Appendix-A Questionnaire & Interview...

204

Appendix-A

Questionnaire & Interview Guide

205

lwfpr lgefr

fiz; fe=]

esjk uke ftrsUnz dqekj dq”kokgk gS vkSj eS VkVk lkekftd foKku laLFkku]

eqEcbZ esa ih-,p-Mh- “kks/kkFkhZ gw¡A eSa Hkkjrh; vk;qZfoKku vuqla/kku ifj’kn ls twfu;j

“kks/k o`fRr izkIr dj jgk gw¡ rFkk izksQslj th-th- oku[ksMs ds ekxZn”kZu esa “kks/kdk;Z

dj jgk gw ¡A bl “kks/k ds vUrZxr eSa mPp f”k{kk ds nkSjku HksnHkko dh otg ls gksus

okyh ruko rFkk ekufld LokLF; ls tqMh leL;kvksa dk xgu v/;;u djuk

pkgrk gw¡A ;g “kks/kdk;Z ih-,p-Mh- fMxzh ds vkf”kad t:jrksa dks iwjk djus dk ,d

vge Hkkx gSaaaA

tSlk fd vki tkurs gSa fd mPp f”k{kk lEiw.kZ fodkl ds fy, vR;Ur

vko”;d gSA ijUrq mPp f”k{kk izkIr djuk vklku dke ugh gS D;ksafd bl ekxZ esa

Nk=ksa dks dbZ dfBukb;ksa dk lkeuk djuk iMrk gSA fo”ks’kdj ds mu yksxksa dks tks

lkekftd&vkfFkZd :i ls leiUu ugh gSaA bl izdkj dh dfBukb;¡k Nk=ksa esa ruko

rFkk ekufld LokLF; ls tqMh leL;kvksa dks c<krh gSA

blfy, bl iz”ukoyh esa Nk=ksa dks gksus okys ruko rFkk ekufld LokLF; dh

leL;k,¡] muds eu esa vkus okyh Hkkouk,¡] muds }kjk fofHkUu izdkj ds y{k.kksa dk

vuqHko vkSj muds eu esa vkus okys fopkjksa ls lEcaf/kr dqN iz”u gSaA dì;k

/;kuiwoZd iz”uksa rFkk funsZ”kksa dks if<+, vkSj fQj mRrj nhft,A vki mRrj nsussa ds

fy, iw.kZ :i ls Lora= gSaA vkidk ;g Hkh vf/kdkj gS fd fdlh Hkh le; vki

mRrj nsus ls euk dj ldrs gSaA vkids }kjk iznku dh xbZ lwpuk xksiuh; j[kh

tk;sxh vkSj flQZ v/;;u@”kks/k dk;Z esa gh mi;ksx dh tk;sxhA

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

eSa ;g ?kks’k.kk djrk@djrh gw¡ fd eS miZ;qDr “kks/k ds mÌs”;ksa dks vPNh rjg le>

x;k gw¡@x;h gw¡ vkSj eq>s blds mRrj nsus es dksbZ ijs”kkuh ugh gSA

izfroknh ds gLrk{kj%

fnukad%

LFkku%

206

iz”ukoyh

Øela[;k----------------------

1-O;fDrxr :ijs[kk%

Ukke%

fyax% efgyk iq:’k vk;q ¼o’kZ esa½%

leqnk;Ӂ% v- i- l- /keZ

µ % fg- eq- bZ- v-

fo’k;% fo”ofo|ky;%

yEckbZ ¼lsUVhehVj½% otu ¼fØ-xzk-½%

jDrpki% LFkk;h vkokl% “kgjh xzkeh.k

rRdky vkokl% Nk=kokl ekrk&firk ds lkFk fdjk, ij vU;

2- “kS{kf.kd :ijs[kk%

d{kk fo|ky; dk

LFkku

fo|ky; dk izdkj funsZ”k dk

ek/;e

iw.kZ djus

esa fy,

x, iz;kl

mRrhZ.k

djus

dk

o’kZ

izkIr

vadks dk

izfr”kr

xzkeh.k “kgj O;fDrxr ljdkjh fgUnh vaxzsth

gkbZLdwy

b.VjehfM,V

Lukrd

LukrdksRrj& I

3- ikfjokfjd :ijs[kk%

Ø- la- izfroknh ds lkFk lEca/k mez ¼o’kZ esa½ f”k{kk O;olk; ekfld vk; ¼#½

1 firk

2 ekrk

3

4

ifjokj esa lnL;ksa dh la[;k %

Ӂ

v- & vuqlwfpr tkfr] i-& fiNMh oxZ] l-& lkekU; oxZ

µ fg-& fgUnw] eq-& eqlyeku] bZ-& bZlkbZ] v-& vU;

207

funsZ”k % fuEu fn, x, lwph esa dqN lkekU; leL;k,¡ nh x;h gS tks fd Nk=ks ds }kjk mPp

f”k{kk ds nkSjku vuqHko dh tkrh gSA bl izdkj dk vuqHko fofHkUu izdkj dh ruko ;qDr

ifjfLFkfr;ksa ds dkj.k gksrk gS ftldk vuqHko yxHkx gj Nk=@Nk=k dks gksrk gSA blfy,

vkils fuosnu gS fd mu leL;kvksa dks crkb, ftudk vuqHko vki fiNys dqN fnuksa ls dj jgs

gSaA

^v*

Ø-

la-

oDr gk¡ uk dz-

la-

oDr gk¡ uk

1 vk¡[kks esa ruko o tyu gk¡ uk 2 xnZu@dU/ksa esa tdMu gk¡ uk

3 ihB esa nnZ gksuk gk¡ uk 4 flj nnZ gksuk gk¡ uk

5 ekalisf”k;ksa esa ,sBu gksuk gk¡ uk 6 Nkrh esa tdMu gksuk gk¡ uk

7 ân; rhoz xfr ls /kMduk gk¡ uk 8 mPp jDrpki gksuk ¼High B.P.) gk¡ uk

9 tYnh&tYnh lk¡l ysuk gk¡ uk 10 gFksyh rFkk ryos esa ilhuk

vkuk

gk¡ uk

11 pDdj vkuk gk¡ uk 12 isVnnZ gksuk@xSl gksuk@dCt

gksuk

gk¡ uk

13 isV xMcM gksuk gk¡ uk 14 cspSuh gksuk gk¡ uk

15 Tofyr Mdkj vkuk gk¡ uk 16 tYnh&tYnh fcekj iMuk gk¡ uk

17 tYnh Fkd tkuk@”kfDrghu

gksuk

gk¡ uk 18 Hkw[k dk u yxuk gk¡ uk

19 vfuanzk ¼uhan uk yxuk½ gk¡ uk

^c*

1 ,dkxzrk dh deh gk¡ uk 2 ¼foLe`fr½ Hkwyus dh leL;k gk¡ uk

3 Hkze esa iMuk gk¡ uk 4 fooj.k tkuus dk tquwu gk¡ uk

5 ^^D;k vxj** esa vR;f/kd /;ku

nsuk

gk¡ uk 6 vrhr es jguk ^dsoy ;fn*

rFkk êq>s pkfg,* ds ckjs esa

lkspuk

gk¡ uk

7 vleatl esa iMuk gk¡ uk 8 vkRe&vkykspuk djuk gk¡ uk

9 vkRe&lansg djuk gk¡ uk 10 cgqr lkjs fopkj ,d gh le; gk¡ uk

208

esa vkuk

11 mnkl gksuk gk¡ uk 12 mRlkg dh deh gksuk gk¡ uk

13 fpUrk djuk (Worry) gk¡ uk 14 vleFkZ eglwl djuk gk¡ uk

15 dq.Bk gksuk@fujk”k gksuk gk¡ uk 16 fpMfpMkiu@cslczh gksuk gk¡ uk

17 vlko/kku gksuk gk¡ uk 18 ?kcjkgV gksuk gk¡ uk

19 mRdaBk gksuk (Anxiety) gk¡ uk 20 dzksf/kr gksuk gk¡ uk

21 vR;f/kd laosnu”khy gksuk gk¡ uk 22 gkL; dh Hkkouk es deh gksuk gk¡ uk

23 ikfjokfjd leL;k,¡ gk¡ uk 24 izkFkfedrk,a fu/kkZfjr djus es

ijs”kkuh

gk¡ uk

^l*

1 cgqr vf/kd ;k cgqr de uhan

vkuk

gk¡ uk 2 flxjsV ;k chMh ihuk “kq:

djuk

gk¡ uk

3 “kjkc ihus esa fyIr gksuk gk¡ uk 4 cgqr de ;k cgqr T;knk Hkw[k

yxuk

gk¡ uk

5 cspSuh dh otg ls iSjksa dks

Bksduk] maxfy;ksa dks Bksduk

;k uk[kwu pckuk

gk¡ uk 6 cksyus esa yM[kMkuk@vkokt

esa dEiu gksuk

gk¡ uk

7 yksxksa ls vyxko j[kuk@cpuk gk¡ uk 8 xqLls ls ikxy gksuk gk¡ uk

9 ckj&ckj xyfr;¡k djuk gk¡ uk 10 d{kk esa i<us esa leL;k gk¡ uk

11 dke dks Vkyrs jgus dh vknr

;k foyEc djuk

gk¡ uk

209

Hkkoukvksa dk vuqHko

funsZ”k % uhps fn, x, dqN dFku mu Hkkoukvksa dks O;Dr djrs gSa tks Nk=ksa dks mPp f”k{kk ds

nkSjku vkrh gSaA dì;k bu dFkuksa dks /;kuiwoZd if<, vkSj crkb, fd mDr dFku fdruh ek=k

esa vkidh Hkkouk dks O;Dr djrk gSA vkidks viuk mRrj uhps fn, x;s i¡kp vadks okys iSekus

ds }kjk r; djuk gS rFkk mi;qDr mÙkj okys vad ij ?ksjk cukuk gSA

1- dHkh ugh

2- U;wure ek=k esa lgh

3- dqN ek=k esa lgh

4- vR;f/kd ek=k esa lgh

5- ges”kk lgh

Ø-

la-

dFku mÙkj

1 bl fo”ofo|ky; ds Nk=ksa ds lkeus] eSa viuh leqnk; dh igpku

crkus esa viekfur eglwl djrk@djrh g¡wA

1 2 3 4 5

2 Nk=x.k esjs lkFk egRoiw.kZ fdrkcsa vkSj uksV~l dk ysu&nsu ilUn ugh

djrs gSaA

1 2 3 4 5

3 esjs ifjokj dh vkfFkZd fLFkfr dh otg ls eSa bl f”k{kk dks vPNs ls

izkIr djus esa vius vki dks nwljs yksxksa ls dkQh ihNs ikrk@ikrh g¡wA

1 2 3 4 5

4 eSa eglwl djrk@djrh g¡w fd tks yksx vPNs leqnk; ls lEcaf/kr gSa

oks yksx ,slk O;ogkj djrs gSa tSls fd oks yksx gels csgrj gSaA

1 2 3 4 5

5 eSa d{kk esa eglwl djrk@djrh g¡w fd esjs vkSj esjs lerqY;

lkekftd&vkfFkZd Lrj okys yksxksa ds lkFk misf{kr vkSj vuns[kk

O;ogkj fd;k tkrk gSA

1 2 3 4 5

6 eSa d{kk esa eglwl djrk@djrh g¡w fd dqN lewg ds Nk= ftles eSa Hkh

lEefyr g¡w ] mudh fuUnk] muds lkFk viekutud etkd vkSj

Vhdk&fVIi.kha dh tkrh gSA

1 2 3 4 5

7 esjh vaxzsth Hkk’kk [kjkc gksus ds dkj.k eSa vius vkidks v/;;u esa ihNs

ikrk@ikrh g¡wA

1 2 3 4 5

8 eSa eglwl djrk@djrh g¡w fd eSa vius fo’k; dh vPNh fdrkcsa ysus esa

leFkZ ugh g¡wA

1 2 3 4 5

9 eSa eglwl djrk@djrh g¡w fd Nk=x.k] ftldh vaxzsth Hkk’kk Bhd gS

oks vPNk vad izkIr djrs gSaA

1 2 3 4 5

10 eSa viekfur eglwl djrk@djrh g¡w tc dqN lewg ds Nk=] ftles eSa

Hkh lEefyr g¡w ] tkfr ds uke ls iqdkjs tkrs gSaA

1 2 3 4 5

11 eSa cqjk eglwl djrk@djrh g¡w tc eq>s vU; fØ;kdykiksa esa Hkkx ysus

dk volj ugh feyrk gSA

1 2 3 4 5

12 eSa d{kk dh igyh iafDr esa cSBus ls fgpfdpkrk@fgpfdpkrh g¡wA

1 2 3 4 5

210

Nk=ksa }kjk fofHkUu y{k.kksa dk vuqHko

funsZ”k % mPp f”k{kk ds nkSjku Nk=ksa dks fofHkUu izdkj dh ruko;qDr ifjfLFkfr;ksa dk lkeuk

djuk iMrk gSA mues ls dqN lkekU; ifjfLFkfr;¡k gSa tSls& fyf[kr ijh{kk nsuk] izSfDVdy dke

dk iwjk u gksuk] ijh{kk dh iw.kZ rS;kjh u gksuk] d{kk esa lcds lkeus cksyuk] ekSf[kd ijh{kk dk

lkeuk djuk] izksQslj ¼v/;kidx.k½@iz”kklfud vf/kdkjh ds lkFk eqykdkr djuk] HksnHkko dh

Hkkouk vkfn vkfnA bu lc ifjfLFkfr;ksa ds pyrs Nk=ksa dks fofHkUu y{k.kksa dk vuqHko gks ldrk

gS] tks fd fuEufyf[kr lwph esa fn, x, gSaA dì;k bu y{k.kksa dks /;kuiwoZd if<, rFkk crkb,

dh mDr y{k.k fdruh ek=k esa vkids vuqHko dks O;Dr djrk gSA mi;qDr mÙkj okys vad ds

Åij ?ksjk cukb,A

Ø-

la-

y{k.k mÙkj

dHkh

ugh

FkksMh ek=k

esa

dqN ek=k

esa

vf/kd ek=k

esa

1 >qu>quh gksuk 0 1 2 3

2 xehZ eglwl djuk 0 1 2 3

3 iSjkssa esa >qu>qukgV 0 1 2 3

4 vkjke djus esa rdyhQ 0 1 2 3

5 lcls cqjk gksus dk Hk; 0 1 2 3

6 pDdj vkuk 0 1 2 3

7 g`n; /kMdu c<uk@rst xfr ls

pyuk

0 1 2 3

8 vfLFkjrk eglwl djuk 0 1 2 3

9 vkrafdr gksuk 0 1 2 3

10 cspSu gksuk 0 1 2 3

11 xyk ?kqVuk eglwl djuk 0 1 2 3

12 gkFkksa esa dEiu 0 1 2 3

13 fgyuk@vfLFkjrk 0 1 2 3

14 fu;a=.k [kksus dk Hk; 0 1 2 3

15 l¡kl ysus esa leL;k 0 1 2 3

16 Hk;Hkhr gksuk 0 1 2 3

17 vip gksuk 0 1 2 3

18 ewfNZr gksuk@flj gYdk gksuk 0 1 2 3

19 psgjs dh lqf[kZ;ka mMuk 0 1 2 3

20 [email protected] ilhuk fudyuk 0 1 2 3

211

Nk=ksa dks vkus okys fopkj

funsZ”k % uhps dqN dFkuksa ds lewg fn, x;sa gSA ,d lewg ,d gh fopkj dks fofHkUu rhozrk ds

vuqlkj izdV+ djrk gS tks fd Nk=ksa }kjk mPp f”k{kk ds nkSjku vuqHko fd;k tk ldrk gSA

dì;k dFkuksa ds lewg dks /;kuiwoZd if<, rFkk mDr dFku ds lkeus fy[ks vad ij ?ksjk

cukb, tks vkids vkus okys fopkj dks iw.kZ :i ls O;Dr djrk gSA

Ø-

la-

vkus okys fopkj

1 0- eSa nqf[kr eglwl ugh djrk g¡wA

1- eSa nqf[kr eglwl djrk g¡wA

2- eSa gj le; nqf[kr gksrk g¡w vkSj eSa blls mcj ugh ikrk g¡wA

3- eSa bruk T;knk nqf[kr vkSj vizlUu g¡w fd bldks lgu ugh dj ldrkA

2 0- eSa fo”ks’kdj Hkfo’; ds ckjs esa grksRlkfgr ugh g¡wA

1- eSa Hkfo’; ds fy, grksRlkfgr eglwl djrk g¡wA

2- eSa eglwl djrk g¡w fd esjs ikl vkxs djus dks dqN ugh gSA

3- eSa eglwl djrk g¡w fd Hkfo’; fujk”kktud gS vkSj phTksa lq/kj ugh ldrh gSaA

3 0- eSa vlQy eglwl ugh djrk g¡wA

1- eSa eglwl djrk g¡w fd eSa ,d vkSlr vkneh ls T;knk vlQy jgkA

2- tc eSa viuh fiNyh ftUnxh ns[krk g¡w rks mlesa cgqr lkjh vlQyrk,¡ ns[krk

g¡wA

3- eSa eglwl djrk g¡w fd eSa iw.kZ :i ls vlQy vkneh g¡wA

4 0- eSa oLrqvksa ls mruh gh larqf’V izkIr djrk g¡w ftruk fd igys djrk FkkA

1- eq>s oLrqvksa ls oSlk vkuUn ugh feyrk tSlk fd igys feyrk FkkA

2- eSa fdlh pht ls fdlh izdkj dh okLrfod larqf’V izkIr ugh djrk g¡wA

3- eSa lHkh phtksa ls vlarq’V rFkk Åc pqdk g¡wA

5 0- eSa vius vki esa fujk”kk eglwl ugh djrk g¡wA

1- eSa vius vki esa fujk”kk eglwl djrk g¡wA

2- eSa vius vkils fujk”k g¡wA

3- eSa vius vkils ?k`.kk djrk g¡wA

6 0- eSa ,slk eglwl ugh djrk fd eSa fdlh vkSj ls T;knk [kjkc g¡wA

1- eSa viuh dfe;ksa vkSj [kkfe;ksa ds ckjs esa vkykspukRed g¡wA

2- eSa gj le; vius vki dks viuh xyfr;ksa ds fy, nks’kh Bgjkrk g¡wA

3- eSa vius vkidks nks’kh Bgjkrk g¡w mu lcds fy,] tks dqN Hkh esjs lkFk cqjk gksrk

