CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This Chapter presents the theoretical orientation and review of related

literature and studies by the researchers that are relevant to the present

investigation.

According to Joyce M. Black and Hawk (2009) stress is a particular

relationship between the person and the environment that is appraised by the

person as taxing and or exceeding his or her resources and endangering his or

her well-being. In addition to external stressful events, people may define stress

in different ways because it is the perception of the event, not the event itself that

stimulated the response. Physical demands for adaptation are compounded by

the adaptive response required by the volume of information and the decisions

required for existence in today’s society. Stress is result of an imbalance

between the demands placed on a person and one’s ability to adapt.

Stress is a complex reaction that affects one’s physiology, behavior,

thinking and emotions. It arises in situations where people believe that the

demands they face are greater than their abilities to handle those demands

(Hiebert, 2000, cited in Malec et al.,2000). Stress can result from environmental

factors (task difficulty) and internal factors (repertoire of coping skills,

perceptions, and genetic predisposition) or from an interaction between the two

(Hiebert, 1983). The external environmental factors are generally termed

"stressors," while a person's reaction to an external stressor is termed "stress"

(Albrecht, 1979; Hiebert, 1983). Lazarus and Folkman (1984) use an outcome

neutral way to describe people's attempts to deal with the demands or stressors

that they encounter. They suggest that stressors have the potential to elicit

different reactions among individuals due to their subjective experience of the

stressor. These different reactions are based on individuals using two forms of

cognitive appraisal: primary appraisal, which involves evaluating the threat of the

situation (e.g., irrelevant, benign, threatening), and secondary appraisal, which

involves evaluating one's available resources for coping with the stressful

situation (e.g., seek more information, control impulsivity).

Stress arises not from the demands people face per se, but from people's

perceived inability to deal with those demands to their own satisfaction (Hiebert,

1983; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Sometimes a person's coping attempts are

successful and the demand is handled satisfactorily. Other times, coping

attempts are not as successful as one desires and, if the demands or stressors

persist, the person begins to feel stressed. When an individual engages in a

situation, there is an initial appraisal, or in some cases a mis-appraisal, of the

demand characteristics of the situation, the individual's resources for coping with

the demand, and the consequences likely to result from the way in which the

situation is handled. As the individual remains engaged in the situation, there is

subsequent ongoing appraisal regarding the continuing nature of the demand

and the adequacy of the individual's coping attempts (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).

Regardless of the accuracy of the person's appraisal of the situation and the

coping resources available, a perceived inequity between demand and coping

resources produces an increase in stress level (Hiebert, 2002, p. 228). For

example, an athlete who makes a mental or physical error during competition

may appraise the stressor as threatening to self-esteem, while another athlete

experiencing the same stressor may appraise it as merely challenging. If an

athlete has appraised a situation as stressful, his or her coping processes then

work to manage the stress reaction. These processes influence the athlete's

subsequent appraisal and, therefore, the type and intensity of the stress reaction.

Studying the relationship between perceived stress and burnout among high

school basketball coaches, Kelley and Gill (1993) found that lower perceived

stress and reduced burnout were correlated with greater social support and more

years of coaching experience.

Lazarus described the stress reaction as having three components:

behavioral, physiological and cognitive (Lazarus, 1974). Recent work by Hiebert,

as described in Malec, Hiebert, Young, Rose, Blackshaw, Felsky-Hunt, and Lea

(2000), includes an emotional component to the stress reaction.

The behavioral component of a stress reaction can be demonstrated

through random tics and tremors along with hyperactivity (Hiebert, 1983). The

increase in muscle activity that accompanies stress tends to be demonstrated in

more "hyper" types of behavior. According to Malec et al. (2000), individuals tend

to speed up when they are stressed. Examples of "hyper" or speedy behaviors

demonstrated when individuals are under stress include walking, talking and

eating fast, using punctuated hand gestures when talking, turning events into

competitions, and getting impatient with people who are slower (Malec et a l ,

2000).

Increased heart rate, respiration rate, and muscle tension are common

indicators of the physiological component of a stress reaction. Other

physiological reactions demonstrated by individuals when under stress include

increased sweat gland activity and increased blood pressure (Hiebert, 1983;

Malec et al., 2000). People's hands get cooler when they are under stress, due to

the shunting of the blood away from the extremities and towards the large muscle

groups, which is indicative of the fight or flight response. Lastly, blood in the brain

is shunted away from the rational problem-solving centers of the brain towards

the parts of the brain that control the muscle movement. This causes individuals

to think less clearly when under stress (Malec et al., 2000).

The cognitive component of a stress reaction often exaggerates the

degree of threat or demand involved and minimizes the individual's coping

attempts (Hiebert, 1983; Lazarus, 1974). Typically, as stress levels increase,

there is increasing interference with people's abilities to engage in accurate

cognitive appraisal. For example, when people feel stressed, they tend to

exaggerate the nature or intensity of the demands they face, catastrophize about

the consequences of not responding optimally in that situation, and thus lessen

their coping abilities. Excessive negative thinking and negative self-talk often

accompany this unproductive thinking, a combination that tends to interfere with

performance and result in less-than-optimal performance. This in turn feeds into

the cycle of exaggeration and catastrophization being experienced by the

individual.

The cognitive, physiological, behavioral, and emotional components of a

stress reaction tend to occur simultaneously as one integrated response

involving heightened arousal, inappropriate cognitive activity, and hyperactivity

(Hiebert, 1983; Malec et al., 2000). According to Malec et al., one component of

the stress reaction is often more exaggerated than the rest. Some people tend to

notice their stress physiologically, while others may tend to notice their

behavioral or cognitive reactions to stress more readily. Because we react to

stress differently, Malec et al. argue that it is possible for individuals to pay

attention to their stress reactions, discover which component seems to be the

most reactive, and use that as an early warning of stress. If stress is recognized

early, steps can be taken to manage or control the stress reaction. Once a

person encounters a demand, reacts, and perceives the coping attempts as to

work, or the demand decreasing, the system returns to normal with very little

harm done to the person (Hiebert, 1983). If the coping attempts are perceived as

inadequate, the arousal is sustained or even increased, and over exaggerated

cognitive activity occurs along with hyperactivation of the motor system. These

stress responses indicate that the demand has become a stressor and that the

person is experiencing stress.

At this point, if the demand decreases and/or if the person's coping

attempts are perceived as adequate, the stress response will begin to decrease

and the system will return to normal. If the demand persists, however, and/or if

the person's coping attempts are perceived to be inadequate and continue to be

perceived as inadequate, a chronic stress reaction will develop.

According to Krames (1993), if someone is under stress, the body’s

response can be harmful. The body releases hormones that trigger many

changes in the body: heart pounds, blood pressure rises, stomach becomes

tense, and muscle clench.

He also said that frequent stress can affect the well-being. That’s why

there is a need to learn to manage stress well. According to Nan Little that stress

has a negative and positive ramifications of the body .Positively, it may be the

driving force for improvement and negatively it may show the following

symptoms: Physical- frequent colds or flu, headaches, difficulty sleeping, muscle

tension, skin problem, trouble with digestion, poor concentration, forgetfulness,

learning problems, frequent negative thoughts, speech problems , anxiety,

depression, anger, irritability, feelings of helplessness, lack of purpose,

relationship troubles , poor appetite, reckless driving, alcohol or drug use,

susceptibility to accidents, and aggression.

With the many potential detriments that stress can induce in a person, an

individual is coerced to utilize his faculties and abilities in order to cope with the

demands that the stress is imposing upon him; this event is central to the

process called stress management.

Stress management is defined by Black and Hawks (2009) as the ability to

cope with the adaptive demands of the external phenomena effectively. A

comprehensive description on stress management found in Webster’s Dictionary

states that stress management are methods of controlling factors that require a

response or change within a person by identifying the stressors, eliminating

negative stressors, and developing effective coping mechanisms to counteract

the response constructively. Examples include progressive muscular relaxation,

guided imagery, biofeedback, breathing techniques, and active problem solving.”

Various authors and researches have presented different methods and

strategies for dealing with stress. Krames (1993) of Health today proposes a

stress management that includes recognizing stress, managing day to day

pressures and little hassle, and identifying stressors. He also added that how one

perceives the threat affects how the way he deals with stress. This includes

putting a positive spin on stress, forming a network like friends, family members,

or mentors, living a healthy lifestyle to face stressors, get enough sleep, eat right,

exercise, and nourishing the spirit.

Woolfolk and Lehrer (1984), added stress management technique that

could be applied; this includes progressive relaxation to eliminate unnecessary

tension by relaxing and thereby reduce or eliminate headache, neuralgia,

excessive physiological arousal, or other stress related disorders .Modified

progressive relaxation by using of a relaxing environment, deep breathing, and

cycles of tensing and relaxing muscles. Another is yogic therapy which includes

progressive relaxation combined with meditation. The technique often contains

elements of the Hindu religion. The therapeutic benefits the therapy helps

alleviate muscle tension, excessive autonomic arousal, and hypertension. People

who like the yoga exercises especially enjoy it.

Furthermore, Elizabeth Scott (2011), in her article Have a Truly Relaxing

Staycation, offered a new method of stress management which she described as

one of the stress management which underscores rest and relaxation, and

enjoying the place that one is “often too stressed and busy to really enjoy: home”.

She states:

“The key to a refreshing staycation is the same as the key to a restful vacation, though somewhat trickier to pull off: “don't overdo it, and don't let work creep in”. That means no cleaning, office work, or dealing with regular responsibilities. Can turn off the phones, ignore email, and make it a point to both rest and play, or go to a nearby hotel to make it easier.”

In addition Dworetzky, John P.also emphasized other coping strategies

such as: trust in time, trying not to be alone much of the time, think positively and

rationally, and think as relaxed person. Selected stress management also

includes autogenic training which teach the body and mind to respond to verbal

command, allowing the person to achieve a deep state of relaxation through self-

suggestion (or self hypnosis), affirmation to have a feeling- rich statement about

a desire change to reinforce and increase the effectiveness of visualization,

meditation, biofeedback, therapeutic touch, massage and yoga.

Black and Hawks (2009) also cited that stress management has three

components: stress resistance, cognitive reappraisal, and effective coping skills

and provided a detailed description of each component and its role in stress

management. Stress resistance involves decreasing the body’s response to

stress: adopting healthy eating patterns. Engaging in physical activity and using

relaxation techniques can help reduce the stress response. Physical activity a

positive stressor that is activity requires an adaptive response and when

performed properly, it result in physical changes that counter the normally

negative effect of stress. Physical activity helps improve mental function,

decrease depression and increase physical endurance.

Cognitive reappraisal or restructuring is to change the perception or

interpretation of events as stressors. Cognitive reappraisal is based on the

assumption that major factoring stress is the individual’s perception of the events

or experience as a stressor. Effective Coping Skills involves recognition of the

problem causing stress and, through problem-solving skills, development and

implementation of an effective strategy to cope with or solve the problem.

Effective coping skill includes time management, assertiveness, solution-oriented

therapy and development of a support system.

In the broad discussion of coping with stress, a dominant model that is

widely used today is the transactional perspective of stress. In this perspective,

stress results from the interaction of people’s physiological, cognitive, and

behavioral systems and occurs when people perceive that the demands of a

situation exceed their coping resource (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). The

stressor or demand itself does not cause stress; rather, individual’s resources for

handling the demand satisfactorily will determine the stress that they will

experience within that situation. If the demand is intense but people believe they

can handle the demand, they will experience little stress. If, however, people

think that they cannot handle the demand, no matter how trivial it is, their stress

levels may be quite high (Spriddle, 2004).

Furthermore, Malec et. al. (2000) emphasized the self-efficacy theory of

stress management which states that self-efficacy is one factor that affects

individual’s perceptions of a situation. He stated that individuals make judgments

about the nature and intensity of the demands required of them in stressful

situations. Individuals with high self efficacy may perceive a stressful situation as

non-threatening due to their confidence in their ability to perform or to meet the

demands of the situation.

