CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 PSYCHOLOGICAL HARDINESS

Hardiness is a psychological style associated with resilience, good health and performance
under a range of stressful conditions (Bartone, 1999; Kobasa, 1979; Maddi& Kobasa,
1984).The concept of hardiness was introduced by Kobasa (1979) who defined it as “a
resistance resource in encountering stressful situations’’.Individuals with high hardiness
influence the result of the struggles in life without considering the positive or negative.They
are activity involved in the activities of the life and learning out of it. On the other hand,
“individual low on hardiness will be more likely to withdraw from hard life circumstances
and perceive them as more threatening’’ (Maddi, 1990).

It is a protective function.It could be found in its effect on the decision made in the
circumstances that one will be engaged with.The impact of hardiness on cognitive appraisal
and coping efforts refers only to the individual difference in the reaction of actual stressful
situation, instead examines the past experiences, benefits of various behaviour and therefore,
the choice of important, meaningful, and challenging situation. Thus ‘hardiness does not
influence only the reaction to the stressful stimuli but can also lead to qualitatively different
experiences (Wiebe& Williams, 1992).

The level of hardiness varies across people. If one is to be described possessing the
characteristic of hardiness, it means to be strong and tolerant of stressful situation.According
to Kobasa (1979), the people who did the best demonstrated the three key feature of
psychological hardiness. These three key features are the 3C’s of the hardiness. These are
commitment, control, and challenge.People vary on their perception of stressful events and
crises; and modes of behaviours and methods of dealing with negative situations.
Psychological hardiness is a personality trait that positively affects individuals' performance,
health, and mood in stressful situations ().

COMMITMENT – It is the first component of hardiness. It refers to serving on sticking

through a hard time. It is tendency to actively involve oneself in whatever one does or
encounters and to find those activities interesting and meaningful. Being committed to a goal
help us overcome occasional losses to motivation and remain in efforts. Commitment is

1
defined as ‘the tendency to maintain a relationship and to feel psychologically attached to it
in context of relationship (Rusbult& Buunk,1993)

CONTROL – The second component of hardiness is control. It has been defined as an

individual’s belief that he or she can control and influence his or her experiences as opposed
to being in a state of powerlessness. In a tough situation, hardy individual does not become
overwhelmed or helpless. Instead, they strive to gain control of what they can. Itis inclination
to believe and act as though they are in control of the situation and can influence rather than
being helpless.

CHALLENGE – It is the third component of hardiness. It is about our view on the

importance of a problems.Psychologically hardy individual sees problems as challenges
rather than threats. When people perceive problems as challenges rather than being
overwhelmed and sealing to retreat, they get into the action mode and be busy looking for
solution. They start mobilizing the resources to deal with it, and to pursue the possibility of a
successful outcome challenge as the norm and opportunity for growth rather than threats to
security.

Taken together, the three components of psychological hardiness provide the

motivation and confidence to look to the future to find meaning in life instead of repeating
the past. It makes a person resilient towards the adversities that they face in their lifetime.
The high level of hardiness provide relief from distress.

1.2 HOMESICKNESS

Almost everyone experiences homesickness during their life, regardless ofage (Thurber &
Walton, 2012). Homesickness is associated with psychological symptoms such as
absentmindedness (e.g., Fisher, 1984, 1989; Fisher & Hood, 1987) and is also linked to
adjustment disorders (Vingerhoets, 2005). People experiencing homesickness also report
psychological disturbances, somatic symptoms, anxiety, depression, and poor academic
performance (Fisher & Hood, 1987). Homesickness is an obstacle to student success
(Guinagh,1992 and is associated with serioushealth problems inadults and the elderly
population (Vingerhoets, 2005).

Homesickness is distress caused by being separated from home. It may look different
for a lot of people. Some of the most common symptoms are Feeling sad, down, or depressed
grief over the loss of familiar surroundings anxiety or nervousness. Withdrawing from or

2
avoiding other people wanting to stay in your room or being afraid to leave your room
Feeling nostalgic about things that remind you of home being easily irritated by new things,
or things that are done differently than how you’re used to. Fisher and Hood (1987) regard
homesickness as a complex cognitive- motivational- emotional state concerned with grieving
and year for home. The American Psychiatric Association(2013) defines homesickness as an
anxiety disorder, marked by recurrent cognitions focused on home.

