ALSMADI MOHAMMAD LAST ONE

CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction It is essential to introduce behavioural cognitive mentoring, especially in the knowledge and production of reducing psychological stress among mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy. To ensure the effectiveness of the Program, this study purports to investigate the effectiveness of the Behavioural Cognitive Mentoring Program in reducing cognitive and psychological problems of the child's independent performance among mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in post-evaluation. To prove the assumptions made earlier and to answer the research questions that follow, this chapter presents the findings and discusses the results at length in the light of the two theoretical premises. 4.2 Descriptive Statistics and Assessment of Normality Based on the measurement model, the study has examined the normality for the items to assessing the distribution for every item or variable involved in the measurement model. In addition, the data characteristics of variables under study were explored through measurement of central tendency (mean), and measurement of dispersion (standard deviation) to discover the data characteristics. Moreover, by using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 24.0, the mean and standard deviation were examined. Table 4.1 below outlines the mean and standard deviation for all indicators. Generally, the mean values for all indicators were above 3.5. This value indicated that the majority of the respondents in this study were in agreement with the questions. Moreover, Table 4.1 showed that the measures of Skew 134

and Kurtosis on most of the items involved in the measurement model exceeding the threshold of −2.58 and +2.58 which indicated that the data is not normally distributed as recommended by Hair et al. (2014). This reflects that the data has not satisfied the cut-off value of multivariate normality distribution. Therefore, the study can proceed for further analysis with Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon. Table 4.0.1 Descriptive Statistics Statistics Mean Std. Skew Kurtosis Deviation -2.926 0.029 CBTPPRTE 4.0633 0.53915 3.363 -0.774 -0.581 CBTPPTE 4.0367 0.60997 -0.275 -2.656 -0.318 CBTPITE 4.2433 0.46139 3.138 -0.828 -2.897 CBTPPRTC 3.9833 0.68334 -0.111 -2.62 -0.361 CBTPPTC 3.9567 0.73188 -0.295 -0.897 -0.248 CBTPITC 4.2133 0.39977 2.596 -2.622 -2.908 CBTFDPRTE 3.97 0.55842 0.308 -0.479 -2.622 CBTFDPTE 3.9067 0.63296 0.063 -0.863 -0.107 CBTFDITE 4.2 0.43786 0.391 -0.515 -2.74 CBTFDPRTC 4.0233 0.47393 0.265 -0.151 -0.515 CBTFDPTC 3.9067 0.63296 0.063 CBTFDITC 4.1767 0.41579 0.439 CBTCFPRTE 3.8667 0.68397 3.104 CBTCFPTE 3.7233 0.74726 0.366 CBTCFPITE 4.18 0.44598 -0.008 CBTCFPRTC 3.8667 0.68397 0.104 CBTCFPTC 3.8433 0.73517 0.217 CBTCFITC 4.2233 0.38924 2.774 CBTIPPRTE 3.82 0.61105 0.124 CBTIPPTE 3.7333 0.76894 -0.242 CBTIPIE 4.2133 0.47251 0.016 CBTIPPRTC 3.82 0.61105 0.124 135

CBTIPPTC 3.7333 0.76894 -0.242 -2.74 0.47251 0.016 -0.151 CBTIPIC 4.2133 0.68145 0.243 -3.106 0.72869 0.024 -1.162 CBTIPPRTE 3.8667 0.48561 2.408 -0.417 0.72478 -0.235 -1.185 CBTIPPTE 3.7933 0.68887 -0.254 -0.389 0.98667 -0.715 -0.338 CBTIPITE 4.2067 0.64616 -0.063 -1.054 0.73719 -2.54 -0.357 CBTIPPRTC 4.0433 0.47542 0.146 0.395 0.73554 -0.081 -1.024 CBTIPPTC 3.8167 0.8033 -0.246 -1.066 0.44675 0.296 -0.826 CBTIPITC 3.86 0.51166 -2.635 -0.273 0.56537 -2.863 0.325 CBTPSPRTE 4.02 0.43746 0.569 -0.419 0.54966 -0.392 -0.45 CBTPSPTE 4 0.56537 -2.863 0.325 0.38009 2.621 0.173 CBTPSITE 4.2133 0.61157 -0.002 -0.532 0.66917 -0.315 -0.325 CBTPSPRTC 3.9367 0.42828 0.327 -0.632 0.51419 0.26 -0.666 CBTPSPTC 3.9433 0.62758 0.062 -0.925 0.4235 0.407 -0.51 CBTPSITC 4.22 0.67815 0.102 -0.673 0.73742 0.279 -0.928 CBTPSIPRTE 4.06 0.41558 0.275 -0.296 0.60585 0.121 -2.575 CBTPSIPTE 4.0633 0.76239 -0.236 -0.781 0.46849 0.015 -0.242 CBTFDSIE 4.2033 0.70312 0.006 -1.232 CBTFDSPRTC 4.0833 CBTFDSPTC 4.0633 CBTFDSIC 4.1367 CBTPPRT 4.0233 CBTPPT 3.9967 CBTCBTIPT 4.2283 CBTFDPRT 3.9967 CBTFDPT 3.9067 CBTFDIT 4.1883 CBTCFPRT 3.8667 CBTCFPT 3.7833 CBTCFIT 4.2017 CBTIPPRT 3.82 CBTIPPT 3.7333 CBTIPIT 4.2133 CBTIPPRT 3.955 136

CBTIPPT 3.805 0.70312 -0.104 -2.854 CBTIPIT 4.0333 0.79055 -1.009 1.212 CBTPSPRT 3.9783 0.68769 -0.096 -1.002 CBTPSPT 3.9717 0.76493 -0.374 -0.805 CBTFDST 4.2167 0.45739 0.208 -0.219 CBTFDSPRT 4.0717 0.52661 -0.483 -0.426 CBTFDSPT 4.0633 0.56056 -2.841 0.194 CBTFDSIT 4.17 0.40768 2.608 -3.197 4.3 Findings of Between-group 4.3.1 Mann-Whitney Results of CBTP The Mann-Whitney (U) results presented in Table 4.2 below, has revealed that there is a significant difference between the Pre-experimental and Pre-control CBTP of the Pre- distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 43.20, z = -4.197, p = 0.000, r = 0.422. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 33.10) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank=24.45). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.422 represents a medium to large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups. Table 4.0.2: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 50 33.10 43.20 -4.197 0.000 -0.422** Pre-Control 24.45 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 137

In addition, the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response presented in Table 4.3 below, has revealed that there is a significant difference between the Post-experimental and Post-control CBTP of the Post-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 18.00, z = -7.210, p = 0.000, r = 0.725. The two mean ranks of the Post-experimental and the Post-control CBTP groups, also indicated that the mean rank value of Post-experimental group (mean rank = 48.11) was higher than the mean rank value of Post- CBTP group (mean rank = 31.34). This confirmed that there is a significant difference between Post- experimental and Post-control CBTP groups. The effect size of r = -0.725 represents a large effect, hence signifying that the effect of the Program was essential between Post- experimental and Post-control CBTP. Table 4.0.3: Between-Group among Post-experimental and Post-control CBTP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Post-Experimental 50 48.11 18.00 -7.210 0.000 -0.725** Post-Control 31.34 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value (), Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, as showed in Table 4.4, the Mann-Whitney U test has indicated that there was a significant difference in the Delay-experimental and the Delay-control CBTP of the immediate-distribution of questionnaires during the Program (U = 10.00, z = -9.231, p = 0.000, r = -0.928). By comparing the two mean ranks of the Program, it was also evident that the mean rank value of the experimental Program (mean rank = 78.44) was greater than the mean rank value of the control Program (mean rank = 44.76). This clearly exposed that the difference between the groups was statistically significant. The 138

effect size of r = -0.928 represents a very large effect; therefore, demonstrating that the Program was substantive between the Delay-experimental and the Delay-control CBTP. Table 4.0.4: Between-Group among Delay-experimental and Delay-control CBTP Group N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Delay-Experimental 50 78.44 10.00 -9.231 0.000 0.928** Delay-Control 50 44.76 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.3.2 Mann-Whitney Results of CBTFD Based on Table 4.2, below, the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has revealed that there is a significant difference between the Pre-experimental and Pre-control CBTFD of the Pre-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 34.25, z = -5.621, p = 0.000, r = 0.564. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 51.11) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 37.02). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = - 0.564 represents a medium to large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the Program was a substantive among the experimental and control groups. Table 4.0.5: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTFD Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 50 51.11 34.25 -5.621 0.000 0.564** Pre-Control 50 37.02 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 139

Furthermore, as shown in Table 4.6, below, the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has revealed that there is a significant difference between the experimental and control group of the post-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 45.00, z = -7.100, p = 0.000, r = 0.714. The two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, also indicated that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 50.60) was higher than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 33.10). This confirmed that there is a significant difference between the groups. The effect size of r = -0.714 represents a large effect, hence signifying that the effect of the Program was essential between Post-experimental and Post-control CBTFD. Table 4.0.6: Between-Group among Post-Experimental and Post-Control CBTFD Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Post-Experimental 50 50.60 45.00 -7.100 0.000 0.714** Post-Control 50 33.10 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value (), Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Also, as shown in Table 4.7, the Mann-Whitney U test has indicated that there was a significant difference in the experimental and control groups of the delay-distribution of questionnaires during the Program (U = 17.00, z = -8.330, p = 0.000, r = -0.837). By comparing the two mean ranks of the Program, it was also evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group Program (mean rank = 67.12) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group Program (mean rank = 31.13). This exposed that the experimental group has more experience than the control group. The effect size of r = -0.837 represents a very large effect; therefore, demonstrating that the Program was substantive between Delay-experimental and Delay-control CBTFD. 140

Table 4.0.7: Between-Group among Delay-Experimental and Delay-Control CBTFD Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Delay-Experimental 50 67.12 17.00 -8.330 0.000 0.837** Delay-Control 50 31.13 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.3.3 Mann-Whitney Results of CBTCF The Mann-Whitney (U) results from the response of CBTCF in Table 4.8, has revealed that there is a significant difference in the experimental and control group of the pre- distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 40.00, z = -5.730, p = 0.000, r = -0.576. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 41.85) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank=30.70). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.576 signified a medium to large effect, thus representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of CBTCF. Table 4.0.8: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTCF Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 50 41.85 40.00 -5.730 0.000 0.576** Pre-Control 50 30.70 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 In addition, Table 4.9 below showed the results of CBTCF. The Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has revealed that there is a significant difference in the experimental and control groups of the post-distribution explicitly explained through 141

the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 28.30, z = -8.590, p = 0.000, r = -0.863. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 66.98) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 42.16). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.863 signified a large effect, thus, representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of CBTCF Table 4.0.9: Between-Group among Post-Experimental and Post-Control CBTCF Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Post-Experimental 50 66.98 28.30 -8.590 0.000 0.863** Post-Control 50 42.16 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Similarly, Table 4.10 below showed the results of CBTCF. The Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has revealed that there is a significant difference in the experimental and control groups of the post-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 19.50, z = -9.416, p = 0.000, r = -0.946. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident also that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 79.22) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 59.03). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.946 signified a very large effect, thus, representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of CBTCF. 142

Table 4.0.10: Between-Group among Delay-Experimental and Delay-Control CBTCF Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 50 79.22 19.50 -9.416 0.000 0.946** post-Control 50 59.03 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.3.4 Mann-Whitney Results of CBTIP Based on Table 4.11, below, the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has revealed that there is a significant difference in the Pre-experimental and Pre-control CBTIP of the pre-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 40.00, z = -3.897, p = 0.000, r = 0.392. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 47.80) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 32.10). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.392 represents a medium to large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups. Table 4.0.11: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTIP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 47.80 40.00 -3.897 0.000 0.392** Pre-Control 50 32.10 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Additionally, Table 4.12 below showed that the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has a significant difference in the Post-experimental and Post-control CBTIP 143

of the post-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 35.00, z = -5.452, p = 0.000, r = 0.548. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 63.00) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 41.35). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.548 represents a medium to large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups. Table 4.0.12: Between-Group among Post-Experimental and Post-Control CBTIP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Post-Experimental 63.00 35.00 -5.452 0.000 0.548** Post-Control 50 41.35 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, Table 4.13, below revealed that the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has a significant difference in the Delay-experimental and Delay-control CBTIP of the delay-distribution of the questionnaires explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 16.80, z = -8.004, p = 0.000, r = -0.804. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 76.20) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 48.60). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.804 represents a large effect, thus, indicating that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups. 144

Table 4.0.13: Between-Group among Delay-Experimental and Delay-Control CBTIP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Delay-Experimental 66.50 45.00 -8.004 0.000 0.804** Delay-Control 50 41.90 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.3.5 Mann-Whitney Results of CBTIPS The Mann-Whitney (U) results of CBTIP shown in Table 4.14, has revealed that there is a significant difference in the experimental and control groups of the pre-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 31.00, z = -5.880, p = 0.000, r = 0.591. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 48.03) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 26.66). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.591 signified a medium to large effect, thus, representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of CBTIP. Table 4.0.14: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTIP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 48.03 31.00 -5.880 0.000 0.591** Pre-Control 50 26.66 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Additionally, based on Table 4.15 below the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has revealed that there is a significant difference in the experimental and 145

control groups of the post-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 19.00, z = -7.083, p = 0.000, r = -0.712. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 55.18) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 38.17). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.712 signified a large effect, thus, representing that the effect of the time was substantive among the experimental and control groups of CBTIP. Table 4.0.15: Between-Group among Post-Experimental and Post-Control CBTIP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Post-Experimental 55.18 19.00 -7.083 0.000 0.712** Post-Control 50 38.17 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, the Mann-Whitney (U) results of CBTIP in Table 4.16, has revealed that there is a significant difference in the experimental and control groups of the delay- distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 14.88, z = -9.109, p = 0.000, r = -0.915. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 70.65) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 51.35). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.915 signified a very large effect, thus, representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of CBTIP. 146

Table 4.0.16: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTIP Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 70.65 14.88 -9.109 0.000 0.915** Pre-Control 50 51.35 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.3.6 Mann-Whitney Results of CBTPS The results presented in Table 4.17, below, showed that the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has a significant difference in the Pre-experimental and Pre-control CBTPS of the pre-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 38.50, z = -6.932, p = 0.000, r = -0.697. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 47.97) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 34.22). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = - 0.697 represents a large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups. Table 4.0.17: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTPS Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 47.97 38.50 -6.932 0.000 -0.697** Pre-Control 50 34.22 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Similarly, the results presented in Table 4.18, below, showed that the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has a significant difference in the Post-experimental and Post-control CBTPS of the pre-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 29.90, z = -7.186, 147

p = 0.000, r = -0.722. By comparing the two mean ranks of experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 53.08) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 35.92). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.722 represents a large effect, thus, indicating that the effect of the Program was substantive among experimental and control groups. Table 4.0.18: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTPS Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Post-Experimental 53.08 29.90 -7.186 0.000 -0.722** Post-Control 50 35.92 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 In addition, the results presented in Table 4.20, below, showed that the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has a significant difference in the Delay-experimental and Delay-control CBTPS of the pre-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 28.50, z = -9.015, p = 0.000, r = -0.906. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 70.14) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 48.67). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.906 represents a large effect, thus, indicating that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups. 148

