While SRRS refers to major life events that take place, there are other scales that look at daily hassles and uplifts, which are also considered sources of stress, for example Kanner et al (1981).
In 1981 Kanner et al, carried out a study comparing two modes of stress measurement, namely daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. The daily hassles and uplifts scale included things such as, too many things to do, not enough time, work responsibilities, troubling thoughts, social obligations, losing things, not getting enough sleep, problems with children, family responsibilities and job dissatisfaction
During the study, Hassles and Uplifts Scales were constructed and administered once a month for 10 consecutive months to a community sample of middle-aged adults. It was found that the Hassles Scale was a better predictor of psychological symptoms than were the life events scores, and that the scale shared most of the variance in symptoms accounted for by life events. When the effects of life events scores were removed, hassles and symptoms remained significantly correlated. Uplifts were positively related to symptoms for women but not for men. Hassles and uplifts were also shown to be related, although only modestly so, to positive and negative affect, thus providing discriminate validation for hassles and uplifts in comparison to measures of emotion. It was concluded that the assessment of daily hassles and uplifts may be a better approach to the prediction of adaptational outcomes than the usual life events approach.
Students entering college can experience a reaction similar to shock as they attempt to respond to the multiplicity of responsibilities facing them, such as organizing their time, handling new social interactions, dealing with changes in their relationships with home base, and adapting to life on a huge campus with large numbers of students. Research on student stress is fairly recent, stemming from not more than a decade ago, but evidence from several studies suggests that academic performance is the most critical concern of students, especially first-year students, and that the problems perceived to be the most intense source of stress are examinations and grades, financial concerns, fear of failure on specific assignments, and career decisions. Johnson's research (1978) revealed nine major categories of student stress, and his findings are supported by the results of several later studies. These categories are: instruction, competition, organisation of time, adjustment to college, administrative problems, social adjustment, finances, housing, and transportation. An analysis of the research involving student stress indicates that the most critical stressors have to do with the instructional process itself, namely results, examinations, and studying.
In a study conducted by Archer & Lamnin (1985), sources of stress were identified and divided into categories, which included academic and personal stressors. In this study, a survey was distributed to 893 undergraduate students asking them to describe the most stressful conditions or situations in their lives either personally or academically. Results indicate that the top five major academic stressors were: performance anxiety and the scheduling of tests and exams, competition for grades, concern with not having enough time for academic demands, the faculty and class environment and concern about their future careers. The five major personal stressors identified were: intimate relationships, parental conflicts, finances, interpersonal conflicts with friends and acceptance by peers.
In this study gender differences were revealed. Women reported to be more concerned with roommate problems and their personal appearance as compared to the men. Age differences also existed in that younger undergraduates listed studying, judgment and acceptance, grades and competition more often than older students. Older students on the other hand rated their financial state as more stressful than the younger students. These age differences in stressors remind us that we must be adaptable in our approach in helping students and never overlook the role that life experience plays in the transitional process.
Further empirical research supporting Archer and Lamnin’s (1985) study was obtained through a replication conducted by Murphy and Archer (1996) with the intention to compare past results to address the issue of how sources of stress may change over time. The general pattern of stressors found by Murphy & Archer’s (1996) study were reliably similar to those found by the earlier study by Archer and Lamnin (1985) with respect to the personal and academic domain. However, there were some differences that emerged between these two studies. For example, “concern about papers and essay writing” was more frequently reported in the 1996 study as an academic stressor.
The authors of the 1996 study propose that the structure of the college campus was related to the changes in students’ stressors. In relation to essay-writing stress, the authors hypothesised that “as class sizes and teaching loads have increased, student writing assignments have probably decreased. Because students do less writing, they may be becoming more afraid and less able to express themselves in writing” (Murphy & Archer, 1996).
Overall, this research indicates that there are a number of sources of stress in both the personal and academic domains of students’ lives. Despite the diversity of sources of student stress and the large number of issues that are related to successful transition, for example assimilation of new norms and assumptions, reduced academic self-esteem and threat to self-image, social integration is extremely important during the first few months upon entry to university.
Research by Cantor & Khilstrom (1985) suggests that social integration is a key life task in the early stages of university life. Although getting good results, passing tests and dealing with the kinds of stressors listed previously are obvious to students, Cantor and Khilstrom’s research indicates that establishing a strong social network is more important for a long term success.
“One of the reasons why stress has been studied so consistently is because of its potential effect on the health of the individual. Stress can effect health via two pathways: via behavioural or physiological changes” (Ogden, 2003). Stress can affect individuals in many different ways, as people develop different symptoms in response to excessive pressure. Usually, the effects of stress are short lived and when the pressure on the individual recedes there is a quick return to normal behaviour. However, in some cases, particularly where pressures are intense and sustained, stress can lead to long-term psychological and physical ill health. There is no easy way to predict what will cause harmful levels of stress. People respond to different types of pressure in different ways. In general, harmful levels of stress are most likely to occur in situations where pressures accumulate or are prolonged. In relation to the student, continuous pressure to meet deadlines or constant financial pressure are potential situations where levels of stress may become harmful.
Edworthy (2000) identified a number of physical and behavioural effects of stress.
Physical symptoms include high blood pressure, headaches and dizziness, heart disease, increased sweating, depression, blurred vision, anxiety, aching neck and shoulders, ulcers, skin rashes, thyroid disorders and lowering of resistance to infection. Behavioural symptoms include irritability, a tendency to over-indulge in smoking, alcohol and drugs, difficulty sleeping, a loss of concentration, an inability to deal calmly with everyday tasks and situations, deteriorating relationships at home or in work, impairment of perception, concentration, memory, judgement, decisiveness, accuracy, motivation and creativity.
Individual methods of coping with stress may be classified into two major categories: primarily preventive strategies and primarily combative strategies. Preventive strategies include avoiding stressors through appropriate life adjustments such as developing more nurturing relationships, finding a more suitable job, attempting to create a working environment or style that is more rewarding. Other preventative strategies include managing the expectations and demands made upon oneself by keeping tasks in perspective and maintaining realistic self-expectations. Stress can also be prevented by changing previously stress inducing behaviours by finding alternative ways of behaving, and using personal strengths to help cope with difficult situations.
Combative Strategies include monitoring stress and being aware of stress-related symptoms within oneself, focusing on the positive and reflecting on past successes in dealing with strong stressors, taking action to reduce the stressor such as being assertive, confronting issues and refusing inappropriate requests for additional responsibilities. Other combative strategies include developing tolerance for unavoidable stress such cognitively restructuring the situation and searching for potential positive outcomes. Stress arousal could also be lowered through techniques such as trying to avoid thinking about a troublesome stressor or effectively blocking it out of one’s consciousness.
There are a number of measures that can be introduced immediately to help alleviate student stress in this institution. While it is necessary for faculty members to challenge their students, the students should not feel so challenged that they lose their motivation, spontaneity and initiative.
All staff should be explicit and extremely clear on all expectations and responsibilities for students and communicate in such a way that students feel free to question and discuss. Staff should also be encouraged to develop a positive interactive relationship with students. Students should be allowed to have some sense of control over the students roles and staff should be made aware that students should be treated as individuals with differing circumstances rather than as a generalised whole.
According to Ogden (2003), exercise has been presented as a mediating factor for the stress response. Exercise may influence stress either by changing an individual’s appraisal of a potentially stressful event by distraction or diversion, or may act as a potential coping strategy to be activated once an event has been appraised as stressful. Students in this institution should be made aware of the benefits of exercise in relation to stress and encouraged to exercise. More funding should be provided for sports societies within the university to enable them to cater for all students.
Stress Management workshops should be run for students especially prior to examinations to help students develop techniques to reduce and manage their stress levels. These could be run in conjunction with study skills and essay writing workshops which, as mentioned previously, are considered areas of high stress for students.
In relation to stress caused by financial pressures, it is recommended that a counselling and advice service is set up where students can talk to someone confidentiality about any financial issues that they might have.
In conclusion, this report has examined some of the sources of student stress, some of the possible effects of student stress and individual coping strategies. Some of the research into student stress was discussed and recommendations were made that would enable the institution to assist students in managing stress.
References
Archer, J., & Lamnin, A. (1985). An investigation of personal and academic stressors in college campuses. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 210-215.
Cantor, N. and Khilstrom, J. F. (1985). Social intelligence: The cognitive basis of personality. In P. Shaver (Ed.) Review of personality and social psychology, 6, 15-33.
Edworthy A (2000). Managing Stress. Buckingham, Open University Press.
Evans, P. (2001). Stress and Coping, in Pitts, M. & Phillips, K (2001) The Psychology of Health. An Introduction. London: Routledge.
Holmes, T.H. and Rahe, R.H. (1967). The social readjustment rating scale, Journal of Psychosomatic Reasearch, 11: 213-18
Johnson, E. E. (1978). Student-identified stresses that relate to college life. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada, August l978.
Kanner A.D., Coyne J.C., Schaefer C. and Lazarus R.S. (1981). Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. Journal of Behavioural Medicine 4(1): 1-39.
Lazarus, R.S. and Launier, R. (1978). Stress related transactions between person and environment, in Ogden, J. (2003) Health Psychology. A Textbook. Second Edition. Buckingham: Open University Press
Murphy, M. C., & Archer, J. (1996). Stressors on the college campus: A
comparison of 1985 and 1993. Journal of College Student Development, 37(1), 20-28.
Ogden, J. (2003). Health Psychology. A Textbook. Second Edition. Buckingham: Open University Press.
