IS THERE LIFE AFTER GRADUATION?: A TEST OF TRANSACTIONAL ... · IS THERE LIFE AFTER GRADUATION?: ... Data Analysis ... also for those investing in further education to ensure them

IS THERE LIFE AFTER GRADUATION?: A TEST OF

TRANSACTIONAL STRESS THEORY

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty

of

California State University, Stanislaus

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

of Master of Science in Psychology

By

Isabel C. Brasil

December 2014

CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL

IS THERE LIFE AFTER GRADUATION?: A TEST OF

TRANSACTIONAL STRESS THEORY

by

Isabel C. Brasil

Dr. Kurt Baker

Professor of Psychology

Dr. Rosanne Roy

Associate Professor of Psychology/

Child Development

Dr. AnaMarie Guichard

Associate Professor of Psychology

Date

Date

Date

Signed Certification of Approval Page

is on file with the University Library

© 2014

Isabel C. Brasil

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

iv

DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to the students that wonder why they are so stressed

about their academic life and to the professors that encourage them. I would also like

to dedicate this work to my husband and my children.

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge and thank Dr. Baker for his kindness,

understanding and continuous encouragement as well as his wise and expert advice. I

would also like to thank Dr. Jane Howard, Dr. Rosanne Roy, and Dr. AnaMarie

Guichard for their assistance, commitment and knowledgeable feedback. Finally, I

would like to acknowledge my husband for believing in me and for his unconditional

support.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Dedication ............................................................................................................... iv

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. v

Abstract ................................................................................................................... vii

CHAPTER

I. Introduction to the Present Study .......................................................... 1

Graduation and Human Development ...................................... 1

Prevalence and Consequences of Student’s Stress ................... 5

Definition of Stress ................................................................... 8

Stress Theories .......................................................................... 9

Specifics of the Present Study................................................... 17

Hypotheses ................................................................................ 19

II. Method .................................................................................................. 22

Participants ................................................................................ 22

Instrumentation ......................................................................... 24

Procedure .................................................................................. 26

Data Analysis ............................................................................ 26

III. Results ................................................................................................... 28

IV. Discussion ............................................................................................. 32

Limitations ................................................................................ 36

Future Research ........................................................................ 37

Conclusion ................................................................................ 38

References ............................................................................................................... 39

Appendices

A. Stress Emotions Questionnaire ................................................................... 44

B. Demographic Questionnaire ....................................................................... 48

C. Consent Form .............................................................................................. 52

D. Debriefing Sheet ......................................................................................... 55

vii

ABSTRACT

The present study focused on stress related to graduation using Lazarus’ transactional

theory to formulate hypotheses. It attempted to replicate Folkman and Lazarus’

(1985) study using a stress questionnaire and centering on the emotional experiences

of 61 graduating students. Data were collected by a voluntary online questionnaire.

Questions about stress were related to graduation; therefore, the emotions reflect how

the participants felt or appraised graduation. The participants were asked to recall

how they felt about graduation during their freshmen year (time 1), they were asked

how they felt about graduation at the senior year (time 2), and finally how they would

feel a year after graduation (time 3). The difference in intensity of emotions reported

between time 1 and time 2 were compared and then the difference between time 2 and

time 3. The hypotheses of this study were based on the anticipated results of these

comparisons. Results indicated that during the period of time between the freshmen

year and the senior year: the intensity of threat emotions did change; the intensity of

challenge emotions stayed the same; the intensity of harm emotions did not change

significantly; and the intensity of benefit emotions increased. In the time period

between senior year and the year after graduation results indicate that: the intensity of

threat emotions did not decrease; the challenge emotions did not decrease in intensity;

the harm feelings did change in intensity; and the benefit emotions did not change in

intensity. This study has provided an indication of a rich and intricate emotional

process related to graduating from college, indicating that this is an area worthy of

more pointed investigation.

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION TO THE PRESENT STUDY

The purpose of the present study was to learn about stress resulting from the

anticipation of graduation and how it affects college students. In order to accomplish

this task, graduating students were questioned regarding their emotions associated

with their upcoming graduation and the life changes associated with this transition.

The results of this study would be important to gain a better understanding of

the challenges students face when completing a degree and joining the job market,

starting graduate school, or pursuing other interests. Understanding the relationship

between stress and graduation may be particularly relevant for school counseling.

Counselors who understand the dynamics of stress associated with graduation would

be better prepared to support and encourage students facing challenges in their last

semester. In addition, the results of the study could possibly be generalized to other

situations where a life transition is associated with significant stress.

Graduation and Human Development

College student stress is ultimately related to the students’ desire of being

academically successful and completing a degree. This means that students’ endure

stressful situations in order to graduate and pursue a professional life. This is an

important and defining phase in most students’ lives.

Although the present study is not focused on analyzing the influence of

students’ developmental stage on their emotions towards graduation, it is important to

2

consider their developmental stage as a way to frame the participants’ circumstances.

The implications of this developmental phase, such as the importance of starting a

career, are also important. These should be considered in the case of students who,

although, experiencing a different developmental phase, are also facing the prospects

of graduation.

In his influential book “Childhood and Society” Erik Erikson (1993) dedicated

one chapter to describing what he called the eight ages of man. In this chapter he

explores human development from birth to the final stage of life. Of particular

interest for the present study is the identity vs. role confusion stage where he

describes the transition from childhood to young adult, the adolescent phase. The

present study will not be studying adolescents, but instead mostly young people

transitioning to adulthood. It is important to consider that it has been argued that

nowadays adulthood has been delayed by continuing education. For instances,

Laurence Steinberg claims:

One of the most notable demographic trends of the last two decades

has been the delayed entry of young people into adulthood. According to a

large scale national study conducted since the late 1970s, it has taken longer

for each successive generation to finish school, establish financial

independence, marry and have children. Today’s 25-year-olds, compared

with their parents’ generation at the same age, are twice as likely to still be

students, only half as likely to be married and 50 percent more likely to be

receiving financial assistance from their parents (2014, p.12).

3

In addition, because the identity vs. role confusion stage addresses issues such as

identity, career, and feelings about the future this is the developmental phase that best

describes the life period the majority of students experience when preparing for the

prospects of graduation.

In Erikson’s own words:

The growing and developing youths, faced with this physiological

revolution within them, and with tangible adult tasks ahead of them are now

primarily concerned with what they appear to be in the eyes of others as

compared with what they feel they are, and with the question of how to

connect the roles and skills cultivated earlier with the occupational prototypes

of the day (1993, p. 261).

According to this statement, identity is of utmost importance for young people

and this is intimately connected to how they perceive their place in society and their

potential to contribute to it. It would be hard to imagine any graduating student not

facing the same questions whether they are young adults or more mature. Graduating

comes with questions of preparedness and acceptance in the work world or in the

more advanced levels of academia. Either way, students are facing a more

challenging world where failing or succeeding is directly connected to their effort and

the skills acquired during their education. One example of this is the unemployment

recent college graduates. Thomas Spreen in his article “Recent college graduates in

the U.S. labor force: data from the Current Population Survey” published in February

of 2013 by Monthly Labor Review stated that: “The unemployment rate of recent

4

college graduates was 12.6 percent in October 2011, little changed from a year

earlier” (p.8). He adds that “the unemployment rate of recent college graduates

remains elevated above prerecession levels” (2013, p.8). This new and challenging

world will also bring more demanding responsibilities and a new identity. This is

also expressed by Erikson: “The sense of ego identity, then is the accrued confidence

that the inner sameness and continuity prepared in the past are matched by the

sameness and continuity of one’s meaning for others, as evidenced in the tangible

promise of a ‘career’” (1993, p. 262). Erikson also discussed the importance of a

professional identity and its impact on youth. “In most instances, however, it is the

inability to settle on an occupational identity which disturbs individual young people”

(Erikson, 1993, p. 262).

Most students have only dreamed of their future occupation and at the time of

graduation their dreams are much closer to reality. They may question if they have

chosen the correct area of study or the correct profession, in addition to questioning

whether they will be successful. Moreover, in the present day economy,

unemployment has become a concern, not only for those entering the job market, but

also for those investing in further education to ensure them a higher position in the

job market. Especially when considering that, according to Spreen: “The

unemployment rate for the 2011 recipients of advanced degrees was 8.6 percent,

compared with 13.5 percent for recipients of bachelor’s degrees in October 2011”

(2013, p.8). This situation might define how students perceive themselves and how

they think they will be perceived by society. For example, entering the job market

5

without or with only minimal experience might come to mean that instead of

becoming a professional, the graduate will become unemployed. For those pursuing

higher education, these considerations are postponed, but not dismissed, especially

for those who might be considering obtaining a student loan for the first time, an

additional loan, or those who need to work while attending graduate school. This

becomes not only an issue of social status, but also of financial survival.

For all that is mentioned above, it is important to address the issues related to

the termination of academic life from a student’s point of view. This will make it

possible to analyze whether stress is present when anticipating the end of the causes

of stress mentioned above. The present study will provide new information regarding

this issue because the results of this author’s literature review indicate that stress

associated with graduation has not been addressed. This lack of literature regarding

such an important chapter of students’ lives indicates that it is not yet understood how

stress is perceived at this stage. This study intends to approach this issue as a way to

provide some insight into this topic.

Prevalence and Consequences of Students’ Stress

Research focusing on the effects of stress on students has been extensive.

Several of these studies were conducted in the last decade. Many studies have

established that stress has a great impact in students’ lives.

According to a study published by the American College Health Association’s

College Health Assessment (NCHA Content Area: Impediments to Academic

Performance, 2007), stress was rated as the highest factor impairing student success.

6

These results were obtained using a survey asking students to rate 25 potential

academic problems that might have led them to experience negative academic

outcomes, such as low grades or withdrawing from a class. This study reports data

since spring 2000 and has consistently reported stress as the highest rated impediment

to academic performance, including its latest reported data results for fall 2006.

These findings are of extreme importance for the different aspects that characterize

them. First of all, the samples sizes are unusually large. Within the above mentioned

years of study the sample size ranges from 4,717 in fall of 2001 to 94,806 in spring of

2006. It is reported in the Data Highlights section that 23,863 students participated in

the more recent data collection in fall of 2006 (American College Health

Association’s National College Health Assessment [ACHA-NCHA], 2007). Second,

these results have been consistent for the six years that the study was conducted.

Third, stress is the highest impairment to succeeding academically even when

compared to other variables such as sleep problems, depression and anxiety,

bereavement and other physical health problems (ACHA-NCHA, 2007), which can in

turn be considered causes of stress.

Stress in college students has been the focus of several studies. At times,

stress has been found to be correlated with other factors, such as depression and

anxiety (e.g., Hammen & Cochran 1981) and suicide and learning disabilities (e.g.,

Bender, Rosenkrans, & Crane, 1999). Moreover, a study about predictors of

adjustment to university life found that as undergraduate students’ stress decreased

their overall adjustment and, in particular, their academic, social and personal-

7

emotional adjustments improved (Friedlander, Reid, Shupak, & Cribbie, 2007). One

study by Dusselier, Dunn, Wang, Shelley, and Whalen (2005) found that a large

amount of academic work, and not GPA (indicating ability to perform), correlated

positively with a greater amount of stress reported by students. This study also found

that out of the 416 students surveyed, 55% stated that their major source of stress was

academics, such as exams, homework and classes.

A study by Aselton (2012) reported that students face several sources of

stress, namely difficulties with roommates, academic problems, apprehension

regarding career and financial issues, and family demands of academic success.

Another study assessed the challenges that millennial college students face in

terms of stress tolerance (Bland, Melton, Welle, & Bigham, 2012). Although, this

study was conducted using a small sample comprised mostly of freshmen, the author

was still able to report on the frequency and percentage of life events and daily

hassles that caused stress as rated by the students. The life event rated as the most

stressful was “Pressure to do well in school/ parental expectations.” The frequency

that this event was reported by students was 205 out of 246 and its percentage was

83.3%. Also reported were “graduation” and “looking for job” in ninth and tenth

place respectively. Graduation’s frequency of report was 131out of 246 and its

percentage was 54.8%, while the frequency of reporting for job hunting was 130 out

of 246 and the percentage was 53.1%. It is noteworthy that these three life events

were interconnected and reflect a concern about academic success as well as life after

graduation. Furthermore, the fact these stressful events were reported mostly by

8

freshmen indicates graduation and post-graduation life are ever-present in university

students’ minds.

Definition of Stress

Defining stress is of importance for this study and although it is a concept

generally used it is not always entirely understood. According to the definition

offered by Selye (1973), stress can be defined in many ways by different people.

Nonetheless, Selye (1973) defines stress as “the nonspecific response of the body to

any demand made upon it” (p. 692). Hans Selye was an endocrinologist and his

central interest was the influence of stress in the body of both animals and humans.

This could be called physical stress. The present study focuses on psychological

stress; therefore, the physiological approach to stress is beyond its scope. Therefore,

a more pertinent definition of stress for the present study was offered by Lazarus

(2000), “Psychological stress can be thought of as part of a complex, organized

biosocial-psychological entity or whole, which psychologists refer to as an emotion”

(p. 668). More specifically, “stress is defined as a relationship between the person

and the environment that is appraised by the person as relevant to his or her well-

being and in which the person’s resources are taxed or exceeded” (Folkman &

Lazarus, 1985, p. 152).

Folkman and Lazarus’s (1985) definition of stress signifies that stress occurs

only when expectations are perceived as greater than the resources available to meet

those expectations. For instance, in the case of college students, stress can occur

when a student is given an assignment that he or she perceives as more difficult than

9

he or she judges to be in his or her ability to perform or to complete the assignment.

In the case that the student did not perceive the assignment as too difficult, stress

would not occur, even if the student did not have the ability to accomplish what was

expected.

Stress Theories

The present study projects hypotheses and analyzes results from the

transactional theory’s perspective, which was developed by Lazarus. However, in

order to provide background and context, other theories were analyzed and will also

be presented below.

According to Selye (1973) and the theory of General Adaptation Syndrome

(GAS), stress has three phases. The first phase is the alarm reaction, where the

organism receives the shock and reacts physically by triggering the body’s defenses.

The second phase is the stage of resistance, also called a stage of adaptation. A

continual state of alarm cannot be maintained ad infinitum without loss of life and,

therefore, it is replaced by the stage of resistance. This change is accompanied by

adaptation in the organism’s physical reactions, such as increased production of

secretory granules in the adrenal cortex, according to Selye (1973). In this phase the

organism attempts to resist the stressors. However, if the previous adaptation is lost

by incessant exposure to the stressor, the organism becomes vulnerable to the

stressor. The stage of resistance is then replaced by the third phase, called the stage

of exhaustion. This phase is maintained by the presence of the stressor.

Theoretically, if the organism has infinite resources, the stage of resistance could

10

continue indefinitely. However, that is usually not the case. Once the attempts to use

the organism’s resources to cope with the stressor in the resistance stage are depleted,

the organism is unable to adapt and faces a fatal outcome. In the exhaustion stage the

organism is no longer able to resist and may suffer irreparable damage, including

death. For this reason the stage of exhaustion is also the final phase of the General

Adaptation Syndrome.

Stevan Hobföll proposed yet another theory to describe how humans

experience stress. He called this theory the model of conservation of resources, also

known as conservation of resources theory (1989). According to Hobföll (1989):

“The model’s basic tenet is that people strive to retain, protect, and build resources

and that what is threatening to them is the potential or actual loss of these valued

resources” (p. 516).

This theory has received strong criticisms from several authorities in the field

of psychological stress, in particular from Richard Lazarus. One of the most pertinent

criticisms is that the conservation of resources theory does not offer significant

contributions to the understanding of psychological stress beyond what had already

been offered by previous theories, especially transactional theory. The implication is

that the fundamentals of Hobföll’s theory, that is resources, do not contribute

significantly to the stress theory field. For further information regarding both the

praise and criticism regarding conservation of resources theory it is suggested that the

reader to consult the following articles: Lazarus, 2001; Thompson and Cooper, 2001;

Schwarzer, 2001; Freund and Riediger, 2001; Quick and Gavin, 2001.

11

Conservation of resources theory has not succeeded to replace transactional

theory completely and both are still being used nowadays in the research of stress.

This author has decided to pursue the research of stress associated with graduating

from the point of view of the transactional theory. This position is further justified by

the intent to replicate, to some extent, the Folkman and Lazarus experiment of 1985.

In the mentioned experiment the participants were students facing a midterm exam.

In the present experiment participants will be graduating students.

Transactional theory was developed by Lazarus and subsequently reviewed

multiple times in cooperation with other authors, in particular, Folkman. This theory

directly relates stress and emotion. As explained by Lazarus and Folkman (1987),

transactional theory has three themes. The first is transaction, also called

relationship, between the person and the environment. Lazarus and Folkman (1987)

state that the terms transaction and relationship are “interchangeable, although

transaction emphasizes more the dynamic interplay of the variables, whereas

relationship emphasizes their confluence and organic unity” (p. 142 -143). This

means that to understand stress it is important to understand the person-environment

relationship.

The second theme is process. At different times and in different situations

change occurs, and this means that process is present. Process is intimately related to

stress since the individual strives to change unpleasant circumstances. This is

referred to as coping.

12

The third theme is emotion as a system. Emotions were defined by Folkman

and Lazarus (1985) as “products of how people construe (appraise) their ongoing

transactions with the environment” (p. 152). More specifically and according to

Lazarus and Folkman (1987) “emotion cannot adequately be defined externally in

terms of environmental stimuli or as a response to such stimuli, or internally as

impulse or conflict between impulses, and further that the quality and intensity of an

emotion depends on a variety of mediating variables and processes” (p. 143). This

contradicts the General Adaptation Syndrome Theory and also explains why GAS

might be inadequate to describe psychological stress. Lazarus and Folkman (1987)

go into more detail, explaining that the above mentioned variables have been grouped

by them as environmental antecedents (i.e., constraints and resources), person

antecedents (i.e., belief system), mediating processes (i.e., coping), short-run

outcomes (i.e., emotions in a particular circumstance), and long-run adaptational

outcomes (i.e., social functioning). According to Folkman and Lazarus: “Emotions

are of tremendous diagnostic value, because their intensity and quality reveal how

people think they are managing what is important to them in any particular context”

(1985, p. 152). Therefore, emotions change as appraisal changes.

Another important concept in transactional theory is cognitive appraisal (see

Figure 1), which consists of primary and secondary appraisal. Primary and secondary

appraisals have different functions and use different types of information. Appraisal

means that an individual uses what he or she knows (or assumes to know) about the

world to judge his or her wellbeing. Primary appraisal is the meaning that the

13

individual attributes to the event (Lazarus & Folkman, 1987). Lazarus and Folkman

(1987) define “primary appraisal as the person’s decision about whether he or she has

any stakes in the encounter, and if so, what kinds” (p. 146). That is, the individual

decides if the situation he or she is presently facing has a positive, negative or even

neutral meaning. According to Folkman and Lazarus (1985): “An irrelevant

encounter has no significance for one’s wellbeing, and the person has no stake in its

outcome; in a benign-positive encounter only a good outcome is signaled: stressful

appraisals are characterized by threat, challenge, or harm-loss” (p. 152). That is, if

the individual perceives the environment’s demands to be equal or less than the

individual’s ability to resist those demands, the individual will not perceive the

demands as a stressor. This is also called a neutral event. A positive event will not

produce stress. On the other hand, if the individual perceives the situation as negative

or relevant to his or her wellbeing, the primary appraisal can be categorized as three

different types. The first type is harm, the second type is threat, the third type is

challenge, which could be confused with a positive event; nevertheless, challenge

implies a risk and the need to cope. Lazarus and Folkman (1987) defined the three

different types of primary appraisal as follows: “harm already experienced; threat,

which is harm that is anticipated; and challenge, which is the potential for mastery or

gain” (p.145). In the case of the present study, graduation could be perceived as

threat if students think of it as loss of current stability and status to be replaced by

uncertainty and possible unemployment. Graduation could also be perceived as a

challenge, because it could be the start of a brilliant and profitable career. Graduation

14

will probably only be perceived as harm once the student has said goodbye to his or

her friends and student life.

Figure 1. Transactional Model of Stress (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984).

Social and cultural environmental factors and psychological characteristics

influence the individual in evaluating whether a situation is harmful or not. In

particular, motivation (i.e., goals), beliefs and way of thinking (i.e., cognition) are

psychological characteristics that directly affect the appraisal of any situation. This

was explained by Lazarus and Folkman (1987) as follows:

An environmental condition will not be a source of harm or benefit unless it

confronts persons or groups having motivational and cognitive characteristics

that make them vulnerable to that particular condition; and a person or group

characteristic is not a source of harm or benefit unless that characteristic, say a

15

goal, is confronted with a relevant environment condition such as an obstacle

that prevents the person form achieving the goal (p. 145).

Coping styles and personality influence the individual variations in quality

and intensity of the emotional reaction to stressful situations. Because primary

appraisal is directly related to how much stake a person perceives to have in a given

situation, the intensity and quality of the emotional reaction is proportional to the

stakes. A stake is a transactional variable, because it is a result of a particular

situation and a goal. Once a person decides that he or she has a stake in a given

situation, it is important to decide if action is required to improve the situation; this is

called evaluative judgment. In the case that action is required, it is necessary to

consider the options available on how to cope; this is called secondary appraisal.

Secondary appraisal is the individual’s perception of options available to be used as

coping (Folkman & Lazarus, 1985). “Secondary appraisal is a crucial supplement to

primary appraisal since harm, threat, challenge, and benefit depend also on how much

control we think we can exert over outcomes” (Lazarus & Folkman, 1987, p. 146).

These processes are interdependent. Primary appraisal and secondary appraisal can

occur at the same time.

Coping is a fundamental concept in transactional theory. As defined by

Folkman and Lazarus (1985): “Coping refers to cognitive and behavioral efforts to

manage (master, reduce, or tolerate) a troubled person-environment relationship” (p.