Table 4.0.19: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTPS Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Delay-Experimental 70.14 28.500 -9.015 0.000 -0.906** Delay-Control 50 48.67 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.3.7 Mann-Whitney Results of CBTFDS The results in Table 4.21 below showed that the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has a significant difference in the Pre-experimental and Pre-control CBTFDS of the pre-distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 38.70, z = -4.104, p = 0.000, r = 0.412. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 42.20) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 33.80). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.412 represents a medium to a large effect, thus, representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of the CBTFDS. Table 4.0.20: Between-Group among Pre-Experimental and Pre-Control CBTFDS Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Pre-Experimental 42.20 38.70 -4.104 0.000 -0.412** Pre-Control 50 33.80 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Besides, Table 4.22, below revealed that the Mann-Whitney (U) result from the response has a significant difference in the Post-experimental and Post-control 149

CBTFDS of the post-distribution of the questionnaires explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 25.00, z = -6.699, p = 0.000, r = -0.673. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 59.10) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 46.30). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.673 represents a large effect, thus, representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of the CBTFDS. Table 4.0.21: Between-Group among Post-Experimental and Post-Control CBTFDS Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Post-Experimental 59.10 25.00 -6.699 0.000 -0.673** Post-Control 50 46.30 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, Table 4.23 confirmed that the Mann-Whitney U test has a significant difference in the Delay-experimental and Delay-control CBTFDS of the delay distribution explicitly explained through the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy reflected in the current study. The U = 13.00, z = -8.193, p = 0.000, r = -0.823. By comparing the two mean ranks of the experimental and control groups, it was evident that the mean rank value of the experimental group (mean rank = 71.13) was greater than the mean rank value of the control group (mean rank = 43.17). This clearly showed a significant difference between the two groups. The effect size of r = -0.823 represents a very large effect, thus representing that the effect of the Program was substantive among the experimental and control groups of the CBTFDS. 150

Table 4.0.22: Between-Group among Delay-Experimental and Delay-Control CBTFDS Program N Mean U value z value p value r value Rank Delay-Experimental 71.13 13.00 -8.193 0.000 -0.823** Delay-Control 50 43.17 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4 Findings of Within- Program Though this study did not specifically aim to investigate the within- Program impact on reducing psychological stress among mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy, it is very essential to present the within- Program findings in the three questionnaires to get a complete picture of the impact of the approach. The data was analysed using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test that was supported by Ali, and Bhaskar, (2016) where the effects of gamification in the classroom based on a longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance was assessed. They mentioned that the results found from the students in the gamified course showed less motivation, satisfaction, and empowerment over time compared to those in the non-gamified class. 4.4.1 Significant Impact of the Experimental Group of CBTP Based on, Table 4.24, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTP (T = 0.000, z = -4.776, p = 0.000, r = -0.682). The results clearly showed that exposure to CBTP had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.682 represents 151

a large effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTP approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy’s knowledge of the CBTP was substantive. Table 4.0.23: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -4.776 0.000 0.682** After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 In a similar vein, Table 4.25, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -5.664, p = 0.000, r = -0.809). The result revealed that exposure to CBTP had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.809 represents a very large effect, therefore signifying that the effect of the CBTP approach in growing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTP was substantive. Table 4.0.24: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -5.664 0.000 0.809** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Furthermore, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference in the post and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -6.344, p = 0.000, r = -0.906). The result indicated that exposure to CBTP had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.906 represents a very large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the CBTP 152

approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTP was substantive. Table 4.0.25: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTP Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -6.344 0.000 0.906** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.2 Significant Impact Experimental Group of CBTFD Based on, Table 4.26, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the experimental group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFD (T = 0.000, z = -4.886, p = 0.000, r = -0.698). The result clearly showed that the exposure to CBTFD had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.447 represents a large effect, consequently, signifying that the effect of the CBTFD approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFD was substantive. Table 4.0.26: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTFD Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -4.886 0.000 0.698** After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, Table 4.27, showed that the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test results revealed a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -5.890, p = 0.000, r = -0.841). The result revealed that exposure to RE had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy 153

in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.841 represented a very large effect, therefore signifying that the effect of the RE approach in growing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFD was substantive. Table 4.0.27: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTFD Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -5.890 0.000 0.841** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Additionally, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test in Table 4.28 below showed that there was a significant difference in the post and delay distribution of the questionnaires of the CBTFD (T = 0.000, z = -6.221, p = 0.000, r = -0.889). The result indicated that exposure to CBTFD had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.889 represents a very large effect, therefore signifying that the effect of the CBTFD approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the RE was substantive. Table 4.0.28: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTFD Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -6.221 0.000 0.889** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.3 Significant Impact Experimental Group of CBTCF Based on, Table 4.29, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTCF (T = 0.000, z = -4.079, p = 0.000, r = -0.583). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTCF had a significant impact on mothers of 154

Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.583 represents a large effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTCF approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTCF was substantive. Table 4.0.29: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTCF Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -4.079 0.000 0.583** After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Similarly, in Table 4.30, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the experimental group of Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -5.318, p = 0.000, r = -0.760). The result revealed that exposure to CBTCF had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.760 represents a very large effect, therefore signifying that the effect of the CBTCF approach in growing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTCF was substantive. Table 4.0.30: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTCF Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -5.318 0.000 0.760** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Likewise, Table 4.31 below revealed that the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test has a significant difference in the post and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -5.911, p = 0.000, r = -0.844). The result indicated that exposure to CBTCF had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The 155

effect size of r = -0.844 represents a very large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the CBTCF approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTCF was substantive. Table 4.0.31: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTCF Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -5.911 0.000 0.844** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.4 Significant Impact Experimental Group of CBTIP Based on Table 4.32, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIP (T = 0.000, z = -4.558, p = 0.000, r = -0.651). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIP had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.651 represents a large effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP was substantive. Table 4.0.32: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -4.558 0.000 0.651** After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 In addition, Table 4.33, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -5.432, p = 0.000, r = -0.776). The result revealed that exposure to CBTIP had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral 156

Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.776 represents a very large effect, demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP was substantive. Table 4.0.33: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -5.432 0.000 0.776** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Furthermore, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference in the post and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -6.288, p = 0.000, r = -0.898). The result indicated that exposure to CBTIP had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.898 represents a very large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP was substantive. Table 4.0.34: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -6.288 0.000 0.898** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.5 Significant Impact Experimental Group of CBTIPS Based on, Table 4.35, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIPS (T = 0.000, z = -4.443, p = 0.000, r = -0.635). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIPS had a significant impact on mothers of 157

Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.635 represents a large effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIPS approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIPS was substantive. Table 4.0.35: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTIPS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -4.443 0.000 0.635** After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Also, as shown in Table 4.36, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the experimental group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -5.296, p = 0.000, r = -0.757). The result revealed that exposure to CBTIPS had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.757 represents a very large effect, therefore signifying that the effect of the CBTIPS approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIPS was substantive. Table 4.0.36: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -5.296 0.000 0.757** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Additionally, Table 4.37 below indicated that the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference in the post and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -6.345, p = 0.000, r = -0.906). The result indicated that exposure to CBTIP had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.906 represents a very large effect, thus 158

indicating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP was substantive. Table 4.0.37: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -6.345 0.000 0.906** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.6 Significant Impact Experimental Group of CBTPS Based on, Table 4.38, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTPS (T = 0.000, z = -5.020, p = 0.000, r = -0.717). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTPS had a significant impact on mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.717 represents a medium to large effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTPS approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTPS was substantive. Table 4.0.38: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTPS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -5.020 0.000 0.717** After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Furthermore, as shown in Table 4.39, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -6.036, p = 0.000, r = -0.862). The 159

result revealed that exposure to CBTPS had a significant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.862 represents a large effect, therefore signifying that the effect of the CBTPS approach in increasing the mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTPS was substantive. Table 4.0.39: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTPS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -6.036 0.000 0.862** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Besides, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test results in Table 4.40 below showed that there was a significant difference in the post and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -6.882, p = 0.000, r = -0.983). The result indicated that exposure to CBTPS had a significant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.983 represents a very large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the CBTPS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTPS was substantive. Table 4.0.40: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTPS Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -6.882 0.000 0.983** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.7 Significant Impact Experimental Group of CBTFDS The results of Table 4.41 below, showed that the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test has a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFDS (T = 0.000, z = -4.802, p = 0.000, r = -0.686). The 160

result clearly showed that exposure to CBTFDS had a significant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.676 represents a large effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of 0.686 approaches in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFDS was substantive. Table 4.0.41: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTFDS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 30 0.000 -4.802 0.000 0.686** After 30 Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Similarly, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test results in Table 4.42, showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -5.445, p = 0.000, r = -0.778). The result revealed that exposure to CBTFDS had a significant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.778 represents a very large effect, therefore signifying that the effect of the CBTFDS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFDS was substantive. Table 4.0.42: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTFDST Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -5.445 0.000 0.778** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Also, in Table 4.43 below, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference in the post and delay distribution of the questionnaires (T = 0.000, z = -6.349, p = 0.000, r = -0.907). The result indicated that exposure to CBTFDS had a significant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The 161

effect size of r = -0.907 represents a very large effect, thus indicating that the effect of the CBTFDS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFDS was substantive. Table 4.0.43: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTFDS Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -6.349 0.000 0.907** Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.8 Significant Impact of CBTP in the Control Group Based on, Table 4.44, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the control group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTP (T = 0.000, z = -1.406, p = 0.511, r = -0.201). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTP to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.201 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.44: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.406 0.511 0.201 After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Also, in Table 4.45, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the control group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTP (T = 0.000, z = -1.264, p = 0.353, r = -0.181). The result 162

clearly showed that exposure to CBTP to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.181 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.45: Within-Group of the control Group of CBTP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.264 0.353 0.181 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Additionally, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Post and Delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTP (T = 0.000, z = -1.169, p = 0.504, r = -0.167). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTP to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.167 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.46: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTPS Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -1.169 0.000 0.167 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 163

4.4.9 Significant Impact of CBTFD in the Control Group The results of RE in Table 4.47 of the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFD (T = 0.000, z = -1.568, p = 0.432, r = -0.224). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTFD to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.224 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTFD approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFD had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.47: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTFD Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.568 0.432 0.224 After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Likewise, in Table 4.48, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the control group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFD (T = 0.000, z = -1.508, p = 0.468, r = -0.215). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTFD to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.215 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTFD approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFD had an unfeasible effect on the control group. 164

Table 4.0.48: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTFD Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.508 0.468 0.215 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Post and Delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFD (T = 0.000, z = -1.423, p = 0.543, r = -0.203). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTFD to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.203 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTFD approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFD had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.49: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTFD Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -1.423 0.000 0.203 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.10 Significant Impact of CBTCF in the Control Group Based on Table 4.50, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the control group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTCF (T = 0.000, z = -1.449, p = 0.221, r = -0.207). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTCF to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.207 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTCF approach in 165

increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTCF had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.50: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTCF Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.449 0.221 0.207 After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Also, in Table 4.51, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTCF (T = 0.000, z = -1.190, p = 0.531, r = -0.170). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTCF to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.170 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTCF approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTCF had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.51: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTCF Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.190 0.531 0.170 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Additionally, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the control group of the Post and Delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTCF (T = 0.000, z = -1.876, p = 0.143, r = -0.268). The result 166

clearly showed that exposure to the CBTCF to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.268 represents a low to medium effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTCF approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTCF had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.52: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTCF Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -1.876 0.000 0.268 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.11 Significant Impact of CBTIP in the Control Group Based on Table 4.53, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference within the control group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIP (T = 0.000, z = -1.148, p = 0.506, r = -0.164). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIP to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.164 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.53: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.148 0.506 0.164 After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 167

Similarly, in Table 4.54, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIP (T = 0.000, z = -1.344, p = 0.430, r = -0.192). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIP to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.192 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.54: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.344 0.430 0.192 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Additionally, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Post and Delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIP (T = 0.000, z = -1.482, p = 0.233, r = -0.212). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIP to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.212 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. 168

Table 4.0.55: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -1.482 0.000 0.212 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.12 Significant Impact of CBTIP in the Control Group In Table 4.56, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIP (T = 0.000, z = -1.289, p = 0.355, r = -0.184). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIP to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.184 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.56: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.289 0.355 0.184 After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, in Table 4.57, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIP (T = 0.000, z = -1.714, p = 0.112, r = -0.245). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIP to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.245 represents a low to medium effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the 169

CBTIP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.57: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.714 0.112 0.245 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Moreover, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Post and Delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTIP (T = 0.000, z = -1.171, p = 0.486, r = -0.167). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTIP to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.167 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTIP approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTIP had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.58: Within-Group of the Experimental Group of CBTIP Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -1.171 0.000 0.167 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.13 Significant Impact of CBTPS in the Control Group Based on Table 4.59, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and Post distribution of the 170

questionnaires in the CBTPS (T = 0.000, z = -1.700, p = 0.211, r = -0.243). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTPS to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.243 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of CBTPS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTPS had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.59: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTPS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.700 0.081 0.243 After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Likewise, in Table 4.60, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTPS (T = 0.000, z = -1.200, p = 0.110, r = -0.171). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTPS to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = - 0.171 represents a very low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of CBTPS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTPS had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.60: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTPS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.200 0.211 0.171 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 171

Additionally, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Post and Delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTPS (T = 0.000, z = -1.765, p = 0.085, r = -0.252). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTPS to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.252 represents a low to medium effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTPS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTPS had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.61: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTPS Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -1.765 0.000 0.252 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 4.4.14 Significant Impact of CBTFDS in the Control Group The result in Table 4.62 below revealed that the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test has shown a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and Post distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFDS (T = 0.000, z = -1.227, p = 0.330, r = -0.175). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTFDS to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.228 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTFDS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFDS had an unfeasible effect on the control group. 172

Table 4.0.62: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTFDS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.227 0.330 0.175 After Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Furthermore, in Table 4.63, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Pre and delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFDS (T = 0.000, z = -1.410, p = 0.148, r = -0.201). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTFDS to the control group had an insignificant impact on mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.201 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTFDS approach in increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFDS had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.63: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTFDS Program N T value z value p value r value Before 50 0.000 -1.410 0.148 0.201 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Also, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that there was a significant difference between the control group of the Post and Delay distribution of the questionnaires in the CBTFDS (T = 0.000, z = -1.349, p = 0.129, r = -0.192). The result clearly showed that exposure to CBTFDS to the control group had an insignificant impact on the mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in the related task. The effect size of r = -0.192 represents a low effect, thus demonstrating that the effect of the CBTFDS approach in 173

increasing the Mothers’ of Children with Cerebral Palsy knowledge of the CBTFDS had an unfeasible effect on the control group. Table 4.0.64: Within-Group of the Control Group of CBTFDS Program N T value z value p value r value After 50 0.000 -1.349 0.129 0.192 Delay Keywords: U value (Mann-Whitney), p value (positive value) r value (rate value) and z value () Note: Significant at **p < 0.05 Pre-test For all groups Analysed using Wilcoxon Intervention (6 week) With. for Exp. groups Analysed using Mann U Without … for Contr. groups Socio-Economic Characteristics Training and activities Analysed using Immediate Delayed Frequency and Post-test Post-test Percentage Analysed using Wilcoxon Figure 4.1 Analysis Chart 174

