Can Time Heal Stress?
A study of the relationship between collegiate year level and test induced stress.
By Breana Dogan and Delaney Walden, Dr. Pittman
Department of Psychology, Wofford College, Spartanburg, South Carolina From movies to television shows to family or friends, college has been depicted as a wonderful place where you go to meet new people and gain an education. College can be both of those things and more but what is not mentioned, is the amount of stress one experiences as a student. Going to college also entails networking, making time to have a social life, building student-professor relationships, and most importantly maintaining good grades. That being said, feelings of stress are unavoidable in college. It is assumed that as one gets promoted to higher levels within their undergraduate study, the ability to manage stress becomes better. Some researchers, however, have found that collegiate year does not influence stress management and that stress may get worse with every passing year (Beiter & Nash, 2014). The progressive worsening of stress or anxiety may be due to harder classes that come with being an upperclassman, along with worry about jobs and plans after undergrad.
Studies about stress in undergraduate students are more frequent as concerns about the mental health of this group continue to rise. College campuses across the country have seen an increase in the number of students seeking counseling services with anxiety as the top presenting concern among college students at 41.6 percent, followed by depression at 36.4 percent
(American Psychological Association, 2013) . Potential causes of mental health concerns most closely surveyed in Beiter and Nash’s study included academic performance, pressure to succeed, post-graduation plans, financial concerns, self-esteem, and more. They found that upperclassmen reported higher levels of depression, stress, and anxiety on survey scales in comparison to underclassmen at Franciscan University in Ohio (2014). This trend was also found across the world in Malaysia at the University of Putra. The study showed that middle to final year students experienced higher levels of stress compared to first-year possibly due to increased difficulty of course work (Elias & Ping, 2011). With previous studies regarding grade level and stress in mind, further research was done to see if this trend holds true at a small, private, liberal arts college. Does classification as an upperclassman versus an underclassman affect test induced stress and academic performance at Wofford College?
Experiment
The study consisted of forty Wofford students total, twenty upperclassmen and twenty underclassmen. Before conducting any tests, students were asked to fill out a questionnaire in order to see how they rated their stress or anxiety during tests. Each participant rated their anxiety on a scale of 0-10 and of those students, individuals that rated their stress around a 5 average were able to participate in the study. Those on either extreme were not allowed to
,
participate as too little stress or too much stress during testing situations could skew the results.
Those accepted came in for testing and were connected to a BIOPAC Machine as shown in Figure 1., to test galvanic
skin response, or emotional arousal, and heart rate.
After connection, a baseline measurement lasting
approximately one minute was obtained. Upon completion of the baseline, students were given the chance to practice their task. Their job was to participate in a Stroop
Color test in which they key in the first letter of the corresponding color that they see, not the word they are reading. The Stroop test, shown in Figure 2., is a neuropsychological test extensively used to assess the ability to inhibit cognitive interference that occurs when the
processing of a specific stimulus feature impedes the simultaneous processing of a second stimulus attribute, well-known as the Stroop Effect (Scarpina & Tagini, 2017). This cognitive test was used to mimic an exam given by a professor. Once students achieved at least 10 consecutive correct answers during their practice, they were asked to stop, refresh the page, and told that the experiment portion of the test was beginning. Before beginning the experiment, students were told that the first test was not graded for accuracy or speed and asked to rate their anxiety/stress on a scale of 1-10. The results from the first test were recorded in terms of congruent, incongruent, and stroop. Beginning the second test, participants were told they would be doing the exact same stroop test, however, accuracy and speed were important factors in whether or not their names would be entered in a raffle to win gift cards. Before and after completing the second test, students were asked to rate their anxiety or stress on a scale of 0-10. Participants were then disconnected from electrodes and told that their accuracy and speed did not in fact affect raffle entry. The data was again recorded in terms of congruent, incongruent, and stroop.
All data was compiled into an Excel SpreadSheet for later analysis.
Figure 1. BIOPAC Machine with wires included for GSR and HR. Blue HR electrode patches present also.
Figure 2. Sample Stroop Test.
Results
In order to compare galvanic skin response peak to peak and year level, a repeated measures ANOVA test was conducted. A repeated measures ANOVA compares means across one or more variables that are based on repeated observations (Conduct and Interpret a Repeated Measures ANOVA, 2020). Results from this test showed that sample was significant, F (2, 78) = 3.593, p = .032. In fact, in both graph A and B one can clearly see differences in samples one and two, with no significant difference between samples two and three. A bonferroni post-hoc test was used to show differences in sample. In Figure 3., both graphs A and B show that upperclass and underclass students showed signs of emotional arousal before beginning Tests 1 and 2.
Figure 3. Average GSR P-P in baseline for graph A and B in accordance to colligate year level in graph A and the condition represented by Test 1 and Test 2 in graph B. Error bars represent standard error.
In order to measure the compiled data, a repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare galvanic skin response standard deviation and collegiate year level. As shown in Figure 4., year has no effect on GSR SD, however, stress is seen to have been a major factor in the study, F (1, 39) = 4.434, p = .042. During Test 2, participants experienced a higher average GSR percent change compared to Test 1.
In order to measure the compiled data, a repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare heart rate (HR) and year level. Much like in Figure 4, stress is seen to have been a major factor in the study, F (1, 39) = 10.424, p = .003. Figure 5 specifically shows that average heart rate percent change, which is a representation of stress, was significantly higher in Test 2 than in Test 1 across subjects.
Figure 4. Average GSR Standard Deviation (SD) Percent Change in baseline under Test 1 and Test 2 conditions. Error bars represent standard error.
Figure 5. Average Heart Rage (HR) Percent Change in baseline under Test 1 and Test 2 conditions. Error bars represent standard error.
Finally, for the purposes of this study a repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare self-reported anxiety scores to year level and stroop score to year level. Neither tests showed any significant relation across subjects and or within the study.
Conclusion
The goal of this study was to test whether there were differences in stress or anxiety response between upperclassmen and underclassmen when presented with a cognitive test. Our initial hypothesis for the experiment was that galvanic skin response and heart rate would show significant differences in stress response across classes. Based on the results represented in Figures 3-5, however, there was no significant effect based on year level. The results of this study did not align with information presented by Beiter & Nash (2014) or Elias & Ping (2011).
Though conducted in different areas across the globe, each study showed a significant correlation between year level, upperclassmen or underclassmen, and stress.
As seen in Figures 4 and 5, subjects showed significant increases in stress, measured by GSR and HR, when taking Test 2. This increase in stress is directly related to the instructions for Test 2 in which students were informed that this portion of the test would be graded for accuracy and speed. Academic performance, presented by Beiter & Nash as having a significant effect on stress, was also proven to affect stress in this study as well. Self-reported feelings of stress did differ slightly between subjects, meaning many subjects reported a higher stress rating on the 0-10 scale after getting the instructions for Test 2, however this slight increase in reported stress was not significant.
As shown in Figure 3, at the beginning of the test, all subjects experienced increased stress response. This is likely due to the fact that participants were nervous and unsure about the experiment itself. After a practice round and Test 1, students became more comfortable with the test, represented by a downward trend in Figure 3.
Despite efforts to make the experiment as accurate as possible, there are a few
confounding variables to consider. The first being a lack of significance in Stroop test results across the study. Differential stress management between subjects directly impacts the Stroop test, as some individuals are immobilized and others are fueled by stress possibly leading to a null effect. A second variable to consider is stress and anxiety because of academic workload.
Students were asked to come in to be a part of the study when it was most convenient for them, however, the experiments were held 1-2 weeks before midterms. Stress built up from studying half a semester’s worth of material for many different classes may have shown up in this study, in which students were asked to further complete a test-like assignment. Both stress management ability and academic workload could have influenced the results of this study.
In conclusion, this experiment shows that in order to decrease stress within college students regardless of year level, there needs to be less emphasis on grade dependent assignments.
References
Beiter, Rebecca & Nash, R. & McCrady, M. & Rhoades, D. & Linscomb, M. & Clarahan, M. & Sammut, Stephen. (2014). The prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and stress in a sample of college students. Journal of Affective Disorders. 173.
10.1016/j.jad.2014.10.054.
“College Students' Mental Health Is a Growing Concern, Survey Finds.” Monitor on Psychology, American Psychological Association, June 2013,
www.apa.org/monitor/2013/06/college-students.
“Conduct and Interpret a Repeated Measures ANOVA.” Statistics Solutions, 23 June 2020, www.statisticssolutions.com/conduct-interpret-repeated-measures-anova/.
Elias, Habibah, et al. “Stress and Academic Achievement among Undergraduate Students in Universiti Putra Malaysia.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier, 17 Dec. 2011, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042811027492.
Scarpina, Federica, and Tagini, Sofia . “The Stroop Color and Word Test.” Frontiers, Frontiers, 27 Mar. 2017, www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00557/full.
