Stress and its effects are prominent in everyday life. College students especially are faced with stress that can affect their mental and physical health as well as their academic performance (Szabo & Marian, 2017). Given the widespread negative effects of stress, we present a method for predicting stress reactions based on personality traits and cultural differences. Cultural differences will affect each person’s personality, which will affect how they react to, deal with, or think about stress. These personality traits can then link to certain stress reactions which are more likely with certain personality indicators. Using these personality traits, we can then better personalize and taper stress-management techniques for each individual, going as far as to use them as indicators for vulnerability to mental health issues or as information to develop coping mechanisms for mental health issues.
First, we will review literature that focuses on stress reactions, connections between personality and stress, physiological and psychological reactions to stress, and previously researched methods of measuring stress reactions with a multidimensional approach. We will then present information on the current study, which examines the link between personality factors and stress reactions in an attempt to predict how personality traits will translate into various stress reactions.
Stress and its negative consequences are known as a major problem for areas in medicine, psychology, and sociology and can have lasting negative effects on mental health and cardiovascular systems in particular (Ababkov, Voyt, Shaboltas, 2015). College students in particular face stressors on a day-to-day basis that will impact their mental and physical health in addition to their academic performance (Szabo & Marian, 2017). In response to this, Tian, Jiang, and Huebner (2018) suggested that school mental-health services provided for adolescents should consider both personality traits and school-based stress.
Personality and Stress
There is a known correlation between personality traits and stress, with a variety of methods to measure personality used in previous studies (Hengartner, van der Linden, Bohleber, & von Wyl, 2016; Ghasemian & Kumar, 2017; Tomaka, Palacios, Schneider, Colotla, Concha, Herrald, 1999). In one study by Hengartner et al. (2016), researchers used the big five personality traits (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) as well as the general factor of personality test (GFP) to assess coping mechanisms in college students on a Swiss university campus following an emergency alarm for a shooting. After the alarm was set off, police secured the campus and the incident was later reported to be a false alarm. After the incident, researchers sent out an online questionnaire that measured acute stress reactions, coping responses, and the big five personality traits in 306 participants. Hengartner et al. (2016) found that personality factors, specifically neuroticism, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, were indicators of how a person would react to stress. For instance, participants who scored high on neuroticism responded more intensely to stress in a physiological dimension while both conscientiousness and agreeableness corresponded to social activity, where persons likely experienced a high rate of social support as a coping mechanism. This relationship between personality and stress supports the theory that personality traits can be used as indicators for how a person will react to stress in regard to coping mechanisms and psychological or physiological reactions.
In one particular personality and stress study by Ghasemian and Kumar (2017), researchers found a significant relationship between personality type and stress among nurses by studying type A and type B personalities. Type A was defined in this study as people who are generally tense, impatient, assertive, and workaholic. Type B was defined in this study as people who are generally easy going, relaxed, and non-domineering. 100 nurses working in varying hospital settings were evaluated for personality indicators and stress levels after being split into two equal groups: male and female. The tests placed each person into a category: type A or type B personality. Ghasemian and Kumar (2017) found that there was a significant relationship between personality and stress, with type A personality displaying a significant positive relationship and type B displaying a significant negative relationship. The results also indicated that nurses with type A personality traits were more prone to stress than those with type B. No significant difference was found between genders with the same personality type. This method of research indicates that personality traits can make a person more prone to stress. This contains significant information for the current study. In addition to using personality traits to help taper coping mechanisms for stress, we can also predict who will be more prone to stress based on certain shared characteristics or personality traits.
Additionally, Smith and Reise (1998) measured gender differences related to negative emotions in a study with 3,242 individuals using the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire, which measures different negative emotions such as anxiety, worry, and guilt. They found that women more often chose questionnaire items related to vulnerability and sensitivity whereas men more often chose items related to tension, irritability, and being easily upset. These results indicate that women are more likely to react to stress as a threat while men are more likely to react to stress as a challenge. These results correlate with the current study hypotheses detailed below regarding personality traits of femininity and masculinity.
Another study by Tomaka et al. (1999) measured the stress response of high assertive and low assertive women while giving an impromptu speech. Participants’ behavior and communication were observed and measured while giving their speech. Assertiveness was measured by the Assertiveness subscale of the NEO Personality Inventory, and participants responded to online questionnaires regarding stress reactions before and after the impromptu speeches. Tomaka et al. (1999) found that high assertive women tended to view the speeches as a challenge while low assertive women tended to view the speeches as a threat. These results show that personality traits can change the way that people view their stress, which changes the way that they confront or cope with their stress. Being able to see how people view their stress based on personality indicators will allow us to predict how individuals will react to or cope with stress.
