The relationship between life events, life satisfaction, and coping style of college students

ABSTRACT

We aimed to investigate the life events, life satisfaction, and coping style of college students, and to assess the relationship between them by performing mediating effect analysis. Our findings may provide a scientific basis for promoting the mental health of college students. Students in a medical college were selected using grade-stratified cluster sampling, and administered a standardized questionnaire survey. Out of 2,000 participants, 1827 participants provided valid questionnaires (response rate: 91.4%). The mean scores of life satisfaction and life events were 181.39 ± 30.28 and 19.32 ± 15.62, respectively. The mean score of coping style was 14.34 ± 7.54, which reflected positive coping style. Analysis of life satisfaction, life events, and factor scores showed that different grades, sibling status (whether the respondent was the only child in the family or not), family location, and life events had a significant association with life satisfaction (p < 0.001). There were significant differences in coping style between male and female students, and between students in different grades (p < 0.001). Positive coping style was found to play a partial mediating role between life events and life satisfaction, and the mediating effect accounted for 33.2% of the total effect. These results suggest that both life events and coping styles are related to college students’ life satisfaction. The impact of life events on life satisfaction can be adjusted by psychological interventions to develop coping styles that can help promote the mental health of college students.

KEYWORDS:

• Life events
• life satisfaction
• coping style
• mediating effect

1. Introduction

Owing to the upward socioeconomic mobility and increased education levels in recent years, an increasing number of studies have focused on the mental health and the subjective psychological experience of college students (Ghrouz et al., 2019; Ng et al., 2018). College students usually strive to achieve the development level and deal with problems posed by the university environment by making new friends and adapting to the college life. However, they do not receive adequate support on mental health when dealing with these problems (Goodwin et al., 2016). Studies (Bruffaerts et al., 2018; Lattie et al., 2019) have found that mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, are a common phenomenon among college students and can seriously impact students’ functioning, interpersonal relationships, and academic achievement (Karyotaki et al., 2022). Thus, college students have represent a significant risk group for mental disorders.

Life events refer to various stimuli experienced during the course of life (Seo et al., 2018; Steinmayr et al., 2019), which have been found to be one of the main determinants of mental health in students. College students who have the ability to cope with stress through healthy life events are more likely to exhibit greater life satisfaction (Saha et al., 2014). However, studies have shown that stressful life events can have short- and long-term effects on subjective well-being (Senocak & Demirkiran, 2020). Especially in medical college, the rigorous academic environment renders the students particularly vulnerable to stress and poor life satisfaction (Hill et al., 2018). In a cluster-randomized controlled trial, mindfulness-based stress reduction training was found to moderately improve the mental health and life satisfaction of medical students during the 20-month follow-up (Van Dijk et al., 2017). The findings indicated that appropriate stress-reduction interventions can improve the life satisfaction of college students. Coping style refers to the manner in which people react to stressful situations. Coping styles of individual students in positive and stressful life events have been proven to be a key determinant of their life satisfaction. A study conducted in Hong Kong university found that family support is widely used as a means to cope with stressful events, but students with specific relationship-related stress more frequently used avoidance strategies; these findings indicated that the mediating effect of coping styles on the relationship between stress-related events and life satisfaction was generally small (Siu & Chang, 2011). However, another study found that for psychological distress and its 3 dimensions (depression, anxiety, and reduced self-affirmation), the proportions of mediating roles of coping styles in Chinese physicians were 26.1%, 29.9%, 24.8%, and 22.7%, respectively (Wang & Wang, 2019). Thus, it can be inferred that life events, life satisfaction, and coping style interact with each other theoretically, but the mediating effect of life styles on medical students remains unclear.

Based on the above considerations, we aimed to investigate the life satisfaction of medical students, the status of life events, and their coping styles. In addition, the mediating effect model was used to explore the effects of different coping styles on life events and life satisfaction, so as to a provide a scientific basis for promoting the mental health of college students.

2. Material and methods

2.1. Participants

The study population was recruited from amongst undergraduate students at a local medical college in Fall 2019. Interns were not included in this survey, and students with history of mental health problems were also not included. The survey lasted from September to December 2019.

