90 Chapter 5 Table 3. Simple mediation models with mediators at post-test (T1) and dependent variables at follow-up (T2) (continued) Mediators T1 a b Total effect c Direct effect c’ Indirect effect a x b (95% CI) Classroom climate quality Mindfulness skills (FFMQ) 0.18*** 0.22*** 0.09 0.05 0.04 (0.01, 0.07) Self-compassion (SCS-SF) 0.47*** 0.10*** 0.09 0.04 0.05 (0.02, 0.08) Emotion regulation skills (BRIEF-A) -0.18*** -0.15* 0.09 0.07 0.03 (0.01, 0.06) Teacher selfefficacy (TSESSF) 0.38** 0.17*** 0.12** 0.06 0.07 (0.03, 0.11) Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001 1 The actual upper bound of the 95% CI was smaller than zero. Multiple mediation models The multiple mediation model of perceived stress shows that all a-paths were significant (Figure 2). The b-paths were only significant for self-compassion and emotion regulation. The total effect was significant, but the direct effect was not significant. The 95% CI of the indirect effect of self-compassion (ab = -0.13, 95% CI = -0.24 to -0.04) and emotion regulation (ab = -0.06, 95% CI = -0.13 to -0.01) did not contain zero. This means that the intervention decreased the level of perceived stress at follow-up (T2) through its effect on increasing self-compassion and emotion regulation at post-test (T1). Figure 3 shows the multiple mediation model of well-being. The indirect effect of selfcompassion was significant (ab = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.35). This means that increased levels of well-being at follow-up (T2) through the intervention was mediated by selfcompassion. In the multiple mediation model of classroom climate quality, teacher self-efficacy was indicated as a mediator (Figure 4, ab = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.10). This indicates that the significant improvement of classroom climate quality at follow-up (T2) through the intervention was mediated by teacher self-efficacy.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw