STRESS COPING STRATEGIES AT UNIVERSITY STUDENTS - PART I: GENDER DIFFERENCES

Authors

  • Hana Chýlová Czech University of Life Sciences Prague
  • Ludmila Natovová Czech University of Life Sciences Prague

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2012.050303

Keywords:

Coping strategy, Czech population sample, gender, stress, university education.

Abstract

The aim of present study is to investigate the particularities of using various stress coping strategies by undergraduate students at the Czech University of Life Sciences (CULS) with a special regard to the balance between positive and negative stress coping strategies, and resulting consequences. Authors focused on comparing differences in the use of coping strategies between standardized scores of the Czech population and student population, as well as on identifying differences in the use of coping strategies between both genders. The data were collected using the standardized stress coping strategies questionnaire - SVF 78. Of the total number of 177 students, 63 were male and 114 were female undergraduate students of Faculty of Economics and Management (FEM) at CULS. The most important outcome of the current study research is a proven significant distinction between the positive-negative stress coping strategies employed by CULS undergraduate students and those of the Czech population sample. From the global point of view, the use of positive stress coping techniques seems comparatively high and might therefore be considered as satisfactory. However, significantly lower use of the most constructive and, in longer prospective, most approved group of strategies is rather disappointing.

References

  • Aldwin, C.M., Yancura, L. (2011) ‘Stress, Coping, and Adult Development‘ In Contrada, R. J. and Baum, A. (eds.) The Handbook of Stress Science, New York: Springer Publishing Company.

  • Balcar, K., Trnka, R., Kuška, M. (2011) ‘How many ways to deal with stress? Stress coping factors in the SVF 78‘, Activitas Nervosa Superior, vol. 53, no. 1/2, pp. 27-34.

  • Chamoutová, K., Chýlová H. (2008) ‘Coping with stress at CULS students – a Comparison study‘, Proceedings of the 5thInternational Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2008), Prague, pp. 88-91.

  • Carver, C.S. et al. (1989) ‘Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach‘, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 267-283.

  • Cohen, S. et al. (1993) ‘Negative Life Events, Perceived Stress, Negative Affect, and Susceptibility to the Common Cold‘, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 131-140.

  • Contrada, R.J. and Baum, A. (eds.) (2011) The Handbook of Stress Science, New York: Springer.

  • Davis, M.C., Burleson, M.H. and Kruszewski, D.M. (2011) ‘Gender: Its Relationship to Stressor Exposure, Cognitive Appraisal/Coping Processes, Stress Responses, and Health Outcomes‘, In Contrada, R.J. and Baum, A. (eds.) The Handbook of Stress Science, New York: Springer Publishing Company.

  • Disman, M. (2008) Jak se vyrábí sociologická znalost, Praha: Karolinum.

  • Dömeová, L., Vostrá, H., Jindrová, A. (2011) ‘Comparison of Full Time and Combined Studies with Gender Aspect‘, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 31-45.

  • Eduardo Piemontesi, S. et al. (2012) ‘Test anxiety and coping styles with academic stress in university students‘, Anales De Psicologia, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 89-96.

  • Gerin, W. (2011) ‘Acute Stress Responses in the Psychophysiological Laboratory‘ In Contrada, R.J. and Baum, A.  The Handbook of Stress Science, New York: Springer.

  • Horáková, M. (2009) ‘Výzkum strategií zvládání stresu a jejich vztah k dalším charakteristikám u řidičů záchranné služby‘, E-psychologie, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 10-21.

  • Ising, M. (2006) ‘Comparing two approaches for the assessment of coping: Part II. Differences in stability in time‘, Journal of Individual Differences, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 15-19.

  • Janke, W., Erdmann, G. (2003) Strategie zvládání stresu SVF 78, Praha: Testcentrum.

  • Janke, W., Erdmann, G. (2005) ‘Stressverarbeitungsfragenbogen (2 Auflage)‘ In: Ising, M. (2006) Comparing two approaches for the assessment of coping: Part II. Differences in stability in time, Journal of Individual Differences, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 15-19.

  • Kebza, V. (2005) Psychosociální determinanty zdraví, Praha: Academia.

  • Lazarus, R.S., Folkman, S. (1984) Stress, appraisal, and coping, New York: Springer.

  • Lukavský, J., Šolcová, I., Preiss, M. (2011) ‘Proaktivní zvládání u osob staršího věku: vztah k vybraným kognitivním proměnným‘, Československá psychologie, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 193-203.

  • Millerová, L., Michálek, P., Franco Ruiz, C. (2007) ‘Stress Factors of University Students‘, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2007), Prague, pp. 153-156.

  • Norušis, M.J. (2011) IBM SPSS Statistics 19 Advanced Statistical Procedures, New York: Pearson.

  • Saklofske, D. et al. (2012) ‘Relationships of personality, affect, emotional intelligence and coping with student stress and academic success: Different patterns of association for stress and success,‟ Learning & Individual Differences, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 251-257.

  • Selye, H. (1950) ‘Stress and the general adaptation syndrome‘, British Medical Journal, vol. 1, no. 4667, pp. 1383-1392.

    • Additional Files

    Published

    2012-09-30

    How to Cite

    Chýlová, H. and Natovová, L. (2012) ’STRESS COPING STRATEGIES AT UNIVERSITY STUDENTS - PART I: GENDER DIFFERENCES’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 135–147. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2012.050303

    Issue

    Vol. 5 No. 3 (2012)

    Section

    Research Paper

    License

    Authors declare with this manuscript intended for publication to ERIES Journal that:

    • all co-authors agree with the publication of the manuscript even after amendments arising from peer review;
    • all co-authors agree with the posting of the full text of this work on the web page of ERIES Journal and to the inclusion of references in databases accessible on the internet;
    • no results of other researchers were used in the submitted manuscript without their consent, proper citation, or acknowledgement of their cooperation or material provided;
    • the results (or any part of them) used in the manuscript have not been sent for publication to any other journal nor have they already been published (or if so, that the relevant works are cited in this manuscript);
    • submission of the manuscript for publication was completed in accordance with the publishing regulations pertaining to place of work;
    • experiments performed comply with current laws and written consent of the Scientific Ethics Committee / National Animal Care Authority (as is mentioned in the manuscript submitted);
    • grant holders confirm that they have been informed of the submitted manuscript and they agree to its publication.

    Authors retain copyright and grant ERIES Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the published work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. Moreover, authors are able to post the published work in an institutional repository with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. In addition, authors are permitted and encouraged to post the published work online (e.g. institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.