Self-efficacy for couples and family crisis management in Saudi Society

1. Introduction  

Nowadays, the family crisis is linked with daily events and the crisis that couples face are ranging between simplicity and complexity. It may just be a simple disagreement which can be solved by understanding each couple to the stave off the crisis and reduce the state of tension resulting from it. The crisis may also be complicated end with severe psychological effects that affect the lifestyle of the individuals and their future. Marital life does not mean the absence of crises but it means the ability to confront crises and deal with them in positive ways. Many houses suffer misery because of the family crises that have been delayed or the lack of ability to resolve which affects the children, spouses, friends, family, and society.

According to this status, the importance of personal characteristics of the couple, the personal and social Self-sufficiency represent the way to study the strengths of the family that help them to resolve their crises which may occur even if there isn’t any pressures or shocks. As a family system, they depend on each other and benefits from the beliefs and abilities of their members to reach a state of stability and overcome difficulties. Both Self-belief and Self-efficacy can be affected by family, cultural contexts, and personality especially in Arab societies that return to a religious reference in their cultural context. The research reviews the mutual relationship between the Self-sufficiency of the spouses and the management of family crises within the framework of the culture of Saudi society as an Arab society still holds its cultural heritage in the thoughts and behavior of its citizens.

Self-efficacy is one of the theoretical constructions based on the theory of social and cognitive learning of  Albert Bandura, Recently, this concept has become increasingly important in the field of behavioral modification (Bandura, 1977). It is the individual's belief and judgment of his abilities and ideas which enable him to achieve aims, control events. The nature of the work or aims that the individuals seek to achieve the amount of effort and persistence of their reaction and their way of thinking and control of their feelings and ideas all factors affect the judgment on the level of Self-efficacy (Bandura, 2002). Self-efficacy is the basis of well-being and motivation for achievement where the success or failure of individuals' lives affect the decisions they make, the knowledge and skills they have that also influence what they choose to do (Pajares, 2002).

            Studies conducted from scholars such as Zimmerman and Cleary (2006) and Schunk (2003) indicated that peoples with high Self-efficacy believes that they have the ability to accomplish tasks successfully and increase their focus and effort to involve in it while individuals with low Self-efficacy tend to succumb easily when confronted with tasks, not necessarily  if the individual has the skill and knowledge to complete the task  mean have the ability to complete it. Zimmerman & Cleary (2006) found that both behaviors of people and external situational factors controlled problems and attitude's outcomes which gives an indication of the strengthening of Self-behavior on the one hand and disability of the individual as a result of external events on the other.and understanding of human motivation requires a consideration of innate psychological needs for competence, autonomy, relatedness, and human needs and the self-determination of behavior (Deci & Ryan, 2000)‏. According to this perspective, the behavior of individuals is influenced by the beliefs of Self-efficacy and environmental conditions that appear in the individual's psychological and social performance which in turn leads to Self-development, personal understanding, problem solving, ability to create good relations with others and develop problem's solutions (Sagone & Indiana, 2017).

The expectations of Self-efficacy affect three levels of behavior: First: the choice of the situation, second: The effort exerted by the individual, third: perseverance in overcoming the situation.  Level 1: Attitudes passed by an individual can be optional or not. If the situation is within the possibilities of the individual's freedom of choice, his choice of position is related to his degree of Self-efficacy, that is, he will choose positions in which he can control his problems and requirements and avoid situations that have difficulties. Level II and III: The degree of Self-efficacy determines the intensity of the efforts and perseverance that is being made in solving a problem. A person who feels a high degree of Self-efficacy will exert more effort and perseverance than that who feels less Self-efficacy, A high pre-assessment of Self-efficacy will give the individual confidence that his or her efforts will lead to success no matter how difficult it may be, while a low Self-efficacy assessment will also drive the individual to exert little effort and perseverance (Rudwam, 1997).

Bandura (2010) refers that the success of the individual is in overcoming the problem or position, and awareness of the relationship between the efforts made and the results obtained the emotional experiences and Self-efficacy expectations change with time and experience, and Perceived self‐efficacy is concerned with people's beliefs in their ability to influence events that affect their lives. This core belief is the foundation of human motivation, performance accomplishments, and emotional well‐being. The marital life is not lacking since its inception and in all stages of its composition from family crises of different types and severity. As they are found in all societies and all social classes and the difference between them is in the way of resolving those crises or judging the severity or psychological impact on individuals. All of the crisis has the potential of causing extreme academic and cognitive stress and even significant behavioral changes (Calhoun & Tedeschi, 2014; Hoff, Brown, & Hoff, 2011).

As a result of economic and social changes, roles have evolved resulting in contradictory responsibilities within the family giving what is called the family crisis. The latter brings about the refusal of collaboration leading to the disintegration of the family where the ultimate solution will be divorce, which will inevitably lead to the disintegration and collapse of the family, and a critical turning point leads to losing equilibrium in a person’s or family’s life (James & Gilliland, 2012). And leads to a severe disturbance in the psychological state in which the usual coping mechanisms fail and the existence of distress and dysfunction reaction. The main cause of the crisis is a very painful or serious event but two other conditions are also necessary: (1) the individual's awareness of the event as a cause of great distress or disorder  and (ii) the individual's inability to resolve the disorder through coping mechanisms (Yeager & Roberts, 2015).

There are many crises ranged natural events such as disasters, diseases, death and social or emotional event such as divorce, travel, unexpected pregnancy, and verbal and physical violence (Hoff et al., 2011) And the threat by emotional & sexual, Poor communication, economic distress. Most families have to adjust to various crises or drastic changes in their lives. Unemployment is another family crisis, although it usually affects men more because of their traditional role as family leaders which can be a positive experience if the couple re-evaluates their priorities. Confronting the situation of stress, difficulty in adaptation, difficulty in facing basic responsibilities and having no apparent sources of support. These elements contribute together or individually or interrelated to cause family crises (Services, 2017). Many crises are similar across the world and across different community cultures (Dykeman, 2005). Saudi society like other societies suffers from many crises within the family environment in which both Couple or one of them try to overcome and pass these crises with minimal losses.

Walsh (2015)noted that families can overcome the crisis through communication, Self-efficacy beliefs and organizational processes. Some families live without the support and resources to resolve crises constructively. People in crisis typically experience a variety of psychological effects which is divided into Difficulty thinking clearly, dwelling on meaningless activities, expressions of hostility or numbness, impulsiveness, dependency and feelings of incompetence. On the other, a crisis may present an opportunity for positive change. A crisis is a time for helping families discovering and strengthen problem-solving skills. learning new problem-solving approaches and gaining strengthened by the experience and meeting the challenges of life (Services, 2017). The sense of coherence and belief in accepting life challenges or managing crises leads to control and improvement in  the quality of life. DeFrain, & Stinnett (2002) showed that in times of crisis, 75% of the positive incidents occurred in middle of hurt or despair and thought that something good came out of the ordeal. Many families reported that through dialing crises together their relationships became enriched and more loving.

A state of crisis in a family is short-lived usually lasting no longer than six weeks and has five phases. The five phases may occur in order or overlap and intertwine: Phase 1: The Family Crisis is Triggered, Phase 2: Seeing the Crisis as Threatening, Phase 3: Staging a Disorganized Response, Phase 4: Searching for a Solution, Phase 5: Adopting New Coping Strategies (Health & Services, 2012). There is a link between individual Self-efficacy and human behavior in many life situations and spheres of life where Self-efficacy contributes to determining the degree and type of behavior. And the individual's effort, as well as contribute to how he perceives the tasks he can perform and thus in making the decision to move towards performance or abstention, as well as affect the processes of attention, thinking or Self-help. As Hartman & Belsky (2016)point out when one is expected to possess the necessary efficiency the probability of doing so will increase and his ability to meet the demands of life increases, and that individuals should differ in their susceptibility to environmental influences, with some being more affected than others by both positive and negative developmental experiences and environmental exposures.. And to be able to solve problems in a practical way and to become more capable of turning these convictions into active behavior (Schwarzer, 2014). Boss& Mancini (2016) explain that his assumption is that the world is not always a fair place, and even powerful families can collapse, not all families are alike; not all events that stress the family should be seen as they are, and not all families have the same values ​and beliefs. Differences should be sought and considered. Wang & McLean (2016) indicate a culture influenced the strategies participants adopted to manage their perceived crises

Individuals with a strong sense of self-efficacy focus on analyzing the problem and trying to find the right solutions. On the other hand, individuals who doubt their own effectiveness draw their attention indoors and plunge themselves into their concerns when confronted with a difficult environment. Focus on focusing on personal deficiencies and inefficiencies, because they look at their failure which in turn leads to negative results. This research presents crisis management of different types of families and the impact of self-efficacy on this.

1.1.Problem statement

Several studies have been conducted on Self-efficacy and their impact on many aspects in the family environment, the relations among Self-efficacy, motivation and performance is documented in the literature (Ramachandran, 2012; Sawyer, Peters, & Willis, 2013). Vancouver and Purl (2017) indicate that Self-efficacy has been found to both positively and negatively influence effort and performance. Banadura defined Self-efficacy “as people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives”.

Esfandiari, Pouyamanesh, and Amirimajd (2013) refer When the Self-efficacy increases, the marital conflict rate is lower and vice versa. The person who has high Self-efficacy believes that he has the ability to participate in a good relationship in his marriages (Johnson, 2015). As a result of the rapid and successive life, events create many crises in family life which affect an individual's life, and interactions with environmental events around him are due to his beliefs, Self-confidence, and ability. So there is a need for more research which reveals Self-efficacy' role of couples and family crisis management. Samuelson, Bartel, Valadez, and Jordan (2017)indicate that there was an indirect effect between the Self and adaptability. Dykeman (2005)told the response of individuals varies according to the nature of the crisis and their situations. Zadeh and Tabrizi (2014) indicate that people feel more responsibility for their lifeAs a result of exposure to crises.

The justification of this study for the following reasons:

a)  The scarceness of the researches that is studying the impact of Self-efficacy on the family crisis management directly.

b) There is no research study the relations between Self-efficacy of couples and family crisis management in Saudi society.

c) The need to study family crisis management and factors affecting it.

As a result, the  research questions were:

(1) Does the degree of family crisis management increase If Self-efficacy for couples is high?

 (2) Is there a statistically significant which means the difference between man and woman in Self-efficacy and crisis management, and the psychological effects of family crises? What are the most variables that affect family crises management?

1.2. Amis of the research

The research's aims are to explore:

1. The psychological effects on individuals as a result of family crises.

2. The correlation between Self-efficiency, demographic variables, and family crisis management.

3. The differences between males and females in study variables.

4. Variables which affect the degree of family crises management.

1.3. Definition of key concepts

1.3.1. Self-efficacy

The individual's beliefs about his ability to organize and implement the practical plans required to achieve the desired goal. This means that if the individual believes that he has the power to accomplish the desired goals, he tries to make these things happen. In other words, Self-efficacy refers to the individual's virtual beliefs about his ability to accomplish a particular task. And Bandura (1977)defined Self-efficacy as the subjective judgment of one’s capabilities to initiate, manage and execute actions with the purpose of attaining desired goals. Schwarzer (2014) defined it as the way person action control and believes about the possibilities of behavioral options. Pajares (1997) defined it as the individual's belief in his own potential and his confidence in his ability and knowledge, and he has the Possibilities that achieve the level of satisfaction and balance. Self-efficacy identified procedurally as The confidence of individuals in performance and finding solutions in different situations, and as far as the individual's awareness of Self-efficacy has the ability to achieve the goal.

1.3.2. family crisis

The crisis is defined as perception or faces off an event or condition that can't exceed the current unsustainable person's resources and methods of confrontation. (James & Gilliland, 2012). A drastic change in the course of events; a turning point that affects future events (DeGenova & Rice, 2002). A situation or circumstance, usually of recent origin, which breaks down the individual’s or the family’s usual pattern of functioning and cannot be resolved with usual coping behaviors (Health & Services, 2012). family crisis identified procedurally as a negative situation leads to a state of tension and instability and it is needed both of many decisions, Adaptive behaviors from family members to resolve it.

1.3.3. crisis management

Reducing the negative effects of the crisis and the ability to withstand stressful through the balance between demands and resources (McCubbin & Patterson, 2014). crisis management identified procedurally as the art of dealing with sudden and unexpected events which disturb the family members and prepare the individuals to face unexpected developments and adverse conditions with adjusting well to the sudden changes.

2. Research design and methods

2.1. Research design: in this research, we used Causal and Descriptive Design

2.2. Research method

2.2.1. Population and sampling

This study was conducted within the Saudi society of husbands and wives. It consists of 219 participants. The sample does not include divorced or widowed individuals. The minimum age of marriage is not less than three years until the pattern of family interactions between the sample is clear. Participants answered the questionnaires online and the number of participants was 246 participants, 27 of whom were excluded because the previous conditions did not apply.

The sample was 219 participants, as displayed in chart1, the number of husband 105 by 47.9%, and the number of wives was 114 wives by 52.1%. The participants who aged less than 30 was 17.4%, from 30 to less than 40 years was 61.2%, From 40 to less than 50 years was 5.0%. And who 50 years and over was 16.4%. Most of them live in cities 94.5%, and Some live in village 5.5%, The duration of their marriage from 3 to less than 5 years was 21.9%,  From 5 to less than 10 years was 19.2%, and 10 years and over was 58.9%.

Participants' Intermediate education level was 4.6%, bachelor's education level was 61.6%, Graduate Studies 'education level "Diploma - Master - Ph.D." was 33.8%. The participants who did not work was 21.9%, And those working in Education  was 37.0%, in Medical career was 6.8%, in Engineering career was 10.5%, in Administrative career was 10.0%, Who have free business was 4.1%, Who works in Military was 3.2%, retired was 6.4%.

The number of family members of participants "4 individuals and less" was their percentage 16.4%, "5 or 6 individuals" was 35.2 %, and "7 individuals and more" was 48.4%. families' income per month was different, those who receive "Less than 5 thousand SR" was 8.2 %," From 5 to less than 10 thousand SR" was 20.5%," From 10 to less than 15 thousand SR" was 29.7 %, "From 15 to less than 20 thousand SR" was 22.4%, and"20 thousand and more SR" was 19.2%.

2.2.2. Data collection

Data were collected by questionnaires online with couples used the following questionnaires:

1-The general data form containing the demographic characteristics of the participants which contain questions about: Gender, Age, Educational level, Profession, Residence place, Duration of marriage, Number of family members, Total family income per month.

2- Survey of family crisis type and frequency and Sources of emotional support during the crisis, Where the types of economic crises were registered (M=21.17- SD=4.973), and social and psychological crises were registered (M=35.43- SD=7.752). as displayed in chart2: the most type of economic crises that the participants were Suffered is payment of bank loans, financial losses, and the lowest was reservation of property according to mean.

the most type of social and psychological crises that the participants were Suffered is a travel and absence of a family member, death of a family member, move to another city, and the lowest was A kidnapping of a family member according to the mean.

Sources of emotional support during the crisis: where participants received many sources of emotional support alone or sharing with one another, as displayed in chart3, The first one was Parents 77.2%, Husband / Wife 74.4%, friends 54.8%, Sons 46.4%, The clergy 17.8%, Colleagues at work 15.1%, and Neighbor 8.2%.

3-Survey of psychological effects of crisis, which contains 46 effects that require a yes or no answer, as displayed in chart4, divided into six dimensions: Difficulty thinking clearly which (M= 12.90- SD=2.729), Dwelling on meaningless activities which (M=16.71- SD=2.154), Expressions of hostility or numbness which (M=16.31- SD=2.967), Impulsiveness which (M=8.44- SD=1.774), Dependency which (M=5.37- SD=1.140), Feelings of incompetency which (M= 14.94- SD= 3.175).

4-  General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE): This measure is a measure of subjective Self-efficacy, contained 10 which Prepared by (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 2010). The permission to use (GSE) has been taken from Prof. Schwarzer by e-mail. Response format was 1 = Not at all true 2 = Hardly true  3 = Moderately true  4 = Exactly true, The total score is calculated by finding the sum of the all items. For the GSE, the total score ranges between 10 & 40, with a higher score indicating more Self-efficacy.

The Reliability and Validity of the scale were calculated because it applied to a different sample and to study it with a new variable. Internal reliability for GSE Cronbach's Alpha=.810, Validity: Both researchers verified the validity of the original scale which was explained in The General Self-Efficacy Scale study, In  this research sample Self-efficacy M= 32.58- SD= 4.178

5- family crisis management questionnaire: which contains 38 questions divided into five phases, Response Format was 1 = does not occur   2 = occurs sometimes 3 = Occurs often, the total score ranges between 38 and 114, with a higher score indicating good management of the family crisis.

