Table 2.
Bivariable analysis: associations of relevant variables with a strong sense of coherence (SOC) (SOC scale score median > 42)
| Variables | Categories | SOC scale score median | p-valuea |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 42 | |
| Female | 42 | 0.589 | |
| Father’s education | High | 43 | |
| Low | 41 | 0.079 | |
| Having religious beliefs | No | 42 | |
| Yes | 42 | 0.205 | |
| Income sufficiency | Sufficient | 43 | |
| Insufficient | 40 | < 0.001 | |
| Only-child | Yes | 42 | |
| No | 42 | 0.035 | |
| Birth place | Countryside | 42 | |
| Small city | 42 | ||
| Large cityb | 43 | 0.482 | |
| Subjective health | Good | 43 | |
| Poor | 37 | < 0.001 | |
| Health awareness | High | 43 | |
| Low | 39 | < 0.001 | |
| Nutrition importance | Important | 43 | |
| Unimportant | 37 | < 0.001 | |
| Physical activity | < 1 a week | 40 | |
| 1–2 a week | 42 | ||
| ≥ 3 a week | 44 | < 0.001 | |
| Weight satisfaction | Satisfied | 43 | |
| Dissatisfied | 41 | 0.015 | |
| Good grade importance | Important | 42 | |
| Unimportant | 40 | 0.282 | |
| Performance compared with peers | Better | 44 | |
| The same | 43 | ||
| Worse | 38 | < 0.001 | |
| Having a partner | Yes | 43 | |
| No | 42 | 0.250 | |
| Social support | Satisfied | 44 | |
| Dissatisfied | 37 | < 0.001 | |
| Relation with parents | Good | 43 | |
| Poor | 37 | < 0.001 | |
| Relation with fellow students | Good | 43 | |
| Poor | 37 | < 0.001 | |
| Relation with friends | Good | 43 | |
| Poor | 36 | < 0.001 | |
| Isolation at university | No | 43 | |
| Yes | 37 | < 0.001 | |
| Political situation | Satisfied | 44 | |
| Dissatisfied | 39 | < 0.001 | |
| Age | 0.026 | ||
| BMI | 0.292 | ||
| Perceived stress scale score | < 0.001 | ||
aChi square test for categorical variables and Mann–Whitney-U-test for continuous variables
bCities higher than county level