Grit has been shown to predict success in several achievement-related domains but had not been studied in the career context. This mixed methods study examined whether grit predicted career success and explored the role and relevance of grit in career success for gritty, successful working adults. Four hundred twenty-three adults participated in the quantitative phase and provided survey responses to the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S), the Career Satisfaction Scale (CSS), a career status measure, and salary information. Quantitative data were analyzed using correlational analysis, independent samples t-test, one-way ANOVA, and multiple regression. In this study, the correlational analysis showed that grit did not predict career success. Multiple regressions demonstrated that grit did not significantly add to any of the models using age and gender as covariates. Five individuals from the quantitative phase agreed to participate in the qualitative phase and were invited based on their top quartile scores on the GritS and CSS. Individual interviews served as the qualitative data collection method, and text data were analyzed using principles of positive psychology as a theoretical framework. Findings suggest that although gritty, successful participants perceived grit as necessary for their career success, they did not think it was sufficient. Participants named luck, opportunity, and networking as more important than grit in their success.

The Health Disparities and Outcomes (HDO) model originally created to explain the complexity of obtaining healthcare in rural settings has been revised and updated using emerging theoretical models of adversity and inequity and two decades of empirical work by the authors. With a strong orientation to explaining population-based health inequities, the HDO is applied to individuals with Serious Mental Illness (SMI), to explain their high rates of morbidity and mortality compared to the general population. Individual-, community-, and system-level factors that reflect an understanding of life-long risk, accrued hazards associated with multiple and intersecting disadvantages, and difficulty obtaining healthcare that meets accepted standards are described. The revised HDO can be applied to populations with disproportionate health challenges to identify multi-level factors that affect illness trajectory and overall health outcomes.

IntroductionTobacco use among young people is a complex and serious global dilemma that demands innovative and diverse research approaches. The purpose of this methodological review was to examine the current use of mixed methods research in tobacco control with youth and young adult populations and to develop practical recommendations for tobacco control researchers interested in this methodology.MethodsUsing PubMed, we searched five peer-reviewed journals that publish tobacco control empirical literature for the use of mixed methods research to study young populations, age 12–25 years. Our team analyzed the features of each article in terms of tobacco control topic, population, youth engagement strategies, and several essential elements of mixed methods research.ResultsWe identified 23 mixed methods studies published by authors from five different countries reported between 2004 and 2015. These 23 articles examined various topics that included tobacco use behavior, tobacco marketing and branding, and cessation among youth and young adults. The most common mixed methods approach was variations of the concurrent design in which the qualitative and quantitative strands were administered at the same time and given equal priority. This review documented several innovative applications of mixed methods research as well as challenges in the reporting of the complex research designs.ConclusionsThe use of mixed methods research in tobacco control has great potential for advancing the understanding of complex behavioral and sociocultural issues for all groups, especially youth and young adults.

No abstract

Background: Self-care is a multicomponent set of capacities that influence beliefs about health and well-being.Objectives: We examined the relationship between self-care capacity, age, and disability status with two perceptions of wellbeing in a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries. Methods:The current study is part of a multisite research project to determine factors associated with cross-sectional and longitudinal morbidity and mortality trajectories observed in Medicare beneficiaries. Variable selection was informed by the health disparities and outcomes model. Using data from the 2013 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and logistic regression models, we determined associations between self-care capacity, including indicators of self-care ability and self-care agency and two perceptions of well-being. Participants were divided into four groups based on how they qualified for Medicare: (a) over 65 years of age, and below 65 years of age and disabled because of (b) physical or (c) mental disorder, or (d) disabled and could not be classified as physically or mentally disabled as the primary cause of eligibility.Results: Self-care ability limitations in activities of daily living (ADL), instrumental activities of living (IADL), and social activity participation were associated with both health perceptions. Those with physical disabilities reported more ADL and IADL limitations when compared with the other eligibility groups and were significantly more likely to have negative health perceptions. Those with serious mental illness were most likely to report the most severe IADL limitations. The over 65 years of age group reported less self-care incapacity than the other three eligibility types. Other components of self-care, including health literacy, agency, and health behaviors, significantly influenced perceptions of health. Women and people identifying as non-Whites were more likely to have negative health perceptions. Discussion: Self-care capacity is a complex construct, and its varied elements have differential relationships with perceptions of well-being. Those with physical disabilities reported more self-care limitations, poorer perceived health, and more health worries than the other groups. Still, there were different patterns of self-care capacities in the serious mental illness type-especially in IADL limitations. The study adds empirical evidence to previous research documenting inequities in health outcomes for women and non-Whites. Findings provide empirical support for the health disparities and outcomes model.