Proactive and Preventive Adjustment Mechanisms to Stress Among University Students

Proactive and Preventive Adjustment Mechanisms to Stress Among University Students

Peter Aloka, Mary Atieno Ooko, Remi Orao, Tom K. O. Onyango, Emmily Achieng Owuor
Copyright: © 2024 |Pages: 14
DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3693-0708-3.ch007
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$37.50
Current Special Offers
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

Students in universities experience numerous stresses from varied sources. Stress makes students develop poor mental health, which eventually may lead to adverse effects in their lives. This chapter sought to analyze proactive and preventive adjustment mechanisms to stress among university students. It is concluded that university students who adopt proactive coping mechanisms to stress experience numerous merits because it minimizes the stressful experience during the situation of stress. The university students who adopt prevention-focused coping strategies have experienced buffer since it serves as important intervening mechanisms that account for the relationships between work stressors and individual outcomes. It is recommended that deans of students at universities should develop holistic cognitive behavioural therapy for students to equip them with best coping mechanisms to stress.
Chapter Preview
Top

The Model Of Coping Modes

The model of coping modes (MCM) deals with individual differences in attention orientation and emotional- behavioral regulation under stressful conditions (Krohne 1993). The MCM extends the (largely descriptive) monitoring blunting conception (as well as the repression–sensitization approach) in that it relates the dimensions vigilance and cognitive avoidance to an explicative cognitive-motivational basis. It assumes that most stressful, especially anxiety evoking, situations are characterized by two central features: the presence of aversive stimulation and a high degree of ambiguity. The experiential counterparts of these situational features are emotional arousal (as being primarily related to aversive stimulation) and uncertainty (related to ambiguity). (Krohne, et al., 2000). Arousal, in turn, should stimulate the tendency to cognitively avoid (or inhibit) the further processing of cues related to the aversive encounter, whereas uncertainty activates vigilant tendencies.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset