↓ Skip to main content

Problem-solving skills and perceived stress among undergraduate students: The moderating role of hardiness

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Health Psychology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Problem-solving skills and perceived stress among undergraduate students: The moderating role of hardiness
Published in
Journal of Health Psychology, June 2016
DOI 10.1177/1359105316653265
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abbas Abdollahi, Mansor Abu Talib, Per Carlbring, Richard Harvey, Siti Nor Yaacob, Zanariah Ismail

Abstract

This study was designed to examine the relationships between problem-solving skills, hardiness, and perceived stress and to test the moderating role of hardiness in the relationship between problem-solving skills and perceived stress among 500 undergraduates from Malaysian public universities. The analyses showed that undergraduates with poor problem-solving confidence, external personal control of emotion, and approach-avoidance style were more likely to report perceived stress. Hardiness moderated the relationships between problem-solving skills and perceived stress. These findings reinforce the importance of moderating role of hardiness as an influencing factor that explains how problem-solving skills affect perceived stress among undergraduates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 128 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Master 12 9%
Lecturer 10 8%
Unspecified 7 5%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 52 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 23%
Social Sciences 13 10%
Unspecified 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 52 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 July 2016.
All research outputs
#3,998,571
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Health Psychology
#434
of 2,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,522
of 351,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Health Psychology
#70
of 401 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,086 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 351,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 401 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.