From the contexts of these studies, we can conclude that by examining personality traits as indicators for stress reactions, we can better suggest and taper coping mechanisms and therapeutic exercises to the needs of each person based on similar or shared personality characteristics.
Adapting Previous Research
In order to expand and adapt these methods into our own study, we adapted several factors from the ‘Psycho-Physiological-Stress-Test’ (PPST), a multidimensional test developed by Neureiter, Hajfanil, Ahnis, Mierkel, Rose, Danzer, and Klapp (2017) used for measuring stress reactions with psychological, physiological, and social dimensions. Our study includes measurements of psychological and physiological reactions to stress within various social environments, an idea adapted from the PPST. We added an additional factor of observation regarding public speaking, a prominent stressor in social situations.
The goal of this study was to predict psychological and physiological reactions to various stressors by evaluating personality traits. Learning how people with certain personality indicators react to stress can help those with diagnosed mental health disorders manage and deal with stress as well as help clinicians and other mental health professionals to develop more accurate means of supporting patients based on differing personality traits. In addition to this, learning cultural differences in stress reactions can lead to a higher tolerance and better handling of stress reactions across cultural barriers in the workplace, school systems, and everyday lifestyles. College students in particular were the main focus in this study, as they are often faced with stressors that influence their mental and physical health as well as their academic performance (Szabo & Marian, 2017). Our study seeks to use personality markers in college-aged students to predict how students will react to various stressors so that coping mechanisms can be personalized based on personality indicators.
To examine the relationship between personality and stress reactions, we completed two separate studies. The first was an observational study of stress reactions in college students in a public speaking environment where students’ stress reactions were observed and recorded during a speech given during a class. The second was a self-evaluation of stress reactions where we has a sample of college students complete a paper survey.
The survey measured for three main categories: psychological reactions (emotions, feelings), mannerisms and body language, and social/personality traits. These categories were further subdivided into more specific categories.
Under psychological reactions, we included five main feelings of alienation, anxiety, fear, depression, and anger/frustration. These feelings were to be self-evaluated by the survey taker based on their personal feelings during set times of stress.
Under mannerisms and body language, we included three main subsections. The first, making yourself smaller, included body language such as crossing your legs, crouching your body, folding your arms, speaking with a low volume, and avoiding eye contact. The second, making yourself larger or more intimidating, included body language such as large hand gestures, high volume, moving around, and focusing exclusively on a few people. The last section included body language and mannerisms such as filler words (uh, um, like, so, okay), shaking, stuttering/repetition, fiddling with jewelry, hair, or clothes, sweating, and turning red/blushing.
Under social and personality traits, we included five main categories: self-identified introverted, extroverted, identification with the traditional view of masculinity, identification with the traditional view of femininity, and minorities, which included the socially disadvantaged, racial and ethnic minorities, and those with diagnosed anxiety or depressive disorders. In order to provide a multidimensional approach, this method was adapted from the previously described research on the PPST (Neureiter et al., 2017) by including a self-assessment by each participant of their own psychological and physiological reactions in social situations.
Based on the previously described research related to personality type and stress (Ghasemian & Kumar, 2017), we predict the following: for public speaking, the highest rated emotion will be anxiety while the lowest will be depression. Additionally, the highest rated and observed mannerisms will be using filler words while the lowest will be making yourself bigger. For examinations, the highest rated emotion will be fear while the lowest will be alienation. Additionally, the highest rated mannerism will be making yourself smaller while the lowest will be blushing. For being called on in class, the highest rated emotion will be fear while the lowest will be depression. Additionally, the highest rated mannerism will be using filler words while the lowest will be making yourself bigger. For performances, the highest rated emotion will be fear while the lowest will be alienation. Additionally, the highest rated mannerism will be sweating while the lowest will be using filler words. For customer service, the highest rated emotion will be anger/frustration while the lowest will be fear. Additionally, the highest rated mannerism will be making yourself smaller while the lowest will be shaking.
We also predicted that those who identify more with the traditional view of masculinity will have a strong correlation with the mannerism or behavior of making yourself bigger while those who identify more with the traditional view of femininity will have a strong correlation with the mannerism or behavior of making yourself smaller. Additionally, those who are introverted will have a strong correlation with the mannerism of filler words while those who are extroverted will have a strong correlation with making yourself bigger. Lastly, we predicted that those who experience minority stressors will have a strong correlation with the mannerism of making yourself smaller.