Postsecondary Students’ Social Stress and Learning Styles

: Postsecondary students can experience anxiety or stress upon initial entry into large campus classrooms or education abroad settings. Social phobia scrutiny fears combined with social interaction anxieties may culminate in social anxiety disorder or social stress. Social stress may negatively affect one’s enjoyment and fulﬁllment of learning and one’s ability to learn. This study investigated relationships between students’ social stress, educational setting, learning style, and demographics using the Social Phobia Scale, Social Interaction Anxiety Scale, and the Learning Styles Inventory. Through a multiple correlational design, quantitative analysis revealed that social stress was positively associated with reﬂective observation and assimilative learning styles, but negatively associated with active experimentation learning styles for 144 students at a large southern US university. Females and on-campus students experienced more social stress than did males or those who participated in education abroad. Multiple linear regression revealed a signiﬁcant increased level of social stress among minority students. About 18% of the variance in social stress was accounted for by signiﬁcant independent variables (accommodative and convergent learning styles, being male, and Caucasian). Increased understanding of associations between social stress and learning style will help educators develop learning activities that promote inclusiveness for all. Continued research is needed to learn how to decrease social stressors in postsecondary education, especially for female and minority students to enable equitable learning spaces.


Introduction
Some postsecondary students experience anxiety or stress upon entering new learning situations like first-time entry into large campus classrooms or education abroad settings. These stressors may negatively affect one's ability to learn, enjoyment, and fulfillment of learning. Social phobia scrutiny fears (i.e., fear of being observed or watched during routine activities) and social interaction anxieties (i.e., distress caused by common social interaction in groups) interact to create social anxiety disorder (SAD) or social stress. SAD is a persistent and intense fear of being embarrassed, humiliated, or negatively evaluated in social situations [1]. It is one of the most common psychiatric disorders, typically occurring between ages 8 and 15 years, and occurs more frequently in women than in men [2][3][4]. However, men are more likely than women to seek treatment. SAD can trigger behavioral tendencies to avoid situations that cause social stress, including some on-campus [5,6] and education abroad activities [7]. Avoidance behaviors can impair occupational and/or social development beyond academia [1], and these behaviors could be linked with learning styles.
Postsecondary students' learning styles may conflict with instructors' expectations of traditional in-class participation or instructor/classmate behaviors within groups, which can cause social stress, especially for those with SAD [8]. Previous research shows significant relationships exist between learning styles and anxiety (stress) levels in education. For example, the transition from high school to college can produce multiple relationship stressors (i.e., family, romantic, peer, and faculty) that affect new college students' a process, not in terms of outcomes; (2) all learning is relearning; (3) learning requires the resolution of conflicts between dialectically opposed phases of adaptation to the world; (4) learning is a holistic process of adaptation to the world; (5) learning results from synergetic transactions between the person and the environment; and (6) learning is the process of creating knowledge (pp. 6-7). This study's framework centered on ELT propositions 4 through 6 to help us understand whether and how students' social stress in domestic and education abroad settings may be correlated with their learning styles and/or selected demographics.
The Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) is a well-known and often-used measure to gauge how we gather new information and transform it into meaningful experience [16]. The LSI (12-item instrument) produces four preferred learning modes: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. Concrete experience learners prefer to gather new information through sensory stimulation. Reflective observation is preferred when new information is gathered primarily through abstract analysis. Neither information gathering preference produces learning until it is processed and transformed into meaningful knowledge. The LSI's two information processing modes are abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. Abstract conceptualization learners prefer to process or transform theoretical principles into meaningful knowledge through intellectual activities (i.e., learning by reflecting). In contrast, active experimentation learners prefer knowledge acquisition through active or experiential processes (i.e., learning by doing).
This study investigated the relationships between students' social stress, preferred learning style, and demographic variables in domestic and education abroad environments. An increased understanding of these relationships may be useful when developing learning activities that promote inclusiveness for all learners, regardless of the educational setting. The research objectives were to:

1.
Determine whether relationships exist between students' social stress, educational setting, preferred learning styles, and/or selected demographics (sex, race/ethnicity, class).

2.
Discover whether students' preferred learning styles, educational setting, and/or selected demographics contribute to social stress.
In addition to the research objectives, two hypotheses were tested: H1. Social stress, educational setting, preferred learning style, and selected demographics are associated.
H2. Social stress can be explained by educational setting, preferred learning style, and selected demographics.

Materials and Methods
A multiple correlational design [29,30] was used to examine the relationships between college students' social stress, educational setting, preferred learning styles, and selected demographic variables. The dependent variable was social stress. Independent variables were educational setting (i.e., on-campus vs. education abroad), preferred learning styles (LSI descriptors), sex (i.e., male vs. female), race/ethnicity (i.e., white vs. non-white) and class (i.e., underclassmen vs. upperclassmen). Dependent and independent variables were ascertained after their natural occurrence.

Population and Data Collection
The target population (N ≈ 75,000) represented students at a large southern US university. The accessible population (n ≈ 4000) included students enrolled in courses with global or international in the course title or description during spring 2022 and those who had participated in education abroad opportunities from 2020 to 2022. Stratified random samples were determined (after university ethics review board approval; IRB2021-  [31] methods for deriving probability samples. We calculated a conservative 50/50 split with a 5% sampling error and a 95% confidence level. These parameters produced a sample of~374, which would represent the accessible population; we rounded the sample to 400. Personalized survey invitations and reminders [31] were sent five times using a secure online platform (Qualtrics), where participants confirmed their informed consent prior to participation. The total responses were 144 (36%), which were reduced to 140 usable responses because of incomplete and/or missing data, resulting in a 35% response rate, which may influence the generalization of the results. Previous research [32] indicates that the average response rates for online surveys in educational settings is 35.1%, 95% CI.

Instrumentation
The study instrument included three sections plus demographics. First, social stress was measured with statements that could trigger anxious behavior. The respondents rated themselves on the degree to which they believed the statement was characteristic or true for them. A social stress score was derived from the summed scores of two instruments: the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) and Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS). The SPS is a 20-item instrument with a five-point scale of responses ranging from 0 (not at all characteristic or true of me) to 4 (extremely characteristic or true of me) [13]. The total scores could range from 0 to 80; higher scores indicated an elevated level of social phobia scrutiny fears. Example items for the SPS included: I get nervous that people are staring at me as I walk down the street; I get panicky that others might see me faint or be sick or ill; I am worried people will think my behavior is odd. The SIAS is a 19-item instrument that was deemed valid and reliable for use with college-aged participants [13]. The items were presented with a similar five-point scale (0 = not at all characteristic or true of me to 4 = extremely characteristic or true of me). The total scores could range from 0 to 76 with higher scores indicating elevated levels of social phobia scrutiny fears. Second, students' preferred learning styles were measured using Kolb's LSI [28], which is a stable measure of learning style preference [33]. The LSI has 12 open-ended statements with four ending responses. The respondents were asked to recall a recent situation where they had to learn something new, and then rank each of four closing responses from 1 (least like you) to 4 (most like you) to complete the open-ended statement. The summed scores for each LSI learning mode produces scores for abstract conceptualization (AC), concrete experience (CE), active experimentation (AE), and reflective observation (RO). These four learning mode scores are combined to produce two outcome scores for preferences in gathering information (AC-CE) and transforming (AE-RO) it into experience. When AC and CE produce positive scores, abstract learning is preferred, while negative AC and CE scores indicate a preference for concrete learning. AE and RO scores combine to produce active (positive score) or reflective (negative score) learning preferences. AC-CE and AE-RO scores are then used to determine one of four preferred learning styles (Accommodator, Diverger, Converger, or Assimilator). Post hoc reliability tests revealed Cronbach's coefficient alphas ranged from 0.80 (CE), to 0.82 (AE), and 0.83 (RO and AC), which were deemed reliable for data analyses and interpretation. The Cronbach's alphas for the AC-CE combined score were 0.61, and 0.60 for AE-RO combined score, which were acceptable for data analyses based on Ursachi et al.'s [34] comment that ". . .alpha of 0.6-0.7 indicates an acceptable level of reliability" (p. 681). Upon completion of the LSI portion of the study instrument, the respondents were reminded that the LSI only provides a general idea of how we perceive ourselves as learners. Also, the LSI does not measure preferred learning styles with 100% accuracy.
Third, the participants were asked to report selected demographic variables such as sex, year in college, race/ethnicity, and whether they had participated in a university-sponsored education abroad experience. If they responded yes, they were asked to indicate which type of experience (e.g., field trip during spring break, short-term faculty-led program of 10-29 days, semester abroad, or year abroad). The experience type was not used in the results because of minimal variation (i.e., the majority of the responses were short-term faculty-led program of 10-29 days).

Data Analysis
Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were used to interpret and report the data. Multichotomous choices in demographic questions were categorized into dichotomous responses for sex, race/ethnicity, and class. A significance level of 0.05 was set a priori for all inferential statistics. All data analysis was conducted on SPSS Version 28.

Social Stress
We measured students' social stress (Table 2). Overall, students exhibited low social phobia scrutiny scores (M = 25.11, SD = 15.31, range = 68). "I can get tense when I speak in front of other people" was rated highest (M = 2.14, SD = 1.25), indicating the statement represented a moderately true characteristic. Six other SPS statements were rated as moderately true (M = 1.51-2.50), and two were rated as not at all true (M = 0.00-0.50). Low social interaction anxiety scores were found (M = 28.58, SD = 16.15, range = 71). "I find it easy to think of things to talk about" (M = 2.37, SD = 1.41) and "I am at ease meeting people at parties, etc." (M = 2.28, SD = 1.47) were rated highest, indicating these statements were moderately true characteristic items for the respondents. Eight SIAS statements were rated as moderately true, and the other nine statements were rated as slightly characteristic or true (M = 0.51-1.50) ( Table 2, descending means by subscale).

Preferred Learning Modes and Styles
We measured students' preferred learning modes and styles using Kolb's [28] LSI. The four possible learning modes included experiencing (CE), reflecting (RO), thinking  Table 3). The least preferred was experiencing (M = 24.97, SD = 7.20, range = 34), although all learning modes produced near equal outcomes. Kolb's [28] learning modes combine to produce four distinct learning styles (Table 4). Divergent learners use concrete experience and reflective observation (CE + RO) to derive meaningful knowledge from new information or experiences. Convergent learners rely on their preferred learning modes of abstract conceptualization and active experimentation (AC + AE). Assimilative learners rely on abstract conceptualization and reflective observation (RO + AC), while accommodative learners emphasize concrete experience and active experimentation (AE + CE). Table 4 shows frequencies for respondents' preferred learning styles.