152). Coping is directly related to appraisal and emotion, because it is activated by

appraisal and together appraisal and coping generate an emotional reaction. In the

16

words of Lazarus and Folkman (1987), “coping has two main functions: to change the

actual terms of the troubled person-environment relationship, which we have referred

to as problem-focused coping, and to regulate emotional distress, which we have

referred to as emotion-focused or cognitive coping” (p. 147). Problem-focused

coping has been found to be used when situations are perceived as changeable and

emotion-focused coping is more often used in situations perceived as unchangeable,

according to research by Folkman and Lazarus (1980).

In their 1985 article titled “If It Changes It Must Be a Process: Study of

Emotion and Coping during Three Stages of a College Examination” Susan Folkman

and Richard Lazarus studied emotion and coping in the context of a midterm

examination. This study is divided in two parts, the first is titled “Examination Stress

Processes” and the second is titled “Individual Differences in Emotion.” The first

part is divided into three sub-studies dedicated to emotion, coping and social support.

The present study will only replicate the “Emotion” section of the first part of this

study. In this sub-study, the participants were volunteers recruited from an

undergraduate psychology class at University of California, Berkley and included

students from all different college years. Data were collected using the Stress

Questionnaire at three different times, namely before the exam, after the exam, and

after the grades were posted. In the first data collection, 189 students participated, in

the second collection 140 students and in the final data collection 136 students

participated; with a total of 261 students participating and 108 participating in all

phases. Most of the participating students (70%) reported obtaining grades of B or

17

higher. Regarding emotion Folkman and Lazarus examined the changes in

anticipatory emotions (threat and challenge) and in outcome emotions (harm and

benefit). Folkman and Lazarus hypothesized that because challenge and threat

emotions are anticipatory that they would be higher before the exam and that they

would have decreased by the time grades were posted. At the same time, benefit and

harm emotions would increase from time 1 to time 3 since they are considered

outcome emotions. The results supported their hypotheses. Their findings revealed

that anticipatory emotions were elevated before and after the exam and decreased

significantly after the grades were posted. At the same time outcome emotions

increased before and after the exam and remained high after the grades were posted.

Folkman and Lazarus concluded from these results that:

The important point is that when anticipating an ambiguous outcome, people

are likely to feel both positive (challenge) emotions and negative (threat)

emotions, whereas when evaluating an outcome that has clearly transpired,

they are likely to feel either positive (benefit) emotions or negative (harm)

emotions (1985, p.156).

The present study replicated this part of Folkman and Lazarus (1985) and focused on

the analysis of emotion.

Specifics of the Present Study

Students’ plans for post-graduation will result in stress caused by this

transition being perceived and dealt with as positive or negative. Some students

might feel that they have not accomplished enough; they might be uncertain about the

18

future or not wanting to abandon a lifestyle that they have learned to enjoy. For those

who have specific plans for after graduation, such as going to graduate school or

entering the job market, stress can arise from the perceived demands of the students’

new role in society. Alternatively, those students who have no career plans for after

graduation might feel less stress or, on the contrary, feel stressed due to the

uncertainty of their future.

The hypotheses of the present study were be based on the fact that stress

theories assume that perceptions of the demands imposed on the individual will cause

not only the presence or absence of stress but also determine the type of stress; that is,

how the situation is appraised. In this case, individuals’ perceptions of demands

resulting from a change in life style and their perceptions in terms of their ability to

cope will determine their appraisal of the type of event they are facing. This will

determine whether graduation is perceived by students as harm, threat, challenge or

benefit. In order to determine how students appraise graduation, it is important to

inquire about their feelings regarding this life changing event. Therefore, according

to transactional theory students who report worry, fear, and anxiety will perceive

graduation as threatening. Also, according to the transactional theory, feeling

confident, hopeful, and eager will be reported by those students appraising graduation

as a challenge. Conversely, students appraising graduation as harm will report anger,

sadness, disappointment, guilt and disgust. In addition, in agreement with

transactional theory, students reporting that graduation is exhilarating, happy, and

pleasant as well as cause for relief will appraise it as a benefit (mastery-gain).

19

These predictions are in agreement with the findings of Folkman and Lazarus

(1985). According to the mentioned article during the phase of anticipation the

participants revealed that threat and challenge emotions did not increase in intensity

from two days before the exam (time 1) to five days after the exam (time 2). Also

during this period of time harm and benefit emotions increased in intensity. From

time 2 to five days after receiving grades for the exam (time 3) threat and challenge

emotions decreased in intensity. While harm and benefit emotions stayed the same

during the period of time between time 2 and time 3.

The present study will examine three points in time as well. In this case the

first point will be the freshmen year. The second point will be the senior year. The

time in between these points will be called the college years period. The third time

point will be a year after graduation and the period of time in-between the second and

third time points will be called the graduate period.

This writer hypothesizes that emotions and therefore the type of stress will

vary from time one (first year of college) to time two (last year of college) to time

three (year after graduation).

Hypotheses

In accordance with what was discussed above, two main hypotheses have

been developed. The first hypothesis regards a comparison of the time frame from

beginning college to the current time (near graduation). This period is referred to as

the college years period. Predictions for this period were divided into four sub-

hypotheses, each relating to a specific type of emotion (threat, challenge, harm, and

20

benefit). Hypothesis 1A states that threat emotions will be reported with the same

intensity when emotions experienced as a freshman and as a senior are compared. In

the same way, it is hypothesized for 1B that challenge emotions will also be reported

with same intensity when freshmen emotions and senior emotions are compared.

Threat and challenge emotions are not expected to be affected by impending

graduation and the life changes that it implies. During the same period of time,

however, hypothesis 1C predicts that harm emotions will increase. Hypothesis 1D

expects that benefit emotions’ intensity will also increase when they are compared

across the same period of time. In the case of harm and benefit emotions the prospect

of graduation experienced during the college years by the undergraduate students, is

expected to result in these emotions being reported with more intensity.

A second set of hypotheses has also been developed for the period comparing

the current time with after graduation, referred to as the graduate period. Sub-

hypothesis 2A anticipates that threat emotions will decrease in the graduate period.

Likewise 2B expects that challenge emotions will also decrease during the same

period of time. While threat and challenge emotions are predicted during the college

years to be unchanged, once graduation has occurred these emotions are expected to

be reported with less intensity. On the other hand, harm emotions are expected to be

reported with the same intensity during the graduate period, according to 2C. Finally,

sub-hypothesis 2D assumes that benefit emotions will also be reported with the same

intensity when considered from the perspective of having graduated. In other words,

21

it is expected that anticipation of graduating will not change the intensity of harm and

benefit emotions.

22

CHAPTER II

METHOD

Participants

The participants were university students who had applied for graduation or

students with fewer than 30 units left to be completed. Initially, it was planned to

include only students ranging in age from 18 to 25 years old because that is the age

bracket for traditional undergraduate students. However, when all analyses (see

results section) were run, the inclusion of older students did not affect the results.

