Dear Editor-in-Chief
The subjective well-being concerns peoples’ self-reported assessment of their own wellbeing, namely both health and quality of life (1, 2). It is an issue of concern for university students (3, 4). The aim of the current study was to examine the level of subjective wellbeing among students in maritime business administration departments followed in university.
We have performed this descriptive study in Kocaeli University in Kocaeli, Turkey, during October 2013. The study was conducted by a sample of convenience students following in maritime business administration departments. Participants volunteered to take part in the study, who were over 18 years of age, and being a first-, second-, third- or fourth-year student Data were gathered using Personal Information Form and The BBC subjective well-being (BBC-SWB) scale (2). Participants’ consent was obtained to use their answers for the purpose of this study. The BBC-SWB scales have been used to identify populations’ the general wellbeing. Respondents were required to select their answer from one of five options that best describes their experience. One item, asking about anxiety and depression, was reversed scored. Higher scores reflect a higher degree of general wellbeing.
Cronbach’s alpha coefficients calculated using the whole sample (n = 178) revealed high levels of internal consistency for the total 24-item scale (Cronbach’s alpha = .84, 24 items). Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS (SPSS for Windows, version 16.0). Mean age of the study participants was 20.52 ± 6.0 years (range: 18-24 years), 63.5% (n=113) of the students were man. %97.8 (n=174) of them was not married.
The mean score was 3.27 ± 0.54; ranging from 2.44±1.08 to 4.19±0.84. Mean scores were psychological well-being 3.34 ± 0.53, physical health and well-being 3.13 ± 0.57, relationships 3.59 ± 0.70.
The mean item score for the BBC-SWB was 3.27 ± 0.54, which was higher than those of reported by Pontin et al. (3.05±0.70). In our study, higher scores (3.59 ±0.70) came against questions related to relationships. Low scores (3.15 ± 0.57) came against questions related to physical health and well-being. In Pontin et al. study, low scores came against questions related to general wellbeing (2).
In terms of well-being perception profiles of students, items 2-11,13,16,17 recorded a median of 4 (range<4), which was significantly good than items 1,12,14,15,18-23 which recorded a median of 3 (range <4). In terms of well-being perception profiles of in Pontin et al. Study (2), items 1,2,811,19,20 recorded a mean of 2, and other items recorded a mean of 3.
In our study, 4 items were recorded a median of 2 (range ≤4). This result is not similar to those of Pontin et al. studies in England populations (2). An important finding was that students populations were more likely to focus on items 1,4,12,14,15,18-23.
The subjective well-being was less than ideal in the study population, indicating the need of proper improving the subjective well-being care to maintain a desirable subjective well-being as a first step in students.
Acknowledgements
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
References
- Michaelson J, Mahony S, Schifferes J (2012). New Economic Foundation. Measuring well-being: a guide for practitioners. London: Available from: www.google.com [Google Scholar]
- Pontin E, Schwannauer M, Tai S, Kinderman P (2013). A UK validation of a general measure of subjective well-being: the modified BBC subjective well-being scale (BBC-SWB). Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 11(1):150. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bird JM, Markle RS (2012). Subjective well-being in school environments: promoting positive youth development through evidence-based assessment and intervention. Am J Orthopsychiat, 82(1): 61–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mathew E, Shaikh RB, Al-Sharbatti S, Muttappallymyalil J, Sreedharan J, Basha SA (2012). Self-rated health, BMI, blood pressure, and perceived health needs of first year students at a Middle-Eastern medical university. Prev Med, 54(3–4): 287. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]