Abstract A laboratory study was conducted to compare first-year university students’ scores on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS, Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995, cited in Crawford & Henry, 2003) with norms based on a general population (Crawford and Henry, 2003). Results replicated findings in Wong, et al. (2006) that the students had higher levels of depression and anxiety than the norms for a general population, but not higher levels of stress, and stress levels were higher for women than for men, but there were no significant gender differences in depression and anxiety levels.
While there were significant relationships between the three DASS subscales, there were no significant differences in the relationship of age with the DASS subscales. Depression, Anxiety and Stress in First Year Psychology Students: Principles of Psychology Lab Report Did you know that eight years after being diagnosed with Stage 1 breast cancer, there remains about a 3% chance you’ll die of a recurrence within the next two years – compared with about a . 001% chance that you’ll die had you been diagnosed with Stage 4 breast cancer, i. e., metastasis has occurred (Taylor, Davis, & Boyages, 2002)?
In another words, after eight years, the 10-year survival rate is higher (almost certain) for those who had been diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer than for those diagnosed with Stage 1 cancer. Why? All together now: because almost all of those diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer have already died. What does this have to do with the finding that first-year university students suffer from greater psychological distress than other students (Adlaf, Gliksman, Demers, Newton-Taylor, 1998, cited and interpreted in Wong et al., 2006)?
Those who had raised mean distress levels during their first year are gone – to McDonald’s, to become rock stars – or to the Institute for Brats-Who-Should-have-been-Children-of-Impoverished-Unwed-Mothers. The first-year students who become second-year students may not be any more or less distressed than they were during their first year. Of course, it’s sad when anyone is distressed, but Wong et al. ’s interpretation of the above finding also should sadden anyone with respect for the scientific method.
In addition, Wong et al. (2006) interpreted findings of higher depression, anxiety, and stress in first-year university students (though only small percentages of the 7915 participants were seriously disturbed) than in studies using norms that were representative of general populations [using the subscales of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995, cited in Crawford & Henry, 2003] as evidence that had “major implications” (p. 781) related to being a first-year student.
The researchers know nothing about the participants’ depression, anxiety, or stress levels prior to entering university or about how, for example, the levels compare with those who had graduated from high school a year ago and have been slinging hamburgers ever since graduation.
They also misleadingly mixed previous studies of university students in general with those with information about first-year students in particular (pp. 777-778) and were not surprised to find higher levels of depression in males than in females (despite not noticing reverse findings using the DASS in research they cite, Crawford & Henry, 2003, p.117), although “women are 2 or 3 times” more likely than men to report being depressed “in study after study” (Emery & Oltmanns, 2000).
(As discussed below, gender differences are not necessarily based on genetic differences. ) Wong et al. (2006) used participants ranging in age from under 18 to 24, although most were 19 to 24 years old. Relationships between age and the DASS subscales were not assessed (and with large samples, small and meaningless differences may be statistically significant, Salkind, 2006).
In fact, Crawford and Henry (2006) did find weak (Salkind, 2006) negative age relationships (Pearson rs < /. 19/, ps < . 01, two-tailed tests) with the depression and stress subscales and with total score. Further research, an intention of the laboratory report described below, is needed on relationships between age and the DASS. The laboratory study reported below was designed to assess whether Wong et al. ’s results (2006) would be replicated using Crawford and Henry’s norms (2003) and to explore the relationship between age and the DASS.
Replication of Wong et al. (2006) required hypothesizing there would be higher levels of depression, anxiety, and stress in first-year university students than in the general population norms in Crawford and Henry (2003), and that female students would report higher levels of anxiety and stress than males would report, but lower levels of depression. Method Participants The participants were 161 women and 46 men, who were first-year undergraduates from a course in Principles of Psychology at an Australian university.
In order to participate in data collection for a laboratory project, students in the course were required to complete a questionnaire (described below) or an alternative option. There were 47 students in the course who did not complete the questionnaire. The participants’ ages were between 18 and 39 (M = 20. 53; SD = 3. 26). However, those at the high end were outliers, and the majority were 18 to 24. Measures The participants completed The Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), consisting of 42 statements, broken into three subscales with 14 statements in each (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995, cited in Crawford & Henry, 2003).
Crawford and Henry (2003, p. 129) provided evidence that the DASS had construct validity (a test measuring what it reports to measure) and the three scales and the total scale were internally reliable (similar responses to similar items), and they cited Lovibond and Lovibond’s evidence (2003) (p. 119) that the DASS also had “adequate” convergent validity (similar scores on tests measuring the thing) and discriminant validity (different scores on tests measuring different things) (p. 112). Lovibond (1998) provided evidence that the scales also had both short term (8 weeks) and long term (3-8 years) test-retest reliability.
Participants responded to instructions to indicate for each of the 42 statements “how much the statement applied to you over the past week”, using a 4-point scale, where “0 [=] did not apply… at all[;] 1 [=] applies … to some degree, or some of the time[;] 2 [=] applied to a considerable degree, or a good part of the time[;] 3 [=] applied to me very much, or most of the time” (DASS web site, 2007). Subscale scores were the sums of responses to the 14 statements in each subscale, and total score was the sum of responses to the 42 statements.
