Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 Enugu State University of Science & Technology Journal of Social Sciences F SO C IY ET NIS CER E AV NI DN U T EE CT HAT N S O U LOG GU YNE Journal of Social Sciences Published by the Faculty of the Social Sciences published by Faculty of Social Sciences Enugu State University of Science & Technology www.esutjss.com Editor-In-Chief Prof. Oby Omeje Managing Editor Barnabas E. Nwankwo, Ph.D Associate Editor Nicholas Attamah, Ph.D EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 298 Stigma, Personality and Social Support as Predictors of Psychological Well-being among Undergraduate Students Aboh, Uche J1 Nwankwo, Nelson I.2* Okoye. C.A.F.3 Oraetue, Henry4 Agu, Solomon5 Ogonwa, Henry6 1,5Department of psychology, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu, Nigeria. 2,3,4Department of Psychology, Nnanndi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria. anohabe@yahoo.com *thegreatnelson20@gmail.com Abstracts This study investigated stigma, personality and social support as predictors of psychological well-being among undergraduate students. Four hundred and thirty participants consisting of 142 (33%) males and 288 (67%) females were selected for this study. The ages of the participants ranging from 18 to 50, with a mean age of 24.90 years and standard deviation of 3.26 years. Four research instruments were used for data collection such as Self-Stigma of Seeking Help scale, Big five inventory, Multidimensional Perceived Social Support Scale and Psychological well-being. Predictive design was adopted for the study while multiple regression analysis was employed to analyze the data. The result showed that self-stigma did not predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students (β = .046, t=.836, p>.05). Also, personality factors such as Extraversion (β = .23, t=3.00, p<.05), conscientiousness (β =.34, t=5.93, p< .01), Openness to experience (β =.32, t=4.90, p< .01), significantly and independently predicted psychological well-being, while Agreeableness (β=.01, t=.11, p>.05) and Neuroticism (β =.10, t=1.77, p> .05) did not predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. It was found that perceived family support (β =.46, t=8.41, p>.05), perceived friends support (β = .52, t= 9.44, p<.05) perceived significant others (β = .65, t=- .167, p<.05) significantly and independently predicted psychological well-being. Generally, the three independent variables explained 18% variation in psychological well-being and this change in R² was significant, F(3, 420) = 11.10, p < .01. Recommendations are that students should understand their psychological make-ups because this influences their overall well-being. Also, mental health practitioners and government should promote students psychological well- being by implementing regular psychological assessment in all the universities across the country. Keywords: Psychological Well-Being, Stigma, Personality, Social Support, undergraduate students Introduction Psychological well-being (PWB) is an individual’s feeling of happiness and meaningful life (Seligman, 2002). According to Shah and Marks (2004), psychological well-being determines a person’s happiness, functionality, fulfilled life and environmental influence. In brief, it mailto:anohabe@yahoo.com mailto:*thegreatnelson20@gmail.com EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 299 influences positive psychological state associated with self-acceptance, positive relation with others, environmental mastery, autonomy, purpose in life, and personal growth (Ryff, 2014). For example, individuals who experience high psychological well-being are capable of utilizing their potentials, developing optimally, personally and professionally than those with low psychological well-being (Purwaningrum, Hanurawan, Degeng & Triyono, 2019). Thus, psychological well-being is the combination of feeling and functioning effectively (Huppert, 2009). The issue of psychological well-being has attracted serious debate among scholars as regard to university students (Roslan, Ahmad, Nabilla & Ghiami, 2017). Research have shown that the poor psychological well-being appears to be a very crucial and critical issue among students who are changing academic environments from a structured environment (course-taking) to a more unstructured environment (independent research) (Roslan et al., 2017). In Nigeria, Onyedibe, Onyekwelu and Ugwu (2015), asserted that students are expected to represent the future of their families, communities as well as the country. Based on these expectations, plethora of demands are placed on students (such as to be a first-class graduate, get a good job and so on), which may be challenging and stressful in the direction of success attainment in their academics and routine endeavours (El Ansari, & Stock, 2010). These undeniable demands may sometimes affect students’ psychological well-being like self-acceptance, positive relation with others, environmental mastery, autonomy, purpose in life, and personal growth (Ryff, 2014). Hence, students need to deal with intellectual, social, and psychological transformations, as they transit from one academics session to another (Lovitts, 2005; Lessing & Schulze, 2002). However, considering the difficulties associated with undue tight schedule of periodic academic curricular activities like daily lectures, practical classes, and examinations as well as extra- curricular activities (El Ansari et al., 2010). Academic burden can induce some physiological and psychological reaction that may influence students’ quality of life and overall well-being (Roslan, Ahmad, Nabilla & Ghiami, 2017; El Ansari et al., 2010). Originally, psychological well-being is categorized into two different types namely: eduaimonic well-being and hedonic well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The first which is eduaimonic well- being involves the meaningful or intentional aspect of PWB, while hedonic well-being has to do with the subjective feelings of happiness, subjective well-being and positive emotions (Johnson, Robertson & Cooper, 2018). Interestingly, the phenomenon of Ryff’s six dimensions of PWB that has been used in numerous studies is based on eudaimonic well-being (Yoon, Coburn & Spence, 2018). One major benefit of Ryff’s psychological well-being model is that an individual’s well-being can change depending on his/her developmental stages. This approach is appropriate in understanding the PWB of any individual (Purwaningrum et al., 2019). Nevertheless, the current study would focus on the six dimensions of psychological well-being by Ryff’s (1989). In the EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 300 same vine, many factors have been identified to influence an individual’s psychological well- being (e.g., achievement, financial freedom, job satisfaction and so on) but little is known about stigma, personality and social support among undergraduate students (Nwankwo, Ezenwa, Okoye, Aboh & Oraetue, 2019). According to Clark, Welch, Berry, Collentine, Collins, et al. (2013), stigma affects individuals’ healthy behaviour and well-being, and this may be a trigger to mental illness. Stigma is an individual’s attitudes and beliefs that people reject, avoid, or fear him/her because he is different (Clark, et al., 2013). Stigma can lead to individuals’ mental health impoverishment, social marginalization, poor adherence to medication, and low quality of life, decrease health-seeking behaviour, and have a negative impact on socioeconomic well-being (Hadera, Salelew, Girma, Dehning, Adorjan et al., 2019; Nwankwo, et al. 2019). As opined by LeBel (2008), social or perceived stigma is associated with fear of being discriminated against by the rest of the society. Experience of stigma can affect students’ psychological well-being especially when they are faced with psychosocial problems. This has been demonstrated in World Health Organization (2010) report that individuals with psychosocial problems are at risk of high levels of stigma and discrimination because of widely held misconceptions about the causes and nature of their mental health conditions (Funk, 2010). Stigma is often characterized by fear, mistrust, dislike, and occasionally, violence against the individual (Gonzalez, Tinsley & Kreuder, 2002). However, a high prevalence of stigma has been observed among Nigeria population (Adewuya, Owoeye, Erinfolami & Ola, 2011). In addition to stigma, personality variables have been found to influence health related issues and well-being (Scollon & Diener, 2006; Arogundade & Akinbobola, 2013). Individuals respond to challenges based on their psychological make-up (Arogundade et al., 2013) and, this in turn influences the ability to adjust to life situations. Personality is the dynamic organisation of characteristics of an individual that influences his/her behaviours, cognition and motivations (Ryckman, 2013). Trait is an enduring pattern of behaviours, thinking and feelings. Personality trait can serve as both protective and deterring factors to health and well-being (Raynor & Levine, 2009). According to Costa and McCrae (1992), individual’s personality trait determines the core factors of personality. This presented into the big five personality model such as: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness and conscientiousness (Costa et al., 1992). Neuroticism is linked to an unhealthy behaviour like decreased exercise adherence (Rhodes & Smith, 2006) and increased substance use (Dordinejad & Shiran, 2011) and so on. For example, an increase in alcohol consumption in college students has been found related to high neuroticism (Littlefield, Sher & Wood, 2009). Extraversion has also been related to higher levels of binge drinking (Benjamin &Wulfert, 2005), increased risky driving (Dahlen & White, 2006) EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 301 and increased substance abuse (Dordinejad et al., 2011). For example, students scoring high on extraversion were involved in riskier sexual behaviours, including increased sexual partners (Ingledew & Ferguson, 2007) and decreased condom use (Raynor & Levine, 2009). Agreeableness has been related to an increase in health-promoting behaviours. Raynor and Levine (2009), found that high agreeableness among college students linked to reduced binge drinking behaviour, increased alcohol-related harm reduction strategies and decrease the number of sexual partners. On the other hand, openness to experience was related to both health-promoting and health- deterring behaviours (Raynor et al., 2009). While high conscientiousness was related to higher access to mental health care among depressive patients (Schomerus, Appel, Meffert & Luppa, 2013). However, from the above observation, it could be assumed that personality traits have impact on individuals’ psychological well-being. Another important factor in this study is social support. Social support is a significant component of solid relationships and strong psychological health (Cuckor, 2017). Perceived social support defines an individual's beliefs about being is supported by friends, family, and others (Cotterell, 2007). This support can be emotional, instrumental, financial or informational (Reevyl & Maslach, 2001) depending on what is needed at a particular time. Indeed, social support has been found to help individuals to cope with life stressors (Dominguez & Watkins, 2003). Researchers has emphasized that a positive associations exits between social support and psychological well-being among adult and youth (Hussong, 2000; Newman et ah, 2007). Hence, social support is consistently linked to better mental health (Barrera, 2011). As stated by Md- Sidin, Sambasiran and Ismail (2010), even in stressful situations, psychological well-being may be promoted by the quality of social support. Thus, the amount of support individuals receives is likely to determine their psychological well-being. On this note, the present study wants to examine whether stigma, personality traits and social support would predict psychological well- being among undergraduate students. Theoretical framework This study would be guided on the framework of Ryff’s (1989) six-dimensional model. The six- dimensions are autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations with others, purpose in life and self-acceptance. For example, individuals with autonomy are self- determined and independent, resist social pressures and regulate their behaviour from within than those that lacks autonomy. Students’ with environmental mastery shows a sense of mastery and competence in managing the environment (Ryff’s, 1995). Individuals with personal growth have a feeling of continued development; they are open to new experiences; has sense of realizing one’s potential. Persons with positive relations with others, has warm satisfying, trusting EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 302 relationships with other people and are capable of strong empathy, affection, and intimacy. Students with purpose in life have goals in life and a sense of direction; they feel there is meaning to present and past life; holds beliefs that give life purpose. Finally, a student with self acceptance possesses a positive attitude toward the self; acknowledges and accepts multiple aspects of self, including good and bad qualities; feels positive about past life (Ryff’s, 1989). Based on the six dimensions model explained, individuals who possessed the under listed aspect of well-being has the psychological and emotional ability to adjust to life challenges. This assertion is confirmed by Huppert (2009), who demonstrated that psychological well-being is capable of assisting an individual in developing cognitive function, better health, and better social function. In addition, PWB plays an important role in health because it serves as a buffer or protector in the face of adverse effects of negative experiences (Fredrickson, 2009). Review of Related literatures Mabekoje (2003), assessed the linear combination of extraversion, agreeableness, self-esteem, self-efficacy, and social support best discriminates psychological well-being among Nigerian teachers. The study adopted the survey research method with 267 secondary school teachers (males = 127 and females = 140; mean age = 35.55 years; standard deviation = 9.57 years; range = 20 - 57 years) randomly sampled from the existing 19 secondary schools in Ijebu North Local Government Area of Ogun State participating. Six instruments with good psychometric qualities were adopted for the study. Analysis by Discriminant Function Analysis revealed that self- esteem, social support and agreeableness were the significant predictors of teachers’ psychological well-being (Wilks’ λ = .412; F (3,263) = 125.065; p < .05). Neither extraversion nor self-efficacy was predictive. Over ninety percent of the cases were successfully classified: 97.7% of teachers with low psychological well-being and 83.7% of teachers with high psychological well-being were correctly classified. In Indian, Pandya and Korat (2015), examined the personality traits and psychological well- being among youths of Rajkot District. A total of 120 participants comprising of males and females in equal numbers was selected through random sampling. Personality Traits Inventory and Psychological well-being Inventory are tailor-made instruments, having sufficient reliability and validity. Pearson product moment correlation coefficient was used to analyze the data. The result revealed that a significant positive correlation exists between the personality traits and psychological well-being among youth. The suggestion made in the above study provided the need to explore further the study variables in a different locality. In United State, Porter, Brennan-Ing, Burr, Dugan and Karpiak (2017), examined the association between HIV stigma and psychological well-being and mediating resources (i.e., spirituality and complementary and integrative health [CIH]) approaches) in older adults with HIV. Using data EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 303 from the Research on Older Adults with HIV (ROAH) study, structural equation modelling was used to estimate these relationships within a latent variable model. Namely, a direct negative association between HIV stigma and psychological well-being was hypothesized that would be mediated by spirituality and/or CIH use. The analyses showed that the model fits the data well [χ2 (137, N = 914) = 561.44, p = .000; comparative fit index = .964; root mean square error of approximation = .058, 95% confidence interval = .053 to .063]. All observed variables significantly loaded on their latent factor, and all paths were significant. Results indicated that spirituality and CIH use significantly mediated the negative association between HIV stigma and psychological well-being. In Australia, Hicks and Mehta (2018), investigated how the Big Five and Type A personality variables relate to psychological well-being. Additionally, the study examined the effect of age on psychological well-being. Various social media sites such as Facebook were used to recruit 286 Participants (209 males, 74 females) from the community population. The sample was broad with an age range of 18-85 years. Participants completed a demographic measure as well as the Ryff’s Psychological Well-being scale, the International Personality Item Pool- Big Five Scale, the Framingham Type A Behavior Scale and a Social Desirability Scale. Pearson’s product correlations and a hierarchical multiple regression were performed to determine the ability of the personality variables and Type A personality scores to predict psychological well-being. The results indicated that the personality variables (the Big Five) predicted psychological well-being but that the addition of variance from the Type A personality