gSA

7 0- eSa tYnh jksrk ugh g¡wA

1- eSa vktdy tYnh jksus yxrk g¡w] igys dh vis{kkA

2- eSa vktdy gj le; jksrk jgrk g¡wA

3- eSa jksus ds fy, rRij g¡w ij eSa jks ugh ldrk] ;g¡k rd fd ,slk pkgus ij HkhA

8 0- eSa mruk T;knk fpMfpM+k ugh g¡w] tSlk fd igys FkkA

1- eSa vktdy igys ls T;knk fpMfpMk g¡wA

2- eSa vf/kdrj le; xqLls esa ;k fpMfpMsiu esa jgrk g¡wA

3- eSa gj le; fpMfpMk eglwl djrk g¡wA

212

9 0- eSa nwljs yksxksa ls feyus&tqyus dk vkuUn ugh [kks;k g¡wA

1- eSa igys dh vis{kk] nwljs yksxksa ls de feyrk&tqyrk g¡wA

2- eSa nwljs yksxksa ls feyus&tqyus dk vkuUn [kks pqdk g¡wA

3- eSa nwljs yksxksa ls feyus&tqyus dk vkuUn] iw.kZ:i ls [kks pqdk g¡wA

10 0- eSa oSlk gh fu.kZ; djrk g¡w tSlk igys djrk FkkA

1- eSa oSls fu.kZ; ysuk cUn dj fn;k g¡w tSlk fd igys djrk FkkA

2- eq>s fu.kZ; ysus esa] igys ls T;knk dfBukbZ dk lkeuk djuk iMrk gSA

3- vc ls eS fdlh izdkj dk fu.kZ; ugh ys ldrk g¡wA

11 0- eSa ,slk eglwl ugh djrk g¡w fd esjk :i igys ls T;knk [kjkc gSA

1- eSa fpfUrr g¡w fd eSa cq<~<k ;k cnlwjr fn[kk;h nsrk g¡wA

2- eSa eglwl djrk g¡w fd esjs psgjs ij LFkk;h ifjoZru gq, gS tks fd esjs :i dks

cnlwjr cukrs gSA

3- esjk fo”okl gS fd eSa cMk cnlwjr fn[krk g¡wA

12 0- eSa igys dh rjg dke dj ldrk g¡wA

1- eq>s dksbZ dke “kq: djus vkSj djrs jgus ds fy, vc T;knk iz;kl djuk iMrk

gSA

2- eq>s dksbZ Hkh dke djus ds fy, vius vki ls T;knk iz;kl djuk iMrk gSA

3- eSa dksbZ dke ugh dj ldrk g¡wA

13 0- eSa igys dh rjg vPNs ls lks ldrk g¡wA

1- eSa igys dh rjg vPNs ls lks ugh ikrk g¡wA

2- eSa ges”kk le; dh vis{kk ls 1&2 ?k.Vsa igys tx tkrk g¡w vkSj cgqr dfBukbZ ls

nqckjk uhan vkrh gSA

3- eSa ges”kk le; dh vis{kk ls dbZ ?k.Vsa igys tx tkrk g¡w vkSj fQj nqckjk ls

uhan ugh vkrh gSA

14 0- eSa Fkdku eglwl ugh djrk g¡wA

1- eSa igys dh vis{kk tYnh Fkd tkrk g¡wA

2- eSa dqN Hkh djus esa Fkdku eglwl djrk g¡wA

3- eSa bruk T;knk Fkdk gqvk g¡w fd dqN Hkh ugh dj ldrkA

15 0- ;fn ,slk dqN gS rks gky gh esa esjk otu de ugh gqvk gSA

1- esjk 2 fdyks otu ?kV+ x;k gSA



16 0- gky gh esa esjh ;kSu&fdz;k dh bPNk esa dksbZ ifjorZu ugh vk;k gSA

1- eSa igys dh vis{kk ;kSu&fdz;k ds fy, de bPNqd g¡wA

2- eSa ;kSu&fdz;k djus dh bPNk yxHkx [kks pqdk g¡wA

3- eSa ;kSu&fdz;k djus dh bPNk iwjh rjg ls [kks pqdk g¡wA

fnukad%

LFkku% “kks/kkFkhZ ds gLrk{kj%

213

Informed Consent

Dear Friend,

I am Jitendra Kumar Kushwaha, a PhD. Scholar at Tata Institute of Social Sciences,

Mumbai. I am awarded Indian Council of Medical Research-Junior Research Fellowship

and working under the guidance of Professor G.G. Wankhede. Under this research

exploration I would like to study deeply „stress and mental health related problems due to

discrimination during higher education‟. This exercise is a relevant part for fulfillment of

requirement of the PhD. Degree.

As you know, the higher education is important for the overall development. But

attaining higher education is not an easy task especially for those who are coming from

the poor socio-economic background and marginalized section of the society. Such type

of barriers, hurdles and background lacuna, induces stress and mental health related

problems among students during higher education.

Therefore, this questionnaire contains questions about stress and mental health related

problems, experiences of feelings, experiences of various symptoms by students and

thoughts occur to students during higher education. Kindly read questions and

instructions carefully and then respond to them. You are free to respond. You too deserve

the right to leave the questionnaire whenever you want. I assure you that the information

provided by you will be totally confidential and nowhere it will be used or reveal except

to research purpose.

I hereby declare that I agree with the objectives and terms of the research and I have no

objection to respond them.

Signature of Respondent

Date:

Place:

214

Questionnaire

Serial No-----------

I- Personal Profile:

Name:

Sex: Male [ ] Female [ ] Age (in years):

Community§§

: S [ ] O [ ] G [ ] Religion***

: H [ ] M [ ] C [ ] O [ ]

Course studying at present: Name of University

Height (in centimeter): Weight (in Kg):

Blood Pressure: Background†††

: Urban [ ] Rural [ ]

Current Residence: Hostel [ ] With Parents [ ] On Rent [ ] Others [ ]

II- Educational Profile:

Class Setting of

School

Type of

School

Medium of

Instruction

Attempts

taken to

complete

Year of

passing

% of

marks

obtained

Rura

l

Urb

an

Gover

nm

ent

Pri

vat

e

Hin

di

Engli

sh

High-school

Intermediate

Graduation

Post-

Graduation- I

III- Family Profile:

S. No Relationship

with

respondent

Age (in year) Education Occupation Monthly income in

Rs.

1 Father

2 Mother

3

4

Number of Family Member:

§§§§

S= SC, O= OBC, G= General ***

H= Hindu, M= Muslim, C=Christian, O= Others

215

Instructions:

In the list below you will find some common problems which are experienced by the

students during higher education. Therefore please tell me the appropriate problems

which you have experienced last few days.

„A‟

S.

N.

Items Yes No S.

N.

Items Yes No

1 Eye Strains Yes No 2 Tight neck or shoulder Yes No

3 Backache Yes No 4 Headache Yes No

5 Muscles twitches Yes No 6 Tightness in chest Yes No

7 Heart palpitation Yes No 8 High blood pressure Yes No

9 Rapid, Swallow breathing Yes No 10 Sweaty palm and feet Yes No

11 Dizziness Yes No 12 Abdominal cramps,

constipation

Yes No

13 Nervous Stomach Yes No 14 Restlessness Yes No

15 Indigestion, Heartburn Yes No 16 Frequent illness Yes No

17 Frequently feeling tired and run

down

Yes No 18 Anorexia (Loss of

appetite)

Yes No

19 Insomnia (Sleeplessness) Yes No

„B‟

1 Lack of Concentration Yes No 2 Forgetfulness Yes No

3 Confusion Yes No 4 Obsession with details Yes No

5 Concern with excessive “what

ifs”

Yes No 6 Being stuck in the past.

“If only” and “I should

Have”

Yes No

7 Indecision Yes No 8 Self-criticism Yes No

9 Self-doubts Yes No 10 Racing thoughts Yes No

11 Boredom Yes No 12 Loss of enthusiasm,

apathy

Yes No

216

13 Worry Yes No 14 Feeling Down Yes No

15 Frustration Yes No 16 Irritability, Impatience Yes No

17 Listlessness Yes No 18 Nervousness Yes No

19 Anxiety Yes No 20 Anger Yes No

21 Excessive sensitivity Yes No 22 Decrease in sense of

Humor

Yes No

23 Family problems Yes No 24 Yes No

25 Difficulty setting priorities or

saying “No”

Yes No

„C‟

1 Too much or too little sleep Yes No 2 Started cigarette/ biri

smoking

Yes No

3 Indulge in alcohol consumption Yes No 4 Loss or increase in appetite Yes No

5 Yes No 6 Nervous activity: Foot

tapping, finger tapping,

Nail biting etc.

Yes No

7 Stuttering or quivering voice Yes No 8 Withdrawing, Avoiding

people

Yes No

9 Angry Outbursts Yes No 10 Making Mistakes Yes No

11 Difficulty in classes Yes No 12 Procrastination / Postpone

of work

Yes No

217

Experiences of Feelings

Instructions: Following there are some statements. These statements express the feelings

of students during higher education. Please read these statements carefully and indicate

how true each of them is for you. Provide you answer based on five point scale and circle

the appropriate choice

1- Never True

2- Slightly True

3- Sometimes True

4- Highly True

5- Always True

S.

No

Statements Your Choice

1 I feel offended to disclose my identity as belonging to a

particular community among the students of this university.

1 2 3 4 5

2 Students do not want to share notes and important books with

me

1 2 3 4 5

3 Because of economic background of my family I am lagging

behind other students to access higher education properly.

1 2 3 4 5

4 I feel that students belonging to well off community act as if

they are better than me.

1 2 3 4 5

5 I feel that in the class, I and other students who are socio-

economically equal to me are being ignored and overlooked.

1 2 3 4 5

6 I feel that some sections of students including me are being

insulted, told offensive jokes or comments.

1 2 3 4 5

7 My English language is poor that is why I am lagging behind

in the study

1 2 3 4 5

8 I feel bad about not able to afford good books of my course.

1 2 3 4 5

9 I feel that students good in English are getting good marks.

1 2 3 4 5

10 I feel offended when some sections of students including me

are being called by caste names.

1 2 3 4 5

11 I feel bad not to get chance to participate in extra-curricular

activities.

1 2 3 4 5

12 I hesitate to sit in the front row of the classroom.

1 2 3 4 5

218

Symptoms Experienced by Students

Instructions: While taking higher education students may confront various stressors and

certain tense situations. Some of these situations are- taking written exams, not completed

practical work, not well prepared for exams, making presentation in the class, facing

viva, meeting with professors and administrative officers, feeling of discrimination etc.

Because of these situations students come across the experiences of various symptoms

which are enlisted below. Read these symptoms carefully and how much you have been

bothered each of the symptoms and circle the corresponding number in each column.

S. No. Symptoms Your Ratings

Not At All Mildly Moderately Severely

1 Numbness or tingling 0 1 2 3

2 Feeling hot 0 1 2 3

3 Wobbliness in legs 0 1 2 3

4 Unable to relax 0 1 2 3

5 Fear of worst happening 0 1 2 3

6 Dizzy 0 1 2 3

7 Heart pounding / racing 0 1 2 3

8 Unsteady 0 1 2 3

9 Terrified or afraid 0 1 2 3

10 Nervous 0 1 2 3

11 Feeling of chocking 0 1 2 3

12 Hands trembling 0 1 2 3

13 Shaky / Unsteady 0 1 2 3

14 Fear of losing control 0 1 2 3

15 Difficulty in breathing 0 1 2 3

16 Scared 0 1 2 3

17 Indigestion 0 1 2 3

18 Faint / Lightheaded 0 1 2 3

19 Face flushed 0 1 2 3

20 Hot / cold sweat 0 1 2 3

219

Thoughts Occurs to Students

Instructions: Following are group of statements conveying the same thought in varying

degree of intensity, which are being experienced by students during higher. Read group

of statement carefully and encircle the digit provided before the statement which defines

your occurring thoughts completely.

