GENDER DIFFERENCES IN ACADEMIC STRESS AND COPING STRATEGIES AMONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

University life is a critical developmental period known as emerging adulthood, during which there are significant psychological, social, emotional and academic shifts (Arnett, 2000). In this time, students should be developing their own identity, self-sufficiency and making important choices about their career journeys, while also competing in an increasingly competitive college environment. While university education is seen as a period of freedom and discovery, it can actually be a very stressful and uncertain time for students around the world, due to the various demands and expectations it brings, such as academic, social, financial and career-related pressures. These challenges have been combined to form a “high-pressured lifestyle” which has a palpable effect on the mental health and wellbeing of students. In higher education institutions, a significant number of students suffer from psychological distress, so there is an immediate need for attention to psychological issues in the university context (Al-Garni et al., 2025).

The competitive nature of the modern day higher education adds to these challenges, making students especially susceptible to stress-related issues (Graves et al., 2021). Academic stress is one of the most common and significant stressors of university students. Academic stress is defined as the physical and mental reaction that occurs when academic demands are greater than an individual's coping resources (Khan et al., 2025; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Some common academic stressors are exams, workload, deadlines, performance pressure from parents and society, and the pressure to go to school to get a good job. These pressures are especially pronounced in the context of education in India, where it is widely considered to be the key to social mobility and economic success (Reddy et al. 2024). The perception and coping styles of individual students also affect the academic stress experienced by them, and hence, is an important factor influencing psychological well-being (Kumar & Bhukar, 2020).

There is a long history of negative psychological and physical health consequences associated with chronic academic stress in University students. It has been found that chronic exposure to academic stressors is linked to increased anxiety, depression and emotional exhaustion or burnout (Liu et al., 2022). Apart from this, high stress levels can lead to sleep problems, difficulty focusing, and exacerbate intense psychological stress (Sharma & Kaur, 2025). If these problems are not dealt with, they can make a significant impact on students' overall well-being and may even result in more serious mental health issues (Aires-González et al., 2024).

To cope with these challenges, students use a range of coping strategies, and access social supports to help manage stress. According to Lazarus & Folkman (1984), coping refers to the adaptive cognitive and behavioral responses people engage in to deal with a particular external or internal demand that is appraised as being challenging or overwhelming to their coping capacities. The ability to use coping strategies is critical in shaping psychological adjustment and academic resilience. The present study also utilizes perceived social support, but will concentrate on academic stress and coping strategies (using the Academic Stress Scale (ASS) and the Coping Strategies Inventory Short Form (CSI-SF)).

There is ample evidence in the literature that the experience of academic stress and psychological distress is very diverse among university students. In this context, gender has become an important variable. There have been several studies conducted which have revealed that gender statistically shows that females may experience more academic stress and emotional distress than their male peers (Misra & McKean, 2011; Graves et al., 2021). Females also tend to be more likely to seek emotional support from their friends and family, as well as to engage in emotion-focused coping strategies (Dwyer & Cummings, 2001). Male students, however, often have expectations from society that limit emotional expression and seeking help, stemming from the traditional expectations of masculinity.The traditional expectations of masculinity, however, often create expectations among boys to not express emotion and not seek help. This makes males more likely to use avoidant or suppression coping strategies, and less likely to report emotional distress (Khan et al., 2025; Matud, 2012).

The literature on academic stress, coping strategies and relevant constructs is vast; however, most studies have looked at the relationship between these variables on an isolated basis and/or in limited combinations. The understanding of their combined effect is limited, especially in the gendered and socio-cultural contexts. Indian undergraduate and postgraduate students' experiences are distinctive because of the high level of academic competition and culturally specific expectations for gender roles and academic success. Hence, the present study was designed to explore the relationships between academic stress and coping strategies of university students and its difference between genders. It aims to add to the creation of targeted and gender-sensitive mental health interventions, and supportive academic spaces in universities in India.

1.2 Theoretical Framework

The present study is based on three main theoretical approaches that together account for the interaction between educational stressors, personal coping strategies and gender factors.

The Transactional Model of Stress and Coping (1.2.1)

The study is built around the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping that was developed by Lazarus and Folkman, 1984. This model looks at stress as a dynamic interaction between the individual and the environment and not just as a straightforward stimulus. Stress is a response to a situation that is perceived as threatening or challenging, and the person feels that the response resources are inadequate (secondary appraisal) to handle the stressor. Coping strategies refer to cognitive and behavioral responses used to deal with the appraised threat (Dwyer & Cummings, 2001; Ikuromotimi & Ebi, 2026; Chýlová & Natovová, 2012). This framework is especially applicable to the comprehension of how students with similar academic stress appraisals and coping repertoires can have different levels of academic stress.

1.2.2 Social Role Theory and Gender Socialization.

The study is based on Social Role Theory, recognizing gender differences. This theory suggests that the social norms and culturally embedded gender roles of society have significant influences on how males and females perceive, experience and react to stress (Khan et al., 2025; Matud, 2012). A socialisation process of the female to express emotions and cope relationally, and the male to suppress emotions and to be self-reliant can occur. Such gendered expectations can impact the nature of stress reports and also coping strategies, with females more likely to utilize social supports and emotion-focused coping, and males more likely to adopt avoidant and instrumental strategies (Graves et al., 2021).

1.3 Academic Stress

Stress broadly defined, is the series of physiological and psychological responses generated by individual's perception of threat to their well-being (Selye, 1976). In the context of the Transactional Model, academic stress is considered a specific type of stress that occurs when students believe that the demands of their schoolwork exceed their ability to cope with them (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Barraza & Silerio, 2007; Khan et al., 2025). The stress in the university environment is ubiquitous with its own set of stressors including exams, excessive workload, tight deadlines, competition, and the transition from organized secondary school education to more independent university education (Misra & McKean, 2011; Sharma & Kaur, 2025; Dwyer & Cummings, 2001). Moreover, the expectations of the parents and society to achieve academic success as a means of future success compound these academic pressures in India (Reddy et al., 2024; Siddiqui et al., 2019).

Chronic academic stress has a variety of effects, including psychological, physical, and academic. Stress has been shown to be linked to anxiety, depression, and emotional fatigue, psychologically (Liu et al., 2022). Students often complain of sleep disturbances, tiredness, headaches and other somatic complaints, which is common (Graves et al., 2021). The effects of chronic stress on academic functioning include difficulty with concentration, memory, motivation, and performance, which can lead to a vicious circle of poor performance and increased stress (Sloboda, 1990; Al-Garni et al., 2025).

One group that is especially vulnerable to academic stress are university students, who are going through a period of emerging adulthood where they are exploring their identities, gaining independence and making important decisions in their lives (Arnett, 2000; Khan et al., 2025). According to the global epidemiological studies, 47-55% of university students suffer from moderate to severe academic stress, and a significant proportion of 30% of the students suffer from major psychological distress (Estrada et al., 2021; Rivas et al., 2014; Al-Garni et al., 2025). Considering the impact of academic stress across all levels is crucial, since exploring factors that enhance academic resilience and well-being, such as coping strategies and gender differences, can serve as a tool for reducing academic stress and enhancing students' academic performance and well-being (Asensio-Martínez et al., 2023; Matud, 2012).

1.4 Coping Strategies

Coping is key to the stress process. It is a continuous process of cognitive and behavioral coping strategies people engage in to cope with demands that are higher than what they have resources for (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Tam & Lim, 2008). Coping is not a fixed process, but rather the process changes with the progress of the stressful situation (Folkman, 2013).

There are three general categories of coping styles in the literature which are distinguished by their focus and function.

Problem-focused coping includes direct attempts to change or control the stressor itself, including planning, time management, and seeking instrumental support (Dwyer & Cummings, 2001; Tam & Lim, 2008).

Emotion-focused coping involves strategies that modify the emotional reactions to the stressor such as venting, seeking emotional support, or maintaining a positive reinterpretation view (Graves et al., 2021; Khan et al., 2025).

Avoidance or disengagement coping involves coping through attempts to avoid or reduce awareness of the stressor, including through denial, behavioral disengagement, or self-distraction (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Graves et al., 2021).

These strategies can also be categorized as adaptive (such as active planning, positive reinterpretation and seeking support) or maladaptive (such as denial, substance use, self-blame, behavioral disengagement). The relationship of adaptive and maladaptive strategies to psychological outcomes and academic performance is generally positive and negative, respectively (Chýlová & Natovová, 2012; Zhang & Chen, 2025; Dwyer & Cummings, 2001).

It is important for students at the university to acquire coping mechanisms to cope with increased academic and social pressures. But, not every student has enough coping skills. Females and males choose and make use of coping strategies in different ways and to different extents. Males are more likely to engage in problem-focused or avoidance coping, whereas females are more likely to engage in emotion-focused coping, and both are more likely to seek social support; this is often influenced by masculine norms (Graves et al., 2021; Matud, 2012; Misigo, 2015; Khan et al., 2025). The Coping Strategies Inventory Short Form (CSI-SF) was employed in the present study, which assesses four dimensions: Problem-Focused Engagement (PFE), Problem-Focused Disengagement (PFD), Emotion-Focused Engagement (EFE), and Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional Coping (EFD). Under this classification, it is possible to make fine-grained distinctions about the association between coping strategies and academic stressors.

1.5 Gender Differences

Gender is a socially and culturally constructed concept and influences roles, behaviours and emotions beyond biological sex (Tam & Lim, 2008; Khan et al., 2025). There are often strong expectations within the society that women are more expressive while men are more emotionally independent, or more emotionally controlled. Therefore, gender can affect students' perceptions and reports of academic stress and coping mechanisms they use to deal with it.

Some empirical evidence exists of differences in academic stress between genders, but the results are varied. There are several studies reporting higher stress in female students (Graves et al., 2021; Asensio-Martínez et al., 2023; Misigo, 2015), others indicating that male students may experience higher stress (Talwar et al., 2013; Siddiqui et al., 2019; Dwyer & Cummings, 2001), and still others reporting no differences (Talwar et al., 2013; Siddiqui et al., 2019; Dwyer & Cummings, 2001). This is the reason why there is a need to consider cultural and contextual aspects, and not take gender patterns for granted.

Women have more uniformity in coping strategies than men. The socialization pressure has led to gender differences between female and male students as female students are more likely to engage in emotion-focused coping and seek social support while the male students are more likely to avoid or engage in maladaptive coping strategies (Graves et al., 2021; Chýlová & Natovová, 2012; Misigo, 2015; Ikuromotimi & Ebi, 2026; Khan et al., 2025). Men are often socialised to avoid showing emotions, and this can make it more difficult if they are struggling in education, as it can make them feel more isolated from others (Siddiqui et al, 2019). These gender differences emphasize the importance of having gender sensitive strategies in student support services.

1.6 Relationship Between Academic Stress and Coping Strategies

Academic stress and coping strategies are dynamically interrelated. Coping and coping strategies are generally activated during stress and can either help to buffer or exacerbate the stress experience. Adaptive coping strategies tend to reduce negative outcomes, while dysfunctional coping strategies (such as Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional Coping) can lead to a vicious circle that perpetuates or worsens stress levels ( Ruiz-Camacho et al., 2025; Zhang & Chen, 2025).

These relationships are also moderated by gender. Female students tend to have a greater social network and be more likely to seek help emotionally, whereas male students may have cultural barriers to emotional expression and seeking help (Graves et al., 2021; Dwyer & Cummings, 2001; Khan et al., 2025; Siddiqui et al., 2019). Specifically, the interrelationships of these variables are examined in the present study with the aid of standardized measures, and the predictive function of the four dimensions of coping with regard to academic stress is examined.

The Rationale of the study is to identify the problems of the study and determine the objectives of the study.

Although there are a number of studies on mental health among students, further research is required to look at these studies as an integrated whole, with a focus on academic stress and coping aspects and related to gender, specifically among Indian university students. The present research attempts to fill this gap by:

Analyzing the differences between men and women in academic stress.

Exploring gender difference in the overall coping strategy and the four dimensions of coping strategy (PFE, PFD, EFE, EFD) of coping.

Examining links between academic stress and coping.

To see if there is a relationship between academic stress and specific coping dimensions.

Evaluating differences in stress and coping among selected demographic factors.

A quantitative correlational design with a balanced sample of 150 university students was used, which included standardized instruments, to offer empirical insights that can be utilized in counselling services, mental health programs, and academic support in higher education institutions in India to inform gender-sensitive approaches.

1.8 Chapter Summary

This chapter has provided the background, theoretical foundation, important concepts and the rationale behind the study of gender differences in academic stress and coping strategies of university students. It provides the context of the study in the Indian context of higher education and paves the way for detailed review of literature presented in the next chapter.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Graves et al. (2021). In their large-scale study, they found female students consistently indicated higher levels of perceived stress, especially at the end of the semester when stressors are at their highest. The researchers pointed out that these distinctions go beyond biology, as they are instilled in socialisation practices that teach women to acknowledge and act upon emotional suffering and men to conceal and downplay it. The patterns have implications for mental health interventions because, for example, the experience of stress is gendered and the coping resources that students bring to university life are also gendered.

Asensio-Martínez et al. (2023). They concluded that females achieved significantly higher scores for both traditional academic stress and technostress linked to DLEs (digital learning environments) in their analysis of Spanish university students. The study showed that social support is a significant buffer, but that buffering effect is greater when it comes to males, who are generally given less emotional support as a result of the cultural norms. The results highlight the need to consider academic stress along with a larger gendered field of demands and resources.

(Dwyer and Cummings, 2001). They conducted a study on professional education programs and found that students with high self-efficacy and social support were capable of using adaptive coping mechanisms when dealing with high workloads. The authors emphasized that gender is an intervening factor, as females tend to approach their problems emotionally, and males tend to solve them by avoiding or problem solving. The findings from these early research efforts are still relevant to current understanding of the relationship between individual and social resources and students' effectiveness coping with academic stress.

Chýlová and Natovová (2012) claim that there are consistent gender differences in the way people cope with stress at university – while females are more likely to use emotion-focused coping strategies, males are more likely to use avoidance or problem-focused coping strategies. In their research on Czech university students, they found that emotion-focused coping was more common among women and minimisation and avoidance coping were more common among men regarding university pressure. The researchers pointed out that the differences can be attributed mainly to socialization and not only to genetic factors. This is important for University Counselling Services to be aware of and to respond to gendered coping so students can develop a more balanced and effective way of coping with stress.

Khan et al. (2025) have noted that gender disparities in mental health experience and perceptions of social support among university students have been identified as different patterns of vulnerability and resilience in accordance with cultural expectations. Their quantitative and qualitative analysis revealed that in China, women students were generally burdened with double duty of studies and household work and their stress level was higher than males. Male students were more likely to underreport distress and to engage in avoidance coping, due to traditional masculinity norms. The study concluded that culturally responsive interventions are crucial to help overcome these gendered patterns and foster equitable mental health care among university populations.

A study by Misigo (2015) shows that Kenyan women students had significantly higher mean stress scores than men students, which was attributed to the combined load of academic work and traditional gender roles. The study revealed that female participants were more likely to engage in adaptive coping strategies (involving seeking help from counsellors and friends) and males in avoidant coping (involving substance abuse). The findings demonstrate the effects of cultural context on experiences of academic stress and coping responses. The study highlights the need to have gender responsive programmes, which recognise the specific challenges that girls experience in contexts of development.

Siddiqui et al. (2019) have demonstrated that academic stress is heightened because of the society and culture, especially for students from a context of high parental aspiration for social mobility. They found that the negative effects of stress were buffered by the perception of social support from family and friends among females in their study of Pakistani university students. For male students there were cultural barriers that often prevented them from receiving emotional support and were known to promote the suppression of distress. The authors' findings indicate a need for interventions that address mental health issues in a gender-sensitive manner in collectivist cultures where traditional gender roles continue to influence students' experience of stress and coping.

Talwar et al (2013) have concluded that perceived social support, stress and gender differences among university students reveal that sometimes males minimize distress because of the norms of masculinity. In their cross sectional study conducted in Malaysia they found that females had higher stress levels than males, but if social support was lacking, then males had higher psychological distress. The study underscored the need to explore perceived and received social support as an important factor in the understanding of gendered stress responses. The findings indicate that university counselling services need to create outreach initiatives geared towards male students who may be less likely to seek assistance due to internal distress and/or uncertainty about the process.

Matud (2012) convincingly demonstrated. The researcher used a large amount of cross-cultural data and showed that females were socialised to be more emotionally expressive and relationally oriented, which resulted in more emotional coping. Males, on the other hand, are more encouraged to be emotionally restrained and independent, leading to greater use of avoidance or problem-focused coping strategies. This socialisation has significant implications for mental health outcomes for young people and raises an urgent need for interventions to break out of restrictive gender norms and move towards healthy coping for all students.

Hamaideh (2011), the females students in Jordanian universities show high emotional response towards stressors, whereas males students show high behavioral and/or cognitive response towards stressors. Results of the study revealed significant gender variations with regard to the stress experienced and coping strategies adopted. Females reported increased anxiety and emotional responses, while males were more likely to respond with a behavioural withdrawal or cognitive minimisation. The culturally-specific patterns highlight the need for culturally responsive mental health interventions targeting emotional expression and behavioral reactions in university student populations.

Ikuromotimi and Ebi (2026) noted that gender disparities in coping mechanisms to academic stress increase at post-graduate studies because male students have more responsibilities in their lives that might engender wider use of adaptive and maladaptive coping mechanisms than the same is observed for female students. They found in their Nigerian study that boys might use more a variety of coping strategies as school demands rise, problem-solving and avoidance strategies. The results indicate that coping repertoires change across the life span and across academic level, and that the kinds of interventions needed to support students vary according to their stage in the educational process.

The research by Zhang et al. (2024) shows that stress to coping relationship varies among the different female and male students according to the strength of the mediating role of emotional intelligence components. In their cross-sectional study of medical students, they found that emotion regulation and others' emotional appraisal were especially effective in females in decreasing avoidant coping behaviors. The study emphasizes the importance of an emotional intelligence training program within the framework of mental health programs at the university level, particularly in fostering more adaptive reactions to academic stress among different genders.

Ruiz-Camacho et al. (2025) have demonstrated that active coping represents a partial mediator in the pathway from stress to the stress-response relationship, and that high levels of academic demands can lead to an inverse relationship between use of adaptive coping strategies. In their recent research, they have discovered what they call the 'erosion effect' where high levels of stress actually decrease students' ability to activate positive coping mechanisms. This important finding has implications for a deeper understanding of the conditions under which some students will resort to less appropriate coping patterns, despite having knowledge of more effective patterns.

Okechukwu et al. (2022) A significant link between academic stress and suicidal ideation has been established by and the relationship is found to be somewhat explained by coping and resilience. In their research they found that maladaptive coping mechanisms like behavioural disengagement and self-blame increased the association between academic stress and suicidal ideation. The researchers highlighted the critical need for early screening of coping and resilience programs in the universities to avoid serious mental health issues in students under high educational pressure.

Prajapati & Khatun (2008) conducted a detailed literature search, which revealed that academic stress and coping strategies are inter-related and the coping strategies used by the students influence their long-term psychological and academic results. Their review of the research literature has identified an essential need to move beyond the mere correlations to more comprehensive models that consider the interaction between gender, culture, and coping on student well-being. The review can be a useful starting point for creating interventions based on evidence in higher education.

Calaguas, 2011). There are gender differences in college academic stress in various domains, with female students being more likely to rate their raw stress scores as higher, although not all stressor scores are statistically significant from others in their respective results . The study highlighted the need to recognise the gender-specific nature of academic stress and therefore, interventions need to be specific by domain, e.g. financial stress, examination anxiety, social adjustment, etc. depending on the population of students. Such subtle results continue to feed into more targeted interventions aimed at supporting student well-being.

Calvarese (1998) has investigated the role of gender in the stress factors, to confirm that the gender socialisation effects on stress factors and coping strategies. The research pointed to the importance of acknowledging the role of traditional gender roles in students' perceptions of academic stress and its coping strategies. This is crucial for designing mental health care that is inclusive and meets the distinctive needs of boys and girls.

Chaplin et al. (1984) studied gender differences in the response to emotional stress; they found that females are more likely to use emotion-focused strategies when they are experiencing similar academic stressors, compared to males, who are more likely to suppress or avoid emotional responses. They have helped to deepen the understanding of the differences in emotional processing styles between men and women and how these differences impact on the overall psychological adjustment of those in the university. The results can support the design of target-oriented programmes to train students' emotional regulation.

Chathuranga and Thalpavila (2002) have done a cross-cultural analysis of perceived academic stress and coping strategies which shows consistent patterns across both cultures, similar to those found in Indian university students. Their study highlights the need to take into account universal and culture-specific dimensions of gender differences in stress and coping. This learning serves as an important guide to creating interventions which are contextually responsive to students' socio-cultural experiences within a range of higher education settings.

Adams, S. (1991) has examined how gender influences how university students cope with stress, adding evidence of the importance of gendered social norms in influencing coping repertoires and the resulting mental health outcomes. The study highlights the need to address the issue of gender sensitivity in programme implementation instead of one size fits all approach in the universities so as to equip students with gender-balanced and effective academic stress management practices throughout their academic career.

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This​‍​‌‍​‍‌ chapter presents the methodological framework the authors used to investigate the research titled "Gender Differences in Academic Stress and Coping Strategies Among University Students". It provides a detailed account of the research design, objectives, hypotheses, and the nature of the variables involved. Additionally, it covers the characteristics of the sample, the sampling methods, the psychometric properties of the instruments used for data collection, the procedural steps followed, ethical considerations, and the statistical methods employed for data ​‍​‌‍​‍‌analysis.

3.2 Research Design

The​‍​‌‍​‍‌ research incorporated a quantitative, cross-sectional, comparative, and correlational methodology.

• Quantitative: A quantitative methodology was chosen to enable the numerical quantification of psychological variables, namely academic pressure and coping mechanisms, through the use of standard psychometric instruments.

• Cross-sectional: The researchers gathered data at one time only from the study group that visually represents the variables studied.

• Comparative: The design provided the capacity to compare the levels of academic pressure and the types of coping mechanisms to see if they changed across gender and different demographic groups.

• Correlational: It was decided to use a correlational approach to examine the nature, possible direction, and strength of the link between academic pressure and the various aspects of ​‍​‌‍​‍‌coping.

3.3 Objectives of the Study

The​‍​‌‍​‍‌ main goals of this research are:

1. To analyze whether there are gender differences in academic stress among university students.

2. To look into whether there are gender differences in general coping strategies and their specific dimensions (Problem-Focused Engagement, Problem-Focused Disengagement, Emotion-Focused Engagement, and Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional Coping).

3. To examine the connect between academic stress and coping strategies (both the overall gender and the individual dimensions) among university students.

4. To find out if any particular coping strategies act as vital predictors of academic stress.

5. To study the changes of academic stress and coping strategies in different demographic variables such as age, course level (UG/PG), locality, family structure, living arrangements, and year of study.

6. To figure out which coping dimensions play the most role in the occurrence of academic ​‍​‌‍​‍‌stress.

3.4 Hypotheses of the Study

According​‍​‌‍​‍‌ to the objectives and the reviewed literature, the null and alternative hypotheses were derived as follows:

• H1: An essential gender distinction in academic stress levels among university students will emerge.

• H2: Gender differences in the adoption of coping strategies among university students will be significant.

• H3: Different levels of academic stress among university students will be significantly associated with the coping strategies used by them.

• H4: The level of academic stress among university students will be significantly foreseen by coping strategies.

• H5: Both academic stress and the strategies to cope with it will show statistically significant variations across different socio-demographic groups (such as age, locality, family structure, ​‍​‌‍​‍‌etc.).

3.5 Variables of the Study

The study involves the following categories of variables:

3.5.1 Independent Variables

1. Gender: Male and Female.

2. demographic variables

• Age group

• Locality (urban/rural)

• Family structure (nuclear/joint)

• Course level (UG/PG)

• Living arrangement (hosteller/day scholar)

• Year of study

3.5.2 Dependent Variables

• Academic Stress

• Coping Strategies

3.5.3 Predictor Variables

• Problem-Focused Engagement (PFE)

• Problem-Focused Disengagement (PFD)

• Emotion-Focused Engagement (EFE)

• Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional Coping (EFD)

3.6 Sample Characteristics

The sample comprised 150 university students (N=150) currently enrolled in various Indian universities.

• Gender Distribution: The sample was equally split between male (n=75) and female (n=75) students.

• Geographic Distribution: While the sample included students from multiple institutions across India, a significant proportion was drawn from SGT University and the Gurgaon (Haryana) region.

• Age Range: Participants ranged from 18 to 33 years, with the highest concentration in the 18–24 years bracket.

• Academic Level: The sample included representation from both undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate (PG) programs.

3.7 Sampling Technique

Data​‍​‌‍​‍‌ was gathered through a convenience sampling technique, which is a type of non-probability sampling method. The reason for choosing this method was that it was practical, offered a low cost, and it was easy to reach a wide variety of university students through digital platforms. The participants were chosen according to their easy access and their willingness to be part of the ​‍​‌‍​‍‌study.

3.8 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

3.8.1 Inclusion Criteria

1)​‍​‌‍​‍‌ Students who are currently enrolled in a recognized undergraduate or postgraduate program.

2) Individuals: People aged 18 years and above.

3) Both: Male and female participants.

4) Those students who provided voluntary informed consent.

5) Proficiency: Mastery of the English language to ensure understanding of the ​‍​‌‍​‍‌scales.

3.8.2 Exclusion Criteria

1.​‍​‌‍​‍‌ Those not engaged in a university program at this very moment.

2. Participants who are younger than 18.

3. Incomplete or identical survey answers.

4. Persons who refused the informed ​‍​‌‍​‍‌consent.

3.9 Tools for Data Collection

The​‍​‌‍​‍‌ research relied on standardized psychometric instruments to guarantee that the data gathered was both reliable and ​‍​‌‍​‍‌valid.

3.9.1 Demographic Information Sheet

A​‍​‌‍​‍‌ proforma that I made myself was used to gather basic background information, such as age, gender, course of study, year, place of residence, family structure, and living ​‍​‌‍​‍‌arrangements.

3.9.2 Academic Stress Scale (ASS)

Developed​‍​‌‍​‍‌ by Dr. Pradeep Kumar and Dr. Jyoti Yadav, this 30-item scale assesses stress concerning workload, exams, expectations, and ​‍​‌‍​‍‌competition.

• Format: Likert-type scale (Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree).

• Scoring: Higher scores indicate higher perceived academic stress.

• Reliability: The scale is recognized for its high psychometric utility in the Indian student population.

3.9.3 Coping Strategies Inventory Short Form (CSI-SF)

The CSI-SF is a 16-item standardized tool used to assess four primary coping dimensions:

1. Problem-Focused Engagement (PFE): Active efforts to manage the stressor.

2. Problem-Focused Disengagement (PFD): Avoidance or denial of the problem.

3. Emotion-Focused Engagement (EFE): Managing emotions related to the stressor.

4. Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional Coping (EFD): Maladaptive emotional responses.

• Format: Likert scale assessing the frequency of use for each strategy.

3.10 Procedure

The​‍​‌‍​‍‌ research was carried out in a well-organized and gradual way. At first, the psychological scales and demographic information sheet that were chosen were changed into digital format through Google Forms, which made online data collection easier. The survey link was then shared via academic networks, university student groups, and across social media platforms such as WhatsApp and LinkedIn. The very first page of the form provided comprehensive information regarding the purpose of the study, voluntary participation, confidentiality, and informed consent. Only those participants who consented by selecting the “I Consent” option were allowed to go further. Responses were gathered and observed through a specific period of time. After the data collection, the responses were thoroughly checked for completeness and correctness, and the duplicate or incomplete entries were taken out. The consolidated data were then transferred to Microsoft Excel for coding and from there to IBM SPSS Statistics for statistical ​‍​‌‍​‍‌analysis.

3.11 Ethical Considerations

We​‍​‌‍​‍‌ adhered to the ethical standards recognized in the field of psychological research. Participants were informed in detail that they always had the option to leave or join the study without any pressure or undue influence. The participants' full understanding of the study was ensured through their giving informed consent before the beginning of the data collection. We did not get any personal details such as names or phone numbers from anyone so that everyone’s privacy and anonymity were preserved. All the data was also stored securely. We made sure that the participants understood that they could opt out of the study at any moment without facing any consequence. Furthermore, the data was only utilized for our academic and research activities, thus confirming that the information we gathered was treated both ethically and with ​‍​‌‍​‍‌integrity.

3.12 Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics. Preliminary analysis included the Shapiro–Wilk Test, which indicated that the data violated the assumption of normality. Consequently, non-parametric tests were prioritized:

• Descriptive Statistics: Frequencies, percentages, Means, and Standard Deviations (SD) to describe sample characteristics.

• Mann–Whitney U Test: To compare differences between two groups (e.g., Male vs. Female).

• Kruskal–Wallis H Test: To examine differences across demographic groups with three or more categories.

• Spearman Rank Correlation: To determine the relationship between academic stress and coping styles.

• Multiple Linear Regression: To identify the extent to which coping dimensions predict academic stress.

3.13 Chapter Summary

This​‍​‌‍​‍‌ chapter described in detail the methodology employed to explore academic stress and coping mechanisms among university students. The research utilized a quantitative cross-sectional approach along with standardized scales to examine a sample of 150 students. The primary goal was to achieve the research aims. The subsequent chapter will showcase the findings and the statistical analyses of the data ​‍​‌‍​‍‌gathered.

Chapter 4: Results

4.1 Introduction

This​‍​‌‍​‍‌ chapter details the statistical analysis and findings of our study "Gender Differences in Academic Stress and Coping Strategies Among University Students." The data analysis was performed with IBM SPSS Statistics software. Descriptive statistics we used to describe the demographic data. To test the research hypotheses, we applied inferential statistics such as Mann–Whitney U tests, Kruskal–Wallis H tests, Spearman’s correlations, and Multiple Linear Regression. We chose non-parametric tests rather than parametric ones for groups and correlations mainly because the distribution of some of the main variables was ​‍​‌‍​‍‌non-normal.

4.2 Demographic Characteristics

Table 1 summarizes the demographic profile of the participants (N=150).

Table 4.1
Demographic Characteristics of the Participants (N=150)

Variable

Category

Frequency (f)

Percentage (%)

Gender

Male

75

50.0

Female

75

50.0

Age Group

18–20 years

52

34.7

21–23 years

78

52.0

24+ years

20

13.3

Course Level

Undergraduate

126

84.0

Postgraduate

21

14.0

Others

3

2.0

Locality

Urban

111

74.0

Rural

23

15.3

Semi-Urban/Other

16

10.7

Family Structure

Nuclear

88

58.7

Joint/Extended

62

41.3

Living Arrangement

With Family

110

73.3

University Hostel

20

13.3

With friends in PG

13

8.7

Living Alone

7

4.7

Interpretation:
The​‍​‌‍​‍‌ sample was gender-balanced (50% male, 50% female). Most of the participants were aged 21–23 (52%), enrolled in undergraduate programs (84%), and lived in urban areas (74%). When it comes to family and living conditions, 58.7% of them were nuclear families, and 73.3% of them lived with their ​‍​‌‍​‍‌families.

4.3 Descriptive Statistics and Normality

Table 4.2

Descriptive Statistics and Test of Normality for Academic Stress and Coping Strategies by Gender

Variable

Female M (SD)

Male M (SD)

Female p

Male p

Academic Stress Total

58.36 (14.29)

58.83 (18.13)

.247

.018*

CSIS Total

50.53 (5.28)

49.13 (8.19)

.004*

< .001*

PFE

12.85 (2.40)

12.41 (3.15)

—

—

PFD

11.95 (2.64)

12.33 (2.91)

—

—

EFE

12.49 (2.74)

11.23 (3.39)

—

—

EFD

13.24 (2.42)

13.16 (3.23)

—

—

Note. PFE=Problem-Focused Engagement; PFD=Problem-Focused Disengagement; EFE=Emotion-Focused Engagement; EFD=Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional.

Interpretation:
According​‍​‌‍​‍‌ to the Shapiro-Wilk test, the Academic Stress scores for males and the Coping Strategy scores for both genders significantly departed from a normal distribution (p<0.05). As a result, non-parametric tests were used for all the following group ​‍​‌‍​‍‌comparisons.

4.4 Gender Differences in Stress and Coping

To examine the differences between male and female students, a Mann–Whitney U test was performed.

Table 4.3
Mann–Whitney U Test Results for Gender Differences

Variable

Mean Rank (F)

Mean Rank (M)

U

Z

p

Academic Stress

74.61

76.39

2746.00

-0.250

0.802

CSIS Total

83.19

67.81

2235.50

-2.173

0.030*

PFE

79.16

71.84

2538.00

-1.040

0.299

PFD

72.52

78.48

2641.00

-0.651

0.515

EFE

83.51

67.49

2211.50

-2.275

0.023*

EFD

75.58

75.42

2673.50

-0.527

0.598

*Note. Significant at p < .05.

Interpretation

There was no noticeable variation in the levels of academic stress between men and women (p=0.802). Nonetheless, a statistically significant difference was identified in the overall utilization of coping strategies (0.030). This indicated that women (Mean Rank = 83.19) employed coping strategies to a greater extent than men (Mean Rank = 67.81). Among the types of coping strategies, the most pronounced difference was in Emotion-Focused Engagement, with women (p=0.023) being significantly more inclined than men to seek emotional support and be open about their feelings as a way of coping with ​‍​‌‍​‍‌stress.

4.5 Relationship Between Academic Stress and Coping Strategies

A​‍ Spearman rank-order correlation was performed to see if there is a link between academic stress and coping strategies among university students. The findings are displayed in Table ​‍​‌‍​‍‌4.4.

Table 4.4

Spearman’s Rho Correlation between Academic Stress and Coping Strategies

Variable

Academic Stress Total

p-value

CSIS Total

0.201*

0.013

PFE

-0.006

0.943

PFD

0.140

0.086

EFE

0.038

0.647

EFD

0.350**

<0 .001

Note.

PFE = Problem-Focused Engagement;
PFD = Problem-Focused Disengagement;
EFE = Emotion-Focused Engagement;
EFD = Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional Coping.

• p <0.05 ** p < 0.01

Interpretation

There​‍​‌‍​‍‌ was a statistically significant, positive association between academic stress and overall coping strategies as shown in Table 4.4 (rₛ = 0.201, p = 0.013). Additionally, academic stress was found to have a statistically significant, moderate positive correlation with Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional coping (rₛ = 0.350, p < 0.001).

Moreover, there were no statistically significant relationships between academic stress and Problem-Focused Engagement, Problem-Focused Disengagement, or Emotion-Focused Engagement coping ​‍​‌‍​‍‌strategies.

4.6 Prediction of Academic Stress from Coping Strategies

A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine whether coping strategies significantly predicted academic stress among university students. The results are presented in Tables 4.5, 4.6, and 4.7.

• Note. : p < .05

PFE = Problem-Focused Engagement;
PFD = Problem-Focused Disengagement;
EFE = Emotion-Focused Engagement;
EFD = Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional Coping.

Interpretation

Table 4.7 shows that among the different types of coping mechanisms, it was only emotion-focused dysfunctional coping that could significantly explain academic stress (β = 0.353, p < 0.001). This means that the more individuals resorted to dysfunctional emotional coping, the higher their levels of academic stress were. The other dimensions of coping that were examined did not have a significant predictive power in relation to academic ​‍​‌‍​‍‌stress.

4.7 Demographic Comparisons

Mann–Whitney U tests, Kruskal–Wallis H tests, and Spearman’s rho correlations were conducted to examine differences in academic stress and coping strategies across demographic variables. The results are presented in Table 4.8.

Interpretation

As​‍​‌‍​‍‌ shown in Table 4.8, no notable variations were observed in academic stress or coping strategies when considering age group, course level, locality, family structure, living arrangement or year of study. This implies that demographic factors had little to no impact on academic stress or coping strategies of the ​‍​‌‍​‍‌participants.

4.7.1 Relationship Between Age and Academic Stress/Coping Strategies

A Spearman’s rho correlation analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between chronological age and study variables. No significant relationships were found between age and academic stress or coping strategies.

4.8 Summary of Hypotheses Testing

Table 4.9 presents the summary of hypotheses tested in the present study.

Interpretation

As​‍​‌‍​‍‌ shown in Table 4.9, the majority of hypotheses were either partially supported or not supported at all. The most significant findings were mostly related to coping strategies, especially to Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional coping, which had a significant correlation with and a predictive effect on academic ​‍​‌‍​‍‌stress.

4.9 Chapter Summary

This​‍​‌‍​‍‌ chapter detailed the statistical analysis and the outcomes of the research on gender differences in academic stress and coping strategies among university students. One of the findings was that there was no significant gender difference in academic stress; however, there was a significant higher usage of coping strategies by female students overall. In particular, Female students were more likely to use Emotion-Focused Engagement coping methods. The relationship between academic stress and the various coping strategies was also significant. The relationship was positive with overall coping strategies and also with Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional coping. Additionally, regression analysis indicated that the use of Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional coping which is a type of coping strategy had a significant effect on academic stress.

Furthermore, no significant differences were recorded in demographic categories including age group, course level, locality, family structure, living arrangement, and year of study. The subsequent chapter will place these findings in the context of previous research and theoretical ​‍​‌‍​‍‌perspectives.

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION

5.1 Overview of Findings
The​‍​‌‍​‍‌ main goal of this research was to explore how academic stress and coping strategies are related among university students, with a special emphasis on gender variations within the Indian higher education context. The study aimed to go beyond mere descriptive analysis and comprehend how the students' inner handling of pressure determines their total stress levels.

The results reflected a complex psychological terrain: the level of academic stress did not show a significant difference between genders, but the behavioural and emotional strategies employed to cope with that stress were clearly gendered. The most striking finding of the study was that the use of dysfunctional emotional coping mechanisms is the single most significant predictor of higher academic stress, independent of a student's demographic ​‍​‌‍​‍‌background.

5.2 Discussion of Major Findings

5.2.1 Academic Stress
​‍​‌‍​‍‌ Surprisingly, the results of this study did not show any statistically significant difference in the level of academic stress between female and male students. The findings challenge the initial hypothesis (H1) and several previous studies (e.g., Graves et al., 2021; Misigo, 2015) that reported significantly higher levels of pressure among female students. The absence of a statistically significant difference points to a possible change in the nature of present-day university life, especially in such highly competitive places as India.

On a psychological level, one can interpret this using the Transactional Model of Stress (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). According to this model, if stress is seen as a "transaction" between the person and the environment, then the Indian higher education environment in its current state full of intense competition and high stakes serves as a standardized "primary appraisal" for every student. Both male and female students find academic demands, such as examinations and career competition, to be equally threatening or challenging. In this vein, Al-Garni et al., (2025) described university life as a "high-pressured lifestyle" that is gradually becoming a common developmental hurdle. The fact that there is no gender difference here suggests that the institutional and societal pressures to excel academically are now exerted with the same intensity on all students, thereby, negating the traditional gendered divisions of stress ​‍​‌‍​‍‌experience.

5.2.2 Coping Strategies
While​‍​‌‍​‍‌ the general perception of stress was quite similar across genders, how people reacted to it was drastically different (partially confirming H2). The research revealed that female students generally used a wider variety of coping methods. In particular, female students had significantly higher scores in< b>Emotion-Focused Engagement (EFE).

This result implies that female students are more inclined to recognize their emotional burden caused by stress and to look for ways to deal with it. When using "active-approach" strategies like positive reinterpretation or expressing feelings women are performing a more sophisticated secondary appraisal of their resources. This is consistent with Hamaideh (2010), who point out that ladies tend to experience stronger emotional reactions but also have more varied means of dealing with those reactions. Male students, on the other hand, had a lower average rank in these engagement strategies, which could indicate a tendency to emotionally suppress or "minimize" (Chýlová & Natovová, 2012), thus perhaps having fewer means to balance the psychological strain of their ​‍​‌‍​‍‌workload.

5.2.3 Gender Differences and Social Role Theory
Social​‍​‌‍​‍‌ Role Theory can be used to deeply analyze the differences in coping styles that were observed. According to gender socialization, students follow certain "scripts" when they are under pressure. In South Asian cultures, the norms often socialize women to be more spiritual, emotionally aware, and expressive (Khan et al., 2025). Consequently, female students tend to be more comfortable in using emotional engagement as a valid tool for stress management.

On the other hand, male students usually face the limitations of "masculinity norms," which consider the expression of emotional distress as equivalent to vulnerability or weakness (Khan et al., 2025; Siddiqui et al., 2019). The fact that males in this research group were less engaged in coping with emotion could mean that, even if they experience the same level of stress as females, they might be culturally inhibited from using certain emotional "outlets." This would cause a psychological bottleneck where the stressor is present, but the inner mechanisms for processing the resulting emotion are ​‍​‌‍​‍‌suppressed.

5.2.4 Relationship Between Variables: The Vicious Cycle of Dysfunctional Coping
One​‍​‌‍​‍‌ of the critical insights of this research was the moderate positive correlation (rₛ = 0.350) between academic stress and< b>Emotion-Focused Dysfunctional (EFD) Coping. A statistical model also supported these results, identifying EFD as the only predictor of academic stress that mattered (β = 0.353).

The above highlights the "vicious circle" of stress in students' emotional health. The moment they adapt to dysfunctional coping means they also confound the problem of the primary stressor. Like denial, self-blame, or behavioral disengagement (Ikuromotimi & Ebi, 2026). At the same time, they only open a door for the intensification of the very emotions that they had hoped to relieve. Unlike "active" coping, which after all focuses on finding a way out either of the problem or of the emotional discomfort in a positive way, EFD coping is just the way to a state of being powerless to act. And thus the "deterioration of the existing physical limitation" theory is best exemplified here by Ruiz-Camacho et al. (2025): prolonged stress damages the internal coping mechanisms thus it becomes more and more difficult to employ them. Consequently, students absorb the negative pattern of their emotional regulation and resort to dysfunctional habits that at first glance seem to reduce the stress instead of being its cause. Anyway, the study neatly demonstrates that the number of tasks (work) is not the measure that indicates the students' stress levels. Rather it is the dysfunctional modes of emotional handling that determine ​‍​‌‍​‍‌them.

5.3 Theoretical Implications
This​‍​‌‍​‍‌ research supports the idea of the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping. It highlights that among different steps in the stress process, the "Secondary Appraisal" (which involves choosing how to cope) is the most important. Moreover, the fact that Emotion-Focused Coping (EFD) was the main predictor of stress outcomes confirms the statement of Lazarus and Folkman (1984). Their statement is that it is not the event itself that creates stress but instead the person's mental and physical efforts to overcome it which characterize the experience of stress.

Besides, the paper elaborates on the Social Role Theory by providing its deeper insight. It was shown that though the sex no longer determines how much stress a student experiences, it still greatly decides the way of their reaction. This, in turn, points to the fact that "gender roles" are changing to allow for an equal share in academic pressure, but still lack the change that would enable an equal share of emotion regulation ​‍​‌‍​‍‌styles.

5.4 Practical Implications
The​‍​‌‍​‍‌ results offer straightforward directions for university counseling and intervention programs:

1. Deconstruction of Dysfunctional Habits: It is essential that mental health interventions first identify "Dysfunctional Coping" behaviors as a priority. Instead of offering neutral stress-management tips, the workshops have to be based on the scientifically-supported concepts of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) for the purpose of substituting denial and disengagement with active planning.

2. Gender-Sensitive Outreach: Since male students are less likely to use emotional engagement strategies, it is important for counseling centers to consider ways of reaching out to men that do not depend on the conventional "talk therapy" frameworks, which they might perceive to be culturally or psychologically stressful.

3. Early Identification: Dysfunctional coping is a strong predictor of high stress; therefore universities can implement brief screenings (e.g., CSI-SF) to detect "at-risk" students who tend to rely on avoidance and equip them with emotional regulation training before their stress levels cause burnout or academic ​‍​‌‍​‍‌failure.

5.5 Limitations of the Study
One​‍​‌‍​‍‌ of the main limitations of this research is the cross-sectional nature of the study. This kind of study does not allow us to establish cause-and-effect relationships. The data indicate that dysfunctional coping is a predictor of stress. However, it could also be argued that the high level of stress in a student can be so overwhelming that it leaves only the possibility of resorting to dysfunctional behaviors. Furthermore, the sample of 150 participants largely consisted of students from the urban Haryana/NCR area. Consequently, their situation may not reflect that of students living in more rural or geographically diverse parts of India. Lastly, relying on self-report measures might lead to social desirability bias. That is, students (especially males) may have been less likely to disclose their maladaptive behaviors such as substance use or severe emotional ​‍​‌‍​‍‌distress.

5.6 Suggestions for Future Research
Future​‍​‌‍​‍‌ research should consider implementing longitudinal approaches that would allow them to track the evolution of coping strategies during a four-year college program. Moreover, there is a demand for mixed-methods studies, which integrate qualitative interviews, to grasp the particular "cultural barriers" that male students encounter when they try to shift from avoidant coping. Additionally, investigating the potential of Emotional Intelligence (EI) as a moderator could shed light on why a number of students are still able to resist dysfunctional coping even when they are subjected to intense academic ​‍​‌‍​‍‌pressure.

5.7 Conclusion
In​‍​‌‍​‍‌ essence, the research points to the fact that although university students of both genders face academic stress as a common challenge, the ways they handle this stress are still very different. Female students engage more emotionally and are more flexible in this regard, while male students seem to have a limited coping repertoire. However, the most striking finding is the negative impact of dysfunctional coping. The results indicate that the way to lower academic stress may not be directly through lessening the amount of work, but rather by providing students with the psychological tools to let go of avoidant, dysfunctional behaviors. Through the development of gender-sensitive support systems that help students actively engage with their emotions and at the same time, prevent them from disengaging, higher education institutions can take a step further in ensuring the resilience and well-being of their ​‍​‌‍​‍‌students.

REFERENCES

Adams, S. (Year). The effect of gender on stress coping strategies in university students.

Asensio-Martínez, A., Aguilar-Latorre, A., Masluk, B., Gascón-Santos, S., Sánchez-Calavera, M. A., & Sánchez-Recio, R. (2023). Social support as a mediator in the relationship between technostress or academic stress and health: Analysis by gender among university students. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1236825.

Calaguas, G. M. (2011). College academic stress: Differences along gender lines. Journal of Social and Development Sciences, 1(5), 194–201.

Calvarese, M. (Year). The effect of gender on stress factors: An exploratory study among university students.

Chaplin, T. M., Hong, K., Bergquist, K., & Sinha, R. (Year). Gender differences in response to emotional stress.

Chathuranga, M. M. N., & Thalpavila, T. K. N. A. (Year). Perceived academic stress and coping strategies: Gender-based analysis.

Chýlová, H., & Natovová, L. (2012). Stress coping strategies at university students – Part I: Gender differences. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 5(3), 135–147.

Dwyer, A. L., & Cummings, A. L. (2001). Stress, self-efficacy, social support, and coping strategies in university students. Canadian Journal of Counselling, 35(3), 208–220.

Graves, B. S., Hall, M. E., Dias-Karch, C., Haischer, M. H., & Apter, C. (2021). Gender differences in perceived stress and coping among college students. PLOS ONE, 16(8), Article e0255634.

Hamaideh, S. H. (2011). Gender differences in stressors and reactions to stressors among Jordanian university students. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 58(1), 26–33.

Ikuromotimi, A. E., & Ebi, M. A. (2026). Gender differences in coping strategies for academic stress.

Khan, A., Zeb, I., & Fang, S. (2025). Gender differences in mental health experiences and perceived social support among university students.

Matud, M. P. (2012). Gender differences in stress and coping styles.

Misigo, B. L. (2015). Gender differences in perceived stress and coping strategies among university students in Kenya.

Okechukwu, F. O., Ogba, K. T. U., Nwufo, J. I., Ogba, M. O., Onyekachi, B. N., Nwanosike, C. I., & Onyishi, A. B. (2022). Academic stress and suicidal ideation: Moderating roles of coping style and resilience. BMC Psychiatry, 22, Article 546.

Prajapati, M. P., & Khatun, J. (Year). Academic stress and coping strategies among college students: A literature review.

Ruiz-Camacho, C., Gozalo, M., & Sánchez Casado, I. (2025). The mediating role of active coping strategies in the relationship between academic stressors and stress responses among university students. Healthcare, 13, Article 1674.

Siddiqui, R. S., Jahangir, A. A., & Hassan, A. (2019). Gender differences on perceived social support and psychological distress among university students. GMJACS, 9(2), 210–223.

Talwar, P., Kumaraswamy, N., & Mohd Fadzil, A. R. (2013). Perceived social support, stress and gender differences among university students: A cross sectional study. Malaysian Journal of Psychiatry, 22(2), 42–49.

Zhang, N., Ren, X., Xu, Z., & Kun, Z. (2024). Gender differences in the relationship between medical students’ emotional intelligence and stress coping: A cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Education, 24, Article 810