variable added insignificantly to the prediction. Psychological well-being was negatively correlated with age. Further studies on personality and psychological wellbeing are needed, including the role of mindfulness in contributing along with personality variables to psychological well-being. Alsubaie, Stain, Webster and Wadman (2019), examined the differential impact of sources of social support on student wellbeing. University students completed an online survey measuring depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)), social support (Multidimensional Perceived Social Support (MPSS)), and quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF). The sample was 461 students (82% female; mean age 20.62 years). The prevalence of depressive symptoms was 33%. Social support from family, and friends was a significant predictor of depressive symptoms (p = 0.000*). Quality of life (psychological) was significantly predicted by social support from family and friends. Quality of life (social relationships) was predicted by social support from significant others and friends. Against this background, it is important explore factors that could influence students psychological well-being in order to improve their healthy living. Purpose of the study • To investigate whether stigma would predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 304 • To ascertain whether personality would predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. • To find out whether social support would predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. • To assess whether stigma, personality and social support would jointly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. Hypotheses The following hypotheses were stated to guide the present study;  Stigma would significantly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. • Personality traits would significantly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. • Social support would significantly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. • Stigma, personality traits and social support would jointly and significantly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. Method Setting of the study The study took take place in Nnamdi Azikiwe University located in Awka, Anambra state. Nnamdi Azikiwe University was founded in 1991 from the old Anambra State University. The university has four campuses, which its main campus is along Onitsha–Enugu Express way, Awka; Ifite Ogwasi campus, Agulu Campus and Nnewi campus. The university has 14 faculties which are Engineering, Law, Social science, Management science, Environmental Sciences, Agricultural Sciences, Medicine, Biological Sciences, Education, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Physical Sciences, Health Sciences and Technology, Basic Medical Sciences and Arts. Out the 14 faculties, social science was randomly selected for this study. Participants Four hundred and thirty (430) undergraduate students of Nnamdi Azikiwe University were sampled in this study. The participants comprised of 142 (33%) males and 288 (67%) females, who were within the ages of 18 to 50 years, with a mean age of 24.90 years and standard deviation of 3.26. They were randomly selected from four different departments in the social science faculty of the Nnamdi Azikiwe University namely: psychology department (120= students), sociology (120 students), economics (120 students) and political science department (80 students) respectively. This was done through the use of proportionate stratified sampling technique (such as dividing the entire population into subgroups or strata). The participants were chosen from pool of undergraduates who are in 300 levels to 400 levels. EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 305 EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 306 Instruments Four set of instruments were used in this study namely: Psychological wellbeing scale This 42-item questionnaire was developed by Ryff’s (1989) to measure individuals’ psychological well-being on six subscales: autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations, purpose in life, and self-acceptance. Each of the subscale contains 7 items respectively. Items on the scale are rated on a 6-point Likert format with options that ranged between strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (6). Some of the items of the scale are negatively worded statements. The 20 items listed are reverse coded: 3, 5, 10, 13,14,15,16,17,18,19, 23, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36, 39 and 41. The total scores are summed up to get the mean. Scores in the scale are interpreted such that those above the mean indicated better psychological wellbeing, while scores below the mean indicated poor psychological wellbeing. In this study, the total mean scores of the scale will be used to represent psychological wellbeing. Hicks and Mehta (2018), reported a Cronbach’s Alpha of .75 for the psychological well-being. The present study reported a reliability coefficient α of .82 using undergraduate population. Multidimensional Perceived Social Support Scale The 12-item questionnaire was developed by Zimet, Dalhlem, Zimet&Farly (1988) to assess individuals’ outcome from different social contexts namely, family, friends and significant others. Each subscale has four items and the response pattern is ranked strongly disagree = 1 to very strongly agree = 7. Dahlem, Zimet and Walker (1991), reported total Cronbach’s alpha (α) of .91 and alphas of .90, .94 & .95 for significant others, family and friends supports respectively. The Cronbach’s alpha for the present study were .75 for significant others, .76 family, .77 friends and .81 for all items in the scale Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness (ISMI) The ISMI scale was developed by Ritsher, Otilingam and Grajales (2003), which comprises of 29 items across five subscales: alienation (6 items), stereotype endorsement (7 