|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Full Text : |
| Stress is an unavoidable part of student’s life. It can take a toll on students’ physical health, mental wellness, and academic success and even on every part of life unless they discover to manage with it appropriately. This research is aimed to explore the quality of life related to the level of prevalence stress among students in public university. The main objective of this study are to investigate whether the components of quality life which are emotional intelligence, personal meaning profile, satisfaction with life and psychological well-being significantly influence the level of prevalence stress among Mathematics students in public universities. This study is conducted at University Malaysia Terengganu and University Technology MARA Kelantan. The data are analyzed by using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in order to test the main hypotheses of this study. The result of study shows that emotional intelligence and psychological well-being are significant in the model. Therefore, parents and the universities should play a role to help students cope with it. |
| References |
1. Arawati, A., & Shukri, M. H. (2012). Lean production supply chain management as driver towards enhancing product quality and business performance: Case study of manufacturing companies in Malaysia. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 29 (1), 92-121.
2. Beck, D., Hackett, M., Srivastava, R., McKim, E. & Rockwell, B. (1997) Perceived level and sources of stress in university professional schools. The Journal of Nursing Education, 36(4), 180.
3. Byrne, B. M. (2010), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Taylor and Francis Group, New York.
4. Campbell, R., Svenson, L. & Jarvis, G. (1992). Perceived level of stress among university
undergraduate students in Edmonton, Canada. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75(2), 552.
5. Eboli, L., Forciniti, C., & Mazzulla, G. (2012). Exploring Land Use and Transport Interaction through Structural Equation Modelling. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 54, 107-116.
6. Golob, T. F. (2003). Structural Equation Modeling for Travel Behavior Research. Transportation Research Part B (37), 1-25.
7. Hamid, T., seyedaliakbar, S. M., & Mandegan, M. (2012). Organizational learning measurement and the effect on firm innovation. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 25 (3), 219-245.
8. Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and Procedures in Adopting Structural Equation Modeling Technique. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3(1), 76-83.
9. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607–610.
10. Misra, R., McKean, M., West, S. & Russo, T. (2000). Academic stress of college students: Comparison of student and faculty perceptions. College Student Journal, 34(2), 236-245.
11. Mueller, R. O. (1996). Basic Principles of Structural Equation Modeling.
12. Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2006). A First Course in Structural Equation Modelling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Schumaker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.).
14. Youth Development Research Institute of Malaysia Ministry of Youth and Sports. (2006). Mapping of Youth and Youth Malaysia Index.
15. Zainudin, A. (2012). Structural Equation Modeling Using Amos Graphic. Selangor: UiTM Press. |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |