Psychological capital and performance among undergraduate students: the role of meaning-focused coping and satisfaction

ABSTRACT This study explores the predictive relationships between psychological capital (PsyCap), meaning-focused coping, satisfaction and performance among undergraduate students. Six hundred and eighty two (n = 682) college students from 29 different academic programmes completed an academic well-being survey, which included measures of PsyCap, coping strategies, and academic satisfaction (time 1). Performance data was collected five months later (time 2), at the end of the year. Path analysis results provided support for a sequential mediation model where PsyCap was directly related to performance, and indirectly related to performance through meaning-focus coping and satisfaction. In addition, PsyCap was directly associated with satisfaction, highlighting the importance of this psychological construct in academic settings. Understanding the role that meaning-focused coping and satisfaction play in the relationship between psychological capital and performance may be useful for scholars and lecturers to design optimal evidenced-based interventions to increase both well-being and academic achievement.

different coping strategies in a demanding situation: problem-focused coping to resolve the problem (when it is considered that something can be done) and emotion-focused coping to directly regulate distress (when nothing can be done and it is necessary to accept the failure). For example, being awake all night to study for an exam, might be a suitable coping strategy if not too much new information has to be learnt (problem focused). On the contrary, if you have never opened the book during the semester, it might be better to go to go to bed, recover and accept the possible failure in the exam (emotion focus). Both strategies would be oriented toward reducing distress, nonetheless, according to Folkman's proposal, there is a third useful option when efforts to manage a stressful event fail: meaning-focused coping. Following our example, accepting the failure could be the first step of starting to plan how to retake the class.
Meaning-focused coping may help students to reformulate the perceived demand and to appreciate it as a challenge rather than a threat. Students draw on their own beliefs, values, and existential goals to sustain coping and psychological well-being during difficult moments. This positive reframing generates positive emotions that help them to restore the psychological resources and motivation needed to persevere through their objectives (Folkman 2008(Folkman , 2009(Folkman , 2010Lazarus 2006). PsyCap has been related to empower students to cope up with adverse events, buffering the negative stress outcomes and boosting the positive outcomes (Riolli, Savicki, and Richards 2012). Riolli and colleges have suggested that the mechanism for this mediating relationship is that PsyCap may be related to more positive and less negative cognitive appraisals of stress. Addressing the call to investigate this relationship, we propose that meaning-focused coping may be the psychological mechanism that mediates between PsyCap and performance.
Hypothesis 2: Meaning-focused coping will mediate the relationship between PsyCap at time 1 and performance over time (time 2).
Academic satisfaction: the role of positive emotions when adversities arise PsyCap and meaning-focused coping may shape a complementary cognitive and affective process related to achieving tasks and goals through positive emotions. Students may feel psychological well-being and satisfaction when they use their psychological capacities to complete their challenging tasks, especially if they are intrinsically motivated and they find real, personal meaning despite the difficulties. Bandura (2011) suggested that people make every effort to obtain satisfaction through their personal activities, especially if these activities bring meaning and purpose to their lives. It was proposed that meaning provides people with the ability to regulate emotions in daily activities (Tuazon 2014). Furthermore, we understand that university studies play a central role in college students' lives, and we understand that university learning activities involves one's life journey during this period. Given these proposals, we hypothesize that academic satisfaction may be a mediator between 'PsyCap-meaning-focused coping process' and academic performance.
Hypothesis 3: Academic satisfaction will mediate the relationship between meaning-focused coping at time 1 and performance over time (time 2).
To summarize, students use personal psychological resources to complete daily tasks and reach academic goals (Youssef-Morgan and Luthans 2015), persevering even under bad circumstances (Folkman 2010). These personal resources are linked to excellence in academic performance, which might be influenced by cognitive-emotional evaluation processes such as academic satisfaction (Bandura 2011). Identifying the path and relationships between academic performance and its psychological predictors could be used for developing evidence-based interventions to improve performance in university settings. The aim of the study was to assess the relationships between PsyCap, meaning-focused coping and satisfaction toward performance. The predictive path analysis model that tested the hypothesized relationships between PsyCap, meaning-focused coping, satisfaction and performance is depicted graphically in Figure 1. It was hypothesized that PsyCap would predict performance directly and also that PsyCap will predict meaning-focus coping which in turn predicts performance. Additionally, it was hypothesized that meaning-focused coping would predict satisfaction, and in turn satisfaction would predict performance as well.

