806687

research-article2018
TCPXXX10.1177/0011000018806687The Counseling PsychologistTran et al.

Regular Manuscript
The Counseling Psychologist
2018, Vol. 46(7) 846­–869
Financial Stress, Social © The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
Supports, Gender, and sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0011000018806687
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000018806687
Anxiety During College: journals.sagepub.com/home/tcp

A Stress-Buffering
Perspective

Alisia G. T. T. Tran1, Christina K. Lam1,

and Eric Legg1

Abstract
In this study, we examined financial stress and general anxiety in college
students (N = 304) with attention to the moderating roles of different
types of social support (i.e., family support, social support) and gender, as
assessed via moderated moderation. Results indicated that financial stress
was moderately-to-strongly associated with symptoms of general anxiety.
A three-way interaction revealed that perceived family support and gender
were moderators of financial stress in relation to general anxiety. Consistent
with a stress-buffering effect, for male college students financial strain was
positively associated with general anxiety at low levels of perceived family
support, but unrelated at high levels of family support. For female college
students, a significant financial stress–anxiety link was present regardless of
level of family support. This study highlights the potential mental health costs
of financial stress faced by college students, with implications for tailoring
mental health interventions that target financial stress.

1Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

Corresponding Author:
Alisia G. T. T. Tran, Counseling and Counseling Psychology, College of Integrative Sciences
and Arts, Arizona State University, 466 Payne Hall MC0811, PO Box 870811, Tempe,
AZ 85287-0811, USA.
Email: alisia@asu.edu

The Division 17 logo denotes that this article is designated as a CE article. To purchase the
CE Test, please visit www.apa.org/ed/ce.
Tran et al. 847

Keywords
financial stress, social support, family support, gender, general anxiety

Anxiety and stress rank as the top two client concerns observed by clinicians
in college counseling centers (Center for Collegiate Mental Health [CCMH],
2016). As anxiety concerns have steadily increased in recent years for college
students (CCMH, 2016), financial stress also has emerged as a prevalent con-
cern in this population. For instance, approximately seven out of 10 college
students endorsed experiencing stress about their personal finances in a multi-
site study (Heckman, Lim, & Montalto, 2014). The stress–coping literature
suggests that having positive social supports, including support provided by
family or kin (i.e., family support) or by one’s social network more generally
(i.e., general social support), can buffer against stress (Cohen & Wills, 1985).
Other research indicates women are more likely to report financial stress than
men (e.g., Brougham, Zail, Mendoza, & Miller, 2009). However, it is unknown
if there are gender variations in the potential roles of social supports in disrupt-
ing the link between financial stress and general anxiety among college stu-
dents. Using a moderated moderation model, the current study examined the
links between financial stress and general anxiety in a college student sample,
with specific attention to the potential moderating roles of social support
(including perceived family support and general social support) and self-iden-
tified gender. Specifically, this study aimed to address the research question:
Is there a buffering effect of social support (i.e., general support, perceived
family support) on the relation between perceived financial stress and general
anxiety, and does this buffering effect differ by gender? At a time when finan-
cial burdens in college are receiving increased national attention, financial
stress among college students remains an understudied empirical topic, with
even less attention paid to its mental health correlates.

Financial Stress and Social Support From a

Stress–Coping Perspective
Personal financial concerns repeatedly rank as a top source of stress among
adults in the United States, with nearly three-quarters of adults (72%) endors-
ing stress about money and nearly one in three adults (29%) reporting increased
stress about money (American Psychological Association [APA], 2015, 2016).
Young adults, including college students, are emerging as a cohort reporting
some of the highest levels of stress about money (APA, 2015; Heckman et al.,
2014; Tran, Mintert, Llamas, & Lam, 2018). Financial stressors for many col-
lege students are diverse and can include typical living expenses, tuition and
848 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

academic expenses, overspending or credit card debt, student loan debt, work–
school–life balance, financial pressures from family, and uncertain employ-
ment after graduation (Beiter et al., 2015; Heckman et al., 2014; London,
1989; Nelson, Lust, Story, & Ehlinger, 2008; Wisconsin HOPE Lab, 2016).
The emergence of financial concerns as a major, widespread source of stress
for young adults comes at a time when general anxiety and stress have reached
peak levels among college students (American College Health Association
[ACHA], 2017; Association for University and College Counseling Center
Directors, 2016; CCMH, 2016). Well over half of college students (61.9%)
report feeling “overwhelming anxiety” in the past year; more than a quarter
(26.5%) describe that past-year anxiety has influenced their academic perfor-
mance, and nearly one in five (19.7%) characterize their anxiety as reaching
clinical levels for which they received a diagnosis or were treated by a profes-
sional (ACHA, 2017). Moreover, a gender difference is notable, as the esti-
mated rate of “overwhelming anxiety” for female college students (67.7%) far
exceeds that of male students (47.4%; ACHA, 2017).
Among the potential contributing factors, financial stressors have been
linked to health and adjustment concerns, including mental health issues such
as anxiety and depression (APA, 2015; Kahn & Pearlin, 2006; Tran et al.,
2018). In a multisite investigation, 78% of college students who attempted
suicide cited financial stress as a reason (Westefeld et al., 2005). In the col-
lege context, financial stress has been linked to reduced course load or drop-
out and poorer academic performance (Dwyer, Hodson, & McLoud, 2013;
Joo, Bagwell Durband, & Grable, 2008). In short, the mental health and
adjustment implications of financial stress for college students should not be
dismissed, and general anxiety may be among the most proximal health cor-
relates of financial stress.
Stress–coping models underscore that the presence of stress does not
guarantee an aversive health outcome, as adaptive coping can disrupt the
stress–health link (e.g., Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Social support has long
been regarded as a major coping resource for individuals who are experienc-
ing a stressor such as financial stress (Cohen & Wills, 1985; Pearlin &
Schooler, 1978; Thoits, 1995). Support from others can be instrumental
(e.g., supplying tangible resources), informational (e.g., providing advice to
guide problem-solving), and/or emotional (e.g., caring, building esteem,
providing encouragement, offering sympathy, fostering a sense of belong-
ing) and has been cited as a buffer against major stressful life events or
chronic difficulties (Peirce, Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1996; Shor, Roelfs, &
Yogev, 2013; Thoits, 1995).
Adults who indicate having emotional social support report lower stress and
stress-based depression symptoms than those who indicate having no emotional
social support (APA, 2015). Results from meta-analyses on social support and
Tran et al. 849

mortality indicate the risk of death for individuals with high social support is
approximately 11% lower compared to those with low levels of social support
(Shor et al., 2013). Social support from one’s family or kin network has been
found to be particularly robust in promoting well-being. For instance, meta-
analytic research indicates that low levels of family support were associated
with greater mortality risk compared to high levels of support from family; and
the health benefits associated with family support are greater than those derived
from support provided by friends or acquaintances (Shor et al., 2013). From a
stress–coping perspective, more social supports—including family support—
may have a stress-buffering role in the relation between financial stress and gen-
eral anxiety among college students.

Gender Contexts of Financial Stress and Gender

Socialization Theory
According to gender socialization theory, men and women are socialized
with emphasis on different roles, values, thoughts, and behaviors (Fagot,
Rodgers, & Leinbach, 2000). Limited research has suggested that money is a
more central component of the socialization processes and identities of men
compared to women (Newcomb & Rabow, 1999), although there is not clear
evidence that financial concerns are necessarily more influential for men. For
instance, financial stress has been tied to greater chronic illness (e.g., high
blood pressure, heart disease) in women but not men in a general Canadian
sample aged 20 years and older (Denton, Prus, & Wills, 2004). Other research
on a Canadian adult sample found that financial stress (i.e., lack of money for
necessities) was linked to chronic illness and distress for both men and
women (McDonough & Walters, 2001). There is also evidence that men and
women in college face different financial experiences that could result in
gender differences in health sequelae, but it remains unclear which group
would be more adversely influenced by financial stress. For example, female
college students, in comparison to their male counterparts, are more likely to
take out loans and persist in obtaining their degrees despite debt (Dwyer
et al., 2013). These findings could imply that student loan debt may be less
aversive for female than for male students’ mental health. Conversely, the
findings may mask the financial stress faced by males if those males most
burdened by student loan debt leave college prematurely, leaving a unique
sample of male college students who are able to persist in their college educa-
tion despite debt. Comparatively, then, females who persist in college may be
doing so with heavy psychological and financial burdens. Thus, gender
appears to be an important factor in conceptualizing the health impact of
financial stress, but extant research has yielded mixed findings on the nature
of gender effects, suggesting a need for further investigation.
850 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

Furthermore, gender differences and variations in gender socialization pro-

cesses may be relevant when conceptualizing social support as a protective
factor. Men are traditionally socialized to be self-reliant (e.g., Addis &
Mahalik, 2003), whereas women are more likely to be socialized to seek sup-
port (e.g., Fivush & Buckner, 2000); this may prime men to be less likely to
utilize, and benefit from, social support than women. However, research is
mixed as to whether the links between social support and health outcomes dif-
fer for men and women, with some results suggesting both men and women
similarly benefit from social support, and others providing inconsistent results
(see Shor et al., 2013 for a review; see also Uchino, Cacioppo, & Kiecolt-
Glaser, 1996).
Although there is evidence suggesting gender variations in the stress-buff-
ering effect of social support in relation to financial stress, the research again
is unclear regarding which gender group experiences the protective benefits.
Past research documents gender differences in levels of personal financial
stress, with women being more likely to endorse greater stress about money
than men (e.g., APA, 2015; Åslund, Larm, Starrin, & Nilsson, 2014;
Brougham et al., 2009). These differences may suggest greater potency of,
and greater exposure to, financial stress in women, which may place them at
heightened risk for general anxiety stemming from financial stress. For
example, it is possible the stress–health link is so strong as to persist in spite
of social supports for women. Research has shown that women are more
likely to report having emotional support than men (APA, 2015), and meta-
analytic research suggests that women are more likely than men to seek social
support for instrumental and emotional coping reasons (Tamres, Janicki, &
Helgeson, 2002). However, compared to men, women report higher levels of
past-month isolation and loneliness due to stress, as well as higher levels of
unmet need for more emotional support in the last year (APA, 2015).
Furthermore, in the limited research focused on family support, poorer fam-
ily support has been implicated in loneliness for women, but not for men (Lee
& Goldstein, 2016). These findings render it plausible that women may not
derive the stress-buffering effect expected of social supports in the context of
financial stress.
On the other hand, there is also evidence suggesting that men may be
especially at risk for negative outcomes associated with financial stress in
college. For instance, men are more likely to drop out of college at lower
levels of student loan debt than women, perhaps signaling a lower threshold
of tolerance for the financial stress associated with debt (Dwyer et al., 2013).
Outside of the college context, men have been found to report higher levels
of stress than women about financial factors (e.g., Denton et al., 2004;
McDonough & Walters, 2001). Despite such risk, there is limited evidence
suggesting social support may be more effective in combating financial stress
Tran et al. 851

in men than in women. For instance, research on a general Swedish adult

sample demonstrated that greater instrumental social support had a more
prominent buffering effect for men than women with regard to the inverse
relation between financial strain (i.e., difficulty paying monthly expenses and
raising emergency funds) and psychological well-being (Åslund et al., 2014).
Although it is uncertain if this finding would apply to a college sample in the
United States, altogether the limited evidence and mixed findings suggest it
is possible that the stress-buffering effect of social supports may vary across
men and women in the relation between financial stress and general anxiety,
but the direction remains unclear.
The basis of gender socialization theory and its applications is the socially
constructed nature of gender. Whereas sex represents male or female biologi-
cal traits (e.g., reproductive organs), gender reflects the socially constructed
self-identification and internalization of oneself as a man, woman, or as hav-
ing a non-binary identity, that is developed through an individual’s observa-
tions of, and interactions with, others in their environment (APA, n.d.; Bem,
1981). As individuals are socialized and, therefore, treated differently based
upon sex or perceived sex, gender as reflected by one’s self-identification as
a man or a woman (or other non-binary identity) may be a more influential
determinant than biological sex in the links between social processes and
mental health (APA, 2011; Unger, 1979). In this study, we draw on a defini-
tion and associated terminology of gender identity based on participants’ self-
identification as “male” or “female” to examine gender differences in the
moderating effects of social support on the link between financial stress and
general anxiety (APA, n.d.). We recognize that in some literature male/female
is used exclusively to denote sex and man/woman to identify gender. In the
remainder of this article, we use the terms male, female, man, woman, and
their plural forms interchangeably to refer to gender.

Present Study
In the current study, we aimed to understand financial stress and its relevance
to mental health, specifically general anxiety, for male and female college
students. The study examined moderated moderation models in which per-
ceived family support and general social support are each considered for their
potential stress-buffering effects, and the possibility of variations in these
effects is considered for males and females. Current literature suggests that
social support provides a buffering effect against stressors (e.g., financial
stress) and the manifestation of stress (e.g., general anxiety). Given that
meta-analytic research has found family support stands out as particularly
influential (i.e., Shor et al., 2013), we considered it valuable to isolate its
effect by examining it separately from general social support. Furthermore,
852 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

research appears to show that men and women tend to utilize social supports
differently, and therefore, may have different health outcomes as a result.
We hypothesized financial stress would be associated with greater self-
reported symptoms of general anxiety. For both family and general social
support, we further hypothesized that more support would mitigate the anxi-
ety associated with financial stress, and that there would be gender variations
in this stress-buffering effect. As there is neither clear nor robust empirical or
theoretical basis to hypothesize the direction of these differences, we did not
make specific predictions regarding the proposed moderating effect of gen-
der within the moderated moderation model.

Method
Sample and Procedures
The sample was comprised of 304 college students drawn from a larger
online study. The larger study, the Financial and Social Stress Study, was
comprised of a single primary data collection focusing on adult financial and
social experiences; this study is the first manuscript from the larger research
project (Tran & Mintert, n.d.). Adults (18 years old and older) were recruited
across multiple forums, including universities nationwide (e.g., email distri-
bution to student groups, instructors, campus registrars), listservs, and social
media outlets (e.g., Reddit). At survey completion, college students received
one extra credit point when allowed by the instructor, and all participants
were given the opportunity to enter a raffle drawing for Amazon gift cards.
Participants indicated consent via a digital consent process and completed the
online survey using Qualtrics. All items related to the primary study variables
required responses, resulting in no missing values for these items. Of the 357
students who identified as currently enrolled in college, 50 participants (14%)
were excluded due to inaccurate responses on validity questions (e.g., “Mark
3 for this question”). This exclusion rate is consistent with rates of careless
responding in existing research on college student samples (approximately
10–60%; Meade & Craig, 2012).
Within the final sample, 71.7% self-identified as female (n = 218) and
28.3% self-identified as male (n = 86). Those who self-identified their gen-
der as “other” (n = 3) were excluded due to insufficient sample size to allow
for meaningful comparison and interpretation. The age of the participants
ranged from 18 to 61 years old (M = 20.98, SD = 4.91). Four participants
indicated they were not within the range of 18–28 years, but did not complete
an open-ended field for their age either voluntarily or because an administra-
tive error that resulted in the space for the open-ended response not being
available to initial respondents of the survey. The self-identified racial and/or
Tran et al. 853

ethnic breakdown of the sample was 61.8% non-Latino White/European

American, 18.8% Latino, 8.9% Multiracial, 6.6% Asian/Asian American,
1.6% African American/Black, 2.0% other, and 0.3% Middle Eastern/Arab
American. Approximately a quarter of the sample was in the first year
(26.3%), second year (28.3%), or third year (24.7%) in college; the remain-
der was in their fourth year (15.1%), or fifth year or later (5.6%). More than
half of the sample (55.6%; 52.3% of males and 56.9% of females) described
their current financial situation by selecting the statement “it’s tight but I’m
doing fine,” whereas 27.6% of the sample (36.0% of males and 24.3% of
females) described “finances aren’t really a problem.” By contrast, a sizeable
minority (16.8%; 11.6% of males and 18.8% of females) characterized their
current financial situation as “it’s a financial struggle.”

Measures
General anxiety.  The seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-
7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, & Lowe, 2006) is among the most widely
used measures of frequency of general anxiety symptoms (e.g., “Over the last
2 weeks, how often have you been bothered by the following problems?”. . .
“Feeling nervous, anxious or on edge;” “Becoming easily annoyed or irrita-
ble”). Response options were given on a 4-point frequency scale (1 = not at
all, 4 = nearly every day). Higher mean scores indicate greater anxiety. The
GAD-7 was previously validated and demonstrated good internal reliability
(α = .92) in a sample of patients of primary care locations in 12 states (Spitzer
et al., 2006). Most (89%) clinical patients with generalized anxiety disorder
report summed GAD-7 scores of 10 or greater, and the scale has been shown
to correlate with medical outcomes (i.e., mental health, social functioning),
disability days, and healthcare use (Spitzer et al., 2006). In the present sam-
ple, approximately two-thirds (66.4%) had summed GAD-7 scores of 10 or
greater, which is consistent with rates of past-year endorsement of “over-
whelming anxiety” (61.9%) in national samples of college students (ACHA,
2017). The reliability score was good in the present sample (α = .91).

Financial stress. The seven-item Financial Anxiety Scale (Archuleta, Dale, &

Spann, 2013) was developed largely based on items from the GAD-7 adapted to
be specific to financial stress (e.g., “I feel anxious about my financial situation”
or “I feel fatigued because I worry about my financial situation.”). Responses
indicated frequency on a 7-point scale (1 = never, 7 = always), with higher
mean scores indicating greater financial stress. The scale was initially developed
and tested on a sample of college students and correlated positively with student
loan debt, other debt, and total debt and correlated negatively with financial
satisfaction. In the original validation study (Archuleta et al., 2013), the
854 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

Financial Anxiety Scale had a mean score of 2.84 (SD = 2.43) in a sample of
college students, which is relatively consistent with the current sample (M =
2.57, SD = 1.39). The scale was found to have good reliability (α = .94) in the
original study, as well as the current study (α = .94).

Perceived family support.  The 13-item Kinship Social Support scale (Taylor,
Casten, & Flickinger, 1993) was used to measure perceived social and emo-
tional support from family and/or relatives. Sample items included “I can
count on my family/relatives to help when I have problems” and “One of the
good things in life for me is to talk and have fun with my family/relatives.”
Responses are reported on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree,
4 = strongly agree). The measure was developed in samples of African Ameri-
can adolescents (e.g., Taylor, 1996; Taylor et al., 1993), in which perceived
family support was found to correlate positively with self-reliance, authorita-
tive parenting, parental involvement in schooling, family organization, and
grades; and to correlate negatively with behavioral problems. In the original
study by Taylor et al. (1993), the reliability estimate was acceptable (α = .72).
In the current sample, the scale yielded a good reliability score (α = .90).

General social support.  In a study of social capital and college students, Elli-
son, Steinfield, and Lampe (2007) utilized a five-item measure of “bonding
social capital” that indexed students’ social support in their local context (i.e.,
Michigan State University). Adaptations to the five items were made for use
in the present study that centered on making the items generalizable to a
national context, making them less about social capital (i.e., the resources
derived from social networks within a given community) and more about
individual perceptions of social support (see Uphoff, Pickett, Cabieses,
Small, & Wright, 2013 for a discussion). Additionally, the dollar value refer-
enced in one item (“If I needed an emergency loan of $100, I know someone
at Michigan State University I can turn to”) was updated to $500 to obtain
more variation in hardship and social resources (“If I needed an emergency
loan of $500, I know someone I can turn to”). Other sample items include:
“The people I interact with would be good job references for me,” and “There
is someone I can turn to for advice about making very important decisions,”
with a response scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
The scale scores correlated positively with self-esteem and satisfaction with
life scores in the original study, yielding an acceptable reliability estimate
(α = .75). In the current sample, the reliability score was α = .68.

Demographic measures.  Participants reported on standard demographic items

such as gender, age, race and/or ethnicity, year in college, and employment
Tran et al. 855

status. In addition, a single item from the 2015–2016 Healthy Minds Study
(an annual online survey of the mental health of university students; Healthy
Minds Network, 2017) asked respondents to describe their current financial
situation with three choices: “It’s a financial struggle,” “It’s tight but I’m
doing fine,” and “Finances aren’t really a problem.”

Results
Descriptive Statistics and Preliminary Analyses
An a priori statistical power analysis with a medium effect size (α = .05;
power = 0.80; Cohen, 1988) was performed for sample size estimation via
G*Power version 3.1. The projected sample size needed with eight predictor
variables was approximately N = 109, suggesting the final sample size of
304 was adequate.
Table 1 presents descriptive statistics and correlations for the study’s pri-
mary variables. Pearson correlations suggested financial stress was moder-
ately tied to general anxiety for males, and strongly correlated with general
anxiety for females, using Cohen’s (1992) conventions as guides for charac-
terizing small (r = .10), medium (r = .30), and large (r = .50) effect sizes for
correlations.
Across participants of both genders, there was a moderate positive correla-
tion between perceived family support and general social support. Lower fam-
ily support was linked to greater financial stress and general anxiety at moderate
effect size levels for males and small-moderate effect size levels for females.
For females, there were small, negative associations for general social support
with financial stress and general anxiety, whereas for males, general social sup-
port was moderately correlated with financial stress but uncorrelated with gen-
eral anxiety. Demographic variables were assessed for their relations to the
study criterion variable (general anxiety) for consideration as covariates. For
males and females, a better current financial situation was moderately associ-
ated with lower general anxiety. No other demographic variables were corre-
lated with anxiety. Based on these results, current financial situation was
included as a covariate in the moderated moderation analyses.
Independent samples t-tests indicated significant gender differences in
financial stress and general anxiety. The female sample reported higher mean
levels of financial stress relative to the male sample, consistent with a medium
effect size, Cohen’s d = 0.47, per Cohen’s (1992) guidelines (small: d = 0.20,
medium: d = 0.50, large: d = 0.80). Females also exhibited higher levels of
anxiety symptoms, on average, than males, Cohen’s d = .50. There was no
significant gender difference in family support, Cohen’s d = .12, or in general
social support, Cohen’s d = .03. Chi-square tests of independence suggested
856
Table 1.  Correlations for Males and Females and Descriptive Statistics

Males Females

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 M SD M SD
1. Financial stress — −.27* −.39* .38* −.55* .16 −.05 .05 −.04 2.48 1.20 3.10 1.42
2. Family support −.19* — .38* −.42* .25* −.02 −.02 .13 .08 2.99 .46 3.05 .56
3. General social support −.16* .35* — −.12 .40* −.02 −.08 .21* −.02 3.92 .67 3.90 .64
4. General anxiety .58* −.23* −.14* — −.22* −.04 −.10 −.09 .00 1.85 .73 2.23 .78
5. Current financial situation −.57* .12 −.20* −.31* — −.18 −.12 .10 .09 2.24 .65 2.06 .66
6. Age .10 −.06 −.04 −.07 −.14* — −.15 .37* −.25* 21.14 3.78 20.91 5.29
7. Racial/ethnic minority statusa .03 −.05 −.04 .03 .01 −.07 — −.16 .04 .40 .49 .38 .49
8. Year in college .07 −.07 .04 −.01 −.13 .45* −.15* — −.20 2.58 1.17 2.40 1.20
9. Employment status −.07 .04 −.09 .09 .09 −.27* .12 −.25* — 2.23 .63 2.21 .60

Note. Correlations for males are presented above the diagonal, and correlations for females are presented below the diagonal. Employment status
(1 = full time, 3 = unemployed/not working).
a0 = non-Latino White, 1 = racial and/or ethnic minority.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Tran et al. 857

no gender differences in current financial situation, χ2(2) = 5.20, p = .074.

Independent samples t-tests and chi-square tests suggested that male and
female participants did not differ on other demographic variables (i.e., age,
racial and/or ethnic minority status, year in college, employment status).

Moderated Moderation: Tests of the Buffering Effect of Social

Supports
The three-way interactions [financial stress x social supports (perceived fam-
ily support or general social support) x gender (1 = male; 2 = female)] with
current financial situation as a covariate were examined with moderated
moderation models (X x M x W→Y) using the PROCESS macro (version
2.16.3 for SPSS [v. 24]; Hayes, 2012). The PROCESS macro provided three-
way multiple regression results based on centered predictor data, as well as
follow-up simple slopes analyses of significant three-way interactions for
males and females at high (+1 standard deviation) and low (-1 standard devi-
ation) levels of support (see Table 2). In a visual inspection of the residual
scatter plots, P-P plots, and histograms, we found no evidence of nonlinear
associations, significant departures from normality, or concerns regarding
heteroscedasticity. Tolerance (> .71) and VIF (< 1.42) values indicated no
major issues regarding multicollinearity.
In testing the moderated moderation model with perceived family support,
main effect results were consistent with preliminary correlational and t-test
results. Greater financial stress was associated with greater general anxiety
symptoms; more family support was tied to lower general anxiety; and
females endorsed greater general anxiety than males, controlling for current
financial situation. All two-way interactions (financial stress x family sup-
port, financial stress x gender, and family support x gender) were significant.
The main effects and two-way interactions were qualified by the hypothe-
sized three-way interaction, ΔR2 = .01, F(1, 295) = 4.70, p = .03. Follow-up
analyses indicated the financial stress x family support interaction was sig-
nificant for male college students (B = -.34, SE = .13, p = .01), but not
female college students (B = -.03, SE = .05, p = .48). Simple slopes analy-
ses (Figure 1) indicated financial stress was not significantly related to
general anxiety for male college students reporting high family support
(B = -.06, SE = .12, p = .60). By contrast, for male college students who
reported low family social support, the significant association between finan-
cial stress and general anxiety persisted (B = .30, SE = .08, p < .001). In
other words, the moderating effect of family support for the male college
student sample was consistent with stress-buffering. For female college stu-
dents, the positive association between financial stress and general anxiety
858 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