S. No. One thoughts given varying degree of intensity

1 0- I do not feel sad.

1- I feel sad.

2- I am sad all the time and I can‟t snap out of it.

3- I am so sad and unhappy that I can‟t stand it.

2 0- I am not particularly discouraged about the future.

1- I feel discouraged about the future.

2- I feel I have nothing to look forward to.

3- I feel the future is hopeless and that things cannot improve.

3 0- I do not feel like a failure

1- I feel I have failed more than the average person

2- As I look back on my life, all I can see is a lot of failures

3- I feel I am a complete failure as a person

4 0- I get as much satisfaction out of things as I used to

1- I don‟t enjoy things the way I used to

2- I don‟t get real satisfaction out of anything anymore

3- I am dissatisfied or bored with everything

5 0- I don‟t feel disappointed in myself

1- I am disappointed in myself

2- I am disgusted with myself

3- I hate myself

6 0- I don‟t feel I am any worse than anybody else

1- I am critical of myself for my weaknesses or mistakes

2- I blame myself all the time for my faults

3- I blame myself for everything bad that happens

7 0- I don‟t cry any more than usual.

1- I cry more now than I used to.

2- I cry all the time now

3- I used to be able to cry, but now I can‟t cry even though I want to.

8 0- I am no more irritated by things than I ever was

1- I am slightly more irritated now than usual

2- I am quite annoyed or irritated a good deal of the time

3- I feel irritated all the time

220

9 0- I have not lost interest in other people

1- I am less interested in other people that I used to be

2- I have lost most of my interest in other people

3- I have lost all of my interest in other people

10 0- I make decision about as well as I ever could

1- I put off making decisions more than I used to

2- I have greater difficulty in making decisions more than I used to

3- I can‟t make decision at all anymore

11 0- I don‟t feel that I look any worse than I used to

1- I am worried that I am looking old or unattractive

2- I feel there are permanent changes in my appearance that make me look

unattractive

3- I believe that I look ugly

12 0- I can work about as well as before

1- It takes an extra effort to get started at doing something

2- I have to put myself very hard to do anything

3- I can‟t do any work at all.

13 0- I can sleep as well as usual

1- I don‟t sleep as well as I used to be

2- I wake up 1-2 hours earlier than usual and find it hard to get back to sleep

3- I wake up several hours earlier than I used to and cannot get back to sleep

14 0- I don‟t get more tired than usual

1- I get tired more easily than I used to.

2- I get tired from doing almost anything

3- I am too tired to do anything

15 0- I haven‟t lost much weight, if any, lately

1- I have lost more than two Kg.

2- I have lost more than four Kg.

3- I have lost more than seven Kg.

16 0- I have not noticed any recent change in my interest in sex.

1- I am less interested in sex than I used to be.

2- I have almost no interest in sex.

3- I have lost interest in sex completely

Date:

Place: Signature of Researcher

221

Interview Guide

1. Introduce yourself first, and tell me about your family background?

2. How did you decide to study in this course? What are reasons behind to select this

course?

3. Is there any gap in your study? If yes then why?

4. What are your opinions about the students who are coming from poor family

background, how do they find themselves or stand in the higher education?

5. According to you what will be their feelings and perceptions? Do they feel

confident, competent enough, significantly smart & satisfactory competitive or

they feel discriminated, being dominated, suppressed or oppressed & depressed?

6. What do you feel about yourself about the above mentioned things?

7. What do you think about the community-community groupism between teacher-

students and between students-students, in the class or in the hostel? Similarly

what about the teachers-students relations in the class during practical or in

providing important notes? Means Brahmin-Brahmin get together, SC-SC become

together, OBC-OBC is together or opposite of that if some teacher is Brahmin

then providing less marks to the SC or so? So what are your opinions on this issue

concerning this university?

8. What is your opinion about the higher authority persons of this university like

dean, administrative officer or head of departments, concerning the issue of

discrimination based on the community / caste belongingness?

9. Do you think that some section (lower community) students are being commented

by caste laden names or discarded in the class, in the group activity or in the

extra-curricular activities?

10. What do you feel about the participation of students of your community in extra-

curricular activities of this university? What do you think about the students who

come from poor-rural socio economic background, do they take participation fully

in the extra-curricular activities? For example do they participate in the sports

events, quiz competition or in the debate?

222

11. What do you feel about your living standard in the hostel? Do you feel any kind

of poor feelings or inferior feelings about your status?

12. Do you think that students share notes with you which are very important?

13. What is your opinion about your English language? Do you feel that because of

“my English language problems I am lagging behind other students? Do you feel

that students good in English language are getting good marks?

14. What is your opinion about the practice of untouchability in this university? It

could not be open or overt but what about the subtle form of practice of

untouchability?

15. Any discriminatory incidents which had happened with you or heard about the

same during higher education? It could be because of teacher‟s mistreatment,

misbehavior of administrative officer or because of student‟s misbehavior?

Anything which was very touchy and stressful to you during this higher

education?

16. Any extra information which you would like to share with me relevant for the

concerning issue?

17. Anything would you like to ask me? Please feel free.

223

Appendix-B

Development and Standardization of the Scales:

Before actual data collection, the perceived Discrimination Scale for Students is

constructed and to know the extent of mental health status, the Beck Depression

Inventory and Beck Anxiety inventory is translated in to Hindi and revalidated for the

population of students pursuing higher education. The common steps which are

involved for the development and standardization of scales are given below. The

description of each scale with its reliability and validity quotient is given

consecutively.

I. For the development and standardization of scales, first of all

the scales were developed into English language. Then after;

keeping in mind that the target population (students of Uttar

Pradesh studying at universities) will be Hindi speaking. Thus

all the scales were translated in to Hindi. In continuation to

check the validity of translated scales into Hindi, again all the

scales were given to three students to translate them from Hindi

to English. The students who have translated these scales were

well verse in Hindi as well as in English. The translation from

Hindi to English, which is done by the students, was quite

compatible with the original draft of English language.

II. After the translation exercise, randomly 22 students, studying

in M.A. courses at Tata Institute of Social Sciences and are

from Uttar Pradesh, are selected for providing their judgment

about the statements of Hindi Version Scales. All the students

are required to provide their judgment about the statements

whether statement is capable enough to assess the attribute

taken into concern or not. For the Perceived Discrimination

Scale which was renamed as „Experiences of Feelings‟, the

seven point judgment rating scale was provided which was

ranging from the „Most Incapable to Most Capable‟ with fourth

as a „Neutral‟ point. For the Beck Anxiety Inventory which was

renamed as „Symptoms Experienced by Students‟ and for the

224

Beck Depression Inventory which was renamed as „Thoughts

Occurs to Students‟, have five point judgment rating scale. This

rating scale was ranging from „Wrong to Right‟ with third point

as „Not Decided‟ judgment. The similar exercise is done, which

is mentioned above for the validation and standardization of

English Version scales. This time judgment is taken from 35

students. They are selected randomly from M.A. courses at

T.I.S.S. and are from different part of India with affinity to

differential socio-economic backgrounds.

III. After taking judgment the scale values of each statement is

calculated. Then after the scale values of Hindi version

statements are correlated with corresponding scale values of

English version statements to find out the validity of the scales.

IV. After the assessment of validity of these scale and inventories,

these are administered to the actual students‟ population. About

540 students are surveyed based on these measures. The

collected information about 540 students is fed into SPSS

(Statistical Package for Social Sciences) software for the further

statistical analysis. With the help of simple correlation the

validity of each scale has been calculated. The reliability of

each scale is evaluated by applying Cronbach Alpha analysis in

the SPSS.

Perceived Discrimination Scale (PDS):

The scale has 12 items intended to measure the extent of perceived discrimination

among the students of higher education. There are two sets of scales one is in Hindi

Language (H-PDS) and another one is in English Language (E-PDS). Both scales are

being developed by Jitendra Kumar Kushwaha & G.G. Wankhede and the statements

of one scale are the translation of another one. The statements of the scale are original

and constructed from the themes of an empirical research done on the population of

students. The reported as well as the analysed sources of perceived discrimination are

because of poor socio-economic background, English language, rural habitat, caste

and particular community belongingness. These items are intended to measure degree

of „General Perceived Discrimination‟ broadly because of poor socio-economic

225

family background, poor English language, unhealthy interaction with teachers and

students, and caste affiliation. The scale is designed to capture the extent of direct

perception of discrimination as well as perceived perception of students; as to how

other people have perception about them. The present scale is the by product of M.

Phil as well as PhD. Research exploration where the attempt is made to scientifically

study the intricate nexus between the Discrimination Perception and mental health of

students.

From the exercise of standardization and validation of scales, it is observed that

during the development of Perceived Discrimination Scale, earlier there were 23

statements intended to measure the degree of discrimination perception among

students. After taking the judgment from the students and calculation of the scale

values (Q50 the Inter--quartile) [The median of the distribution of judgment for each

statements) and the quartile deviation (Q), pave the path to eliminate almost half of

the statements from this scales. According to the experts on development of scales

and Edward Allen, L (1951), „the inter-quartile range is the measure of the spread of

the middle 50 percent of judgment‟. In other words the scale values (Inter-quartile) of

each statement must be greater than the midpoint of rating scales. However, when

there is good agreement among the judges in judging the degree of favourableness or

unfavourableness of a statement, Q (quartile deviation) will be small compared with

the value obtained when there is relatively little agreement among the judges. A large

Q value indicates disagreement among the judges as to the degree of the attribute

possessed by a statement. It is therefore taken as an indication that there is something

wrong with the statement. Thus, in the development of Perceived Discrimination

Scale, the above mentioned criterion is fallowed due to that almost half of the

statements are eliminated because some of them were either having lower scale values

or larger Q value. Finally there are twelve statements which have higher scale values

with smaller Q values. The Table- B1 and Table-B2 show the frequency distribution,

scale values and Q values of each statements of Perceived Discrimination Scale-

Table- B1 Hindi Perceived Discrimination Scale: Frequency Proportion and

Scale Values of items

Seven point scale for judgments (1-Most Incapable, 2-Some Extent Incapable, 3-

Least Incapable, 4-Neutral, 5- Least Capable, 6-Some Extent Capable, 7-Most

Capable)

226

New

S.N.

