Peer mentoring of adults with spinal cord injury: a transformational leadership perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Drawing from the tenets of transformational leadership theory, the purpose of this study was to examine the nature of effective peer mentoring of adults with a spinal cord injury (SCI) from the perspective of mentees. METHODS: The study utilised a qualitative methodology (informed by a social constructionist approach), involving 15 adult mentees with a SCI (mean age = 47.2; mean time since injury = 14.5 years), in which data were obtained via semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The results revealed that effective mentoring, as used by mentors with SCIs, closely aligns with the core components of transformational leadership. Specifically, all four dimensions of transformational leadership (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individualised consideration and intellectual stimulation) as displayed by mentors with a SCI were evident in their interactions with mentees. Participants who perceived their mentors to use transformational leadership behaviours reported increases in motivation, self-confidence, hope and overall well-being, relatedness with their mentor, greater comfort/acceptance of their situation, a redefined sense of their limitations, as well as greater engagement in various life pursuits. CONCLUSIONS: Displays of transformational leadership by peer mentors (i.e. transformational mentoring) were reported by mentees to be associated with a range of adaptive psychological and behavioural outcomes. The results have the potential to inform the development and dissemination of peer mentor-based interventions and initiatives. Implications for Rehabilitation Within the context of spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation, positive peer mentorship is reflected in mentors' use of transformational leadership behaviours (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individualised consideration and intellectual stimulation). When SCI peer mentors use transformational leadership behaviours, mentees report a redefined sense of their limitations, and increased self-confidence, hope, motivation, acceptance, participation and overall well-being. The results of this study have the potential to inform future longitudinal and experimental research concerning the (causal) effects of peer mentoring on mentee outcomes. In particular, research should examine the effects of peer-mentorship training, informed by the tenets of transformational leadership theory, in relation to the mentee outcomes assessed in this qualitative study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".