The Relationship Between Big Five Personality Traits and Psychological Stress Processes in College Students:

Examination of Stressor Differences

Abstract

[Purpose]

  As mental health challenges among university students become increasingly serious, understanding the mechanisms underlying stress responses and tailoring support based on individual personality traits is essential. This study examined how the Big Five personality traits relate to stress responses through cognitive appraisal and coping by, focusing on different stress-inducting situations.

[Methods]

  A total of 206 undergraduate students (1^st to 4^th year) participated in the survey. The measures included the Japanese version of the Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI-J), the Cognitive Appraisal Rating Scale (CARS), coping scale (SSRS), and stress response scale (SSRS). Participants completed the CARS and coping scale (SSRS) for both interpersonal and academic stress situations. Structural equation modeling was performed to examine the hypothesized pathways.

[Results]

  In the interpersonal stress context, extraversion and neuroticism were associated with higher levels of depression through commitment and coping. By contrast, agreeableness and openness were associated with reduced depression through controllability appraisal and passive coping. In the academic stress context, agreeableness was associated with reduced emotional distress through commitment, controllability, and active coping, while neuroticism was associated with increased emotional distress through low controllability and reduced active coping.

[Discussion/Conclusion]

  These findings suggest that the effectiveness of coping strategies differs according to stressor context, even for individuals with the same personality traits. In particular, students high in agreeableness appeared to evaluate commitment and controllability, which facilitated adaptive coping and contributed to reduced stress responses across contexts. Conversely, those high in neuroticism tended to evaluate situations as uncontrollable, thereby limiting their use of adaptive coping strategies. These results highlight the importance of interventions that enhance controllability evaluation and flexible coping choices based on personality traits and stress context. Future research should employ longitudinal designs and address a broader range of stressor contexts to deepen understanding and inform student support strategies.