items), discrimination experience (5 items), social withdrawal (6 items), and stigma resistance (5 items). Each item is rated on a four-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The five stigma resistance subscale items are reverse-coded, and also serve as a validity check (Ritsher et al., 2003). The stigma resistance score is calculated by subtracting the actual value from five. Therefore, stigma resistance displays the same direction of correlation as the other four subscales. A high total score on the ISMI scale indicates more severe internalized stigmatization. The internal consistency and test–retest reliability for the five subscales ranges from .79 to .94 (Ritsher et al., 2003). The present study reported a cronbach’s alpha of ranging from .70 to .87 EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 307 Big five inventory (BFI) This 44-item scale was developed by John, Donalue and kentle (1991), to assess personality from a five-dimensional perspective. The five dimensions or subscales of (BFI) are: Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness. Items on the scale are rated on a 5-point Likert format and scored from least to highest thus from 1 = Disagree strongly to 5 = Agree strongly. John et al (1991), provided the original psychometric properties for American samples, while Umeh (2004) provide the properties for Nigerian samples. John et al (1991) reported a test retest reliability of r= .85 and Alpha of r = .80 for the scale. The divergent validity coefficient obtained by Umeh (2004) with University Maladjustment scale ranged from Extraversion = .05 to Neuroticism =.39. However, the present study obtained a Cronbach’s alpha of .75 for Extraversion, Agreeableness .78; Conscientiousness .83; Neuroticism .76; Openness .93. Procedure The research instruments were randomly distributed to the students in their classrooms by the researchers and trained research assistants. Participants were told that participating in the study was not obligatory. However, after establishing rapport and confidentiality, a verbal consent was obtained from the participants. A total of 440 copies of the questionnaire distributed to participants were all returned it to the researchers immediately after responding. All the participants were very cooperative and had no difficulties in completing the questionnaires. Nevertheless, it was observed that ten (10) participants failed to complete the questionnaire properly and were excluded from the study. Therefore, 430 copies of the questionnaires that were properly filled were used for the data analysis. Design/Statistics A predictive design was adopted for this study. This is because the researchers want to evaluate the predictive effects of the study variables. Hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was used to analysis the data. This is because the researchers want to know the difference in the model as regard to stigma, personality factors and social support. SSPS version 23 was employed to manage the data. EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 308 Results Table 1: Socio-demographic variables of the participants Variables Frequency (𝑛= 500) Percent (100%) Sex Male 142 33% Female 288 67% Religion Catholic 157 37% Anglican 174 41% Pentecostal 92 21% Others 7 1.6% Marital status Married 174 41% Separated 201 47% Widowed 55 12% Table 1 revealed the frequency distribution of the participants of the study by sex, religion, and marital status. Majority of the respondents are females totally 288 (67%) while males are 142 (33%). The respondents religious information showed that the highest proportion were Anglicans 157 (37%), Catholic 174 (41%), while Pentecostal and those who do not belong to no particular religion were 92 (21%) and 7 (1.6%) respectively. Marital status information revealed that the respondents who are separated were 201 (47%) and married 174 (41%) and followed by those are widowed 55 (47%). EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 309 TABLE 1: Means, Standard Deviations and Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients ** p< .01, * p<. 05 Note: ** indicated a significant level at .01; * indicated a significant level at .05. The inspection from the table above showed that stigma did not correlate with psychological well-being, r = .01 at p>. 05 level of significance. Personality traits such as extraversion, conscientiousness positively correlated with psychological well-being at r = .33 at p<.01 and .24 at p<.01. While agreeableness, neuroticism and openness to experience did not correlate with psychological well-being, r = -.01 at p>. 05; .06 at p>.05 and -.05 at p>.05 respectively. Also, social support such as perceived family support, perceived friends support and perceived significant others positively correlated with psychological well-being at r = .25 at p<. 05; .34 at p<.01 and .26 at p<.01, respectively (see Table 1). Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 M SD 1 Psychological wellbeing 1 81.72 16.90 Stigma .01 1 25.40 8.91 Extraversion .33** .13** 1 26.60 10.38 Agreeableness -.01 -.16** .12 1 28.59 9.89 Conscientiousness .24** .06 .28** .22** 1 30.03 16.50 Neuroticism .06 -.03 .16** .08** -.06 1 25.91 3.58 Openness -.05 .29** .39** .34 .09 -.08 1 14.24 7.97 Perceived family support .25** .04 .45** .01 .66 .01 .00 1 20.06 11.76 Perceived friends support .34** .03 .74** .01 .36 .01 .04 .65** 1 20.65 9.96 Perceived significant others .26** .03 .39 .03 .65 .01 .01 .96** .58** 1 19.99 10.04 EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 310 Table 2: Hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis on stigma, personality and social support on psychological well-being. ** p< .01, * p<. 05 The result of the hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis in the step 1, revealed that stigma did not significantly predict psychological well-being, β(.01; t= .10, p>.05); F (1,428) = .10, p > .05. Thus, hypothesis 1 was rejected. However, in the step 2, personality traits such as extraversion β (.36; t= 6.94, p<. 