Thurber and Walton (2007) argue that homesickness is characterized by distress and
functional impairment resulting from actual or anticipated separation from home and
attachment object. Regarding home and attachment object, research first conducted by
Bowlby (1969, 1973) suggest that children experience the stress when separated from
someone that is parents with whom they have developed a strong attachment. Parents serve as
a secure base from which children can explore new surroundings and to which they can
return when they feel threatened (Trees, 2006). The attachment bond, central to attachment
theory, typically focuses on relationships; however, individuals might also develop additional
bonds with other attachment figures/objects over the course of their lifetime. A growing
number of researchers (Altman & Low, 1992; Manzo, 2003; Manzo & Devine-Wright, 2014;
Scannell & Gifford, 2013) argue that individual also experience place attachment.

Homesickness presents differently from person to person. Some may experience mild
sadness that goes away rather quickly, while others may experience more significant anxiety
or depression. Homesickness can affect many different areas of a person’s life, like their
relationships and ability to function at work. Homesick individuals may isolate and possibly
turn to unhealthy coping mechanisms like alcohol, drugs, or gambling.

Homesickness also affects children and teens differently than adults. Children and
teens may express their negative emotions through acting out, temper tantrums, or problems
in school. Homesickness may have a particular impact on children because they usually have
little control over a change like a move. Therefore, they may feel powerless and struggle to
adjust.

Symptoms of homesickness

Homesickness operates on a spectrum ranging from mild to severe with a potentially

incapacitating impact on physical, cognitive, and psychological functioning (Fisher, 2017).
The multi-facet features of homesickness are present across cultures, race, age, and contexts
(Eurelings-Bontekoe, 1994; Fisher, 2017; Fisher, et al., 1986; Hack-Polay, 2012;

3
Tartakovsky, 2007; Thurber, 2005). The most common manifestations of this is seen in
impairment of physical, cognitive, and psychological functioning. It is crucial to note that
these symptoms are not inclusive, nor absolute, and different suffers can report varying levels
of intensity in their personal experience and perceptions.

PHYSICAL SYMPTOMS

The disruptive and stressful experience of homesickness has been suggested to generate a
higher risk of ill-health (Fisher, 2017). Physical ailments, including disruption in sleep and
appetite, increased risk of infection, and gastrointestinal issues is seen in people suffering
from homesickness (Fisher, 2017; VanTilburg, 1996). The stressful nature of homesickness is
linked to an increase in arousal. Consequently, high arousal, which impacts blood circulation
may lead to physical ailments such as headaches or dizziness (Fisher, 2017). In a study
among boarding school children, homesickness was positively associated with the frequency
of experiencing non-traumatic ailments (Fisher, 2017).

COGINITIVE SYMPTOMS

The cognitive symptoms of homesickness can manifest as pervasive thoughts about longing
for and a desire to return home, and pessimistic views about the new environment
(VanTilburg, 1996). In a cross-cultural study on homesickness, rumination about home was a
characteristic associated with college students in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands
(Stroebe, et al., 2002) Implications have been made suggesting the potential negative impact
rumination about home, a characteristic of the homesick experience, can have on the college
experience, particularly within the academic setting (Fisher, 2017). Researchers have sought
to understand if these pervasive thoughts have a negative impact on further cognitive
functioning. The results are mixed, where in some instances a reduction in attentional ability
(Burt, 1993), and higher scores on the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (Fisher, Murray, &
Frazer, 1985) were both linked to homesick university students. However, Fisher and Hood
(1987) did not find a statistically significant difference in cognitive failure between non-
homesick and homesick university students.

PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS

As previously suggested, cognitive symptoms of homesickness can potentially develop into

pervasive mental health issues (Thurber & Walton, 2012). Emotional and psychological
disturbances represented through depressive mood, loneliness, and anxiety are found in

4
sufferers from homesickness (Fisher, 2017; VanTilburg, 1996). In particular, the work by
Fisher and Hood (1987, 1988), and Fisher, Murray, and Frazer (1985) have found that
homesick university students are more likely than non-homesick counterparts to exhibit
symptoms of anxiety and depression. The psychological disturbances associated with
homesickness, particularly in the form of depression, have been witnessed across cultures,
age groups, and gender (Fisher 2017; Stroebe, et al. 2002).

Coping with feeling homesick involves balancing the ability to remain connected to
the past while also adjusting to a new place or experience. Recovering from homesickness
also takes time, one should remember try to remain patient throughout the process.

