Volume 24, Issue 1 (4-2025)
JRUMS 2025, 24(1): 3-18 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.US.PSYEDU.REC.1403.069
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
ّFouladchang M, Dadvand F. The Mediating Role of Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies in the Relationship between Proactive Personality and Perceived Social Support and Emotional Well-Being among Students: A Descriptive Study. JRUMS 2025; 24 (1) :3-18
URL: http://journal.rums.ac.ir/article-1-7566-en.html
URL: http://journal.rums.ac.ir/article-1-7566-en.html
Shiraz University
Abstract: (443 Views)
Background and Objectives: University life is a critical phase that introduces students to new responsibilities and demands. These pressures can lead to negative emotional experiences and reduced emotional well-being. This study examines the role of perceived social support and proactive personality in students’ emotional well-being and explores the mediating role of cognitive emotion regulation strategies.
Materials and Methods: The present research was descriptive. The statistical population consisted of students at Shiraz University during the 2024-2025 academic year. A total of 300 participants were selected through a cluster random sampling method. They completed four scales: Perceived Social Support (Zimet et al., 1988), Proactive Personality (Bateman & Crant, 1993), Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies (Garnefski & Kraaij, 2006), and Emotional Well-Being (Keyes & Magyar-Moe, 2003). Pearson’s correlation test and structural equation modeling were used to analyze the data.
Results: The findings showed that out of 300 studied students, 182 (60.7%) were females and 118 (39.3%) were males. The proposed model had a good fit. Proactive personality contributes to emotional well-being directly (β=0.17, p=0.040) and indirectly (β=0.14, p=0.016), through the mediation of increased adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Also, perceived social support leads to improvements in emotional well-being both directly (β=0.36, p=0.006) and indirectly (β=0.15, p=0.002) by increasing adaptive strategies and reducing maladaptive emotion regulation strategies.
Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrated that proactive personality and perceived social support enhance emotional well-being among students by strengthening adaptive strategies and reducing maladaptive strategies in emotion regulation. These results emphasize the importance of personal and social factors in improving students' well-being.
Keywords: Proactive personality, Perceived social support, Cognitive emotion regulation strategies, Emotional well-being, Students
Funding: This study did not have any funds.
Conflict of interest: None declared.
Ethical considerations: The Ethics Committee of Shiraz University approved the study (IR.US.PSYEDU.REC.1403.069).
Authors’ contributions:
- Conceptualization: Mahboobeh Fouladchang, Fatemeh Dadvand
- Methodology: Mahboobeh Fouladchang, Fatemeh Dadvand
- Data collection: Fatemeh Dadvand
- Formal analysis: Fatemeh Dadvand
- Supervision: Mahboobeh Fouladchang
- Project administration: Mahboobeh Fouladchang
- Writing – original draft: Mahboobeh Fouladchang, Fatemeh Dadvand
- Writing – review & editing: Mahboobeh Fouladchang, Fatemeh Dadvand
Materials and Methods: The present research was descriptive. The statistical population consisted of students at Shiraz University during the 2024-2025 academic year. A total of 300 participants were selected through a cluster random sampling method. They completed four scales: Perceived Social Support (Zimet et al., 1988), Proactive Personality (Bateman & Crant, 1993), Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies (Garnefski & Kraaij, 2006), and Emotional Well-Being (Keyes & Magyar-Moe, 2003). Pearson’s correlation test and structural equation modeling were used to analyze the data.
Results: The findings showed that out of 300 studied students, 182 (60.7%) were females and 118 (39.3%) were males. The proposed model had a good fit. Proactive personality contributes to emotional well-being directly (β=0.17, p=0.040) and indirectly (β=0.14, p=0.016), through the mediation of increased adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Also, perceived social support leads to improvements in emotional well-being both directly (β=0.36, p=0.006) and indirectly (β=0.15, p=0.002) by increasing adaptive strategies and reducing maladaptive emotion regulation strategies.
Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrated that proactive personality and perceived social support enhance emotional well-being among students by strengthening adaptive strategies and reducing maladaptive strategies in emotion regulation. These results emphasize the importance of personal and social factors in improving students' well-being.
Keywords: Proactive personality, Perceived social support, Cognitive emotion regulation strategies, Emotional well-being, Students
Funding: This study did not have any funds.
Conflict of interest: None declared.
Ethical considerations: The Ethics Committee of Shiraz University approved the study (IR.US.PSYEDU.REC.1403.069).
Authors’ contributions:
- Conceptualization: Mahboobeh Fouladchang, Fatemeh Dadvand
- Methodology: Mahboobeh Fouladchang, Fatemeh Dadvand
- Data collection: Fatemeh Dadvand
- Formal analysis: Fatemeh Dadvand
- Supervision: Mahboobeh Fouladchang
- Project administration: Mahboobeh Fouladchang
- Writing – original draft: Mahboobeh Fouladchang, Fatemeh Dadvand
|
Citation: Fouladchang M, Dadvand F. The Mediating Role of Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies in the Relationship between Proactive Personality and Perceived Social Support and Emotional Well-Being among Students: A Descriptive Study. J Rafsanjan Univ Med Sci 2025; 24 (1): 3-18. [Farsi]
|
Keywords: Proactive personality, Perceived social support, Cognitive emotion regulation strategies, Emotional well-being, Students
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Psychiatry
Received: 2024/11/18 | Accepted: 2025/03/1 | Published: 2025/04/21
Received: 2024/11/18 | Accepted: 2025/03/1 | Published: 2025/04/21
References
1. Park CL, Kubzansky LD, Chafouleas SM, Davidson RJ, Keltner D, Parsafar P, et al. Emotional well-being: What it is and why it matters. Affective Science 2023; 4(1): 10-20.
2. Simmons SB, Knight KE, Menard S. Long-term consequences of intimate partner abuse on physical health, emotional well-being, and problem behaviors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 2018; 33(4): 539-70.
3. Aloia LS, McTigue M. Buffering against sources of academic stress: The influence of supportive informational and emotional communication on psychological well-being. Communication Research Reports 2019; 36(2): 126-35.
4. Baum CM, Christiansen CH, Bass JD. The person-environment- occupation- performance (PEOP) model. Occupational Therapy: Routledge; 2024. p. 47-55.
5. Koydemir S, Sökmez AB, Schütz A. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of randomized controlled positive psychological interventions on subjective and psychological well-being. Applied Research in Quality of Life 2021; 16: 1145-85.
6. Hati L, Pradhan RK. Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Well-being: A theoretical framework. Emotion, Well-being, and Resilience: Apple Academic Press; 2021; p: 379-94.
7. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping. European Journal of Personality 1987; 1(3): 141-69.
8. Crant JM, Hu J, Jiang K. Proactive personality: A twenty-year review. Proactivity at work 2016: 211-43.
9. Kamboj KP, Garg P. Teachers' psychological well-being role of emotional intelligence and resilient character traits in determining the psychological well-being of Indian school teachers. International Journal of Educational Management 2021; 35(4): 768-88.
10. Perugini MLL, Solano AC. Normal and maladaptive personality traits as predictors of motives for social media use and its effects on well-being. Psychological Reports 2021; 124(3): 1070-92.
11. Huang L, Zhang T. Perceived social support, psychological capital, and subjective well-being among college students in the context of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 2022; 31(5): 563-74.
12. Brunsting NC, Zachry C, Liu J, Bryant R, Fang X, Wu S, et al. Sources of perceived social support, social-emotional experiences, and psychological well-being of international students. The Journal of Experimental Education 2021; 89(1): 95-111.
13. Pierce KD, Quiroz CS. Who matters most? Social support, social strain, and emotions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 2019; 36(10): 3273-92.
14. Dobos B, Piko BF, Mellor D. What makes university students perfectionists? The role of childhood trauma, emotional dysregulation, academic anxiety, and social support. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 2021; 62(3): 443-7.
15. Newman DB, Nezlek JB. The influence of daily events on emotion regulation and well-being in daily life. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2022; 48(1): 19-33.