4.5 Socio-Economic Characteristics In the descriptive analysis, the study evaluated the distribution of the data across some demographic characteristics of the respondents. Based on this study, the respondents were asked to indicate their gender, budget, education level, employment, who helped them, day-care, number of children, and religion. Below are the tables showing how the 50 respondents are distributed according to the selected demographic characteristics. Table 4.65 revealed the gender distribution of the respondents in this study. It showed that out of the 50 respondents interviewed, the majority of children were male (26), that is, 52.00%, while the remaining 24 (48.00 %) were female. Moreover, the result of the socio-demographic characteristics further revealed the age distribution of the respondents. It indicated that the majority of the respondents (20) that is 40.00% of the total respondents were between the ages of 20-25. Similarly, 10 (20.00%) of them were between the ages of 26-30, while 9 (18.00%) were between the ages of 31-35, finally, 11 (22.00%) were between the ages of 31 and above. The result on respondents’ current level of education revealed that out of the 50 valid responses obtained, the majority of them (22) that is 44.00% were enrolled in diploma programs. Moreover, 13 (26.00%) enrolled in secondary school, while 8 (16.00%) were enrolled in primary school. Those who enrolled in Bachelor’s degree constituted 7 (14.00%) of the total responses obtained. On respondents’ employment status, the result in Table 4.65 showed that those who were working constituted the majority of the respondents (28), that is, more than 56.00% of the respondents interviewed. Those who reported being unemployed were 22 (44.00%). 175

The result of the study on respondents’ distribution based on income further revealed that 33 (66.00%) of the respondent were from 200-300. Moreover, 9 (18.00%) respondents were from 301-400, while those from 401-500 were 5 (10.00%). Additionally, 3 (6.00%) of the respondents were from 501-600, whereas those from 601 and above were 3 (6.00%). Moreover, the results of the study revealed that 35 (70.00%) stated that they were getting help, while 15 (30%) reported that they were not getting any help. The result on respondents’ who helped them revealed that out of the 50 valid responses obtained, the majority of them (31) that is 62.00% received help from maids. Moreover, 19 (38.00%) received help from relatives. The results in Table 4.65 showed that respondents who attended day-care for 1-2hrs were 9 (18.00%), 3-5hrs were 16 (32.00%), and 6-10hrs were 25 (50.00%). Moreover, the results of the study revealed the number of children of the respondents. It showed that out of the 50 respondents, a majority of them have 1 child (39), that is, 78.00%, while the remaining 11 (22.00% %) have 2 children. Finally, the results of the study revealed the respondents’ religion. Out of the 50 respondents, a majority were Muslims (45), that is, 90.00%, while the remaining 5 (10.00 %) were Christians. 176

Table 4.0.65 Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Respondents Age Frequency Percent 20-25 20 40.00 26-30 10 20.00 31-35 9 18.00 36 and above 11 22.00 Total 50 100.0 Gender Male 26 52.00 Female 24 48.00 Total 50 100.0 Budget 200-300 33 66 301-400 9 18 401-500 5 10 501 and above 3 6 Total 50 100.0 Education Primary 8 16.00 Secondary 13 26.00 Diploma 22 44.00 Bachelor degree 7 14.00 Total 50 100.0 Employment Yes 28 56.00 No 22 44.00 Total 50 100.00 Help Yes 35 70.00 No 15 30.00 Total 50 100.00 Whelp Relative 19 38.00 Maid 31 62.00 Total 50 100.0 Daycare 1-2hrs 9 18.00 3-5hr 16 32.00 6-10hrs 25 50.00 Total 50 100.00 Number of Children 1 39 78.00 2 11 22.00 Total 50 100.00 Religion Islam 45 90.00 Christian 5 10.00 Total 50 100.00 177

4.6 Summary of the Chapter This chapter has presented a concise illustration of the results, findings, interpretation, and integration of the resultant data from the questionnaires. Whereas the questionnaires pioneered the quantitative aspects of the study – the quasi-experimentation. Such a quasi-experimentation research approach was crucial in offsetting the loopholes in conducting the quantitative research singly. Hence, the researcher used a quasi- experimentation method in a precise fashion to answer the seven research questions and test the research hypothesis. 178

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION OF THE RESULT 5.1 Introduction The present study addressed the gap in current literature by making a direct comparison of cognitive and psychological problems of the child's independent performance among mothers of children with cerebral palsy in post-evaluation. The study improved upon previous research by including a larger sample restricting the age range for the target child and examining maternal and paternal stress outcomes within the same statistical models. 5.2 Discussion of the Analysis First Objective: To examine the effectiveness of the Behavioural Cognitive Mentoring Program in reducing Cognitive and Psychological problems of the child among mothers of children with Cerebral Palsy in post evaluation. The results of the Mann-Whitney U test have indicated that there was a significant difference in the Delay-experimental and Delay-control CBTP of the immediate- distribution of questionnaires during the Program (U = 10.00, z = -9.231, p = 0.000, r = -0.928). By comparing the two mean ranks of the Program, it was also evident that the mean rank value of the experimental Program (mean rank = 78.44) was greater than the mean rank value of the control Program (mean rank = 44.76). This exposed that the difference between groups was statistically significant. The effect size of r = -0.928 represents a very large effect; therefore, demonstrating that the Program was substantive between the Delay-experimental and Delay-control CBTP. 179

An essential finding of this investigation is the significance of moving past standard assessments of gathering implies when making correlations of mothers' parenting stress. In the ebb and flow study, like past research, there is a critical distinction in the Pre- trial and Pre-control CBTP of the pre-dispersion unequivocally clarified through mothers of youngsters with Cerebral Palsy. This discovery was valid by considerable parenting stress yet, in addition, the three areas (i.e., youngster, parent, and parent- child). Moreover, r impact speaks to an enormous impact, which shows the impact of the CBTP approach in expanding the Mothers' of Children with Cerebral Palsy information on the CBTP was substantive. The after-effects of the investigation have indicated that mediation programs for parents have diminished parenting stress. The decrease in parenting stress is more prominent for parents who went to intercession contrasted with the individuals who go to control gatherings. The outcomes have additionally indicated that the intercessions for the parent are related with little, quick and kept up upgrades for children crosswise over disguising, externalizing, intellectual, and social areas of mental working. Enhancements in child externalizing and decreases in parenting stress anticipate individual results. To put our discoveries in regards to the parenting stress impact size into setting, this investigation tried to analyze the present outcomes against different analyses. This investigation was not able to discover Man-Whitney of CBT or other intercession programs that planned for bringing down parenting stress. Be that as it may, Lewis et al. (2019) evaluated enthusiastic parental alteration, which joined parenting stress. They announced a moderate inside gathering improvement in that result, in their audit of parent projects to diminish child misuse. The post-mediation impact in that review was more significant than in the present analysis. This may have been because of the 180

proportion of passionate parental modification including some negative enthusiastic states, for example, outrage, notwithstanding parenting stress. It is, in this manner, conceivable that the impact size was driven by enhancements in excited states other than parenting stress. This investigation likewise tried to analyze the leeway found for intercession programs over control bunches with other parent mediations. Once more, it was not able to discover any investigation concerning parenting worry as an independent result. In any case, Fitzpatrick, McCrudden, and Kirby, (2019) decided the impacts of parent preparing programs on a composite parenting result, which included parenting stress. Naeem, Arif, Asghar, and Mahmood, (2018) characterized social preparing programs as those instructing parents to fortify their youngsters' sure conduct and to overlook or rebuff poor conduct. Non-social projects were characterized as those that did not instruct these particular aptitudes and included projects planned for improving guardian youngster correspondence or modifying child-related insights. In light of this definition, mediation programs are conduct programs, and in fact the preferred position over control programs in the present investigation is like that found by Hashem, and El Aziz, (2018) for conduct parent programs. The upside of conduct programs over the control program was somewhat more significant. Strangely, this analysis likewise found that the decrease in parenting stress was more prominent during follow up contrasted with post-intercession. This is as opposed to the example revealed for social parent preparing by Dim, Edwards, and Gibbons, (2018), who found a diminished impact during follow up for a composite parenting result that included parenting stress. Also, the impacts of intellectual conduct treatment for general stress are kept up during development, yet not expanded Ellery et al. (2018). The present outcomes proposed, consequently, that 181

mediation programs give severe results to parent, and contrast well in this regard with conduct parent preparing and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Heterogeneity in connection to parenting stress is high, demonstrating fluctuation in the genuine impact size crosswise over investigations. This recommended parent gets nonexclusive abilities in the intervening program enduring from 9 to 27 that they can apply in different parenting conditions and over their youngster's improvement. Interestingly, the decrease in parenting stress was more prominent when the mediation was conveyed distinctly to parent, contrasted with when it was conveyed to parallel parent and youth gatherings. This outcome was astonishing since it is sensible to expect that preparation parents in CBT would add to better results, given the bi-directionality of parent factors Kuschmann (2018). This study discovered proof for parents preparing programs being viable in improving parent's levels. This discovering was factually critical and subsequently, it very well may be presumed that it is a vigorous parent result measure to assess the adequacy of parenting projects. Parental self-viability levels had a critical increment and enormous impact size for parents of children s more youthful than 5 years old, regardless of the children's analysis in the study. In this way, the study proposed that preparation parents of more youthful children s are increasingly valuable in improving CBT results contrasted with starting preparing after the child is 5 years old. This might be because the abilities educated to parents of more youthful children s depend on formative standards and subsequently have a more straightforward effect on the formative results of children contrasted with aptitudes instructed to more seasoned parents. Parents who can see the positive effect their recently gained aptitudes have on their children ' results would possibly be bound to expand their conviction that they can give the help that their children need. These discoveries validate the expanding assemblage of exact proof 182

recording the valuable impacts of early mediation on parents' results Mohamed Mandy and Aranda, (2019). These discoveries compare to a previous model that indicated that uplifted degrees of CBT lead to consequent elevated degrees of achievement in the child Kuschmann and Lowit, (2019). Along these lines, parenting projects that expansion CBT levels may likewise advance positive child result. Parent preparing programs were demonstrated to be compelling independent of whether analysts or other medicinal services experts directed them. This finding might be of specific importance, in particular, building up nation's settings that do not have settled proficient preparing programs for therapeutic and united wellbeing experts that may subsequently graduate a set number of human services experts on a yearly premise. Undertaking moving has been proposed as an approach to boost access to mediations in settings where there is a shortage of prepared experts. Furthermore, there is a growing collection of proof that proposed elective consideration experts, for example, restoration care laborers or network-based carers, are additionally ready to adequately convey parent preparing programs. Although parents were satisfied with the program as a whole, they continued to face barriers to program adherence and provided avenues for future adaptations to further improve the acceptability of the program. In particular, parents identified ways that the online modules could be made even more accessible, such as through the creation of a mobile-enabled website that could be accessed on portable devices. Lifecircumstances and life stressors continue to impact families’ abilities to access intervention. Although eliminating all challenges faced by families is likely never possible, future iterations of this program will seek to identify ways to address common barriers to access, such as 183