1.3 ACADEMIC ACHIVEMENT

Academic achievement is the extent to which a student or institution has achieved either
short- or long-term educational goals. Achievement may be measured through students’ grade
point average, whereas for institutions, achievement may be measured through graduation
rates.Dictionary of Education by Carter (1959) defines Academic Achievement as the
knowledge attained or skills developed in the school subjects, usually determined by test
scores or marks assigned by teachers or both. Dictionary of Psychology by Chaplin (1959)
defines educational or Academic Achievement as specified level of attainment or proficiency
in academic work as evaluated by standardized tests or by a combination of both.

Academic achievement is any identifiable success in the areas of scholarship or

disciplined study. In educational psychology, a level of proficiency in scholastic work in
general or in a specific skill, such as arithmetic or reading. Evidence of future academic
achievement is usually based on the results of standardized ability tests and assessment of
performance by a teacher or other supervisor.Academic performance is commonly measured
through examinations or continuous assessments but there is no general agreement on how it
is best evaluated, or which aspects are most important procedural knowledge such as skills or
declarative knowledge such as facts (Bhagat 2013).

From the perspective of the achievement goals theory two general classes of goals
that influence students’ motivation and achievement can be identified: mastery and
performance each achievement goals. Students with mastery goals are directed toward
learning, improvement and demonstrating competence in a certain field. On the other hand,
students with performance goals are directed to the competence needed to outperform others
(Ames, 1992, Dweck, 1986, Nichols, 1984). Early research in this area concentrated on

5
mastery versus performance goal comparisons and found superiority of mastery goals over
performance in promoting achievement (Harackiewicz&Linnenbrink, 2005). Later, mastery
and performance goals were conceptualized as independent dimensions. Research also
constantly indicates a possibility of performance goals having some positive effects on
performance and achievement as well (Church, Elliot & Gable, 2001, Senko &Harackiewicz,
2005)

Youthfulness is the time of youth, which lies among adolescence and adulthood. It is
particularly a time of growing up. Students studying secondary classes are in the time of
immaturity, and the academic achievement helps them to boost their self Confidence and
could help them to flourish.

The theory of academic performance (ToP) was developed by Elger (2007). The
theory emphasizes six foundational concepts to form a framework that can be used to explain
performance as well as performance improvements. Bhatnagar (1969) considers academic
achievement or performance of students as an aspect of their total behaviour. It is the product
of the interaction of the student, as an individual with his environment, namely school,
teachers, and peers. Gupta and Kapoor (1969) have stated that Academic Achievement or
Academic Performance like performance in other fields is not one-dimensional, but it is a
multidimensional activity, involving several phases. Academic achievement influences the
student's concept by telling him how other judges him and how rates himself in relation to
others. It also affects the amount of time and energy he can spend on social activities, and this
will how sociable he becomes. Symons (1960) indicated many ways in which academic
achievement influenced. He recognised that marks earned in the examination make a
tremendous difference to a student. Marks influence his estimate of himself, serve as a sign to
him that he was liked or disliked, and determined whether he has to remain with classmates
or instead to become an outcast and forced to join a group of strange students in another class
marks indicate success or failure, and they determine promotion, indicate the probability of
future success and influence his parents' attitude toward him. Marks help to determine
whether a student thought of himself as successful, smart or as a failure, an outcast, stupid.

The exploration of academic achievement has led to numerous empirical studies and
fundamental progress such as the development of the first intelligence test by Binet and
Simon (1905). Woolfolk (2007) provide theoretical and empirical insight into the
determinants of academic achievement and its assessment.

6
 CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

 Audrey Wittrup, Noelle Hurd (2021), conducted a study on "Extracurricular

involvement, homesickness, and depressive symptoms among underrepresented
college students". There were 340 students taken as participants and the study
investigated the potential of extracurricular involvement during the first year of
college to attenuate depressive symptom via decrease in homesickness among
underrepresented students attending. Results indicated that extracurricular
involvement was negatively associated with depressive symptoms and the association
between homesickness and depressive symptoms was mediated by decreases in
homesickness findings suggest extracurricular.
 Rasool (2020) conducted a study “Psychological Hardiness among Undergraduate
Students” on a sample of 120 students from different colleges using simple random
sampling technique. The result concluded that female undergraduate students exhibit
high psychological hardiness compared to the male students. The results revealed that
female students possess high commitment towards their work and have self-
confidence. Female students were highly ambitious and are willing to achieve their
goal.
 English, Davis, Wei, and Gross (2017), "Homesickness and adjustment across the first
year of college: A longitudinal study" concluded that homesickness is a common
experience for freshmen, and, despite its relatively transient nature, homesickness has
important implications for college adjustment. Academic outcomes were not
adversely impacted by homesickness.
 AzizollahArbabisarjou, SadegnZare, Mahnazshahrakipour, GholamrezaGhordshinha
(2016) in a study on the topic “the relationship between academic achievement
motivation and academic performance among medical students on a sample of 200
students and found there is a significant relationship between academic achievement
motivation and academic performance.
 Dr.Subarna V. D., Dr. H. S. Ganesha Hata (2015), conducted a study on ‘Academic
Achievement and personality of secondary school students’. The sample consisted of
300 adolescents aged between 13-16. The Ravens standard Progressive Matrices was
used to assess the Academic Achievement scores of the students and the

7
 Eysenkpersonality inventory used for assess personality of the students. The result
reflected that there is negligible positive relationship between academic achievement
and personality of the students.
 Jahangir, Leyla, Ali, Mehndi (2013), conducted a study on “Effect of Psychological
Hardiness training on mental health of students “for this study 120 students were
selected randomly. This result showed the effectiveness of a hardiness training
program to increase hardiness as well as promoting mental health level among the
students.

 Mehdi, Moslem, Bita (2011), in a survey of relationship between psychological

hardiness, thinking style and social skills conducted on a sample of 210 high school
students. The result revealed that there is a significant correlation between
psychological hardiness and thinking style and social skills with academic
performance progress. The achievements found that individuals belonging to high
socioeconomic status have high academic achievement.
 Nayyeri and Audi (2011), conducted a study on ‘prediction wellbeing on basic
component of hardiness’ the result indicated that the hardiness predicts 38.1% and
control component predicts 36.7% of the variables related to the wellbeing in a
significant manner therefore increase or decrease in manager’s hardiness and control
have significant varieties in relation to their wellbeing.
 Singh (2011) conducted study on “achievement motivation in relation to achievement
of student” conducted study on 50 male managers and their assistant whose average
age was 40 years participated in the study and found that students with high academic
motivation are more likely to have increased level of academic achievement and have
lower dropout rates.
 Harrison and Brower (2011), conducted a study on “The impact of cultural
intelligence and Psychological Hardiness on Homesickness among Study Abroad
Students”. The study was conducted among undergraduate students from a private
university in the United States. A sample of 537 students was taken and they were
surveyed via email. The findings suggested that emotional cultural intelligence had
the strongest relationship with psychological adjustment. In the case of psychological
hardiness and homesickness correlation analysis demonstrated a strong positive
relationship between psychological hardiness and psychological adjustment, as

8
 predicted, but the control dimension of Psychological was not related to
homesickness. The strongest correlation was found between the challenge dimension
of Psychological Hardiness and homesickness.
 Murray-Harvey (2010), in a study "Relationship influences on students' academic
achievement, psychological health and well-being at school" for this study data was
collected from both students and teachers about student’s social-emotional adjustment
and academic achievement and motivation data were obtained for 888 students 5-9
years old and found that academic achievement is influenced by the quality of the
relationships between teachers and students which, when compared with that of
family and peers, exert the strongest influence, on well-being and achievement
outcomes for students.
 Sheard(2009) conducted study on “Hardiness Commitment, Gender, and Age
Differentiate University Academic Performance “conducted on 134 university
undergraduate students. They concluded that Psychological hardiness plays an
important part in the life of an individual. While conducting his research he revealed
that female’s possess high psychological hardiness than males.
 Tilburg, Vingerhosts, Heck and Krischbarum (1999), conducted a study on
homesickness, mood and focused on health, this study focused on health
status,mood,cognition, saliva control, and social activities in homesick (N=80),
recovery (N=152), recovery (N=48), and non-homesickness adult women (N=45).
The result of this study show that homesickness is associated with lowered mood,
health complaints and cognitive failures.
 Patton and Goldenberg (1999) conducted a study on “Hardiness and anxiety as
predictor of academic structures in first year, full-time and part-time RN students” a
sample of 41 full-time, part-time RN students were taken the finding indicated that
participants possessing moderately high levels of hardiness and low levels of anxiety,
but for some, these characteristics did not relate to academic achievement.
 Furham(1997), conducted a study on "Culture shock, homesickness and adaptation to
a foreign culture" and found that for a few the experience was negative,and they recall
the loneliness, homesickness and rejection of the foreign country, but for most the
experience was very enriching.
 AliseandShaunessy (1993) ‘The relationship between hardiness ego strength stressors
academic performance and social competence in an adolescent population’.They

9
 discovered the fact that hardiness is associated with academic achievement. One of
the individual differences between the individual is the difference in their style, and
this one has been the second procedure variable of the study.
 Carden and Feicht (1991), in a study ‘Homesickness among American and Turkish
college students’ that found that there was a significant difference in the number of
homesick students in the two culture groups. The homesickness rating of the
American sample was significantly less than the Turkish participants.
 Luo Lu (1990) did a study on ‘Adaptation to British university {Homesickness and
mental health} of Chinese students. The result showed that homesickness is a
common psychological reaction amongst Chinese students studying in Britain, their
psychological symptom was influenced by different personality and environmental
factors.
 Maddi(1990) in theresearch ‘Issues and interventions in stress mastery’ found that
persons with high hardiness approach life actively and perceive that they can handle
them successfully, view them as meaningful and useful, which results in less stressful
experience.
 Fisher, Frazer, and Murray(1986) conducted a study on 115 students titled
"Homesickness and health in boarding school children". In the study, seventy-one per
cent of the students reported having experienced homesickness during the school year.

After the review of literature, followings are the objectives and hypotheses.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of the study are as follows:

 To investigate the relationship between psychological hardiness, academic

achievement, and homesickness.
 To aim the gender difference in psychological hardiness among females and males of
hostellers.
 To aim the gender difference in homesickness among females and males of hostellers.

10
HYPOTHESES

 There will be negative correlation between psychological hardiness and homesickness

among students.
 There will be positive correlation between psychological hardiness and academic
achievement among students.
 There will be significant gender difference in psychological hardiness.
 There will be significant gender different in homesickness.

11
 CHAPTER 3

METHOD OF STUDY
The present chapter comprises the following subsections:-

3.1 Sample

3.2 Psychological tool used

3.3Design

3.4Procedure of data collection

3.5 Statistical tool used

3.1 Sample –

The sample consisted of 100 respondents consisting of 50 male and 50 female taken from
various colleges of Patna. All the samples are taken in offline mode from Patna. The age
range for the entire sample was 18-21 years focusing on college going undergraduate course
students.

N =100

MALE =50 FEMALE=50

3.2 Psychological test used –

Following psychological test was used for the study: -

3.2.1 Psychological hardiness scale- Singh (2015)

The psychological hardiness scale by Arun Kumar Singh consisted of 30 items where each
item can be answered using a 5-point Likert scale, with each statement rated on five options
(strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree).Theitems were divided into 3

12
components that is commitment, control and challenge negative items are also included in it.
The Reliability was found to be 0.86.

3.2.2 Homesickness questionnaire

The scale was adapted from Sun,Hagedorn, and Zhang(2016). The group of 5items. Each
item was answered using Likert scale on extremely, often, neutral, sometime, and not at all.

3.2.2 Academic Achievement

Demographic data is prepared in which the marks were recorded of their last semester. The
range was found to be 40-90.

3.3 Design

The study is non-experimental study therefore, no specific design was followed. The study is
a field study of hypothesis testing type.

3.4 Procedure of data collection –

The data was collected from hostellers of Patna studying in different colleges of Patna.
Informed consent was taken from the participants.The rapport was established with the
participants. Then, participants were given instructions for filling the scale. The participants
were assured of confidentiality. The participants were thanked for their cooperation. The data
were collected in 10 days.

3.5 Statistical tool used –

The statistical method to be used for testing the hypotheseswould be Mean, Standard
Deviation, Coefficient of Correlation and t-ratio.

13
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The purpose of the study was to empirically test and evaluate psychological hardiness,
academic achievement, and homesickness among hostellers in Patna. The statistical treatment
of data was done accordingly to the requirement of the hypothesis. The result has been
presented in tables for the better comprehension of the collected data and its analysis.

Hypothesis 1: “There would be negative correlation between psychological hardiness

and homesickness among students.”

TABLE NO. 1

Correlation between psychological hardiness and homesickness among hostellers.

Variables r Level of Significance

Psychological Hardiness -0.319 p ≤0.01
Academic Achievement
N=100, df=98, Table value= .23 (one tailed)

In table no.1, the r value is – 0.319 which is significant at 0.01 level of confidence.
The value of coefficient of correlation clearly indicates a negative correlation between the
two variables, i.e., the psychological hardiness and homesickness. Thus, the hypothesis no. 1
that “there is negative correlation between psychological hardiness and homesickness” has
been accepted.

Harrison and Brower (2011) conducted a study on “The impact of cultural intelligence
and Psychological Hardiness on Homesickness among Study Abroad Students”. The study
was conducted among undergraduate students from a private university in the United States.
The findings suggested that emotional cultural intelligence had the strongest relationship with
psychological adjustment. In the case of psychological hardiness and homesickness
correlation analysis demonstrated a strong positive relationship between psychological
hardiness and psychological adjustment.

14
Hypothesis 2; “There would be positive correlation between psychological hardiness
and homesickness”.

TABLE NO. 2

Correlation between Psychological hardiness and Academic achievement

Variables r Level of Significance

Psychological Hardiness 0.03 p≤0.05
Academic Achievement
N=100, df= 98, Table value= .23(one tailed)

In table no. 2 the value of r is 0.03 which is not significant at both 0.05 and 0.01 level
of confidence. The value of coefficient of coefficient is not significant. Thus, the result does
notsupportthe second hypothesis that there is a positive corelation between Psychological
Hardiness and academic Achievement. Hence, hypothesis no. 2 is not accepted.

In line with this study, Dilliard did a study on Hardiness and Academic Achievement.
This study examined the relationship of hardiness to academic achievement, measured as
cumulative grade point average. The result indicated that some correlations were found with
grade point average and among hardiness scales and subscales, but not to the extent expected.
None of the hardiness scores contributed significantly to the variance found in grade point
averages, even though students' hardiness scores were like scores in other populations.
Hardiness can be studied in relation to stress, coping, and burnout among students and other
types of populations. Even though" hardiness" as a concept makes conceptual sense with
academic success, perhaps the current hardiness tools do not measure hardiness in the same
sense.

Hypothesis 3: “There would be significant gender difference in psychological hardiness

TABLE NO. 3

Gender differences in psychological hardiness

Variable Groups N Mean SD t ratio df Level of

significance
Psychological Males 50 112.1 13.02 1.18 98 p ≤0.05
Hardiness
Females 50 109.44 9.22
N=100, df=98, table value= 1.658

15
 As we can see in that above table the mean value of psychological hardiness of female
is 109.44 (SD=9.22) which is slightly less than the scores of males (M=112.1,SD=13.02).
Further to test the significant difference between the two means, t-ratio was calculated which
was found to be statistically not significant at 0.05 level of significance. Thus,significant
gender difference was found in psychological hardiness. The hypothesis that “There would be
significant gender difference in psychological hardiness” has been accepted.

In accordance with this hypothesis a study done by Rahul (2017), the aim of the study
was to know the differences of gender on psychological hardiness among college students.
And result showed that there is significant gender difference on psychological hardiness
among college students.

Hypothesis 4: “There would be significant gender difference in homesickness among

students”.

TABLE NO. 4

Gender differences in homesickness

Variable Groups N Mean SD t ratio df Level of significance

Homesickness Males 50 22.88 6.17 0.12 98 P≥ 0.05

Females 50 22.76 3.57
N= 100, df =98

This table shows that mean score of males is 22.88 (SD=6.17) which is slightly higher
than females that is 22.76 (SD=3.57). The obtained t-ratio is 0.12 which is not significant
even at 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the hypothesis that there would be significant
gender difference in homesickness have been rejected.

In accordance with this, a study is done by Abbas and Aqeel (2018) on the topic ‘The
moderating role of gender inequality and age among emotional intelligence, homesickness
and development of mood swings in university students', the result showed that homesickness
was positively and significantly correlated with mood swings and the demographic variables
such as age and gender were the moderator between homesickness and development of mood
swings. The study also showed that those young students who had experienced homesickness
were more likely to develop negative mood swings as compared to other students.

16
 Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 SUMMARY

The purpose of the project was to find the relationship among psychological hardiness,
academic achievement, and homesickness among students. The study also tried to find the
gender differences in these variables. The hypotheses was framed according to the objectives
of the present study on the basis of literature review.

For the study, a sample of 100 students was selected. The participants completed the
three standardized tests. The statistical treatment was done manually, and the data was
analysed.For the result interpretation,the statistical tests of mean, SD, t-test and co-efficient
of correlation was conducted.

5.2 CONCLUSION

On the basis of result and interpretation of data,the following conclusions can be drawn.

1. The first hypothesis: “There would be negative correlation between Psychological

Hardiness and Homesickness” has been accepted as the obtained value of ‘r’ is –0.319 is
significant at 0.01 level of significance.

2. The second hypothesis: “There would be positive correlation between Psychological

Hardiness and academic achievement” has been rejected as the value of ‘r’ which is 0.03 is
not significant at both 0.05 and 0.01 level of significance.