Table 2.  Moderated Moderation Multiple Regressions With General Anxiety as

the Criterion Variable

Variable B SE Model
Moderator: Family support R2 = .38, F(8, 295) = 22.31***
  Current financial situation .04 .07  
  Family support −.32*** .07  
  Financial stress .26*** .03  
 Gender .35*** .09  
  Financial stress x Family support −.12* .05  
  Financial stress x Gender .20** .07  
  Family support x Gender .60** .19  
  Financial stress x Family support .31* .14  
x Gender
Moderator: General social support R2 = .33, F(8, 295) = 18.34***
  Current financial situation .03 .07  
  General social support −.04 .06  
  Financial stress .29*** .03  
 Gender .26** .09  
  Financial stress x General social −.03 .04  
support
  Financial stress x Gender .10 .07  
  General social support x Gender −.08 .13  
  Financial stress x General social .10 .09  
support x Gender

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

remained significant regardless of high (B = .30, SE = .04, p < .001) or low

(B = .33, SE = .04, p < .001) family social support. In the case of general
social support, financial stress also was related to greater general anxiety in
main effect analyses, and females reported greater general anxiety when con-
trolling for current financial situation. Interestingly, general social support
was not linked to anxiety. There were no significant two-way or three-way
interactions, ΔR2 = .003, F(1, 295) = 1.31, p = .25.
In post hoc analyses, general social support was entered as a covariate
in the perceived family support moderated moderation model, and per-
ceived family support was controlled for in the general social support
moderated moderation model.1 The results were consistent with initial
analyses without these controls, supporting the robustness of the effects
for the specific source of social support. Analyses were also conducted
without current financial situation as a covariate, yielding the same pat-
tern of findings (significant three-way interaction for family social
Tran et al. 859

Figure 1.  Interaction between financial stress and perceived family support.

support with the same pattern of simple slopes; nonsignificant three-way

interaction for general social support).

Discussion
When facing stress related to personal financial resources, many college stu-
dents might turn to their social resources. The present study examined
whether there is a buffering effect of social support (i.e., general support,
860 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

perceived family support) on the relation between perceived financial stress

and general anxiety, and whether this buffering effect differs for male and
female college students. The results were significant for affirming the link
between financial stress and general anxiety among college students, while
also revealing that perceived family support may nullify the link for male
college students. Specifically, we found a moderated moderation effect for
perceived family support, but not general social support, in which family sup-
port appeared protective in the context of financial stress for males. This
study highlights the psychologically aversive nature of financial stress in the
college context, but offers hope that factors such as family support may serve
as protective factors for some individuals.
The first major consideration that emerges from the study is the affirma-
tion that stressful financial circumstances are tied to general anxiety for col-
lege students. Previous literature has emphasized the role of financial factors
(e.g., financial aid) in academic outcomes, including nonpersistence (e.g.,
Nora, Cabrera, Serra Hagedorn, & Pascarella, 1996), but the link to mental
health has not been well-established empirically. Although this finding may
seem intuitive, college students generally are not regarded as vulnerable to
the risks associated with financial stress, particularly given the financial
resources implied in being able to attend college and the relatively auspicious
financial prospects of obtaining a college degree versus not obtaining one
(e.g., Hershbein & Kerney, 2014). Thus, the financial stress and mental health
correlates of college students could be underestimated or overlooked. Our
findings along with other research (e.g., Tran et al., 2018; Westefeld et al.,
2005), supports that stressful financial circumstances can be common among
college students and can have significant mental health and academic costs
(e.g., Joo et al., 2008).
The present study further offers nuanced perspectives on the complex cir-
cumstances surrounding the conditions in which financial stress is tied to
anxiety for college students, including gender contexts. Although the anxiety
levels of both our male and female college student subsamples appeared to be
adversely tied to financial strains (i.e., poorer current financial situations,
financial stress), females demonstrated unique risk in that they reported mod-
erately higher levels of financial stress despite no group-level gender differ-
ences in current financial situation; the correlation between financial stress
and anxiety was stronger for females relative to males; and female college
students in the present sample were not similarly benefited by a stress-buff-
ering effect of perceived family support as their male counterparts. The per-
sistence of the strong correlation between financial stress and general anxiety
for female college students, regardless of level of perceived family support,
suggests that financial stress may be especially harmful to their mental health.
Tran et al. 861

