A Cross-Sectional Study on Mental Health of School Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic in India
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Magnitude of School Student Enrolment in India, Computer Facilities and Impact
1.2. Research Objectives
1.3. Contributions of the Paper
- (a)
- Within our best possible search, we noticed scanty work related to the mental health of school children. In this regard, our study puts forth a new perspective for the educational leaders, parents and policymakers.
- (b)
- The present paper provides a first of its kind integrated framework of empirical multivariate analysis and PFS based FFA, grounded on a psychological perspective.
- (c)
- A new framework of PF-FFA is proposed in the broad domain of change management.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Stage 1
2.1.1. Study Design
2.1.2. Sample
2.1.3. Study Tools
- Did you attend online classes offered by your school?
- Did you face an internet connectivity problem?
- How did you find the online mode of teaching?
- Could you clarify your doubts, ask questions and get the answers?
- (a)
- Depression Scale:
- (b)
- Anxiety Scale:
2.1.4. Data Collection and Analysis
2.2. Stage 2
2.2.1. Description of the FGs
- -
- FG 1: The representative sample consists of 20 students belonging to AA category.
- -
- FG 2: In this group 10 students from SA category are included.
- -
- FG 3: 05 (five) students from the VRA category.
2.2.2. Identification of the Factor
2.2.3. Force Field Analysis (FFA)
2.2.4. PFS
2.2.5. LBWA Method
2.2.6. The Proposed PF-FFA Method
- Step 1. Formulation of the linguistic rating matrix
- Step 2. Formulation of the PF factor weight matrix
- Step 3. Calculation of the actual scores
- Step 4. Determination of weights of the factors
- Step 5. Finding out the aggregated scores of the facilitating and prohibiting factors
- Step 6. Comparison of aggregated scores of the facilitating and prohibiting factors
3. Results
3.1. Stage 1
3.1.1. Description of the Sample
3.1.2. Description of Anxiety and Depression
3.1.3. Levels of Anxiety among Students during COVID-19 Lockdown
3.1.4. Levels of Depression among Students during COVID-19 Lockdown
3.1.5. Association of Anxiety and Depression with Demographic Variables
3.2. Stage 2
3.2.1. Analysis of the Responses of the FG-1 (i.e., AA Category)
3.2.2. Analysis of the Responses of the FG-2 (i.e., SA Category)
3.2.3. Analysis of the Responses of the FG-3 (i.e., VRA Category)
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Preliminaries of PFS
Appendix A.1. Definition
Appendix A.2. Properties
Appendix A.3. Basic Operations
Appendix A.4. Defuzzification
Appendix A.5. Score and Accuracy Functions
Appendix A.6. Absolute and Actual Score
Appendix A.7. Aggregation Operator
Appendix B. Computational Steps of LBWA Algorithm
References
- Duggal, D.; Sacks-Zimmerman, A.; Liberta, T. The Impact of Hope and Resilience on Multiple Factors in Neurosurgical Patients. Cureus 2016, 8, e849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lee, J. Mental health effects of school closures during COVID-19. Lancet Child Adolesc. Health 2020, 4, 421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qin, Z.; Shi, L.; Xue, Y.; Lin, H.; Zhang, J.; Liang, P.; Lu, Z.; Wu, M.; Chen, Y.; Zheng, X.; et al. Prevalence and Risk Factors Associated with Self-reported Psychological Distress Among Children and Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China. JAMA Netw. Open 2021, 4, e2035487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Qiu, J.; Shen, B.; Zhao, M.; Wang, Z.; Xie, B.; Xu, Y. A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epidemic: Implications and policy recommendations. Gen. Psychiatry 2020, 33, e100213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Zhou, X. Managing psychological distress in children and adolescents following the COVID-19 epidemic: A cooperative approach. Psychol. Trauma Theory Res. Pract. Policy 2020, 12, S76–S78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, S.-J.; Zhang, L.-G.; Wang, L.-L.; Guo, Z.-C.; Wang, J.-Q.; Chen, J.-C.; Liu, M.; Chen, X.; Chen, J.-X. Prevalence and socio-demographic correlates of psychological health problems in Chinese adolescents during the outbreak of COVID-19. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2020, 29, 749–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dangi, R.R.; George, M. Psychological Perception of Students during COVID-19 Outbreak in India. High Technol. Lett. 2020, 26, 142–144. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, L.; Jacob, L.; Trott, M.; Yakkundi, A.; Butler, L.; Barnett, Y.; Armstrong, N.C.; McDermott, D.; Schuch, F.; Meyer, J.; et al. The association between screen time and mental health during COVID-19: A cross sectional study. Psychiatry Res. 2020, 292, 113333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNICEF. India Case Study: Situation Analysis on the Effects of and Responses to COVID-19 on the Education Sector in Asia. 2021. Available online: https://www.unicef.org/rosa/media/16511/file/India%20Case%20Study.pdf (accessed on 10 December 2021).
- Vyas, A. Status Report: Government and Private Schools During COVID-19. Oxfam India 2020, 4, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Jena, P.K. Impact of pandemic COVID-19 on education in India. Int. J. Curr. Res. 2020, 12, 12582–12586. [Google Scholar]
- Mahapatra, A.; Sharma, P. Education in times of COVID-19 pandemic: Academic stress and its psychosocial impact on children and adolescents in India. Int. J. Soc. Psychiatry 2020, 67, 397–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- UDISE. Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE) Report 2019–2020, Provisional. 2021. Available online: https://udiseplus.gov.in/#/home (accessed on 22 November 2021).
- The Hindu. In Academic Year 2019–2020, only 22% Indian Schools Had Internet. The Hindu, Chennai, 2 July 2021. Available online: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/in-academic-year-2019-20-only-22-indian-schools-had-internet/article35082011.ece (accessed on 22 December 2021).
- Samuel, S.; Saksena, K. The Effect of COVID-19 Second Wave on Primary Education, Education Times, Chennai India. 2021, p. 2. Available online: https://www.educationtimes.com/article/school-guide/84117353/portal-exclusive-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-impact-of-covid-19-second-wave-on-childrens-education (accessed on 2 January 2022).
- Dangi, R.R.; Dewett, P.; Joshi, P. Stress level and coping strategies among youth during coronavirus disease lockdown in INDIA. SSRN Electron. J. 2020, 8, 605–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaudin, J.M., Jr.; Pollane, L. Social networks, stress and child abuse. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 1983, 5, 91–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hefner, J.; Eisenberg, D. Social support and mental health among college students. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 2009, 79, 491–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grover, S.; Sahoo, S.; Mehra, A.; Avasthi, A.; Tripathi, A.; Subramanyan, A.; Pattojoshi, A.; Rao, G.P.; Saha, G.; Mishra, K.; et al. Psychological impact of COVID-19 lockdown: An online survey from India. Indian J. Psychiatry 2020, 62, 354–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liang, L.; Ren, H.; Cao, R.; Hu, Y.; Qin, Z.; Li, C.; Mei, S. The Effect of COVID-19 on Youth Mental Health. Psychiatr. Q. 2020, 91, 841–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Torales, J.; O’Higgins, M.; Castaldelli-Maia, J.M.; Ventriglio, A. The outbreak of COVID-19 coronavirus and its impact on global mental health. Int. J. Soc. Psychiatry 2020, 66, 317–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hawes, M.T.; Szenczy, A.K.; Klein, D.N.; Hajcak, G.; Nelson, B.D. Increases in depression and anxiety symptoms in adolescents and young adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol. Med. 2021, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keskin, S.; Yurdugül, H. Factors affecting students’ preferences for online and blended learning: Motivational vs. cognitive. Eur. J. Open Distance E-Learn. 2019, 22, 72–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Neuhauser, C. Learning Style and Effectiveness of Online and Face-to-Face Instruction. Am. J. Distance Educ. 2002, 16, 99–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reblin, M.; Uchino, B.N. Social and emotional support and its implication for health. Curr. Opin. Psychiatry 2008, 21, 201–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Smart, K.L.; Cappel, J.J. Students’ Perceptions of Online Learning: A Comparative Study. J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res. 2006, 5, 201–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Thongsri, N.; Shen, L.; Bao, Y. Investigating factors affecting learner’s perception toward online learning: Evidence from ClassStart application in Thailand. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2019, 38, 1243–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Demuyakor, J. Coronavirus (COVID-19) and Online Learning in Higher Institutions of Education: A Survey of the Perceptions of Ghanaian International Students in China. Online J. Commun. Media Technol. 2020, 10, e202018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Chudzicka-Czupała, A.; Grabowski, D.; Pan, R.; Adamus, K.; Wan, X.; Hetnał, M.; Tan, Y.; Olszewska-Guizzo, A.; Xu, L.; et al. The Association Between Physical and Mental Health and Face Mask Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparison of Two Countries with Different Views and Practices. Front. Psychiatry 2020, 11, 569981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adnan, M.; Anwar, K. Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students’ perspectives. Online Submiss. 2020, 2, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agustina, P.Z.R.; Cheng, T.H. How students’ perspectives about online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic? Stud. Learn. Teach. 2020, 1, 133–139. [Google Scholar]
- Alawamleh, M.; Al-Twait, L.M.; Al-Saht, G.R. The effect of online learning on communication between instructors and students during COVID-19 pandemic. Asian Educ. Dev. Stud. 2020, 11, 380–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lewin, K. Field Theory in Social Science; Harper Row: London, UK, 1951. [Google Scholar]
- Baulcomb, J.S. Management of change through force field analysis. J. Nurs. Manag. 2003, 11, 275–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paquin, J.-P.; Koplyay, T. Force Field Analysis and Strategic Management: A Dynamic Approach. Eng. Manag. J. 2007, 19, 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hlalele, B.M. Application of the force-field technique to drought vulnerability analysis: A phenomenological approach. Jàmbá J. Disaster Risk Stud. 2019, 11, 589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Youssef, A.; Mostafa, A.M. Critical Decision-Making on Cloud Computing Adoption in Organizations Based on Augmented Force Field Analysis. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 167229–167239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mak, A.H.; Chang, R.C. The driving and restraining forces for environmental strategy adoption in the hotel Industry: A force field analysis approach. Tour. Manag. 2019, 73, 48–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shamsher, S.; Praba, T.; Sethuraman, K.R. The force field analysis of online learning. Asian J. Med. Health Sci. 2021, 4, 154–163. [Google Scholar]
- Ramos, P.N.; Enteria, M.L.B.; Norona, M.I. Readiness Model Development in the Adoption of Internet of Things (IoT) among Philippine Manufacturing SMEs Using Force Field Analysis Approach and Structural Equation Modelling. In Proceedings of the Second Asia Pacific International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Surakarta, Indonesia, 14–16 September 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Zhou, X.; Tu, H.; Tao, S. Some geometric aggregation operators based on picture fuzzy sets and their application in multiple attribute decision making. Ital. J. Pure Appl. Math 2017, 37, 477–492. [Google Scholar]
- Biswas, S.; Majumder, S.; Pamucar, D.; Dawn, S.K. An Extended LBWA Framework in Picture Fuzzy Environment Using Actual Score Measures Application in Social Enterprise Systems. Int. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2021, 17, 37–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, S.; Pamucar, D.; Chowdhury, P.; Kar, S. A New Decision Support Framework with Picture Fuzzy Information: Comparison of Video Conferencing Platforms for Higher Education in India. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2021, 2021, 2046097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duong, T.T.T.; Thao, N.X. A novel dissimilarity measure on picture fuzzy sets and its application in multi-criteria decision making. Soft Comput. 2021, 25, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gocer, F. A Novel Interval Value Extension of Picture Fuzzy Sets into Group Decision Making: An Approach to Support Supply Chain Sustainability in Catastrophic Disruptions. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 117080–117096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.J.; Kumam, P.; Deebani, W.; Kumam, W.; Shah, Z. Bi-parametric distance and similarity measures of picture fuzzy sets and their applications in medical diagnosis. Egypt. Inform. J. 2021, 22, 201–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmood, T.; Waqas, H.M.; Ali, Z.; Ullah, K.; Pamucar, D. Frank aggregation operators and analytic hierarchy process based on interval-valued picture fuzzy sets and their applications. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2021, 36, 7925–7962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tchier, F.; Ali, G.; Gulzar, M.; Pamučar, D.; Ghorai, G. A New Group Decision-Making Technique under Picture Fuzzy Soft Expert Information. Entropy 2021, 23, 1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cuong, B.C.; Kreinovich, V. Picture fuzzy sets. J. Comput. Sci. Cybern. 2014, 30, 409–420. [Google Scholar]
- Cuong, B.C.; Kreinovich, V. Picture Fuzzy Sets-a new concept for computational intelligence problems. In Proceedings of the 2013 Third World Congress on Information and Communication Technologies (WICT 2013), Hanoi, Vietnam, 15–18 December 2013; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Žižović, M.; Pamucar, D. New model for determining criteria weights: Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) model. Decis. Mak. Appl. Manag. Eng. 2019, 2, 126–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, S.; Pamucar, D. Facility Location Selection for B-Schools in Indian Context: A Multi-Criteria Group Decision Based Analysis. Axioms 2020, 9, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamucar, D.; Deveci, M.; Canıtez, F.; Lukovac, V. Selecting an airport ground access mode using novel fuzzy LBWA-WASPAS-H decision making model. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2020, 93, 103703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hristov, N.; Pamucar, D.; Amine, M.E. Application of a D Number based LBWA Model and an Interval MABAC Model in Selection of an Automatic Cannon for Integration into Combat Vehicles. Def. Sci. J. 2021, 71, 34–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Božanić, D.; Jurišić, D.; Erkić, D. LBWA–Z-MAIRCA model supporting decision making in the army. Oper. Res. Eng. Sci. Theory Appl. 2020, 3, 87–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Božanić, D.; Ranđelović, A.; Radovanović, M.; Tešić, D. A hybrid lbwa-ir-mairca multi-criteria decision-making model for determination of constructive elements of weapons. Facta Univ. Ser. Mech. Eng. 2020, 18, 399–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamučar, D.; Žižović, M.; Marinković, D.; Doljanica, D.; Jovanović, S.; Brzaković, P. Development of a Multi-Criteria Model for Sustainable Reorganization of a Healthcare System in an Emergency Situation Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deveci, M.; Özcan, E.; John, R.; Covrig, C.-F.; Pamucar, D. A study on offshore wind farm siting criteria using a novel interval-valued fuzzy-rough based Delphi method. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 270, 110916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ecer, F.; Pamucar, D.; Mardani, A.; Alrasheedi, M. Assessment of renewable energy resources using new interval rough number extension of the level based weight assessment and combinative distance-based assessment. Renew. Energy 2021, 170, 1156–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamučar, D.; Behzad, M.; Božanić, D.; Behzad, M. Decision making to support sustainable energy policies corresponding to agriculture sector: Case study in Iran’s Caspian Sea coastline. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 292, 125302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jovčić, S.; Simić, V.; Průša, P.; Dobrodolac, M. Picture Fuzzy ARAS Method for Freight Distribution Concept Selection. Symmetry 2020, 12, 1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamucar, D.; Torkayesh, A.E.; Biswas, S. Supplier selection in healthcare supply chain management during the COVID-19 pandemic: A novel fuzzy rough decision-making approach. Ann. Oper. Res. 2022, 1–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamučar, D.; Žižović, M.; Biswas, S.; Božanić, D. A new logarithm methodology of additive weights (lmaw) for multi-criteria decision-making: Application in logistics. Facta Univ. Series Mech. Eng. 2021, 19, 361–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, S.; Majumder, S.; Dawn, S.K. Comparing the Socioeconomic Development of G7 and BRICS Countries and Resilience to COVID-19: An Entropy–MARCOS Framework. Bus. Perspect. Res. 2021, 10, 286–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, S.; Pamucar, D.; Kar, S.; Sana, S.S. A New Integrated FUCOM–CODAS Framework with Fermatean Fuzzy Information for Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making. Symmetry 2021, 13, 2430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pramanik, P.K.D.; Biswas, S.; Pal, S.; Marinković, D.; Choudhury, P. A Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Resource Selection in Mobile Crowd Computing. Symmetry 2021, 13, 1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, S.; Anand, O.P. Logistics Competitiveness Index-Based Comparison of BRICS and G7 Countries: An Integrated PSI-PIV Approach. IUP J. Supply Chain. Manag. 2020, 17, 32–57. [Google Scholar]
- Biswas, S. Measuring performance of healthcare supply chains in India: A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. Decis. Making Appl. Manag. Eng. 2020, 3, 162–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butnaru, G.; Niță, V.; Anichiti, A.; Brînză, G. The Effectiveness of Online Education during COVID 19 Pandemic—A Comparative Analysis between the Perceptions of Academic Students and High School Students from Romania. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kroll, C. Towards a Sociology of Happiness: The Case of an Age Perspective on the Social Context of Well-Being. Sociol. Res. Online 2014, 19, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larsen, L.; Helland, M.S.; Holt, T. The impact of school closure and social isolation on children in vulnerable families during COVID-19: A focus on children’s reactions. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2021, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, J.; Horta, H.; Postiglione, G.A. Living in uncertainty: The COVID-19 pandemic and higher education in Hong Kong. Stud. High. Educ. 2021, 46, 107–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferren, M. Social and Emotional Supports for Educators during and after the Pandemic. 2021. Available online: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/social-emotional-supports-educators-pandemic/ (accessed on 14 June 2022).
- Labrague, L.J.; De los Santos, J.A.A.; Falguera, C. Social and Emotional Loneliness among College Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Predictive Role of Coping Behaviours, Social Support, and Personal Resilience. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.-G.; Shi, H.; Xu, D.-H.; Liu, H.-C. Picture Fuzzy Petri Nets for Knowledge Representation and Acquisition in Considering Conflicting Opinions. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Son, L.H. Measuring analogousness in picture fuzzy sets: From picture distance measures to picture association measures. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak. 2016, 16, 359–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Si, A.; Das, S.; Kar, S. An Approach to Rank Picture Fuzzy Numbers for Decision Making Problems. Decis. Making Appl. Manag. Eng. 2019, 2, 54–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, G. Picture fuzzy aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2017, 33, 713–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Facilitating Factors | Prohibiting Factors | ||
---|---|---|---|
S/L | Description of the Factor | S/L | Description of the Factor |
P1 | Less travelling | N1 | Lack of infrastructure |
P2 | Access to distant courses | N2 | Physical health issue |
P3 | Staying together with family | N3 | Difficulty in online learning |
P4 | Enjoy online class | N4 | Worry about Covid-19 |
P5 | Free time | N5 | Worry about future |
P6 | Enjoy online exam | N6 | Movement restriction |
Variable | N | (%) |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 150 | 54.9 |
Female | 123 | 45.1 |
Family Type | ||
Joint | 64 | 23.4 |
Single | 204 | 74.7 |
Staying with relative family | 05 | 1.8 |
Grade | ||
9th class | 66 | 24.2 |
10th class | 51 | 18.7 |
11th class | 60 | 22.0 |
12th class | 96 | 35.2 |
Age | ||
14 to 15 years | 134 | 49.1 |
16 to 18 years | 139 | 50.9 |
Siblings | ||
Only child | 88 | 32.2 |
1 sibling | 159 | 58.2 |
2 siblings and above | 26 | 9.5 |
Monthly income | ||
Less than 20,000 INR | 48 | 17.6 |
20,001 to 50,000 INR | 86 | 31.5 |
50,001 to 100,000 INR | 72 | 26.4 |
100,001 to 150,000 INR | 42 | 15.4 |
150,001 and above INR | 25 | 9.2 |
How did you find the online mode of teaching? | ||
Most effective | 09 | 3.3 |
Effective | 59 | 21.6 |
Moderately effective | 104 | 38.1 |
Not so effective | 67 | 24.5 |
Not at all effective | 34 | 12.5 |
Are you worried that you will catch COVID-19? | ||
Highly worried | 41 | 15.0 |
Worried | 50 | 18.3 |
Worried to some extent | 75 | 27.5 |
Not so worried | 54 | 19.8 |
Not at all worried | 53 | 19.4 |
Do you feel stressed from staying at home for a long period during COVID-19 pandemic? | ||
Highly stressed | 118 | 43.2 |
Stressed | 51 | 18.7 |
Moderately stressed | 46 | 16.8 |
Rarely stressed | 27 | 9.9 |
Not so stressed | 31 | 11.4 |
Are you worried about your future career? | ||
Highly worried | 119 | 43.6 |
Worried | 77 | 28.2 |
Worried to some extent | 39 | 14.3 |
Not so worried | 19 | 7.0 |
Not at all worried | 19 | 7.0 |
Do you get emotional support from your family when you need it? | ||
Always | 105 | 38.5 |
Most of the time | 66 | 24.2 |
Sometimes | 58 | 21.2 |
Rarely | 29 | 10.6 |
Never | 15 | 5.5 |
Do you have friends who extend support at times of any crisis or challenge? | ||
Always | 108 | 39.6 |
Most of the time | 52 | 19.0 |
Sometimes | 63 | 23.1 |
Rarely | 23 | 8.4 |
Never | 27 | 9.9 |
Mean | SD | Actual Score Range | Possible Score Range | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Anxiety | 8.05 | 4.10 | 0–18 | 0–18 |
Depression | 3.10 | 1.86 | 0–6 | 0–6 |
Level | Score Range | n | % |
---|---|---|---|
No anxiety | 0 | 6 | 2.2 |
Low anxiety | 1 to 6 | 103 | 37.7 |
Moderate anxiety | 7 to 12 | 128 | 46.9 |
High anxiety | 13 to 18 | 36 | 13.2 |
Total | 273 | 100 |
Level | Score Range | n | % |
---|---|---|---|
No depression | 0 | 34 | 12.5 |
Low depression | 1 to 2 | 69 | 25.3 |
Moderate depression | 3 to 4 | 95 | 34.8 |
High depression | 5 to 6 | 75 | 27.5 |
Total | 273 | 100 |
Anxiety | Depression | |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 7.82 (4.25) 1.04 | 2.96 (1.90) 1.34 |
Female | 8.32 (3.92) | 3.26 (1.80) |
Grade | ||
9th class | 7.55 (4.23) 0.66 | 2.48 (1.73) 4.15 ** |
10th class | 8.53 (4.64) | 2.94 (2.0) |
11th class | 8.31 (3.74) | 3.50 (1.84) |
12th class | 7.96 (3.95) | 3.34 (1.79) |
Do you feel stressed from staying at home for along period during COVID-19 pandemic? | ||
Highly stressed | 8.34 (4.56) 2.48 * | 3.52 (1.73) 8.10 *** |
Stressed | 9.06 (3.30) | 3.57 (1.81) |
Moderately stressed | 7.37 (3.64) | 2.83 (1.83) |
Rarely stressed | 7.81 (4.19) | 2.11 (1.76) |
Not so stressed | 6.45 (3.62) | 1.97 (1.74) |
How did you find the online mode of teaching? | ||
Most effective | 6.33 (5.31) 4.20 ** | 1.11 (1.26) 8.44 *** |
Effective | 6.92 (4.16) | 2.37 (1.82) |
Moderately effective | 8.04 (3.63) | 3.15 (1.77) |
Not so effective | 8.15 (3.53) | 3.42 (1.77) |
Not at all effective | 10.26 (5.25) | 4.06 (1.76) |
Do you get emotional support from your family when you need it? | ||
Always | 7.86 (4.51) 0.69 | 2.43 (1.78) 12.13 *** |
Most of the time | 7.76 (3.77) | 2.92 (1.74) |
Sometimes | 8.07 (3.39) | 3.53 (1.67) |
Rarely | 8.62 (4.35) | 3.97 (1.72) |
Never | 9.40 (4.73) | 5.13 (1.41) |
Do you have friends who extend support at times of any crisis or challenge? | ||
Always | 7.90 (4.42) 1.93 | 2.74 (1.91) 2.83 * |
Most of the time | 8.52 (3.66) | 3.44 (1.78) |
Sometimes | 7.49 (3.59) | 3.24 (1.77) |
Rarely | 7.17 (4.03) | 2.74 (1.79) |
Never | 9.74 (4.47) | 3.81 (1.82) |
Are you worried that you will catch COVID-19? | ||
Highly worried | 8.61 (4.21) 3.10 * | 3.22 (1.96) 1.36 |
Worried | 9.06 (4.47) | 3.30 (1.90) |
Worried to some extent | 7.88 (4.13) | 3.35 (1.66) |
Not so worried | 8.43 (3.69) | 2.72 (1.87) |
Not at all worried | 6.49 (3.68) | 2.83 (1.98) |
Are you worried about your future career? | ||
Highly worried | 9.09 (4.31) 5.66 *** | 3.62 (1.85) 6.62 *** |
Worried | 7.95 (3.61) | 3.06 (1.79) |
Moderately worried | 7.21 (3.99) | 2.54 (1.59) |
Rarely worried | 6.32 (3.11) | 2.11 (1.70) |
Not so worried | 5.32 (3.27) | 2.05 (1.87) |
Respondent | Facilitating Factors | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | |
R1 | Y | A | Y | A | Y | N |
R2 | Y | A | Y | N | Y | N |
R3 | Y | A | Y | Y | Y | A |
R4 | Y | A | Y | Y | Y | Y |
R5 | A | A | Y | Y | Y | A |
R6 | A | A | N | A | Y | Y |
R7 | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | A |
R8 | N | N | Y | Y | Y | A |
R9 | N | A | Y | Y | A | Y |
R10 | A | Y | N | A | N | Y |
R11 | Y | Y | A | N | N | Y |
R12 | Y | A | N | Y | Y | Y |
R13 | N | A | Y | Y | N | N |
R14 | N | A | A | A | Y | Y |
R15 | A | A | Y | Y | A | Y |
R16 | N | Y | N | Y | Y | A |
R17 | N | A | Y | Y | A | A |
R18 | N | Y | A | A | N | N |
R19 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | A |
R20 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
μ | 0.4 | 0.35 | 0.6 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.4 |
η | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.15 | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.35 |
ν | 0.4 | 0.05 | 0.25 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.25 |
Respondent | Prohibiting Factors | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | N4 | N5 | N6 | |
R1 | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y |
R2 | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y |
R3 | N | Y | Y | A | A | Y |
R4 | N | Y | N | N | A | A |
R5 | A | N | Y | A | A | Y |
R6 | Y | A | A | N | N | A |
R7 | Y | N | Y | Y | A | A |
R8 | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N |
R9 | N | N | Y | Y | A | N |
R10 | N | N | N | Y | N | A |
R11 | N | N | N | N | N | Y |
R12 | Y | N | Y | A | Y | N |
R13 | Y | N | Y | N | A | A |
R14 | Y | Y | Y | N | N | A |
R15 | N | Y | Y | A | A | N |
R16 | A | Y | N | A | A | N |
R17 | N | Y | N | N | N | A |
R18 | N | Y | N | Y | N | A |
R19 | N | N | N | N | A | N |
R20 | Y | Y | A | Y | N | Y |
μ | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.55 | 0.3 | 0.15 | 0.3 |
η | 0.1 | 0.05 | 0.1 | 0.25 | 0.45 | 0.4 |
ν | 0.5 | 0.45 | 0.35 | 0.45 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
Factors | PGD | NGD | Abs_Score | Act_Score | Weight | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P1 | 0.25 | 0.35 | 0.40 | 0.4364 | 0.1065 | 6 |
P2 | 0.30 | 0.00 | 0.70 | 0.5316 | 0.1538 | 4 |
P3 | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.75 | 0.8654 | 0.1730 | 3 |
P4 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.95 | 0.9828 | 0.2307 | 1 |
P5 | 0.00 | 0.15 | 0.85 | 0.9808 | 0.1977 | 2 |
P6 | 0.25 | 0.20 | 0.55 | 0.5156 | 0.1384 | 5 |
Σ = 1.000 |
Factors | PGD | NGD | Abs_Score | Act_Score | Weight | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | 0.15 | 0.20 | 0.65 | 0.7429 | 0.17300 | 3 |
N2 | 0.05 | 0.15 | 0.80 | 0.9697 | 0.19771 | 2 |
N3 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.95 | 1.0857 | 0.23066 | 1 |
N4 | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.60 | 0.5854 | 0.13840 | 5 |
N5 | 0.40 | 0.10 | 0.50 | 0.4082 | 0.10646 | 6 |
N6 | 0.25 | 0.00 | 0.75 | 0.6383 | 0.15377 | 4 |
Σ | 1.00000 |
Criteria | C4 | C5 | C3 | C2 | C6 | C1 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Level | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
Integer value | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 | |
Function | 1.000 | 0.857 | 0.750 | 0.667 | 0.600 | 0.462 | Σ |
Criteria weights | 0.2307 | 0.1977 | 0.1730 | 0.1538 | 0.1384 | 0.1065 | 1.00 |
Criteria | C3 | C2 | C1 | C6 | C4 | C5 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Level | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
Integer Value | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 | |
Function | 1.000 | 0.857 | 0.750 | 0.667 | 0.600 | 0.462 | Σ |
Criteria weights | 0.2307 | 0.1977 | 0.1730 | 0.1538 | 0.1384 | 0.1065 | 1.00 |
PFWA | μ | η | ν | π |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.55047 | 0.24214 | 0.15894 | 0.04845 | |
0.70525 |
PFWA | μ | η | ν | Π |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.41205 | 0.14377 | 0.40126 | 0.04292 | |
0.50562 |
Respondent | Facilitating Factors | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | |
R1 | Y | A | Y | Y | Y | A |
R2 | Y | N | Y | N | A | A |
R3 | N | A | Y | N | N | Y |
R4 | A | A | Y | Y | Y | A |
R5 | Y | Y | N | A | Y | N |
R6 | A | Y | A | Y | N | Y |
R7 | A | N | A | Y | A | Y |
R8 | Y | Y | Y | A | Y | Y |
R9 | N | A | Y | A | N | Y |
R10 | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | A |
μ | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
η | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.4 |
ν | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.1 |
Respondent | Prohibiting Factors | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | N4 | N5 | N6 | |
R1 | N | Y | Y | Y | A | Y |
R2 | N | Y | Y | A | A | A |
R3 | A | Y | N | N | A | Y |
R4 | Y | N | Y | N | A | N |
R5 | Y | N | Y | N | A | Y |
R6 | Y | A | A | Y | N | A |
R7 | Y | N | A | A | Y | N |
R8 | A | Y | N | N | A | A |
R9 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
R10 | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y |
μ | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.4 |
η | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
ν | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.3 |
Factors | PGD | NGD | Abs_Score | Act_Score | Weight | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P1 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.80 | 0.8000 | 0.1701 | 3 |
P2 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 0.70 | 0.6364 | 0.1276 | 6 |
P3 | 0.00 | 0.10 | 0.90 | 1.0000 | 0.2187 | 1 |
P4 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.80 | 0.8000 | 0.1531 | 4 |
P5 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.70 | 0.7778 | 0.1392 | 4 |
P6 | 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.90 | 0.8182 | 0.1914 | 2 |
Factors | PGD | NGD | Abs_Score | Act_Score | Weight | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.80 | 0.8421 | 0.17300 | 3 |
N2 | 0.00 | 0.10 | 0.90 | 1.0588 | 0.23066 | 1 |
N3 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.0526 | 0.19771 | 2 |
N4 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.40 | 0.4211 | 0.10646 | 6 |
N5 | 0.30 | 0.00 | 0.70 | 0.5600 | 0.13840 | 5 |
N6 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 0.70 | 0.6667 | 0.15377 | 4 |
PFWA | μ | H | ν | π |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.51261 | 0.28441 | 0.18532 | 0.01765 | |
0.66653 |
PFWA | μ | η | ν | π |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.49253 | 0.20594 | 0.27641 | 0.02512 | |
0.61077 |
Respondent | Facilitating Factors | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | |
R1 | A | N | A | N | Y | N |
R2 | N | N | A | A | Y | N |
R3 | A | N | N | N | A | N |
R4 | Y | A | A | Y | N | A |
R5 | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y |
μ | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.2 |
η | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
ν | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.6 |
Respondent | Prohibiting Factors | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | N4 | N5 | N6 | |
R1 | Y | Y | Y | Y | A | Y |
R2 | Y | A | N | N | Y | N |
R3 | N | Y | A | N | N | A |
R4 | A | N | N | A | Y | A |
R5 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
μ | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
η | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 |
ν | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
Factors | PGD | NGD | Abs_Score | Act_Score | Weight | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P1 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 0.80 | 0.7273 | 0.2867 | 2 |
P2 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.20 | 0.2222 | 0.0683 | 4 |
P3 | 0.40 | 0.00 | 0.60 | 0.4615 | 0.1593 | 3 |
P4 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.20 | 0.2222 | 0.0652 | 5 |
P5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.1111 | 0.3583 | 1 |
P6 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.20 | 0.2222 | 0.0623 | 6 |
Factors | PGD | NGD | Abs_Score | Act_Score | Weight | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.0345 | 0.21870 | 1 |
N2 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.0345 | 0.19136 | 2 |
N3 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.60 | 0.6207 | 0.13917 | 5 |
N4 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.60 | 0.6207 | 0.12757 | 6 |
N5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.0345 | 0.17010 | 3 |
N6 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 0.80 | 0.6857 | 0.15309 | 4 |
PFWA | μ | η | ν | π |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.42535 | 0.29061 | 0.24798 | 0.03606 | |
0.59188 |
PFWA | μ | η | ν | π |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.52577 | 0.22239 | 0.24062 | 0.01122 | |
0.64418 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Deb, S.; Kar, S.; Deb, S.; Biswas, S.; Dar, A.A.; Mukherjee, T. A Cross-Sectional Study on Mental Health of School Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic in India. Data 2022, 7, 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/data7070099
Deb S, Kar S, Deb S, Biswas S, Dar AA, Mukherjee T. A Cross-Sectional Study on Mental Health of School Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic in India. Data. 2022; 7(7):99. https://doi.org/10.3390/data7070099
Chicago/Turabian StyleDeb, Sibnath, Samarjit Kar, Shayana Deb, Sanjib Biswas, Aehsan Ahmad Dar, and Tusharika Mukherjee. 2022. "A Cross-Sectional Study on Mental Health of School Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic in India" Data 7, no. 7: 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/data7070099