motivation training for increasing the
quality of life.
The results of the study carried out by Murphy and Murphy (2006) showed that self-esteem
and self-efficacy are among the most salient explaining factors of quality of life in those
suffering from psychological disabilities.
According to the findings of the study by Kermode and Maclin (2001), high self-esteem is
significantly important in general indices of life quality; in the same way high positive self-
esteem and the nonexistence of low self-esteem, are effective factors in happiness aspect of
life quality. The outcomes of the research performed by May and Warren (2002) proved that
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 449
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
there is a relationship between self-esteem and the quality of life of the patients suffering
from spinal injuries.
Bent, Jones, Molloy, Chamberlain, and Tennant (2001) in an interview with 45 complex
physically disabled who were 16-28 years old perceived that the most important determinants
of the people’s participation in activities is energy, pain, the intensity of disability and self-
efficacy. The results of Tsay and Healstead’s (2002) study confirmed that after controlling
the age effect, self-efficacy is the most important predictor in life quality of hemo-dialysis
patients. In a separate study Taylor, Dean and Sigert (2006) carried out a survey on public
population and found out that general self-efficacy is strongly related to psychological
irritation. Jokes and Van Eldern (2007) in a study on patients suffering from heart disease
understood that there is a relationship between these patients’ self-efficacy and their quality
of life.
Kujerr and De Ridder (2003) found that there is a relationship between higher difference of
the goals importance and accessibility to them and lower level of life quality in patients
having asthma, diabetes, and heart stroke; moreover self-efficacy in accessing to the desired
goals mediates the above relationship.
The results of path analysis by Moradi (2009) the aim whereof was to determine the degree of
the effect of self-esteem, self-efficacy and achievement motivation on life quality in young
females suffering from physical-motor disability and to determine the mediating role of
entrepreneurship behavior in this effect, showed that the variables of self-esteem and
achievement motivation directly affect these female’s quality of life, however self-esteem
didn’t directly affect quality of life despite being relatively great its path coefficient.
The findings of the survey by Asadi Sadeghi Azar, Vasudeva and Abdollahi (2007) proved
that in the whole sample and in all three sub-groups of incumbent women in professional
vocations, incumbent women in non-professional vocations and jobless women, there is
positive relationship between life quality, being stubborn, self-efficacy and self-esteem. The
results, also, proved that three variables of being stubborn, self-efficacy and self-esteem,
respectively, are strongest predictors of life quality in the whole sample as well as in three
sub-groups.
The results of Zaki’s study (2007) stated that there is a significant relationship between self-
esteem and life quality of the students in Isfahan University.
The findings of the study carried out by Esmaeili, Alikhani, Gholam Araghi and Hoseini
(2005) proved that there is a direct relationship between life quality and self-efficacy in
patients under hemo-dialysis. Similarly in the study by Karimzade Shirazi, Razavie and Kave
(2008) conducted on incumbent teachers in different educational levels in Shahrekord, it is
found out that there is a positive relationship between the teachers’ life quality and their
vocational self-efficacy.
Now taking into account the need to assess the degree of women’s quality of life and the
importance of identifying effective factors in this group’s quality of life in the society and the
fact that relying on the research history, achievement motivation, self-efficacy and self-
esteem are among effective factors on quality of life; and due to population context and
special cultural, social and economic features of Isfahan which possibly can make the role of
some effective factors on life quality of women in this city prominent, the present study is to
answer to this question that how much the share of each of the variables of self-esteem, self-
efficacy and achievement motivation is in predicting these women’s quality of life. The
purpose of the current study includes determining the share of each of the factors of self-
esteem, self-efficacy and achievement motivation in predicting the life quality of women in
Isfahan.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 450
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
The hypotheses of the present research are:
1. The self-esteem variable can predict the degree of women’s life quality in Isfahan.
2. Adding the self-efficacy variable to self-esteem variable would increase the power of
predicting women’s quality of life in Isfahan.
3. Adding the achievement motivation variable to variables of self-esteem and self-efficacy
would increase the power of predicting women’s quality of life in Isfahan.
Method:
Research design:
The design of the present study is a predictive correlational one.
Statistical population, sample and sampling method
The statistical population of the present study were women referring to 5 public libraries in
summer of 2010 who were selected from public library list in Isfahan. The samples of the
study were 160 from cited population chosen through accessible method. From 160 rendered
questionnaires 114 were completely filled out.
Table 1 the number of the participants shows different levels of investigated demographic
variables.
Table 1: The number of participants of different levels of demographic variables
frequency percentage
Vocational status
having governmental
vocation 13 11.4
having non-
governmental vocation 13 11.4
jobless 88 77.2
Marital status married 17 85.1
single 97 14.9
Education level
diploma 35 30.7
sophomore 9 7.9
bachelor degree 49 43
Economic status
post graduate 21 18.4
weak 3 2.6
medium 92 80.7
good 19 16.7
Age mean 25.30
Instrument
The present study has applied the demographic feature questionnaire, brief form of WHO’s
Quality Of Life questionnaire, Rosenberg’s self-esteem questionnaire, Schwarzer and
Jerusalem self-efficacy questionnaire and Hermans achievement motivation questionnaire
which will be described at length in following parts.
1. demographic features questionnaire
Demographic features questionnaire was composed of the questions regarding vocational
status, marital status, educational level, birth year, and economic status (weak, medium, and
good).
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 451
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
2. WHO’s brief form of Quality Of Life Questionnaire was composed via combining some
domains and omitting some questions from WHOQOL-100. The studies indicated that these
two forms of the questionnaire have satisfying harmony. WHOQOL-BREF would measure 4
domains of physical health, psychological health, social relations and health of the
environment and it has 26 questions wherein 2 first were general questions and it does not
have anything in common with domains (Bonomi et.al, 2000). This questionnaire has been
standardized by Nejat, Montazeri, Halakooei Naeini, Mohammad and Majdzade (2006).
Nejat and his cooperators have reported its content diagnostic validity as suitable and
measured its test-retest reliability, in order, 0.77, 5.77, 0..07 and 0.84 for physical health,
psychological health, social relations and the health of the environment and calculated
internal consistency of its different domains via Cronbach alpha method 0.52- 0.84 for
healthy and sick individuals.
It is worth mentioning that since in analyzing factors proposed by Nejat et.al (2006) the
correlation between all 3 questions in social relations subscale with this subscale was lower
than its correlation with other subscales and the estimated Cronbach alpha for it has also been
reported low just as the same as other studies (0.52 for sick people and 0.55 for healthy
people) and in the research conducted by Moradi (2010), in the same way, its internal
consistency was measured 0.60, therefore the above questionnaire includes 3 subscales
(physical health, psychological health and the health of the environment). In the study carried
out by Moradi (2010) the reliability of WHOQOL-BREF was calculated 0.92 through
Cronbach alpha and that of physical health subscale 0.77, psychological health 0.81 and the
health of environment subscale 0.73.
3. Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale
Rosenberg’s 10 item scale is scored through Likert scale, which is one of high fame
instrument to assess internal aspects of self-esteem (Nosek et.al, 2003). Blascovich and
Tomaka (1991) in reviewing the studies printed in case of self-esteem perceived that in 25%
of these studies, Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale was applied. It is interesting because of its
shortness and simplicity (Murphy and Murphy, 2006). It is a simple and short questionnaire
having appropriate or suitable reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) and validity
(convergent and divergent) and it is applicable for every age group with education of fifth
grade (Rosenberg, 1979). In sum, the results of various studies (e.g. Whiteside-Mensell and
Corwyn, 2003; Hujian, 2003; Greenberger, Chen, Dmitrieva and Farruggia, 2003; Weiss,
2002) have proved the reliability and validity of Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale.
The findings of the study carried out by Schmitt and Allik (2005) on people living in 53
countries, in almost all of them the scores of Rosenberg’s self-esteem relates to neuroticism
and romantic attachment style.
The above questionnaire was normalized by Shapoorian et.al (1987) and Rajabi and Bohlool
(2007). The results of the study by Mohammadi (2005) indicated that the correlation of form
B of Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale with Cooper Smith self-esteem scale is 0.61 and subscales
of depression and anxiety of revised form of SCL-90 are -0.54 and -0.43. In Moradi’s survey
(2000) the reliability of Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale was estimated 0.69 through
administering it on 30 members of disabled society in Isfahan and via Cronbach alpha.
4. general self-efficacy scale
The general 10 item scale of self-efficacy in 2002 was designed by Schwarzer and Jerusalem
(cited from Schwrzer and Jerusalem, 1995). The participants should recognize the degree of
each item’s truth regarding themselves in a four-degree scale from 1 (it is not true) to (it is
completely true). The more the scores are, the higher the general feeling of the person’s self-
efficacy will be (Rajabi, 2006).
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 452
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
Now the previously discussed scale is applied for predicting the adjustment after life change
and for assessing the effectiveness of clinical affairs and making changes in the behavior
(Asadi Sadeghi Azar et.al. 2006).
For German version of general self-efficacy scale, upper range of internal consistency (0.82-
0.93) and test-retest reliability was reported to be high (Schwarzes, 1994). Schools et.al
(2002) have also reported a high internal consistency for this scale. test-retest reliability of
general self-efficacy scale achieved through administering on 5 various samples in a six-
month period was 0.67, in a one-year period 0.5 to 0.70 and in a two-year period from 0.47 to
0.63 (cited from Wu, 2009).
The estimated concurrent validity and the criterion-related validity for the scale of general
self-efficacy have been reported suitable in different studies (e.g. Schwarzer, Schmmits and
Tang, 2000; Schwarzer, Babler, Kwiatek, Schroder and Zhang, 1997; Schwrzer and
Jerusalem, 1979; and Rajabi, 2006).
In a survey carried out by Moradi (2000) the reliability of general self-efficacy scale was
measured 0.92 through administering on 30 members of disabled society in Isfahan via
Cronbach alpha method.
5. Hermans achievement motivation questionnaire
This questionnaire was made up in the form of 29 incomplete sentences by Hermans (1970)
and each of them was followed by 3 or 4 options ranging from “I completely agree” to “I
totally disagree”. Getting high scores in this questionnaire would imply having high
achievement motivation (cited from Talebpour, Nouri and Mowlavi, 2002).
The achieved reliability for the achievement motivation questionnaire in various studies was
reported suitable (e.g. Hermans, 1970; Asvadi, 2000; Talebpour et.al., 2002; Shokrkob,
Boroumand Nasab, Najjarian and Shahni Yeilagh, 2002).
Moreover Hermans (1970) perceived suitable the concurrent and content validity in
achievement motivation questionnaire. He has assessed diagnosing reliability of its questions
from 0.3 to 0.57 (cited from Talebpoor et.al. 2002). Achievement motivation questionnaire
was rendered into Persian and normalized by Shokrkon et.al. (2002), one of its items has been
deleted.
In a survey by Moradi (2010) the reliability of Herman’s achievement motivation
questionnaire was measured 0.71 through administering on 30 members of disables society
Isfahan via Cronbach alpha method.
Method
After choosing the samples, the selected public libraries of Isfahan were referred to.
Following some agreements with principals of each library, the questionnaires were given to
the subjects informing them how to fill them out as well as emphasizing them regarding
confidentiality of their information. 114 out of 160 questionnaires have been filled out
completely.
Data analysis
In order to analyze the data the indices of frequency, mean and standard deviation from
descriptive statistics and step-by-step regression in inferential statistics have been used. In
step-by-step regression the scores of WHO’s Quality Of Life questionnaire (WHOQOL-
BREF) were analyzed as predicting (dependent) variable and their mean scores in each 3
questionnaires of Rosenberg’s self-esteem, Schwarzer and Jerusalem self-efficacy and
Herman’s achievement motivation as predictor (independent) variable.
Results
In this part, first to the descriptive statistics indices investigated are pointed out; afterwards
the results from stepwise regression are rendered.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 453
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
Table 2 depicts descriptive statistics indices of the scores from women’s quality of life, self-
esteem, self-efficacy and achievement motivation and table 3 shows the descriptive statistics
indices of the scores from women’s quality of life according to different demographic
features.
Table 2: The descriptive statistics indices of the scored of the women’s quality of life,
self-esteem, self-efficacy and achievement motivation
statistical
indices
variable
mean standard
deviation range maximum minimum Number
life quality 86.96 13.02 60 114 54 114
self-esteem 29.24 5.73 29 39 10 114
self-efficacy 31.15 5.97 25 40 15 114
achievement
motivation 74.46 6.15 28 88 60 114
Table 3: The descriptive statistics indices of the scores from the participants’ quality of
life according to different demographic features
Mean standard
deviation
Vocational status
having governmental
vocation 87.38 18.60
having non-
governmental vocation 87.30 6.11
jobless 86.85 12.94
Marital status married 93.88 9.25
single 85.75 13.25
Education level
diploma 82.2 11.34
sophomore 91.44 11.67
bachelor 88.02 12.90
postgraduate 90.52 14.87
Economic status
weak 67.33 1.15
medium 86.66 13.36
good 91.52 8.73
Table 2 shows that the mean scores of quality of life, their self-esteem, their self-efficacy and
their achievement motivation were sequentially 86.96, 29.24, 31.15 and 74.46.
The results of table 3 implies that the employed women’s quality of life is a little higher than
unemployed women, that of married women higher than single ones, that of sophomore
women higher than other educations and that of good economical status higher is than
medium and low economic status.
Table 4 indicates internal consistency matrix between self-esteem, self-efficacy and
achievement motivation and female citizen’s life quality.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 454
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
Table 4: Internal consistency matrix between self-esteem, self-efficacy and achievement
motivation and quality of life.
factors self-esteem self-efficacy achievement
motivation
self-efficacy 0.58***
achievement
motivation 0.38
*** 0.49
***
quality of life 0.49***
0.38***
0.42***
*P<0.05 **P<0.01 ***P<0.001
As it is clear from the information of the matrix, there is a significant relationship between
quality of life on the one hand and self-esteem, self-efficacy and women’s achievement
motivation scores on the other (P=0.00). Moreover, there is a significant relationship between
the variables of self-esteem and self-efficacy, self-esteem and achievement motivation, and
also self-efficacy and achievement motivation (P=0.00).
Table 5:Regression analysis of life quality variable on the variables of self-esteem, self-
efficacy and achievement motivation.
Indices
???
sum of
the
squares
degree of
freedom
square
mean F
significant
level
Self-esteem regression 4628.16 1 4628.16
35.62 0.00 residual 14553.70 112 129.94
Achievement
motivation
regression 5820.89 2 2910.44 24.18 0.00
residual 13360.97 111 120.37
The results of table 5 show that self-esteem and achievement motivation were interred into
regression analysis equation and self-efficacy was deleted from it. The above results indicate
that self-esteem can significantly predict the subjects’ quality of life (P=0.00), and adding
achievement motivation variable to self-esteem has the power to significantly predict the
participants’ quality of life (P=0.002), however adding self-efficacy variable to self-esteem
and achievement motivation cannot significantly increase the prediction power of women’s
quality of life in Isfahan, therefore this variable would be omitted from the equation.
Table 6 shows the determinant coefficient and standard error of measurement in
regression analysis of life quality variable on self-esteem, self-efficacy and achievement
motivation
Indices
variable
R R2 standard error of
measurement
self-esteem 0.49 0.24 11.40
achievement
motivation 0.55 0.30 10.97
As it can be observed from table 6, when the self-esteem variable is interred into the equation
its coefficient square would be 0.24. i.e. in women 0.24 of variance between self-esteem and
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 455
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
quality of life scores are in common, or to put it another way 24% of the changes in quality of
life scores relates to the scores from self-esteem. When the achievement motivation is added
to self-esteem variable, the amount of correlation square reaches to 0.30, that is in women
0.06 of variance between the scores of achievement motivation and life quality is common, or
to tell it another way, 6% of the changes in the scores of quality of life relates to the scores of
achievement motivation.
Table 7 shows raw and standard regression coefficient of self-esteem and achievement
motivation and their significance
Indices
variable
raw coefficient standard
coefficient t significance
standard error Beta
self esteem 1.12 0.187 0.491 5.97 0.00
self esteem 0.88 0.195 0.388 4.52 0.00
achievement
motivation 0.57 0.182 0.270 3.15 0.002
The results of table 7 implying the significance of regression coefficient in self-esteem and
achievement motivation, indicates that the absolute effect of self-esteem and achievement
motivation on quality of life is also significant.
Table 8 shows Beta coefficients, the amount of t and their significance and partial correlation
of omitted variables from regression equation.
Table 8: Beta coefficient, the amount of t and its significance and partial correlation of
omitted variables from regression equation
indices
variables
Beta
coefficient t significance level partial correlation
self-efficacy 0.040 0.381 0.704 0.036
The results of table 8 represents that the significance of regression coefficient in self-efficacy
was more than 0.05, therefore it was not interred into equation, i.e. this variable could not
significantly increase the prediction power of women’s quality of life.
Discussion and conclusion
The results of the present study indicated that there is a significant relationship between
women’s scores of life quality and self-esteem, their scores of self-efficacy and achievement
motivation. According to these results self-esteem could significantly predict the participants’
quality of life and adding the variable of achievement motivation to the variable of self-
esteem would increase the prediction power of the participants’ quality of life, but adding the
variable of self-efficacy to variables of self-esteem and achievement motivation could not
significantly increase the participants’ quality of life. The findings of the current study is in
accordance with the survey conducted by Mir Moradi (2010), however it somehow agrees
with the results of Murphy and Murphy (2006) and Asadi Sadeghi Azar et.al. (2006).
The results of this study in case of self-esteem in predicting women’s quality of life is in
agreement with that of Kermode and Maclin (2001) proving the fact that high self-esteem has
outstanding importance in general indices of life quality; and high positive self-esteem and
the nonexistence of low self-esteem are important factors in the aspect of happiness in quality
of life. It also conforms with the results of the study by May and Warren (2002) on being a
direct relationship between self-esteem and quality of life in those suffering from spinal
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 456
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
injuries and in the same way with the results of the path analysis carried out by Moradi
(2010) showing that self esteem variable directly affects the quality of life of those young
women who suffer from physical-motor disability and the finding of the survey by zaki
(2007) on being a significant relationship between self-esteem and quality of life in the
students of Isfahan University.
The results of the present study on direct effect of self-esteem on women’s quality of life in
Isfahan, would accentuate this assumption of life quality hypothesis among the apt personal
features of dissatisfaction from life is low self-esteem (Frisch, 2006). Keller (1987, cited from
Lee, 2005) assumes self-esteem as one of predictors of quality of life. Self-esteem is often
considered as an individual source which adjusts the effect of threatening happenings and
conditions. The degree of self-esteem plays an important role in determining the person’s
longing and satisfaction (Oliver et.al. 1996). Self-acceptance and self-satisfaction closely
relates to satisfaction and happiness in life (Frisch, 2006). Research has shown that self-
esteem is the best predictor of life satisfaction (Diener and Diener, 1995; Lewinsohn, Render
and Seeley, 1991; Sekaran, 1986). Life satisfaction, in itself, would lead to better physical
and mental health which are two important constituents in quality of life. Self-esteem helps in
overcoming negative experiences and it leads to success. Such success, also, assists the
person to have good experiences in life (Sekaran, 1986). Moreover it seems that those who
see themselves positively incline to assume life events positively and therefore they can have
high life satisfaction.
The results of the current study in case of disability of self-efficacy in predicting women’s
quality of life in Isfahan was in agreement with the survey carried out by Tsay, and
Healstead (2002) indicating that after controlling the age effect, self-efficacy is the most
important predictor of quality of life in Hemo-dialyzed patients. The results of the study by
Taylor et.al. (2006) regarding strong relationship between general self-efficacy and
psychological irritation in public do not agree with the findings of the study by Middleton
et.al (2007) which indicted that in those suffering from spinal injuries in Australia, low self-
efficacy and the intensity of pain would decrease the quality of life in all domains of SF-36
and the results of path analysis of Motl, and Snook (2008) in which those suffering from
multiple skelleros, more self-efficacy for acting and control more intensely relates with
quality of life, but it conforms with the findings of the path analysis by Moradi (2010) which
proved that despite being relatively great its path coefficient, self-efficacy does not directly
relate to the quality of life.
Of course according to the results of the present study, there is a significant relationship
between self-efficacy and women’s quality of life, but due to strong relationship between
self-esteem and achievement motivation and variable of self-efficacy, the impression of this
variable affects women’s quality of life, that is, not being significant the regression
coefficients for self-efficacy is not because of this variable’s essential ineffectiveness or its
low effect, otherwise through interring a collection of variables in regression equation the
effect of self-efficacy on the quality of life of female citizens would decrease profoundly.
The findings of the current study in case of ability of achievement motivation in predicting
women’s quality of life is in agreement with the results of the study carried out by Kuijer and
Ridder (2003) indicating that in patients suffering from asthma, diabetes, and heart stroke the
greater difference between the goals importance and accessibility to them relates to lower
level of life quality and so does it regarding the results of path analysis by Moradi (2010)
which proved that the achievement motivation variable directly affects the quality of life of
young women suffering from physical-motor disability.
The results of this study in case of the ability of achievement motivation in predicting
women’s quality of life in Isfahan would accentuate this assumption of life quality which is
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 457
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
among personal features prone to life dissatisfaction, the feeling of laggardness and
stagnancy in valuable fields of life (Frisch, 2006:18) and not actually having achievement
motivation.
Some researchers have emphasized the role of personal goals and related structures in
assessing people from their quality of life. In Calman’s (1984) view the quality of life would
measure the distance between the person’s hopes, dreams, and wishes and his/her experiences
or facts. People are usually motivated to lessen this distance. Carr et.al. (2001) have applied
Calman’s definition to propose a model of quality of life according to the distance between
expectations and real experiences. Cella, and Tulsky (1990), too, introduces the fact that the
quality of life points to the person’s assessment from his present condition comparing to what
perceived as possible or ideal. The basic element in all these definitions is that it is supposed
that the quality of life includes some mental assessments regarding getting to the goals.
Moreover the basic assumption of motivational theories in case of wellbeing and personal
goals is that successful follow up of meaningful goals, plays an outstanding role in creating
and continuity of psychological wellbeing (cited from Bronstein, 1993).
From another view, the people with high achievement motivation have features such as the
feeling of control on life, the preference for challenging actions (Tokreld, 2000 Seif, 2000),
being internal the source of control and consequently the increase of perseverance to continue
working after defeat (Winner, cited in Tokreld, 2000; Seif, 2000) which increase the
probability of following up the goals and reaching to success. Naturally these goals include
promoting different parts and domains of quality of life. This phenomenon is reverse in
people with low achievement motivation.
Among limitations of the current study which can be pointed out is the inability to generalize
the findings to men in Isfahan and residents of others parts of the country. According to the
above fact, it is proposed that similar study would be carried out on men in Isfahan and
residents of other parts of the country in order to make the probable role of gender and
residency clear.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 458
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
References
Asadi Sadeghi Azar,I., Vasudeva, P., and Abdollahi,A.(2006). Relationship between quality
of life, hardiness, self-efficacy and self-esteem amongst employed and unemployed
married women in Zabol. Iran Journal Psychiatry ,1, 104-111.
Asvadi, M. (2000). The effectiveness of Bach’s therapeutic in group work method on the
increase of achievement motivation in high school students in the town of Gaz. MA
thesis of advising, Allame Tabatabei University, faculty of behavioral sciences.
Bandura,A.(1997).Self-efficacy: The exercise of control .New York: Freeman.
Barry,M, M., and Zissis, A.(1997).Quality of life as an out come measure in evaluating
mental health services: A review of the empirical evidence. Social Psychiatry and
Psychiatric Epidemiology,32,38-47.
Bent,N., Jones,A., Molloy,I., Chamberlain,A., and Tennant,A.(2001). Factors determining
participation in young adults with a physical disability: a pilot study. Clinical
Rehabilitation,15,552-561.
Blascovich,J., and Tomaka, J.(1991). Measures of self esteem. In J.P. Robinson and
P.R.Shaver(Eds.), Measures of Journal of Personality and Social Psychological
attitudes(pp.115-160). San Diego, CA; Academic Press.
Bonomi,A.E., Patrick , D.L., Bushnell,D.M., and Martin,M.(2000). Validation of the United
States' version of the world Health Organization Quality of Life(WOQOL) instrument
.Journal of Clinical Epidemiologyl,53,1,19-23.
Brunstein, J.C. (1993). Personal goals and subjective well-being: a longitudinal study. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1061–1070.
Calman, K.C. (1984). Quality of life in cancer patients – an hypothesis. Journal of Medical
Ethics, 10, 124–127.
Carr, A.J., Gibson, B. and Robinson, P.G. (2001). Measuring quality of life: is quality of life
determined by expectations or experience? British Medical Journal, 322, 1240–1243.
Cella, D.F. and Tulsky, D.S. (1990). Measuring quality of life today: methodological aspects.
Oncology, 4, 29–39.
Denney,D.R. and Frisch,M.B.(1981). The role of neuroticism in relation to life stress and
illness. Journal of Psychosomatic Research,25 , 303-307.
Diener,E., and Diener,M.(1995). Cross-Cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,68,653-663.
Elliot,A. J., and Church,M.(1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance
achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,72,1, 218-232.
Esmaeili, M. Alikhani, M. Gholam Araghi, M. and Hoseini, F. (2005). The quality of life and
its relation with self-efficacy in under hemo- dialysis patients. Iran Nursing Periodical,
18(41-42), 77-84.
Fayers,P.M., and Machin,D.(2000). Quality of life assessment, analysis and interpretation.
John Willy, New York.
Frisch,M.B.(2006). Quality of life of therapy: Applying life satisfaction approach to positive
psychology and cognitive therapy. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
Frisch,M.B., and McCord,M.(1987). Sex role orientation and social skill: A naturalistic
assessment of assertion and conversational skill. Sex Roles,17,437-448.
Greenberger,E., Chen,C., Dmitrieva,J., and Farruggia,S.P.(2003). Item- Wording and
dimensionality of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale: Do they matter? Personality and
Individual Differences, 35,6, 1241-1254.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 459
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
Hansson,L., Middelboe ,T., Mernider,L., and Bjarnason, O. (1999). Predictor of subjective
quality of life in schizophrenic patient living in community. A Nordic multicetre study.
The International Journal of Psychiatry,45,247-258.
Hujian,C.(2003).The effect of implicit self-esteem and the relationship of explicit self-esteem
and implicit self-esteem. Acta Psychologica Sinica,35,6,796-801.
Jerusalem,m., and Schwarzer,R.(1979). The general self-efficacy scale(GSE).[Updated 2006
Oct 7]. Available from :Http://www. Healthpsych.de.
Joekes,K.,van Eldern,T., and Schreurs,K.(2007).Self-efficacy and overprotection are related
to quality of life, psychological well-being and self-management in cardiac patients.
Journal of Health Psychology,12,1,4-16.
Judge,T.A., Locke,E.A., and Durham,C.C.(1997).The dispositional causes of job satisfaction
:A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior,19,151-188.
Karimzade Shirazi, M. Razavie, A. and Kave, M. H. (2007). the relationship between quality
of life and self-efficacy of teachers working in Shahrekord. Journal of Shahrekord
Medical Science University. 10, 1, 28-35.
Kentros,M.K., Terkelsen ,K., Hull,J., Smith, T.E., and Goodman,M. (1997). The relationship
between personality and quality of life in persons with schizoaffective disorder and
schizophrenia . Qulity of Life Research, 6, 118-122.
Kermode,S., and Maclin,D.(2001). A study of the relationship between quality of life, health
and self-esteem. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing,19,2, 33-40.
Kuijer,R.G., and De Ridder,D.T.D.(2003).Discrepancy in illness-related goals and quality of
life in chronically ill patients: The role of self-efficacy. Psychology and Health,18,3,
313–330.
Lee, M.(1994). Change in personality. Translated by: Mansour M. Tehran: Tehran University
Press.
Lee,J.W.(2005). Gender roles. Nova Publishers.
Lennings,C.J.(1994).An evaluation of a generalized self-efficacy scale.
Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 5, 745-750.
Leu,R.w.(1985).Economic evaluation of new drug therapies in terms of improved life quality.
Special Issue: Drugs and Moods. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,45,1313-
1324.
Lewinsohn,P.M., Render,E., and Seeley,J.R. (1991).The relationship between life satisfaction
and psychosocial variables: New perspectives. In: Strack F, Argyle M, Schwarz N, eds.
Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective. New York: Pergamon Press; p.
193-212.
May,L., and Warren,S.(2002). Measuring quality of life in persons with spinal cord injury:
external and structural validity. Spinal Cord,40, 341-350.
Mohammadi, N. (2005). Preliminary investigation of validity and reliability of Rosenberg’s
self-reverence scale. Periodical of Iranian psychologists. first year.4. 313-320.
Moradi, A. (2000). The effect of self-esteem, self-efficacy and achievement motivation on the
quality of life and entrepreneurship behavior of young women: a model for physical-
motor disabled. PhD thesis of psychology. Isfahan. Isfahan University.
Motl,R.W., and Snook,E.M.(2008).Physical activity, self-efficacy and quality of life in
multiple sclerosis. Annals of Behavioral Medicine,35,1, 111-115.
Murphy,H. and Murphy,E.K.(2006).Comparing quality of life using the world health
organization quality of life measure(WHOQL-100) in a clinical and non-clinical sample:
Exploring the role of self-esteem, self-efficacy and social functioning. Journal of Mental
Health,15,3,289-300.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 460
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
Nejat, S. Halakouei Naeini, K. M. K., Majdzade, S. R. (2006). standardizing the World
Health Organization Quality Of Life questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF): translation and
psychometrics of Iranian type. Journal of Faculty of Hygiene and Hygienic Studies
Institute, 4.4, 1-12.
Newa Chek,P.W., and Taylor,W.R.(1992).Childhood chronic illness: Prevalence, severity
and impact. American Journal of Public Health,82,364-371.
NosekM.A.HughesR.BSwdiundN.TaylorH.B. and SwankP.(2003). Self–esteem and
women with disabilities. Social Science and Medicine5681737-1747.
NosekM.A.HughesR.BSwdiundN.TaylorH.B. and SwankP.(2003). Self–esteem and
women with disabilities. Social Science and Medicine5681737-1747.
Oliver,J.,Huxley,P., Bridges,K., and Mohamad ,H.(1996). Quality of life and mental health
services. London: Rutledge.
Pajares,F(2002).Overview of Social Cognitive Theory and Self –Eefficacy from
http://www.emory.edu/EDUcation/eff.htm/
Rajabi, Gh. (2006). investigating the reliability and validity of general self-esteem believes
scale (GSE-10) in the students of psychology. Faculty of behavioral sciences and
psychology, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz. new behavioral thoughts, 2. 1, 2, 111-
122.
Rajabi, Gh. and Bohlool, N. (2007). measuring reliability and validity of the scales of general
self-efficacy beliefs (GSE-10) in freshmen of psychology, Shahid Chamran University.
Behavioral and psychological researches.2,3, 33-48.
Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.
Sadrossadat, S. J. (2000). How do we increase the self-esteem in children and adolescents.
medicine and purification. 38, 64-70.
Saxena,S., and O'Connell, K.(2002). A commentary cross-cultural quality of life assessment
at the end of life. Gemologist,42,81-85.
Schmitt,D.P., and Allik,J.(2005).Simultaneous Administration of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem
Scale in 53 Nations: Exploring the Universal and Culture-Specific Features of Global
Self-Esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 4, 623-642.
Scholz,U., Gutierrez, Doza,B., Sud,S., and Schwarzer,R.(2002). Is general self-efficacy a
universal construct ? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. European Journal of
Psychological Assessment,18, 242-251.
Schwarzer, R., and Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In S. Wright, & M.
Johnston, and J. Weinman, (Eds.), Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio.
Causal and Control Beliefs (pp. 35–37). Windsor, UK: nferNelson.
Schwarzer, R., Bäßler, J., Kwiatek, P., Schröder, K., and Zhang, J. X. (1997). The assessment
of optimistic self-beliefs: Comparison of the German, Spanish, and Chinese versions of
the general self efficacy scale. Applied Psychology, 46,1, 69–88.
Schwarzer, R., Schmitz, G. S., and Tang, C. (2000). Teacher burnout in Hong Kong and
Germany: A cross-cultural validation of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Anxiety, Stress,
and Coping, 13,3, 309–326.
Schwarzer,R.(1994).Optimism, vulnerability and self-beliefs as Health – related cognitions:
A systematic overview. Psychology and health,9,161-180.
Seif, A.A. (2000). Pedagogical psychology (learning Psychology and education). Tehran:
Agah publications.
Sekaran,U.(1986). Significant differences in quality of life factors and their correlates: A
function of differences in career orientations or gender? Sex Roles, 14, 261-279
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 461
JUNE 2012
VOL 4, NO 2
Shapurian, R., Hojat, M., and Nayerahmadi, H. (1987). Psychometric characteristics and
dimensionality of a Persian version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 65,27-34.
Shokrkon, H. Boroumand Nasab, M. Najarian, B. and Shahni Yeilagh, M. (2002).
investigating simple and multiple relationship of creativity, development stimulus and
self-esteem with entrepreneurship in Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz. Journal of
Behavioral Sciences and Psychology. Shahid Chamran University. Ahvaz. third period.
9,3 &4. 1-24.
Talebpoor, A. Nouri, A. and Mowlavi, H. (2002). the effect of cognitive education on
subduction seat, achievement motivation and educational development of Shahed
students. Journal of Psychology. 1,6, 19-28.
Taylor,W.J., Dean,S.G., and Siegert,R.J.(2006). Differential association of general and health
self-efficacy with disability, health-related quality of life and psychological distress from
musculoskeletal pain in a cross-sectional general adult population survey. Pain, 125, 3,
225-232.
Tsay, S.L., and Healstead, M.(2002).Self-care, self-efficacy, depression, and quality of life
among patients receiving hemodialysis in Taiwan. International Journal of Nursing
Studies,39,3,245-247.
Tsay, S.L., and Healstead, M.(2002).Self-care, self-efficacy, depression, and quality of life
among patients receiving hemodialysis in Taiwan. International Journal of Nursing
Studies,39,3,245-247.
Tucker-Ladd.C.E.(2000). Psychological self-help. http.// mental help.
Net/Psyhelp/Chap4/Chap4 K.htm.
Weare,K.(2000). Promoting mental and social health: a whole school approach. London:
Routledge.
Weiss,P.A.(2002). self-esteem: A study of methods of measurements. Dissertation Abstract
International: Section B, The Sciences and Engineering,62,(9-B),32-42.
Whiteside-Mensell,L., and Corwyn,R.F.(2003). Mean and covariance structures analysis: An
examination of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale among adolescents and adults.
Educational and Psychological Measurement,63,1,163-173.
WHO Quality of life Group.(1996). WHOQOL-BREF Introduction, Administration and
scoring, Field Trial version, Geneva: World Health Organization.
Wiegandm,DM., and Geller,ES.(2004).Connecting positive psychology and organizational
behavior management: Achievement motivation and the power of positive
reinforcement. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management,24 ,1-2, 3-25.
Wu,C.H.(2009). Factor analysis of the general self-efficacy scale and its relationship with
individualism/ collectivism among twenty –five countries: Application of multilevel
confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 699-703.
Zaki, M.A. (2007). the quality of life and its relation with self-esteem in male and female
students of Isfahan University. Iran Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology Journal. 13,4.
416-419.