Reliability: Internal reliability for family crisis management questionnaire Cronbach's Alpha=.901

Factor Validity: all Correlations among the degree of family crisis management and each of ( Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, Phase 4, and Phase 5) were significant at(.001) level. Which Correlation between Phase 1 and family crisis management  r=(.485), between Phase 2 and family crisis management  r= (.547), Phase 3 and family crisis management  r=(.291), Phase 4 and family crisis management  r=(.706), and between Phase 5 and family crisis management  r=(.812). In this research sample Phase1 (M= 11.49- SD= 1.744), Phase2(M=11.49- SD=1.746), Phase 3(M=11.33- SD=1.500), Phase 4 (M= 22.30- SD= 3.164), and Phase 5 (M=26.95- SD=4.042), Family crisis management (M= 83.57- SD= 7.725).

2.2.3. Data analysis

Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), using Mean, Standard Deviation, Frequency of participant responses, Pearson Correlation coefficient, Independent T-test, and Multi-Linear Regression Analysis.

3. Results and discussion

The results of the research problem are discussed with the results of related previous studies to the enrichment of data. Results helped to formulate recommendations for couples and families for how to manage family crisis and family institutions to strengthen their programs in the field of family guidance.

3.1. Correlations among Demographic Variables, Self-efficacy and family crisis management's Variables:

Demographic variables, Self-efficacy variable, and Family crisis management's variables were identified, as displayed in Table1 which summarized the correlations among these variables used Spearman correlations. The results have been shown:

There is no significant correlation between age and each of Self-efficacy, Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 of family crisis management. There is a significant positive correlation relationship between age and Phase 4: Searching for a solution at p= (0.05). and there is a positive correlation relationship between the age and each of Phase 5: Adopting new coping strategies, Family crisis management at p=(0.001), Where the results indicate that as the person progresses in age, the individual gains different experiences that enable him to search for many solutions, Adopting New Coping Strategies, and have the ability to manage family crisis.

There is no significant correlation between the level of education and each of Self-efficacy, family crisis management, and it's Phases (2-3-4-5). There is a significant positive correlation relationship between the educational level and Phase 1: The family crisis is triggered at p= (0.05), The educational level works to expand the individual's perception and awareness of the events and objects and indicators of the beginnings of problems and crises.

There is no significant correlation between the duration of the marriage and each of Self-efficacy, Phase 1: The family crisis is triggered, Phase 2: Seeing the crisis as threatening, and Phase 3: Staging a disorganized response. And there is a significant positive correlational relationship between marriage duration and Phase 4: Searching for a solution at p= (0.05), and with Phase 5: Adopting new coping strategies, Family crisis management at p=(0.001). The longer the marriage duration was, the more familiarity, harmony, and intimacy of the relationship between husband and wife were, and provide more opportunities to understand the personality of each of them and causes which made them feel happy or sad.

There is no significant correlation between the number of family members and each of Self-efficacy, Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 of family crisis management. There is a significant negative correlational between the number of family members and Phase 4: Searching for a solution at p= (0.05), and with Phase 5 Adopting new coping strategies, family crisis management at p= (0.01).

There is a significant positive correlational relationship between family income and Phase 1: The family crisis is triggered at p= (0.05), There is no significant correlation between family income and  other variables.

There is a significant positive correlation between Self-efficacy and each of  Phase 1: The family crisis is triggered at p= (0.05), and with Phase 2: Seeing the crisis as threading at p=(0.01), and with  Phase 3: Staging a disorganized response at p=(0.01), and with Phase 4: Searching for a solution, Phase 5: Adopting new coping strategies, family crisis management at p= (0.001).

The results of the current study indicate that the more degree of Self-efficacy and control of requirements, the more able to overcome crises and benefit from resources to complete the tasks, and more dealing with all five stages of crisis management and circumstances surrounding the crisis.

Several studies have indicated a close link between an individual's Self-efficacy and human behavior in many life situations, where Self-efficacy contributes to determining the degree and type of behavior (Zahran, 2003). The more individual sense of Self-efficacy increased the effort, perseverance, and rigidity and became more able to deal with difficult problems and activities (Pajares, 1997). Vancouver and Purl (2017) confirmed that Self-efficacy influence effort and performance. The results of Villada, Hidalgo, Almela, and Salvador (2016) indicate that a positive Self-assessment of their own ability to overcome a social threat was related to the predominance of vagal tone and better performance.

Table 1. Spearman Correlations coefficients of variables: Demographic Variables, Self-efficacy and family crisis management's Variables

*p ≤ .05       ** p ≤ .01    *** p ≤ .001