examining the relationship between physical activity
TRANSCRIPT
EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSICAL ACTIVITY,
PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING, AND STRESS IN A COLLEGE POPULATION
By
Hannah Kruse Wike
Bart L. Weathington
UC Foundation Professor
(Chair)
Michael D. Biderman
(Committee Member)
Christopher J.L. Cunningham
(Committee Member)
ii
EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSICAL ACTIVITY,
PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING, AND STRESS IN A COLLEGE POPULATION
By
Hannah Kruse Wike
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Master of Science: Psychology
The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Chattanooga, TN
May 2015
iii
ABSTRACT
The present study evaluated the relationship between perceived stress and psychological
well-being as moderated by physical activity in college-age participants. Previous research
suggests physical activity relates to lower stress levels (Nguyen‐Michel, Unger, Hamilton, &
Spruijt‐Metz, 2006). Additionally, research has found physical activity is connected with overall
well-being and lower levels of mental health issues.
The results from an online survey collection (n=291) suggest that physical activity, at
least as operationalized in the study, does not moderate the relationship between perceived stress
and psychological well-being. However, perceived stress did have a significant relationship with
psychological well-being. Also, the interest and enjoyment motive for physical activity was a
significant predictor of physical activity participation. Lastly, students who scored higher in
positive affect were more likely to participate in physical activity.
iv
DEDICATION
This body of research is dedicated to both my mother and father. Each, in their unique
way, instilled a desire to seek knowledge in all aspects of life. To my mom, who has inspired me
by the utter passion she holds for everyday life. She truly lives presently and vibrantly. Through
her, I have learned I need to care for myself physically, mentally, and emotionally. To my dad,
whose work ethic is second to none. He will forever be a teacher for the many who cross and
have crossed his path. Through him, I have learned that hard work always proves fruitful in the
end.
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge my thesis committee – Dr. Bart Weathington, Dr. Chris
Cunningham, and Dr. Michael Biderman for an ample amount of support and expertise
throughout the duration of this project. Dr. Cunningham provided helpful and insightful feedback.
Dr. Biderman provided great statistical support. And, my thesis chair, Dr. Bart Weathington,
who was always on board with my ideas. Thank you, for your dedication and support towards
this project and my I-O professional development.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT iii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT v
LIST OF TABLES viii
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. LITERATURE REVIEW 3
Understanding Stress 3 Stress in a College Setting 5
Physical Manifestations of Stress 8 Coping Mechanisms 9
Physical Activity Levels in College Students 10
Physical Activity as a Coping Mechanism 12
Psychological Well-Being 13
Hypothesis and Research Questions 14
III. METHOD 16
Participants 16 Materials and Procedures 17
Survey Data Collection 17 Measures 17
Perceived Stress 17
Core Self Evaluation 17
Psychological Well-Being 18
Physical Activity 18
Positive and Negative Affect 19
General Achievement Motivation 19
Motives for Physical Activity 19
Personality 20
vii
IV. RESULTS 21
Analyses 21 Hypothesis Test 25 Hypothesis 1: Physical Activity as moderator between perceived stress and
psychological well-being 25 Research Question Tests 26
Research Question 1: Relationship between Positive Affect and Physical Activity 26 Research Question 2: Relationship between Conscientiousness and Physical Activity 27 Research Question 3: Relationship between Motives for Physical Activity and Physical Activity 27
V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 28 Implications and Conclusion 31 Limitations 31 Theoretical 32 Applied 32 Conclusion 33
REFERENCES 34
APPENDIX
A.IRB 41
B. IRB Amendment 43
C. SURVEY 45
VITA 85
viii
LIST OF TABLES
1. Internal Consistencies for All Measures 22
2. Measure Descriptive Statistics 23
3. Inter-measure Correlations 24
4. Hypothesis Test Results 26
5. Research Question Results 27
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A university degree is becoming increasingly necessary for entry into many jobs in the
modern workplace. Correspondingly, the number of students attending college is at an all-time
high. The typical student ("Digest of Education Statistics, 2013 ", 2013) begins college at the age
of 18 and graduates in his/her early 20s. This is a time of life fraught with many changes and
college adds to the stress and anxiety. In 2014, the American College Health Association
reported stress as the most important factor interfering with academic performance. Therefore, it
is necessary to identify coping mechanisms that students can use to alleviate stress. One potential
opportunity to combat the consequences of stress is the use of physical activity. In previous
research, daily physical activity has been found to help prevent physical and psychological
maladaptive occurrences (Moksnes, Moljord, Espnes, & Byrne, 2010). In addition, adolescent
students that experienced stress were less likely to report health complaints if they participated in
physical activity (Haugland, Wold, & Torsheim, 2003). Overall, it appears that physical activity
helps individuals control stress levels (Nguyen‐Michel et al., 2006)
Many universities utilize college-health personnel to help promote physical activity.
Similar to the implementation of employee wellness programs in the workplace, it has been
proposed that one optimal goal of college-health personnel is improved performance (Trockel,
Barnes, & Egget, (2000). When college-age students participate in physical activity, they have
the opportunity to improve their personal well-being (Keating, Guan, Piñero, & Bridges, 2010).
2
Bray and Born (2004) found that students who maintained high physical activity levels after
transitioning to college, reported lower levels of tension and fatigue. Further, significant
correlations between reduced anxiety and positive affect are found when physical activity is used
as a coping mechanism (Thome & Espelage, 2004). The current research is beneficial because it
addresses the use of physical activity as a moderator between stress and psychological well-
being.
3
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Understanding Stress
Stress is a multifaceted construct; therefore it is difficult to concretely define (McCoy,
Hutchinson, Hawthorne, Cosley, & Ell, 2014). In general, the experience of stress is an arousal
that occurs when external demands of the environment exceed a person’s ability to react
(Lazarus, 1966). However, the demands do not always result in negative outcomes. Two main
distinctions of stress are (1) eustress, which is a positive stressor that increases motivation and
(2) distress, a negative stressor that disturbs bodily states (Lazarus, 1993; Selye, 1974).
There are two ways to cognitively appraise stress. The Primary Appraisal Process
(Folkman, Lazarus, Gruen, & DeLongis, 1986) helps determine the meaning of a stressor. First,
the person assesses the potential harm of the situation. If the event is a threat to the person,
damage is a possibility. However, if the event is viewed as a challenge, the stressor has
beneficial potential (Folkman et al., 1986). Next, the Secondary Appraisal Process (Folkman et
al.) allows a person to determine what resources will be used in the event of a harm, threat, or
challenge.
4
Walter Cannon in 1932 proposed the “fight or flight” concept, which describes the
physiological response to a stressful event. He proposed the body releases the hormones,
epinephrine and norepinephrine in emergency situations (Kemeny, 2003). The stressful condition
triggers the adrenaline rush, then fight or flight via autonomic nervous system. (Kemeny, 2003).
Later, Selye (1950), explored the “fight or flight” reaction through the General Adaptation
Syndrome (GAS). The GAS has three stages: alarm, resistance, and exhaustion. During the alarm
phase, a person uses current resources to face the threat. In resistance, the person actively copes
with the stressful event. In exhaustion phase, a person depletes the resources to cope with the
stressor (Selye, 1956).
In addition to the cognitive appraisal of stress, the pressure – threat model is introduced.
Individuals feel pressure when performance is necessary to achieve a goal (McCoy et al., 2014).
Pressure can be categorized in different ways, similar to stress. Therefore pressure is not always
stressful (McCoy et al.). McCoy et al. (2014) defines pressure through two ways: (1) outcome
and (2) monitoring. Outcome pressure occurs when the working memory and attention resources
are unavailable to complete a cognitive task (McCoy et al.). Monitoring pressure is the
impairment of completing a cognitive task due to a social situation (McCoy et al.). These
researchers found that both monitoring pressure and outcome pressure hindered performance
when trying to complete rule-based tasks and information-integration tasks (McCoy et al.) Long
(2014) studied threatening workplace situations. When downsizing was a perceived threat,
employees were less creative. Further, he found employees that may lose their job were more
creative when they felt less pressure to complete a work task (Long, 2014).
Another way to appraise stress is through the challenge - hindrance model. This model
presented by LePine, LePine, and Jackson (2004), states that stressors can be positive or negative.
5
Challenges are stressors that improve performance. Hindrances are harmful stressors (LePine,
LePine, & Jackson, 2004). Stressors perceived as challenges or hindrance can elicit different
responses. Edwards, Franco-Watkins, Cullen, Howell, and Acuff (2014) stated stressors that are
perceived as challenges elicit more effort. On the other hand, those stressors perceived as
hindrances do not receive effort because usually there is no goal achievement. LePine et al.
(2004) found challenge stress positively relates to learning performance and hindrance stress
negatively relates to learning performance. Widmer, Semmer, Kälin, Jacobshagen, and Meier
(2012) found when strain was partialled out, there was a positive relationship between time
pressure and a positive outlook towards life. In this research, strain was a hindrance stressor
(Widmer et al., 2012).
Due to the difficulty of finding a single cause for stress, researchers turned to
understanding the personal perception. (DeLongis, Folkman, & Lazarus, 1988). If the individual
perceives an event as stressful, he or she is vulnerable to other negative effects (Chen, 1999).
Cohen, Kamarck, and Mermelstein (1983) stated perceived stress is a person’s appraisal of the
stressor through the environmental contexts and the intensity of the event. Cohen et al. (1983)
created a Perceived Stress Scale, which measures the different perceptions of stress from person
to person. This scale was developed to measure how respondents viewed their lives as irregular,
uncontrollable, or overwhelming (Cohen et al.). These three components were previously found
as factors of stress (Cohen et al.).
Hamarat et al. (2001) studied perceived stress levels as predictors for life satisfaction. In
young adults, such as college age students, perceived stress was a significantly better predictor
for life satisfaction, than the use of coping mechanisms. Furthermore, the study found that young
adults exhibited higher levels of perceived stress (Hamarat et al., 2001).
6
Stress in a College Setting
The term stressor(s) is more appropriate for this research because of the complex concept
of stress. Sonnentag (2003) defined stressors as single or multiple events, ranging in severity,
which evoke strain. Strain can arise from multiple stressors. Cheung and Cheung (2013) stated
that strain can cause disruption in one’s concentration, physiology and emotions. This research
will center on stressors in a collegiate environment. Psychological stressors, academic stressors,
and social stressors display a holistic view of a student’s perception of stress.
Students in higher education experience a diverse amount of stressors, Towbes and
Cohen (1996) measured six major areas of stress in this particular setting: (a) academic
achievement, (b) relationships with peers, (c) relationships with family members, (d) romantic
relationships, (e) difference in lifestyle, and (f) physical activity and appearance. Although these
subsets cannot be measured individually, together these constructs can help predict students’
depression levels (Towbes & Cohen, 1996). These stressors do not individually cause a student
to experience stress, but the culmination of numerous stressors dictates how the student perceives
stress (Ross, Niebling, & Heckert, 1999). Negga, Applewhite and Livingston (2007) studied
students at a historically black university. The five most highly reported stressors were (1) death
of a family member, (2) low grades, (3) time management issues, (4) romantic relationship issues,
and (5) missing class (Negga et al., 2007).
Daily hassles are considered stressors that occur in an individual’s everyday routine.
These can include sleep interruption, short disputes with friends or family, or even traffic issues.
Many daily hassles are out of a one’s control (Iwasaki, 2001). In previous research, students
reported higher levels of stress due to academic stressors and daily hassles (Iwasaki, 2001)
7
Academic stressors occur when there is inadequate time to increase the student’s present
knowledge base (Misra & McKean, 2000). A stress response can occur when academic material
overwhelms the current knowledge platform. Stressors in a college classroom are inversely
related to academic performance (Zajacova, Lynch, & Espenshade, 2005). Stressors include
examinations, deadlines, and increased workloads (Robotham & Julian, 2006). Ross, Neibling
and Heckert (1999) found weekly tests, ambiguous assignments, and uncomfortable classrooms
can increase stress levels. College students experience continual evaluation of their knowledge,
due to completing papers and studying for tests and quizzes (Ross et al., 1999).
Most students wish to excel in a university setting. There is continuous pressure of
receiving high grades and a diploma. Earning a degree creates a pipeline of employment
opportunities however, students who experience stress can have decreased performance in the
classroom (Pike & Kuh, 2005; Lumley and Provenzano (2003). Studying, class attendance, and
paying attention are hindered by stress. The students who choose not to perform these activities,
could experience more stress (Lumley & Provenzano, 2003).
Academic stressors can also lead to physical manifestations of stress by inducing poor
health outcomes for students (Akgun & Ciarrochi, 2003). The amount of stressors, such as tests
or papers, is positively correlated to occurrence of illness in a college setting (Lesko &
Summerfield, 1989). Perceived academic stress can lead to anxiety and depression in students
(Aldwin & Greenberger, 1987).
In a university setting, social stressors include: (1) gaining independence from family
members, (2) networking for their chosen career path, (3) creating new relationships, and (4)
searching for an ethical structure (Towbes & Cohen, 1996). Previous research found freshmen
students who have difficulty transitioning to college participate in maladaptive behaviors such as
8
blaming others and withdrawing from peer relationships (Zaleski, Levey-Thors, & Schiaffino,
1998). Furthermore, Sek (1991) found that social support mediates the relationship of stressful
events. This research suggests social support is a buffer when appraising stressful situations (Sęk,
1991). Zaleski, Levey-Thor and Schiaffino (1998), additionally found a positive correlation
between social support and positive views of the future.
Transitions to college may amplify the perceived stress for a new student because of the
numerous life adjustments occurring in a short amount of time (Rayle & Chung, 2008; Verger et
al. (2009)) studied the transitions of French medical students in association with the participants’
psychological distress. Socioeconomic status and the move from the parental home to school are
the two main stressors. However, participants, especially women, who had more social support,
reported lower levels of psychological distress (Verger et al., 2009).
Physical Manifestations of Stress
Physical manifestations of stress can lead to negative outcomes. Students who report high
levels of stress were predisposed to engage in unhealthy behaviors such as binge drinking,
smoking, and eating “junk” food (Hudd et al., 2000). However, having social support mediates
the effects of stress on a student (Hudd et al., 2000). Even more so, social support can be a buffer
for the effects of stress (El Ansari & Stock, 2011). Zaleski, Levey-Thor and Schiffino (1998)
found a positive correlation between students who experience more stressors and negative
physical symptoms.
Side effects of stress can lead to negative behaviors or outcomes. For example, some
researchers have found lack of exercise, weight gain, excessive drinking, coronary heart disease,
and mental illness as side effects of stress (Hillier, Fewell, Cann, & Shephard, 2005). Likewise,
9
in the college setting, there are social norms that contribute to stress inducing behaviors, such as
staying up all night to study for an exam (Hudd et al., 2000) Students who reported more stress
also engaged in unhealthy eating habits. Some other behaviors student participate in are smoking,
drinking, and considering suicide (Robotham & Julian, 2006). Further, to understand how some
individuals combat stress, coping mechanisms are introduced.
Coping Mechanisms
For this research, coping mechanisms are introduced to understand the role of physical
activity in a student’s life. Coping is the process of altering the interpretation of a stressful event,
to make it less taxing (Lazarus, 1993). The use of coping involves cognitive and behavioral
changes by the person to manage internal and external demands (Folkman, Lazarus, Gruen, &
DeLongis, 1986). Coping mechanisms are ongoing processes and highly based on the context of
the stressful situation (Lazarus, 1993). There are to main ways to cope: (1) problem focused
coping or (2) emotion-focused coping. Problem focused coping is a physical action to change the
stressful event. Emotion focused coping occurs when there is a difference of interpretation of the
stressful event. Both of these processes change the appraisal of the stressful event (Lazarus,
1993). In college age students, it is unclear which coping styles lead to poorer health outcomes
(Pritchard, Wilson, & Yamnitz, 2007). Additionally, Folkman, Lazarus, Gruen and DeLongis
(1986) hypothesized that how one person copes with one stressful event, could be how he or she
could cope with numerous stressors. Coping uses a person’s behaviors and thoughts to manage
the person-environment interaction. This interaction has a connection with his or her
psychological well-being (Folkman, et al., 1986). To further understand how individuals use
coping mechanism, physical activity is introduced.
10
Physical Activity Levels in College Students
Physical activity is categorized as a positive leisure activity, which is linked to many
health benefits. For this research, physical activity is defined as any movement between skeletal
muscles that exerts energy. It is categorized as low, moderate, vigorous and strength training
activities and must be consecutive for at least 20 minutes (Sliter & Sliter, 2014). Shinew and
Parry (2005) note that physical activity results in reduced heart rate, hypertension, and weight
gain. Likewise, the use of positive leisure activities is linked to higher confidence levels (Shinew
& Parry, 2005).
Although there are numerous physical activity resources for college students, many do
not take advantage of the opportunities. Wallace, Buckworth, Kirby, and Sherman (2000)
reported the steepest decline in physical activity levels occur in adolescence and young adults.
Physical activity is more prevalent for those students who live off-campus, than those who live
on-campus (Hicks & Heastie, 2008). Physical activity is one stress-connected intervention that
positively relates to self-esteem, a more subjective well-being, and health-related quality of life
(Thøgersen-Ntoumani, Fox, & Ntoumanis, 2005). Additionally, physical activity improves
resistance, so individuals are less susceptible to stress (Holland, 1997).
Motives to participate is physical activity differ in college students, like participating in
intramural sports or using the recreation center for exercise (Kilpatrick, Hebert, & Bartholomew,
2005). A commonly reported reason that students exercise is to maintain a positive, healthy
lifestyle. In contrast, students reported competition to be the highest motive to participate in
11
physical activity through sports. Using physical activity or sports for stress management
purposes were similar in the male students, but female students reported use of exercise over
sports (Kilpatrick et al., 2005).
Additionally, higher levels of self-efficacy are linked to physical activity. Individuals
who perceived themselves as capable are more likely to exercise (McAuley, Lox, & Duncan,
1993). Moreover, even participation in short spurts of exercise increases levels of self-efficacy
(McAuley et al.). Self-efficacy is an important determinant for health related behaviors, such as
physical activity (McAuley, Jerome, Marquez, Elavsky, & Blissmer, 2003).
Positive affect, referring to the extent of how a person feels active, alert and energetic
(Thome & Espelage, 2004) relates to physical activity levels. Thome and Espelage (2004) found
that positive and negative affect are both significantly associated with exercise participation.
However, when exercise is used for coping, it is only significantly associated with positive affect.
In college age males, exercise was found to be associated significantly with lower levels of
depression and a less negative affect (Thome & Espelage, 2004).
Moreover, the five-factor personality model (FFM) is studied in association with physical
activity. Some research is to understand development of personality traits with physical activity
(Stephan, Sutin, & Terracciano, 2014). Stephan, Sutin, and Terracciano (2014) found in
adulthood, physical activity leads to higher conscientiousness and extraversion levels to cope
with aging, such as preserving energy. Conscientiousness is linked to the intent to participate in
physical activity, and to act on those intentions (de Bruijn, De Groot, van den Putte, & Rhodes,
2009). Raynor and Levine (2009) found college age students’ who were high in
conscientiousness participated in moderate and vigorous physical activity.
12
Physical activity can act as a “buffer” between stressful events and physical and
psychological symptoms. Carmack, Boudreaux, Amaral-Melendez, Brandlty, and de Moor
(1999) found results that exercise can be a buffer for physical symptoms of stress in university
students. Further, these results were consistent with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. (Carmack et al.) The results also suggest students who participate in more leisure
physical activity have more buffers against stress (Carmack et al.)
However, Nguyen-Michel, Unger, Hamilton and Spruijt-Metz (2006) found inconsistent
results. These researchers found a non-significant association between physical activity and
perceived stress (Nguyen‐Michel et al., 2006). Similar to Nguyen‐Michel et al. (2006)
Moksnes, Moljord, Espnes, and Byrne (2010) found that physical activity did not moderate the
relationship between stress and psychological functioning in teenagers.
Physical Activity as a Coping Mechanism
Many college students enjoy being involved in organizations and using the physical
activity facilities on campus. Physical activity may be a positive coping mechanism for stressful
events in college students. In the literature based on physical activity of college students, it was
found that the use of exercise may buffer the effects of stressful events (Nguyen-Michel et al.,
2006). Wide ranges of health behaviors in college students affect GPA including exercise and
social support (Trockel, Barnes, & Egget, 2010). However, it is difficult to note if physical
activity is used as an active coping or an escape-avoidance technique. Many coping mechanism
measures do not capture physical activity in general as a coping mechanism (Thome & Espelage,
2004). Thome and Espelage (2004) uncovered interesting results surrounding students who use
exercise or physical activity as a coping mechanism. These researchers found exercise coping is
13
a separate category from task, emotion and avoidance focused coping strategies. Therefore, this
new grouping calls for additions of items to measures and further research (Thome & Espelage,
2004).
Previous research studied the concepts of action planning and coping planning to better
understand physical activity levels. Action planning has been previously found to help bridge the
gap between intentions and behaviors (Caudroit, Boiché, & Stephan, 2014). Action planning
refers to creating a plan based on intentions to complete specific actions. Coping planning refers
to anticipating daily hassles and creating an action plan to overcome difficulties (Caudroit et al.,
2014). Caudroit et al. (2014) found that individuals with high intentions to engage in physical
activity were more likely to participate because of the planning. Further, those individuals with
high level coping plans participated in physical activity because they understand the benefit of
physical activity (e.g. positive mood, less tired) (Caudroit et al., 2014).
Using physical activity as coping mechanism relates to student’s having a healthy
transition into an academic setting. Bray and Kwan (2006) found that students who participated
in vigorous physical activity had a more positive psychological well-being and fewer illnesses.
Pritchard et al. (2007) found in college students, emotion focused coping related to negative
psychological outcomes. Further, Taliaferro, Rienzo, Pigg, Miller, and Dodd (2009) found
empirical evidence that the use of physical activity is positively related to reduced suicidal
thoughts. Physical activity also relates to reduced risks of hopelessness and depression in young
adults (Taliaferro et al., 2009). Moreover, using physical activity as a coping mechanism can
help better understand the overall quality of life, through psychological well-being.
Psychological Well-Being
14
Psychological well-being distinguishes the difference between positive and negative
affect in individuals (Ryff, 1989). Ryff (1995) presents six dimensions of psychological well-
being: (1) self-acceptance, (2) position relations with other people, (3) autonomy, (4)
environmental mastery, (5) purpose in life, and (6) personal growth. These six dimensions
represent variations of well-being based on different life experiences (Ryff, 1995).
Dispositional optimism is related to psychological well-being through the measured
constructs. This is the general belief that positive occurrences will happen in the future and the
negative occurrences will be minimal (Hayes & Weathington, 2007). Dispositional optimism has
been found to be a mediator of how people respond to stressful situations (Scheier, Weintraub, &
Carver, 1986). Someone with an optimistic outlook may not perceive a challenging event as very
taxing (Hayes & Weathington, 2007). Scheier, Weintraub, and Carver (1986) found that
optimistic students are more adaptive and use coping mechanisms. (Scheier et al., 1986).
Furthermore, optimism is a buffer for stressful events in college (Hayes & Weathington, 2007).
In an academic setting, psychological well-being and stress do have a relationship.
Rogers, Creed, and Searle (2012) found academic stress to be a strong predictor of well-being in
medical school students. The results of this study suggested students who appraised school
workload as stressful or threatening displayed lower levels of well-being (Rogers et al., 2012)
Moreover, psychological well-being and physical exercise are linked. The use of a leisure
activity, such as physical activity, increases well-being and lowers mental health-issues (Iwasaki,
2001). Chow (2007) found physical health to be a significant predictor of psychological well-
being in undergraduate students. Physical exercise alleviates negative moods, reduces anger, and
decreases depression and anxiety (Hassmen, Koivula, & Uutela, 2000). Hassmen, Koivula and
Uutela (2000) found that those who exercised more, experienced lower cynical distrust in others
15
and lower levels of perceived stress. Additionally, those who exercised more frequently felt more
socially integrated into their community (Hassmen et al., 2000) The current research hopes
uncover the inconsistencies between stress, physical activity and well-being.
Hypothesis and Research Questions
The proposed hypotheses for this study follow the concepts of stressors, physical activity
levels, and psychological well-being. The model below follows a moderation relationship
between stress and psychological well-being.
Hypothesis 1: Students’ physical activity will moderate the relationship between perceived stress
and psychological well-being.
Research Question 1: Will students with higher levels of positive affect display higher levels of
physical activity?
Research Question 2: Will students with higher levels of conscientiousness display higher levels
of physical activity?
Research Question 3: Will students with differing motives for physical activity (interest,
enjoyment, or fitness) display different levels of physical activity?
16
CHAPTER III
METHOD
Participants
This research was conducted at a mid-sized, public university located in the southeastern
United States. Data was collected from 309 students, but after removing those participants who
failed to complete all items, the total of 291 participants. All students over the age of 18 on the
university’s campus were eligible to participant. Ages ranged from 18 to 30 (Mage=21.71, median
= 18, SD=33.06). There were 211 females (72.5%) and 77 males (26.5%) in the sample. Three
participants chose not to disclose gender (1%). The sample consisted of 80% White participants
(n=234), 11% African Americans (n=32), 2.4% Asian (n=7), 2.1% multiracial (n=6), 1%
Hispanic (n=3), 0.7% Indian (n=2), and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander and American
Indian (n=1) or Alaskan Native (n=1) each made up 0.3% of the participants. The participants
represented all four academic years (freshmen=211, sophomore= 26, juniors = 19, seniors = 28).
About 66% of the participant population uses the Aquatic Recreational Center (ARC) on campus
(n=192). Lastly, the sample population noted if he or she attended the university on NCAA
scholarship (n=18). Demographics are displayed is Table 1.
17
Materials and Procedures
Survey Data Collection
Data was collected online utilizing SurveyMonkey (www.surveymonkey.com) and
administered by survey link. This assessment took 60 minutes. Survey data collection was
finalized spring of 2015. The data set was exported to SPSS (v. 21) for analyses
Measures
Perceived Stress
The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) was used to assess perceived stress (Cohen et al., 1983).
This measure consists of ten questions and utilizes a 5-point Likert-type rating scale, ranging
from zero (never) to four (very often). The PSS can be used to understand the “appraised” stress
of the respondent. These perceived levels of stress are influenced by daily tasks, major events,
and coping resources (e.g. social support). The reliability for this measure was α=.86 (Cohen,
Kamarck, & Marmelstein, 1983).
Core Self Evaluation
The Core Self Evaluation Scale (CSES) measures four constructs: self-esteem, general
self-efficacy, neuroticism, and locus of control(Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, 1998)).
Overall, this measure appraises the respondent’s worthiness, effectiveness, and capability as a
person (Judge et al., 1998) This measure consists of 12 items, based on a 5-point Likert-type
18
scale ranging from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree). The reliability for this
measure was α=.84 (Judge et al., 1998)
Psychological General Well-Being
The Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWBI) is a validated measure to help
understand respondent’s health-related quality of life. The measure is based on five domains:
anxiety, depressed mood, positive well-being, self-control, and general health and vitality. There
are 22 questions, rated on a 6-point scale with different answers, assessing psychological and
general well-being. The summary score is a sum of all the responses, ranging from 0 (lowest
level of well-being) to 110 (highest level of well-being). For the current research, this measure
was used to evaluate the outcome of the study. The reliability for this measure was α= .80 to .92
Physical Activity
The Concise Physical Activity Questionnaire (CPAQ) developed by Sliter and Sliter
(2014) was used to assess levels of physical activity. It is a self-report measure of general
physical activity. The CPAQ defines physical activity as, “any movement of the body that is the
result of contractions on skeletal muscles and that leads to expenditure of energy” (p.3).
Respondents’ answer based on how often he or she participates in physical activity a week, based
on the last month. The activity must be continued for at least 20 consecutive minutes. The types
of physical activity are light, moderate, vigorous, and muscle-strengthening activity. The
researchers concluded reliability was not appropriate for this questionnaire because of the
different types of physical activity measured are not expected to relate to one another in a
consistent way.
19
Positive and Negative Affect
The Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS –X) was developed byWatson and
Clark (1999) . This measure is an extended version that assesses the overall emotional state of
the respondent, either positive or negative, and distinctive affects. The positive affect scale
measures the following emotions: active, alert, attentive, determined, enthusiastic, excited,
inspired, interested, proud, and strong (Watson & Clark, 1999) The negative affect scale
measures these emotions: afraid, scared, nervous, jittery, irritable, hostile, guilty, ashamed, upset
and distressed (Watson & Clark, 1999)The entire measure consists of 60 questions, rated on a 5-
point Likert scale, ranging one (very slightly or not all) to 5 (extremely). This measure supports
the current research by helping understand the relationship between participant’s psychological
well-being and his or her affect. The reliability Positive Affect ranged from α=.83 to α=.90. The
reliability for Negative Affect ranged from α=.85 to α=.90.
General Achievement Motivation
The IPIP Achievement Striving (Goldberg, 1999) was used to determine participant’s
drive for excellence. This measure had adequate reliability (α=.79). This measure consists of ten
questions, rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from one (very strongly disagree) to seven
(very strongly agree). This measure is a facet of the conscientiousness construct.
Motives for Physical Activity
20
The Motives for Physical Activity Measure (MPAM-R) created by Ryan, Frederick, Lepes,
Rubio, and Sheldon (1997)is used to decipher the purpose of participating in physical activity.
Five different constructs are measured: enjoyment/interest, competence, appearance, fitness, and
social. Participants answer 30 questions, rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from one
(not true for me at all) to 7(very true to me). Each construct received a summary scale to further
understand the motives (Ryan et al., 1997)The reliabilities ranged from α=.78 to α=.92 based on
the constructs.
Personality
To measure the Big Five Factor Model of personality, the International Person Item Pool 50-
item questionnaire was used (Goldberg, 1999). . This 50-item questionnaire measures five
constructs: openness to experiences, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and
emotional stability. The assessment uses a 7-point Likert scale, one (completely inaccurate) to
seven (completely accurate). Previous research displays conscientiousness plays a role in
determining health related behaviors (Lodi-Smith et al., 2010). The average reliability for this
measure was α=.80 (Goldberg, 1999)
21
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Analyses
Several preliminary measures were taken before analyses were performed. First, students
who did not consent to participate were removed from the data set (n=1). The remaining data
points were evaluated for missing responses. Participants who failed to respond to 10% or more
of the survey were removed (n=18). Remaining missing data points in each measure were
assigned the mean response for that particular item. The number of useable participants was 291.
After, items that needed reverse coding were identified. Internal consistencies for each of
the measures were evaluated with Cronbach’s alpha (Table 1). Descriptive statistics are
presented in Table 2 and inter-measure correlations are all summarized in Table 3
22
Table 1 Internal Consistencies for All Measures
Measure N # of Items Cronbach's α
Core Self- Evaluations 291 12 0.87
IPIP Achievement Striving 291 10 0.80
Motives for Physical Activity
Measure 291 30 0.97
Interest and Enjoyment 291 7 0.94
Competence 291 7 0.95
Appearance 291 6 0.90
Fitness 291 5 0.92
Social 291 5 0.90
IPIP Big Five Factor Model - 50
Item 291 50 0.91
Extraversion 291 10 0.89
Agreeableness 291 10 0.81
Conscientiousness 291 10 0.82
Emotional Stability 291 10 0.86
Openness to Experience 291 10 0.77
Perceived Stress Scale 291 10 0.84
Positive Affect and Negative Affect
Scale 291 60 0.88
General Positive Affect 291 10 0.88
General Negative Affect 291 10 0.90
Psychological General Well-Being 291 22 0.94
23
24
Table 2 Measure Descriptive Statistics
Measure N Mean S.D.
1. Concise Physical Activity Questionnaire 291 7.85 4.72
2. Core Self- Evaluations 291 44.40 7.86
3. IPIP Achievement Striving 291 46.75 7.86
4. MPAM Interest and Enjoyment 291 32.97 10.82
5. MPAM Competence 291 32.63 11.15
6. MPAM Appearance 291 30.52 8.53
7. MPAM Fitness 291 26.15 7.28
8. MPAM Social 291 19.41 8.00
9. Extraversion 291 32.37 8.10
10. Agreeableness 291 38.98 5.95
11. Conscientiousness 291 35.71 6.35
12. Emotional Stability 291 30.72 7.53
13. Openness to Experience 291 36.01 5.41
14. Perceived Stress Scale 291 17.98 6.1
15. General Positive Affect 291 32.36 7.35
16. General Negative Affect 291 21.34 8.18
17. Psychological General Well-Being 291 70.38 17.54
24
Table 3 Inter-measure Correlations
25
To test the hypothesis a moderated regression analysis was run to understand the
significance of the predictors perceived stress and physical activity levels while holding
psychological well-being constant. Both Aiken and West (1991) and A. F. Hayes (2013)
techniques for moderation regression analyses were used. Hayes model of moderation helps
determine the interaction variable displays the independent variable effect is dependent on the
moderator variable or if the interaction is what is expected to occur assuming the moderator
doesn't actually moderate the relationship (A. F. Hayes, 2013). An interaction variable was
calculated for perceived stress and physical activity to test for moderation. To test the research
questions, a multiple linear regression was used to evaluate the significance of the predictors:
positive affect, conscientiousness, and motives for physical activity, while holding physical
activity constant.
Hypothesis Test
Hypothesis 1: Physical Activity as moderator between perceived stress and psychological
well-being
Moderated regression procedures were used to test the main hypothesis. The first step is
to identify the dependent variable, psychological general well-being. The second and third steps
are adding perceived stress and physical activity measures into the regression model to determine
the influence on the relationship. Lastly, the interaction variable, perceived stress multiplied by
physical activity is added to the regression model to determine the moderation. For all tests the
p-value of .05 was the cutoff to determine statistical significance.
It was hypothesized that the relationship between students’ perceived stress and
psychological well-being would be moderated by physical activity levels. Table 4 displays the
26
moderated regression results. Overall, physical activity did not moderate the relationship
between students’ perceived stress and psychological general well-being (Figure 1) (β=0.080,
t=0.831 NS p > 0.05,). However, depicted in Figure 2, perceived stress did contribute
significantly to the moderated regression model (β= -0.846, t= -26.971, p = 0.00,).
Table 4 Hypothesis Test Results
Predictors Β t p
Perceived Stress -0.847 -26.971 0.00
Physical Activity -0.004 -0.138 0.89
Research Questions
Several research questions were tested to further understand the relationship with
students’ physical activity levels. A multiple regression procedure was used to test the
significance of the predictors positive affect, conscientiousness, and the motives for physical
activity. Physical activity was held constant throughout the multiple regression. In the first step
positive affect was added, then conscientiousness in step two, and lastly the motives for physical
activity: interested and enjoyment, and then fitness. This process was used to see if any of the
predictors affected over and above any of the others.
Research Question 1: Relationship between Positive Affect and Physical Activity
Research Question 1 examined the relationship between students’ level of positive affect
and level of physical activity. Positive Affect was a significant predictor for physical activity.
(β=0.137, t= 2.251, p < 0.05).
27
Research Question 2: Relationship between Conscientiousness and Physical Activity
Research Question 2 tested the relationship between students’ conscientiousness levels
and physical activity. Conscientiousness was added to the multiple regression model
Conscientiousness was not significantly related to physical activity levels (β=-.039, t=-.678, NS p
> 0.05).
Research Question 3: Relationship between Motives for Physical Activity and Physical
Activity
Research Question 3 studied relationship between the motives for physical activity:
interest and enjoyment and fitness and physical activity levels. Both of these motives were added
to the regression model, with positive affect and conscientiousness. While holding physical
activity constant, the motive of fitness did not significantly add to the relationships (β=0.116, t
=1.449, NS p > 0.05). However, the motive of interest and enjoyment did significantly add to the
relationship (β =0.300, t=3.618, p < 0.05).
Table 5 Research Question Results
Predictors Β t P
General positive affect 0.137 2.251 0.025
Conscientiousness -0.039 -0.678 0.498
Interest and Enjoyment 0.3 3.618 0.000
Fitness 0.116 1.449 0.148
28
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The current research examines the associations between stress, physical activity, and
well-being. Earlier research studied relationships between stress and physical activity or stress
and psychological well-being. This study, however, hopes to display the purpose of studying all
three concepts. The hypothesis predicting physical activity would moderate the relationship
between perceived stress and psychological general well-being was not significant. Although,
perceived stress did significantly affect well-being. Based on the research questions, the multiple
regression results display general positive affect and having interest and enjoyment in physical
activity, both significantly relate to physical activity levels.
The main hypothesis results are consistent with research presented by Moksnes et al.,
(2010). These researchers focused on adolescents in Norway, studying the relationships between
stress, psychological functioning and the use of leisure physical activity. Higher levels of
physical activity significantly associated with higher self-esteem and lower depression, except
when controlling for age and gender. However, leisure time physical activity did not moderate
the relationship between stress and psychological functioning (Moksnes et al., 2010).
These results are also consistent with Nguyen-Michel et al. (2006). These researchers found a
significant relationship between college age students’ physical activity and daily hassles, but no
significant relationship with perceived stress (Nguyen‐Michel et al., 2006).
29
Moksnes et al. (2010) and Nguyen-Michel et al. (2006) contribute these findings to the
complexity of stress. Stress is a multifaceted construct; therefore it is affected by many factors.
These constructs still remained unexplored, so the contributing mechanisms are an important
area for future research. Because the types of stressors were not investigated, the contributing
factors are unknown for this particular study.
Additionally, perceived stress being a significant predictor of well-being is consistent
with the research conducted by Rogers et al. (2012) The study found that academic stress
predicted well-being levels in medical school students(Rogers et al., 2012).
Interest and enjoyment as a motive for physical activity was found as a significant
contributor physical activity levels. Kilpatrick, Hebert and Bartholomew (2005) found that
enjoyment in physical activity, either a sport or exercise, was important for participation. These
findings also align with Teixeira et al. (2006), which found intrinsic motivation (interest and
enjoyment) for physical activity play a central role in continually participating in physical
activity.
Additionally, general positive affect was found to be a significant predictor for physical
activity. Similarly, Thome and Espelage (2004) found when exercise was used as coping
mechanism, it significantly related to positive affect. Although, for the current study, physical
activity was not a coping mechanism, this result adds to the body of research. Kavussanu and
McAuley (1995) researched the relationship between optimism and physical activity. This study
suggests that more active individuals are also more optimistic compared to inactive individuals
(Kavussanu & McAuley, 1995). This study may be outdated; however it is consistent with the
present findings.
30
Conscientiousness was evaluated based on its relationship with physical activity. The
relationship was non-significant, which is inconsistent with previous findings (Raynor and
Levine (2009); Stephan et al., 2014). The inconsistency in results could be due to the sample
population. Unlike the current research, previous research used adult participants. Another
reason could be the short term phase of this research. The relationship between physical activity
and personality is unidirectional, meaning a physically active lifestyle may contribute to
personality development (Stephan et al., 2014) .
Fitness, a motive for physical activity, along with interest and enjoyment is an intrinsic
motivator. In the current study, fitness was non-significantly associated with physical activity.
These results are inconsistent with past research. Ingeldew and Markland (2009) found a positive
association between health and fitness and physical activity. With further investigation, Ingeldew,
Markland, and Ferguseon (2009) found interests in health and fitness positively predicted
participation in physical activity. This inconsistency could be based on two reasons: first,
different measures for motives of physical activity were used. Secondly, Ingeldew and Markland
(2008) used a sample from a workplace setting, different from the present research.
The present study focused on stress, physical activity and general well-being, some
findings being convergent with past literature. Specifically the findings associated with physical
activity, which does not moderate the relationship between perceived stress and psychological
well-being. Although this does not solve current issues, it brings to light a gap in college-age
research. This break allows an opportunity for more research surrounding the relationship of
stressors and physical activity. Another helpful link could be to further understand physical
activity and psychological well-being.
31
However, this research provides knowledge based on positive affect and its relationship
to physical activity. Previous research is outdated or focused on the use of coping mechanisms.
Further, positive affect added significantly to physical activity when controlling for
conscientiousness, and two motives for physical activity: interest and enjoyment and fitness. A
new distinction in the research could help further investigate the relationships between positive
affect and intrinsic motives for physical activity.
Implications and Conclusion
Limitations
As with all self-report measures, common method bias is an issue. Even though honesty
is encouraged, these types of reports seem to bring about common method bias. Also, the sample
demographics could cause problems with the generalizability of results. Many of the respondents
were freshmen, white and female. The results may have been varied if other demographics were
present. This research was on a short-term basis. Therefore, a longitudinal study, focusing on
students throughout their academic career and changing stress levels could be beneficial. Using
physical activity as an intervention, compared to a control group could also produce helpful
results.
Additionally, college stressors were not identified. This could help categorize where
college students experience the most amount of stress. Further these categories could lead to
uncovering more information associated with social support, stress, and the use of physical
activity.
32
Theoretical
In the current study, physical activity was not viewed as a coping mechanism. However,
the measure used, the Concise Physical Activity Questionnaire (Sliter & Sliter, 2014) is based on
behaviors. Therefore, the Effort-Recovery model was used to further understand the use of
physical activity for college age participants. Research displayed results that physical activity
could be linked to less fatigue. Further, the Conservation of Resources theory could help
categorize physical activity as a resource. The use of physical activity can help gain social
support, lead to learning about one’s body, and could be a link to personal characteristics. This
research offers prospective studies surrounding relationships between well-being, overall
optimism and physical activity levels.
Applied
From an applied perspective, this research indicates an opportunity for college-health
personnel gain new insight. The current study could bring to light areas of strength or challenges
in college health personnel programming. Many colleges offer opportunities for students to
participate in physical activity, however there could be more opportunities for education
surrounding stress relief. As stated previously, research presented by Hicks and Heastie (2008)
stated that students who lived off-campus were more likely to participate in physical activity than
on-campus students. Therefore, this could be an area of improvement for college-health
personnel. This research calls for new approaches for college health personnel educators to share
information about stress, well-being and the benefits of physical activity.
Additionally, there is a call for research to better understand physical activity as a coping
mechanism. Previous research displayed physical activity could be an additional coping
33
mechanism category (Thome & Espelage, 2004). New findings could help uncover a different
positive purpose for physical activity participation.
Conclusion
Overall, the present research adds to the current literature surrounding university students.
Although the moderation hypothesis was not significant, it is convergent with other research.
Therefore, this research calls to further understand how physical activity connects with stress
levels and well-being. However, the predictive significant relationship of perceived stress for
psychological well-being displays additional results to current literature. Positive affect and
interest and enjoyment predict the use of physical activity, which is also consistent with previous
research. Conscientiousness and fitness as a motive for physical activity are not significant
predictors for physical activity levels. All of the results of the current research contribute to
further understanding the relationship between stress, physical activity and psychological well-
being.
34
REFERENCES
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Mutliple regresison: Testing and interpreting interactions
Sage
Akgun, S., & Ciarrochi, J. (2003). Learned resourcefulness moderates the relationship between
academic stress and academic performance. Educational Psychology, 23(3), 287-294.
doi: 10.1080/0144341032000060129
Aldwin, C., & Greenberger, E. (1987). Cultural differences in the predictors of depression.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 15(6), 789-813.
Bray, & Kwan, M. Y. W. (2006). Physical activity is associated with better health and
psychological well-being during transition to university life. Journal of American College
Health, 55(2), 77-82. doi: 10.3200/JACH.55.2.77-82
Bray, S. R., & Born, H. A. (2004). Transitions to univsersity and vigorous physical acitivity:
Implications for health and psychological well-being. Journal Of American College
Health, 52(4), 181-188.
Carmack, C. L., Boudreaux, E., Amaral-Melendez, M., Brantley, P. J., & de Moor, C. (1999).
Aerobic fitness and leaisure physical activity as moderators of stress-illness relation.
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 21(3), 251-257.
Caudroit, J., Boiché, J., & Stephan, Y. (2014). The role of action and coping planning in the
relationship between intention and physical activity: A moderated mediation analysis.
Psychology & Health, 29(7), 768-780. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2014.884223
Chen, C. P. (1999). Professional Issues: Common Stressors Among International College
Students: Research and Counseling Implications. Journal of College Counseling, 2(1),
49-65. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1882.1999.tb00142.x
Cheung, F. Y.-L., & Cheung, R. Y.-H. (2013). Effect of emotional dissonance on organizational
citizenship behavior: Testing the stressor-strain-outcome model. The Journal of
Psychology, 147(1), 89-103.
Chow, H. P. (2007). Psychological well-being and scholastic achievement among university
students in a Canadian Prairie City. Social Psychology of Education, 10(4), 483-493.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress.
Journal of health and social behavior, 385-396.
de Bruijn, G.-J., De Groot, R., van den Putte, B., & Rhodes, R. E. (2009). Conscientiousness,
extroversion, and action control: Comparing moderate and vigorous physical activity.
Journal of Aport & Exercise Psychology, 31(6), 724-742.
35
DeLongis, A., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). The impact of daily stress on health and
mood: Psychological and social resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54(3), 486-495.
Digest of Education Statistics, 2013 (2013).
Edwards, Franco-Watkins, A. M., Cullen, K., L., Howell, J. W., & Acuff, R. E. (2014). Unifying
the challenge-hindrance and sociocognitive models of stress. International Journal of
Stress Management, 21(2), 162.
Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Harrison, R. V. (1998). Person-Environment fit theory:
Conceptual foundations, empirical evidence, and directions for future research. 28-67.
El Ansari, W., & Stock, C. (2011). Feeling healthy? A survey of physical and psychological
wellbeing of students from seven universities in the UK. International journal of
environmental research and public health, 8(5), 1308-1323.
Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Gruen, R. J., & DeLongis, A. (1986). Appraisal, coping, health
status, and psychological symptoms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3),
571-579.
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the
lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality psychology in Europe, 7, 7-
28.
Hamarat, E., Thompson, D., Zabrucky, K. M., Steele, D., Matheny, K. B., & Aysan, F. (2001).
Perceived stress and coping resource availability as predictors of life satisfaction in
young, middle-aged, and older adults. Experimental Aging Research, 27(2), 181-196.
Hassmen, P., Koivula, N., & Uutela, A. (2000). Physical exercise and psychological well-being:
a population study in Finland. Preventive Medicine, 30(1), 17-25. doi:
10.1006/pmed.1999.0597
Haugland, S., Wold, B., & Torsheim, T. (2003). Relieving the pressure? The role of physical
activity in the relationship between school-related stress and adolescent health complaints.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74(2), 127-135. doi:
10.1080/02701367.2003.10609074
Hayes, & Weathington, B. L. (2007). Optimism, stress, life satisfaction, and job burnout in
restaurant managers. Journal of Psychology, 141(6), 565-579.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A
regression based approach. New York: The Guilford Press.
36
Hicks, T., & Heastie, S. (2008). High school to college transition: A profile of the stressors,
physical and psychological health issues that affect the first-year on-campus college
student. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 15(3), 144-147.
Hillier, D., Fewell, F., Cann, W., & Shephard, V. (2005). Wellness at work: Enhancing the
quality of our working lives. International Review of Psychiatry, 17(5), 419-431.
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work
environments: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Hudd, S., Dumlao, J., Erdmann-Sager, D., Murray, D., Phan, E., Soukas, N., & Yokozuka, N.
(2000). Stress at college: Effects on health habits, health status and self-esteem. College
Student Journal, 34(2), 217-227.
Ingeldew, D. K., & Markland, D. (2008). The role of motives in exercise participationy.
Psychology and Health, 23(7).
Ingeldew, D. K., & Markland, D. (2009). Three levels of exercise motivation. Applied
Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1(3).
Ingledew, D. K., Markland, D., & Ferguson, E. (2009). Three levels of exercise motivation.
Applied Psychology: Health and Well‐Being, 1(3), 336-355.
Iwasaki, Y. (2001). Contributions of leisure to coping with daily hassles in university students'
lives. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du
comportement, 33(2), 128-141. doi: 10.1037/h0087135
Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C., & Kluger, A. N. (1998). Dispositional effects on job
and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1),
17.
Kavussanu, M., & McAuley, E. (1995). Exercise and optimism: Are highly active individuals
more optimistic? Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 246-246.
Keating, X. D., Guan, J., Piñero, J. C., & Bridges, D. M. (2010). A meta-analysis of college
students' physical activity behaviors. Journal of American College Health, 54(2), 116-
126. doi: 10.3200/JACH.54.2.116-126
Kemeny, M. E. (2003). Psychobiology of Stress. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
12(4). doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.01246
Kilpatrick, M., Hebert, E., & Bartholomew, J. (2005). College students' motivation for physical
activity: differentiating men's and women's motives for sport participation and exercise.
Journal of American College Health, 54(2), 87-94.
Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York McGraw-Hill.
37
Lazarus, R. S. (1993). From psychological stress to the emotions: A history of changing outlooks.
Annual review of psychology, 44, 1-21.
LePine, J. A., LePine, M. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2004). Challenge and hindrance stress:
Relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 89(5), 883.
Lesko, W. A., & Summerfield, L. (1989). Academic stress and health changes in female college
students. Health education, 20(1), 18-21.
Lodi-Smith, J., Jackson, J., Bogg, T., Walton, K., Wood, D., Harms, P., & Roberts, B. W. (2010).
Mechanisms of health: Education and health-related behaviours partially mediate the
relationship between conscientiousness and self-reported physical health. Psychology and
Health, 25(3), 305-319.
Lumley, M. A., & Provenzano, K. M. (2003). Stress management through written emotional
disclosure improves academic performance among college students with physical
symptoms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 641.
McAuley, E., Jerome, G. J., Marquez, D. X., Elavsky, S., & Blissmer, B. (2003). Exercise self-
efficacy in older adults: Social, affective, and behavioral influences. Annals of Behavioral
Medicine, 25(1), 1-7. doi: 10.1207/S15324796ABM2501_01
McAuley, E., Lox, C., & Duncan, T. E. (1993). Long-term Maintenance of Exercise, Self-
Efficacy, and Physiological Change in Older Adults. Journal of Gerontology, 48(4),
P218-P224. doi: 10.1093/geronj/48.4.P218
McCoy, S. K., Hutchinson, S., Hawthorne, L., Cosley, B. J., & Ell, S. W. (2014). Is pressure
stressful? The impact of pressure on the stress response and category learning. Cognitive,
Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14(2), 769-781.
Misra, R., & McKean, M. (2000). College students' academic stress and its relation to their
anxiety, time management, and leisure satisfaction American Journal of Health Studies,
16(1), 41.
Moksnes, U. K., Moljord, I. E. O., Espnes, G. A., & Byrne, D. G. (2010). Leisure time physical
activity does not moderate the relationship between stress and psychological functioning
in Norwegian adolescents. Mental Health and Physical Activity, 3, 17-22. doi:
10.1016/j.mhpa.2009.12.002
Negga, F., Applewhite, S., & Livingston, I. (2007). African american college students and stress:
School racial compostion, self-esteem, and social support. College Student Journal, 41(4),
823-830.
38
Nguyen‐Michel, S. T., Unger, J. B., Hamilton, J., & Spruijt‐Metz, D. (2006). Associations
between physical activity and perceived stress/hassles in college students. Stress and
Health, 22(3), 179-188.
Pritchard, M. E., Wilson, G. S., & Yamnitz, B. (2007). What Predicts Adjustment Among
College Students? A Longitudinal Panel Study. Journal of American College Health,
56(1), 15-21. doi: 10.3200/JACH.56.1.15-22
Rayle, A. D., & Chung, K.-Y. (2008). Revisiting first-year college students' mattering: Social
support, academic stress, and the mattering experience. Journal of College Student
Retention, 9(21-37).
Raynor, D. A., & Levine, H. (2009). Associations between the five-factor model of personality
and health behaviors among college students. Journal of American College Health, 58(1),
73-82.
Robotham, D., & Julian, C. (2006). Stress and the higher education student: A critical review of
the literature. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 30(02), 107-117.
Rogers, M. E., Creed, P. A., & Searle, J. (2012). Person and environmental factors associated
with well-being in medical students. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(4), 472-
477.
Ross, S. E., Niebling, B. C., & Heckert, T. M. (1999). Sources of stress among college students.
Social Psychology, 61(5), 841-846.
Ryan, R. M., Frederick, C. M., Lepes, D., Rubio, N., & Sheldon, K. M. (1997). Intrinsic
motivation and exercise adherence. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 28(4),
335-354.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of
psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57(6), 1069.
Ryff, C. D. (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current directions in psychological
science, 99-104.
Scheier, M. F., Weintraub, J. K., & Carver, C. S. (1986). Coping with stress: Divergent strategies
of optimists and pessimists. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1257.
Sęk, H. (1991). Life stress in various domains and perceived effectiveness of social support.
Polish Psychological Bulletin.
Selye, H. (1950). Stress and the general adaptation syndrome. British medical journal, 1(4667),
1383.
Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life.
39
Selye, H. (1974). Stress sans détresse: Lippincott.
Shinew, K. J., & Parry, D. C. (2005). Examining college students' participation in the leisure
pursuits of drinking and illegal drug use. Journal of Leisure Research, 37(3), 364.
Sliter, K. A., & Sliter, M. T. (2014). The Concise Physical Activity Questionnaire (CPAQ): Its
development, validation, and application to firefighter occupational health. International
Journal of Stress Management, 21(3), 283.
Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: a new look at the
interface between nonwork and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 518.
Stephan, Y., Sutin, A. R., & Terracciano, A. (2014). Physical activity and personality
development across adulthood and old age: Evidence from two longitudinal studies.
Journal of Research in Personality, 49, 1-7.
Taliaferro, L. A., Rienzo, B. A., Pigg, M., Jr., Miller, M. D., & Dodd, V. J. (2009). Associations
Between Physical Activity and Reduced Rates of Hopelessness, Depression, and Suicidal
Behavior Among College Students. Journal of American College Health, 57(4), 427-435.
doi: 10.3200/JACH.57.4.427-436
Teixeira, P. J., Going, S. B., Houtkooper, L. B., Cussler, E. C., Metcalfe, L. L., Blew, R. M., . . .
Lohman, T. G. (2006). Exercise motivation, eating, and body image variables as
predictors of weight control. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 38(1), 179.
Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C., Fox, K. R., & Ntoumanis, N. (2005). Relationships between exercise
and three components of mental well-being in corporate employees. Psychology of Sport
and Exercise, 6(6), 609-627.
Thome, J., & Espelage, D. L. (2004). Relations among exercise, coping, disordered eating, and
psychological health among college students. Eating Behaviors, 5(4), 337-351.
Towbes, L. C., & Cohen, L. H. (1996). Chronic stress in the lives of college students: Scale
development and prospective prediction of distress. Journal of youth and adolescence,
25(2), 199-217.
Trockel, M. T., Barnes, M. D., & Egget, D. L. (2000). Health-related variables and academic
performance among first-year college students: Implications for sleep and other behaviors.
Journal of American college health, 49(3), 125-131.
Verger, P., Combes, J.-B., Kovess-Masfety, V., Choquet, M., Guagliardo, V., Rouillon, F., &
Peretti-Wattel, P. (2009). Psychological distress in first year university students:
socioeconomic and academic stressors, mastery and social support in young men and
women. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 44(8), 643-650. doi:
10.1007/s00127-008-0486-y
40
Wallace, L. S., Buckworth, J., Kirby, T. E., & Sherman, W. M. (2000). Characteristics of
exercise behavior among college students: Application of social cognitive theory to
predicting stage of change. Preventive Medicine, 31(5), 494-505. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2000.0736
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1999). The PANAS-X: Manual for the positive and negative affect
schedule-expanded form.
Widmer, P. S., Semmer, N. K., Kälin, W., Jacobshagen, N., & Meier, L. L. (2012). The
ambivalence of challenge stressors: Time pressure associated with both negative and
positive well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 422-433.
Zajacova, A., Lynch, S. M., & Espenshade, T. J. (2005). Self-efficacy, stress, and academic
success in college. Research in higher education, 46(6), 677-706.
Zaleski, E. H., Levey-Thors, C., & Schiaffino, K. M. (1998). Coping mechanisms, stress, social
support, and health problems in college students. Applied Developmental Science, 2(3),
127-137.
41
APPENDIX A
IRB
42
43
APPENDIX B
IRB Amendment
44
45
APPENDIX C
SURVEY
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
VITA
Hannah Wike was born in Memphis, TN and raised by her parents Jim Wike and Anne J.
Froning. She has one older sibling, Kathryn. She graduated Cum Laude from the University of
Tennessee at Knoxville with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology. After working for a non-
profit organization, teaching holistic healthy living in a low-income environment, she decided to
pursue a graduate degree. Hannah will receive her Master of Science degree in Industrial –
Organizational Psychology from the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in May of 2015.
Hannah will begin her career working with employee wellness programs soon after graduation.