Psychological distress in students today and 20 years ago

Franke, Gabriele Helga; Jagla, M.; Petrowski, Katja; Gall, Carolin

doi:10.1016/j.mhp.2016.10.003

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Female students show a higher difference with a medium effect size in the stress experience compared to male students, particularly in the case of "Lack of Energy". Higher levels of stress and lower levels of recovery in students compared to non-students in the norm sample are also in line with the current state of research, as expected [5,21]. The nding that female full-time students have a lower score on the "General Wellbeing" scale with a higher difference with a medium effect size compared to female parttime students can be interpreted in an approximately similar direction.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…This nding contrasts with earlier studies that postulated a fundamental increase in mental disorders in the German general population [25]. In a more recent study, mental stress was analyzed by Franke et al [21] in students in the following speci c areas: Anxiety, somatization, interpersonal sensitivity, compulsivity, level of impairment in general and number of symptoms (η 2 = 0.09). No age effects were found.…”

Section: Theoretical and Empirical Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Benton et al [20] found that, retrospectively between 1988 and 2001, there was an increase in anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts and personality disorders among American students who visited a campus counselling center. However, there was no signi cant increase when considering the severity of distress [21]. Holm-Hadulla et al [22] concluded that even between 1993 and 2008, the type and extent of psychological distress among German students attending a counselling center was fairly stable.…”

Section: Theoretical and Empirical Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exploring Stress and Recovery among Students: Implications for Well-being and Academic Performance

Stang,

Weiss,

Jaensch

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding stress and recovery dynamics among students is essential for promoting their well-being and academic success. This study delves into the complex interplay of stressors and coping mechanisms among university students. Drawing upon health psychology and resilience research, we investigate the experiences of stress and recovery among both full-time and part-time students, considering factors such as gender and age. Our findings reveal significant differences between full-time and part-time students in various aspects of stress, including emotional stress, conflicts, and lack of energy. Full-time students reported higher levels of stress in these dimensions, which could indicate possible effects on their academic performance and general well-being. Moreover, gender-specific differences in stress experiences were observed, with female students exhibiting higher levels of stress compared to their male counterparts, particularly in terms of emotional stress and lack of energy. Interestingly, while age did not significantly impact stress and recovery experiences, other variables such as workload and coping strategies appeared to play crucial roles. Our study underscores the importance of tailored interventions and support mechanisms to address the diverse needs of students, including mindfulness-based approaches, social support networks, and academic accommodations. Overall, this research sheds light on the intricate relationship between stress, resilience, and academic outcomes among students, offering valuable insights for educators, policymakers, and mental health practitioners seeking to enhance student well-being and academic success in higher education settings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Theoretical and Empirical Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Theoretical and Empirical Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring Stress and Recovery among Students: Implications for Well-being and Academic Performance

Stang,

Weiss,

Jaensch

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the BSI can be used to evaluate psychological distress as “The BSI possesses characteristics that are more suitable for screening than other instruments such as the General Health Questionnaire or the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale” ( Zabora et al, 2001 , p. 21–22). In line with this, the Brief Symptom Checklist (BSCL) is often used in the evaluation of psychological distress in psychotherapeutic inpatients and outpatients ( Busmann et al, 2019 ) as well as of students ( Franke et al, 2017 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Routine for Analyzing Brief Symptom Inventory Profiles in Chronic Pain Patients to Evaluate Psychological Comorbidity

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Question: Comorbidity, i.e., additional psychological distress in patients already suffering from chronic somatic diseases (e.g., orthopedic conditions) is of growing importance. The quality of analyzing and interpreting the often used Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) used with orthopedic patients should improve by employing a new “case definition” of four groups (instead of two) of differentially psychologically distressed patients instead of two groups as before.Methods: Four groups with the different psychological distress definitions of “no,” “mild,” “remarkable,” and “severe” were to be analyzed from a group of 639 orthopedic patients in inpatient rehabilitation clinics. The BSI is transformed into T values (M=50, SD=10). There is “no” distress if no T [two scales] is ≥60 and “mild” distress if T [two scales] and/or T [GSI] is ≥60 and <63. If T [two scales] and/or T [GSI] is ≥63 and <70, it is “remarkable,” and if T [two scales] and/or T [GSI] ≥70, it speaks for “severe” psychological distress.Results: The new tool for analyzing psychological distress based on the T-scores of the BSI resulted in the following four groups: No psychological distress (41.9%): unspecific health-related information stands for a useful intervention. About 13.3% demonstrated low psychological distress: shorter diagnostic interviews and a few more diagnostic examinations led to a low-level outpatient group program to improve health and well-being in a preventive sense; one repeated measurement in 4weeks is advised. Remarkable psychological distress (26%): in-depth exploration using interviews, tests, and questionnaires to choose specific interventions in a single and/or group setting, outpatient or inpatient treatment; repeated measurements and process control. About 18.8% reported severe psychological distress: in-depth exploration led to specific interventions in a single and/or group setting, almost an inpatient setting; immediately crisis intervention and high-frequent process control.Conclusion: The new evaluation strategy of the BSI should improve practice and research; further investigation is necessary.

show abstract

“…In the most recent study, Berger, Franke, Hofmann, Sperth, and Holm‐Hadulla () found even a decrease in symptom severity in medical and psychology students and Schwartz () analysing data from more than 4,000 students spanning from 1992 to 2007 found a stable levels of severity and a significant decline in suicidality. Also, Franke, Jagla, Petrowski, and Gall () in a German sample of university found a lower psychological distress than it was 20 years ago.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Does the severity of psychopathology of Italian students receiving counselling services increase over time? A 5‐year analysis and a comparison with a clinical and non‐clinical sample

Strepparava

Bani

Zorzi

et al. 2017

Clin Psychology and Psychoth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychological problems-from the most minor such as exams anxiety to the more severe such as personality disorders-are not rare in young adults. University Counselling Services often present the only opportunity for undergraduates to meet health professionals and to be confronted with their difficulties in a non-clinical setting or-in cases of more severe psychopathology-to be referred to mental health services. Recent research attests to the increasing severity of psychological problems among undergraduate and graduate university students. The question necessarily arises as to whether this trend is replicated in the general population being referred to mental health services and, if such is the case, whether there are differences between the two populations. This paper analyses the change in the severity of self-reported symptoms in a sample of 194 students attending a University Counselling Service over a course of 5 years (2010-2014). Clinical severity was assessed in both groups by Symptoms Check List 90-Revised, Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure, and Emotion Regulation Questionnaire scores. Results show a substantial stability in severity level across time, and a comparison with an age-matched sample of patients referred to a public hospital clinical psychology service shows overlapping data with respect to disease severity level. As the mental health of university students is an important public health issue, the implications for the organization and structure of university counselling services and the connection with public mental health hospital centres are discussed.

show abstract

Psychological distress in students today and 20 years ago

Cited by 4 publications

References 10 publications

Exploring Stress and Recovery among Students: Implications for Well-being and Academic Performance

Exploring Stress and Recovery among Students: Implications for Well-being and Academic Performance

A New Routine for Analyzing Brief Symptom Inventory Profiles in Chronic Pain Patients to Evaluate Psychological Comorbidity

Does the severity of psychopathology of Italian students receiving counselling services increase over time? A 5‐year analysis and a comparison with a clinical and non‐clinical sample

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About