Therefore, it was decided that all 61 students who responded to the online

questionnaire would be included in the interest of robustness of the sample. The

students older than 25 years old ranged in age from 26 to 55, with a total of 16. The

age range for the total sample was from 21 to 55, with the highest frequencies being

22-years-old with 15 participants and 23-year-olds with 11 participants, followed by

21-years-old with 8, 25-year-olds with 7, 24-years-old with 4, 26-, 27- and 34-year-

olds with 2 and the remaining categories with one participant each. It was also

anticipated that more female students than male students would participate since in

more recent years the female university population has been larger than the male

university population. Unfortunately, this could not be verified due to an error in

creating the questionnaire online. For this reason, the data for gender are not

available. From the total 61 participants, 27 were White (44.3%), 22 (36.1%) were

Hispanic, 5 (8.2%) were Asian, 4 (6.6%) were Mixed, 1 (1.6%) was African-

23

American, and 2 (3.3%) declined to say. Regarding religious affiliation, 21 (34.4%)

participants were Catholic, 20 (32.8%) were Christian, 11 (18%) did not have a

religious affiliation, 3 (4.9%) declared to be non-denominational, 2 (3.3%) identified

as agnostic, 1 (1.6%) Buddhist, 1 (1.6%) Latter Day Saints (Mormon), 1 (1.6%)

Protestant and 1 (1.6%) Sikh. Of the 61 participants, 47 (77%) were single, 11 (18%)

were married, 2 (3.3%) were engaged and 1 (1.6%) was separated. Most of the

participants, that is 48 (78.7%), were not parents with the remaining 13 (21.3%)

declaring to be parents. When asked how participating students identified

themselves, 55 (90.2%) identified as mostly a student and 6 (9.8%) as other such as

parent and fulltime worker. Regarding area of study, 25 (41%) of participants

declared Psychology as their undergraduate program; Accounting, Child

Development, Liberal Studies, and Sociology were declared by 4 participants each;

Art and Nursing were declared by 3 participants each, Biological Sciences, Business,

Kinesiology were declared by 2 participants each, Communication Studies,

Economics, History, Music and a combination of two area of study were declared one

time each. The self-reported GPA of the participating students ranged from 2.8 to

4.0. On the subject of the participants’ family combined annual income, 9 (14.8%)

reported under $20,000, 13 (21.3%) reported between $20,000 and $40,000, 17

(27.9%) participants reported between $40,000 and $70,000, 12 (19.7%) reported

between $70,000 and $100,000, 7 (11.5%) reported between $100,000 and $150,000,

and 3 (4.9%) did not report.

24

Instrumentation

The present study used a questionnaire developed by Folkman and Lazarus

(1985). From the mentioned article it is not clear if the questionnaire has been given

a title. This questionnaire consists of several questions regarding emotions related to

graduation (see appendix A). Those completing the survey are asked about the

intensity of different emotions such as fear, hope, worry, etc. In the present study the

answers from the questions about emotions connected to graduation were scored

using a five point likert scale ranging from “0 = not at all” to “4 = a great deal.” For

example:

“As I prepare for completing my degree I feel:

o Eager

0 = not at all; 1 = somewhat; 2 = average; 3 = a lot; 4 = a great deal”

The threat emotions are fearful, anxious and worried; the challenge emotions

are hopeful, confident, and eager; the harm emotions are angry, disappointed,

disgusted, sad and guilty; and the benefit emotions are pleased, relieved, happy and

exhilarated. According to Folkman and Lazarus (1985), the rating of each item of the

scale was summed to obtain each scale’s score, this was also the procedure for the

present study. The authors reported the mean alpha for each scale, with threat

emotions scale rating .80, the harm emotions scale rated .84, the benefit emotions

scale rated .78 and the challenge emotions scale rated .59. The authors advise caution

when interpreting the results for the challenge emotions scale because that its

reliability is somewhat low.

25

For the purposes of this study all questions were about graduation and

therefore the emotions reflect how the participants feel or appraise graduation. Due

to time constrictions, a longitudinal study was not possible to accomplish. Since

according to transactional theory of stress it is important to analyze change in

emotions in order to have process, it was necessary to collect data about emotions at

different times. Therefore, to remedy this issue while still accounting for changes in

emotions, the participants were asked to recall how they felt about graduation during

their freshmen year (time 1), they were also be asked how they feel about graduation

at the present senior year (time 2), and finally they were asked how they anticipate

they would feel about graduation in the year after graduation (time 3). The responses

for the items in each scale were summed and the sum was used for comparison. That

is, the different feelings were not compared, but instead comparisons were made

using the sum of all the feelings in each scale. The scales were used to analyze

potential differences between the three different times studied. The difference in

intensity of emotions reported between time 1 and time 2 were compared and then the

difference between time 2 and time 3 were also compared. The hypotheses of this

study were based on the anticipated results of these comparisons.

In addition, a demographic questionnaire developed by this writer was also

used to collect data pertinent to the analysis of the participants’ characteristics (see

appendix B).

26

Procedure

Students were asked to participate in the present study through email and

through personal communication in a classroom setting. Participation was

completely voluntary. The questionnaire was available on the internet through

Qualtrics at the students’ convenience. Each student participated by answering the

questionnaire only once. Students were asked to read an informed consent (see

appendix C) previous to completing the survey and at the end select an “I agree” or “I

disagree” buttons as a way to accepting or declining participating in the present study.

In the case that students agreed to participate they were presented with the

demographic questionnaire first, the stress emotions questionnaire next and finally

with the debriefing sheet (see appendix D). The participants were offered incentive to

participate in this study, namely promotional pens (for those asked in person) and the

possibility of being included in a raffle of 5 $10 gift cards from Starbucks coffee.

The participants elected to participate in the raffle by providing their contact

information (email address or phone number) in the comments section or by emailing

it to this writer. The 5 winners were randomly selected and all requested that the gift

cards be mailed to them.

Data Analysis

Paired t-tests were used to analyze the emotion changes for the different

categories between the different times. For the purposes of this study it was

predetermined that an effect size of .5, an alpha level of 0.05 would be used.

27

However, as recommended by Folkman and Lazarus (1985), the alpha level was

changed to 0.01 to protect against alpha slippage from doing so many comparisons.

The data were examined using SPSS. The first step after collecting the data

was to converge the data for the different feelings into the appropriate appraisal

categories. For example, the data for worried, anxious and fearful were combined

into the threat emotions category as a new variable. The next step was to calculate

the reliabilities for the emotion categories’ scales. This was done not only by

combining the different emotions into the appropriate appraisal categories, but also by

combining the different times. For instance, threat emotions for time 1, 2 and 3 were

all combined together. The Cronbach’s Alpha for the threat emotions for all times

was 0.82, indicating good internal consistency. The challenge emotions for all times

presented a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.77, indicating adequate internal consistency. The

harm emotions for all times scale also presented good internal consistency with a

Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.91. In the same way, the Cronbach’s Alpha for the benefit

emotions was 0.76 also indicating a good internal consistency.

28

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

Data were analyzed using a series of t-tests to examine the potential changes in

the means of the different emotions’ categories between the different time periods. The

results are presented in Table 1. As stated previously, the p-value for the data analysis

was 0.01 as recommended by Folkman and Lazarus, 1985, to protect from alpha

slippage as a result of making the several comparisons required in the present study.

The scale for threat emotions presented a minimum score of 3.0 and a

maximum of 15.0 for time 1, 2 and 3. The challenge emotions scale presented a

minimum score of 3.0 for time 1 and 3 and 4.0 for time 2; while the maximum score

for this scale was 15.0 for all times. The harm scale presented a minimum score of

5.0 for all times and maximum score of 19.0 for time 1 and 3 and 20.0 for time 2.

Finally, the scale for benefit emotions presented a minimum score of 4.0 for time 1,

6.0 for time 2 and 5.0 for time 3; its maximum score was 20.0 for all times.