A sample was selected using a stratified cluster sampling method according to different grades. Out of 2000 respondents, 1827 valid questionnaires were obtained (response rate: 91.4%). The study was approved by the ethical committee of our college.

2.2. Procedure

Prior to the initiation of the main survey, 30 medical college students participated in a small-scale pilot survey. Based on the collected data, the questionnaire was further modified. Furthermore, all investigators received standardized training and regularly reviewed the data during the investigation to ensure the validity of the questionnaire. The students completed the questionnaires described below which included Adolescent Self-Rating Life Events Checklist (ASLEC), the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS), the Simplified Coping Style Scale (SCSS), as well as general demographic information.

2.3. Measures

2.3.1. Life events

The Adolescent Self-Rating Life Events Check List (ASLEC) (Liu et al. (1997) was used which has a total of 27 items. The statistics included the frequency of events and the amount of stimulus, and the total amount of stimulus refers to the accumulation of multiple event stimuli. Assessment: no = 0, It happened; How much it affected you (no = 1, Mild = 2, Moderate = 3, Heavy = 4, extremely heavy = 5). The checklist is divided into six factors: interpersonal relationship, learning stress, punishment, loss of family or property, health and use problems, and other factors. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability estimate for the internal consistency of questions was 0.88.

2.3.2. Life satisfaction

Life satisfaction was measured using SWLS compiled by Emerson et al (Emerson et al., 2017). The scale shows favorable psychometric properties, including high internal consistency. There are a total of 35 items in the scale, which were divided into 6 factors: friendship satisfaction, family satisfaction, school satisfaction, academic satisfaction, freedom satisfaction, and environmental satisfaction. Participants were asked to indicate their agreement with each statement on a 7-point scale, where 1 indicated ‘disagree’ and 7 ‘agree’. The total score was 252, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction with life. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability estimate for the internal consistency of questions was 0.9.

2.3.3. Coping style

The Simple Coping Style Questionnaire [SCSQ; (13)] contains 20 items. Items 1–12 belong to positive coping and 13–20 belong to negative coping. The score of each item is from 0 (never) to 3 (always). Coping style = score of positive coping style score – the score of negative coping style. Coping style >0 is indicative of positive coping and <0 is indicative of negative coping. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability estimate for the internal consistency of questions was 0.89.

2.4. Data analysis

A data management software (EpiData version 3.2) was used to set up the database and the parallel double-entry method was used for data input. Descriptive statistics, the Chi-squared test, and multiple linear regression were performed with SPSS 22.0. All statistical tests were two-sided and the significance level was set at a familywise α = 0.05 for the analyses.

In order to examine the potential mediating role of coping style on the relationship between life events and life satisfaction, we constructed a linear regression model (Figure 1). Model 1: Life events as an independent dummy variable, life satisfaction as the dependent variable; model 2: life events as an independent dummy variable, coping style as the dependent variable; model 3: life events and coping style as independent variables, life satisfaction as the dependent variable. All models were adjusted for demographic characteristics including age, gender, grade town/rural, sibling status (only child/non-only child). A follow-up mediation analysis was performed (Vansteelandt, 2012) to estimate the amount of the total effect of life events on life satisfaction by Coping style (see, Figure 1, depicting a hypothetical mediation model). The bootstrap method of Preacher and Hayes (2004) and Hayes (2012) was used to test the mediating effect.

Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the mediating effect model.

3. Results

3.1. Background information

A relatively large proportion of the study population (n = 1827) was female (55.5%), while 45.5% were male. The average age of students was 19.09 years (SD = 1.21, range = 16–27). 792 (43.3%) came from urban area and 1035 (56.7%) from rural area. Among these, 40.2% (735) students were the only child in the family. The percentage of first graders, second graders, and third graders was 53.0%, 32.3%, and 14.7%, respectively.

3.2. Comparison of life events, coping styles, and life satisfaction scores among different groups

The scores of life events, coping styles, and life satisfaction are shown in Table 1. The average score of life satisfaction in our study was 181.39 (SD = 30.28). The average score of life events was 19.32 (SD = 15.62). In addition, among the results of the average stimulus amount and frequency of various life events, life events such as heavy learning burden (68.9%), prolonged separation from the family (68.7%), unsatisfactory academic performance (64.3%), and being misunderstood or wronged by others (61.9%) occurred more frequently (> 60%). The average score of coping style was 14.34 (SD = 7.54), indicating an overall positive coping style of our sample.

Table 1. Scores for life satisfaction, life events, and coping style (N = 1827).

Variables		Score	Variables		Score
Life satisfaction		181.39 ± 30.28		Learning Stress	5.12 ± 3.95
	Friendship satisfaction	35.73 ± 6.74		Punishment	2.78 ± 4.07
	Family satisfaction	38.67 ± 7.56		Loss	1.74 ± 2.49
	School satisfaction	29.84 ± 6.16		Healthy adaptation	2.99 ± 2.27
	Academic satisfaction	25.08 ± 6.80		Other	2.33 ± 2.59
	Free satisfaction	25.94 ± 5.33	Coping style		14.34 ± 7.54
	Environmental satisfaction	26.13 ± 4.80		Positive	23.48 ± 6.62
Life events		19.32 ± 15.62		Negative	9.14 ± 4.91
	Interpersonal relationships	4.36 ± 3.75

Data presented as mean ± standard deviation

Analysis of the life satisfaction and life events scores of students with demographic characteristics are shown in Table 2. There were no significant associations between life satisfaction, life events, and sex (p > 0.05). Comparison of life satisfaction under different family environments showed that the only child (184.25) is higher than the non-only child (179.47), and the urban area (184.34) is higher than the rural area (179.14) (p < 0.001). An opposite phenomenon was observed with respect to life events (p < 0.001).

Table 2. Comparison of life satisfaction, life events, and coping style scores among different groups (N = 1827).

Population characteristics		Number of persons	Life satisfaction	H/t	p	Life events	H/t	p	Response modalities	H/t	p
Gender	Male	813	180.55 ± 34.09	1.014	0.311	20.04 ± 16.96	1.740	0.082	13.65 ± 8.12	3.432	0.001**
	Female	1014	182.03 ± 26.84			18.74 ± 14.44			14.88 ± 6.99
Grade	I	969	186.38 ± 29.69	60.133	0.000***	17.28 ± 14.14	29.935	0.000***	15.60 ± 7.54	70.885	0.000***
	II	590	176.06 ± 31.60			21.44 ± 17.49			12.49 ± 7.40
	III	268	175.13 ± 26.07			22.03 ± 15.38			13.82 ± 6.90
Single child	Yes	735	184.25 ± 31.18	3.321	0.001**	17.36 ± 15.05	4.411	0.000***	14.06 ± 7.58	1.296	0.195
	No	1092	179.47 ± 29.12			20.63 ± 15.87			14.52 ± 7.50
Family	Urban	792	184.34 ± 30.91	3.646	0.000***	17.49 ± 14.99	4.389	0.000***	14.43 ± 7.65	0.478	0.633
	Rural	1035	179.14 ± 29.61			20.71 ± 15.95			14.26 ± 7.45

**p < 0.01; **p < 0.001

3.3. Correlation analysis of life events, coping style, and life satisfaction of college students

The correlations among life satisfaction, life events, and coping style are shown in Table 3. After controlling for demographic characteristics including age, sex, gender, town/rural, only child/non-only child, life events was negatively related to life satisfaction, whereas coping style was negatively related to life events and positively related to life satisfaction (p < 0.001).

Table 3. Correlation between life events, coping style, and life satisfaction (r value)^a.

Variables		life satisfaction	Life events	Interpersonal relationships	Learning Stress	Punishment	Loss	Healthy adaptation	Others	Coping style	Positive
Life events		−0.384***
	Interpersonal relationships	−0.349***	0.844***
	Learning Stress	−0.335***	0.842***	0.839***
	Punishment	−0.307***	0.871***	0.85***	0.628***
	Loss	−0.193***	0.726***	0.73***	0.507***	0.648***
	Healthy adaptation	−0.307***	0.722***	0.733***	0.564***	0.519***	0.435***
	Others	−0.336***	0.808***	0.801***	0.581***	0.712***	0.496***	0.563***
Coping style		0.541***	−0.267***	−0.27***	−0.195***	−0.227***	−0.142***	−0.225***	−0.296***
	Positive	0.574***	−0.195***	−0.196***	−0.155***	−0.161***	−0.105***	−0.175***	−0.189***	0.765***
	Negative	−0.050*	0.144***	0.148***	0.088***	0.129***	0.076***	0.107***	0.196***	−0.492***	0.184***

^aPartial correlation regression adjusted for study covariates including age, gender, grade, and family conditions (town/rural, only child/non-only child)

*p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001

3.4. The mediating effects of coping styles between life events and life satisfaction

The results from a series of regression analyses are presented in Table 4 (All models were adjusted for demographic characteristics including age, sex, gender, town/rural, only child/non-only child). The model results were statistically significant (p < 0.001).

Table 4. The mediating role of coping style between life events and life satisfaction.

Variables		Model 1		Model 2		Model 3
		Life satisfaction		Coping style		Life satisfaction
		β	T	β	T	β	T
demographic characteristics	age	1.453	2.089*	−0.143	−0.788	1.724	2.848***
	gender	1.806	1.352	1.034	2.968***	−0.150	−0.129
	grade	−6.140	−5.503***	−0.961	−3.303***	−4.322	−4.438***
	town/rural	−2.448	−1.675	0.003	0.008	−2.454	−1.929
	child/non-only child	−2.128	−1.422	0.765	1.96*	−3.575	−2.743***
life events		−0.737	−17.556***	−0.129	−11.832***	−0.492	−12.979***
Coping style						1.892	24.19***
R2		0.178		0.097		0.378
Adjusted R2		0.175		0.094		0.376
F		65.74***		32.759***		158.03***

*p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001

The results of bootstrap method are shown in Table 5. The standardized 95% CI of total effect of life events on life satisfaction was (−0.825, −0.649), direct effect was (−0.576, −0.408), indirect effect was (−0.295, −0.201), excluding 0. Therefore, the overall effect, direct and indirect effects were significant. In the model, the overall effect of life events on life satisfaction was c = −0.737, a = −0.129, b = 1.892, c’ = −0.492, all of which reached a significant level (p < 0.001). This indicated that the life events could not only directly predict adult life satisfaction, but also influence depression through the mediating effect of coping style. The direct effect (0.492) and indirect effect (−0.245) accounted for 66.8% and 33.2% of the total effect (−0.737).

Table 5. Analysis of total effect, direct effect, and indirect effect.

	Effect value	Boot SE	Boot CI lower	Boot CI upper	Relative effect value
Total effect	−0.737	0.045	−0.825	−0.649
Direct effect	−0.492	0.043	−0.576	−0.408	66.8%
Indirect effect	−0.245	0.024	−0.295	−0.201	33.2%

Boot SE, Boot CI Lower, and Boot CI Upper refer to the standard error of indirect effect estimated by percentile bootstrap method corrected by deviation, the lower limit and upper limit of 95% confidence interval, respectively.

4. Discussion

College students represent a key population segment that determines the economic growth and development of a country. College life is characterized by substantial instability – changes in romantic status (including sexual orientation), peer groups, course selection (i.e., major, concentration), and career choices (Auerbach et al., 2018). This instability may contribute to various stress events in the life of college students. The coping style of individuals towards various stress events has a major influence on their life satisfaction. In this study, we used life satisfaction as an index of subjective well-being to evaluate the mental health and quality of life of college students. Life satisfaction extends beyond the momentary affective experiences and includes a reflective and evaluative perspective of life in its totality (Ng et al., 2018). In this study, the overall satisfaction score of 1827 subjects was consistent with the results of similar previous surveys (Jhang, 2019; Sæther, Knapstad, Askeland, & Skogen, 2019). The reported frequency of life events such as heavy academic burden, long-term separation from the family, unsatisfactory academic performance, and being misunderstood or mistaken was higher than 60%; this suggested that study and communication are the major pressures faced by college students.

Life satisfaction is liable to be affected by numerous factors, including age, personality, outlook towards life, experiences, career, and family (Kyeong et al., 2020). In this study, the life satisfaction of first-grade college students was higher than that of students in other grades, which may be related to the increased academic pressure and anxiety related to future employment in higher grades. Studies have indeed documented that stress levels increase over the course of medical school, peaking either in the second year or when students start their clinical postings (Zvauya et al., 2017). Furthermore, unlike Western countries, the one-child policy was in place in China from 1978 to 2016. Most Chinese college students do not have siblings, which affected their personality development (Ali, 2018). Personality development is closely related to life satisfaction. In our study, the life satisfaction of students with no siblings was better than that of students with siblings. The life satisfaction of college students from urban areas was significantly higher than those from rural areas, which may be related to the family environment. However, previous studies have shown that students from urban areas or from better-off families were not more satisfied with current life than students coming from the countryside or low-income families (Zhang et al., 2014).

Coping style has been classified as problem-focused and emotion-focused, which was expanded later to positive coping style and negative coping style, respectively (Zhou et al., 2017). On comparing the coping styles, female and first-grade college students were more inclined to positive coping style; in addition, on correlation analysis, coping style was positively correlated with life satisfaction, but negatively correlated with life events. In previous studies, adolescent females were found to use a broader range of coping strategies such as more frequent use of social support when coping with stress compared to males (Jhang, 2019). From another perspective, life satisfaction appeared to be a more robust predictor of coping behaviors in females (Jiang et al., 2019).

We found a negative correlation between life events and life satisfaction, which was consistent with other studies (Tian, 2019). Positive coping style showed a moderate positive correlation with life satisfaction, and negative coping style showed a negative correlation with life satisfaction. In previous studies, positive affection was shown to promote the use of effective coping styles and to enhance problem-solving in stressful situations (Xu et al., 2017). The results of the intermediary effect test showed that the influence of stressful life events on life satisfaction was increased under the coping style.

The study explored the mediating effect of coping style on life events and life satisfaction, and provided evidence for improving life satisfaction of medical students. Coping style refers to an individual’s conscious, purposive, and flexible adjustment behavior to environmental changes. With the growth of age and grade, college students inevitably face various types of life events, but their coping methods tend to remain unchanged. Studies have shown a negative correlation of life events with life satisfaction, and that coping style can be used as a mediating variable to regulate the impact of life events on life satisfaction. Life events are uncontrollable, but life satisfaction of medical students can be improved by interventions aimed to promote positive coping style, so as to maintain a healthier mental and physical state.

Some limitations of this study should be considered while interpreting the findings. First, the sample size was relatively small and our data were collected from a single university; this may potentially limit the generalizability of our results. Second, owing to the cross-sectional nature of the study, we could not assess the longitudinal relation between life satisfaction and the coping style. Although we adjusted for study covariates in the analyses, there could be residual or unmeasured confounding from other factors.

5. Conclusion

In summary, life satisfaction of medical college students in our study was basically the same as that of other students. The grade, family status (only child, place of household registration), life events, and coping style were related to life satisfaction. More importantly, the results indicate that coping style plays an important mediating role between life events and life satisfaction. Therefore, different psychological interventions should be implemented for college students in different grades. These interventions should focus on dealing with misunderstanding and interpersonal relationship among students, promoting the mental health of college students, and adoption of appropriate coping strategies for stress events. Future studies should investigate a preventive approach based on satisfaction to promote adaptive coping and preventing maladaptive coping among college students.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the innovation and entrepreneurship training program for College Students [S202010368004]; Key research base project of Anhui humanities and Social Sciences [SJD201510, SJD201609]; Research Fund Project of Humanities and social sciences of Anhui Provincial Department of Education [SK2013B549]; Scientific research project of Anhui University [SK2020A0378].