Stress Vulnerability among Professional Students from Different Areas ... Professor, Dept. of Physical Education, Lovely Professional University, Punjab.
Indian Journal of Movement Education and Exercises Sciences (IJMEES), Bi-annual Refereed Journal Vol. II No. 1 Jan.-June 2012 Online ISSN 2249-6246, Print ISSN 2249-5010
Stress Vulnerability among Professional Students from Different Areas Dr. Vikram Singh* Dr. T. Onima Reddy* Dr. Vijay Prakash ** *Assistant Professor, Dept. of Physical Education, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi U.P. ** Assistant Professor, Dept. of Physical Education, Lovely Professional University, Punjab. (Received 1 January 2012 – Accepted 9 January 2012) Abstract Background: The purpose of the study was to assess and compare stress vulnerability among professional students from different areas. Methods: For the purpose of the study, 150 professional students from different areas (50 Medical Students, 50 Engineering Students & 50 Physical Education Students) were selected randomly on the basis of stratified random sampling. The subjects were selected from Banaras Hindu University. The age level of the subjects ranged from 18 to 25 years. Keeping the feasibility criterion in mind, the Stress Vulnerability variable was selected for the present study. Stress Vulnerability was assessed with the help of Stress Vulnerability Scale developed by Lyle H. Miller and Alma Dell Smith. To assess and Compare the level of Stress Vulnerability among professional students from different areas, Descriptive Statistics i.e. (Mean, Standard Deviation) and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were used.The level of significance was set at 0.05 level. Conclusion: Significant difference was found among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability. Physical Education Students possessed greater/higher Stress Vulnerability in comparison to Medical Students, and Engineering Students (Non-Sports Persons).In case of Stress Vulnerability between Medical Students and Engineering Students; Medical Students and Physical Education Students; Engineering Students and Physical Education Students and the observed sequence of performance was found Physical Education Students > Medical Students > Engineering Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability. Key words: Stress Vulnerability, Professional Students. INTRODUCTION The Stress Vulnerability model was first proposed by Zubin & Spring in 1977, and although it has evolved into several versions since, the model continues to be used as a dominant conceptual framework for understanding psychosis. This framework allows clients to have an ‘active role’ in the process of reducing their vulnerability to stress, and also raising the threshold for relapse through the development of various strategies. While there are a number of approaches to understanding occupational vulnerability and impairment in psychologists, the most useful of those emphasize the interaction between the specific demands of the work and individual characteristics of each psychologist. In other words, as psychologists, our vulnerability to occupational stress stems from the interaction between particular aspects of our work (the situation) and aspects of who we are and our current life circumstances (Saakvitne, K. 1996). Although vulnerability and stress can be reasonably considered to be conceptually distinct constructs, separately, their power to describe key aspects of psychopathology is limited. Thus, most modern models of psychopathology explicitly combine vulnerability and stress in their descriptions of the functional processes leading to disorder. Copyright 2011 Society for Research Movement and Exercise Sciences (SRME)
Indian Journal of Movement Education and Exercises Sciences (IJMEES), Bi-annual Refereed Journal Vol. II No. 1 Jan.-June 2012 Online ISSN 2249-6246, Print ISSN 2249-5010 Focuses on the interaction of vulnerability and stress as essential for understanding the development of psychopathology. To serve as a background for exploring their interactive role, we briefly provide definitions of vulnerability and stress and then briefly discuss the origins of these constructs. We then examine general principles that characterize most diathesis-stress models and, finally, explore different models of vulnerability-stress interactions. Finally, we comment on some issues that are pertinent to conceptualizations of stress and conceptualizations of diatheses in the context of the diathesis-stress relationship (Segal, Z. V. & Ingram, R. E. 1994). Objectives of the Study 1. To assess stress vulnerability among professional students from different areas. 2. To compare stress vulnerability among professional students from different areas. Hypothesis It was hypothesized that there will not be any significant difference among professional students in relation to Stress Vulnerability. PROCEDURE AND METHODOLOGY Selection of Subjects For the purpose of the study, 150 professional students from different areas (50 Medical Students, 50 Engineering Students & 50 Physical Education Students) were selected randomly on the basis of stratified random sampling. The subjects were selected from Banaras Hindu University. The age level of the subjects ranged from 18 to 25 years. Selection of Variables Keeping the feasibility criterion in mind, the Stress Vulnerability variable was selected for the present study. Criterion Measures Stress Vulnerability was assessed with the help of Stress Vulnerability Scale developed by Lyle H. Miller and Alma Dell Smith. Statistical Analysis 1. To assess the level of Stress Vulnerability among professional students from different areas, Descriptive Statistics i.e. (Mean, Standard Deviation) was used. 2. To compare the Stress Vulnerability among professional students from different areas, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used. 3. The level of significance was set at 0.05 level.