Judgment Ratings N. Scale

Values

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 f 1 0 1 2 2 4 12 22 6.57

P 0.05 00 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.18 0.55

Cp 0.05 .05 0.10 0.19 0.28 0.46 1.00

2 f 4 3 2 5 2 3 3 22 4.14

P 0.18 0.14 0.09 0.23 0.09 0.14 0.14

Cp 0.18 0.32 0.41 0.54 0.86 0.91 1.00

3 f 3 1 1 2 1 5 9 22 6.02

P 0.14 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.05 0.23 0.41

Cp 0.14 0.19 0.24 0.33 0.38 0.60 1.00

4 f 1 0 0 2 1 7 11 22 6.50

P 0.05 00 00 0.09 0.05 0.32 .50

Cp 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.14 0.19 0.50 1.00

5 f 1 2 5 2 7 2 3 22 4.63

P 0.05 0.09 0.23 0.09 032 0.09 0.14

Cp 0.09 0.14 0.37 0.46 0.78 0.86 1.00

6 f 2 1 0 3 2 5 3 22 4.38

P 0.09 0.05 00 0.41 0.09 0.23 0.14

Cp 0.09 0.14 0.14 0.55 0.64 0.87 1.00

7 f 1 1 0 0 0 6 14 22 6.70

P 0.05 0.05 00 00 00 0.27 0.64

Cp 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.37 1.00

8 f 2 1 0 9 3 2 5 22 4.38

P 0.09 0.05 00 0.41 0.14 0.09 0.23

Cp 0.09 0.14 0.14 0.55 0.69 0.78 1.00

9 f 1 0 2 0 3 7 9 22 6.19

P 0.05 00 0.09 00 .14 0.32 0.41

Cp 0.05 0.05 0.14 0.14 028 0.60 1.00

10 f 2 3 0 4 2 3 8 22 5.5

P 0.09 0.14 00 0.18 0.09 0.14 0.36

Cp 0.09 0.23 00 0.41 0.50 0.64 1.00

11 f 3 2 4 2 5 4 2 22 4.5

P 0.14 0.09 0.18 0.09 0.23 0.18 0.09

Cp 0.14 0.23 0.41 0.50 0.73 0.91 1.00

12 f 4 2 3 3 1 4 5 22 5.14

227

P 0.18 0.9 0.14 0.14 0.05 0.18 0.23

Cp 0.18 0.27 0.41 0.55 0.60 0.78 1.00

Table- B2 English Perceived Discrimination Scale: Frequency, Proportion and

Scale Values of items

New S.N. Judgment Ratings N. Scale Values

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 f 2 0 0 3 6 13 11 35 5.98

P 0.06 00 00 0.09 0.17 0.37 0.31

Cp 0.06 0.06 0.6 0.15 0.32 0.69 1.00

2 f 2 2 6 6 6 8 5 35 4.72

P 0.06 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.23 0.14

Cp 0.06 0.12 0.29 0.46 0.63 0.86 1.00

3 f 1 3 3 1 8 8 11 35 5.63

P 0.03 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.23 .23 0.31

Cp 0.03 0.12 0.21 0.24 0.47 0.70 1.00

4 f 1 0 3 9 3 8 11 35 5.63

P 0.03 00 0.09 0.26 0.09 0.23 0.31

Cp 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.38 0.47 0.70 1.00

5 f 1 1 3 5 6 9 10 35 5.65

P 0.03 0.03 0.09 0.14 0.17 0.26 0.29

Cp 0.03 0.06 0.15 0.29 0.46 0.72 1.00

6 f 1 2 3 2 8 9 10 35 5.62

P 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.06 0.23 0.26 0.29

Cp 0.03 0.09 0.18 0.24 0.47 0.73 1.00

7 f 4 1 4 4 3 11 8 35 5.66

P 0.11 0.03 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.31 0.23

Cp 0.11 0.14 0.25 0.36 0.45 0.76 1.00

8 f 0 6 1 8 4 8 8 35 5.13

P 00 0.17 0.03 0.23 0.11 0.23 0.23

Cp 00 0.17 0.20 0.43 0.54 0.77 1.00

9 f 3 3 1 5 3 8 12 35 5.76

P 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.14 0.03 0.23 0.34

Cp 0.09 0.18 0.21 0.35 0.44 0.67 1.00

10 f 0 2 1 4 4 9 15 35 6.23

P 00 0.06 0.03 0.11 0.11 0.26 0.43

Cp 00 0.06 0.09 0.20 0.31 0.57 1.00

228

11 f 1 2 3 11 3 8 7 35 4.61

P 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.31 0.09 0.23 0.20

Cp 0.03 0.09 0.18 0.49 0.58 0.81 1.00

12 f 6 1 2 1 5 12 8 35 5.77

P .17 0.03 .06 0.03 0.14 0.34 0.23

Cp .17 0.20 0.26 0.29 0.43 0.77 1.00

Table- B3 Scale Values of Items on Perceived Discrimination Scale (PDS)

Old S.

N.

New

S.N.

Hindi PDS

Scale Values

English PDS

Scale Values

Hindi PDS

„Q‟ Values

English PDS

„Q‟ Values

1 1 6.57 5.98 1.86 1.61

3 2 4.14 4.72 2.98 2.76

7 3 6.02 5.63 2.25 2.12

8 4 6.50 5.63 1.32 2.66

9 5 4.63 5.65 2.43 2.39

10 6 4.38 5.62 2.21 2.02

12 7 6.70 5.66 1.03 2.96

13 8 4.38 5.13 2.04 2.69

14 9 6.19 5.76 1.58 2.94

19 10 5.50 6.23 3.20 1.93

21 11 4.50 4.61 3.00 2.51

23 12 5.14 5.71 4.05 3.11

Table- B4 Correlations between Hindi PDS and English PDS Scale Values

Hindi

PDS

English

PDS

Hindi Version Discrimination perception

Scale

Pearson

Correlation

1 .616*

Sig. (2-tailed) .033

N 12 12

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

To find out the validity of PDS, the correlation between the scale values of statements

from Hindi version and scale values of statements from English version is calculated.

The degree of correlation is 0.616 and also correlation is significant at 0.05 levels

(Table-B4). This degree of correlation is quite satisfactory for the assessment of

discrimination perception among the students studying at higher education. It reveals

that statements are valid for the assessment of discrimination.

Based on the data of 540 students, the internal consistency of the scale is assessed by

computing Cronbach Alpha Coefficient (Table-B5). It is evident that the coefficient is

229

.836 (approximately .84) which is reasonably high and suggesting higher internal

consistency of items of H-PDS. Each item is sufficiently correlated with other items

independently (Table-B6). Total inter-item correlation ranges from .36 to .60 and all

the items are statistically significant (Table-B7). From the table-B7, it is observed

that higher value of each item; in the column entitled „Cronbach‟s Alpha if Item

deleted‟, determines that each item is relatively significant for the degree of alpha. If

in case any item would be deleted then it would drag down the overall degree of

internal consistency from .84 to the lower degree of it. Item discrimination index for

each items of the scale are statistically significant (Table-B8).

Table-B5 Reliability Statistics of H-PDS

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items

.836 .839 12

Table-B6 Inter Item Correlation of H-PDS

Item

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1 1.00 .273 .354 .256 .371 .291 .304 .353 .130 .342 .217 .324

2 1.00 .289 .290 .231 .233 .271 .325 .174 .276 .266 .310

3 1.00 .344 .428 .255 .399 .593 .240 .290 .261 .341

4 1.00 .334 .364 .365 .342 .194 .294 .225 .213

5 1.00 .497 .346 .392 .181 .365 .236 .316

6 1.00 .347 .332 .204 .337 .227 .307

7 1.00 .454 .397 .259 .319 .339

8 1.00 .266 .326 .273 .298

9 1.00 .180 .271 .210

10 1.00 .393 .274

11 1.00 .235

12 1.00

230

Table-B7 Item-Total Statistics of H-PDS

Scale Mean

if Item

Deleted

Scale

Variance if

Item

Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Squared

Multiple

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if

Item Deleted

Item 1 23.19 79.091 .478 .263 .825

Item 2 22.98 79.681 .437 .212 .828

Item 3 22.82 75.564 .573 .439 .817

Item 4 22.27 75.861 .482 .262 .825

Item 5 22.80 75.764 .557 .387 .819

Item 6 22.84 76.738 .511 .341 .822

Item 7 22.49 74.314 .580 .378 .816

Item 8 22.78 74.847 .600 .448 .815

Item 9 21.92 77.822 .364 .193 .835

Item 10 22.65 74.669 .500 .299 .823

Item 11 22.41 76.696 .441 .239 .828

Item 12 23.06 78.387 .470 .249 .825

Table-B8 Item Discrimination Index for H-PDS

One Sample Test (Test Value = 0) 95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

t df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference Lower Upper

Item 1 32.424 539 .000 1.559 1.46 1.65

Item 2 36.061 539 .000 1.765 1.67 1.86

Item 3 35.268 539 .000 1.930 1.82 2.04

Item 4 40.380 539 .000 2.474 2.35 2.59

Item 5 35.299 539 .000 1.948 1.84 2.06

Item 6 34.673 539 .000 1.909 1.80 2.02

Item 7 38.308 539 .000 2.252 2.14 2.37

Item 8 35.577 539 .000 1.967 1.86 2.08

Item 9 43.327 539 .000 2.822 2.69 2.95

Item 10 32.553 539 .000 2.096 1.97 2.22

Item 11 37.750 539 .000 2.333 2.21 2.45

Item 12 32.674 539 .000 1.691 1.59 1.79

231

Appendix-C

Re-Validation and Standardization of Beck Anxiety Inventory:

The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) is the most useful and widely used measures for

assessing anxiety level and that is why several adaptations have been done in different

languages. The BAI is the well accepted self reported measures of anxiety in adults

and adolescent for the use in both; clinical and research settings. The BAI is created

by Dr. Aron T. Beck and colleagues in English language and it is a 21 items multiple

choice self reported inventory that measures the severity of anxiety in adults and

adolescents (Beck et al. 1988). Items in the BAI describe the emotional, physiological

and cognitive symptoms of anxiety. However, each item is a simple description of

symptoms of anxiety in one of its four expressed aspects: A- Subjective (e.g. Unable

to Relax), B- Neurophysiologic (Numbness or tingling), C-Autonomic (Feeling hot)

and D- Panic related (e.g. Fear of losing control).