29

Table 1

Changes in Emotion from Time 1 to Time 2 and Time 2, (N = 61)

Variable Time M SD value t value df 2-tailed probability

Time 1 7.0 3.10 -2.80 60 .007*

Threat emotions Time 2 8.0 2.85

1.52 60 .135

Time 3 7.5 3.24

Time 1 11.1 2.95 -0.23 60 .819

Challenge emotions Time 2 11.2 2.73

-0.05 60 .957

Time 3 11.2 2.68

Time 1 6.8 3.38 -0.64 60 .527

Harm emotions Time 2 7.0 3.10

1.16 60 .249

Time 3 6.8 3.04

Time 1 12.7 3.88 -5.15 60 <.001*

Benefit emotions Time 2 15.3 3.57

-0.62 60 .537

Time 3 15.5 3.79

When comparing the means of threat emotions between the freshman period

of time (time 1) and the senior period of time (time 2), the calculations yielded a

significant difference with a freshman time mean of 7.0 and a senior time mean of 8.0

with a significance of p = .007. The mean for threat emotions in the graduate period

of time (time 3) was 7.5; however, this was not significant (p = .135).

30

Regarding the means for challenge emotions, freshman period presented a

mean of 11.1 and the senior period a mean of 11.2, the difference was not significant

(p = .819). When the freshman period and the senior period were compared their

means were the same (11.2); therefore no significant difference (p = .957) was found.

The next emotions to be compared were the harm emotions. Results revealed

a mean of 6.8 for the freshman period and 7.0 for the senior period with no significant

difference (p = .527) to report. The graduate period for harm emotions’ mean was

6.8, also not revealing a significant difference (p = .249).

Finally, when benefit emotions were compared, the mean for the freshman

period was 12.7 and for the senior period was 15.3; this revealed a significant

difference (p < .001). The mean for the graduate period was 15.5 and did not

revealed a significant difference (p = .537) from the senior period.

This indicates that the instances where the intensity of emotions changed

significantly were between the freshman period and the senior period for the threat

emotions, which increased in intensity. Likewise, the intensity of benefit emotions

also increased between the freshman period and senior period.

When these results are considered in relation to the sub-hypotheses previously

stated in this study, the outcomes differ somewhat from what was predicted.

Hypothesis 1A stated that threat emotions would have been reported with the same

intensity when emotions experienced as a freshman (time 1) and as a senior (time 2)

were compared. These results contradict hypothesis 1A, because, in fact, the intensity

of threat emotions did change during the period of time referred as college years. On

31

the other hand, the results indicated that the intensity of challenge emotions stayed the

same from the freshman period to the senior period, as predicted by hypothesis 1B.

At the same time, the results also contradict hypothesis 1C which predicted that harm

emotions would increase in intensity from freshman to senior year. In fact, the

intensity of harm emotions did not change significantly between the two periods of

time. In contrast, the analysis of the data indicates that, as predicted, in hypothesis

1D the intensity of benefit emotions increased from freshman to senior ratings.

Hypothesis 2A, which predicted that the intensity of threat emotions would

decrease from the senior period (time 2) to the graduate period (time 3), was also

contradicted. As well, hypothesis 2B stating that challenge emotions would decrease

in intensity between the senior period and the graduate period was also refuted.

Hypothesis 2C predicted that harm feelings would not change in intensity from the

senior period to the graduate period was also refuted. In the same way, benefit

emotions did not change in intensity from the senior period to the graduate period as

anticipated by hypothesis 2D.

32

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

The present study used the transactional theory to predict and examine the

stress emotions associated with graduation. The data were collected once, but

pertained to three different times (freshmen year, senior year and one year after

graduation) using an online questionnaire. This was accomplished by asking the 61

participants to recall, report and anticipate their feelings related to graduation.

Results were obtained by analyzing the differences in intensity of emotions when

comparing the different times.

It was predicted that the intensity of emotions would at some points change

and at others remain unaffected according to transaction theory’s primary and

secondary appraisal principles. Specifically, from time 1 to time 2 it was predicted

that harm and benefit emotions would increase in intensity, while threat and challenge

emotions would maintain their level of intensity. Variation of emotion intensity was

only observed with significant results between time1 (freshmen period) and time 2

(senior period) in relation to threat emotions and benefit emotions. The same was not

observed from time 2 to time 3 (graduate period) in regards to any of the emotions.

Contrary to the prediction that threat emotions would maintain their level of

intensity they instead increased in intensity. This contradicts not only this study’s

hypothesis, but also the principles of transaction theory as presented in Folkman and

Lazarus (1985). The fact that threat emotions increased in intensity from the

33

freshmen period and the senior period is very interesting. According to Lazarus and

Folkman (1987), threat “is harm that is anticipated” (p.145). It appears that the

emotions connected with threat are more noticeable during the senior period than the

freshmen period. This might indicate that as graduation approaches students start to

consider potential “dangers” that threaten their present lifestyle or wellbeing. What

could be inferred from this is that the potential harm of graduation is perceived at an

earlier time (at the anticipatory stage) than at the time expected by the present study

(at the outcome stage). As stated before, graduation could be perceived as threat if

students think of it as loss of current stability and status to be replaced by uncertainty

and possible unemployment.

At the same time, the intensity of benefit emotions increased between the

freshman period and the senior period. This is in accordance with what was predicted

in the present study. This was the only instance where the present results replicated

the findings of Folkman and Lazarus (1985). It might be that students simultaneously

considered the “dangers” of graduation while also considering the benefits. Students

could be speculating that graduation could be the start of a brilliant and profitable

career, and it could even be seen as the start of the students’ adult life where they

would feel free to make their own choices. It is possible that this is an important

factor in students’ ability to endure the usual four years of studying, exams and other

academic demands.

Threat and benefit emotions increased between the freshmen period and the

senior period although the first was expected to remain at the same level is very

34

interesting. These two emotions intuitively appear to be contradictory, yet, their

intensity changed. This might mean that students have ambivalent feelings about

graduation and everything that it implies. More specifically, because the increase in

intensity of threat and benefit emotions happens during the anticipatory phase, it

might reflect the everyday challenges of academic life, such as experiencing little

success like completing assignments and obtaining desirable grades, and at the same

time being apprehensive about the next challenge and possibly graduation.

As predicted, the intensity of challenge emotions did not change between the

freshmen year and the senior year. According to Lazarus (1993): “Challenge results

from difficult demands that we feel confident about overcoming by effective

mobilizing and deploying our coping resources” (p. 5). This might indicate that

during college years students maintain the same level of confidence regarding their

ability to cope with the academic challenges. Maybe they have developed a sense of

their abilities. Therefore, their threat related feelings might increase as a result of

anticipation of harm and, at the same time, the challenge related feelings stay the

same because the student’s sense of coping ability does not change.

The results of the present study also indicated that harm emotions did not

change in intensity from time 1 to time 2 while it was predicted that harm emotions

would increase. Since harm can be described as the psychological perception of

irreparable damage, it is possible that students in their college years would not

perceive graduation in a harmful way at least until they have graduated. However,

this cannot be verified since the results were not significant.

35

Regarding the change in intensity of emotions from the senior year to a year

after graduation (time 3), it was predicted that harm and benefit emotions would

remain the same while threat and challenge emotions would decrease. As predicted

no significant differences were observed. Harm and benefit emotions did not change

in intensity; this might appear to be contradictory since once students graduate it

would be reasonable to expect them to perceive this accomplishment as an advantage

or as disadvantage. However, the results do not indicate that graduation would cause

students to view graduation in either way. Nonetheless, it is important to keep in

mind that students are only expressing their feelings as they anticipate them, since the

data were collected when they had not graduated yet.

Although, it was predicted that threat and challenge emotions would decrease

in intensity, no significant difference was verifiable from time 2 to time 3. This may

indicate that students face graduation as challenge and a threat in the same way

through all their college years as what they expect after graduation. In other words,

the feelings of threat and challenge do not end with graduation they endure

afterwards. It is possible that students perceive the demands of life after graduation

in the same way as they perceive the demands of academic life. Whether, students

will attempt to enter the work world, attend graduate school, become parents, or any

combination of these life paths, they still face the possibility of success and failure in

their everyday lives in a similar way as they faced failing or succeeding in their

academic tasks. Graduation might not be a respite when it comes to feelings related

to threat and challenge.

36

Limitations

The present study provides only a glimpse into what could be a very

informative area of study. Unfortunately, due to time constraints, data at different

stages in the students’ academic lives were not collected. It would have been of great

value if the students had answered the questionnaire during their freshmen year, then

their senior year, and finally during the year after graduation. This would most likely

have provided more accurate data than asking participants to recall and speculate

about their feelings. Nevertheless, the data collected in this present study were still

very valuable, because they provide insight into, not only, the participants’ views of

the beginning of their college years, but also, their estimate of their future in relation

to how they feel about graduation.

The limitations of this study are mostly time constraints and sample size. A

larger sample would also have provided robustness to the study. Simultaneously, a

larger sample of participants would also have allowed for comparisons between

majors and other participant characteristics. This could have provided useful

information that would be specific and instrumental to professors and counselors. It

is also important to mention that along these lines it is unfortunate that the present

study failed to collect data regarding the participants’ gender. This is a mistake that

should unquestionably be avoided in future studies.

As in any research using a questionnaire, it is also important to consider the

possible disadvantages of such methods. It is possible that in the present study the

participants were susceptible to answer the questions in a socially desirable manner,

37

or that they were not completely honest, or even that questions were not clearly

understood. Questionnaires have limitations; hence, the results of research solely

based on questionnaires should be evaluated with prudence. It is possible that a

detailed interview administered by someone competent in student culture might have

been able to return results that might be in depth and accurate. Also, asking students

to keep what could be called an emotional diary might provide valuable information

on how the intensity of their emotions changed as their academic status also changed.

Future Research

Future research could include collecting data from high school students, so

that the emotions could be compared to those collected during college years. Also, it

would be important to consider the participants’ expectations for the future, such as

continuing education or entering the work world.

Another interesting study would be to test the intensity of feelings in students

who have not been successful in completing their academic work to assess whether

the intensity of their emotions vary in the same way. As stated before, this study

revealed that students experience an increase of threat and benefit emotions when the

freshmen and the senior periods are compared. The present study collected data from

graduating students, which means that they have been successful. It would be of

interest to evaluate whether students who fail their classes would present emotions’

intensity in the same manner.

It would also be helpful to extend the study of emotions related to graduation

by also collecting data regarding coping and social support as was done by Folkman

38

and Lazarus in the 1985 study. Social support and coping ability add essential

information on how students deal with their emotions and how those emotions change

over time. In fact, the emotions (including primary and secondary appraisals), coping

and social support are intrinsically connected. Therefore, the study of emotions only

provides one view of an intricate process. The present study was not able to

undertake such a time demanding analysis and can only provide insight into one part

of a multifaceted process. Future research in this area should consider looking at the

entire process in the interest of comprehensive results.

Conclusion

This study should be considered as a first attempt to understand the emotional

changes students go through when considering graduation. Even with its limitations

the present study yielded interesting information. It provided an indication of the rich

and intricate emotional process related to graduating from college, indicating that this

is an area worthy of more pointed investigation.

REFERENCES

40

REFERENCES

American College Health Association (2007). National College Health Assessment

(ACHA-NCHA). Web summary retrieved January 12, 2013, from

http://www.acha-ncha.org/data_highlights.html.& http://www.acha-

ncha.org/data/IMPEDIMENTS_0_all.html

Aselton, P. (2012). Sources of stress and coping in American college students who

have been diagnosed with depression. Journal of Child and Adolescent

Psychiatric Nursing, 25(3), 119-123. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6171.2012.00341.x

Bender, W., Rosenkrans, C., & Crane, M. (1999). Stress, depression, and suicide

among students with learning disabilities: Assessing the risk. Learning

Disability Quarterly, 22, 143-56. doi:10.2307/1511272

Bland, H. W., Melton, B. F., Welle, P., & Bigham, L. (2012). Stress tolerance: New

challenges for millennial college students. College Student Journal, 46(2),

362-375.

Dusselier, L., Dunn, B., Wang, Y., Shelley, M., & Whalen, D. (2005). Personal,

health, academic, and environmental predictors of stress for residence hall

students. Journal of American College Health, 54, 15-24.

Erikson, E. (1993). Childhood and society. New York, NY US: W W Norton & Co.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged

community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21(3), 219-239.

41

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: study of

emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 150-170.

Freund, A. M., & Riediger, M. (2001). What I Have and What I Do--The Role of

Resource Loss and Gain Throughout Life. Applied Psychology: An

International Review, 50(3), 370-380. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00063

Friedlander, L., Reid, G., Shupak, N., & Cribbie, R. (2007). Social support, self-

esteem, and stress as predictors of adjustment to university among first-year

undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, 48, 259-274.

Hammen, C., & Cochran, S. (1981). Cognitive correlates of life stress and depression

in college students. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90, 23-27.

doi:10.1037/0021-843X.90.1.23

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing

stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524. doi:10.1037/0003-

066X.44.3.513

Lazarus, R. S. (2000). Toward better research on stress and coping. American

Psychologist, 55(6), 665-673. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.6.665

Lazarus, R. S. (2001). Conservation of Resources Theory (COR): Little More Than

Words Masquerading as a New Theory. Applied Psychology: An International

Review, 50(3), 381-391.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York:

Springer Pub. Co.

42

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1987). Transactional theory and research on emotions

and coping. European Journal of Personality, 1(3), 141-169.

Quick, J., & Gavin, J. H. (2001). Four Perspectives on Conservation of Resources

Theory: A Commentary. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50(3),

392-400.

Schwarzer, R. (2001). Stress, resources, and proactive coping. Applied Psychology:

An International Review, 50(3), 400-407.

Selye, H. (1973). The evolution of the stress concept. American Scientist, 61(6), 692-

699.

Spreen, T. L. (2013). Recent college graduates in the U.S. labor force: data from the

Current Population Survey. Monthly Labor Review, 136(2), 3-13.

Steinberg, L. (2014, September 21). The case for delayed adulthood. New York Times,

p.12.

Thompson, M. S., & Cooper, C. L. (2001). A Rose By Any Other Name...: A

Commentary on Hobfoll's Conservation of Resources Theory. Applied

Psychology: An International Review, 50(3), 408-418.

APPENDICES

44

APPENDIX A

STRESS EMOTIONS QUESTIONNAIRE

1. In the next questions you will be asked about three different time periods (the first

year of college, the present time and after graduation). Please circle below the

intensity of all the emotions that you feel when you think of graduating and all of

the life changes associated with obtaining a bachelor’s degree. Please answer

honestly keeping in mind that all emotions are acceptable including conflicting

emotions.

1.1. When I considered graduation in my first year of college/university I felt:

1.1.1. Worried

0 = not at all; 1 = somewhat; 2 = average; 3 = a lot; 4 = a great deal

1.1.2. Fearful


1.1.3. Anxious


1.1.4. Confident


1.1.5. Hopeful


1.1.6. Eager


1.1.7. Angry


1.1.8. Sad


1.1.9. Disappointed


1.1.10. Guilty


45

1.1.11. Disgusted


1.1.12. Exhilarated


1.1.13. Pleased


1.1.14. Happy


1.1.15. Relieved


2. As I prepare to complete my degree I feel:

2.1.1. Worried


2.1.2. Fearful


2.1.3. Anxious


2.1.4. Confident


2.1.5. Hopeful


2.1.6. Eager


2.1.7. Angry


2.1.8. Sad


2.1.9. Disappointed

46


2.1.10. Guilty


2.1.11. Disgusted


2.1.12. Exhilarated


2.1.13. Pleased


2.1.14. Happy


2.1.15. Relieved


3. After I complete my degree I think I will feel:

3.1.1. Worried


3.1.2. Fearful


3.1.3. Anxious


3.1.4. Confident


3.1.5. Hopeful


3.1.6. Eager


3.1.7. Angry


47

3.1.8. Sad


3.1.9. Disappointed


3.1.10. Guilty


3.1.11. Disgusted


3.1.12. Exhilarated


3.1.13. Pleased


3.1.14. Happy


3.1.15. Relieved


48

APPENDIX B

DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONAIRE

1) Date of Birth: ______________________________

2) Age: __________

3) Ethnicity _________________________________

4) Religious affiliation:

_________________________________________________________

5) Marital status:

a) Single

b) Married

c) Separated

d) Divorced

e) Other: ________________________

6) Are you a parent? Yes No

49

7) How would you identify yourself?

a) Mostly as a student, or

b) Other:

____________________________________________________________

8) GPA: _____________

9) Area of study: -

____________________________________________________________

10) Number of units completed: _________________

11) Anticipated graduation date: _________________

12) How many semesters do you have left until completing your degree?

_____________________

13) When did you start attending college/university?

__________________________________

14) How well do you remember the emotions you felt during your first

semester?

50

(Please select only one)

a) Very well

b) Well

c) Somewhat

d) Not very well

e) Not at all

15) Estimate of family’s combined annual income:

a) Under $20,000

b) Between $20,000 and $40,000

c) Between $40,000 and $70,000

d) Between $70,000 and $100,000

e) Between $100,000 and $150,000

f) Greater than $150,000

16) How do you pay for your bachelor’s degree?

(Select all that apply)

a) Student loan

b) Parents pay

c) Work

d) Scholarships and/or grants

51

e) Other:

____________________________________________________________

17) When you think of graduating – completing your degree – do you consider it to

be a positive or negative change in your life?


a) Positive

b) Negative

18) What are your plans for the year after graduation?


a) Start a career (working full time in the area of your degree);

b) Start graduate school (attending graduate school full-time);

c) Start a family (full-time stay-at-home mother or father);

d) Travel the world (travel for the duration of 6 months to 1 year);

e) I don’t have any plans yet;

f) Other:

____________________________________________________________

19) Please feel free to add any comments that might be important:

_______________________________________________________________

52

APPENDIX C

CONSENT FORM

This research study will examine factors that are related to stress emotions

associated with graduation among graduating students. If you agree to participate,

you will be asked to answer survey questions that ask about the intensity of your

emotions pertaining to your impending graduation, as well as questions about your

demographic characteristics.

You are free to discontinue your participation at any time without penalty.

You may also skip any survey questions that make you feel uncomfortable. Even if

you withdraw from the study, you will receive any entitlements that have been

promised to you in exchange for your participation, such as extra credit.

Participation in this research study does not guarantee any benefits to you.

However, possible benefits include the fact that you may learn something about how

research studies are conducted and you may learn something about this area of

research (i.e., factors that are related to stress emotions how they relate to

graduation).

You will be given additional information about the study after your

participation is complete.

In addition, 5 $10 gift cards for Starbucks coffee or for the CSU Stanislaus

bookstore will be raffled among the participants.

53

If you agree to participate in the study, it will take about 20 minutes or less to

complete the survey.

All data from this study will be kept from inappropriate disclosure and will be

accessible only to the researchers and their faculty advisor. The researchers are not

interested in anyone’s individual responses, only the average responses of everyone in

the study.

The present research is designed to reduce the possibility of any negative

experiences as a result of participation. Risks to participants are kept to a minimum.

However, if your participation in this study causes you any concerns, anxiety, or

distress, please contact the Student Counseling Center at (209) 667-3381 to make an

appointment to discuss your concerns.

This research study is being conducted by Isabel Brasil, a graduate student in

psychology. The faculty supervisor is Dr. Kurt Baker, Professor, Department of

Psychology and Child Development, California State University, Stanislaus. If you

have questions or concerns about your participation in this study, you may contact the

researchers through Dr. Baker at (209) 664-6681.

You may obtain information about the outcome of the study at the end of the

academic year by contacting Dr. Baker.

If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, you may

contact the Campus Compliance Officer of California State University Stanislaus at

[email protected].

You may print or save a copy of this page for your records.

54

By selecting "I agree" below, you attest that you are 18 years old or older.

By selecting "I agree" below, you are indicating that you have freely consented to participate

in this research study

55

APPENDIX D

DEBRIEFING SHEET

Thank you for participating in this study! We are interested in understanding the

relationship between stress emotions and graduation among graduating students.

Stress is closely connected with emotions. When people are first confronted with a

new situation they evaluate the importance of this experience and whether they can

cope with it. The experience can be perceived as a threat, a challenge, a harm or a

benefit to them. As a result they experience emotions associated with the meaning

that they attribute to the situation. If they perceive the situation to be a threat they

might feel fear, if it is perceived as a challenge they might feel hopeful, if considered

as a harm they might experience anger, and they would likely feel happy if they

perceive the situation as a benefit. The importance of the situation is revealed by the

change in the intensity of the emotions experienced. Identifying emotions and their

change in intensity is of fundamental importance in order to categorize the type of

stress experienced by students in connection with graduation. Obtaining information

on how students perceive graduation is valuable so that counselors, professors and

other important people in the lives of graduating students can provide them with the

appropriate support during this live transition.

All the information we collected in this study will be kept safe from

inappropriate disclosure, and there will be no way of identifying your responses in the

data archive. We are not interested in anyone’s individual responses; rather, we want

to look at the general patterns that emerge when all of the participants’ responses are

put together. We ask that you do not discuss the nature of the study with others who

may later participate in it, as this could affect the validity of our research conclusions.

If you have any questions about the study or would like to learn about the results

of the study, you may contact me (Isabel Brasil) through our research supervisor, Dr.

Kurt Baker, at (209) 664-6681. If you have questions about your rights as a research

participant, you may contact the Campus Compliance Officer of CSU Stanislaus at

[email protected]. If participation in the study caused you any concern,

anxiety, or distress, you may contact the Student Counseling Center at (209) 667-

3381.

If you would like to learn more about this research topic, we suggest the following

references:

56

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1987). Transactional theory and research on emotions

and coping. European Journal of Personality, 1(3), 141-169.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: study of

emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 150-170.

Documents

IS THERE LIFE AFTER GRADUATION?: A TEST OF TRANSACTIONAL ... · IS THERE LIFE AFTER GRADUATION?: ... Data Analysis ... also for those investing in further education to ensure them