Evaluating the impact of a peer coaching intervention on well-being amongst psychology undergraduate students

Abstract

Objectives: To examine the effectiveness of a peer coaching intervention on aspects of well-being in students.
Design: A two-factor mixed design was employed.
Method: Two groups of third-year undergraduate psychology students participated in this study. The coaching group (N=32) comprised 24 females and eight males (mean age 25.23, SD=8.07) who were studying coaching psychology. This group was introduced to a model of coaching and practiced skills during lectures/seminars. They subsequently conducted and received five sessions of peer coaching before an examination period. The control group (N=33) comprised 30 females and three males (mean age 24.77, SD=5.57). This group were also third-year students, but were not studying coaching psychology or engaged in peer coaching.
Measures were taken at Time 1 (pre-coaching intervention) and Time 2 (post-coaching intervention). Demographic data was obtained and the General Health Questionnaire (Goldberg, 1992) and the Inventory of Personal Problems (Berkham et al., 1996), were utilised. The topics covered in coaching sessions and the perceived effectiveness of the technique were examined at Time 2.
Results: Levels of psychological distress were high at both data points. Findings highlighted significant differences in outcome variables for both groups between Times 1 and 2. Nonetheless, the increase in psychological distress was significantly lower in the peer coaching group. The most common topics covered in coaching sessions were relationships, health and career issues and 67 per cent of the sample found the intervention to be at least moderately effective.
Conclusions: Findings highlight the potential value of peer coaching in helping students manage their well-being during a potentially stressful period. Follow-up research is ongoing to examine ways of extending this technique in university settings.

Full text

T
HE NEED FOR research to evaluate the
effectiveness of coaching strategies is
widely recognised in the emerging field
of coaching psychology (Linley, 2006).
Indeed, it has been argued that without the
systematic empirical evaluation of the success
of coaching interventions, coaching practice
may be seen as being based on hypothetical
theories and conjecture (Biswas-Diener &
Dean, 2007). It is, therefore, necessary to
develop coaching techniques that are firmly
grounded in evidence-based principles
(Stober & Grant, 2006; Linley, 2006).
Solution-focused coaching is rapidly
gaining popularity in the field. This tech-
nique does not seek to alleviate long-term
underlying problems, but assists people in
meeting their goals by helping them develop
their skills and resources (Kauffman &
Scoular, 2004). By examining the client’s
core values and life experiences, skills and
resources that had previously been unrecog-
nised may be brought to light. Solutions can
subsequently be developed that help achieve
the identified goals. Research findings
indeed indicate that solution-focused
coaching has the potential to enhance goal-
setting and psychological functioning.
Studies have found this technique may
improve stress management capabilities and
enhance goal striving, emotional well-being,
hope, self-confidence and job satisfaction
(Gyllensten & Palmer, 2006; Kauffman &
Scoular, 2004; Seligman, 2002). There is
International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010 29
© The British Psychological Society – ISSN: 1750-2764
Evaluating the impact of a peer coaching
intervention on well-being amongst
psychology undergraduate students
Emma Short, Gail Kinman & Sarah Baker
Objectives: To examine the effectiveness of a peer coaching intervention on aspects of well-being in students.
Design: A two-factor mixed design was employed.
Method: Two groups of third-year undergraduate psychology students participated in this study. The coaching
group (N=32) comprised 24 females and eight males (mean age 25.23, SD=8.07) who were studying coaching
psychology. This group was introduced to a model of coaching and practiced skills during lectures/seminars.
They subsequently conducted and received five sessions of peer coaching before an examination period. The
control group (N=33) comprised 30 females and three males (mean age 24.77, SD=5.57). This group were
also third-year students, but were not studying coaching psychology or engaged in peer coaching.
Measures were taken at Time 1 (pre-coaching intervention) and Time 2 (post-coaching intervention).
Demographic data was obtained and the General Health Questionnaire (Goldberg, 1992) and the
Inventory of Personal Problems (Berkham et al., 1996), were utilised. The topics covered in coaching
sessions and the perceived effectiveness of the technique were examined at Time 2.
Results: Levels of psychological distress were high at both data points. Findings highlighted significant
differences in outcome variables for both groups between Times 1 and 2. Nonetheless, the increase in
psychological distress was significantly lower in the peer coaching group. The most common topics covered
in coaching sessions were relationships, health and career issues and 67 per cent of the sample found the
intervention to be at least moderately effective.
Conclusions: Findings highlight the potential value of peer coaching in helping students manage their well-
being during a potentially stressful period. Follow-up research is ongoing to examine ways of extending this
technique in university settings.
Keywords: peer coaching, well-being, students, stress, interpersonal problems.

some evidence that gains might be main-
tained over time (Green, Oades & Grant,
2006).
Coaching in education
Peer-coaching has been described as a rela-
tionship between teachers based on sharing
experiences, practices and planning, with
learning taking place through observation
and skills transfer (Joyce & Showers, 1996;
Zwart et al., 2007). This technique has been
used as a means of facilitating the imple-
mentation of new practices and approaches
within teaching. The use of peer coaching to
enhance the professional development of
teachers is strongly endorsed by the UK
Department of Education (DfEE, 2001). In
the US, large corporations such as Microsoft,
sponsor programmes to promote the posi-
tive benefits of peer-coaching interaction
between teachers.
The model of peer coaching utilised in
teaching typically entails groups of two to
three teachers coming together to offer sup-
port, feedback and encouragement. Strate-
gies employed include modelling from
observed demonstration and skills transfer
by assistance. Direct verbal feedback is
avoided, however, as it may be perceived by
colleagues as evaluative and, therefore, detri-
mental to the coaching process (Joyce &
Showers, 1996). Within these peer-coaching
programmes, the coach is seen as the person
who teaches and the coachee as the person
who learns through observation (Joyce &
Showers, 1996). It could be argued that this
approach has more in common with men-
toring than coaching, as the teacher with
experience offers guidance to a protégé to
help them gain knowledge and skills
(Greene & Grant, 2003). Coaching differs
from mentoring as it is based on a collabora-
tive relationship that aims to facilitate the
development and enhancement of skills and
performance through feedback, reflection
and self-directed learning (Greene & Grant,
2003; Green, Grant & Rynsaardt, 2007).
Life coaching in education
Life coaching is a systematic, structured and
goal-focused approach to helping individ-
uals to construct individual solutions to
make positive changes in their lives (Green,
Oades & Grant, 2006; Spence & Grant,
2007). In contrast to standard educational
tutoring, mentoring and coaching, which
seeks to enhance and develop academic per-
formance, the cognitive-behavioural, solu-
tion-focused model of life coaching can
promote motivation, goal striving and attain-
ment, and enhance personal growth in an
educational setting (Grant, 2003; Green,
Oades & Grant, 2006; Spence & Grant, 2007;
Grant, 2008; Green, Grant & Rynsaardt,
2007; Spence & Grant, 2007). The coaching
process can also exert a strong influence on
psychological well-being; studies have found
that life coaching can also help students
manage anxiety and stress and, accordingly,
enhance resilience and perceived quality of
life (Grant, 2003; Campbell & Gardner,
2005; Spence & Grant, 2007).
Whilst life coaching is normally con-
ducted in one-to-one sessions by trained pro-
fessional coaches (Spence & Grant, 2007), it
is argued that the use of peer coaching has
the potential to enhance the skills and per-
sonal development of students. It has also
been proposed that there can be benefits for
the peer coach as well as the recipient of
coaching, in terms of enhanced socio-emo-
tional development and improved interper-
sonal skills such as active listening,
questioning and probing (Ladyshewsky,
2006; Laske, 2006). Although studies have
assessed the impact of life coaching in this
context, as yet, little systematic research has
been conducted that examines the impact of
peer coaching techniques in students. The
studies that have been conducted tend to
yield contradictory findings. Sue-Chan and
Latham (2004) and Spence and Grant
(2007) reported that an external coach was
perceived to be more credible and effective
than a peer-coach, whereas other research
has yielded more positive findings.
Ladyshewsky (2006) observed that student
30 International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010
Emma Short, Gail Kinman & Sarah Baker

peer coaches have greater credibility than
academic or support staff. Peer coaching by
and for students has been found to promote
self esteem, motivation and personal growth
and enhance achievement (Hudson, 1999
Ladyshewsky, 2006; Zwart et al., 2007).
Despite there being strong evidence that stu-
dents can experience high levels of stress,
especially during assessment periods, the
impact of peer coaching on psychological
well-being has been little examined in uni-
versity environments. It is argued that this
technique has the potential to enhance well-
being in this context.
Student stress
There is evidence that university students are
subjected to considerable stress and that this
has increased in recent years (Benton et al.,
2003; Gall, Evans & Bellerose, 2000) The
most common stressors reported by students
include relationship conflicts, academic
pressure, health, financial difficulties, rela-
tionships with family, friends and peers and
life transition problems (Green et al., 2007;
Roussis & Wells, 2008). The final year of uni-
versity study is thought to be particularly
stressful owing to anxiety about examina-
tions, dissertation preparation and plans for
the future (Abouserie, 1994; Deary et al.,
2003; Devonport & Lane, 2006).
It is important for universities to help stu-
dents manage the stress they experience, as
this is likely to lead to impaired academic per-
formance as well as exert a negative impact on
well-being (Akgun & Ciarrochi, 2003;
Struthers, Perry & Menec, 2000). As high-
lighted above, final-year students may be par-
ticularly vulnerable. It is argued that
interventions that help students develop their
multi-tasking solutions and enhance their
time management skills are likely to provide
an additional benefit of providing life-long
stress management skills (Hudd et al., 2000).
Aims of study
Based on the research reviewed above, it is
proposed that cognitive behavioural, solu-
tion focused peer coaching has the potential
to help students manage stress and enhance
their well-being. This study, therefore, exam-
ines the effectiveness of a peer coaching
intervention on levels of psychological dis-
tress and inter-personal problems in students
during the run-up to a final year examina-
tion period. As it has been recommended
that future research on the effectiveness of
peer coaching in university settings should
utilise students from the same cohort (Green
et al., 2007), a group of final year psychology
students from the University of Bedfordshire
was studied.
The study context
Psychology students at the University of Bed-
fordshire have the option to study coaching
psychology during the final year of their
undergraduate degree. The module is rigor-
ously evidence-based and incorporates aca-
demic and practical components. It aims to
provide students with an understanding of
the skills of peer coaching, the psychological
principles that underlie them and the oppor-
tunity to develop and practice these skills.
Students are required to engage in a super-
vised peer coaching practice with two peers.
As the use of a model has been shown to be
beneficial to the structure of coaching inter-
ventions (Greene & Grant, 2003), the
TGROW model is utilised (Downey, 2003).
This is an extension of the GROW model
proposed by Whitmore (1996). The addi-
tional ‘T’ stands for Topic or Theme, and
refers to the broad area that the coachee
wants to work on.
Previous research that has evaluated the
impact of peer coaching has typically
exposed participants to intensive training in
coaching techniques through, for example,
one-day workshops (Grant, 2003; Green et al,
2006; Grant, 2008). There is evidence that
exposing learners to information over an
extended period of time and allowing them
to gradually accumulate and practice skills is
likely to deepen learning and increase insight
(Grant, 2007). The present study, therefore,
extends previous research by providing
coaching training over a 12-week period.
International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010 31
Evaluating the impact of a peer coaching intervention …

Method
Design
This study utilised a longitudinal design,
with two assessment points pre- and post-
coaching separated by six weeks
Participants
Two groups of third-year undergraduate psy-
chology students participated in this study.
The coaching group (N=32) comprised 24
females and eight males with a mean age of
25.23 (SD=8.07). This group was registered
on a module on coaching psychology and
attended a one hour lecture and one hour
tutorial each week. There were 33 partici-
pants in the control group which comprised
30 females and three males with a mean age
of 24.77 (SD=5.57). Like the study group, the
control group were final year psychology stu-
dents, but were not studying coaching psy-
chology or engaged in peer coaching. The
participants for the coaching group and the
control group were approached separately
during classes. The request to participate was
made at the beginning of a lecture by a
researcher who was independent of the
teaching team.
Measures
Demographic information
Age, gender, marital status, dependents,
accommodation, education, employment
and ethnicity were assessed.
Psychological distress
This was assessed by the 12-item General
Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12; Goldberg &
Williams, 1988). This questionnaire is widely
used as a measure of general distress. Items
are rated on a fully anchored four-point
scale. An example of an item is: ‘Have you
recently felt constantly under strain?’, where
responses range from ‘not at all’ to ‘much
more than usual’. Mean scores were taken
across items, with high scores representing
poorer well-being
Interpersonal problems
The IIP-32 (Barkham, Hardy & Startup,
1996) is a reliable and valid short form of the
original Inventory of Interpersonal Prob-
lems developed by Horowitz et al. (1988).
The IIP-32 consists of 32 items. Nineteen of
the items are based on behaviour partici-
pants find difficult ‘It is hard for me to…’
(e.g. ‘to disagree with other people’, ‘to be
supportive of another person’s goals in life’)
and 13 of the items are based on behaviour
that participants do ‘too much’ (e.g. ‘I fight
with other people’, ‘I open up to people’).
Each item is rated on five-point scale ranging
from ‘not at all’ (0) to ‘extremely’ (4). Mean
scores were calculated across items, with
high scores indicating general interpersonal
problems (Horowitz et al., 1988).
Topics addressed in coaching intervention
A single item investigated the type of prob-
lems that students discussed during the
coaching intervention. Participants were
asked to indicate areas from a specified list
(e.g. ‘Relationships’, ‘Health’ and ‘Career’).
Participants were also given the option not
to disclose this information.
Level of satisfaction with coaching intervention
This was examined by a single item that
assessed satisfaction with the peer coaching
intervention on a five-point Likert scale
ranging from 1 ‘not effective’ to 5 ‘extremely
effective’.
Procedure
Participants in the control group were
approached at university and asked to partic-
ipate as control in a peer-coaching study.
The control group comprised final year
undergraduate psychology students who had
not taken part in the peer-coaching inter-
vention. Participants in the study group were
introduced to the key principles and models
of coaching, including the TGROW model
(Downey, 2003) utilised in the study, during
lectures on the coaching psychology
module. As described above, coaching skills
were practised and in seminars.
At Time 1 (pre-coaching intervention)
measures of psychological distress and inter-
32 International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010
Emma Short, Gail Kinman & Sarah Baker

personal problems were taken from both the
study group and the control group. The
study group subsequently conducted and
received five sessions of peer-coaching over
six weeks, prior to an examination period.
At Time 2 (post-coaching intervention)
measures of psychological distress and inter-
personal problems were once again taken
from both groups. In addition, measures of
perceived effectiveness of the peer-coaching
intervention and types of problems addressed
in peer coaching were obtained from the
study group. Time 2 measures were taken two
weeks before the final exam period.
Ethics
The research received full ethical clearance
from the Departmental Ethics Committee.
Peer coaches were instructed to work within
their competencies and to be mindful of the
mental health of their coachees. Students
were not obliged to participate in the
research project. Codes were used to match
data from Time 1 and Time 2 meaning that
individual respondents were not identifiable
to the researchers.
Results
Coaching topics and perceived success of
coaching intervention
The most common topics covered in
coaching sessions were relationships (36 per
cent of participants), health (24 per cent)
and career issues (44 per cent). Participants
were asked to indicate the extent to which
they believed the coaching intervention had
been effective. As can be seen from Figure 1,
72 per cent found it to be ‘quite effective’ or
‘moderately effective’. No respondents indi-
cated that the intervention had been ‘very
effective’ or ‘not at all effective’.
Impact of coaching intervention
The means and standard deviations for the
study variables at Time 1 (pre-coaching
intervention) are shown in Table 1. Inde-
pendent samples t-tests found no significant
differences between the study and control
groups on levels of psychological distress
(p=.21) or interpersonal problems (p=.32).
In order to examine whether any signifi-
cant change in any outcome variable
occurred between Times 1 and 2, repeated
measures t-tests were conducted. Table 2 pro-
vides details for the study group and the con-
trol group. As can be seen, for the study
group no statistically significant differences
were found between the two time points.
However, the reduction in mean levels of
self-reported personal problems at Time 2
approached significance at .06.
For the control group, mean levels of
personal problems and psychological dis-
tress (indicated by the GHQ-12 scores) were
higher at Time 2 than Time 1. The differ-
ence in levels of psychological distress was
found to be statistically significant (t=–3.76,
p=.002). Figure 2 shows the changes in the
GHQ-12 scores for the study and control
groups at times 1 and 2.
International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010 33
Evaluating the impact of a peer coaching intervention …
Table 1: Mean scores for study variables at Time 1.
Study Group Control Group
Mean scores (SD) Mean scores (SD)
IIP-32 75.37 (22.85) 68.29 (18.67)
GHQ-12 15.71 (8.01) 14.82 (8.73)

34 International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010
Emma Short, Gail Kinman & Sarah Baker
Table 2: Mean scores and
SD
for study variables at Times 1 and 2.
Figure 1: Perceived effectiveness of peer coaching Intervention.
Figure 2: GHQ scores for Study and Control Groups at Times 1 and 2.
Study Group Control Group
Mean scores (SD) T value/significance Mean scores (SD) T value/significance
GHQ-12
Time 1 15.71 (8.01) 14.82 (8.73)
Time 2 16.08 (9.06) -0.59/ns 19. 89 (5.86) -3.76/p=0.002
IIP-32
Time 1 75.37 (22.85) 68.29 (18.67)
Time 2 68.77 (18.32) 2.00/p=0.058 71.65 (5.86) -1.01/ns
50
40
30
20
10
0
Per cent
Effectiveness evaluation
Quite Moderate A little
48
24
28
Time 1 Time 2
30
25
20
15
10
GHQ-12 scores
Study group
Control group

Discussion
The findings of this study provide evidence
that a short programme of peer coaching
may be beneficial for students at a stressful
time in their lives. The peer coaching pro-
gramme may have offered some protection
from an increase in psychological distress
during a stressful period. Some tentative evi-
dence is also provided that peer coaching
may protect students from enhanced inter-
personal personal problems during this time.
Mean scores for GHQ-12 for both groups
were high in comparison with published
norms from occupational groups and com-
munity samples (Mullarkey et al., 1999). This
finding, together with other studies that
highlight high levels of stress in final year
students (e.g. Deary et al., 2003) clearly indi-
cates that interventions are required to help
them manage their psychological well-being
more effectively. Although levels of psycho-
logical distress did not reduce after the peer
coaching intervention, neither did they
increase like those of the control group.
Coaching topics covered during sessions
tended to correspond with those highlighted
in previous studies as the main sources of
stress in students (Roussis & Wells, 2008).
Relationships, health and career issues
appear to be the most salient sources of
stress for final year students. Nonetheless
future research might examine the type of
problems presented during peer coaching
sessions using a more free format as there
may have been topics that were not included
in the categories provided.
Previous research findings have sug-
gested that coaching by peers may be seen as
less effective than coaching by professionals
(Sue-Chan & Latham, 2004; Spence & Grant,
(2007).) The present study, however, pro-
vides strong evidence that peer coaching
techniques can be successful in university
settings. For the majority of participants (67
per cent), peer coaching was found to be at
least moderately effective. This highlights
the potential utility of peer coaching inter-
ventions for helping students formulate
goals and manage stress. Findings have the
potential to enhance support structures to
foster resilience in student populations. Peer
coaching might, therefore, be a practical,
fruitful and low cost method by which stu-
dent mental health might be managed
during stressful periods.
Limitations of this study
Although it has added to the evidence base
for the effectiveness of solution-focused peer
coaching techniques in an educational con-
text, the study had a number of limitations
that should be taken into consideration.
Firstly, the sample size is relatively small and
a cohort from one year group . It is possible,
therefore, that the results may not be gener-
alised to the larger university population. In
addition, self-report data was utilised, which
may be subject to demand characteristics,
such as social desirability bias; students may
wish to represent their experience as posi-
tive, as a way of demonstrating engagement
with the coaching process. Moreover, self-
report of the benefits attributed to peer
coaching may have tempered the validity of
the results, as the data reflects a subjective
estimate of the competence of the peer
coach rather than an objective measure of
the benefits provided. It is clear, however,
that individual perceptions of the effective-
ness of the process and individual well-being
are fundamentally important in studies of
this type.
Conclusion
This exploratory study has presented
original data demonstrating some benefits of
peer coaching within the higher education
context. There are several areas where
future research may be fruitful. Although
peer coaching has been generally found to
be effective, insight into the type of prob-
lems that are most receptive to peer
coaching techniques is needed. Further
work is also required to examine the benefits
of peer coaching to student well-being and
academic performance, together with the
extent to which any benefits are maintained
over time. It has been suggested that peer
International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010 35
Evaluating the impact of a peer coaching intervention …

coaching has benefits for the coach as well as
the coachee (Ladyshewsky, 2006). The
present study did not assess this issue, but
the nature of these benefits to well-being and
personal development should be further
explored in a university environment.
Finally, although this study has examined
the coachee’s perception of coaching effec-
tiveness, it would be useful to assess the
coach’s perception of the coachee’s readi-
ness and suitability to engage in peer
coaching.
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the assistance
of Guiseppe Turi, Dominika Dainoki, Virag
Darida and Jennifer Vincent in collecting
the data for this study.
The authors
Emma Short, Gail Kinman & Sarah Baker
University of Bedfordshire.
Correspondence
Emma Short
Psychology Department,
University of Bedfordshire, Park Square,
Luton, Bedfordshire, LU1 3JU,
United Kingdom.
Mobile: 0788 1521350
E-mail: emma.short@beds.ac.uk
36 International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010
Emma Short, Gail Kinman & Sarah Baker
References
Abouserie, R. (1994). Sources and levels of stress in
relation to locus of control and self-esteem in
university students. Educational Psychology, 14(3),
323–331.
Akgun, S. & Ciarrochi, J. (2003). Learned resource-
fulness moderates the relationship between aca-
demic stress and academic performance.
Educational Psychology, 23(30), 287–294.
Andrews, B. & Wilding, J.M. (2004). The relation of
depression and anxiety to life-stress and achieve-
ment in students. British Journal of Psychology, 95,
509–521.
Barkham, M., Hardy, G.E. & Startup, M. (1996). The
development of the IIP-32: A short version of the
Inventory of Interpersonal Problems. British
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 35, 21–35.
Benton, S.A., Robertson, J.M., Wen-Chih, T., Newton,
F.B. & Benton, S.L. (2003). Changes in coun-
selling centre client problems across 13 years.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34(1),
66–72.
Biswas-Diener, R. & Dean, B. (2007). Positive psy-
chology coaching: Putting the science of happiness to
work for your clients. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons.
Campbell, M.A. & Gardner, S. (2005). A pilot study to
assess the effects of life coaching with year 12 stu-
dents. In M. Cavanagh, A.M. Grant & T. Kemp
(Eds), Evidence-Based Coaching: Vol 1: Theory,
research and practice from the behavioural sciences.
Bowen Hills, Qld: Australian Academic Press.
Deary, I., Watson, R. & Hogston, R. (2003).
A longitudinal cohort study of burnout and attri-
tion in nursing students. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 43(1), 71-81.
DfEE (2001). Learning and teaching: A strategy for pro-
fessional development. London: Stationary Office.
Devonport, T.J. & Lane, A.M. (2006). Cognitive
appraisal of dissertation stress among undergrad-
uate students. The Psychological Record, 56,
259–266.
Downey, M. (2003). Effective coaching. London:
Texere.
Gall, T.L., Evans, D.R. & Bellerose, S. (2000). Transi-
tion to first-year university: Patterns of change in
adjustment and across life domains and time.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19,
544–567.
Goldberg, D. & Willliams, P.A. (1988). A user’s guide to
the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor: NFER
NELSON Publishing Company Ltd.
Greene, J. & Grant, A.M. (2003). Solution-focused
coaching. Harlow, England: Pearson Education
Ltd.
Green, S., Grant, A.M. & Rynsaardt, J. (2007).
Evidence-based life coaching for senior high
school students: Building hardiness and hope.
International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(1),
24–32.
Green, L.S., Oades, L.G. & Grant, A.M. (2006).
Cognitive-behavioural, solution-focused life
coaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being,
and hope. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(3),
142–149.

Grant, A.M. (2003). The impact of life coaching on
goal attainment, metacognition and mental
health. Social Behaviour and Personality, 31(3),
253–264.
Grant, A.M. (2007). Enhancing coaching skills and
emotional intelligence through training. Indus-
trial and Commercial Training, 39(5), 257–266.
Grant, A.M. (2008). Personal life coaching for
coaches-in-training enhances goal attainment
insight and learning. Coaching: An International
Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 1(1), 54–70.
Gyllensten, K. & Palmer, S. (2005). Can coaching
reduce workplace stress? The Coaching Psychologist,
1(1), 15–17.
Horowitz, L.M., Rosenberg, S.E., Baer, B.A., Ureno,
G. & Villasenor, V.S. (1988). Inventory of inter-
personal problems: Psychometric properties and
clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 56, 885–892.
Hudd, S.S., Dumlao, J., Erdmann-Sager, D., Murray,
D., Phan, E., Soukas, N. & Yokozuka, N. (2000).
Stress at college: Effects on health habits, health
status and self-esteem. College Student Journal,
34(2), 217–228.
Hudson, F. (1999). The handbook of coaching.
Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley & Sons.
Ladyshewsky, R.K. (2006). Peer coaching:
A constructivist methodology for enhancing
critical thinking in postgraduate business educa-
tion. Higher Education Research & Development
25(1), 67–84.
Laske, O.E. (2006). From coach training to coach
education: Teaching coaching within a compre-
hensively evidence-based framework. Interna-
tional Journal of Evidence-Based Coaching and
Mentoring, 4(1), 45–57
Linley, P.A. (2006). Coaching research: Who? What?
Where? When? Why? International Journal of
Evidence-Based Coaching and Mentoring, 4(2), 1–7.
Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1996). The evolution of peer
coaching. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 12–16.
Kauffman, C. & Scoular, A. (2004). Toward a positive
psychology of executive coaching. In P.A. Linley
& S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice.
Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley & Sons.
Misra, R., McKean, M., West, S. & Russo, T. (2000).
Academic stress of college students: Comparison
of student and faculty perception. College Student
Journal, 34(2), 236–245.
Roussis, P. & Wells, A. (2008). Psychological factors
predicting stress symptoms: Metacognition,
thought control, and varieties of worry. Anxiety,
Stress and Coping, 21(3), 213–225
Seligman, M.E.P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the
new positive psychology to realise your potential for
lasting fulfilment. London: Nicholas Brealey.
Spence, G.B. & Grant, A.M. (2007). Professional and
peer life coaching and the enhancement of goal
striving and well-being: An exploratory study.
The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(3), 185–194.
Stober, D.R. & Grant, A.M. (2006). Evidence-based
coaching handbook. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons.
Struthers, C.W., Perry, R.P. & Menec, V.H. (2000). An
examination of the relationship among academic
stress, copying style, motivation, and perform-
ance. Research in Higher Education, 41, 581–592.
Sue-Chan, C. & Latham, G.P. (2004). The relative
effectiveness of external, peer, and self-coaches.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(2),
260–278.
Struthers, C.W., Perry, P. & Menec, V.H. (2000). An
examination of the relationships among aca-
demic stress, coping motivation, and perform-
ance in college. Research in Higher Education, 41,
581–592.
Whitmore, J. (2002). Coaching for performance (3rd
ed.). London: Nicholas Brealey.
Zwart, R.C., Wubbels, T., Bergen, T.C.M. & Bolhuis, S.
(2007). Experienced teacher learning within the
context of reciprocal peer coaching. Teachers and
Teaching, 13(2), 165–187.
International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 5 No. 1 March 2010 37
Evaluating the impact of a peer coaching intervention …