ojmp Open Journal of Medical Psychology 2165-9370 2165-9389 Scientific Research Publishing 10.4236/ojmp.2025.143009 ojmp-144404 Articles Medicine Healthcare Grief, Coping, Resilience, and Post-Traumatic Growth in the Undergraduate Population Connor McHardy 1 Mohammed K. Shakeel 1 2 aDepartment of Psychology, St. Mary’s University, Calgary, Canada aDepartment of Psychiatry, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada 29 07 2025 14 03 143 159 3, June 2025 26, June 2025 26, July 2025 © Copyright 2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. 2014 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Grief is an unfortunate part of life that almost everyone must endure at some point. Grief is often seen as a traumatic event and individuals have the chance to experience post-traumatic growth as a result of their grief experience. The current study investigates how grief and post-traumatic growth are impacted by emotional, interpersonal, coping, and resilience factors in and sample of 51 undergraduate students. Results indicated that grief was associated with emotion-oriented coping style, and anxiety. Post traumatic growth was associated with anxiety as well, but also with interpersonal and emotional support, and resilience. Our findings suggest that higher levels of anxiety and emotional-based coping was associated with higher levels of grief as well as post-traumatic growth. Grief Coping Resilience Posttraumatic Growth Depression Anxiety 1. Introduction

The loss of a loved one can significantly impact an individual’s life. This can serve as a barrier that hinders an individual’s ability to function within society. The level of grief experienced by an individual is affected by the coping mechanisms they use and their level of resilience [1] . While previous research has investigated the importance of individual factors like grief, coping mechanisms, resilience, social support, perceived control, depression, anxiety and post-traumatic growth [1] - [5] , there has been limited research investigating the relationship between these variables in the undergraduate population. The current study aims to determine the level of grief and post-traumatic growth experienced by a sample of adult undergraduate students and the factors affecting it.

1.1. Grief

Grief occurs when an individual experiences negative emotion because of their experience [6] . These emotions can impede an individual’s ability to function within society [6] . Although grief is generally perceived as a negative event [4] , it can also positively affect personal growth and functioning within a society [4] [7] - [10] . For instance, people grow closer to the remaining family after the death of a loved one [4] . The level of grief an individual experiences is also affected by resilience [9] , as lower levels of resilience results in greater experience of grief [9] . Post-traumatic growth after grief experiences may result from greater understanding of oneself, spirituality, and ability to relate to others [4] . This growth may result from individuals living with more intention and recognizing that one’s lifetime is limited [4] .

 1.2. Stress

Stress occurs when internal or external demands exceeds the resources limits of an individual [11] . Stress negatively affects both physical and psychological health [11] . The emotional response to stress varies between individuals [12] , and some of this variation may result from differences in resilience and coping styles.

 1.3. Resilience

Resilience refers to the likelihood that an individual will adapt when faced with a challenging experience [13] . Higher levels of resilience can lead to more positive outcomes when faced with trauma [14] . The level of resilience that an individual possesses is influenced by their culture, social support, internal sense of control, and frequency of stressors [13] - [17] . An individual’s appraisal of a stressor can influence the coping strategies they use [17] , but the magnitude of the stressor can also affect the selection of coping strategy, and thereby resilience [16] [17] .

 1.4. Social Support

Social support is significantly associated with an individual’s ability to cope with grief [18] . While high levels of social support is seen immediately following the death of a loved one, these levels quickly decline [18] . Thus, social support is effective in helping individuals in grief, especially those who experience the sudden loss of a loved one [18] .

 1.5. Depression and Anxiety

Depression is an important factor when examining the severity of grief among individuals. Depression shares many common traits with grief, such as lack of appetite and energy [3] . While grief requires counselling or support, depression can often be treated with pharmacological interventions as well [3] .

Anxiety is prominent when an individual is experiencing grief [5] . Anxiety typically relates to separation that has occurred because of the traumatic event [5] . The anxiety that individuals experience due to trauma often resolves on its own with time [5] .

 1.6. Sense of Control

Sense of control refers to the extent which an individual feels that they are in control of their life and events [13] . Individuals with higher internal sense of control are more likely to experience greater levels of trauma [13] . Internal sense of control is an important factor when attempting to understand the importance of resilience and trauma [13] .

 1.7. Coping

Coping strategies regulate stress, overcome challenges, and are a source of strength to protect the individual [19] . Coping strategies can be classified into three types—problem-focused, emotion-focused, and avoidant [19] - [21] . Problem-focused coping tries to remove the stressor or reduce its impact [20] . This can be achieved through planning, use of information, and positive framing [19] [20] . Emotion-focused coping refers to when an individual attempts to reduce the negative feelings that arise in response to an active threat (e.g., self-blame, emotional venting, and use of humor) [19] [20] . Avoidant coping refers to not engaging/acknowledging the presence of an event [20] . Avoidant coping can include behavioral disconnection, denial, and self-distraction (e.g., watching a movie) [19] [20] .

 1.8. Post-Traumatic Growth

Post traumatic growth refers to positive change experienced by an individual resulting from a traumatic event [10] [22] . The level of trauma an individual experiences can influence the amount of post-traumatic growth [23] [24] . There are five major areas in which individuals can see post-traumatic growth: relating to others (e.g., having empathy for others), new possibilities (e.g., interest in new things), personal strength (e.g., “I learned I was stronger than I previously thought”), spiritual change (e.g., a clearer understanding of spiritual life and matters), and appreciation of life (e.g., “I value my own life more than I did”) [10] [25] . The amount of growth an individual experiences in these categories is significantly affected by their cultural beliefs and personal interpretations of the events [26] .

 1.9. Current Study

The current study examined the relation between loss, trauma, coping, resilience, and post-traumatic growth in a sample of university students. The aims of this study was to identify the presence of loss and trauma among undergraduate students, post-traumatic growth, and factors affecting them.

2. Methods 2.1. Participants

Undergraduate students attending St. Mary’s University located in Calgary, Alberta, were invited to participate in the study. Inclusion criteria required participants to be current students at the University, which served as a proxy for age and intelligence requirements. Students were recruited through in-person classes and asked to fill out a series of questionnaires. The average age of these participants was 20.55 (SD = 3.264), as the sample consists of only current undergraduate students.

 2.2. Measures

Participants in the study were given a socio-demographic questionnaire and asked to complete questions about their sex/gender, age, current year of study in university, major, student status, marital status, current living arrangement, work status, household income, ethnicity, and religious beliefs.

The 21-item Texas Revised Inventory of Grief (TRIG) [27] was used to assess grief (both past and present) that students have experienced related to the loss of a loved one. The TRIG is rated by participants on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“completely true”) to 5 (“completely false”). Eight items ask about past behaviors (e.g., “After this person’s death, I lost interest in my family, friends, and outside activities.”). Thirteen items ask about the participants present feelings (e.g., “I still cry when I think of the person who died.”). Scores for both past and present are counted and summed separately, higher scores are labeled as severe grief, lower scores are labelled as either normal or low levels of grief [28] .

The 25-item Posttraumatic Growth Inventory—Expanded (PTGI-X) [10] was used to measure individual growth after experiencing trauma. The PTGI-X contains twenty-five items that are rated on a 6-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (“I did not experience this change as a result of my crisis.”) to 5 (“I experienced this change to a very great degree as a result of my crisis.”). The PTGI-X is scored by summing scores of respective categories (“relating to others”, e.g., empathy), (“new possibilities”, e.g., new interests), (“personal strength”, e.g., learning you had more strength than you believed you had previously), (“spiritual change”, e.g., greater understanding of spiritual matters), and (“appreciation of life”, e.g., valuing life more) [10] [26] . Higher scores indicate more growth in the category.

The 21-item Depression Anxiety Scale (DASS-21) [29] was used to assess the extent of stress, anxiety, and depression in undergraduate students. The DASS-21 is rated by participants on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (“did not apply to me at all”) to 3 (“applied to me very much or most of the time”). The final score is obtained by summing each category individually and multiplying the sum by two.

The 12-item Interpersonal Support Evaluation List shortened version (ISEL) [30] was used to assess perceived social support in the undergraduate population. The ISEL is rated by participants on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“definitely false”) to 4 (“definitely true”). The final scores are obtained through reverse scoring certain items and summing individual categories. Higher scores indicate higher perceived social support. Scores are classified into the “appraisal” referring to guidance or advice in life decisions [30] , “belonging” refers to acceptance or empathy coming from others [30] , or “tangible support” referring to financial or material assistance [30] .

The 29-item Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale (RLCS) [31] was used to assess locus of control. This scale contains pairs of sentences and the participant has to choose one from each pair (e.g., “No matter how hard you try some people just don’t like you”; “People who can’t get others to like them don’t understand how to get along with others”). Final scores are obtained by summing responses of participants. Higher scores indicate an external locus of control, lower scores indicate an internal locus of control.

The 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) [32] was used to assess the amount of stress experienced by undergraduate students over the last month. The PSS is rated by participants on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (“never”) to 4 (“very often”). The final score is obtained through reverse scoring the positive questions, then summing all items. Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress.

The 21-item Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations–Situation Specific Version (CISS) [33] was administered to assess the frequency of different coping strategies in undergraduate students when in a stressful situation. The CISS is used to assess three different subscales of coping: task-oriented coping is related to the use of active problem-solving when faced with stressful situations [34] (e.g., “(I) analyze my problem before reacting”), emotion-oriented coping is related to affective reactions or self-blame when faced with a stressful situation [34] (e.g., “(I) focus on my general inadequacies”), and avoidance-oriented coping is related to strategies of distraction such as social diversion [34] (e.g., “(I) treat myself to a favorite food or snack”). Participants are asked to rate how often they use different strategies when faced with a difficult or stressful situation. The CISS is scored on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“not at all”) to 5 (“very much”). Final scores for the CISS are obtained by summing all the items for each subsection. Greater scores indicate higher utilization of that coping strategy.

The 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) [35] was used to assess the level of resilience of undergraduate students. The BRS contains six items that is rated by participants on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). All six items measure the participant’s level of resilience. The BRS is scored by reverse coding items 2, 4, and 6 and computing the average of all items [35] .

 2.3. Procedure

After receiving approval from St. Mary’s University Research Ethics Board, participants were recruited from the undergraduate population at the university using convenience sampling. Informed consent was obtained from all participants. Participation in this study was completely voluntary, and participants were allowed to discontinue the study at any time. Full confidentiality was maintained by not gathering name or any identifying details of the participants. All participants who sign the informed consent were asked to complete the following: a sociodemographic questionnaire, a grief questionnaire (TRIG), a post-traumatic growth questionnaire (PTGI-X), a depression and anxiety scale (DASS-21), a social support scale (ISEL), a locus of control scale (RLCS), a perceived stress scale (PSS), coping inventory (CISS), and a resilience scale (BRS). Additionally, participants were also provided with information about mental health resources. Lastly, participants were given a debriefing sheet with information about coping and to remind them of their right to withdraw as well as the purpose of the study.

 2.4. Analysis

Data was analyzed using a combination of correlation and regression models. A multiple linear regression model was used to investigate whether severity of grief can be predicted by resilience, social support, perceived stress, locus of control and depression and anxiety. Similarly, factors affecting post-traumatic growth were also examined.

 3. Results

Of the 51 participants who completed the study, 6 (11.76%) did not experience grief. Socio-demographic details of participants are described in Table 1 . Most participants were in their first year of study, psychology majors, full-time students, single, living with family, Caucasian, and identified as female and Christian ( Table 1 ). The means and standard deviations of all the measures are described in Table 2 .

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics.

n = 51

Gender

Male

13 (25.5%)

Female

37 (72.5%)

Other

1 (2.0%)

Age in Years (mean, standard deviation)

20.55 (3.264%)

Year of Study

First Year

34 (66.7%)

Second Year

6 (11.8%)

Third Year

5 (9.8%)

Fourth Year

4 (7.8%)

Fifth Year

2 (3.9%)

Major of Study

English

2 (3.9%)

General Studies

3 (5.9%)

Psychology

33 (64.7%)

Biology

9 (17.6%)

Education

1 (2.0%)

History

3 (5.9%)

Student

Part-time Student

2 (3.9%)

Full-time Student

49 (96.1%)

Current Marital Status

Married

1 (2.0%)

Living Common-law

3 (5.9%)

Single

47 (92.2%)

Current Living Arrangement

Alone

1 (2.0%)

With Partner/Spouse

4 (7.8%)

With Family

46 (90.2%)

Current Work Status

Part-time Employed

37 (72.5%)

Full-time Employed

3 (5.9%)

Not Working

11 (21.6%)

Household Incomea

Under $20,000

11 (21.6%)

$20,001 - $40,000

3 (5.9%)

$40,001 - $60,000

4 (7.8%)

$60,001 - $80,000

11 (21.6%)

$80,001 - 100,000

7 (13.7%)

$100,001 or over

14 (27.5%)

Ethnicity

Asian

15 (29.4%)

Black

1 (2.0%)

Latino

2 (3.9%)

Caucasian

31 (60.8%)

Indigenous

1 (2.0%)

Other

1 (2.0%)

Religious Beliefsb

Christian

33 (64.7%)

Hinduism

1 (2.0%)

Atheist

8 (15.7%)

Agnostic

6 (11.8%)

Other

1 (2.0%)

aData missing for 1 participant; bData missing for 2 participants.

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 2. Mean (Standard deviation) of measures (n = 51).

M

SD

TRIGb

64.911

17.618

PTGIX Relating to Othersc

18.25

8.99

PTGIX New Possibilitiesd

9.54

4.79

PTGIX Personal Strengthc

10.81

4.84

PTGIX Spiritual Growthc

14.41

8.32

PTGIX Appreciation of Lifec

9.41

3.78

DASS Stress

20.47

9.99

DASS Anxiety

15.53

11.19

DASS Depression

15.68

9.87

ISEL Appraisal

12.21

3.25

ISEL Belonginga

11.46

2.81

ISEL Tangible

12.84

2.54

RLCSa

13.04

3.49

PSSa

43.44

7.04

CISS Task

22.92

5.09

CISS Emotional

23.07

6.06

CISS Avoidant

21.39

5.80

BRS

3.06

0.34

aData missing for 1 participant; bData missing for 6 participants; cData missing; for 7 participant; dData missing for 8 participants.

3.1. Correlational Analysis

In order to examine the relationships between grief and posttraumatic growth with other variables, Pearson’s correlational analysis was conducted. The level of grief experienced had significant positive correlations with anxiety [r(49) = 0.357, p = 0.016] and emotional oriented coping [r(49) = 0.370, p = 0.012]. Posttraumatic growth relating to others had significant positive correlations with belonging [r(48) = 0.511, p = < 0.001], appraisal [r(49) = 0.420, p = 0.005], tangible support [r(49) = 0.309, p = 0.041], and avoidant-oriented coping [r(49) = 0.302, p = 0.046]. Posttraumatic growth (new possibilities) had a significant positive correlation with anxiety [r(49) = 0.308, p = 0.042], emotional oriented coping [r(49) = 0.308, p = 0.042], and resilience [r(49) = 0.364, p = 0.015]. Posttraumatic growth (personal growth) had a significant positive correlation with belonging [r(48) = 0.465, p = 0.002]. Posttraumatic growth (spiritual growth) had significant positive correlations with belonging [r(48) = 0.355, p = 0.019]. Posttraumatic growth (appreciation of life) had significant positive correlations with belonging [r(48) = 0.412, p = 0.006]. See Table 3 for correlations between variables.

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 3. Correlation between variables.

TRIG

PTGIX Relating

PTGIX

New Possibilities

PTGIX

Personal Growth

PTGIX

Spiritual Growth

PTGIX

Appreciation of life

TRIG

—

—

—

—

—

—

PTGIX Relating

0.104

—

—

—

—

—

PTGIX New Possibilities

0.436**

0.549**

—

—

—

—

PTGIX Personal Growth

0.088

0.697**

0.562**

—

—

—

PTGIX Spiritual Growth

0.101

0.597**

0.653**

0.584**

—

—

PTGIX Appreciation of life

0.166

0.541**

0.510**

0.674**

0.626**

—

DASS Stress

0.266

−0.064

0.164

−0.038

−0.113

0.181

DASS Anxiety

0.357*

0.063

0.308*

0.080

0.051

0.103

DASS Depression

0.291

−0.222

0.054

−0.123

−0.197

−0.102

ISEL Appraisal

−0.004

0.420**

0.066

0.197

0.202

0.122

ISEL Belonging

0.044

0.511**

0.285

0.465**

0.355*

0.412**

ISEL Tangible

−0.087

0.309*

−0.071

0.254

−0.003

0.243

RLCS

0.296

−0.299

−0.235

−0.283

−0.151

−0.216

PSS

0.261

−0.191

−0.053

−0.291

−0.251

−0.192

CISS Task

0.103

0.083

0.203

0.284

0.077

0.241

CISS Emotional

0.370*

0.172

0.308*

−0.024

0.019

0.089

CISS Avoidant

0.182

0.302*

0.143

0.227

0.165

0.094

BRS

0.041

−0.034

0.364*

0.003

0.019

0.129

*p < 0.05 (2-tailed); **p < 0.01 (2-tailed).

 3.2. Regression Analysis

To further understand the interrelationship between variables, multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. Bonferroni correction was used to correct for multiple comparison (revised alpha = 0.008). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that PTGIX (relating to others) is predicted by anxiety, stress, belonging, locus of control, emotional coping, avoidant coping, and resilience. The results were significant after Bonferroni corrections [F(7, 34) = 4.632, p = 0.001]. The final model accounted for nearly 50% of the variance in PTGIX (relating to others) (R2 = 0.488). Emotional coping and belonging were significant individual predictors in the model, with higher levels of both predicting greater PTGIX (relating to others) ( Table 4 ). The remaining regression analyses are reported below, however, they are interpreted cautiously as they did not survive correction for multiple comparisons. Linear regression of TRIG grief level was conducted to determine whether it could be predicted by anxiety, stress, belonging, locus of control, emotional coping, avoidant coping, and resilience. Results found the model was significant before corrections [F(7, 36) = 3.078, p = 0.012, R2 = 0.374] ( Table 5 ). Linear regression of PTGIX (new possibilities) was conducted to determine whether it could be predicted by stress, belonging, locus of control, emotional coping, avoidant coping, and resilience. The model was significant before corrections [F(7, 34) = 2.769, p = 0.022, R2 = 0.363] ( Table 6 ). Linear regression of PTGIX (personal strength) was conducted to determine whether it could be predicted by stress, belonging, locus of control, emotional coping, avoidant coping, and resilience. The model was significant before corrections [F(7, 34) = 2.709, p = 0.024, R2 = 0.358] ( Table 7 ). Linear regression of PTGIX (spiritual growth) was conducted to determine whether it could be predicted by stress, belonging, locus of control, emotional coping, avoidant coping, and resilience. The model was not significant [F(7, 34) = 1.299, p = 0.281, R2 = 0.211] ( Table 8 ). Linear regression of PTGIX (appreciation of life) was conducted to determine whether it could be predicted by stress, belonging, locus of control, emotional coping, avoidant coping, and resilience. The model was significant before corrections [F(7, 34) = 2.023, p = 0.081, R2 = 0.294] ( Table 9 ).

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 4. Results of Linear regression analysis with posttraumatic growth inventory relating to others, the depression, anxiety and stress scale—21 items, interpersonal support evaluation list shortened version—12 items, rotter’s locus of control scale, perceived stress scale, coping inventory for stressful situations—situation specific version, brief resilience scale (n = 51).

95% CI

Variable

Beta

SE

LL

UL

β

t

p

(Constant)

19.606

14.478

−9.817

49.028

1.354

0.185

DASS Anxiety

0.076

0.110

−0.147

0.299

0.099

0.693

0.493

ISEL Belonging

1.801

0.469

0.848

2.754

0.527

3.842

<0.001

RLCS

−0.412

0.310

−1.042

0.217

−0.169

−1.331

0.192

PSS

−0.533

0.220

−0.979

−0.087

−0.420

−2.427

0.021

CISS Emotional

0.883

0.284

0.305

1.460

0.605

3.106

0.004

CISS Avoidant

−0.093

0.227

−0.553

0.368

−0.059

−0.409

0.685

BRS

−4.183

3.844

−11.995

3.629

−0.150

−1.088

0.284

Note: CI = Confidence interval, LL = Lower Limit, UL = Upper Limit, SE = Standard Error, 𝛽 = Beta.

Predictors: (Constant), Posttraumatic Growth Inventory Relating to Others.

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 5. Results of linear regression analysis with Texas revised inventory of grief, the depression, anxiety and stress scale—21 items, interpersonal support evaluation list shortened version—12 items, rotter’s locus of control scale, perceived stress scale, coping inventory for stressful situations—situation specific version, brief resilience scale (n = 51).

95% CI

Variable

Beta

SE

LL

UL

β

t

p

(Constant)

44.750

30.486

−17.079

106.579

1.468

0.151

DASS Anxiety

0.516

0.231

0.048

0.984

0.344

2.236

0.032

ISEL Belonging

0.713

0.941

−1.196

2.622

0.110

0.758

0.454

RLCS

1.392

0.653

0.067

2.717

0.292

2.131

0.040

PSS

0.067

0.445

−0.835

0.969

0.027

0.151

0.881

CISS Emotional

0.529

0.561

−0.609

1.666

0.190

0.943

0.352

CISS Avoidant

0.803

0.472

−0.155

1.761

0.263

1.700

0.098

BRS

−15.357

7.960

−31.500

0.786

−0.285

−1.929

0.062

Note: CI = Confidence interval, LL = Lower Limit, UL = Upper Limit, SE = Standard Error, 𝛽 = Beta.

Predictors: (Constant), TRIG.

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 6. Results of linear regression analysis with posttraumatic growth inventory new possibilities, the depression, anxiety and stress scale—21 items, interpersonal support evaluation list shortened version—12 items, rotter’s locus of control scale, perceived stress scale, coping inventory for stressful situations—situation specific version, brief resilience scale (n = 51).

95% CI

Variable

Beta

SE

LL

UL

β

t

p

(Constant)

1.618

8.387

−15.427

18.662

0.193

0.848

DASS Anxiety

0.100

0.064

−0.030

0.229

0.250

1.564

0.127

ISEL Belonging

0.561

0.272

0.009

1.113

0.316

2.066

0.047

RLCS

−0.185

0.180

−0.550

0.180

−0.146

−1.031

0.310

PSS

−0.212

0.127

−0.471

0.046

−0.323

−1.669

0.104

CISS Emotional

0.275

0.165

−0.060

0.609

0.363

1.670

0.104

CISS Avoidant

0.043

0.131

−0.224

0.310

0.053

0.327

0.745

BRS

1.356

2.227

−3.170

5.881

0.094

0.609

0.547

Note: CI = Confidence interval, LL = Lower Limit, UL = Upper Limit, SE = Standard Error, β = Beta.

Predictors: (Constant), Posttraumatic Growth Inventory New Possibilities.

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 7. Results of linear regression analysis with posttraumatic growth inventory personal strength, anxiety and stress scale—21 items, interpersonal support evaluation list shortened version—12 items, rotter’s locus of control scale, perceived stress scale, coping inventory for stressful situations—situation specific version, brief resilience scale (n = 51).

95% CI

Variable

Beta

SE

LL

UL

β

t

p

(Constant)

13.674

8.872

−4.356

31.705

1.541

0.133

DASS Anxiety

0.086

0.067

−0.051

0.222

0.204

1.272

0.212

ISEL Belonging

0.765

0.287

0.181

1.349

0.409

2.664

0.012

RLCS

−0.222

0.190

−0.608

0.164

−0.166

−1.169

0.251

PSS

−0.259

0.135

−0.532

0.015

−0.373

−1.921

0.063

CISS Emotional

0.184

0.174

−0.169

0.538

.231

1.059

0.297

CISS Avoidant

0.032

0.139

−0.250

0.314

0.037

0.230

0.819

BRS

−1.229

2.356

−6.016

3.558

−0.081

−0.522

0.605

Note: CI = Confidence interval, LL = Lower Limit, UL = Upper Limit, SE = Standard Error, β = Beta.

Predictors: (Constant), Posttraumatic Growth Inventory Personal Growth.

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 8. Results of linear regression analysis with posttraumatic growth inventory spiritual growth, anxiety and stress scale—21 items, interpersonal support evaluation list shortened version—12 items, rotter’s locus of control scale, perceived stress scale, coping inventory for stressful situations—situation specific version, brief resilience scale (n = 51).

95% CI

Variable

Beta

SE

LL

UL

β

t

p

(Constant)

13.203

16.095

−19.506

45.912

0.820

0.418

DASS Stress

0.092

0.122

−0.157

0.340

0.134

0.750

0.458

ISEL Belonging

1.085

0.521

0.026

2.144

0.355

2.082

0.045

RLCS

−0.087

0.344

−0.788

0.613

−0.040

−0.254

0.801

PSS

−0.295

0.244

−0.791

0.201

−0.260

−1.207

0.236

CISS Emotional

0.188

0.316

−0.454

0.830

0.144

0.596

0.555

CISS Avoidant

0.083

0.252

−0.429

0.595

0.059

0.330

0.744

BRS

−1.588

4.274

−10.273

7.097

−0.064

−0.372

0.713

Note: CI = Confidence interval, LL = Lower Limit, UL = Upper Limit, SE = Standard Error, β = Beta.

Predictors: (Constant), Posttraumatic Growth Inventory Spiritual Growth.

<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144404-"></xref>Table 9. Results of linear regression analysis with posttraumatic growth inventory appreciation of life, anxiety and stress scale—21 items, interpersonal support evaluation list shortened version—12 items, rotter’s locus of control scale, perceived stress scale, coping inventory for stressful situations—situation specific version, brief resilience scale (n = 51).

95% CI

Variable

Beta

SE

LL

UL

β

t

p

(Constant)

7.829

7.114

−6.629

22.287

1.101

0.279

DASS Stress

0.042

0.054

−0.068

0.151

0.130

0.773

0.445

ISEL Belonging

0.651

0.230

0.183

1.119

0.455

2.825

0.008

RLCS

−0.112

0.152

−0.422

0.197

−0.110

−0.738

0.466

PSS

−0.154

0.108

−0.374

0.065

−0.291

−1.429

0.162

CISS Emotional

0.171

0.140

−0.113

0.454

0.280

1.223

0.230

CISS Avoidant

−0.030

0.111

−0.256

0.197

−0.045

−0.266

0.792

BRS

−0.591

1.889

−4.430

3.248

−0.051

−0.313

0.756

Note: CI = Confidence interval, LL = Lower Limit, UL = Upper Limit, SE = Standard Error, β = Beta.

Predictors: (Constant), Posttraumatic Growth Inventory Appreciation of Life.

 4. Discussion

Currently, there is limited research on grief, resilience, coping, and post-traumatic growth in the undergraduate student population. Bylund-Grenklo et al. (2021) investigated the impact of death of a parent on teenagers and found that over half the participants had not found a proper way to grieve for the loss they endured [8] . The current study found that nearly 90% of the respondents reported experiencing grief. Our study further found that higher levels of grief was associated with higher levels of anxiety and emotion-oriented coping. Posttraumatic growth was also associated with anxiety and emotional-oriented coping, but also with higher interpersonal support and resilience. Linear regression analysis showed that anxiety, stress, belonging, emotional coping, sense of control, avoidant coping, and resilience did not predict grief. However, stress, belonging, and emotional-oriented coping significantly predicted posttraumatic growth.

4.1. Grief

Our findings about anxiety were similar to [36] which reported individuals experienced higher levels of anxiety related to grief. However, our sample differs from [36] in that they observed caregivers while we observed undergraduate students with varying relationships to the deceased. Our findings about coping styles were similar to [37] which found a positive association between emotional coping styles and the amount of grief, but also varies from other studies [38] . Future research may clarify the relation between these variables.

 4.2. Posttraumatic Growth and Interpersonal Support

Our study demonstrated a significant positive association between posttraumatic growth and interpersonal support. These findings suggest that individuals will experience more posttraumatic growth when interpersonal support is available. Our findings are similar to [39] which found that interpersonal support is positively correlated with higher levels of posttraumatic growth. However, other studies have found no significant relation between posttraumatic growth and interpersonal support [40] . The difference in findings could be attributed to [40] investigating online social support while we used questionnaires, and [39] investigating social support through partners. Future studies should further explore the difference between online and in-person support.

 4.3. Posttraumatic Growth and Resilience

Our study found a significant positive relation between posttraumatic growth and resilience. Our findings are similar to findings by [41] which found resilience to be positively correlated with post-traumatic growth.

 4.4. Posttraumatic Growth and Anxiety

Our study found a significant positive relation between posttraumatic growth and anxiety. These findings suggest that individuals who experience greater amount of anxiety will have more posttraumatic growth. Findings were similar to [42] , which found the greatest levels of posttraumatic growth were associated with moderate anxiety levels. Furthermore, the type of traumatic event and presence of prolonged grief can affect the amount of anxiety [42] .

 4.5. Posttraumatic Growth and Relating to Others

Our study found that posttraumatic growth—specifically relating to others—had a significant positive correlation with stress, belonging, and emotional coping. Our findings differ from [42] who found no relation between post traumatic growth relating to others and stress. Future research should continue to investigate the role that stress plays on posttraumatic growth relating to others. A study by [43] found posttraumatic growth relating to others was associated with higher levels of emotional coping in a sample of caretakers of patients. There has been a lack of research into the relationship between posttraumatic growth relating to others and sense of belonging. This is likely owing to both concepts being similar to each other. Belonging refers to the extent to which an individual feels they fit in with others, while posttraumatic growth relating to others measures factors such as empathy felt by the individual.

 4.6. Limitations

The primary limitation of this study was the relatively small sample size (n = 51) and use of convenience sampling, which decreases statistical power and generalizability to the larger population. Further studies may aim to collect data from a larger sample or combine data from multiple undergraduate samples.

The second limitation of the study is that information regarding when the loss occurred was not included in statistical analysis. Time elapsed since the loss maybe significantly associated with severity of grief and post-traumatic growth.

 5. Conclusion

The study has the potential to inform post-secondary institutions about the impact grief has on the undergraduate population and the factors that can ameliorate its effects. Our findings suggest the need for greater awareness of grief in the undergraduate population and need for support systems to help them. Finally, our study suggests that certain factors which underlie grief—such as anxiety and emotion-oriented coping—may also provide an impetus for posttraumatic growth. As the current study is cross-sectional in nature, further longitudinal studies are required to determine whether a causal relation exists between severity of grief, use of emotion-oriented coping, and post-traumatic growth.

 Abbreviation

TRIG, Texas Revised Inventory of Grief; PTGIX, Posttraumatic Growth Inventory-Expanded; DASS, The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale—21 Items; ISEL, Interpersonal Support Evaluation List Shortened Version—12 Items; RLCS, Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale; PSS, Perceived stress scale; CISS, Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations—Situation Specific Version; BRS, Brief Resilience Scale.

 References Tantrarungroj, T., Ocharoen, P. and Sachdev, V. (2022) Grief Reaction, Depression, Anxiety, and Coping of Relatives after Palliative Patients’ Death in Thailand. PLOS One, 17, e0276583. >https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276583 Asselmann, E., Specht, J. and Wagner, G.G. (2022) Personality Growth after Relationship Losses: Changes of Perceived Control in the Years around Separation, Divorce, and the Death of a Partner. PLOS One, 17, e0268598. >https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268598 Periyakoil, V.S., Kraemer, H.C. and Noda, A. (2012) Measuring Grief and Depression in Seriously Ill Outpatients Using the Palliative Grief Depression Scale. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 15, 1350-1355. >https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2012.0280 Rogalla, K.B. (2018) Anticipatory Grief, Proactive Coping, Social Support, and Growth: Exploring Positive Experiences of Preparing for Loss. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 81, 107-129. >https://doi.org/10.1177/0030222818761461 Shear, M.K. and Skritskaya, N.A. (2012) Bereavement and Anxiety. Current Psychiatry Reports, 14, 169-175. >https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-012-0270-2 Duffy, M. and Wild, J. (2023) Living with Loss: A Cognitive Approach to Prolonged Grief Disorder-Incorporating Complicated, Enduring and Traumatic Grief. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 51, 645-658. >https://doi.org/10.1017/s1352465822000674 Katzman, W. and Papouchis, N. (2022) Grief Responses during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Differences in Attachment and Emotion Regulation. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 27, 761-772. >https://doi.org/10.1080/15325024.2022.2040154 Bylund-Grenklo, T., Birgisdóttir, D., Beernaert, K., Nyberg, T., Skokic, V., Kristensson, J., et al. (2021) Acute and Long-Term Grief Reactions and Experiences in Parentally Cancer-Bereaved Teenagers. BMC Palliative Care, 20, Article No. 75. >https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-021-00758-7 King, K.M. and Delgado, H. (2020) Losing a Family Member to Incarceration: Grief and Resilience. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 26, 436-450. >https://doi.org/10.1080/15325024.2020.1816753 Tedeschi, R.G., Cann, A., Taku, K., Senol‐Durak, E. and Calhoun, L.G. (2017) The Posttraumatic Growth Inventory: A Revision Integrating Existential and Spiritual Change. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 30, 11-18. Keller, A., Litzelman, K., Wisk, L.E., Maddox, T., Cheng, E.R., Creswell, P.D., et al. (2012) Does the Perception That Stress Affects Health Matter? The Association with Health and Mortality. Health Psychology, 31, 677-684. >https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026743 Erbas, Y., Ceulemans, E., Kalokerinos, E.K., Houben, M., Koval, P., Pe, M.L., et al. (2018) Why I Don’t Always Know What I’m Feeling: The Role of Stress in Within-Person Fluctuations in Emotion Differentiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 179-191. >https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000126 Shebuski, K., Bowie, J. and Ashby, J.S. (2020) Self‐Compassion, Trait Resilience, and Trauma Exposure in Undergraduate Students. Journal of College Counseling, 23, 2-14. >https://doi.org/10.1002/jocc.12145 Nugent, N.R., Sumner, J.A. and Amstadter, A.B. (2014) Resilience after Trauma: From Surviving to Thriving. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 5, Article 25339. >https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v5.25339 McCleary, J. and Figley, C. (2017) Resilience and Trauma: Expanding Definitions, Uses, and Contexts. Traumatology, 23, 1-3. >https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000103 Smith-Osborne, A., Maleku, A. and Morgan, S. (2017) Impact of Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Training on Resilience and Suicide Risk in Army Reserve Units. Traumatology, 23, 49-55. >https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000092 Fletcher, D. and Sarkar, M. (2013) Psychological Resilience: A Review and Critique of Definitions, Concepts, and Theory. European Psychologist, 18, 12-23. >https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000124 Cacciatore, J., Thieleman, K., Fretts, R. and Jackson, L.B. (2021) What Is Good Grief Support? Exploring the Actors and Actions in Social Support after Traumatic Grief. PLOS ONE, 16, e0252324. >https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252324 Li, Y., Kim, M., Dong, F. and Zhang, X. (2024) Racial Discrimination, Coping, and Suicidal Ideation in Chinese Immigrants. Cultural Diversity&Ethnic Minority Psychology, 30, 467-475. >https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000588 Carver, C.S. and Scheier, M.F. (1994) Situational Coping and Coping Dispositions in a Stressful Transaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 184-195. >https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.1.184 Endler, N.S. and Parker, J.D.A. (1994) Assessment of Multidimensional Coping: Task, Emotion, and Avoidance Strategies. Psychological Assessment, 6, 50-60. >https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.1.50 Butler, L.D., Blasey, C.M., Garlan, R.W., McCaslin, S.E., Azarow, J., Chen, X., et al. (2005) Posttraumatic Growth Following the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001: Cognitive, Coping, and Trauma Symptom Predictors in an Internet Convenience Sample. Traumatology, 11, 247-267. >https://doi.org/10.1177/153476560501100405 Cordova, M.J., Cunningham, L.L.C., Carlson, C.R. and Andrykowski, M.A. (2001) Posttraumatic Growth Following Breast Cancer: A Controlled Comparison Study. Health Psychology, 20, 176-185. >https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.20.3.176 Fontana, A. and Rosenheck, R. (1998) Psychological Benefits and Liabilities of Traumatic Exposure in the War Zone. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 11, 485-503. >https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1024452612412 Baker, J.M., Kelly, C., Calhoun, L.G., Cann, A. and Tedeschi, R.G. (2008) An Examination of Posttraumatic Growth and Posttraumatic Depreciation: Two Exploratory Studies. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 13, 450-465. >https://doi.org/10.1080/15325020802171367 Jayawickreme, E., Infurna, F.J., Alajak, K., Blackie, L.E.R., Chopik, W.J., Chung, J.M., et al. (2020) Post‐Traumatic Growth as Positive Personality Change: Challenges, Opportunities, and Recommendations. Journal of Personality, 89, 145-165. >https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12591 Faschingbauer, T.R., DeVaul, R.A. and Zisook, S. (1977) Development of the Texas Inventory of Grief. American Journal of Psychiatry, 134, 696-698. >https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.134.6.696 ffrench-O’Carroll, R., Feeley, T., Crowe, S. and Doherty, E.M. (2019) Grief Reactions and Coping Strategies of Trainee Doctors Working in Paediatric Intensive Care. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 123, 74-80. >https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2019.01.034 Lovibond, P.F. and Lovibond, S.H. (1995) The Structure of Negative Emotional States: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 335-343. >https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-u Merz, E.L., Roesch, S.C., Malcarne, V.L., Penedo, F.J., Llabre, M.M., Weitzman, O.B., et al. (2014) Validation of Interpersonal Support Evaluation List-12 (ISEL-12) Scores among English-and Spanish-Speaking Hispanics/Latinos from the HCHS/SOL Sociocultural Ancillary Study. Psychological Assessment, 26, 384-394. >https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035248 Smith, P.B., Trompenaars, F. and Dugan, S. (1995) The Rotter Locus of Control Scale in 43 Countries: A Test of Cultural Relativity. International Journal of Psychology, 30, 377-400. >https://doi.org/10.1080/00207599508246576 Cohen, S., Kamarck, T. and Mermelstein, R. (1983) A Global Measure of Perceived Stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385-396. >https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404 Endler, N.S. and Parker, J.D. (1990) Multidimensional Assessment of Coping: A Critical Evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 844-854. >https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.5.844 Tramonti, F., Gerini, A. and Stampacchia, G. (2013) Individualised and Health-Related Quality of Life of Persons with Spinal Cord Injury. Spinal Cord, 52, 231-235. >https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2013.156 Smith, B.W., Dalen, J., Wiggins, K., Tooley, E., Christopher, P. and Bernard, J. (2008) The Brief Resilience Scale: Assessing the Ability to Bounce Back. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 15, 194-200. >https://doi.org/10.1080/10705500802222972 Holm, M., Årestedt, K., Öhlen, J. and Alvariza, A. (2019) Variations in Grief, Anxiety, Depression, and Health among Family Caregivers before and after the Death of a Close Person in the Context of Palliative Home Care. Death Studies, 44, 531-539. >https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2019.1586797 Schnider, K.R., Elhai, J.D. and Gray, M.J. (2007) Coping Style Use Predicts Posttraumatic Stress and Complicated Grief Symptom Severity among College Students Reporting a Traumatic Loss. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 344-350. >https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.344 Nag, A. and Halder, S. (2024) Grief and Stress During and Beyond Pandemic: A Follow-Up Study on Bereaved College Students. Journal of Psychosocial Research, 19, 213-221. Yoon, M., Jeon, Y. and Lee, S. (2022) Grief, Partner Support, Posttraumatic Growth among Women with Pregnancy Loss in Korea. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 28, 206-216. >https://doi.org/10.1080/15325024.2022.2106682 S. Lipp, N. and O’Brien, K.M. (2020) Bereaved College Students: Social Support, Coping Style, Continuing Bonds, and Social Media Use as Predictors of Complicated Grief and Posttraumatic Growth. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 85, 178-203. >https://doi.org/10.1177/0030222820941952 Wan, X., Huang, H., Peng, Q., Yu, N.X., Zhang, Y., Ding, Y., et al. (2022) A Meta‐Analysis on the Relationship between Posttraumatic Growth and Resilience in People with Breast Cancer. Nursing Open, 10, 2734-2745. >https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1540 Eisma, M.C., Lenferink, L.I.M., Stroebe, M.S., Boelen, P.A. and Schut, H.A.W. (2019) No Pain, No Gain: Cross-Lagged Analyses of Posttraumatic Growth and Anxiety, Depression, Posttraumatic Stress and Prolonged Grief Symptoms after Loss. Anxiety, Stress,&Coping, 32, 231-243. >https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2019.1584293 Gil-González, I., Pérez-San-Gregorio, M.Á., Funuyet-Salas, J., Conrad, R. and Martín-Rodríguez, A. (2023) Significance of Post-Traumatic Growth and Mental Health for Coping in Multiple Sclerosis Caregivers. Healthcare, 11, Article 1390. >https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11101390