إجهاد القرار وعلاقته بأساليب التفكير لدى مديري المدارس

The Decision Prostration and its Relation with Schools Headmasters

The current research aims at knowing:
1. The decision prostration to schools headmasters.
2. Identifying the statistically significant differences for decision stress among school principles on the According to the variable gender (male and Female)
3.Types of thinking to schools headmasters.
4.The connected relation between the decision prostration types of thinking
5.The differences of the connected relation between the decision prostration and types of thinking.
The current research is limited to schools headmasters in Kerbala and Najaf provinces and for both genders ( males and females) for the academic year 2021- 2022.
The research sample composed of 233 males and females schools headmasters that were randomly chosen with appropriate distribution. In order to achieve the study aims, the researcher designed the decision prostration standard in this study relying on (Baumeister, 2012, 34) power model which was displayed on a group of specialized jury to test the reliability of its items. Then, its psychological characteristics were taken out through the application on the statistical analysis sample which was about 233 males and females schools headmasters. The value of the stability factor by Alf Kronbach reached ( 0.85) and by retest way reached ( 0.81). When the final form of the standard became 34 items, the researcher adopted ( Al Jumaili, 2013) standard to styles of thinking which was displayed on a group of specialized jury to take out the its psychological characteristics were taken out by Alfa Kronbach model for each factor of types of thinking factors. So, reliability factor of structural thinking style reached (0.85), the stability factor of the typical thinking factor reached about (0.83), the stability factor of the practical factor reached about (0.83), the statistical style (0.86), the stability factor of the tactual factor reached( 0.84), by the retesting, the connected relation for each style of thinking styles when the stability factor of the structural thinking style reached ( 0,81). The stability factor of the typical thinking factor reached about (0.79), the stability factor of the practical factor reached about (0.80), the statistical style (0.81), the stability factor of the tactual factor reached( 0.78). When the standard became in its final form (58 ) items, the researcher applied it on the research sample.
When the application ended, the researcher used the suitable statistical means to analyze the data relying on statistical package for the social sciences (spss), so, the results were the following:
1. The research samples do not possess the decision prostration.
2. The research samples possess styles of thinking.
3. Presence of reverse connected relation between the decision prostration and the structural, practical, and factual styles.
4. There is no connected relation between the decision prostration and the typical and statistical styles.
5. There are no differences in the connected relation between the decision prostration and the thinking styles according to gender variables and years of service.
In the light of these results, the researcher introduced some recommendations and suggestions that were clarified in chapter four