Rosanna Cousins

Prof. Rosanna Cousins

Department of Psychology, Liverpool Hope University, Liverpool L16 9JD, UK
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

31Years (1996-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2014 in Comprehensive Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HAHikari Ando
Hikari Ando
Rosanna CousinsRosanna Cousins
Rosanna Cousins
CYCarolyn Young
Carolyn Young
Reaching a saturation point in thematic analysis is important to validity in qualitative studies, yet the process of achieving saturation is often left ambiguous. The lack of information about the process creates uncertainty in the timing of recruitment closure. This exploratory study was conducted to demonstrate a rigorous approach to reaching saturation through two-stage establishment of a codebook used for thematic analysis. The codebook development involved inductive analysis with six interviews, followed by a refinement of the coding system by applying them to an additional 33 interviews. These findings are discussed in relation to plausible pattern in code occurrence rate and suggested sample sizes for thematic analysis.

1 April 2004 in Work & Stress
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Rosanna CousinsRosanna Cousins
Rosanna Cousins
CMColin J. MacKay
Colin J. MacKay
SCSimon D. Clarke
Simon D. Clarke
CKChris Kelly
Chris Kelly
PKPeter J. Kelly
Peter J. Kelly
RMRon H. McCaig
Ron H. McCaig
Research commissioned for the UK's Health & Safety Executive (HSE) supports the view that a preventative, risk-assessment based approach would be more effective than case-based methods in achieving a nationwide reduction in work-related stress. The background to this approach is described and discussed in a companion paper in this issue (Mackay, Cousins, Kelly, Lee, & McCaig, 2004 Mackay, CJ , Cousins, R , Kelly, PJ , Lee, S and McCaig, RH . (2004). ‘Management Standards’ and work-related stress in the UK: Policy background and science. Work & Stress, 18, 2: 91–112. ). The present paper describes the development of HSE's new stress Management Standards—which offer organizations continuous improvement through a three-phase stress preventative process—and the development of a supporting ‘Indicator Tool’ (a two-phase questionnaire to assess employee perceptions of working conditions). The Management Standards comprise a series of ‘states to be achieved’, which are statements of good practice in six key stressor areas: demands, control, support, relationships, role and organizational change. For each stressor area there is also a ‘platform statement’ that outlines the main aims to be achieved by the organization. This statement may include a target percentage of employees finding that the organization meets the standard: this matter will be settled after the standards have been assessed in a public consultation campaign. To use the new process, an organization's state can first be assessed using the Indicator Tool; liaising with workers in focus groups enables a further exploration of issues raised; finally, there may be formulation of interventions and subsequent review. It is not intended that the standards will be legally enforceable. HSE's aim is that they and the associated methodology will enable organizations to effectively tackle work-related stress, and subsequently reduce both its incidence and prevalence.

1 April 2004 in Work & Stress
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CMColin J. MacKay
Colin J. MacKay
Rosanna CousinsRosanna Cousins
Rosanna Cousins
PKPeter J. Kelly
Peter J. Kelly
SLSteve Lee
Steve Lee
RMRon H. McCaig
Ron H. McCaig
In the late 1990s, the Health and Safety Commission, as the lead authority in the UK responsible for Health and Safety at Work, conducted an extensive consultation exercise to elicit views about how work-related stress should be tackled. The Commission subsequently decided that regulation was not justified and opted for an approach with four strands. One of these was to work with stakeholders to develop clear, agreed standards of good management practice. This paper describes and discusses the rationale behind a standards-based approach that is essentially based on a method of controlling hazards. The Management Standards approach uses a taxonomy of six stressors that has evolved out of extensive research carried out on behalf of the UK's Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and in conjunction with stakeholders, and a three-phase risk assessment methodology. Further developmental work on the standards (which are to be subjected to public consultation) and associated measurement tools is described in a companion paper in this issue of Work & Stress (Cousins, Mackay, Clarke, Kelly, Kelly, & McCaig, 2004 Cousins, R , Mackay, CJ , Clarke, SD , Kelly, C , Kelly, PJ and McCaig, RH . (2004). ‘Management Standards’ and work-related stress in the UK: Practical development. Work & Stress, 18(2): 113–136. ). The emphasis is on prevention towards reducing stress in the UK working population. We review current thinking on models of work stress, consider evidence linking workplace psychosocial factors and various health and organizational outcomes, and examine the effectiveness of organizational interventions. We argue that the literature supports an approach that aims to move organizational states (represented by the current situation) to more desirable ones (represented by the six Management Standards), and that this is an effective ‘population’ based approach to tackling workplace stress and promoting individual and organizational health.

1 January 2016 in Journal of Diabetes Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AAAbdul-Razak Abubakari
Abdul-Razak Abubakari
Rosanna CousinsRosanna Cousins
Rosanna Cousins
CTCecil Thomas
Cecil Thomas
DSDushyant Sharma
Dushyant Sharma
ENEbrahim K. Naderali
Ebrahim K. Naderali
Self-management is critical if people with diabetes are to minimise their risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications, yet adherence to self-management recommendations is suboptimal. Understanding the predictors of optimal diabetes self-management in specific populations is needed to inform effective interventions. This study investigated the role of demographic and clinical characteristics, illness perceptions, and self-efficacy in explaining adherence to self-management recommendations among people with poorly controlled diabetes in North West of England. Illness perceptions and self-efficacy data were collected using validated questionnaires and clinical data were obtained from hospital records. Correlations were used to investigate bivariate relationships between independent variables and self-management, and multiple regression techniques were used to determine demographic and psychosocial predictors of self-management. Various demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with adherence to self-management recommendations. In particular, employment status explained 11% of the variation in adherence to foot care whilst diabetes treatment category explained 9% of exercise and 21% of the variations in SMBG recommendations. Also, 22% and 8% of the variations in overall self-management were explained by illness perceptions and self-efficacy beliefs, respectively. Illness perceptions and self-efficacy beliefs of people with poorly controlled diabetes are important predictors of their self-management behaviours and could potentially guide effective interventions.

1 August 2008 in Brain and Cognition
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JWJ.H. Wearden
J.H. Wearden
James H. Smith-SparkJames H. Smith-Spark
James H. Smith-Spark
Rosanna CousinsRosanna Cousins
Rosanna Cousins
NEN.M.J. Edelstyn
N.M.J. Edelstyn
FCF.W.J. Cody
F.W.J. Cody
DOD.J. O’bOyle
D.J. O’bOyle

2 January 2020 in European Journal of Applied Physiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BKBen Kirk
Ben Kirk
KMKate Mooney
Kate Mooney
Rosanna CousinsRosanna Cousins
Rosanna Cousins
PAPeter Angell
Peter Angell
MJMatthew Jackson
Matthew Jackson
OKOmid Khaiyat
Omid Khaiyat