Scores were used to categorize respondents as normal, mildly, moderately, severely, or extremely depressed, anxious, and/or stressed (based on Crawford & Henry, 2003). Procedure When participants logged onto the DASS web site (2007), they first entered their names and student numbers (in order to receive credit for participation), but they were assured of confidentiality because the names and numbers were removed from the data and only grouped, rather than individual, results would be reported. The only personal information used was the participant’s age (in years) and gender.
They responded to the DASS statements on the web, and after data collection was completed, participants and non-participants from the Principles of Psychology course noted above received SPSS output files to use in their laboratory reports of the study. Results Comparisons with Crawford and Henry (2003) To test whether the sample means for depression (M = 8. 88; SD = 8. 34), anxiety (M = 6. 98; SD = 7. 06), and stress (M = 12. 16; SD = 8. 32) were higher than the norms reported by Crawford and Henry (2003), one-sample t tests were conducted for each of the three sub-scales.
The sample mean for depression was higher than that obtained by Crawford and Henry (M = 5. 55; SD = 7. 48) and the difference was significant, t (206) = 5. 75, p < . 00l (one- or two-tailed test). The sample mean for anxiety also was significantly higher than that obtained by the same researchers (M = 3. 56; SD = 5. 39), t (206) = 6. 97, p < . 001 (one- or two-tailed test). Thus the hypothesized differences were supported for the depression and anxiety measures.
Contrary to the hypothesis, the sample mean for stress was lower than the mean reported by the same researchers (M = 9.27; SD = 8. 04), thus the difference between the means was not significant in a one-tailed test, t (206) = -5. 01, i. e. t < 1. 00, and the hypothesis was not supported for the stress sub-scale. (It should be noted for researchers who might attempt to replicate the finding that in a two-tailed test, p < . 001. ).
Gender differences Independent t tests, with equal variances not assumed, were used to compare the means for males (n = 46) and females (n = 161). Contrary to the hypothesized difference, male depression scores (M = 7. 87, SD = 7. 23) were lower than those of females (M = 9.17; SD = 8. 63).
Thus the hypothesized difference was not significant, one-tailed t (85. 15) = 1. 03 (had a one-tailed test been conducted for the hypothesis that males would have lower means than females, the hypothesized difference still would not have been significant, p = . 15). As hypothesized, the mean on the anxiety subscale was higher for women (M = 7. 34; SD = 7. 22) than for men (M = 5. 74; SD = 6. 38), but the difference was not significant (though it did approach significance), t (80. 86) = 1. 45, p = . 075 (one-tailed test), i. e. , the hypothesis was not supported.
However, on the stress subscale, as hypothesized, the mean for women (M = 12. 83; SD = 8. 50) was significantly higher than the mean for men (M = 9. 85; SD = 7. 29), t = 2. 35, p = . 01 (one-tailed test). Tests of the Pearson r for Age and the DASS Subscales As Table 1 illustrates, for the 207 participants, Pearson rs between age and the three subscales were weak (Salkind, 2006) and not significant (rs for the three subscales with age were < /. 08/ and ps > . 26). Thus, there was no evidence that age is related to depression, anxiety, or Table 1 Pearson Correlations between Age, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Subscales of the DASS.
Depression Anxiety Stress Age Anxiety . 678** 1 . 768** -. 078 Stress . 710** – 1 -. 058 Age -. 074 – – 1 **p < . 01 (two-tailed) stress (as measured by the DASS). There were moderately high correlations (Salkind, 2006) between the depression, anxiety, and stress subscales (rs > . 67 and ps < . 001). Discussion
Though the hypotheses that the students’ depression and anxiety subscale scores would be higher than those obtained by Crawford and Henry (2003) was supported, these findings cannot be interpreted as evidence that depression and anxiety were either higher or lower than prior to beginning college or than the scores during the second year of college, i. e. , using a longitudinal design. Nor can the results be compared to measures using participants leaving their homes for the first time, but not entering university, high-school seniors living at home, first-year university students still living at home, or second-year university students, i.e. , using cross-sectional designs.
The only reasonable interpretation was that the first-year university students were more depressed than those in a population (Crawford & Henry, 2003) ranging in age from 15 to 91 and with a mean age of 40. 9 (p. 114) and either currently were in the work force or worked prior to having children, retiring or being unemployed, or were “unskilled,” the category used for the eight participants who had never worked (p. 115). In other words, we might have learned more had norms been available for particular populations (high-school seniors, post-first-year university students, etc.).
The finding that students reported less stress than those in Crawford and Henry’s study (2003) was interesting (though, of course, not significant in a one-tailed test of the reverse pattern). Because in the latter study, retired persons were categorized based on their previous occupations, the percentage of those working, raising children, or being unemployed was not reported. In reality, these are categories for those with more serious sources of stress than those of university students, e. g. , worrying about a child who is ill or about getting or losing a job vs.worrying about a grade or being invited to a party, but it is unlikely that students consider the future when reporting how stressful they feel.
A more plausible interpretation would be the likelihood of the mean socioeconomic status (SES) of a group comparable to the general population being lower than the mean SES of a group comparable to university students. One robust finding has been that there are relationships between SES and a variety of variables, e. g. , cancer survival rates (Coleman, 2004), education (Harris, 1995) – future SES of children (Harris, 1995).
SES differences would not be inconsistent with the findings for depression and anxiety, since spending one’s time digging ditches, for example, makes it difficult to focus attention on how one feels (perhaps similar to findings that reasonably well-adjusted people focus their attention away from such traumatic experiences as becoming a widow (Bonano, Keltner, Holen, & Horowitz, 1995) or even of having been in a concentration camp during the Holocaust (Lavie & Kaminer, 1996). It was not surprising that the mean was higher for women than for men on the depression subscale.
Although the difference would not have been significant even if the direction of the hypothesized difference had been reversed, as in failing to find a statistically significant gender difference in anxiety), finding gender differences might require a male sample size larger than 46 (as in the study). While it isn’t clear why effect sizes for gender differences in depression and anxiety would be smaller than for stress (where the gender difference was significant), as previously discussed, most of the research has provided evidence that women’s reports of mental distress in general have been higher than those of men (Clancy & Gove, 1974).
However, while individuals differ in their genetic predispositions for a number of personality variables (e. g. , depression, Behar, 1980; altruism, Ruston, 1989; shyness, Kagan, Reznick, & Snidman, 1988), that interact with experience in determining whether genotypes become phenotypes (Bronfenbrenner & Ceci, 1994), there has been no evidence that the genders differ in their genetic predispositions for depression, anxiety, or stress (Maccoby, 2002).
The only gender difference in a mental condition related to these moods that has been based on a genetic predisposition, linked to hormonal differences, is schizophrenia, with males more likely than females to be schizophrenic (e. g. , Goldman, 1995). Finally, failing to find correlations between age and the three DASS subscales might have been attributable to the restricted age range of the participants, i. e. , most were between 18 and 24 years old.
Also, if heightened depression, anxiety, and stress during the first year of university were related to being away from home for the first time, it isn’t likely that first-year students older than 19 or 20 would be away from home for the first time. While there have been findings of increased negative mood in early adolescence, relative to pre-adolescence and adulthood (Larson & Richards, 1994), and findings of a linear decline in depression and anxiety in three age groups, 20-24-years, 40-44-years, and 60-64-years (Jorm et al. , 2005), no studies were found comparing depression, anxiety, or stress in 18-19-year-olds with any other age group.
Thus, the most reasonable conclusion is that further research is needed in order to assess the relationship between being a first-year-university student and depression, anxiety, or stress. References Behar, D. (1980). Familial substrates of depression. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 41, 52-56. Bonano, G. A. , Keltner, D. , Holen, A. , & Horowitz, M. J. (1997). When avoiding unpleasant memories might not be such a bad thing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 975-989. Bronfenbrenner, U. , & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nurture re-conceptualized in developmental perspective.
Psychological Review, 101, 568-586. Clancy, K. , & Gove, W. (1974). Gender differences in mental illness. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 205-216. Coleman, M. P. (2001). Trends and socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England and Wales. British Journal of Cancer, 90, 1367-1373. Crawford J. R. , & Henry, J. D. (2003). The depression anxiety stress scales (DASS): Normative data and latent structure in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 111-131. Depression anxiety stress scales – DASS, retrieved October, 1, 2007. Emery, R. E. , & Oltmanns, T. F.(2000).
Essentials of clinical psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Goldstein, J. M. (1995). The impact of gender on understanding the epidemology of schizophrenia. In M. V. Seeman (Ed. ), Gender and psychopathology, pp. 159- 199. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press. Harris, J. R. (1995). Where is the child’s environment? A group socialization theory of development. Psychological Review, 102, 458-490. Jorm, A. F. , Windsor, T. D. , Dear, K. J. , Antstey, H. , & Christensen, H. (2005). Age group differences in psychological distress. Psychological Medicine, 35, 1253-1263.
Kagan, J. , Resnick, J. S. , & Sidman, N. (1998). Biological bases of childhood shyness. Science, 240, 167-171. Larson, R. , & Kaminer, H. (1996). Sleep, dreaming, and coping style in Holocaust survivors. In D. Barrett (Ed. ), Trauma and dreams (pp. 114-127). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Loribond, P. F. (1998). Long-term stability of depression, anxiety, and stress syndromes. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107, 520-526. Maccooby, E, E. (2002). Gender and group process: A developmental perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 54-58. Rushton, J. P. (1989).
Genetic similarity, human altruism, and group selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 503-559. Salkind, N. J. (2006). Exploring research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Taylor, R. , Davis, P. , & Boyages, J. (2003). Long-term survival of women with breast cancer in New South Wales. European Journal of Cancer, 39, 215-222. Wong, J. G. W. S. , Cheung, E. P. T,, Chan, K. K. C. , Ma, K. K. M. , & Tang, S. W. (2006). Web-based survey of depression, anxiety and stress in first-year tertiary education students. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40, 777-782.