This notion is supported by Scott (2012) who stated that optimism and

positive frame of mind provide huge benefits; accordingly, optimists enjoy better

health, stronger relationships and more productive experience and less stress

among other things. This is because optimists tend to take more risks, and blame

external circumstances if they fail, maintaining a 'try again' mindset; this makes

them more likely to succeed in the future, and less upset by failure in general.

Hiebert’s (2000) framework for stress recognizes that mediating factors

affect individual’s appraisal of a situation. One important personal factor that

mediates appraisal in a competitive or threatening sporting environment is self-

efficacy. If individuals are confident that they have the resources to handle a

particular situation, they may view it as challenging and exciting. If they do not

perceive themselves to have the resources to cope with the situation, they may

perceive it as very stressful.

According to Bandura, people fear and tend to avoid threatening situations

that they believe exceed their coping skills, yet they get involved in activities and

behave with assurance when they judge themselves capable of handling

situations that would otherwise be intimidating (Spriddle, 2004).

Hiebert (1983) maintains that stress control is best approached by

developing a wide range of coping skills, some aimed at dealing with the

demands people face (stressor management strategies) and others aimed at

helping people calm their stressful reactions (stress management strategies).

According to Hiebert (2002), stressor management strategies can be used in a

preventive manner. For Hiebert, people with good skills, or other resources for

dealing with the demands they face, are less likely to be overtaxed and will

experienced less stress.

Successful coping requires a set of skills and knowledge that are

adequate for dealing with a variety of situations (Hiebert, 2002). In addition,

people need to be able to feel they are in control of their personal situations,

rather than victims of circumstance with no feelings of control over the situations.

Numerous literatures have presented evidence that the means by which

an individual copes with stress varies from person to person. This is because

people view the same situation differently thus, their reactions to the same

stimulus may not necessarily be the same but instead differ, in terms of their

assessment of the situation as either threatening to their integrity or challenging

to them. Thus, the use of any form of coping management is influenced by a

multitude of factors.

Many researchers today study possible factors that affect stress

management which includes: age, sex, ordinal position, year level and monthly

income.

Nwamaka (2011), in her study The Mediating Impact of Personality and

Socio-Economic Status in the treatment of Stress in Adolescents emphasized

that the coping styles of an individual to stress is influenced primarily by his/her

personality. She presented an extensive literature in this context citing various

authorities.

“Eysenck (1970) in Cole (1995) and Larsen & Buss (2005)

described personality as the more or less stable and enduring

organization of person’s characteristics, temperament, intellect and

physique which determine his unique adjustment to the environment.

Adolescents that have stable, enduring and united characteristics are

able to device coping strategies in a given situation. On the other hand,

adolescents with less enduring traits are quick to perceive an event or

situations as stressful. Herbert and Cohen (1994) agreed that stress is a

person’s perception of environment events. The perception may include

the appraisal of a situation or events as being dreadful, harmful,

threatening and challenging (Chen, Langer, Raphaelson, and Mathews,

2004, Naughton, 1997; Okorodudu, 2004). . . “

“Personal characteristic or traits are commonly referred to as

stress-buffering resource because they can protect or buffer people from

the pathogenic effects of stress. Cole (1995) also features Cattell’s (1950)

view of personality as the organization, which permits a prediction of what

a person will do in a given situation. Some researches carried out

indicated that coping is a complex process, influenced by both personality

characteristics and situational demands (Friedman, Nelson, Baer, Smith,

& Dworthkin, 1992).”

Aldwin, et.al (1996) conducted assessed the age differences in Stress,

Coping, and Appraisal and came with the following findings:

“We examined age differences in stress, appraisal, and coping . . .

in middle-aged, young-old, and old-old men. Despite extensive probing,

nearly a quarter of the old-old reported having had no problems and they

expended less coping effort even when they did have problems. The

types of problems reported varied systematically with age. Middle-aged

men were more likely to appraise their problems both as challenges and

as annoyances than the older men. . . However, there were no age

differences in perceived stressfulness of the problem, appraisals of

harm/loss, or helpless appraisals, number of emotions reported, or coping

efficacy. One interpretation of these results is that the nature of stress

changes with age, from episodic to chronic, which in turn affects appraisal

and coping processes.”

He adds; “it is not coping strategies per se that change, but rather

management strategies. Older adults tend to use more concrete strategies they

tend to use less interpersonal hostility and escapism. It may be that they have

tried these strategies and found them impractical or ineffective.”

On the other hand most teenagers respond to stressful events in their

lives by doing something relaxing, trying positive and self-reliant problem –

solving or seeking friendship and support from others. Common examples

include listening to music, trying to make their own decisions, daydreaming,

trying to figure out solutions, keeping up friendships, watching television and

being close to people they care about. These behaviors are appropriate for

adolescents who are trying to become independent, taking responsibility for

themselves and drawing on their friends and family for support.

http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/youthdevelopment/da3083.html

According to Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development,

adolescence is the period of identity development. Changes in the adolescent’s

body are taking place rapidly and highly preoccupied with how he looks and how

others view him. While trying to meet the expectations of his peers, he’s also

trying to establish his own identity. Furthermore, conformity to standards is of

utmost importance at this time which may lead to rebellion and questioning of

parental or other adult authority. These changes or development pose a great

amount of stress on the adolescent (Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins (2005).

In addition, Walker ( 1985) points that the primary sources of tension and

trouble for teens and their friends are: relationships with friends and family; the

pressure of expectations from self and others; pressure at school from teachers,

coaches, grades and homework; financial pressures; and tragedy in the lives of

family and friends (described as death, divorce, cancer).

According to Shelley E. Taylor, PhD, a professor of psychology at UCLA

and lead author of the study of behavioral studies, they analyzed the data from

hundreds of biological and behavioral studies (both human and animal), they

concluded that females were more likely to deal with stress by "tending and

befriending" -- that is, nurturing those around them and reaching out to others.

Men, on the other hand, were more likely to sequester themselves or initiate a

confrontation, behavior in line with the "fight or flight" response that's long been

associated with stress.

She also added that men and women's different reactions to stress might

be more than just an interesting observation; it could account for differences in

their longevity and health. "Women enjoy a greater life expectancy than men as

she said. One reason may be that the tend-and-befriend system protects them

from some of the damaging effects of stress."The researchers found out that

oxytocin, a hormone that promotes both maternal and social behavior and

enhances relaxation, as the key factor behind the gender difference.

Initially, women have the same response to stress as men, leaving them

somewhat vulnerable to cortisol and adrenaline. But then women also begin

secreting oxytocin from the pituitary gland, which helps scale back the production

of cortisol and adrenaline, minimizing their harmful effects.

Interestingly, men also secrete oxytocin when under stress, but they

produce it in lesser amounts than women do, and its effects are inhibited by male

hormones such as testosterone.

The more relaxed behavior that oxytocin promotes also seems to offer

some protection of its own. "Hostility has been shown over and over again to be

health-damaging," says Williams. As another example of how women's convivial

nature may be protective, William cites the fact that an older man's chance of

dying after the death of his spouse rises substantially while a woman's risk

increases only slightly. "That's probably because women access a social network

to help them get through the ordeal."

Taylor and her colleagues also believe that men and women's differing

responses to stress may have evolved to suit the needs of earliest ancestors.

The researchers theorize, that females were probably better off laying low and

tending to their offspring in the face of danger than fighting, which would have put

both themselves and their children in harm's way. Likewise, affiliating with others

might have been a more valuable strategy -- a kind of safety in numbers defense

-- than fleeing and leaving their offspring without protection.

Folkman and Lazarus(1988) postulated that gender differences in the

sources of stress may explain different coping styles between men and

women(e.g., hostile reaction, expression of feeling, distraction, passivity, wishful

thinking, and use of sedation) when coping when coping with stressful situation.

Folkman, Lazarus, Pimley,and Novacek (1987) noted that men use more self-

control(e. g., keeping feelings to oneself) that women, while women use more

positive reappraisal than men.

In a 1997 study published in the Journal of Family Psychology, UCLA

psychologist Rena Repetti found that on days that women reported their stress

level at work was highest; their children reported that their mothers had been

especially loving and nurturing.

In an earlier study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, Repetti found that fathers who had conflict at work were likely to

also have conflict at home on the same day. Likewise, when the fathers had

highly stressful days, they tended to withdraw from their families.

An article in the American Psychological Association presented disparities

in the way men and women deal with stress. Accordingly, men are more likely

than women to say they play sports as a way of managing stress. Furthermore,

women are less likely to exercise frequently (usually once a week) than men

saying that they are too tired to engage in any form of physical activity.

Additionally, women are far more likely than men to say they read to manage

stress and overall, tend to report more stress management activities that connect

them with other people, like spending time with friends or family

(http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/gender-stress.aspx.)

Kottan & Johnson (1993) who conducted a study on birth order dynamics

and stress stated that birth order is one also of the factor that influence stress

management. Family roles govern the perceived expectations and

responsibilities placed on children by parents and siblings. Children's perception

of their place in the family constellation influences how they feel about

themselves, and how they interact with others. Components of family structure

during formative years that reflect emotional and affiliative ties are implicated in

the psychological status, coping and relating styles of mature individuals

(Fullerton, Ursano, Wetzler&Slusarcick, 1989).

Although many genetic and environmental factors contribute to differences

between siblings, some differences in behavior of siblings have been attributed to

the effects of birth order (Claxton, 1994), an individual's rank by age among

siblings (Steelman, 1985 in Claxton, 1994). The place of the individual within the

family, the first social structure encountered, has been suggested as a

contributing factor in shaping human personalities (Gould, 1997), and influencing

interactions in subsequent social structures.

Although the view that birth order is the sole predictor of development

across the lifespan has never been widely accepted, an individual's birth order is

a possible influence on relationships with parents and siblings, which may affect

personality formation and social behavior across the lifespan (Buckley, 1998).

Socialization differences experienced by individuals due to their ordinal position

of birth may result in overt personality and behavior differences. In the absence

of siblings, first borns tend to be socialized by adults, whereas later borns are

exposed to the socializing influences of older siblings (Claxton, 1994). Adults

socialized as first borns, are sometimes theorized to be more achievement

oriented, while their younger siblings are often believed to be more successful in

social endeavors, experience greater enjoyment during risk taking behavior and

be more independent of authority (Claxton, 1994). It is acknowledged that such

characterizations are general and imprecise at best (Claxton, 1994).

Birth order research has always been controversial. One of the first

modern psychologists to address the influence of birth order on personality

development across the lifespan was Alfred Adler in the 1920's. Since his

description of the effects of ordinal position of birth on personality (Claxton,

1994), many theories have been suggested to explain apparent differences.

These include dethronement of the first born, parental anxiety, economic factors,

intrauterine conditions (Claxton, 1994) and historical cohort effects. Much of the

debate of possible effects of birth order has focused on intellectual abilities,

academic achievement (Bohmer & Sitton, 1993; Morjoribanks, 1997), economic

resources (Travis & Kohli, 1995) and family intellectual environment (Travis &

Kohli, 1995).

The transient enthusiasm with which birth order research is investigated is

partly caused by the accompanying revival of the nature versus nurture in the

formation of human personality debate, and partly by inconsistent and conflicting

findings in this area (Claxton, 1994).

Walter Toman analyzed different patterns of sibling order and gender

stressors encountered in relationships in adult life may replicate those

experienced in the first and most significant relationships of childhood - those

between family members. Some adult relationships closely mirror the dynamics

of those from childhood. The more closely facets of an adult interpersonal

relationship mirrors sibling, or parent and child relationship dynamics, the greater

the chance that the individual will apply the coping skills learnt in the childhood

scenario (Buckley, 1998).

In the book McEwen 2002&Clarke 2008, it states that academic stress

among college students has been a topic of interest for many years. College

students are prone to stress due to the transitional nature of college life. For

example, many college students move away from home for the first time, which

can necessitate leaving all previously learned support systems such as parents,

siblings and high school friends.

Accordingly, stress among nursing students has been well documented; a

study by Trockel, (2000) found that nursing students suffer from long hours of

study, multiple assignments, lack of free time, lack of timely feedback and lack of

faculty response to student needs.(Beck 1999 &Trockel 2000).

During their college years, students experience constant challenges and

demands for adjustment and change. Along with academic pressures, students

must take responsibility for themselves, must seek acceptance from their peers

in a world of mixed values, and begin more intimate relationships. Mahat (1998)

found that negative interpersonal relationships were the most frequently reported

stressful event , while Ross (1999) found that intrapersonal sources of stress

were the most common . Among a cohort of students, the four least frequently

reported stressors were divorce between parents, quitting a job, severe injury,

and transferring schools, in agreement with Ross (1999). In comparison, Evans &

Kelly (2004) found that examinations, the intense amount of work, and finding the

academic work difficult were the most important source of stress. Nigerian

nursing students have high levels of stress, with the most common stressors

including excessive schoolwork, financial problems, inadequate recreational

facilities, and overcrowded accommodations. These findings indicated a need for

counseling and other support services among nursing students.

The researchers found that first-year students experienced greater stress

than students in subsequent years, findings in agreement with those reported

previously (Walton, 2000). In addition, Misra&McKeen (2000) found that students

at the freshman and sophomore levels experienced more stress than juniors or

seniors due to the fact that they are in the alarm stage (Selye’s theory of General

Adaptation Syndrome).In the alarm stage, the body's first stage of response to a

stressor, during which its defenses prepare for action.

Fourth year level students are already capable of adjusting to the

stressors, due to the fact that they have already accumulated many experiences,

learned from it, adjusted to it, and find stress management. The researchers

found that first-year students experienced greater stress than students in

subsequent years, (Walton, 2000).

In another article by Elizabeth Scott, entitled Stress In College: Common

Cause of Stress in College, dated September 24, 2012, she motioned that,

college freshmen face the most obvious social challenges that usually involve

leaving one’s entire support structure behind, creating a new social network,

dealing with being away from home for the first time and finding less parental

support, most students face social stress. Finding and living with a roommate,

balancing friends with school work (and often part-time jobs), and dealing with

the dynamics of young adult relationships can all be difficult, and these

challenges can lead to significant stress

An article featured in the Carnegie Mellon News Service featured an

article written by Psychology Professor Sheldon Cohen showed that a lack of

income can increase stress levels in individuals who do not have enough money

to pay for their expenses. Low income groups suffer from higher stress levels,

followed by the middle class and then the higher income earners. High stress can

cause several health issues, including heart problems, balding and diabetes

complications.

In another study published in Psychosomatic Medicine, mentioned by

Scott (2006) it's those in the lower socio-economic levels who experience greater

levels of stress and experience more stress-related health problems as well.

Higher stress hormone levels were found in those with higher levels of

socioeconomic status. People of lower socioeconomic status may experience

greater levels of stress and poorer health outcomes for several reasons: Higher

paying jobs bring greater personal control thus allowing people in high offices to

have more personal choices in their lifestyles and more resources at their

disposal leading to lower stress levels; those in higher socio-economic levels

make healthier choices while people in lower socio-economic status tend to

make health damaging choices (e.g. smoking, skipping breakfast or

meals).Lastly, higher socio-economic status brings greater resources for health;

those in the lower levels of socio-economic stats tend to have poorer health

outcomes because they are less able to take care of their health and even afford

health care, among other things which consequently contributes to greater levels

of stress. http://stress.about.com/od/stresshealth/a/socioeconomic.htm

In studies concerning the role of socio-economic status to the stress levels

of an individual, it has been noted that people from higher socio-economic

groups differ significantly from those in the lower socio-economic stratum in

terms of cognitive reappraisal particularly because some children from lower

socioeconomic status backgrounds get less training in critical thinking and in

anticipating crises. This is significant, because stress can be managed in large

part by anticipating stressful events and making plans to reduce their stressful

impact. Making healthier choices and planning ahead are behaviors that can be

taught, but they may not be taught as much in every family.

(http://stress.about.com/od/stresshealth/a/socioeconomic.htm)