3. The third hypothesis: “There would be significant gender difference in Psychological

Hardiness” has been accepted as the t-value is 0.18 which is significantat 0.05level of
significance.

4. The fourth hypothesis: “There would be significant gender difference in Homesickness

among students” has been rejected as the t-value is 0.12 which is not significanteven at 0,05
level of significance.

5.3 SUGGESTIONS

On the basis of this research, following suggestions can be made:

17
One can inculcate and develop the psychological hardiness to endure tough situations. One
has to go out of home, away from our loved ones for one or the other purpose. This usually
starts with the academics when adolescents and youth move out for better opportunities in
studies and jobs. Psychological hardiness can help to lower down the feelings of
homesickness. Recognize that feeling homesick is normal and temporary. Reach out to others
for support and share your feelings. Create new traditions that make the campus feel like
home. Familiarize yourself with your new surroundings on campus.It offers you many
benefits that includefostering critical thinking and analytical skills through hands-on learning.
Defining academic, career and personal interests. Expanding knowledge and understanding of
a chosen field outside of the classroom.

Girls should have a strong and optimistic life orientation; they need to develop a
greater sense of self-efficacy. They should have a sense of independence. Girls should be
encouraged to develop a hardy personality. The upbringing of girls and boys should be done
in the same manner.

There is a need of organizing workshops for such students who are weak, depressed
as to how to use coping strategies and skills in overcoming the problems in educational
settings or social settings.

There were limitations of sample distribution, size, and sampling procedure. Further
researchers should study different populations for the same variables to diversify the
knowledge of the chosen variables in other populations, they may also look at a different set
of variables to help shed light on the topic.Most of the existing studies including the present
one, use quantitative data for analysis, more qualitative research can also be done to reconcile
the discrepant findings.

18
REFERENCES
Altman, I. & Low, S. M. (1992) Place Attachment: A conceptual inquiry. Human
Behaviour and Environment: Advances in Theory and Research, 12, 1-12.
American Psychiatric Association. Homesickness.In APA dictionary of psychology.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. Vol. 1: Attachment. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Biggs, M. B. (1974) (Ed.) A Survey of Research in Education, Baroda, Society for
Educational Research and Development.
Bartone, P. (1999). Hardiness Protects Against War-Related Stress in Army Reserve Forces.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 51(2), 72-82.
Beck, R., Taylor, C. & Robbins, M. (2003). Missing home: Sociography and autonomy and
their relationship to psychological distress and homesickness in college freshmen.
Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 16 (2), 155-166.
Carden A. I.&Feicht, R. (1991). Homesickness among American and Turkish college
students. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 22(3),418-428.

Wang, W. & Miao, D. (2009). The relationships among coping styles, personality traits and
mental health of Chinese medical students. Social Behavior and Personality: An
International Journal, 37(2), 163-172.

Good, C. V. (1973). Dictionary of Education (3rd Edition). McGraw-Hills Inc. US.

English, T., Davis, J., Wei, M., & Gross, J. J. (2017). Homesickness and adjustment across
the first year of college: A longitudinal study. Emotion, 17(1), 1–5.
Fisher, S, Frazer, N. & Murray, K. (1986). Homesickness and health in boarding school

children. Journal of Environmental Psychology,6(1), 35-47.

Fisher, S. & Hood, B. M. (1987). The stress of the transition to university: A longitudinal

study of psychological disturbance, absent-mindedness and vulnerability to

homesickness.British Journal of Psychology, 78(4), 425-441.

Fisher, S., Frazer, N. & Murray, K. (1984). The transition from home to boarding
school:Adiary-style analysis of the problems and worries of boarding school pupils.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 4, 211-221.

19
Fisher, S. (1989). Homesickness, Cognition and Health. Erlbaum, London.
Gjesme, T. & Nygard, R. (1970). Achievement-Related Motives: Theoretical
Considerations and Construction of a Measuring Instrument. University of Oslo.
Guarnotta, E., (2021, August 31). Homesickness effects &7 ways to cope. Choosing
therapy. https://www.choosingtherapy.com/homesicknesHomes/.
Hack- Polay D. (2012). When home isn’t – A Study of homesickness and coping strategies
among migrant workers and expatriates. International Journal of Psychological Studies,
4(3).

Harrison, K. J.& Brower, H. H. (2011). The impact of cultural intelligence and psychological
hardiness on Homesickness among study abroad student. The Interdisciplinary Journal
of Study Abroad, 21, 41-62.

Hecker, D. (1998). Occupations and earnings ofworkerswith somecollege but no degree.

Occupational Outlook Quarterly, 42(2), 28-39.
Kobasa, S.C. (1979). Stressful Life Events, Personality, and Health: An inquiry into
hardiness.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1–11.

Kalantar, J., Khedri, L., Nikbakht, A., &Motbalian, M. (2013). Effects of psychological
hardiness training on mental health of students. International Journal of Academic
Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(3), 68-67.
Klog, S.&Bardly, G. (2004). The role of hardiness in stress and illness: an exploration of the
effect of negative affectivity at gender. British Journal of Health Psychology, 9(2), 137-61.
Lu, L. (2007). Adaptation to British universities homesickness and mental health amongst
Chinese students. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 3(3), 225-232.
Maddi, S.R. (1990). Issues and Interventions in Stress Mastery. In H.S. Friedman (Ed.),
Personality and Disease (pp. 121-154). New York:Wiley
Maddi, S.R. (1999). Comments on Trends in Hardiness Research and Theorizing. Consulting
Psychology Journal, 51, 67-71.
Nayyeri, M.& Aubi, S. (2011). Prediction wellbeing on basic components of
hardiness.Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 30(4), 1571-1575.

Rassol, R. (2020). Psychological hardiness among undergraduate students.International

Journal of Social Relevance and Concern, 8(10), 15-18.

20
Rusbult, C.E. & Bunk, B.P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: An

interdependence analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10(2), 175-204.

Samadzadeh, M., Abbasi, M., &Shahbazzadegan, B. (2011). Survey of relationship between

psychological hardiness, thinking styles and social skills with high school students

academic progress in Arak city.Procedia–Social and Behavioural Sciences, 28, 286-292.

Sheard, M. (2009). Hardiness commitment, gender, and age differentiate university academic

performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 189-204.

Singh, K. (2011). Study of achievement motivation in relation to academic achievement of

students. International Journal of Educational Planning and Administration, 1(2), 161-

171.

Sternberg, R.J. &Wanger, R.K.(1998). Mental self-government; a theory of intellectual

styles and their development. Human Development, 31,197-224.

Strobe,M., Vliet, T.V. Hewstone, M. & Willis, H. (2002) Homesickness among students in
two cultures: antecedents and consequences. British Journal of Psychology, 73(2), 147-
168.

Sun, J. &SerraHagedorn, L. (2016). Homesickness at college: Its impact on academic

performance and retention. Journal of College Student Development, 57 (8), 943-957.
Tartakovsky, E. (2007). A longitudinal study of acculturative stress and homesickness ;

High-school adolescence immigrating from Russia and Ukraine to Israel without

parents. National library of medicine, 42(6), 485-494.

Thurber, C.A. & Walton, E. (2007). Preventing and treating homesickness. American
Academy of Pediatrics Council on School Health.Pediatrics. 119(1), 192-201. DOI:
10.1542/peds.2006-2781.

Thurber, C.A. & Walton, E. (2012). Homesickness and adjustment in university students.
Journal of American College Health, 60(5), 415-19.

21
Van Tilburg, M.A.L., Vingerhoets, A.J.J.M., Kirschbaum, C.,&VanHeck,G.L. (1996).
Moodchanges in homesick persons during a holiday trip: A multiple case study.
Psychosom. 65, 91-96.

VanTillburg, M.A.L., Vingerhoets, A.J.J.M., Van Heck, G.L., &Kirchbaum,C. (1999).

Homesickness, mood and self-reported health. Stress and Health, 15(3),189-196.

Vingerhoets, A. J. J. M. (1997). The homesickness concept: Questions and doubts. In M. van

Tilburg, & A. J. J. M. Vingerhoets (Eds.), Psychological aspects of geographical
moves: Homesickness and acculturation stress. (pp. 1-16).

Welsh, M., Parke, R. D., Widaman, K., & O'Neil, R. (2001). Linkages between children's
social and academic competence: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of School
Psychology, 39 (6), 463-482.

Weiling, W.& Miao, D. (2009). The relationship among coping styles, personality traits
and mental health of Chinese medical students. Social Behaviour and Personality:An
International Journal, 37(2), 163-172.
Wiebe, D.J. &Williams, P.G. (1992). Hardiness and health: A social psychophysiological

perspectives on stress and adaptation. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 11(3),
238-262.

Wilson, P.M. & Wilson, J.R. (1992). Environmental influences on adolescent educational
aspirations.Youth & Society, 24(1), 52-70.

22