The Hindi Beck Anxiety inventory (H-BAI) consists of 20 items translated into Hindi

from the English version of Beck Anxiety Inventory. In the original BAI, there were

21 items whereas in H-BAI one item is eliminated because the scale value of that item

was found low and is found not applicable for the student‟s population by the process

of judgment rating. H-BAI intended to measure the severity of anxiety among the

students with somatic and cognitive symptoms of anxiety. Each item of the inventory

is the symptoms of anxiety and hence each symptoms item has four possible answer

choices: Not at All= 0, Mildly (It did not bother me much)= 1, Moderately (It was

very unpleasant but I could stand it)= 2, Severity (I could barely stand it)= 3. The

respondents are free to mark one of the four points against the item symptoms which

they are experiencing last few days. The values for each item are summed yielding

total score for an individual of 20 symptoms and that can range between 0 to 60

points. A total score of 0-6 is interpreted as a „Minimal level of anxiety‟, 7-14 as

„Mild‟, 15-24 as „Moderate‟, and 25-60 as „Severe level of Anxiety‟.

Fallowing the same procedure as it had done for the perceived discrimination scale;

the standardisation of anxiety inventory is done by taking judgement from the

students of TISS on its both versions (Hindi and English). Similarly to validate and

standardize the Beck Anxiety Inventory; in Indian culture for the students of higher

232

education, the judgments from students are taken and for the each statement the scale

value is calculated. On the basis of higher scale value the selection of statements are

done. Interestingly out of 21 statements, 20 statements are selected for the H-BAI

because all of them have higher scale values (Table-C1 & C2) which is higher than

the midpoint of the rating scale.

Table- C1 Hindi Beck Anxiety Inventory (H-BAI): Frequency, Proportion and

Scale Values of Items

Judgment Rating Scale (1- Wrong, 2- Slightly Wrong, 3- Undecided, 4- Slightly

Right, 5- Right)

Item No. Judgment Ratings N Scale Values

1 2 3 4 5

1 f 1 5 4 10 2 22 3.59

P 0.05 0.23 0.18 0.45 0.2

Cp 0.05 0.28 0.46 0.91 1.00

2 f 2 2 7 6 5 22 3.50

P 0.09 0.09 0.32 0.27 0.23

Cp 0.09 0.18 0.50 0.77 1.00

3 f 3 3 7 6 3 22 3.19

P 0.14 0.14 0.32 0.27 0.14

Cp 0.14 0.28 0.60 0.87 1.00

4 f 2 2 3 8 7 22 4.00

P 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.36 0.32

Cp 0.09 0.18 0.32 0.68 1.00

5 f 3 2 1 11 5 22 4.10

P 0.14 0.09 0.05 0.20 0.23

Cp 0.14 0.23 0.28 0.78 1.00

6 f 2 5 2 6 7 22 3.83

P 0.09 0.23 0.09 0.27 0.32

Cp 0.09 0.32 0.41 .68 1.00

7 f 2 0 4 4 12 22 4.59

P 0.9 00 0.18 0.18 0.55

Cp 0.09 0.09 0.27 0.45 1.00

8 f 3 0 3 5 11 22 4.46

P 0.14 00 0.14 0.23 0.50

Cp 0.14 00 0.28 0.50 1.00

233

9 f 3 4 5 7 3 22 3.28

P 0.14 0.18 0.23 0.32 0.14

Cp 0.14 0.32 0.55 0.87 1.00

10 f 3 0 3 7 9 22 3.88

P 0.14 0.14 0.28 0.32 0.41

Cp 0.14 0.14 0.28 0.60 1.00

11 f 5 6 6 3 2 22 2.50

P 0.23 0.27 0.27 0.14 0.09

Cp 0.23 0.50 0.77 0.91 1.00

12 f 4 4 4 8 2 22 3.28

P 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.36 0.09

Cp 0.18 0.36 0.54 0.90 1.00

13 f 3 3 4 8 4 22 3.61

P 0.14 0.14 0.18 0.36 0.18

Cp 0.14 0.28 0.46 0.82 1.00

14 f 3 2 6 6 5 22 3.50

P 0.14 0.09 0.27 0.27 0.23

Cp 0.14 0.23 0.50 0.77 1.00

15 f 4 5 6 4 3 22 2.83

P 0.18 0.23 0.27 0.18 0.14

Cp 0.18 0.41 0.68 0.86 1.00

16 f 5 4 2 7 4 22 3.50

P .23 0.18 0.09 0.32 0.18

Cp 0.23 0.41 0.50 0.82 1.00

17 f 3 2 4 10 3 22 3.70

P 0.14 0.09 0.18 0.45 0.14

Cp 0.14 0.23 0.41 0.86 1.00

18 f 5 7 4 5 1 22 2.34

P 0.23 .32 0.18 0.23 .05

Cp 0.23 .55 0.73 0.96 1.00

19 f 1 1 6 10 4 22 3.79

P 0.05 0.05 0.27 0.45 0.18

Cp 0.05 0.10 0.37 0.82 1.00

20 f 4 3 1 8 6 22 3.86

P 0.18 0.14 0.05 0.36 0.27

Cp 0.18 0.32 0.37 0.73 1.00

234

Table-C2 English Version Anxiety Inventory (E-BAI): Frequency, Proportion

and Scale Value of each item

Item No Judgment Ratings N Scale Values

1 2 3 4 5

1 f 4 4 10 10 7 35 3.47

P 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.29 .20

Cp 0.11 0.22 0.51 0.80 1.00

2 f 6 3 11 9 6 35 3.27

P 0.17 0.09 0.31 0.26 0.17

Cp 0.17 0.26 0.57 0.83 1.00

3 f 5 2 10 13 5 35 3.53

P 0.14 0.06 0.29 0.37 0.14

Cp 0.14 0.20 0.49 0.86 1.00

4 f 1 1 4 12 17 35 4.18

P 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.34 .49

Cp 0.03 0.06 0.17 0.57 1.00

5 f 0 0 4 13 18 35 4.54

P 0 0 0.11 .37 .51

Cp 00 00 0.11 0.48 1.00

6 f 2 5 7 13 8 35 4.08

P 0.6 0.14 0.20 0.37 0.23

Cp 0.06 0.20 0.40 0.77 1.00

7 f 3 2 6 11 13 35 4.08

P 0.09 0.06 0.17 0.31 0.31

Cp 0.09 0.15 0.32 0.63 1.00

8 f 4 3 5 12 11 35 3.97

P 0.11 0.09 0.14 0.34 0.31

Cp 0.11 0.20 0.34 0.68 1.00

9 f 4 5 4 12 10 35 3.91

P 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.34 0.29

Cp 0.11 0.25 0.36 0.70 1.00

10 f 2 1 3 11 18 35 4.52

P 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.31 0.51

Cp 0.06 0.09 0.18 0.49 1.00

11 f 7 2 12 9 5 35 3.21

P 0.20 0.06 0.34 0.26 0.14

235

Cp 0.20 0.26 0.60 0.86 1.00

12 f 3 3 4 15 10 35 3.99

P 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.43 0.29

Cp 0.09 0.18 0.29 0.72 1.00

13 f 4 2 6 11 12 35 4.02

P 0.11 0.06 0.17 0.31 .34

Cp .11 0.17 0.34 0.65 1.00

14 f 2 2 6 15 10 35 3.99

P 0.06 0.06 0.17 0.43 0.29

Cp 0.06 .12 0.29 0.72 1.00

15 f 9 4 9 8 5 35 3.00

P 0.26 0.11 0.26 0.23 0.14

Cp 0.26 0.37 0.63 0.86 1.00

16 f 6 2 3 12 12 35 4.03

P 0.17 0.06 .09 0.34 0.34

Cp 0.17 0.23 0.32 0.66 1.00

17 f 8 6 6 6 9 35 3.09

P 0.23 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.26

Cp 0.23 0.40 0.57 0.74 1.00

18 f 5 4 10 9 7 35 3.36

P 0.14 0.11 0.29 0.26 0.20

Cp 0.14 0.25 0.54 0.80 1.00

19 f 4 5 6 14 6 35 3.70

P 0.11 0.14 0.17 .40 0.17

Cp 0.11 0.25 0.42 0.82 1.00

20 f 5 2 4 16 8 35 3.91

P 0.14 0.06 0.11 0.46 0.23

Cp 0.14 0.20 0.31 0.77 1.00

236

Table- C3 Validity of Anxiety Inventory (AI)

Old S.

N.

New S.

N.

Hindi AI

Scale Values

English AI

Scale Values

1 1 3.59 3.47

2 2 3.50 3.27

3 3 3.19 3.53

4 4 4.00 4.18

5 5 4.10 4.54

6 6 3.38 3.77

7 7 4.59 4.08

8 8 4.46 3.97

9 9 3.28 3.91

10 10 3.88 4.52

11 11 2.50 3.21

12 12 3.28 3.99

13 13 3.61 4.2

14 14 3.50 3.99

15 15 2.83 3.00

17 16 3.50 4.03

18 17 3.70 3.09

19 18 2.34 3.36

20 19 3.79 3.70

21 20 3.86 3.91

237

Table- C4 Correlations between the Scale Values of H-BAI and E-BAI

H-BAI E-BAI

H-BAI Pearson Correlation 1 .614**


N 20 20

**Correlation is significant on 0.01 levels

For the validity, the scale values of Hindi version statements are correlated with the

scale values of English version. It is found that the degree of association is 0.614 and

this correlation is significant at 0.01 levels (Table- C4). The degree of association

reveals that H-BAI is valid appropriately for the assessment of anxiety level among

the students of higher education

Table- C5 Mean and SD of the Items of H-BAI (N=540)

Item No Mean Std. Deviation N

Item 1 .60 .753 540

Item 2 1.10 1.036 540

Item 3 .71 .861 540

Item 4 .48 .788 540

Item 5 .77 1.012 540

Item 6 .46 .820 540

Item 7 .89 .995 540

Item 8 .65 .871 540

Item 9 .46 .787 540

Item 10 .77 .934 540

Item 11 .32 .730 540

Item 12 .53 .836 540

Item 13 .50 .821 540

Item 14 .59 .892 540

Item 15 .34 .707 540

Item 16 .61 .870 540

Item 17 .40 .735 540

Item 18 .37 .715 540

Item 19 .54 .840 540

Item 20 .51 .858 540

238

Similarly the analysis of internal consistency is done for the Anxiety inventory, where

it is found that the degree of reliability is 0.882 (Table-C8). The statistical analysis of

each item is given in Table-C5 and the summary of Items statistics of H-BAI is given

on the Table-C6. Inter item correlation matrix (Table-C7) reflect the sufficient

correlation between items. Item discrimination index for each item of inventory is

found statistically significant (Table-C10).

Table-C6 Summary Item Statistics of H-BAI

Mean Minimum Maximum Range

Maximum

/

Minimum Variance

N of

Items

Item Means .580 .317 1.104 .787 3.485 .038 20

Item

Variances

.720 .500 1.073 .573 2.147 .028 20

Inter-Item

Covariance

.196 -.024 .402 .425 -17.010 .007 20

Inter-Item

Correlations

.276 -.031 .538 .569 -17.211 .011 20

239

Table-C7 Inter-Item correlation Matrix of H-BAI

Item No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

1 1.00 .451 .538 .247 .167 .198 .100 .159 .164 .169 .024 .153 .118 .183 .067 .149 .110 .086 .127 .227

2 1.00 .394 .176 .194 .090 .133 .104 .122 .136 -.031 .136 .062 .161 .114 .191 .128 .159 .163 .276

3 1.00 .286 .203 .176 .100 .149 .183 .178 .118 .225 .119 .145 .167 .168 .146 .181 .166 .242

4 1.00 .284 .231 .302 .264 .283 .273 .211 .171 .221 .227 .220 .273 .222 .219 .227 .173

5 1.00 .356 .368 .356 .346 .368 .172 .196 .251 .328 .160 .402 .178 .145 .289 .190

6 1.00 .370 .351 .380 .330 .266 .225 .223 .284 .262 .361 .260 .337 .284 .272

7 1.00 .463 .354 .360 .274 .305 .195 .303 .271 .438 .213 .254 .390 .284

8 1.00 .510 .485 .322 .327 .372 .377 .225 .383 .277 .267 .419 .270

9 1.00 .463 .414 .297 .382 .384 .277 .385 .350 .388 .437 .369

10 1.00 .457 .386 .350 .412 .194 .411 .257 .303 .382 .326

11 1.00 .401 .372 .232 .352 .258 .276 .328 .367 .302

12 1.00 .407 .374 .307 .335 .273 .337 .353 .301

13 1.00 .426 .274 .288 .324 .277 .392 .277

14 1.00 .387 .454 .290 .333 .378 .340

15 1.00 .408 .363 .296 .297 .236

16 1.00 .360 .336 .420 .324

17 1.00 .431 .353 .269

18 1.00 .441 .327

19 1.00 .394

20 1.00

240

Table-C8 Reliability Statistics of H-BAI


.882 .884 20

Table- C9 Item-Total Statistics (Homogeneity Index) Reliability of H-BAI

Scale Mean

if Item

Deleted

Scale

Variance if

Item

Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Squared

Multiple

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if

Item Deleted

Item 1 10.99 83.709 .329 .394 .881

Item 2 10.49 82.254 .292 .301 .885

Item 3 10.88 82.422 .361 .373 .881

Item 4 11.11 82.149 .423 .224 .879

Item 5 10.82 79.278 .472 .324 .878

Item 6 11.13 80.857 .494 .308 .876

Item 7 10.70 78.664 .519 .381 .876

Item 8 10.94 79.082 .579 .433 .874

Item 9 11.14 79.572 .614 .442 .873

Item 10 10.82 78.153 .592 .445 .873

Item 11 11.27 82.036 .472 .405 .877

Item 12 11.06 80.397 .515 .343 .876

Item 13 11.09 80.832 .495 .356 .876

Item 14 11.00 79.004 .568 .410 .874

Item 15 11.25 82.518 .451 .335 .878

Item 16 10.98 78.719 .604 .433 .873

Item 17 11.19 82.037 .468 .306 .877

Item 18 11.22 81.766 .505 .369 .876

Item 19 11.05 79.248 .592 .409 .873

Item 20 11.08 80.274 .507 .305 .876

241

Table-C10 Item Discrimination Index for H-BAI

One-Sample test

Test Value = 0 95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Item No.

t df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean


Item 1 18.391 539 .000 .596 .53 .66

Item 2 24.763 539 .000 1.104 1.02 1.19

Item 3 19.088 539 .000 .707 .63 .78

Item 4 14.089 539 .000 .478 .41 .54

Item 5 17.768 539 .000 .774 .69 .86

Item 6 13.123 539 .000 .463 .39 .53

Item 7 20.843 539 .000 .893 .81 .98

Item 8 17.287 539 .000 .648 .57 .72

Item 9 13.449 539 .000 .456 .39 .52

Item 10 19.067 539 .000 .767 .69 .85

Item 11 10.087 539 .000 .317 .25 .38

Item 12 14.673 539 .000 .528 .46 .60

Item 13 14.053 539 .000 .496 .43 .57

Item 14 15.344 539 .000 .589 .51 .66

Item 15 11.202 539 .000 .341 .28 .40

Item 16 16.370 539 .000 .613 .54 .69

Item 17 12.583 539 .000 .398 .34 .46

Item 18 11.920 539 .000 .367 .31 .43

Item 19 15.016 539 .000 .543 .47 .61

Item 20 13.942 539 .000 .515 .44 .59

In table –C9, looking at last column, it is inferred that all the items are contributing to

the total alpha. The lower value of last column than to the actual alpha suggests that

particular items if deleted from the scale will drop down the total alpha to the degree

of its corresponding value. For this scale each item is significant and contributing

significantly to the total alpha. Thus, the reliability of inventory is 0.88 for assessment

of anxiety level.

242

Appendix-D

Re-Validation and Standardization of Beck Depression Inventory

The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) is also widely accepted instrument for the

assessment of depression and its severity of symptoms. Originally it is developed by

Aron T. Beck (1961) in English language which contains 21 items. It is a self reported

instrument intended to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression.

Each of the 21 items; corresponding to symptoms of depression is summed to give a

single score for the BDI. There is a four point scale for each item ranging from 0 to 3.

BDI has been used for the years to identify and assess depressive symptoms and has

been reported to be highly reliable regardless of the population.

The Hindi translation of BDI is done in the same as it is done for anxiety inventory

and for perceived discrimination scale. Similarly, both versions of BDI (Hindi and

English) are given to the students for their judgments so that the suitability of and

each item could be determined. As usual, the judgments are taken from the students

pursuing higher education at T.I.S.S. Through the process of validation and

standardization, in Indian context, it is realized that out of 21 statements of Beck

Depression Inventory, 5 statements are not applicable for the students in general.

Therefore, in Hindi-BAI, finally there are 16 statements in depression inventory and

scale values of each statements in Hindi (H-BDI) as well as English (E-BDI) is given

in table- D1 &D2 respectively in order to assess the validity in the given context of

higher education.

Table- D1 Hindi Beck Depression Inventory (H-BDI): Frequency, Proportion

and Scale Values of Items

Judgment Rating Scale (1- Wrong, 2- Slightly Wrong, 3- Undecided, 4- Slightly

Right, 5- Right)

