Como se dice self efficacy?

I was new to San Antonio as a recently licensed physical therapist a year into marriage.  I worked in an inpatient rehabilitation unit in a level 1 trauma center, meaning I worked with many individuals following spinal cord injury or traumatic brain injury for months until they were ready to transition to home.  Because this was southern Texas, I worked with many Spanish-speaking individuals.  As a new therapist, I was still learning how to communicate with patients effectively in English, let alone Spanish, of which I knew essentially none.  When you work with someone daily for several months, the relationship dynamic importantly sets the tone for sessions, which last about 90 minutes.  My point is…it’s good when you can communicate with your patients.

So, I did what I could to engage with Spanish speakers.  “Como se dice…” and then I would gesture or act out the term I was lacking.  They would oblige and tell me (usually) the correct term and we would move forward with our Spanglish conversation.  In a 90-minute session, I likely said, “Como se dice…” 70 times.  It was my only fluent phrase.  So, it should come as no surprise that in the middle of one night, deeply dreaming, I (reportedly) sat straight up in bed, turned to my new husband, and shouted, “Como se dice…” and followed with an opening and closing of my hand, as though a duck’s bill.  “Duck?” Andy replied, likely disturbed.  “Oh, yeah.”  Lay back down.  End scene.

Understanding requires communicating in the same language.  This is true across cultural lines, but also when considering the study of theoretical concepts.  In my own research, there is emerging literature about the concept of intervention fidelity, the extent to which a prescribed intervention is carried out in the manner in which it was intended.¹ The study of this concept is difficult because factors that contribute to fidelity are described by so many words that seemingly are being described in the same-ish manner: adherence, engagement, compliance, competence, enactment, implementation.  Each researcher has an idea of the construct they are trying to understand, but developing a body of knowledge, where clear relationships are defined is complicated by, perhaps, a vocabulary issue.

This seems to be occurring when trying to understand motivation and behavior in an academic setting.  With the development of various constructs and conceptualizations, so has come a list of terms to understand and define: task-specific self-concept, self-concept of ability, expectancies, expectancy beliefs, expectancy for success, performance expectancies, perceptions of competence, perceptions of task difficulty, self-perceptions of ability, ability perceptions, perceived ability, self-appraisals of ability, perceived control, subjective competence, and confidence.² While it may be indicated to use different terms for subtly different constructs, this number of terms presents an overwhelming challenge when trying to understand complicated human motivation and resultant behavior.  Clear, common language and definitions of constructs would improve the ability to validate assessment and define relationships, a challenge with regard to self efficacy in relation to other expectancy beliefs.²

The solution seems to find a common language and use that common language to test ideas about these constructs in rigorous ways.  In this way, relationships can be better defined and understanding enhanced.

Como se dice self efficacy?

1. Toomey E, Hardeman W. Addressing Intervention Fidelity Within Physical Therapy Research and Clinical Practice. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017;47(12):895-898. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.0609

2. Pajares F. Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings. Review of Educational Research. 1996;66(4):543-578.