Although a number of studies have documented greater availability and

use of social support among women relative to men (e.g., Denton et al., 2004;
Tamres et al., 2002), some scholars question the assumption that women
would benefit from social supports, as women’s social network involvement
can be conceptualized as a liability (McDonough & Walters, 2001; Walen &
Lachman, 2000). Kawachi and Berkman (2001) proposed that more frequent
social network involvement may place women at risk of “contagion of stress”
(p. 462). Indeed, women have been found to have higher levels of social life
stress than men (McDonough & Walters, 2001). Kawachi and Berkman
(2001) further argued that women with fewer socioeconomic resources are
particularly at risk because, compared to those with more resources, they may
have greater difficulty in responding to the needs of significant others, may
be less likely to receive support from their social network, and may be encum-
bered by obligations within their social networks. One way in which the cur-
rent findings might be extended is by offering a multifaceted analysis of both
the supports and strains of family and general social networks within the
context of financial stress and mental health among college students (e.g.,
Walen & Lachman, 2000). Moreover, as the present results do not shed light
on a stress-buffering mechanism for female college students faced with
financial stress, a pressing direction for future research is the identification of
protective factors that address their unique financial experiences.
In contrast, the moderated moderation results revealed that the stress-buff-
ering effect of perceived family support was restricted to male college stu-
dents facing financial stress. For male college students who reported low
levels of family support, the link of greater financial stress and higher general
anxiety suggested in the extant literature persisted. However, for male col-
lege students reporting high levels of family support, this link was disrupted,
suggesting family support may be protective for this population. Our findings
could suggest that men who counter traditional gender-socialized values
emphasizing self-reliance may be better enabled to enjoy the psychological
benefit of close kinship ties and resources (e.g., DeFranc & Mahalik, 2002).
The results showed that perceived family support demonstrated stress-buff-
ering potential against financial stress, whereas general social support did not,
among male participants. These findings held when controlling for the other
respective type of social support (e.g., controlling for general social support in
the perceived family support analysis), suggesting some robustness of the
effects. The important role of family support is consistent with previous
research that demonstrates a compelling positive health benefit of family sup-
port, and no benefit for friend or acquaintance support (Shor et al., 2013). It is
also consistent with other research suggesting that connections with family
have a different effect on health than connections with peers (e.g., Carter,
862 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

McGee, Taylor, & Williams, 2007). Understandably, family may provide a

safety net for college students, particularly male college students, who may be
navigating a number of financial concerns for the first time. Family also may
be uniquely equipped to provide trusted socialization, advisement, and emo-
tional support in the specific case of financial matters (Lyons, Scherpf, &
Roberts, 2006). It is notable in the present study that family support was oper-
ationalized with items spanning emotional, informational, and instrumental
forms of support, suggesting family support generally may be valuable to
males faced with financial stress during college. Thus, the study findings chal-
lenge a specificity hypothesis of social support, which contends a person
experiencing a given life stressor benefits from support aimed at alleviating
that specific type of stress (i.e., individuals suffering from financial stress ben-
efit the most from instrumental or tangible family supports specifically target-
ing financial needs; Peirce et al., 1996). More research is needed to test the
relative contribution of each type of family support in combating the effects of
financial stress on female and male college students.

Practical Implications
The significant links between current financial situation, financial stress, and
anxiety draw attention to the mental health costs and clinical relevance of
financial strain faced by many college students. The findings emphasize that
placing a major focus on stressful financial circumstances is important for
those working with college students, including counseling psychologists pro-
viding direct mental health services, as well as college staff, educators, and
administrators. Counseling psychologists might engage in outreach efforts
with financial aid offices to alert staff to mental health risks for students,
facilitate mental health referral processes, and generate interrelated financial
and mental health services. Additionally, there are documented financial
stressors that are specific to the developmental context of being in college,
such as being unable to afford the same activities as peers, and experiencing
worry about impending student loans postgraduation (Heckman et al., 2014).
These concerns could be addressed by offering frequent and widely accessi-
ble no- or low-cost campus recreational activities, and by providing program-
ming focused on financial planning.
Our results also have practical implications for targeted interventions for men
and women. When conceptualizing clients’ mental health needs, counseling pro-
fessionals should recognize women college students as a group with heightened
susceptibility to the mental health risks of financial stress. These students may
benefit from targeted mental health interventions and campus outreach that aim
to assess and alleviate financial pressures and strains. For example, university
Tran et al. 863

mental health professionals and financial aid officers could present psychoedu-
cational lectures to student organizations predominantly composed of women,
such as sororities, highlighting the relevance of financial stress on mental health.
A financial skills-based counseling group for college students experiencing
financial stress may be beneficial, as financial educational programs provided in
a group format have shown beneficial outcomes, such as increasing financial
knowledge and well-being among participants (e.g., Garman, Kim, Kratzer,
Brunson, & Joo, 1999; Kim, 2007).
In working with college students, the results also suggest it is important to
explore men’s perceptions of, and access to, family supports. It is important
for clinicians to recognize that low levels of family support may pose con-
cerns for male college students in the context of financial stress and mental
health. Unfortunately, a quarter of young adults report having no emotional
support, and a third report that stress has contributed to their sense of loneli-
ness and isolation in the past month, placing students at risk (APA, 2015).
Gender theory and research have long considered that men, especially, may
face sociocultural pressures (e.g., gender socialization, masculinity stereo-
types) that discourage them from seeking help from others (Addis & Mahalik,
2003; O’Brien, Hunt, & Hart, 2005). Male clients should be encouraged to
draw on family support as they contend with financial stress, and clinicians
may utilize different interventions (i.e., modeling, role-playing) to help these
clients work through barriers to seeking support. Counseling psychologists
might also partner with university financial aid services to create financial
education programs for students’ families that bolster both parental socializa-
tion of financial knowledge relevant to the college context and parents’
awareness of the importance of family support in mitigating financial stress,
especially for men.

Limitations and Future Research

As with other cross-sectional research, we cannot infer causal pathways from
the findings. For instance, it is plausible college students with higher levels
of anxiety may be more likely to perceive financial stress. Although longitu-
dinal research is needed, additional cross-sectional studies examining differ-
ent socioeconomic groups, including low-income, moderate-income, and
high-income college students, would help to clarify how socioeconomic sta-
tus may drive these processes differently. In addition, this study focused on
the college student population, and the results may not be generalizable to
others beyond this specific developmental context. It is also important to rec-
ognize that the amount and nature of financial stress and social supports
change in later stages of adulthood (Walen & Lachman, 2000).
864 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

There are also a number of measurement considerations. The present

study offers a limited perspective on participants’ current financial situation
(i.e., a single item with three fairly general response options). In contrast,
more nuanced analyses could incorporate more objective financial function-
ing measures (e.g., personal and family income), financial aid information,
and student loan debt and repayment data. The study’s perspective on gender
was also limited in its focus on a binary conceptualization of gender. It is pos-
sible that the gender item’s response option (male, female, other) may not
have been reflective of other gender terminology and conceptualizations
(e.g., man, woman); thus we cannot rule out the possibility that some indi-
viduals may have been reporting their biological sex rather than their gender
self-identity. It is also worthwhile to note that the internal consistency score
of the general social support scale was marginal (α = .68), which may have
influenced the results. Future replication with different general social support
instruments would help to strengthen confidence in the potential buffering
role, or lack thereof, of general social support.
Although the present study makes important inroads in shedding light on
the mental health costs of financial stress for college students in terms of
general anxiety, which is currently among the top mental health concerns
afflicting college students, it is critical for future studies to examine other
mental health indicators. Gender variations in stress reactivity have been
demonstrated depending on health outcomes. For instance, in a rural
Midwestern sample, financial stress was tied to hostility in men, whereas it
was linked to greater likelihood of somatic symptoms in women (Conger,
Lorenz, Elder, Simons, & Ge, 1993). There could be variations in results
depending on the mental health indicator measured, such as depression—
another top mental health concern for college students (ACHA, 2017). Future
research should also assess financial stress manifested in ways beyond self-
perceptions, including physiological stress responses (e.g., cortisol levels).

Conclusion
Existing trends suggest current college students are faced with rising costs for
attending college without an equivalent increase in financial aid (College
Board, 2016). Thus, it could be expected that anxiety related to financial
issues will continue to be an important factor affecting the mental health of
college students. Our study is among the first to document the mental health
correlates of financial stress among college students and to draw attention to
possible protective mechanisms, such as family social support.
Tran et al. 865

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publica-
tion of this article.

Note
1. As further evidence of the robustness of the results, we replicated the moder-
ated moderation with bootstrapping and bias-corrected confidence intervals via
SPSS. This is considered a robust approach that does not rely on assumptions of
normality or homoscedasticity. As in the original ordinary least squares regres-
sion analyses, the three-way interaction term remained significant in the family
support model and nonsignificant for the general social support model.

References
Addis, M. E., & Mahalik, J. R. (2003). Men, masculinity, and the contexts of help
seeking. American Psychologist, 58, 5–14. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.58.1.5
American College Health Association. (2017). American College Health Association-
National College Health Assessment II: Undergraduate student reference group
executive summary Fall 2016. Retrieved from https://www.acha.org/documents
/ncha/NCHA-II_FALL_2016_UNDERGRADUATE_REFERENCE_GROUP
_EXECUTIVE_SUMMARY.pdf
American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Definitions Related to Sexual Orientation
and Gender Diversity in APA Documents. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org
/pi/lgbt/resources/sexuality-definitions.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2011). Answers to your questions about trans-
gender people, gender identity, and gender expression. Retrieved from http:
//www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender.aspx
American Psychological Association. (2015). Stress in America: Paying with our
health. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2014
/stress-report.pdf
American Psychological Association (2016). Stress in America: The impact of dis-
crimination. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2015
/impact-of-discrimination.pdf
Archuleta, K. L., Dale, A., & Spann, S. M. (2013). College students and financial
distress: Exploring debt, financial satisfaction, and financial anxiety. Journal of
Financial Counseling and Planning, 24, 50–62.
Åslund, C., Larm, P., Starrin, B., & Nilsson, K. W. (2014). The buffering effect of tangible
social support on financial stress: Influence on psychological well-being and psycho-
866 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

somatic symptoms in a large sample of the adult general population. International

Journal for Equity in Health, 13, 85–93. doi:10.1186/s12939-014-0085-3
Beiter, R., Nash, R., McCrady, D., Rhoades, D., Linscomb, M., Clarahan, M., &
Sammut, S. (2015). The prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and
stress in a sample of college students. Journal of Affective Disorders, 173, 90–96.
doi:10.1016/j.jad.2014.10.054
Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing.
Psychological Review, 88, 354–364. doi:10.1037//0033-295x.88.4.354
Brougham, R. R., Zail, C. M., Mendoza, C. M., & Miller, J. R. (2009). Stress, sex dif-
ferences, and coping strategies among college students. Current Psychology, 28,
85–97. doi:10.1007/s12144-009-9047-0
Carter, M., McGee, R., Taylor, B., & Williams, S. (2007). Health outcomes in ado-
lescence: Associations with family, friends and school engagement. Journal of
Adolescence, 30, 51–62. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.04.002
Center for Collegiate Mental Health. (2016). 2015 annual report (Publication No.
STA 15-108). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572760.pdf
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis.
Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310
College Board. (2016, October). Trends in college pricing 2016. Retrieved from
https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/2016-trends-college-pricing
-web_0.pdf
Conger, R. D., Lorenz, F. O., Elder Jr, G. H., Simons, R. L., & Ge, X. (1993). Husband
and wife differences in response to undesirable life events. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 34, 71–88. doi:10.2307/2137305
DeFranc, W., & Mahalik, J. R. (2002). Masculine gender role conflict and stress in
relation to parental attachment and separation. Psychology of Men & Masculinity,
3, 51–60. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.3.1.51
Denton, M., Prus, S., & Walters, V. (2004). Gender differences in health: A Canadian
study of the psychosocial, structural, and behavioral determinants of heath. Social
Science and Medicine, 58, 2585–2600. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.09.008
Dwyer, R. E., Hodson, R., & McLoud, L. (2013). Gender, debt, and dropping out of
college. Gender & Society, 27, 30–55. doi:10.1177/0891243212464906
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”:
Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal
of Computer- Mediated Communication, 12, 1143–1168. doi:10.1111/j.1083-
6101.2007.00367.x
Fagot, B. I., Rodgers, C. S., & Leinbach, M. D. (2000). Theories of gender socializa-
tion. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology
of gender (pp. 65–89). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fivush, R., & Buckner, J. P. (2000). Gender, sadness, and depression: The devel-
opment of emotional focus through gendered discourse. In A. H. Fischer (Ed.),
Tran et al. 867

Studies in emotion and social interaction. Second series. Gender and emotion:
Social psychological perspectives (pp. 232–253). New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511628191.012
Garman, E. T., Kim, J., Kratzer, C. Y., Brunson, B. H., & Joo, S. H. (1999). Workplace
financial education improves personal financial wellness. Journal of Financial
Counseling and Planning, 10, 79–88.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed vari-
able mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper].
Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
Healthy Minds Network. (2017). The healthy minds study. Retrieved from: http:
//healthymindsnetwork.org/research/hms
Heckman, S., Lim, H., & Montalto, C. (2014). Factors related to financial stress among
college students. Journal of Financial Therapy, 5, 19–39. doi:10.4148/1944-
9771.1063
Hershbein, B., & Kerney, M. S. (2014). Major decisions: What graduates earn over
their lifetimes. Retrieved from http://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/major
_decisions_what_graduates_earn_over_their_lifetimes
Joo, S.-H., Bagwell Durband, D., & Grable, J. (2008). The academic impact of finan-
cial stress in college students. Journal of College Student Retention: Research,
Theory, and Practice, 10, 287–305. doi:10.2190/CS.10.3.c
Kahn, J., & Pearlin, L. (2006). Financial strain over the life course and health. Journal
of Health and Social Behavior, 47, 17–31. doi:10.1177/002214650604700102
Kawachi, I., & Berkman, L. F. (2001). Social ties and mental health. Journal of Urban
Health, 78, 458–467. doi:10.1093/jurban/78.3.458
Kim, J. (2007). Workplace financial education program: Does it have an impact on
employees’ personal finances? Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 99,
43–47.
Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1984) Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York, NY:
Springer.
Lee, C. Y., & Goldstein, S. E. (2016). Loneliness, stress, and social support in young
adulthood: Does the source of support matter? Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
45, 568–580. doi:10.1007/s10964-015-0395-9
London, H. B. (1989). Breaking away: A study of first-generation college students
and their families. American Journal of Education, 97(2), 144–170.
Lyons, A. C., Scherpf, E., & Roberts, H. (2006). Financial education and communica-
tion between parents and children. Journal of Consumer Education, 23, 64–76.
McDonough, P., & Walters, W. (2001). Gender and health: Reassessing patterns
and explanations. Social Science & Medicine, 52, 547–559. doi:10.1016/s0277-
9536(00)00159-3
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data.
Psychological Methods, 17, 437–455. doi:10.1037/a0028085
Nelson, M. C., Lust, K., Story, M., & Ehlinger, E., (2008). Credit card debt, stress,
and key health risk behaviors among college students. American Journal of
Health Promotions, 22, 400–407. doi:10.4278/ajhp.22.6.400
868 The Counseling Psychologist 46(7)

Newcomb, M. D., & Rabow, J. (1999). Gender, socialization, and money. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 852–869. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.
tb02029.x
Nora, A., Cabrera, A., Serra Hagedorn, L., & Pascarella, E. (1996). Differential
impacts of academic and social experiences on college-related behavioral out-
comes across different ethnic and gender groups at four-year institutions.
Research in Higher Education, 37, 427–451. doi:10.1007/bf01730109
O’Brien, R., Hunt, K., & Hart, G. (2005). “It’s caveman stuff, but that is to a certain
extent how guys still operate”: Men’s accounts of masculinity and help seeking.
Social Science & Medicine, 61, 503–516. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.12.008
Pearlin, L. I., & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 19, 2–21. doi:10.2307/2136319
Peirce, R. S., Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1996). Financial stress,
social support, and alcohol involvement: A longitudinal test of the buffer-
ing hypothesis in a general population survey. Health Psychology, 15, 38–47.
doi:10.1037/0278-6133.15.1.38
Shor, E., Roelfs, D. J., & Yogev, T. (2013). The strength of family ties: A meta-
analysis and meta-regression of self-reported social support and mortality. Social
Networks, 35, 626–638. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2013.08.004
Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., & Lowe, B. (2006). A brief measure
for assessing generalized anxiety disorder. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166,
1092–1097. doi:10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092
Tamres, L. K., Janicki, D., & Helgeson, V. S. (2002). Sex differences in coping behav-
ior: A meta-analytic review and an examination of relative coping. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 6, 2–30. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0601_1
Taylor, R. D., Casten, R., & Flickinger, S. M. (1993). Influence of kinship
social support on the parenting experiences and psychosocial adjustment of
African-American adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 29, 382–388.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.29.2.382
Taylor, R. D. (1996). Adolescents’ perceptions of kinship support and family man-
agement practices: Association with adolescent adjustment in African American
families. Developmental Psychology, 32(4), 687–695. doi:10.1037/0012-1649
.32.4.687
Thoits, P. A. (1995). Stress, coping and social support processes: Where are we?
What next? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35, 53–79.
Tran, A. G. T. T., & Mintert, J. S. (n.d.). Financial and Social Stress Study [Data set].
Tempe, AZ.
Tran, A. G. T. T., Mintert, J. S., Llamas, J. D., & Lam, C. K. (2018). At what costs?
Student loan debt, debt stress, and racially/ethnically diverse college students’ per-
ceived health. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 24, 459–469.
doi:10.1037/cdp0000207
Uchino, B. N., Cacioppo, J. T., & Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K. (1996). The relationship
between social support and physiological processes: A review with emphasis on
underlying mechanisms and implications for health. Psychological Bulletin, 119,
488–531. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.3.488
Tran et al. 869

Unger, R. K. (1979). Toward a redefinition of sex and gender. American Psychologist,

34, 1085–1094. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.11.1085
Uphoff, E. P., Pickett, K. E., Cabieses, B., Small, N., & Wright, J. (2013). A sys-
tematic review of the relationships between social capital and socioeconomic
inequalities in health: A contribution to understanding the psychosocial pathway
of health inequalities. International Journal for Equity in Health, 12, 54–66.
doi:10.1186/1475-9276-12-54
Walen, H. R., & Lachman, M. E. (2000). Social support and strain from partner, fam-
ily, and friends: Costs and benefits for men and women in adulthood. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 5–30. doi:10.1177/0265407500171001
Westefeld, J. S., Homaifar, B., Spotts, J., Furr, S., Range, L., & Werth, J. L. (2005).
Perceptions concerning college student suicide: Data from four universities.
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 35, 640–645.
Wisconsin HOPE Lab. (2016). What we’re learning: Prevalence of and responses to
financial stress among undergraduates. Retrieved from http://www.wihopelab
.com/publications/Wisconsin-HOPE-Lab-Data-Brief%2016-04-Financial-Stress
-Among-Undergraduates.pdf

Author Biographies
Alisia G. T. T. Tran, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Counseling and Counseling
Psychology program at Arizona State University. Her Tran Ethnic & Minority
Psychology & Experiences (TEMPE) research lab (https://sites.google.com/site
/tempelab/) examines socioeconomic disparities, financial stressors, discrimination,
ethnic–racial socialization, and ethnic minority psychology.
Christina K. Lam, MA, is a PhD student in the Counseling Psychology program at
Arizona State University. Her research interests broadly examine ethnic minority
cultural experiences and mental health.
Eric Legg, PhD, is an assistant professor in the School of Community Resources &
Development at Arizona State University. His research uses a socioecological
approach to explore questions of positive youth and adolescent development, primar-
ily in a community sport context. In addition, his research examines issues related to
sense of community, social capital, and social support.