| Literature DB >> 36012067 |
Gerardo Gómez-García1, Magdalena Ramos-Navas-Parejo2, Juan-Carlos de la Cruz-Campos2, Carmen Rodríguez-Jiménez2.
Abstract
The irruption of COVID-19 has had different consequences on mental health in the youth population. Specifically, the sector made up of university students has suffered an abrupt change of teaching modality because of the pandemic. As such, this paper aims to analyze the impact that COVID-19 has had on different personal factors of students: (i) satisfaction with life; (ii) lived uncertainty; (iii) depression, anxiety, and stress, as well as factors related to academic development; (iv) motivation and the creation of teaching and learning strategies during this period; and (v) the perception of the degree of adaptability to the new scenario brought about by the university system. For this purpose, a cross-sectional quantitative design was advocated through the elaboration of an SEM model, which included 1873 university students from Andalusian Universities (Spain). The results reflected the strong negative impact that the pandemic had, especially on the levels of life satisfaction and the indices of depression, anxiety, and stress of the students. Likewise, the findings reflected the relevance of the correct adaptability on the part of the university to these new circumstances. It is necessary for university institutions to focus their efforts on quality attention to students, in order to establish fluid communication with them and to adapt to their academic and personal needs.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; academic motivation; depression; higher education; life satisfaction; structural equation modelling
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36012067 PMCID: PMC9407859 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191610433
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Theoretical model to determine the level of dependence between latent variables. Note: Own production.
Gender and age.
| Variable |
| % |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Men | 457 | 24.4 |
| Women | 1415 | 75.6 |
|
| ||
| Between 17–30 years old | 1174 | 94.7 |
| Between 31–50 years old | 94 | 4.9 |
| Over 51 years old | 3 | 0.4 |
Note: Own production.
Descriptive statistics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| COVID | 2.80 | 1.423 | 0.270 | −0.876 |
| SAT | 4.71 | 1.860 | −0.613 | −0.567 |
| UNC | 3.37 | 1.135 | −0.216 | −0.914 |
| DAS | 1.98 | 0.986 | −0.543 | −0.694 |
| MOT | 3.84 | 1.151 | −0.682 | −0.128 |
| FC | 5.14 | 1.958 | −0.956 | −0.154 |
Note: Own production.
Covariance relationships between the constructs.
| H | Relation | Estimate | SE | C.R. |
| Decision | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | COVID | <--> | SAT | −0.767 | 0.046 | −18.521 | *** | Accepted |
| H2 | COVID | <--> | UNC | 0.621 | 0.045 | 19.152 | *** | Accepted |
| H3 | COVID | <--> | DAS | 0.599 | 0.040 | 18.564 | *** | Accepted |
| H4 | COVID | <--> | MOT | 0.355 | 0.034 | 15.565 | *** | Rejected |
| H5 | COVID | <--> | FC | −0.921 | 0.072 | −20.956 | *** | Accepted |
| H6 | SAT | <--> | FC | 0.852 | 0.097 | 22.473 | *** | Accepted |
| H7 | SAT | <--> | DAS | −0.597 | 0.029 | −16.720 | *** | Accepted |
| H8 | SAT | <--> | UNC | −0.687 | 0.052 | −17.458 | *** | Accepted |
| H9 | SAT | <--> | MOT | −0.199 | 0.019 | −11.241 | *** | Accepted |
| H10 | UNC | <--> | DAS | 0.414 | 0.037 | 18.246 | *** | Accepted |
| H11 | UNC | <--> | MOT | 0.245 | 0.030 | 13.351 | *** | Rejected |
| H12 | UNC | <--> | FC | −0.812 | 0.054 | −18.32 | *** | Accepted |
| H13 | DAS | <--> | MOT | −454 | 0.032 | −10.548 | *** | Accepted |
| H14 | DAS | <--> | FC | −0.648 | 0.054 | −14.956 | *** | Accepted |
| H15 | MOT | <--> | FC | −0.424 | 0.033 | −13.453 | *** | Accepted |
Note: Own production. *** denotes significance at p < 0.001.
Figure 2Estimations of the structural equation model. The relations were significant at p < 0.001. Note: Own production.