New S.N. Judgment Ratings N Scale Values

1 2 3 4 5

1 f 1 2 4 12 3 22 3.83

P 0.05 0.09 0.18 0.55 0.14

Cp 0.05 0.14 0.32 0.87 1.00

2 f 2 2 2 10 6 22 4.01

P 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.45 0.27

Cp 0.09 0.18 0.27 0.72 1.00

243

3 f 3 0 5 9 5 22 3.82

P 0.14 00 0.28 0.41 0.23

Cp 0.14 0.14 0.37 0.78 1.00

4 f 1 5 1 9 6 22 3.91

P 0.05 0.23 0.05 0.41 0.27

Cp 0.05 0.28 0.33 0.74 1.00

5 f 4 0 5 9 4 22 3.72

P 0.18 00 0.23 0.41 0.18

Cp 0.18 0.18 0.41 0.82 1.00

6 f 2 1 5 11 3 22 3.76

P 0.09 0.05 0.23 0.50 0.14

Cp 0.09 0.14 0.37 0.87 1.00

7 f 4 5 2 8 3 22 3.50

P 0.18 0.23 0.09 0.36 0.14

Cp 0.18 0.41 0.50 0.86 1.00

8 f 1 5 4 7 5 22 3.63

P 0.05 0.23 0.18 0.32 0.23

Cp 0.05 0.28 0.46 0.78 1.00

9 f 2 2 4 10 4 22 3.81

P 0.09 0.09 0.18 0.45 0.18

Cp 0.09 0.18 0.36 0.81 1.00

10 f 1 2 1 10 8 22 4.19

P 0.05 0.09 0.05 0.45 0.36

Cp 0.05 0.14 0.19 0.64 1.00

11 f 2 2 5 8 5 22 3.75

P 0.09 0.09 0.23 0.36 0.23

Cp 0.09 0.18 0.41 0.77 1.00

12 f 1 2 3 9 7 22 4.04

P 0.05 0.09 0.14 0.41 0.32

Cp 0.05 0.14 0.28 0.69 1.00

13 f 3 1 3 7 8 22 4.04

P 0.14 0.05 0.14 0.32 0.36

Cp 0.14 0.19 0.33 0.65 1.00

14 f 2 1 4 12 3 22 3.83

P 0.09 0.05 0.18 0.55 0.14

Cp 0.09 0.14 0.32 0.87 1.00

244

15 f 3 4 7 4 4 22 3.06

P 0.14 0.18 0.32 0.18 0.18

Cp 0.14 0.32 0.64 0.82 1.00

16 f 4 3 3 10 2 22 3.59

P 0.18 0.14 0.14 0.45 0.09

Cp 0.18 0.32 0.46 0.91 1.00

Table-D2 English Version Depression Inventory (E-BDI): Frequency, Proportion

and Scale Value of each item

New S.N. Judgment Ratings N Scale Values

1 2 3 4 5

1 f 2 1 5 16 11 35 4.09

P 0.06 0.03 0.14 0.46 0.31

Cp 0.06 0.09 0.23 0.69 1.00

2 f 5 1 4 12 13 35 4.15

P 0.14 0.03 0.11 0.34 0.37

Cp 0.14 0.17 0.28 0.62 1.00

3 f 2 7 5 8 13 35 3.93

P 0.06 0.20 0.14 0.23 0.37

Cp 0.06 0.26 0.40 .63 1.00

4 f 2 6 5 9 13 35 4.00

P 0.06 0.17 0.14 .26 0.37

Cp 0.06 0.23 0.37 0.63 1.00

5 f 5 4 4 10 12 35 3.98

P 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.34

Cp 0.14 0.25 0.36 0.65 1.00

6 f 2 5 5 14 9 35 3.90

P 0.06 0.14 0.14 0.40 0.26

Cp 0.06 0.20 0.34 0.74 1.00

7 f 4 10 6 5 10 35 3.09

P 0.11 0.29 0.17 0.14 0.29

Cp 0.11 0.40 0.57 0.71 1.00

8 f 1 4 4 14 12 35 4.12

P 0.03 0.11 0.11 0.40 0.34

Cp 0.03 0.14 0.25 0.65 1.00

9 f 4 3 6 13 9 35 3.85

245

P 0.11 0.09 0.17 0.37 0.26

Cp 0.11 0.20 0.37 0.74 1.00

10 f 2 5 5 14 9 35 3.90

P 0.06 0.14 0.14 0.40 0.26

Cp 0.06 0.20 0.34 0.74 1.00

11 f 5 7 5 7 11 35 3.60

P 0.14 0.20 0.14 0.20 0.31

Cp 0.14 0.34 0.48 0.68 1.00

12 f 3 2 5 13 12 35 4.06

P 0.09 0.06 0.14 0.37 0.34

Cp 0.09 0.15 0.29 0.66 1.00

13 f 1 3 6 7 18 35 4.52

P 0.03 0.09 0.17 0.20 0.57

Cp 0.03 0.12 0.29 0.49 1.00

14 f 2 3 6 12 12 35 4.03

P 0.06 0.09 0.17 0.34 0.34

Cp 0.06 .15 0.32 0.66 1.00

15 f 6 4 8 9 8 35 3.46

P 0.17 0.11 0.23 0.26 0.23

Cp 0.17 0.28 0.51 0.77 1.00

16 f 4 3 10 12 6 35 3.53

P 0.11 0.09 0.29 0.34 0.17

Cp 0.11 0.20 0.49 0.83 1.00

246

Table- D3 Validity for Depression Inventory (DI)

Old

S.N.

New S.

N.

Hindi DI

Scale Values

English DI

Scale Values

1 1 3.83 4.09

2 2 4.01 4.15

3 3 3.82 3.93

4 4 3.91 4.00

7 5 3.72 3.93

8 6 3.76 3.90

10 7 3.50 3.09

11 8 3.63 4.12

12 9 3.81 3.85

13 10 4.19 3.90

14 11 3.75 3.60

15 12 4.04 4.06

16 13 4.04 4.52

17 14 3.83 4.03

19 15 3.06 3.46

21 16 3.59 3.53

.

Table-D4 Correlations between Hindi DI and English DI Scale Values

H-BDI E-BDI

H-BDI Pearson Correlation 1 .667**


N 16 16

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

247

When the scale values of statements are correlated with statements of corresponding

version of scale, then it is found that the degree of association is 0.667 (Table-D4) and

correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. This degree of association suggests that the

statements are valid for the assessment of depression among the students who are at

higher education

Similar to other scales standardization, again the internal consistency analysis is

computed for the H-BDI based on the data of 540 students. Internal consistency has

been assessed for the H-BDI and from the analysis it is observed that the reliability

for the inventory is 0.862 (Table-D7 and D8). The items statistics is given for the

further understanding (Table- D5) and summary of items analysis for internal

consistency is given in table-D6. It is found that items of inventory are satisfactorily

correlated with each other (Table-D9). The item discrimination index revealed that

each item is significant for the student‟s population and able to assess the attribute

intended to measure attribute through these items (Table-D10)

Table- D5 Mean and SD of the Items of H-BDI (N=540)

Item No Mean Std. Deviation N

Item 1 .50 .714 540

Item 2 .68 .763 540

Item 3 .57 .898 540

Item 4 .54 .802 540

Item 5 .49 .786 540

Item 6 .78 1.058 540

Item 7 .59 .966 540

Item 8 .59 .847 540

Item 9 .41 .628 540

Item 10 .54 .799 540

Item 11 .33 .745 540

Item 12 .58 .831 540

Item 13 .65 .832 540

Item 14 .65 .769 540

Item 15 .53 .816 540

Item 16 .31 .579 540

248

Table-D6 Summary Item Statistics of H-BDI

Mean Minimum Maximum Range

Maximum

/

Minimum Variance

N of

Items

Item Means .545 .306 .783 .478 2.564 .015 16

Item

Variances

.656 .335 1.120 .785 3.343 .036 16

Inter-Item

Correlations

.284 .126 .454 .328 3.592 .005 16

Table- D7 Reliability Statistics of H-BDI


.862 .864 16

Table- D8 Item-Total Statistics (Homogeneity Index) Reliability of H-BDI

Scale Mean

if Item

Deleted

Scale

Variance if

Item

Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Squared

Multiple

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if

Item Deleted

Item 1 8.21 49.152 .494 .267 .854

Item 2 8.04 48.746 .496 .278 .854

Item 3 8.14 47.880 .477 .290 .855

Item 4 8.18 48.039 .534 .322 .852

Item 5 8.22 47.938 .557 .356 .851

Item 6 7.93 46.088 .515 .334 .854

Item 7 8.13 47.554 .460 .229 .856

Item 8 8.12 47.748 .525 .302 .852

Item 9 8.31 49.303 .558 .340 .852

Item 10 8.18 47.935 .546 .333 .851

Item 11 8.39 49.425 .442 .224 .856

Item 12 8.14 47.547 .557 .353 .851

Item 13 8.07 48.010 .512 .325 .853

Item 14 8.06 48.191 .546 .368 .851

Item 15 8.18 50.024 .340 .140 .861

Item 16 8.41 51.496 .335 .152 .860

249

Table-D9 Inter-Item correlation Matrix of H-BDI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 1 .319 .269 .292 .312 .325 .301 .347 .304 .345 .240 .254 .297 .316 .170 .152

2 1 .337 .292 .349 .286 .285 .301 .379 .301 .261 .285 .314 .255 .170 .148

3 1 .386 .373 .357 .222 .277 .270 .351 .218 .304 .185 .238 .181 .127

4 1 .346 .314 .274 .321 .388 .372 .343 .322 .256 .276 .238 .171

5 1 .454 .298 .348 .352 .300 .320 .321 .264 .296 .174 .231

6 1 .333 .278 .270 .350 .217 .322 .258 .348 .157 .126

7 1 .283 .299 .292 .219 .288 .307 .258 .151 .160

8 1 .346 .289 .242 .330 .307 .385 .234 .278

9 1 .397 .285 .357 .347 .332 .248 .239

10 1 .247 .398 .332 .289 .210 .211

11 1 .321 .271 .289 .212 .185

12 1 .386 .445 .195 .266

13 1 .451 .233 .252

14 1 .268 .238

15 1 .191

16 1

250

Table- D10 Item Discrimination Index for H-BDI

One-Sample test

Test Value = 0 95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Item No.

t df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean


Item 1 16.206 539 .000 .498 .44 .56

Item 2 20.638 539 .000 .678 .61 .74

Item 3 14.816 539 .000 .572 .50 .65

Item 4 15.515 539 .000 .535 .47 .60

Item 5 14.564 539 .000 .493 .43 .56

Item 6 17.201 539 .000 .783 .69 .87

Item 7 14.123 539 .000 .587 .51 .67

Item 8 16.210 539 .000 .591 .52 .66

Item 9 15.082 539 .000 .407 .35 .46

Item 10 15.560 539 .000 .535 .47 .60

Item 11 10.227 539 .000 .328 .26 .39

Item 12 16.112 539 .000 .576 .51 .65

Item 13 18.043 539 .000 .646 .58 .72

Item 14 19.574 539 .000 .648 .58 .71

Item 15 15.090 539 .000 .530 .46 .60

Item 16 12.267 539 .000 .306 .26 .35

From the above analysis it is noticed that each items of the inventory translated into

Hindi, are sufficiently correlated with each other. The corrected Item-Total correlation

ranges from 0.335 to 0.558. Further, from the item discrimination index analysis, it is

confirmed that all the items of the inventory are statistically significant for the

population of students of higher education.

From the table-D8 it is observed that each item of this inventory is also significant

and contributing reasonably to the total alpha of the inventory. None of the item has

higher „Cronbach‟s Alpha if Item Deleted‟ value than to the total alpha which suggest

that each item is relevant in this inventory.

Date post:	05-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Appendix-A Questionnaire & Interview...

Documents