Gratitude’s Impact on Resilience in Adolescents with Physical Disabilities

 

Dr. Poonam Kumari ¹

 

¹ Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Women's College Samastipur, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga, Bihar, India

 

1. INTRODUCTION

This study, titled "Gratitude Unveiled: Exploring Emotional Resilience in Male and Female Adolescents with Physical Disabilities," aims to shed light on the intricate relationship between gratitude levels and emotional resilience within this unique demographic. Adolescents aged 25-40 facing physical disabilities encounter a plethora of challenges that can significantly impact their emotional well-being. Among these challenges, understanding how gratitude manifests and contributes to their emotional resilience becomes essential for devising targeted interventions that effectively support their mental health. Gratitude, characterized by recognizing and appreciating positive aspects in life, has been linked to various psychological benefits, yet its specific implications for adolescents with physical disabilities remain relatively unexplored.

Robert Emmons and Michael McCullough define gratitude as a two-step process: 1) “recognizing that one has obtained a positive outcome” and 2) “recognizing that there is an external source for this positive outcome.” Gratitude has been found to be connected to concepts of well-being rooted in humanistic counseling perspectives, offering an alternative understanding of human nature and psychopathology (Wood & Joseph, 2007). This aligns with survey findings indicating that over 90% of American teenagers and adults reported that expressing gratitude contributed to them feeling either "extremely happy" or "somewhat happy" (Gallup, 1999). The correlation between gratitude and mood as well as life satisfaction appears robust. In terms of more existential views of well-being, gratitude has been associated with psychological or "eudemonic" well-being. While subjective well-being encompasses the emotionally pleasing and satisfying aspects of life, eudemonic well-being signifies a life lived to the fullest, maximizing human potentials and growth Ryan and Deci (2001). Wood and Joseph (2010) demonstrated that individuals with low eudemonic well-being were 7.16 times more likely to meet criteria for clinical depression a decade later. Experiencing gratitude may contribute to eudemonic well-being, providing resilience against depression in later life. Froh et al. (2009) revealed that gratitude in youth was correlated with well-being and relationships, even after accounting for general positive affect. This suggests that gratitude has effects beyond simple affective valence.

Emmons and McCullough (2003) explored the impact of a gratitude intervention on individuals' subjective well-being. Their findings indicated that participants in the gratitude group experienced higher levels of subjective well-being compared to those in the hassles group, displaying increased life satisfaction and positive affect. Kashdan et al. (2006) highlighted the role of gratitude as a significant predictor of well-being, even in the face of trauma and adversity among veterans. In a study by Froh et al. (2008) focusing on early adolescents, it was observed that practicing gratitude through journaling could serve as a beneficial intervention for enhancing well-being in this age group. Additionally, Lestari and Fajar (2020) reported a notable connection between optimism, self-esteem, and gratitude in individuals with physical disabilities, emphasizing the contributing roles of gratitude and self-esteem.

Hermansyah's investigation in 2017 revealed a noteworthy positive association between gratitude and perceived social support. Raihana, in 2023, elucidated the concept of gratitude among Indonesians with physical disabilities. The study found that both subjects exhibited a sense of gratitude in various aspects of their lives. This was evident in their expressions of gratitude through heartfelt appreciation, verbal expressions, and actions. They demonstrated their gratitude by remembering to worship Allah, following His commands, avoiding prohibitions, and using positive language in their daily interactions. In 2021, Nurdin explored the impact of social support and gratitude on resilience in individuals with physical disabilities. The study discovered that both social support and gratitude had a positive influence on resilience, with emotional support and abundant gratitude identified as crucial factors. This suggests potential interventions to enhance resilience in adults facing physical limitations. Rizkiana's 2019 study investigated the influence of gratitude on life satisfaction in hearing-impaired college students at the Centre for Disability Studies & Services. The results indicated that higher levels of gratitude correlated with a 12.2% increase in life satisfaction for these students. In 2018, Ati conducted a study to examine the relationship between gratitude, social support, and the stress experienced by parents of special needs children. The regression analysis revealed a significant connection between social support, gratitude, and parental stress.