01), conscientiousness β (.16; t= 3.41, p<. 05) and openness to experience β (-.19; t= -3.41, p<. 01) significantly predicted psychological well-being while agreeableness β (.01; t= .10, p>. 05); neuroticism β (.01; t= .10, p>. 05) did not predict psychological well-being. These personality factors accounted for 1.6% variation in psychological well-being and this change in R2 was significant, F (5,423) = 14.0, p < .01. Thus, hypothesis 3 was accepted. Models Adjusted R2 Δ R2 DF F 𝜷 T Sig Step 1 .00 .00 1(428) .10 33.032 .92 Stigma .01 .10 .92 Step 2 .16 .17 5(423) 14.07** 10.67 .00 Stigma -.00 -.03 .97 Extraversion .36 6.94 .00 Agreeableness -.03 -.48 .63 Conscientiousness .16 3.41 .00 Neuroticism -.00 -.07 .95 Openness -.19 -3.41 .00 Step 3 .18 .03 3(420) 11.10** 9.48 .00 Stigma .004 .080 .94 Extraversion .28 3.45 .00 Agreeableness -.05 -.87 .39 Conscientiousness .20 3.19 .00 Neuroticism .01 .30 .77 Openness -.16 -2.76 .01 Perceived family support -.63 -3.52 .00 Perceived friends support .18 2.08 .04 Perceived significant others .53 3.26 .00 EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 311 Furthermore, the addition of social support variables such as perceived family support β (-.63; t= -3.52, p<. 01), Perceived friends support β (.18; t= 2.08, p<. 05), Perceived significant others β (.53; t= 3.26, p<. 01) to the regression model significantly predicted psychological well-being among undergraduate students. Finally, the three independent variables explained 18% of the variation in psychological well-being and this change in R² square was significant, F (3, 420) = 11.10, p < .01. Hence, hypothesis 3 was accepted. Discussion The main goal of this study is to investigate whether stigma, personality and social support would jointly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students. Following the objectives of this study, four hypotheses were postulated and tested as well. The first hypothesis which stated that stigma would significantly predict psychological well- being among undergraduate students was rejected. This means that stigma do not impact students’ psychological well-being. Thus, stigma may be a negative factor that affects undergraduates’ academic success, achievement and overall psychological well being. This finding is supported by Hadera et al. (2019), who found that stigma impoverish individuals quality of life, decreases health-seeking behaviour, and negatively impact on socioeconomic well-being. Also, Nwankwo et al. (2019), found that perceived stigma does not promote individuals’ help seeking behaviour for mental health. This is in agreement Porter et al. (2017), who found that a direct negative association exists between HIV stigma and psychological well- being. The second hypothesis which stated that personality traits would significantly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students was accepted. This means that individual disposition is a significant factor that determines their psychological well-being. Based on this observed result, undergraduate students who posed extraversion, conscientiousness and openness to experience traits are more likely experience psychological well-being than those without the traits. This has been confirmed in Nigeria by Nwankwo et al. (2019) who found that personality factors such as conscientiousness and Openness to experience significantly and independently predicted help-seeking behaviour. However, this result is in consistent with the findings of Hicks et al. (2018), that personality variables (the Big Five) significantly predicted psychological well-being among community population. Pandya et al., (2015), found that a significant positive correlation between the personality traits and psychological well-being among youth. The third hypothesis which stated that social support would significantly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students was accepted. This means that social support influence undergraduate psychological well-being. This result is in agreement with Alsubaie et al. (2019), who found that social support from family, friends and others was a significant predictor of EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 312 quality of life of students’. Also, Mabekoje (2003) found that social support is significant predictor of psychological well-being among teachers. The fourth hypothesis which stated that stigma, personality traits and social support would jointly and significantly predict psychological well-being among undergraduate students as accepted. This finding is in congruency with Mabekoje (2003), result that social support and agreeableness were the significant predictors of psychological well-being. Limitations This study is limited based on the following; it did not capture the pattern, changes and development of undergraduates’ social support over time which could be achieved through a longitudinal study. The participants used for this study may not be through a representative of the general population of the study. Based on this, there should be caution in generalizing the findings of this study. Implications This study will provide the platform for mental health policy makers, researchers and educationist to understand factors could hinder psychological well-being among undergraduate students in Nigeria. Practically, the findings of this study will help researchers to form literature and empirical based on psychological well-being among undergraduate students. Recommendation The following recommendations are made in this study; Students should understand their psychological make-ups because this influences their overall well-being. Mental health practitioners and government should promote students psychological well-being by implementing regular psychological assessment in all the universities across the country. Since psychological well-being is a multiple dimensional construct, this study also recommends that a longitudinal approach should be employ in the course of further studies. Factors like family background, socioeconomic status, self-efficacy and peer influence should be considered in future research. Undergraduate students are urged to understand their personality disposition that improves their psychological well-being. Finally, social supports should be strengthened among undergraduates. Conclusion This study investigated the stigma, personality and social support as predictors of psychological well-being among undergraduate students. From the findings of the study, it was observed that stigma, personality and social support jointly and significantly predicted psychological well- being among undergraduate students. Independently, stigma did not predict psychological well- being. Thus, the hypotheses of the study were confirmed. Based on this, the study concludes that personality traits and social support are significant factors that influence individual’s psychological well-being. EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 313 References Adewuya, A. O. Owoeye, A. O. Erinfolami, A. O., & Ola, B. A. (2011). Correlates of self-stigma among outpatients with Mental Illness in Lagos, Nigeria. International Journal of Social Psychiatry; 57(4): 418–427. Andersen, R. M. (2012). Personality-related factors as predictors of help-seeking for depression: a population-based study applying the Behavioural Model of Health Services Use. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. DOI 10.1007/s00127-012-0643-1 Arogundade, O. T., Akinbobola, O. I. (2013). Influence of Locus of Control on Students’ Illness Behaviour in Ogun State, Nigeria. Journal of Health Science; 3(1): 1-4. doi:10.5923/j.health.20130301.01 Barrera, I., & Jordan, C. (2011). Potentially Harmful Practices: Using the DSM with people of colour, social work in Mental Health, 9:4, 272-286, DOI: 10.1080/15332985.2011.554306 Carmel, S., Raveis, V.H., O’Rourke, N. and Tovel, H. (2016). Health, coping and subjective well-being: results of a longitudinal study of elderly Israelis. Aging and Mental Health; 21(6): 616-623. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J.K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2): 267- 283. Clark, W., Welch, S. N. Berry, S.H., Collentine, A.M., Collins, R., Lebron, D., Shearer, A. L. (2013). California’s historic effort to reduce the stigma of mental illness: the mental health services act. American Journal of Public Health, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 786–794, 2013. Dio:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301225 Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R (Professional Manual). Odessa, Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources. Cotterell, J. (2007). Social Networks in Youth and Adolescence (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Dahlen, E. R., & White, R. P. (2006). The Big Five factors, sensation seeking, and driving anger in the prediction of unsafe driving. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(5), 903- 915. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.03.016 Domínguez, S., & Watkins-Hayes, C. M. (2003). Creating networks for survival and mobility: Social capital among African-American and Latin-American low-income mothers. Social Problems, 50(1), 111-135. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2003.50.1.111 EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 314 Dordinejad, G. F., & Shiran, A. G. M. (2011). Personality Traits and Drug Usage among Addicts. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal. 2(2): 402-405. 10.20533/licej.2040.2589.2011.0056. El Ansari, W., & Stock, C. (2010). Is the health and wellbeing of university students associated with their academic performance? Cross sectional findings from the United Kingdom. International Journal of Environmental Research. Public Health. 7, 509-527. El Ansari, W., Stock, C., Snelgrove, S., Hu, X., Parke, S., Davies, S., J., John, J., Adetunji, J. Y., Stoate, M., Deeny, P., Phillips, C., & Mabhala A. (2010). Feeling Healthy? A Survey of Physical and Psychological Wellbeing of Students from Seven Universities in the UK. International Journal of Environmental Research. Public Health, 8, 1308-1323. Fredrickson, B.L. (2009). Positivity. New York: Crown. Funk, M. (2010). Mental Health and Development: Targeting People with Mental Health Conditions as a Vulnerable Group, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2010. Gonzalez, J. M., Tinsley, H. E. A., & Kreuder, K. R. (2002). Effects of psychoeducational interventions on opinions of mental illness, attitudes toward help seeking, and expectations about psychotherapy in college students. Journal of College Student Development, 43(1): 51-63. Hadera, E., Salelew, E., Girma, E., Dehning, S., Adorjan, K., & Tesfaye, M. (2019). Psychiatry Journal, 8427561, 9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8427561 Hicks, R. E., & Mehta, Y. P. (2018). The Big Five, Type A Personality, and Psychological Well- Being. International Journal of Psychological Studies; 10(1): 49:58. doi:10.5539/ijps.v10n1p49 Huppert, F, H. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence Regarding its causes and consequences. Applied Psychological: Health and Well-being; 1(2): 137-164. Doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01008.x Hussong, A. M. (2000). Distinguishing mean and structural sex differences in adolescent friendship quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(2), 223-243. doi.org/10.1177/0265407500172004 Ingledew, K. D., & Ferguson, E. (2007). Personality and riskier sexual behaviour: Motivational mediators. Psychology and Health; 22(3):291-315. 10.1080/14768320600941004. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8427561 EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 315 John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991).The Big Five Inventory--Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research. Johnson, S., Robertson, I., & Cooper, C.L. (2018), Well-being: Productivity and Happiness at Work, 2nd ed., Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. LeBel, T. P. (2008). Perceptions of and responses to stigma,” Sociology Compass, 2(2), 409– 432. Lessing, A., & Schulze, S. (2002). Postgraduate supervision and academic support: students’ perceptions. South African Journal of Higher Education, 16(2): 139-149. Lovitts, B. E. (2005). Being a good course taker is not enough: A theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in Higher Education, 30(2): 137-154. Mabekoje, S. O. (2003). Psychological Well-being among Nigerian Teachers: A Discriminant Function Analysis. Journal of Research in Counselling Psychology, 9(1): 48-57. Md-Sidin, S., Sambasivan, M., & Ismail, I. (2010). Relationship between work-family conflict and quality of life; An investigation into the role of social support. Journal of Managerial Psychology; 25(1): pp. 58. Newman, M., & Barabasi, A., & Watts, D. (2006). The Structure and Dynamics of Networks. The Structure and Dynamics of Networks. Nwankwo, N. I., Ezenwa, M. O., Okoye., C. A.F., Aboh, U. J., & Oraetue, H. (2019). Do personality traits and perceived stigma predict attitude towards help seeking behaviour among clients under psychiatric management?. Practicum Psychologia; 9(1), 41-64. http://journals.aphriapub.com/index.php.pp Onyedibe, M. C. C., Onyekwelu, C. A., &Ugwu, L. L. (2015). An Evaluation of the Relationship between Coping, Emotional Intelligence and Psychological Well-Being among Nigerian Undergraduates. International Journal of English Language, Literature and Humanities; 2(10): 1-18. Pandya, M. M., & Korat, N. R. (2015).Personality Traits and Psychological Well-being among Youths of Rajkot District.The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 2(2): 19: 23. Paper ID: B00303V2I22015 http://www.ijip.in Porter, K. E., Brennan-Ing, M., Burr, J. A., Dugan, E., & Karpiak, S. E. (2017). Stigma and Psychological Well-being among Older Adults with HIV: The Impact of Spirituality and Integrative Health Approaches. The Gerontologist, 57(2): 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnv128 http://journals.aphriapub.com/index.php.pp EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 316 Purwaningrum, R., Hanurawan, F., Degeng, I. N. S., Triyono. (2019). School counselor’s psychological well-being: a phenomenological study. European Journal of education studies. 6(2): 80-93.doi: 10.5281/zenodo.2691173 Raynor, D.A., & Levine, H. (2009). Associations between the five-factor model of personality and health behaviors among college students. Journal of American College Health 58(1):73-81. doi: 10.3200/JACH.58.1.73-82. Reevyl, G. M. & Maslach, C. (2001). Use of social support: Gender and personality differences. Sex Roles, Vol. 44, Nos. 7/8, 437-459. Rhodes, R. E., & Smith, N. E. I. (2006). Personality correlates of physical activity: A review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine; 40, 958–965. Ritsher (Boyd), J. B., Otilingam, P. O., & Grajales, M. (2003). Internalized stigma of mental illness: Psychometric properties of a new measure. Psychiatry Research, 121, 31–49. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2003.08.008 Roslan, S., Ahmad, N., Nabilla, N., & Ghiami, Z. (2017). Psychological Well-Being among Postgraduate Students. Acta Medica Bulgarica, 44,1:35-41. 10.1515/AMB-2017-0006 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E.L. (2000), “Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being”. American Psychologist, 55(1): 68-78. Ryan, R.M, Huta, V., &Deci, E.L. (2008). Living well: A self determination theory of perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies. 9, 139-170. Ryckman, R. M. (2013). Theories of personality (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Ryff, C. (1989a). Beyond Ponce de Leon and life satisfaction: New directions in quest of successful aging. International Journal of Behavioral Development; 12: 35-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/016502548901200102 Ryff, C. (1989b). Happiness in Everything, or Is It? Explorations on the Meaning of Psychological Well-Being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; 57: 1069- 1081. https://DOI.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069 Ryff, C. (2014). Psychological Well-being Revisited: Advances in the Science and Practice of Eudaimonia. Journal of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatology. 83: 10-38. Ryff, C. D. (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 4, 99-104. https://doi.org/10.1177/016502548901200102 EJSS, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2019 317 Schomerus, G., Appel, K., Grabe, H. J., Meffert, P. J., Baumeister, S. E., Luppa, M., & Andersen, R. M. (2012). Personality-related factors as predictors of help-seeking for depression: a population-based study applying the Behavioural Model of Health Services Use. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. DOI 10.1007/s00127-012-0643-1 Scollon, C. N., & Diener, E. (2006). Love, work, and changes in extraversion and neuroticism over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(6), 1152-1165. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1152 Shah, H., & Marks, N. 2004. A Well-being Manifesto for A Flourishing Society. London: The New Economics Foundation. Accessed 24 April 2019. Umeh, C. S. (2004). The impact of personality characteristics on students’ adjustment on campus. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Lagos, Nigeria. World Health Organization, (2010). Discussion Paper: Mental Health, Poverty And Development, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland. Yoon, E., Coburn, C. & Spence, S. A. (2018), “Perceived discrimination and mental health among older African Americans: the role of psychological well-being”. Aging and Mental Health, doi: 10.1080/13607863.2017.1423034. Page 1