Copyright 2011 Society for Research Movement and Exercise Sciences (SRME)
Indian Journal of Movement Education and Exercises Sciences (IJMEES), Bi-annual Refereed Journal Vol. II No. 1 Jan.-June 2012 Online ISSN 2249-6246, Print ISSN 2249-5010 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY The findings pertaining to descriptive statistics, one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) as well as post hoc test for the Stress Vulnerability variable of one hundred and fifty Professional Students from different areas have been presented in table no. 1 to 3. Table-1: Descriptive Statistics of Professional Students from Different Areas in relation to Stress Vulnerability Medical Students
Engineering Students
Physical Education Students
Mean 50.2800 Mean 45.6800 Mean 53.0600 Standard Error 1.98834 Standard Error 1.60444 Standard Error 2.00864 Median 51.0000 Median 44.0000 Median 52.5000 Standard Deviation 14.05970 Standard Deviation 11.34512 Standard Deviation 14.20320 Sample Variance 197.675 Sample Variance 128.712 Sample Variance 201.731 Kurtosis .417 Kurtosis -.447 Kurtosis -.412 Skewness .089 Skewness .297 Skewness .029 Range 69.00 Range 47.00 Range 64.00 Minimum 17.00 Minimum 23.00 Minimum 17.00 Maximum 86.00 Maximum 70.00 Maximum 81.00 Count 50 Count 50 Count 50 It is evident from table - 1 that mean and standard deviation scores of Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability has been found 50.28, 45.68 & 53.06 and 14.05, 11.34 & 14.20 respectively and range of score was 69, 47 & 64 respectively where as standard error was found 1.98, 1.60 & 2.00 respectively. Table-2: Analysis of Variance of Professional Students from Different Areas in relation to Stress Vulnerability Sum of Mean Source of Variation df F-Value Sig. Squares Square 1389.213 2 694.607 3.946* .021 Between Groups Within Groups
25877.780
147
176.039
* Significant at 0.05 level of significance F 0.05 (2, 147) = 3.06 Table- 2 revealed that there was significant difference among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability, as obtained F-ratio was 3.94, which was higher than the tabulated value 3.06, required for F-ratio to be significant at 0.05 level with (2,147) degree of freedom. Since the one way analysis of variance was found significant in relation to Stress Vulnerability, the least significant difference (LSD) test was applied to find out the differences of the paired means among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students.
Copyright 2011 Society for Research Movement and Exercise Sciences (SRME)
Indian Journal of Movement Education and Exercises Sciences (IJMEES), Bi-annual Refereed Journal Vol. II No. 1 Jan.-June 2012 Online ISSN 2249-6246, Print ISSN 2249-5010 Table-3: Least Significant Difference (LSD) post hoc test for the paired means among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability Means Medical Students 50.2800
Engineering Students
Physical Education Students
Sig. .154
4.60000*
53.0600
.128
2.78000*
53.0600
.004
7.38000*
45.6800
50.2800 45.6800
Mean Difference
Critical Difference
0.746
* Significant at 0.05 level of significance It is evident from table- 3 that paired mean differences among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability was found significant between Medical Students and Engineering Students; Medical Students and Physical Education Students; Engineering Students and Physical Education Students. The graphical representation of means among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability has been presented in figure No.1. Figure 1: Graphical representation of the Comparison of Means of Professional Students from Different Areas in relation to Stress Vulnerability
Copyright 2011 Society for Research Movement and Exercise Sciences (SRME)
Indian Journal of Movement Education and Exercises Sciences (IJMEES), Bi-annual Refereed Journal Vol. II No. 1 Jan.-June 2012 Online ISSN 2249-6246, Print ISSN 2249-5010 Discussion and Finding The findings of the study revealed that significant difference was found among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability. Physical Education Students possessed greater/higher Stress Vulnerability in comparison to Medical Students, and Engineering Students (Non-Sports Persons). The reason for this may be that Stress Vulnerability is defined as individual’s ability related to unprotected to stress, unguarded to stress, helpless to stress, defenseless to stress, at risk to stress, thin skinned to stress and touchy to stress. In Stress Vulnerability individual becomes sensitive to stress. Sports Persons possessed greater Stress Vulnerability probably they are not equip with the coping strategies. Coping strategies are individualistic and moreover some individuals used emotional focused and some used problem focused. Finally, In case of Stress Vulnerability significant difference was found between Medical Students and Engineering Students; Medical Students and Physical Education Students; Engineering Students and Physical Education Students and the observed sequence of performance was found Physical Education Students > Medical Students > Engineering Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability. The reason for this may be that Stress Vulnerability is defined as individual’s ability related to unprotected to stress, unguarded to stress, helpless to stress, defenseless to stress, at risk to stress, thin skinned to stress and touchy to stress. In Stress Vulnerability individual becomes sensitive to stress. Physical Education Students possessed greater Stress Vulnerability in comparison to Medical Students and Engineering Students probably they are not equipped with the coping strategies. Coping strategies are individualistic or moreover some individual used emotional focused and some used problem focused. Discussion of Hypothesis The hypothesis, that there will not be any significant difference among professional students in relation to Stress Vulnerability is rejected since significant difference was found among professional students in relation to Stress Vulnerability. CONCLUSIONS 1. 2. 3.
Significant difference was found among Medical Students, Engineering Students and Physical Education Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability. Physical Education Students possessed greater/higher Stress Vulnerability in comparison to Medical Students, and Engineering Students (Non-Sports Persons). In case of Stress Vulnerability between Medical Students and Engineering Students; Medical Students and Physical Education Students; Engineering Students and Physical Education Students and the observed sequence of performance was found Physical Education Students > Medical Students > Engineering Students in relation to Stress Vulnerability.
References Amaral, A. P. & Serra, A. V. (2009). Vulnerability to Stress and Physical and Mental Illness. Journal of European Psychiatry, 19(2), 219-225. Copyright 2011 Society for Research Movement and Exercise Sciences (SRME)
Indian Journal of Movement Education and Exercises Sciences (IJMEES), Bi-annual Refereed Journal Vol. II No. 1 Jan.-June 2012 Online ISSN 2249-6246, Print ISSN 2249-5010 Bayram Nuran and Bilgel Nazan (2008) “The prevalence and socio-demographic correlations of depression, anxiety and stress among a group of university students” Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, Volume 43, Number 8, pages 667-672. Bunevicius Adomas, Katkute Arune and Bunevicius Robertas (2008) “Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression in Medical Students and in Humanities Students: Relationship with Big-Five Personality Dimensions and Vulnerability to Stress” International Journal of Social Psychiatry, Vol. 54, No. 6, 494-501. Caredda, M., Roscioli, C., Mistretta, M. & Pacitti, F. (2009). Stress Vulnerability and Night Eating Syndrome in the General Population. Rivista di Psichiatria Journal, 44(1), 45-54. De-Beurs, E., Comijs, H., Twisk, J. W., Sonnenberg, C., Beekman, A. T. & Deeg, D. (2005). Stability and Change of Emotional Functioning in Late Life: Modelling of Vulnerability Profiles. Journal of Affective Disorders, 84(1), 53-62. Dixon Sarah K. and Kurpius Sharon E. Robinson (2008) “Depression and College Stress Among University Undergraduates: Do Mattering and Self-Esteem Make a Difference” Journal of College Student Development, Volume 49, Number 5, pp. 412-424. El-Gilany Abdel-Hady, Amr Mostafa, and Hammad Sabry (2008) “Perceived stress among male medical students in Egypt and Saudi Arabia: Effect of sociodemographic factors” Ann Saudi Med. Vol. 28; Issue6, page 442-8. Finkelstein, Claudia; Brownstein, Alice; Scott, Craig; and Lan, Yu-Ling (2007) “Anxiety and stress reduction in medical education: an intervention” Medical Education, Volume 41, Number 3, pp. 258-264. Iigen, A. M. & Hutchison, E. K. (2005). A History of Major Depressive Disorder and the Response to Stress. Journal of Affective Disorders, 86(2), 143-150. Josephine G. W. S. Wong et. al. (2006) “Web-based survey of depression, anxiety and stress in first-year tertiary education students in Hong Kong” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, Volume 40, Issue 9 , pages 777 – 782. Pine, D. S., Mogg, K., Bradley, B. P., Montgomery, L., Monk, C. S., McClure, E. & Guyer, A. E. (2005). Attention Bias to Threat in Maltreated Children: Implications for Vulnerability to Stress-Related Psychopathology. Journal of American Psychiatric Association, 162(2), 291296. Pocinho, Margarida and Capelo, Maria Regina (2009) “Vulnerability to stress, coping strategies and self-efficiency among Portuguese teachers” Educaçã e pesquisa 35 (2) 351-367. Saakvitne, K. (1996). Transforming the Pain: A Workbook on Vicarious Traumatization. New York, Ny: Norton. Seligman, M. E. P., Walker, E .F. & Rosenhan, D. L. (1982). Abnormal Psychology. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. Sorensen, S. (n.d.). Understanding Stress & Vulnerability. Retrived on 2003, from http://www.dbtselfhelp.com/html/understanding_stress____vulner.html Stress & Vulnerability, Psychosocial Interventions and the Treatment of Serious and Enduring Mental Disorder. (n.d.). Retrived on August 2010, from http://stuartsorensen.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/emotional-management-25-stressvulnerability-psychosocial-interventions-and-the-treatment-of-serious-and-enduringmental-disorder-semi. Strupp, H. H. & Binder, J. C. (1984). Psychotherapy in a New Key: A Guide to Time-Limited Dynamic Psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books. Copyright 2011 Society for Research Movement and Exercise Sciences (SRME)