Jackowska et al. (2016) conducted a study on gratitude intervention, assessing sleep quality and disturbance. After two weeks of gratitude journaling, daily sleep quality showed a slightly but significantly greater improvement compared to a control group receiving no treatment. Digdon and Koble (2011) suggested that focusing on positive aspects each evening, as in a gratitude intervention, reduces pre-sleep arousal, improving sleep quality and duration, although not surpassing the benefits of constructive worry or imagery distraction exercises.

 

2. Objectives

·        To explore into the intricacies of gratitude levels among adults aged 25-40 with physical disabilities, aiming to comprehend of their emotional experiences.

·        To examine emotional resilience in male and female adolescents with physical disabilities, emphasizing the potential impact of gratitude on their overall emotional well-being.

·        To investigate gender differences in gratitude levels and emotional resilience, recognizing and addressing the distinct emotional challenges faced by both male and female adolescents with physical disabilities.

·        To generate insights that can inform the development of targeted interventions and support mechanisms tailored to the unique emotional needs of male and female adolescents with physical disabilities.

 

3. Hypotheses

·        There will be no significant relationship between gratitude levels and emotional resilience among physically disabled adults aged 25-40.

·        There will be no significant difference in gratitude levels between male and female adolescents with physical disabilities.

Method: This study employed an Explanatory Research design to examine gratitude levels among physically disabled adults aged 25-40 with Post Graduate education. A purposive sampling method was used to enlist 102 participants, evenly distributed with 51 males and 51 females, from Bihar and UP. Participants were recruited from various sources, including local disability support organizations, community centers, and online platforms, ensuring a diverse and representative sample. This study utilized the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6) developed by McCullough et al. (2002) as the measurement tool to assess participants' levels of gratitude. The GQ-6 is a reliable and validated self-report scale designed to evaluate an individual's inclination to experience and express gratitude. Data collection was conducted with fairness and transparency. The primary instrument for measuring gratitude levels was the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6). Ethical considerations were rigorously upheld, encompassing informed consent, data confidentiality, anonymity, and obtaining necessary approvals from Institutional Review Boards.Data analysis employed a comprehensive approach, including Descriptive analysis to summarize data, correlation to explore relationships, ANOVA to assess group differences, and Regression Analysis to identify potential predictors of gratitude levels. This methodological framework aimed to provide a thorough and deep understanding of gratitude experiences among physically disabled adults.

 

4. Result Analysis

Table 1

Table 1 Descriptive Analysis
Report
Gender		G.T.1	G.T.2	G.T.3	G.T.4	G.T.5	G.T.6
Male	Mean	3.86	3.76	2.73	3.86	4	3.2
	N	51	51	51	51	51	51
	Std. Deviation	1.357	1.193	1.358	1.342	1.4	1.357
Female	Mean	4.06	3.76	2.41	4.14	4.12	3.57
	N	51	51	51	51	51	51
	Std. Deviation	1.223	1.242	1.219	1.217	1.227	1.221
Total	Mean	3.96	3.76	2.57	4	4.06	3.38
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102
	Std. Deviation	1.289	1.212	1.294	1.282	1.311	1.298

 

The Table 1 results reveal distinctive patterns in gratitude levels among male and female adolescents with physical disabilities. For males, the mean gratitude scores vary across dimensions, with notable highs in Dimensions 1, 4, and 5 and a lower score in Dimension 3. Females, on the other hand, exhibit slightly elevated mean gratitude scores in Dimensions 1, 4, and 5, with a lower score in Dimension 3. The aggregated data for both genders demonstrates a moderate overall gratitude level, with higher scores in Dimensions 1, 4, and 5. Standard deviations indicate moderate variability in gratitude responses across dimensions, suggesting diversity in individual experiences within this population. These findings contribute valuable insights into the deep landscape of gratitude among adolescents facing physical disabilities, informing potential interventions tailored to address specific emotional needs within this demographic.

Table 2

Table 2 Corelation Analysis
		Gender	G.T.1	G.T.2	G.T.3	G.T.4	G.T.5	G.T.6
Gender	Pearson Correlation	1	.061	-.004	-.159	.092	.031	.135
	Sig. (2-tailed)		.545	.970	.111	.357	.758	.176
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102	102
G.T.1	Pearson Correlation	.061	1	.672**	-.159	.605**	.622**	.210*
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.545		.000	.111	.000	.000	.034
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102	102
G.T.2	Pearson Correlation	-.004	.672**	1	-.267**	.554**	.526**	.266**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.970	.000		.007	.000	.000	.007
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102	102
G.T.3	Pearson Correlation	-.159	-.159	-.267**	1	-.221*	-.102	-.019
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.111	.111	.007		.026	.309	.852
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102	102
G.T.4	Pearson Correlation	.092	.605**	.554**	-.221*	1	.595**	.321**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.357	.000	.000	.026		.000	.001
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102	102
G.T.5	Pearson Correlation	.031	.622**	.526**	-.102	.595**	1	.219*
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.758	.000	.000	.309	.000		.027
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102	102
G.T.6	Pearson Correlation	.135	.210*	.266**	-.019	.321**	.219*	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.176	.034	.007	.852	.001	.027
	N	102	102	102	102	102	102	102
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

 

The Table 2. correlation analysis aimed to discern relationships between gender and gratitude dimensions (G.T.1 to G.T.6) in adolescents with physical disabilities. The findings indicated generally weak associations between gender and specific gratitude dimensions. None of the correlations between gender and gratitude dimensions were statistically significant (all p > 0.05), implying that, at an overall level, gender did not strongly correlate with particular gratitude dimensions. However, within the gratitude dimensions, noteworthy interdimensional correlations were observed: A moderate positive association was found between gratitude in Dimension 1 (G.T.1) and Dimension 2 (G.T.2) (r = 0.672, p < 0.01).A substantial positive correlation emerged between gratitude in Dimension 1 (G.T.1) and Dimension 4 (G.T.4) (r = 0.605, p < 0.01).A moderate negative association was identified between gratitude in Dimension 2 (G.T.2) and Dimension 3 (G.T.3) (r = -0.267, p < 0.01).A substantial positive correlation was observed between gratitude in Dimension 4 (G.T.4) and Dimension 5 (G.T.5) (r = 0.595, p < 0.01).A modest positive association was noted between gratitude in Dimension 5 (G.T.5) and Dimension 6 (G.T.6) (r = 0.219, p < 0.05).

Table 3
ANOVA
		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
G.T.1	Between Groups	.615	1	.615	.368	.545
	Within Groups	167.228	100	1.672
	Total	167.843	101
G.T.2	Between Groups	.002	1	.002	.001	.970
	Within Groups	148.351	100	1.484
	Total	148.353	101
G.T.3	Between Groups	4.269	1	4.269	2.591	.111
	Within Groups	164.751	100	1.648
	Total	169.020	101
G.T.4	Between Groups	1.412	1	1.412	.858	.357
	Within Groups	164.588	100	1.646
	Total	166.000	101
G.T.5	Between Groups	.166	1	.166	.096	.758
	Within Groups	173.481	100	1.735
	Total	173.647	101
G.T.6	Between Groups	3.095	1	3.095	1.853	.176
	Within Groups	166.993	100	1.670
	Total	170.088	101

 

The ANOVA results examined the variations in gratitude dimensions (G.T.1 to G.T.6) among adolescents with physical disabilities. Overall, no statistically significant differences were found in gratitude levels between different groups for most dimensions. Notably, G.T.3 showed a marginal significance, suggesting a potential difference that warrants further investigation. These findings imply a generally consistent experience of gratitude among adolescents with physical disabilities across various dimensions, highlighting the resilience and commonalities within this unique demographic.

Table 4

Table 4 Regression Analysis
Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	.243a	.059	.000	.502
a. Predictors: (Constant), G.T.6, G.T.3, G.T.5, G.T.2, G.T.4, G.T.1

 

The Table 4 Model Summary reveals that the regression model, incorporating predictors G.T.6, G.T.3, G.T.5, G.T.2, G.T.4, and G.T.1, demonstrates limited effectiveness in explaining the variance in the dependent variable. The R Square value of 0.059 indicates that these predictors collectively explain only 5.9% of the variability. The Adjusted R Square, factoring in the number of predictors and sample size, remains at 0.000, signaling minimal improvement. The Std. Error of the Estimate is 0.502, representing the average discrepancy between observed and predicted values.

Table 5

Table 5
ANOVAb
Model		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	1.502	6	.250	.992	.436a
	Residual	23.988	95	.253
	Total	25.490	101
a. Predictors: (Constant), G.T.6, G.T.3, G.T.5, G.T.2, G.T.4, G.T.1
b. Dependent Variable: Gender

                                                       

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to evaluate the significance of a regression model predicting Gender based on seven predictors. The results revealed a non-significant model (F = 0.992, p = 0.436), indicating that the predictors, including G.T.6, G.T.3, G.T.5, G.T.2, G.T.4, and G.T.1, collectively did not significantly explain the variability in Gender. The Residual Sum of Squares was 23.988, and the Total Sum of Squares was 25.490, with 95 and 101 degrees of freedom, respectively. In conclusion, the model did not exhibit statistical significance in predicting Gender.

Table 6

Table 6
Coefficientsa
Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	1.544	.252		6.124	.000
	G.T.1	.039	.060	.100	.652	.516
	G.T.2	-.073	.060	-.177	-1.232	.221
	G.T.3	-.069	.041	-.177	-1.694	.094
	G.T.4	.023	.055	.058	.410	.683
	G.T.5	-.008	.052	-.022	-.161	.873
	G.T.6	.056	.041	.144	1.355	.179
a. Dependent Variable: Gender

 

The regression analysis suggests that gratitude dimensions (G.T.1 to G.T.6) have limited predictive power for the dependent variable (Gender). Notably, G.T.3 shows a marginally significant negative association with Gender, while G.T.6 exhibits a positive trend, though not statistically significant.

 

5. Discussion

The exploration of gratitude levels among male and female adolescents with physical disabilities, framed within theoretical perspectives of emotional resilience and positive psychology, has yielded  deep findings. The study leveraged the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6) to assess gratitude levels, guided by the comprehensive model developed by McCullough et al. (2002). Here are the key findings discussed in the context of established theories supporting emotional resilience and the role of gratitude in this specific population: The Positive Psychology framework, emphasizing strengths and positive emotions, aligns with the study's identification of moderate overall gratitude levels among adolescents with physical disabilities. This suggests that, despite facing distinct challenges, participants demonstrate a commendable capacity for recognizing and appreciating positive aspects in their lives. McCullough and Emmons' model views gratitude as a multifaceted construct involving recognition, appreciation, and acknowledgment of positive experiences. The study's exploration across gratitude dimensions resonates with this model, revealing variations in gratitude levels within specific dimensions. Notably, dimensions linked to interpersonal relationships (e.g., Dimensions 4 and 5) displayed higher gratitude scores, emphasizing the significance of social connections for adolescents with physical disabilities.

Theoretical frameworks on resilience underscore the adaptive coping strategies individuals employ in the face of adversity. The study's observation of moderate overall gratitude levels suggests a potential adaptive role of gratitude in fostering emotional resilience among adolescents with physical disabilities. The diversity in gratitude responses further underscores the unique and individualized nature of resilience within this demographic. The study's geographical focus on Bihar and UP aligns with cultural theories recognizing the impact of cultural contexts on emotional experiences. While the findings offer valuable insights, acknowledging the cultural   within these regions is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of gratitude dynamics. The research findings, rooted in established theoretical frameworks, contribute to the evolving knowledge on gratitude and emotional resilience among adolescents with physical disabilities. The moderate overall gratitude levels and variations across dimensions highlight the intricate nature of emotional experiences in this population, providing valuable implications for interventions and further theoretical refinement in understanding the emotional well-being of individuals confronting physical challenges.

 

 

6. Conclusion

The study advances our understanding of gratitude and emotional resilience among adolescents with physical disabilities. The findings underscore the importance of recognizing and fostering gratitude as a potential resource for enhancing emotional well-being within this resilient demographic. As we navigate the implications of these findings, the call for tailored interventions and continued research becomes imperative to ensure that support strategies align with the unique needs of adolescents facing both physical challenges and the intricacies of emotional resilience.

 

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

None . 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

None.

 

REFERENCES

Ati, M. R. S., Matulessy, A., and Rochim, M. F. (2018). The Relationship Between Gratitude and Social Support With the Stress of Parents Who Have Children in Need of Special. Journal of Child Development Studies, 3(1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.29244/jcds.3.1.44-58

Digdon, N., and Koble, A. (2011). Effects of Constructive Worry, Imagery Distraction, and Gratitude Interventions on Sleep Quality: A Pilot Trial. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 3(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-0854.2011.01049.x

Emmons, R. A., and McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting Blessings Versus Burdens: An Experimental Investigation of Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being in Daily Life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.2.377

Froh, J. J., Sefick, W. J., and Emmons, R. A. (2008). Counting Blessings in Early Adolescents: An Experimental Study of Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being. Journal of School Psychology, 46(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2007.03.005

Froh, J. J., Yurkewicz, C., and Kashdan, T. B. (2009). Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being in Early Adolescence: Examining Gender Differences. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 633–650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.006 

Gallup. (1999). Survey Results on “Gratitude”, Adults and Teenagers. Emerging Trends, 20(4–5), 9.

Hermansyah, A. D., Saleh, U., and Permatasari, N. (2017, August). Correlation Between Gratitude and Perceived Social Support in Parents of Children With Intellectual Disability. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of Asian Association of Indigenous and Cultural Psychology (ICAAIP 2017) (11–14). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/icaaip-17.2018.3

Jackowska, M., Brown, J., Ronaldson, A., and Steptoe, A. (2016). The Impact of a Brief Gratitude Intervention on Subjective Well-Being, Biology and Sleep. Journal of Health Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105315572455 

Joseph, S., and Wood, A. M. (2010). Assessment of Positive Functioning in Clinical Psychology: Theoretical and Practical Issues. Clinical Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.01.002

Kashdan, T. B., Uswatte, G., and Julian, T. (2006). Gratitude and Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being in Vietnam War Veterans. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.01.005

Lestari, R., and Fajar, M. (2020). Gratitude, Self-Esteem and Optimism in People With Physical Disabilities. Prizren Social Science Journal, 4(2), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.32936/pssj.v4i2.150

Raihana, D., Isnaini, M., Puspita, A., Nanda, T. T., Srimulya, I., Anggraini, J. A., … Utami, A. M. (2023). Picture of Gratitude in Persons With Physical Disabilities. Journal of Islamic Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 54–64. https://doi.org/10.61994/jipbs.v1i1.9

Rizkiana, A., and Santoso, D. S. (2019, March). Gratitude and Life Satisfaction of Hearing Impaired College Students. In Proceedings of the 4th ASEAN Conference on Psychology, Counselling, and Humanities (ACPCH 2018) (186–189). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/acpch-18.2019.46

Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2001). On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141

Wood, A. M., and Joseph, S. (2010). The Absence of Positive Psychological (Eudaimonic) Well-Being as a Risk Factor for Depression: A Ten Year Cohort Study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 122, 213–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2009.06.032

Wood, A. M., Froh, J. J., and Geraghty, A. W. A. (2010). Gratitude and Well-Being: A Review and Theoretical Integration. Clinical Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.005