Working College Students’ Time Pressure and Work-School Conflict: Do Boundary Permeability and Dispositional Mindfulness Matter?

2021 ◽  
pp. 003329412110296
Author(s):  
Min (Maggie) Wan ◽  
Li Feng ◽  
Xiao Meng ◽  
Muxin Zhai ◽  
Robert Konopaske

Although working college students are experiencing increasing demands on their time, the influence of time pressure on students’ work-school experience has been under-studied in the extant career development literature. Drawing on boundary theory and conservation of resources theory, the present research investigates the degree to which work or school time pressure is associated with working college students’ work-school conflict through work-school boundary permeability. Moreover, this study considers dispositional mindfulness as an individual resource that buffers the relationships above. Using a sample of 222 working college students in a large and diverse public university in the United States, we find support that work and school time pressures predict higher work-school conflict through work-school boundary permeability. Results also suggest that dispositional mindfulness moderates the indirect relationship among school time pressure, school-to-work boundary permeability, and school-to-work conflict. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings.

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052199793
Author(s):  
Tiffany L. Marcantonio ◽  
Danny Valdez ◽  
Kristen N. Jozkowski

The purpose of this study was to assess the cues college students use to determine a sexual partner is refusing vaginal-penile sex (i.e., refusal interpretations). As a secondary aim, we explored the influence of item wording ( not willing/non-consent vs refusal) on college students’ self-reported refusal interpretations. A sample of 175 college students from Canada and the United States completed an open-ended online survey where they were randomly assigned to one of two wording conditions ( not willing/non-consent vs refusal); students were then prompted to write about the cues they used to interpret their partner was refusing. An inductive coding procedure was used to analyze open-ended data. Themes included explicit and implicit verbal and nonverbal cues. The refusal condition elicited more explicit and implicit nonverbal cues than the not willing/non-consent condition. Frequency results suggested men reported interpreting more explicit and implicit verbal cues. Women reported interpreting more implicit nonverbal cues from their partner. Our findings reflect prior research and appear in line with traditional gender and sexual scripts. We recommend researchers consider using the word refusal when assessing the cues students interpret from their sexual partners as this wording choice may reflect college students’ sexual experiences more accurately.


2000 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 643-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Beth Pinto ◽  
Diane H. Parente ◽  
Todd S. Palmer

Much has been written in the popular press on credit card use and spending patterns of American college students. The proliferation of credit cards and their ease of acquisition ensure that students today have more opportunities for making more credit purchases than any other generation of college students. Little is known about the relationship between students' attitudes towards materialism and their use of credit cards. A study was conducted at three college campuses in the northeastern part of the United States where a total of 1,022 students were surveyed. Students' attitudes toward use of credit and their credit card balances were evaluated relative to their scores on Richins and Dawson's Materialism Scale (1992). Our findings suggest no significant difference between those individuals scoring high versus low on the Materialism Scale in terms of the number of credit cards owned and the average balance owed. Individuals high on materialism, however, significantly differed in terms of their uses for credit cards and their general attitude toward their use.


Author(s):  
Julie Newman Kingery ◽  
Jamie S. Bodenlos ◽  
Travis I. Schneider ◽  
Jack S. Peltz ◽  
Mara W. Sindoni

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document