16. Extremera N, Sánchez-Álvarez N, Rey L. Pathways between ability emotional intelligence and subjective well-being: Bridging links through cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Sustainability 2020; 12(5): 2111.
17. Akfirat ON. Investigation of the relationship between psychological well-being, self-esteem, perceived general self-efficacy, level of hope, and cognitive emotion regulation strategies. European Journal of Education Studies 2020; 7(9).
18. Hasani J, Chashmi SJE, Firoozabadi MA, Noory L, Turel O, Montag C. Cognitive emotion regulation mediates the relationship between big-five personality traits and internet use disorder tendencies. Computers in Human Behavior 2024; 152: 108020.
19. Tao S, Lan M, Tan CY, Liang Q, Pan Q, Law NW. Adolescents’ cyberbullying experience and subjective well-being: sex difference in the moderating role of cognitive-emotional regulation strategy. Computers in Human Behavior 2024; 153: 108122.
20. Kline RB. 26 Convergence of Structural Equation Modeling and Multilevel Modeling. The SAGE handbook of innovation in social research methods: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2011; p: 562-89.
21. 21 Bateman TS, Crant JM. The proactive component of organizational behavior: A measure and correlates. Journal of Organizational Behavior 1993; 14(2): 103-18.
22. Mohammadi B. The relationship between proactive personality and supervisor support with job performance through proactive behaviors in Bid Boland gas refinery employees. Strategic Studies in Oil and Energy Industry Journal 2016; 7(27): 163-81. [Farsi]
23. Iloke SE, Joe-Akunne CO, Joe-Akunne IG, Ezeh LN. Relationship between proactive personality traits and transformational leadership style among workers: Moderating role of psychological empowerment. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review 2021; 4(09).
24. Spreitzer GM. Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal 1995; 38(5): 1442-65.
25. Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK. The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment 1988; 52(1): 30-41.
26. Nasiri F, Abdolmaleki S, Shobu S. Explaining the relationship between perceived social support and quality of life with the mediating role of perceived stress in female-headed households in Sanandaj. Applied Sociology Journal 2017; 27(4): 99-116. [Farsi]
27. Keyes CL, Magyar-Moe JL. The measurement and utility of adult subjective well-being. Journal of Positive Psychology 2003; 5(2): 123-45.
28. Saltalı ND, Erbay F, Işık E, İmir HM. Turkish validation of social emotional well-being and resilience scale (PERIK): Preschool children social-emotional well-being. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education 2018; 10(5): 525-33.
29. Nasiri F, Abdolmaleki S, Shobu S. Explaining the relationship between perceived social support and quality of life with the mediating role of perceived stress in female-headed households in Sanandaj. Applied Sociology Journal 2017; 27(4): 99-116. [Farsi]
30. Garnefski N, Kraaij V. Cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire–development of a short 18-item version (CERQ-short). Personality and Individual Differences 2006; 41(6): 1045-53.
31. Garnefski N, Kraaij V. The cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 2007; 23(3): 141-9.
32. Jafarpoor Memaghani S, Morabahi Eskoei M, & Hashemi T. (2017). Factor structure of the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire. Journal of Applied Psychological Research 2017; 9(1): 25-42. [Farsi]
33. Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 5th ed. New York, NY: Guilford Publications; 2023; p: 1-500.
34. Bohlmann C, Rudolph CW, Zacher H. Effects of proactive behavior on within-day changes in occupational well-being: the role of organizational tenure and emotion regulation skills. Occupational Health Science 2021; 5(3): 277-306.
35. Ridwanda RR, Qibtiyah MR, Salsabil I. The influence of proactive personality and emotional regulation on employee engagement with religiosity as a moderator in Muslim lecturers in West Java. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478) 2024; 13(3): 167-78.
36. McCormick BW, Guay RP, Colbert AE, Stewart GL. Proactive personality and proactive behaviour: Perspectives on person–situation interactions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 2019; 92(1): 30-51.
37. Pejičić M, Ristić M, Anđelković V. The mediating effect of cognitive emotion regulation strategies in the relationship between perceived social support and resilience in postwar youth. Journal of Community Psychology 2018; 46(4): 457-72.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
