




































Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal  

Vol. 19 (2), August 2022, 148-160 
ISSN:  2598-6368(online); 1693-7236(print)                                                                 

        humanitas@psy.uad.ac.id      https://doi.org/10.26555/humanitas.v19i2.49 

Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college 

students during the COVID-19 pandemic  

Karina Angelica, Monique Elizabeth Sukamto, Clara Citra Chandra, Kelvin Andrea 

Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Surabaya, Indonesia 

Corresponding author: monique@staff.ubaya.ac.id 

 

Introduction 

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the implementation of physical 

distancing in Indonesia through work from home (WFH) and study from home (SFH) 

policies. These policies also affect the learning process in higher education by implementing 

distance or online learning. Previous studies on college students in several regions in 

Indonesia, such as Lampung, Medan, and Jakarta, showed that students experienced mild, 

moderate, to severe anxiety and stress in undergoing distance or online learning during the 

COVID-19 pandemic (Harahap et al., 2020; NurCita & Susantiningsih, 2021). When 

carrying out online education, college students experience constraints, including difficulty 

concentrating and understanding lecture material, unstable internet signals and networks, 

less than optimal lectures in explaining lecture material, and too many assignments with 

short deadlines (Hasanah et al., 2020).  

The psychological impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on college students have also 

been extensively studied in various countries, including Italy as the first country to 

implement a lockdown in Europe (Villani et al., 2021). A study among 787 university 

students in Australia shows that 31.5% of study participants had very low well-being (Dodd 

et al., 2021). Research on 291 first-year college students in France showed that most 

ART ICLE  INFO  

 

AB ST R ACT  

 

Article history 

Received December 28, 2021 

Revised July 14, 2022 

Accepted July 22, 2022 

 The COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia has forced college students to 
undergo online learning. Various problems that arise due to this 
pandemic, especially those related to academic achievement, can 
disrupt the students' psychological well-being. This study 
investigated coping strategies' role in predicting college students' 
psychological well-being during the pandemic's first wave. Two 
hundred eleven students participated online in this quantitative study 
and completed the shortened version of the Psychological Well-Being 
Scale and the Brief Cope Inventory. The regression analysis results 
show that problem-focused coping strategies, such as planning and 
the use of instrumental support, significantly predict the increase in 
female students' psychological well-being. In contrast, only active 
coping positively predicts psychological well-being in male students. 
Dysfunctional coping strategies, such as behavioral disengagement 
and denial, significantly predict the decline in female students' 
psychological well-being. On the other hand, venting showed a 
significant role in predicting the increased psychological well-being 
of female students. Emotion-focused coping strategies do not 
significantly predict psychological well-being in female and male 
students. Therefore, regarding the psychological well-being of 
college students during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, 
coping strategies, especially problem-focused and dysfunctional 
strategies, contribute differently to female and male students.  

    

 
Keywords 

college students;  

coping strategy; 

COVID-19; 

online learning; 

psychological well-being. 

 

mailto:humanitas@psy.uad.ac.id
https://doi.org/10.26555/humanitas.v19i2.31
mailto:monique@staff.ubaya.ac.id


Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 149 

 

                         Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…)   

participants reported increased anxiety and moderate to severe stress levels since the 

beginning of the COVID-19 confinement period (Husky et al., 2020). A literature review of 

eleven studies conducted in several countries found that the psychological effects of the 

COVID-19 pandemic on college students were anxiety, depression, stress, post-traumatic 

stress disorder, and post-traumatic growth (Ratunuman et al., 2021). First-year female 

college students were more likely to have higher anxiety, depression, stress, and post-

traumatic stress disorder than male and older students.  

According to research on Jordanian undergraduate students, the transition to online 

learning during the COVID-19 pandemic caused several problems, which include 

technology, mental health, time management, and balancing life and education (Maqableh 

& Alia, 2021). Dissatisfaction among students was caused by distraction and reduced focus, 

technology and internet connectivity issues, insufficient support, increased workload, 

increased difficulty in exams and quizzes, poor interaction with colleagues and lecturers, 

psychological issues, and management. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the 

psychological well-being of university students (Ebrahim et al., 2022). 

These various psychological impacts can interfere with the psychological well-being 

of college students. According to Ryff and Keyes (1995), psychological well-being is a 

multidimensional domain. Psychological well-being includes self-acceptance, 

environmental mastery, purpose in life, positive relations with others, personal growth 

(sustainable growth and development), and autonomy (the capacity for self-determination). 

Previous studies have shown that college students' psychological well-being can be 

influenced by several factors, including social support and religiosity (Abdillah et al., 2021; 

Eva et al., 2020), stress, and emotional regulation (Gunawan & Bintari, 2021), academic 

stress (Pratiwi et al., 2021), and coping strategies (Abbas et al., 2020; Abdillah et al., 2021; 

Guszkowska & Dąbrowska-Zimakowska, 2022; Pratiwi et al., 2021; Sagone & De Caroli, 

2014). Research by Abdillah et al. (2021) on 145 college students in Surakarta showed 

coping strategies mediated by the correlation between religiosity and psychological well-

being. Coping strategies and academic stress could also be significant predictors of the 

psychological well-being of first-year students in Yogyakarta during the pandemic (Pratiwi 

et al., 2021).  

Problem-focused coping strategies, emotion-focused coping strategies, and 

dysfunctional coping strategies are the three main types of coping strategies (Carver, 1997; 

Carver et al., 1989). Problem-focused coping strategies include active coping, the use of 

instrumental support, and planning, all of which aim to solve a problem or change the source 

of stress. Active coping is the process of taking active steps, such as taking immediate action, 

increasing one's efforts, and gradually increasing one's coping efforts to eliminate or avoid 

a stressor or reduce its effects. The use of instrumental support is an attempt to seek advice, 

assistance, or information. In contrast, planning is thinking about how to deal with the 

stressor, which involves developing an action plan, deciding steps to take, and determining 

the best way to deal with the problem. Emotion-focused coping strategies include using 

emotional support, religion, humor, acceptance, and positive reframing to reduce or manage 

the emotional distress associated with a situation. 

Dysfunctional coping strategies refer to coping strategies that are only felt helpful at 

first but ineffective if used continuously or in the long term, such as self-distraction, 

behavioral disengagement, denial, substance use, self-blame, and venting (Carver, 1997; 

Carver et al., 1989). Self-distraction or mental disengagement is an act of doing various 

alternative activities to distract a person from a problem or task. The activities include 

daydreaming, escaping through sleep, or watching TV. Behavioral disengagement is a 

reduction in a person's efforts to deal with stressors or complete cessation of efforts to 



150   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…) 

achieve goals disrupted by stressors. Behavioral disengagement is frequently associated with 

feelings of helplessness and is most likely to occur when people anticipate poor coping 

outcomes. Denial is not accepting a stressor or problem or attempting to act as if the stressor 

did not exist. Unless the stressor can be profitably ignored, this strategy only creates 

additional problems because denying the reality of the event allows the event to become 

more serious, making it more difficult to cope. Similarly, focusing on and venting emotions 

(e.g., distress or upset) can hinder adjustment and distract people from active coping efforts 

to get out of problems if used for long periods. 

A study of 183 Italian college students aged 20 to 26 showed that the reinterpretation 

coping strategy (problem-focused coping) predicted increased psychological well-being. 

Still, the avoidance coping strategy (dysfunctional coping) negatively predicted 

psychological well-being (Sagone & De Caroli, 2014). Thus, college students, who 

expressed a state of psychological well-being, actively deal with problems and stressful 

events without using avoidance and escape strategies. Research on 198 first-year university 

students in Yogyakarta during the pandemic showed that academic stress negatively 

predicted psychological well-being, whereas coping strategies positively predicted 

psychological well-being (Pratiwi et al., 2021). First-year students who could carry out 

effective coping strategies would have increased psychological well-being. A study of 1330 

Polish university students aged 18 to 30 found that maladaptive coping was the strongest 

negative predictor, whereas coping by positive reappraisals and coping by actions were 

positively significant but less predictive for the students' psychological well-being during 

the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (Guszkowska & Dąbrowska-Zimakowska, 

2022). In this study, maladaptive coping includes behavioral disengagement, self-blaming, 

denial, substance use, and venting. In comparison, coping by positive reappraisals were 

humor, acceptance, and positive reframing. In contrast, coping by actions were active 

coping, physical activity, planning, and doing something else. 

Studies on coping strategies' role in predicting college students' psychological well-

being in Indonesia and other countries were quite often conducted before the COVID-19 

pandemic (Abbas et al., 2020; Abdillah et al., 2021; Sagone & De Caroli, 2014). However, 

similar studies on college students during the pandemic were relatively few (Guszkowska & 

Dąbrowska-Zimakowska, 2022; Pratiwi et al., 2021). Pratiwi et al. (2021) showed that 

coping strategies could contribute as a predictor of psychological well-being in 

undergraduate students, especially freshmen, in Yogyakarta, but this study examined coping 

strategies as a whole.  
This study aimed to investigate the role of coping strategies classified into three types: 

problem-focused, emotion-focused, and dysfunctional coping strategies to predict 
psychological well-being in college students during the first wave of the COVID-19 
pandemic. This study also explored the problems experienced by students during the first 
wave of the pandemic. Previous studies showed gender differences in the use of coping 
strategies (Carver et al., 1989; Guszkowska & Dąbrowska-Zimakowska, 2022; Sagone & De 
Caroli, 2014). Therefore, this study examined the role of each coping strategy used by female 
and male students to predict their psychological well-being. 

Method 

Participants  

Participants in this study were 211 Indonesian college students (153 females and 58 males) 
aged 18 to 26 years. The determination of the total participants was obtained through the 

calculation of G*Power 3.1.9.7 (α error probability = .05; power (1-β error probability) = 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 151 

 

                         Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…)   

.95) and resulted in a minimum target of 197 participants. The inclusion criteria of this study 

were male and female students aged 18 to 30 actively participating in online lectures due to 

the pandemic. Data collection was carried out by distributing online questionnaires using 

google forms to undergraduate students via Line and Instagram in November 2020. 

Instruments 

The questionnaire in this study consisted of two scales, i.e., the Brief Cope Inventory and 

Psychological Well-Being Scale, and some additional questions regarding demographic 

data, such as gender, age, class, and students' residence during the pandemic. In addition, 

there was also a question about the problems experienced by students during the pandemic: 

"During this pandemic period, what problems made you stressed or burdened the most?" 

Students could answer this question according to the problems they subjectively experienced 

or perceived. They were allowed to choose more than one answer from the eleven available 

options, including 'Other' and 'None' (see Table 1). The 'Other' option was provided so that 

students could add their answers freely if they were having problems that were not included 

in the answer choices.  

Coping strategies were measured using the 28-item Brief COPE Inventory (Carver, 

1997) with a Likert scale model (1 = I haven't been doing this at all; 2 = I've been doing this 

a little bit; 3 = I've been doing this a medium amount; 4 = I've been doing this a lot). This 

scale consists of 14 subscales, each of which contains two items. Carver (1997) categorized 

14 subscales into three broad categories of coping strategies, e.g., emotion-focused, 

problem-focused, and dysfunctional coping strategies. Acceptance, the use of emotional 

support, humor, positive reframing, and religion are subscales categorized under emotion-

focused coping strategies. Active coping, planning and the use of instrumental support are 

subscales categorized in problem-focused coping strategies. The other six subscales, self-

distraction, behavioral disengagement, denial, substance use, self-blame, and venting, are 

categorized as dysfunctional coping strategies. The reliability coefficient (α) in the current 

sample for each dimension is .701 for dysfunctional coping, .680 for problem-focused 

coping, and .604 for emotion-focused coping without omitting any items. 
Psychological well-being was measured using a shortened version of the Psychological 

Well-Being Scale (Ryff et al., 2021). This short version of the scale consists of 18 items with 
a Likert scale model of 1-7 (1 = strongly agree; 2 = somewhat agree; 3 = a little agree; 4 = 
neither agree or disagree; 5 = a little disagree; 6 = somewhat disagree ; 7 = strongly disagree). 
This psychological well-being scale consists of six subscales with three items each. The 
subscales are autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations with 
others, purpose in life, and self-acceptance. Some items need to be reverse-scored. Cronbach's 
alpha for the current sample is .821 after dropping one item (10) because it had a negative 
discrimination index. 

 

Data Analysis 
The data collected was then analyzed. Multiple regression analysis was applied to analyze the 
data using SPSS (Version 25; IBM Corp. 2016). 

Results 

In this study sample, the mean age of the participants was 20 years (SD = 1.32). Most 

participants were female students (72.5%) from the 2017 intake year (32.7%) and lived at 

their parent's house during the pandemic (88.2%). Based on Table 1, the most frequently 

reported problems that made students feel stressed or burdened during the pandemic were 

many difficult tasks to do, lack of time and discipline, difficulty in understanding lecture 



152   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…) 

material, inability to meet friends, and declining mental health conditions, and financial 

situation. Most of these problems were related to academic matters. 
 
Table 1 
Characteristics of Participants 

Characteristics 

Female Male Total 

N 

(153) 
% (72.5) N (58) % (27.5) N (211) % 

Age (years)       

18 17 11.1 5 8.6 22 10.4 

19 50 32.7 14 24.1 64 30.3 

20 26 17.0 17 29.3 43 20.4 

21 43 28.1 17 29.3 60 28.4 

22 15 9.8 2 3.4 17 8.1 

23 2 1.3 1 1.7 3 1.4 

25 0 0 1 1.7 1 0.5 

26 0 0 1 1.7 1 0.5 

   

Intake year   

2016 2 1.3 2 3.4 4 1.9 

2017 54 35.3 15 25.9 69 32.7 

2018 31 20.3 16 27.6 47 22.3 

2019 47 30.7 20 34.5 67 31.8 

2020 19 12.4 5 8.6 24 11.4 

   

Where to stay during the pandemic   

At home with family 136 88.9 50 86.2 186 88.2 

At a relative's house 4 2.6 1 1.7 5 2.4 

Boarding house 10 6.5 6 10.3 16 7.6 

Other 3 2.0 1 1.7 4 1.9 

   

 

Problems during the pandemic 

  

Many difficult tasks to do 119 77.8 44 75.9 163 77.3 

Lack of time and discipline 103 67.3 33 56.9 136 64.5 

Difficulty in understanding lecture 

material 
96 62.7 34 58.6 130 61.6 

Unable to meet friends 90 58.8 35 60.3 125 59.2 

Declining mental health conditions 72 47.1 30 51.7 102 48.3 

Financial condition 70 45.8 28 48.3 98 46.4 

Declining grades 44 28.8 15 25.9 59 28.0 

Declining physical health conditions 31 20.3 10 17.2 41 19.4 

Worsening relationship with family 23 15.0 7 12.1 30 14.2 

Other 7 4.6 3 5.2 10 4.7 

None 1 0.7 0 0 1 0.5 

 

The Role of Coping Strategy Dimensions on Psychological Well-Being  

The regression analysis in Table 2 examined the effect of each coping strategy dimension on 

psychological well-being in total participants, female participants, and male participants. In 

total participants, problem-focused coping strategies showed a significant positive effect (β 

= .387, p = .001), while dysfunctional coping strategies had a significant negative effect (β 

= -.285, p = .001) on psychological well-being.  

In female participants, problem-focused coping strategies also showed a significant 

positive effect (β = .376, p = .001), whereas the effect of dysfunctional coping strategies on 

psychological well-being was negatively significant (β = - .337, p = .001). Emotion-focused 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 153 

 

                         Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…)   

coping strategies did not show significant effects on psychological well-being, both in total 

(β = .114, p = .129) and female participants (β = .135, p = .115). Slightly different in male 

participants, only problem-focused coping strategies showed a significant positive effect (β 

= .430, p = .008) on psychological well-being, while the effect of dysfunctional coping 

strategies (β = -.165 p = .171) and emotion-focused coping strategies (β = .058, p = .711) 

were not significant.  
 

Table 2 

Regression Analysis of Each Dimension of Coping Strategies on Psychological Well-being  

Participants Predictors 
Standardized 

Coefficients Beta (β) 
t Sig. R 

R 
Square 

F 
(Sig.) 

Total PCS .387  5.189 .001** .545 .297 29.154 

(.001**) DCS -.285 -4.883 .001** 

ECS .114  1.524    .129 

Female 

students 

PCS .376  4.421 .001** .576 .332 24.633 

(.001**) DCS -.337 -5.028 .001** 

ECS .135  1.584    .115 

Male students PCS .430  2.771 .008** .496 .246 5.888 

(.001**) DCS -.165 -1.387    .171 

ECS .058    .372    .711 

Note: Dependent variable: Psychological well-being; PCS = Problem-focused coping strategies; DCS = 

Dysfunctional coping strategies; ECS = Emotion-focused coping strategies 
*   p < .05  
** p < .01  

 
The Role of Problem-Focused and Dysfunctional Coping Strategies on Psychological 
Well-Being  

The regression analysis in Table 3 showed the effect of each problem-focused coping 

strategy, such as planning, the use of instrumental support, and active coping, on the 

psychological well-being of total participants, female participants, and male participants. 

The results showed that in total participants, only planning (β = .309, p = .001) and the use 

of instrumental support (β = .173, p = .007) had significant positive effects on psychological 

well-being, while the effect of active coping was not significant (β = .136, p = .064).  

In female college students, planning and the use of instrumental support also 

significantly affected psychological well-being. Planning (β = .342, p = .001) and the use of 

instrumental support (β = .188, p = .015) showed significant positive effects, whereas active 

coping had no significant effect (β = .082, p = .331) on psychological well-being. Using the 

enter method, none of the problem-focused coping strategies showed a significant effect 

among male participants. However, using the stepwise method, active coping had a 

significant positive effect (β = .424, p = .001) on male college students' psychological well-

being (see Table 4). 

Table 3 also shows the regression analysis of the effect of each dysfunctional coping 

strategy. Results for total participants showed that only behavioral disengagement, denial, 

and venting affected psychological well-being significantly. Behavioral disengagement (β = 

-.321, p = .001) and denial (β = -.153, p = .031) showed significant negative effects, whereas 

venting had a significant positive effect (β = .182, p = .005) on psychological well-being.   

In female participants, initially, when using the enter method, only behavioral 

disengagement (β = -.331, p = .001) showed a significant negative effect, whereas venting 

(β = .169, p = .026) showed a positively significant effect on psychological well-being. 

However, further stepwise testing (Table 4) showed that denial was also negatively affected. 

 



154   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…) 

Table 3 

Regression Analysis of Each Problem-Focused and Dysfunctional Coping Strategy on 

Psychological Well-being 

Participants Predictors 
Standardized 

Coefficients Beta (β) 
t Sig. R 

R 
Square 

F 
(Sig.) 

Problem-focused coping 

Total P .309 4.282 .001** .471 .222 19.722 

(.001**) UIS .173 2.717 .007** 

AC .136 1.861 .064 

Female 

students 

P .342 4.146 .001** .477 .228 14.642 

(.001**) UIS .188 2.468 .015* 

AC .082   .976 .331 

Male 

students 

P .198 1.296 .200 .477 .227 5.300 

(.003**) UIS .155 1.281 .206 

AC .278 1.807 .076 

 

Dysfunctional coping 

Total SD   .028     .442 .659 .472 .223 9.749 

(.001**)  BD -.321 -4.289 .001** 

 D -.153 -2.177 .031* 

 SU -.004   -.056 .956 

 SB -.090 -1.217 .225 

 V   .182  2.826 .005** 

Female 

students 

SD   .026    .347 .729 .498 .248 8.009 

(.001**) BD -.331 -3.759 .001** 

D -.153 -1.839 .068 

SU -.029   -.376 .708 

SB -.102 -1.143 .255 

V   .169   2.246 .026* 

Note: Dependent variable: Psychological well-being; P = Planning; UIS = Use of instrumental support; AC = 

Active coping; SD = Self-distraction; BD = Behavioral disengagement; D = Denial; SU = Substance use; SB 

= Self-blame; V = Venting 
*   p < .05  
** p < .01  
 

 

Effective Contribution of Significant Coping Strategies to Psychological Well-Being 

Table 4 illustrates the coefficient of determination of coping strategies that significantly 

affected psychological well-being for total, female, and male participants. The coping 

strategy with the largest coefficient of determination on psychological well-being in total 

participants was the problem-focused coping strategy (R2 = 20.9%), followed by the 

dysfunctional coping strategy (R2 = 8.0%). Planning (R2 = 17.3%) was the largest problem-

focused coping strategy contributing to all participants' psychological well-being, followed 

by instrumental support (R2 = 3.6%). The largest contribution of dysfunctional coping 

strategies came from behavioral disengagement (R2 = 16.9%), followed by venting (R2 = 

2.6%) and denial (R2 = 2.2%). 

In female participants, the largest coefficient of determination on psychological well-

being also came from problem-focused coping strategies (R2 = 20.6%), followed by 

dysfunctional coping strategies (R2 = 11.4%). The largest contribution of the problem-

focused coping strategy to psychological well-being in female students came from planning 

(R2 = 18.3%), followed by the use of instrumental support (R2 = 3.9%). Behavioral 

disengagement (R2 = 19.2%) was the largest dysfunctional coping strategies which 

contributed to psychological well-being, followed by denial (R2 = 2.7%) and venting (R2 = 

2.2%). Similarly, the problem-focused coping strategy (R2 = 21.9%) showed the largest 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 155 

 

                         Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…)   

contribution to psychological well-being in male participants, with the largest contribution 

coming from active coping (R2 = 18%). 

 

Table 4 

The Coefficient of Determination of Coping Strategies on Psychological Well-being  

Model 
Summary 

Total Female Students Male Students 

R 
Square 

β p 
R 

Square 
β p 

R 
Square 

β p 

PCS .209 .458 .001** .206 .458 .001** .219 .468 .001** 

DCS .080 -.282 .001** .114 -.338 .001** - - - 

P .173 .376 .001** .183 .377 .001** - - - 

UIS .036 .194 .002** .039 .205 .007** - - - 

AC - - - - - - .180 .424 .001** 

BD .169 -.358 .001** .192 -.376 .001** - - - 

V .026 .174 .006** .022 .148   .041* - - - 

D .022 -.165   .016* .027 -.179   .024* - - - 

Note: Dependent variable: Psychological well-being; PCS = Problem-focused coping strategies; DCS = 

Dysfunctional coping strategies; P = Planning; UIS = Use of instrumental support; AC = Active coping; BD = 

Behavioral disengagement; V = Venting; D = Denial  
*   p < .05  
** p < .01  

Discussion 

This research aimed to examine the role of problem-focused, emotion-focused, and 

dysfunctional coping strategies in predicting college students' psychological well-being 

during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to this research findings, only 

problem-focused and dysfunctional coping strategies significantly predicted college 

students' psychological well-being. In contrast, emotion-focused coping strategies did not 

play a significant role. The problem-focused coping strategy contributed the most to total 

college students' psychological well-being, followed by the dysfunctional coping strategy. 

Using problem-focused coping strategies could significantly predict improved 

psychological well-being in total college students, female students, and male students. 

Problem-focused coping strategies aim to solve problems or do something to change the 

source of stress (Carver, 1997; Carver et al., 1989). College students who used these coping 

strategies would be able to adapt and overcome various problems encountered during the 

first wave of the pandemic and, in turn, have better psychological well-being. The study 

result was in line with previous research. First-year students in Yogyakarta who could carry 

out more effective coping strategies would have more positive psychological well-being 

when adapting to online learning models during the pandemic (Pratiwi et al., 2021). 

However, Pratiwi et al. (2021) did not divide coping strategies based on three categories as 

applied in this study. Guszkowska and Dąbrowska-Zimakowska (2022) also mentioned that 

coping by actions was one of the positive predictors of college students' psychological well-

being during the second pandemic wave. 

Findings on the dimensions of problem-focused coping strategies showed that only 

planning and the use of instrumental support significantly predicted increased psychological 

well-being in total college students and female students. In contrast, active coping had no 

significant effect. On the other hand, active coping was the only problem-focused coping 

strategy that significantly predicted improvement in the psychological well-being of male 

college students. Guszkowska and Dąbrowska-Zimakowska (2022) discovered that during 

the second wave of the pandemic, female students were more likely to use several strategies, 

including seeking emotional and instrumental support (asking for advice, help, or 



156   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…) 

information from others) and planning (thinking about how to deal with difficult situations). 

A study before the pandemic also found that female students used coping strategies that 

focused more on seeking support from other people and resources than male students 

(Sagone & De Caroli, 2014). However, neither Guszkowska and Dąbrowska-Zimakowska 

(2022) nor Sagone and De Caroli (2014) examined the role of each problem-focused coping 

strategy on psychological well-being in female and male college students. Thus, this finding 

extends previous research findings regarding the types of problem-focused coping strategies 

that increase psychological well-being in male and female students. In this study, we found 

that planning was a problem-focused coping strategy that highly contributed to total college 

and female students' psychological well-being, followed by instrumental support. On the 

other hand, active coping significantly contributed to psychological well-being in male 

college students. 

Dysfunctional coping strategies negatively affected the psychological well-being of 

total college students and female students, but not male students. This finding showed that 

dysfunctional coping strategies could predict decreased psychological well-being in total 

students and female students. Dysfunctional coping strategies in this study include self-

distraction, behavioral disengagement, denial, substance use, self-blame, and venting 

(Carver, 1997; Carver et al., 1989). The finding aligns with a previous study that discovered 

maladaptive coping was the strongest negative predictor of college students' psychological 

well-being during the second pandemic wave (Guszkowska & Dąbrowska-Zimakowska, 

2022). Nonetheless, Guszkowska and Dąbrowska-Zimakowska (2022) did not investigate 

the role of coping strategies based on gender differences in predicting psychological well-

being as this study did. 

The role of dysfunctional coping strategy dimensions on psychological well-being will 

only be discussed in total college students and female students because dysfunctional coping 

strategies did not significantly predict psychological well-being in male students. Only 

behavioral disengagement, denial, and venting were significant predictors of psychological 

well-being both in total college and female students. Behavioral disengagement contributed 

the most to dysfunctional coping strategies in both total and female students, followed by 

venting and denial. Guszkowska and Dąbrowska-Zimakowska (2022) discovered that during 

the second wave of the pandemic, female students used several strategies more frequently, 

including venting (expressing negative emotions), and doing something else, denial, and 

behavioral release (refusing to deal with stress actively). Previous research also found a 

greater tendency to focus on and vent emotions among women than men (Carver et al., 

1989). Behavioral disengagement and denial significantly negatively affected this study, 

predicting lower psychological well-being. Venting, on the other hand, was discovered to 

play a significant role in predicting improved psychological well-being in both total college 

students and female students. The research findings differ slightly from those of Guszkowska 

and Dąbrowska-Zimakowska (2022). They showed that frequent use of behavioral 

disengagement, venting, and denial were negatively correlated with psychological well-

being. Focusing and venting emotions is a dysfunctional coping strategy because individuals 

will be fixated on negative emotions for a long time, which can exacerbate suffering (Carver 

et al., 1989). However, during the first wave of the pandemic, college students were required 

to spend most of their time at home. Therefore, limited opportunities to interact directly with 

friends may have made venting as a cathartic tool that can improve female students' 

psychological well-being. 

During the first wave of the pandemic, emotion-focused coping strategies had no 

significant impact on the psychological well-being of all college students, female or male 

students. In this study, emotion-focused coping strategies included humor, acceptance, 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 157 

 

                         Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…)   

positive reframing, the use of emotional support, and religion (Carver, 1997; Carver et al., 

1989). During the second wave of the pandemic, Guszkowska and Dąbrowska-Zimakowska 

(2022) discovered coping through positive reappraisal, which included humor, acceptance, 

and positive reframing, played a significant role in predicting increased psychological well-

being in college students, whereas coping through seeking support, including instrumental 

and emotional support and turning to religion, did not affect. The gap in the results of these 

two studies could be attributed to the different conditions that college students face. Students 

were required to quickly adapt to various changes related to the implementation of online 

learning during the first wave of the pandemic, so they had to make direct efforts to take 

online lectures and do college assignments. As a result, problem-focused coping strategies 

played a larger role in college students' psychological well-being than emotion-focused 

coping strategies. This finding was in contrast to the second wave of the pandemic, when 

students may become more familiar with and adapt to online learning, using emotion-

focused coping strategies like humor, acceptance, and positive reframing more likely to 

improve psychological well-being. 

This study discovered some academic-related issues that mostly caused students to 

stress or burden during the first wave of the pandemic. Most college students reported having 

many difficult tasks to do, a lack of time discipline, and difficulty understanding lecture 

materials, which was consistent with previous research (Hasanah et al., 2020; Maqableh & 

Alia, 2021). This condition was also related to a lack of opportunities to meet with their 

lecturers and college friends to discuss lecture materials or tasks. Transitioning from offline 

or physical classes to online classes affects time management and students' learning-life 

balance, resulting in dissatisfaction among most students (Maqableh & Alia, 2021). These 

problems became apparent as more students lived with their families and had obligations 

other than distance learning. Academic affairs are real and objective, so using problem-

focused coping strategies, such as planning and instrumental support by female students and 

active coping by male students, were quite effective in improving their psychological well-

being.  

The limitation of this study lies in the lack of balance between female and male student 

participants. During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, data could only be collected 

online using a google form distributed via Line and Instagram. So the data obtained was 

determined mainly by the willingness of college students who use social media to fill out 

online questionnaires, most of whom were female college students. As a result, the findings 

of this study must be more carefully generalized, particularly for male students. Further 

research can be suggested to explore coping strategies and psychological well-being in 

college students during the transition from pandemic to endemic COVID-19. College 

students also need the ability to adapt from online learning that has been carried out for 

approximately two years to face-to-face learning. Therefore, it will be interesting to examine 

the coping strategies used by male and female students and their role in psychological well-

being during the transition period. 

Conclusion 

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, only problem-focused and dysfunctional 

coping strategies were significant predictors of college students' psychological well-being. 

Problem-focused coping strategies predicted increased psychological well-being in male and 

female college students. Planning and using instrumental support predicted female students' 

psychological well-being, whereas active coping predicted male students' psychological 

well-being. Dysfunctional coping strategies only significantly predicted psychological well-

being in total college students and female students. In total college and female students, only 



158   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…) 

behavioral disengagement, denial, and venting were significant predictors of psychological 

well-being. Behavioral disengagement and denial were associated with lower psychological 

well-being, whereas venting was associated with higher psychological well-being. 

Therefore, understanding the different coping strategies used by female and male students is 

needed to enhance college students' psychological well-being.  

Acknowledgment 

This article was presented online in the Student Conference Faculty of Psychology, 

Universitas Surabaya, 2020.  

Declarations  

Author contribution. The first author compiles research designs, collects data, conducts 

theoretical studies, and compiles research drafts. The second author is the corresponding 

author, doing literature reviews, analyzing and interpreting data, performing translation, and 

proofreading. The third  and fourth authors contribute to compiling research questionnaires 

and collecting data 
Funding statement. This research was partially funded by the student conference committee 
and partly by the author independently. 
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest. 
Additional information. No additional information is available for this paper. 
 

References 
 

Abbas, A., Eliyana, A., Ekowati, D., Saud, M., Raza, A., & Wardani, R. (2020). Data set on 

coping strategies in the digital age: The role of psychological well-being and social 

capital among university students in Java Timor, Surabaya, Indonesia. Data in Brief, 

30, 105583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.105583. 

Abdillah, M., Prihartanti, N., & Purwandari, E. (2021). Model hubungan religiositas dan 

dukungan sosial dengan kesejahteraan psikologis mahasiswa melalui mediasi strategi 

koping [The relationship model of religiosity and social support with students’ 

psychological well-being through the mediation of coping str. Aspirasi: Jurnal 

Masalah-Masalah Sosial, 12(2), 139–155. 

Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: Consider 

the brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4(1), 92–100. 

https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6. 

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, K. J. (1989). Assessing Coping Strategies: A 

Theoretically Based Approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 

267–283. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.2.267. 

Dodd, R. H., Dadaczynski, K., Okan, O., McCaffery, K. J., & Pickles, K. (2021). 

Psychological wellbeing and academic experience of university students in Australia 

during COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public 

Health, 18(3), 866. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18030866. 

Ebrahim, A. H., Dhahi, A., Husain, M. A., & Jahrami, H. (2022). The psychological well-

being of university students amidst COVID-19 pandemic: Scoping review, systematic 

review and meta-analysis. Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal, 22(2), 179–197. 

https://doi.org/10.18295/squmj.6.2021.081. 

Eva, N., Hidayah, N., & Shanti, P. (2020). Model kesejateraan psikologis mahasiswa 

Indonesia dan Malaysia [Model of psychological wellbeing among Indonesian and 

Malaysian university students] [Monograph]. In M. S. Dr. Tutut Chusniyah (Ed.). 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.105583
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.2.267
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18030866
https://doi.org/10.18295/squmj.6.2021.081


Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 159 

 

                         Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…)   

Fakultas Pendidikan Psikologi Universitas Negeri Malang. 

Gunawan, A., & Bintari, D. R. (2021). Kesejahteraan psikologis, stres, dan regulasi emosi 

pada mahasiwa baru selama pandemi COVID-19 [Psychological well-being, stres and 

emotion regulation among first year university students during COVID-19 pandemic]. 

Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengukuran Psikologi, 20(1), 51–64. 

https://doi.org/10.21009/JPPP.101.07. 

Guszkowska, M., & Dąbrowska-Zimakowska, A. (2022). Coping with stress during the 

second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic by Polish university students: Strategies, 

structure, and relation to psychological well-being. Psychology Research and Behavior 

Management, 15, 339–352. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S345648. 

Harahap, A. C. P., Harahap, D. P., & Harahap, S. R. (2020). Analisis tingkat stres akademik 

pada mahasiswa selama pembelajaran jarak jauh di masa Covid-19 [Analysis of 

academic stress level among university students during distance learning in Covid-19 

period]. Biblio Couns : Jurnal Kajian Konseling Dan Pendidikan, 3(1), 10–14. 

https://doi.org/10.30596/bibliocouns.v3i1.4804. 

Hasanah, U., Ludiana, Immawati, & PH, L. (2020). Gambaran psikologis mahasiswa dalam 

proses pembelajaran selama pandemi COVID-19 [Psychological description of 

students in the learning process during pandemic COVID-19]. Jurnal Keperawatan 

Jiwa, 8(3), 299–306. https://doi.org/10.26714/jkj.8.3.2020.299-306. 

Husky, M. M., Kovess-Masfety, V., & Swendsen, J. D. (2020). Stress and anxiety among 

university students in France during Covid-19 mandatory confinement. Comprehensive 

Psychiatry, 102, 152191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2020.152191. 

Maqableh, M., & Alia, M. (2021). Evaluation online learning of undergraduate students 

under lockdown amidst COVID-19 pandemic: The online learning experience and 

students’ satisfaction. Children and Youth Services Review, 128, 106160. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106160. 

NurCita, B., & Susantiningsih, T. (2021). Dampak pembelajaran jarak jauh dan physical 

distancing pada tingkat kecemasan mahasiswa [The impact of distance learning and 

physical distancing on anxiety level among university students]. Journal of Borneo 

Holistic Health, 3(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.35334/borticalth.v3i1.1389. 

Pratiwi, R., Rahmatulloh, A. R., Sari, D. S., & Nihayah, M. (2021). Peran stress akademik 

dan strategi coping pada psychological well being mahasiswa baru di masa pandemi 

[The role of academic stress and coping strategy on psychological well being among 

fist year university students during pandemic period]. Mempersiapkan Generasi Digital 

Yang Berwatak Sociopreneur: Kreatif, Inisiatif, Dan Peduli Di Era Society 5.0, 230–

242. http://ejurnal.mercubuana-

yogya.ac.id/index.php/ProsidingSemNasPsikologi/article/view/2017. 

Ratunuman, R. A., David, L. E. V., & Opod, H. (2021). Dampak psikologis pandemi 

COVID-19 pada mahasiswa [The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic among 

university students]. Jurnal Biomedik (Jbm), 13(2), 227–232. 

https://doi.org/10.35790/jbm.13.2.2021.31836. 

Ryff, C. D., Almeida, D. M., Ayanian, J. Z., Carr, D. S., Cleary, P. D., Coe, C., Davidson, 

R. J., Krueger, R. F., Lachman, M. E., Marks, N. F., Mroczek, D. K., Seeman, T. E., 

Seltzer, M. M., Singer, B. H., Sloan, R. P., Tun, P. A., Weinstein, M., & Williams, D. 

R. (2021). Midlife in the United States (MIDUS 2), 2004-2006. ICPSR04652-v8. Inter-

university Consortium for Political and Social Research. 

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04652.v8. 

Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. 

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727. 

https://doi.org/10.21009/JPPP.101.07
https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S345648
https://doi.org/10.30596/bibliocouns.v3i1.4804
https://doi.org/10.26714/jkj.8.3.2020.299-306
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2020.152191
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106160
https://doi.org/10.35334/borticalth.v3i1.1389
http://ejurnal.mercubuana-yogya.ac.id/index.php/ProsidingSemNasPsikologi/article/view/2017
http://ejurnal.mercubuana-yogya.ac.id/index.php/ProsidingSemNasPsikologi/article/view/2017
https://doi.org/10.35790/jbm.13.2.2021.31836
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04652.v8


160   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Angelica et.al. (Coping strategies to predict the psychological well-being of college students…) 

https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719. 

Sagone, E., & De Caroli, M. E. (2014). A correlational study on dispositional resilience, 

psychological well-being, and coping strategies in university students. American 

Journal of Educational Research, 2(7), 463–471. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-

2-7-5. 

Villani, L., Pastorino, R., Molinari, E., Anelli, F., Ricciardi, W., Grafficna, G., & Boccia, S. 

(2021). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological well-being of students in 

an Italian university: A web-based cross-sectional survey. Global Health 17, 39. 

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-021-00680-w. 
 

 
 

  

https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719
https://doi.org/10.12691/education-2-7-5
https://doi.org/10.12691/education-2-7-5
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-021-00680-w