Sample and procedure
The study was conducted at a Spanish University. Researchers gave a brief presentation of the study to participants during class time and invited them to participate on an academic well-being survey. Each student filled out a paper and pencil questionnaire. Sample comprised 682 students (60.3% female). Participants were stratified and they belonged to the four colleges of which the University is composed: College of Humanities and Social Sciences (31.5%), College of Law and Economics (25.1%), School of Technology and Experimental Sciences (24%), and College of Health Sciences (19.4%). They belonged to 29 different undergraduate academic programmes. Thereby 35.1% were studying at first year, 35.7% at second, 21.1% at third, 7% at fourth and finally 1% at fifth year. Ages ranged from 18 to 62 years old (M age = 22.6 years; SD = 5.6). Finally, 84.6% were not working at the time.

Psychological capital
To measure participants' PsyCap we adapted to the academic context the Spanish short version (12-item) of the Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ-12) (Avey, Avolio, and Luthans 2011;Luthans et al. 2008). This questionnaire, distributed by Mind Garden, Inc., contains four items to measure hope, three items to measure self-efficacy, three items to measure resilience, and two to measure optimism. PsyCap is used as a higher order core construct in which these four positive psychological resources interact in a synergic way (see Luthans, Youssef-Morgan, and Avolio 2015). An example item is: 'I can think of many ways to reach my current goals related to my studies'. The reliability value is shown in Table 1.

Meaning-focused coping strategies
Coping strategies were assessed using The Spanish version of the Brief COPE inventory adapted to the academic context (Morán, Landero, and González 2010;Perczek et al. 2000). This questionnaire contains 28 items to measure 14 different coping reactions, including both adaptive and maladaptive. According to coping strategies literature (Folkman 2008;Folkman and Moskowitz 2000) and previous research findings in factor analysis of Brief COPE inventory among Spanish undergraduate students (Meneghel 2014), meaning-focused coping was measured using acceptance, humour and positive reframing subscales. Example items are: 'I've been learning to live with it' (acceptance subscale), 'I've been making jokes about it' (humour subscale), and 'I've been looking for the bright side of what is happening' (positive reframing subscale). The reliability value is shown in Table 1.

Satisfaction
Satisfaction was measured with a four-item scale that took into consideration four main relevant aspects for university students: the university as a whole, the faculty to which they belonged, the programme that they were studying at, and their professors. For each element students indicated the extent of their satisfaction on a 5-point Faces scale ranging from 1 (frowning) to 5 (smiling). An example item is: 'How satisfied are you with the University?' The reliability value is shown in Table 1.

Performance
Performance was assessed by the Grade Point Average (GPA), provided by the University. It was obtained at the end of the school year around five months after the students completed the questionnaire. Consistent with the Spanish system of qualifications, GPA ranged from 5 (poor) to 10 (excellent). Because of the ethical rules of the University, at the end of the questionnaire, participants signed a consent form to obtain their permission to access to their GPA.

Data analysis
We used path modelling (Figure 1) in order to test the hypotheses and estimate both direct and indirect effects (Preacher and Hayes 2008). Data were analysed using path analysis programme IBM SPSS Amos 21. Standardized regression coefficients were used to examine predictive paths relationships that were hypothesized (Lane, Hall, and Lane 2004;Meneghel 2014 (Hu and Bentler 1999). Two strategies were conducted in order to mitigate problems with common method bias. First, predictor and criterion measures were obtained from different sources (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, and Podsakoff 2012). Thus, PsyCap, meaning-focused coping and satisfaction were obtained from self-report assessment (students), and performance was collected from an external source (GPA). Second, there was a time lag (five months) between obtaining GPA and the rest of measures.

Goodness of fit
Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1. All correlations were positive and in the expected direction. The initial hypothesized model ( Figure 1) showed a poor fit (NFI = .72, IFI = .72, TLI = −.71, CFI = .71 and RMSEA = .32.). Given the correlations found between the study variables (see Table 1) we decided to consult the modification indices in order to improve the model goodness of fit. Based on these indices and according to the literature Riolli, Savicki, and Richards 2012), we decided to include a direct path from PsyCap to satisfaction as well as removing a direct path from meaning-focused coping to academic performance (GPA). The final hypothesized model had a good fit (NFI = .99, IFI = 1, TLI = .98, CFI = 1, and RMSEA = .04).

Effects
The final path model that tested hypothesized relationships between PsyCap, meaningfocused coping, satisfaction and performance is presented in Figure 2. Results showed significant relationships between PsyCap and meaning-focused coping. Meaning-focused coping significantly contributed to explain satisfaction and satisfaction significantly contributed to explain performance. PsyCap showed direct effects on performance and satisfaction.
Meaning-focused coping and satisfaction partially mediated the relationship between PsyCap and performance. We conducted bias corrected percentile method with 1000 bootstrap samples to calculate confidence intervals of indirect effects (Cheung and Lau 2007). We used the standardized indirect effect as an 'index of mediation' (Preacher and Hayes 2008). The results of all the indirect effects found are presented in Table 2. Indirect effect of PsyCap on performance through meaning-focused coping and then satisfaction, was positive and significant (Indirect effect = .041). Indirect effect of PsyCap on performance through satisfaction, was positive and significant (Indirect effect = .037). The total effect of PsyCap on performance was .191 and predictor variables explained a 5% of performance (GPA).