Associations between Social Stress and Learning Styles
We assessed the relationships between social stress and preferred learning styles. Social stress was positively associated with learning through reflective observation (RO) (r = 0.27, p = 0.001) and negatively associated with learning by active experimentation (AE) (r = −0.26, p = 0.002) ( Table 5). H1 was supported by the significant association between social stress and preferred learning style. Regarding the significant probability that RO learners experience more social stress, perhaps it is because they might be more sensitive to being observed by others, thereby increasing their social phobia, fears, anxieties, and social stress. AE learners may be less concerned about being observed during routine activities or group interactions, resulting in less social stress. We presumed that students' preferred learning modes were formed before their cognizance of social stress. Nevertheless, Pearson's r is an association, not a causation test; therefore, we cannot infer that preferred learning modes or styles increase or decrease student social stress in educational settings. Social stress was positively associated with the assimilative (RO + AC) learning style (r = 0.24, p = 0.005). Assimilative learners prefer concise, logical approaches and absorb new experiences into larger frameworks of theory, concept, or idea. Figure 1 illustrates the highly statistically significant positive linear association (r = 0.27, p = 0.001) between RO learners (i.e., reflective observation) and social stress. As the value for one variable increased, it also increased for the other. Inversely, the highly statistically significant negative linear association (r = −0.26 0.002) between AE learners (i.e., learning by doing) and social stress showed that as dents' preferences for AE learning increased, social stress scores decreased (Figure 2) learners might participate more often in unfamiliar social activities because they are anxious about what others observe or think about them. The axiom, "do it first, ask q tions later", may describe this association. Inversely, the highly statistically significant negative linear association (r = −0.26, p = 0.002) between AE learners (i.e., learning by doing) and social stress showed that as students' preferences for AE learning increased, social stress scores decreased (Figure 2). AE learners might participate more often in unfamiliar social activities because they are less anxious about what others observe or think about them. The axiom, "do it first, ask questions later", may describe this association. Figure 3 shows the significant positive linear association (r = 0.24, p = 0.005) between the assimilative learning style and social stress. Assimilative learners rely on reflective observations and abstract conceptualization processes to create meaningful experience and/or knowledge from newly acquired information. Their social stress may be increased because of an increased awareness of being watched by others or developing observations about their own experiences during the learning process.
Inversely, the highly statistically significant negative linear association (r = −0.26, 0.002) between AE learners (i.e., learning by doing) and social stress showed that as s dents' preferences for AE learning increased, social stress scores decreased (Figure 2). learners might participate more often in unfamiliar social activities because they are anxious about what others observe or think about them. The axiom, "do it first, ask qu tions later", may describe this association.   observations and abstract conceptualization processes to create meaningful experience and/or knowledge from newly acquired information. Their social stress may be increased because of an increased awareness of being watched by others or developing observations about their own experiences during the learning process.

Associations between Social Stress, Educational Setting, and Demographics
We evaluated the associations between social stress, educational setting, and selected demographic variables (Table 6). Social stress was significantly negatively associated with education abroad (r = −0.19, p = 0.03) and positively associated with on-campus learning (r = 0.19, p = 0.03). Social stress was negatively correlated with being male (r = −0.32, p = 0.000) and positively associated with being female (r = 0.32, p = 0.000). On-campus students and females experienced more social stress than education abroad students or males. H1 was supported by the significant associations between social stress and educational setting. In terms of demographics, H1 was supported only by the significant association between social stress and sex.

Associations between Social Stress, Educational Setting, and Demographics
We evaluated the associations between social stress, educational setting, and selected demographic variables (Table 6). Social stress was significantly negatively associated with education abroad (r = −0.19, p = 0.03) and positively associated with on-campus learning (r = 0.19, p = 0.03). Social stress was negatively correlated with being male (r = −0.32, p = 0.000) and positively associated with being female (r = 0.32, p = 0.000). On-campus students and females experienced more social stress than education abroad students or males. H1 was supported by the significant associations between social stress and educational setting. In terms of demographics, H1 was supported only by the significant association between social stress and sex.

Regression Analysis
We sought to explain the variance in social stress scores by examining the contributing independent variables. Considering significant associations between social stress, educational settings, learning styles, and selected demographics, we included all variables in the forced entry multiple regression procedure. In the first regression model (Table 7), 10 explanatory variables accounted for 22.2% of the variance in social stress scores, F(7, 132) = 5.38, p < 0.001, while the second model accounted for 18.3% of the explainable variation in the students' social stress scores. H2 was supported by the significant amount of variance explained in social stress by the independent variables. The amount of variance explained in the social stress scores was attributed to all statistically significant independent variables in the first regression model (Table 8). All assumptions were met except autocorrelation between residuals (Durbin-Watson value = 0.66). The residuals were positively correlated; however, because all data were collected via questionnaires from independent participants one time only, not as a time-series order to the same participants [29], an assumption of independent errors is not a concern in this regression. As noted, the second regression model (Table 9) resulted in 18.3% of the variance in social stress scores being accounted for by significant independent variables: accommodative and convergent learning styles (t = −2.89 and −2.32 respectively), being male (t = −4.04), and race/ethnicity (t = −2.14). The variable race/ethnicity was just outside the rejection region in the first regression model; therefore, we included it in the second model, which proved useful in the final analyses (Table 9).

Discussion
Social stress is related to some postsecondary students' preferred learning modes and styles, as found elsewhere [8,12]. According to Marilou [8], a student will have a high psychological cost in their academic performance when experiencing a form of social anxiety. Nikols [12] and Kolb [28] discovered that learning was affected when students encountered social stress in their academic studies. Almost 20% of the variance in the social stress scores was accounted for by a significant combination of learning style (accommodative and convergent) and being a white male. Significantly lower social stress scores can be explained by a preferred learning style for "action-oriented" situations. Accommodative and convergent learners' curiosities are driven by questions such as "what would happen if I did this" or "how does this work?" They prefer independent and applicable learning environments. Perhaps their tendencies for active learning lowers their inhibitions about what others think or perceive of them as learners. The saying, "let's do it, and ask for permission later," could explain well those who experience lower social stress. Moreover, those lower stress levels may be amplified by being male and Caucasian. Our results concerning significant associations between elevated social stress, academic achievement, and non-Caucasian populations supports previous studies [21,23,24,35], but requires further investigation. Lower stress scores among white males could be due to the lower social pressure that men face in comparison to the social stress levels faced by women [17]. Less social stress among Caucasians in comparison to social stress levels among people of color could be due to the racial tensions experienced by people of color [23]. Increasing the likelihood of minority students' success in the classroom, field, and society requires more insights on the factors affecting social stress, avoidance behaviors, disengagement, and lowered fulfillment of the postsecondary educational learning experience.
Student success is a top priority in academia. Our findings confirm previous results that decreasing social stress in classrooms is conducive to maintaining educational environments and promoting student success. Research [36] showed that if students perceived that their institution of higher education supported their own academic goals, those students would experience reduced stress in the university setting. These outcomes align with other research confirming positive [37] and negative relationships between student and university goals for education abroad [38]. Social stressors (i.e., cross-cultural adaptation, language barriers, assignment deadlines) affect academic performance, but educators can alleviate these stressors with purposeful planning both in and out of the classroom.
When designing classroom activities, educators should remember the variety of learning styles and how they can be linked to social stress. When incorporating reflecting activities, educators should take measures to decrease social stress such as encouraging working with students who understand or recognize cross-cultural differences and learning styles. Classroom activities that are focused on experimentation should be less concerned with alleviating social stress. Future research should focus on further identifying the relationship between social stress and learning style.
The negative correlation between education abroad versus the positive correlation of being on campus could be due to entry into a new environment and limited prior interactions with fellow students. The findings that females were more likely to experience social stress than males were consistent across several studies that examined relationships between stress and gender [18][19][20]. Maybe this finding is because of females' perceptions of social status, presence, and/or equality in comparison to males' perceptions of the same factors [17]. We believe more research is needed to examine the relationships between perceived social pressure and social stress. In addition, studying the relationships between gender, educational setting, and learning style might further reveal societal expectations of gender norms in campus-based classrooms and education abroad settings. Informed Consent Statement: All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion in the study when they agreed to the online Simple Survey Consent Script, which granted subjects entry to and participation in the study. All participants were informed fully that anonymity was assured, why the research was being conducted, how their data would be used, and whether there were any risks or benefits associated with participating in the study.

Data Availability Statement:
The data presented in this study are available in SPSS v28 format only, upon request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available at this time.

Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest.