Attitudes-Low-Favorable impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 1 - 10 of 15

The impact of veteran support programs on stress, satisfaction, and retention for veteran employees (Singh, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of employer-offered veteran transition support programs on veteran job satisfaction levels, stress rates, and retention. This study was a non-…
Health Profession Opportunity Grants (HPOG 1.0) impact study: Three-year impacts report (Peck et al. 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Health Profession Opportunity Grants (HPOG) on employment, education, earnings, and public benefit receipt three years after participants were…
The impact of motivational interviewing training on rehabilitation counselors: Assessing working alliance and client engagement (Torres et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of motivational interviewing (MI) training on self-perceptions of MI competence. The study was a randomized controlled trial that used…
Using mindfulness to reduce occupational stress and burnout in music teachers: A randomized controlled trial (Varona, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of a mindfulness training program for music educators on occupational stress & burnout. This study was a randomized controlled trial…
Impacts of a web-based course on mental health clinicians' attitudes and communication behaviors related to use of OpenNotes (Dobscha et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of participation in the VA OpenNotes for Mental Health Clinicians course on clinicians’ attitudes towards their work. The study…
Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM? (Cheryan et al. 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of interacting with an upper-level college role model on female students’ beliefs that they could succeed as a computer science major. The study used…
An outcome evaluation of an adult education and postsecondary alignment program: The Accelerate New Mexico experience (Rivera et al. 2013)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Accelerate New Mexico Math Camp on outcomes for community college students, including women and minority students traditionally…
Inquiry-based science and technology enrichment program: Green earth enhanced with inquiry and technology (Kim 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Inquiry-based Science and Technology Enrichment Program (InSTEP)—a week-long, half-day summer science curriculum for female 8th-grade students—…
Impact of a 5-week collegiate-level residential STEM summer program on secondary school students (Research to practice) (Campbell et al. 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of participating in the Pennsylvania Governor’s School for the Sciences’ (PGSS) five-week residential program in summer 2013 on high school seniors…
When trying hard isn’t natural: Women’s belonging with and motivation for male-dominated STEM fields as a function of effort expenditure concerns (Smith et al. 2013)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study examined the effect of providing information about effort requirements to succeed in a fictitious male-dominated eco-psychology master’s program on female students’ attitudes toward their…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.