Discussion
The aim of the study was to assess the predictive relationships between PsyCap, meaningfocused coping and satisfaction toward academic performance. The initial predictive path analysis model tested the hypothesis that PsyCap would predict performance directly, and also PsyCap would predict meaning-focused coping which in turn would predict performance. Additionally, it was hypothesized that meaning-focused coping would predict satisfaction, and satisfaction would predict performance as well. Results did not confirm this Figure 2. Path model to investigate predictive relationships between PsyCap, Meaning-focused coping, satisfaction and performance among undergraduate students (N = 682). Notes: *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. initial model, however, the alternative model proposed based on theoretical and statistical reasons, showed a good fit and statistically significant predictive paths. The final model confirmed most of the initial hypothesis formulated and showed interesting information regarding the role of academic satisfaction in academic performance. These findings support our initial first hypothesis showing a positive direct relationship between PsyCap and performance over time. As in previous findings in undergraduate students' PsyCap, this study lends additional support to the capability of PsyCap as a predictor of positive psychological outcomes and excellence performance (Siu, Bakker, and Jiang 2014). Meaning-focused coping and satisfaction partially mediated the relationship between PsyCap and performance over time, supporting our third hypothesis. However, the final model did not confirm a direct effect of meaning-focused coping on performance, as it was suggested in our second hypothesis. These findings showed that meaning-focused coping strategies such acceptance, positive reappraisal, benefit finding and reminding, reordering priorities, self-regulation, and adaptive goal processes, (Folkman 1997(Folkman , 2008(Folkman , 2009Folkman and Moskowitz 2004) might reinforce students' PsyCap to persevere through reaching an academic goal. Students with higher levels in PsyCap would perceive the academic environment in a more positive way, assessing it as less distressing. They would perceive better challenging aspects of problems, and would be able to understand difficulties as possibilities to enhance learning and personal growth (Riolli, Savicki, and Richards 2012). In line of Siu and colleges proposals (Siu, Bakker, and Jiang 2014), students with high development of PsyCap can cope better with the hindrance demands they face, which would influence positively in their success and performance.
Meaning-focused coping would help undergraduate students reaching the challenges of their study, connecting with their personal values and intrinsic motivation. Satisfaction, such a positive emotional outcome, could play a full mediating role between meaningfocused coping and academic performance. This mediation role could be an explanation of how reformulating a perceived demand to understand it as a challenge rather than a threat, may predict better performance. In this regard, this positive reframing would generate positive emotions, that might help students to restore coping resources to face demands (Folkman 2008(Folkman , 2009Lazarus 2006). That is, students need to be satisfied with their academic lives in order to look for the bright side in adverse situations.
The final model showed a non-hypothesized path relationship: PsyCap was directly associated with satisfaction, highlighting the importance of this variable in academic settings. PsyCap is a positive state-like based on psychological resources and involved in completing tasks successfully. For this reason, a high level of PsyCap means higher levels of happiness, satisfaction and psychological well-being (Datu, King, and Valdez 2016;Datu and Valdez 2015;Nielsen et al. 2016;Riolli, Savicki, and Richards 2012;Siu, Bakker, and Jiang 2014). Students feel good when they use their personal strengths and resources to complete tasks to reach academic goals. Besides, being satisfied with their studies could also reinforce the power of their psychological resources, improving excellence in their performance. Moreover, there is recent empirical evidence about how positive psychological resources increase academic satisfaction and well-being, supporting the evidence of the relevance of positive predictors on positive outcomes. Howells et al. (2017) found that gratitude between doctoral students and their supervisors have positive effects on students' psychological well-being, motivation and self-efficacy. Hanson et al. (2016) found that social cooperation and collaborative learning had a significant positive effect on student's psychological well-being.

Practical implications
This study suggests multivariable predictors and mechanisms to explain and understand academic performance. Results show specifically a sequential mediated relationship between PsyCap and performance, revealing the mediating role of meaning-focused coping and satisfaction in this relationship. These theoretical links between PsyCap, meaning-focused coping, satisfaction and performance, along with the results of the present study, indicate the relevance of considering meaning-focused coping and PsyCap as two complementary psychological resources that can improve students' fulfilment.
These results provide lectures with empirical evidence to develop and implement innovative pedagogical strategies to enhance students' quality of learning and excellence performance. In order to optimize these interventions these strategies must be based on theory and research (Lane, Hall, and Lane 2004). The results of this study support the PsyCap literature on evidence-based interventions and institutional programmes oriented to improve psychological well-being and performance in university settings Luthans et al. 2010). However, these results suggest that adding meaning-focused coping content to PsyCap workshops (Luthans et al. 2006) could be a useful strategy to reinforce the effectiveness of this positive intervention. Thus, students could attend face-to-face, small-group workshop sessions, composed of specific exercises designed to develop hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and resilience (PsyCap) (Luthans et al. 2006), and they could also train different meaning-focused coping skills. Developing personal capacity of acceptance, positive reappraisal, benefit finding, and reordering priorities and goal processes could be essential to increase levels of academic performance and psychological well-being. Positive education and positive psychology basis and literature may serve as a proper scaffolding to build these interventions, not only for extra curricula workshops but also for designing programme pedagogical strategies.

Limitations
This study has several limitations which highlight important avenues for future research. First, we use self-reported data for psychological measures, which increases the risk of common method bias (Podsakoff et al. 2003). We consider that the use of self-reports could be justified by the nature of the constructs. However, we conducted two strategies in order to mitigate these problems with common method bias. First, predictor and criterion measures were obtained from different sources (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, and Podsakoff 2012). Thus, PsyCap, meaning-focused coping and satisfaction were obtained from self-report assessment (students), and performance was collected from an external source (GPA). On the other hand, there was a time lag (five months) between obtaining GPA and the rest of measures.
Second, our results are based on a sample from the same university. However, we found interesting results to enhance PsyCap and performance literature among students that came from different faculties and several university programmes. Thus, we consider that the results need to be replicated in others universities and countries, to allow their generalizability. Additionally, our model explains only 5% of students' performance. It would be interesting to reach higher levels of statistical explanation. However, academic performance is a construct influenced by several social, economic, psychological and pedagogical variables. It takes place in a complex multivariate social context, as it is education setting. Factors such as availability of resources, expectances, motivation, or previous experience, has been proposed as predictors of success in higher education (Hernández-Sánchez and Ortega-Maldonado 2015). Thus, previous findings in undergraduate students' PsyCap (Luthans, Luthans, and Jensen 2012) explained similar percentage of the variance of GPA (7%). Additionally, previous findings in undergraduate students' coping (MacCann et al. 2012) explained similar percentage of the variance of GPA (2%, without considering the effects of personality factors). Finally, we consider that explaining more than 5% of students' performance is a difficult and important challenge for scholars.

Conclusions and prospective
According to our findings, PsyCap, meaning-focused coping and satisfaction have a predictor role on academic performance. Additional directions for future research include testing personal differences and factors to distinguish meaning-focused coping effectiveness with academic stress (MacCann et al. 2012;Riolli, Savicki, and Richards 2012). Recent research has shown links between the student personality and meaning-focused coping strategies of college students. Gustems-Carnicer and Calderón (2016) found that positive reappraisal is predicted by the wisdom virtue which include personal strengths such as creativity, curiosity, perspective, judgement and love of learning (Peterson and Seligman 2004). Prosen and Vitulić (2016) found differences in the frequency of use of the cognitive reappraisal (meaning and positive) in different attachment styles in students. In this regard, qualitative research could be a useful methodology to obtain deeper information to evaluate student personality and coping mechanisms.
Finally, it would be important that additional directions for future research also include designing and testing interventions on PsyCap and meaning-focused coping at the academic setting. Students need excellence performance in order to get better employability. They need to learn technical knowledge and develop better learning strategies. But they also need to increase their psychological capacities and skills related to face daily life with emotional intelligence. Higher education institutions should address this real need, and scholars and lecturers could support them with evidence-based interventions. The better the interventions are, the better the students' quality of life will be.
Alberto Ortega-Maldonado is a PhD student at the Universitat Jaume I of Castellón, Spain. He is conducting his doctoral thesis on how to increase well-being in academic and work organizations through positive interventions. He is very interested in the scientific dissemination in order to improve the evidence-based management.
Marisa Salanova is a full professor in Positive Organizational Psychology at the Universitat Jaume I of Castellón, Spain. She is also the Director of WANT-Research Team High Performance Group. Currently she is the salient President of the Spanish Society of Positive Psychology (SEPP) and she is an Advisor of the International Positive Psychology Association (IPPA) Work and Organizations Division's. She has about 300 national and international publications on Occupational Health Psychology and Positive Psychology applied to work. She has created a project of dissemination to share scientific knowledge and to help people and organizations to live a more fulfilling and meaningful life and be happier.