Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This cross-sectional study explored the relationship between emotional regulation, the Big Five personality traits, and happiness among 411 nursing students in Saudi Arabia, with an average age of 19.6. The Oxford Happiness Inventory, Big Five Personality Test, and Emotional Regulation Inventory were used as research instruments through selfadministered questionnaires. The findings revealed that nursing students had a moderate level of happiness (mean = 3.5), with students in their third year being happier than those in their first year. The most expressed personality traits among the students were agreeableness (79%) and conscientiousness (69%). Furthermore, the study discovered that cognitive reappraisal was higher among single students and those aged 19 or younger. Finally, the study identified extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and cognitive reappraisal as predictors of happiness level (adjusted R ² = 57%). The study suggests that improving emotional regulation could enhance the happiness and well-being of nursing students.

Plain language summary

This study examined the relationship between the Big Five personality traits, happiness, and emotional regulation among nursing students. A cross-sectional study was employed to collect data from nursing students using three research instruments: the Oxford Happiness Inventory, the Big Five Personality Test, and the Emotional Regulation Inventory. Data were collected from April to June 2022 and a response rate of 41% was achieved. It was found that the nursing students had a moderate. The predictors of happiness were extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and cognitive reappraisal [F(6, 404) = 87.8, p < .001, adjusted R ² = 57%]. The study has revealed that personality traits, happiness, and emotional regulation are interconnected and suggests that improving emotional regulation may help improve nursing students’ happiness levels. Furthermore, these results may provide useful information for nursing educators aiming to improve the overall well-being of their students.

Keywords

big-five personality happiness emotional regulation nursing students predictors

Introduction

Personality traits have been linked with domains of human behavior, particularly emotional regulation, and happiness. Despite this, the exploration of the nuanced influence of an individual’s traits remains relatively uncharted in the realm of the Big Five personality traits (Barańczuk, 2019; Husain & Carvalho, 2020; McCabe & Fleeson, 2016). Diverse psychological perspectives have shed light on personality traits. For instance, individuals exhibiting higher levels of subjective well-being tend to score prominently in the Big Five domains of conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness (Soto, 2015). Moreover, the connection between optimism and agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness has been established (Akhtar & Saleem, 2020).

Emotional regulation (ER), a crucial concept in clinical and academic contexts, involves explicit attempts to shape emotional experiences. This aspect has significant implications for human psychological functioning (Kobylińska & Kusev, 2019). Strategies for ER, including cognitive reappraisal, have also been associated with happiness (Purnamaningsih, 2017; Troy et al., 2018). As well as various dimensions of well-being (Aldao et al., 2014; Conklin et al., 2015). Demonstrating positive ER tendencies is linked to academic success, well-being, higher socioeconomic status, and resilience against mental health issues (Behrouian et al., 2021; Côté et al., 2010; Joormann & Stanton, 2016; Merkebu, 2019).

Notably, studies on happiness among university students have unveiled significant findings. Happiness has been correlated with personality traits, efficacy beliefs, self-esteem, and academic success (Demirtaş, 2020; Flynn & MacLeod, 2015; Lee & Padilla, 2016; Ziapour et al., 2018). Particularly, cognitive reappraisal emerges as a significant contributor to student happiness (Demirtaş, 2018). Highlighting the importance of exploring factors that contribute to positive youth development.

Against this backdrop, this study aims to examine personality traits, happiness levels, and ER among nursing students in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, an area yet to be explored in published studies. Given the potential impacts of these associations on undergraduate students, investigating these variables becomes paramount. The research addresses the following questions: (1) What are the Big Five personality traits among students? (2) What is the level of happiness among students? (3) What is the level of ER among students? and (4) What predictor variables contribute to happiness? The suggested hypotheses for the study were First, it is expected that there will be positive correlations between specific Big Five personality traits (conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and optimism) and nursing student happiness levels. Second, a positive association is found between the use of positive emotional regulation strategies, particularly cognitive reappraisal, and increased levels of happiness in nursing students. Finally, In terms of demographic variables, there is a predicted significant relation between factors such as age, gender, marital status, and program year and happiness levels among nursing students.

Methods

Site and Setting

A cross-sectional study was conducted at the College of Nursing, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU) in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia, from April to June 2022. The College offers Bachelor’s and Master’s degree programs in nursing.

Sampling Technique and Size

The students enrolled in the College of Nursing were the target population of this study. The accessible population comprised the first to fifth-year (the internship year) nursing students in the College. According to the Yamane method, the required number of participants was calculated to be 267. The following equation was used:

n = \frac{N}{1 + N {(e)}^{2}}

Considering the drop-down, we aimed to have 300 students involved in this study (Louangrath, 2017). Convenient sampling was utilized to collect data.

Survey Instrument

Three instruments were used in this study to achieve the goal of the study:

Oxford Happiness Inventory (OHI): The OHI was used to evaluate the level of happiness of the study participants. The instrument included 29 items rated on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) (Argyle et al., 1995). Validity and reliability for the Arabic version were measured, and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .91 to .89 for the subscales (Al-Dababi et al., 2019). After reverse coding for some items, the total marks were added and then divided by 29. In this study, reverse coding was done for the negative items, and Cronbach’s alpha was .89. The construct validity of each item was evaluated using the Pearson correlation analysis by comparing the results to the critical value table and comparing them to the total value. The findings are, therefore, valid and significant; the r value ranged from .168 to .743. The level of happiness was divided into three levels: low (1–2.33), moderate (2.34–3.67), and high (3.68–5).

The Big Five Inventory: The Big Five personality traits were assessed using the short version of the Big Five Inventory, which included 44 items categorized on the Likert scale varying from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The scale included five sub-scales: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism (John et al., 1991). Validity and reliability for the Arabic version were tested, and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .84 to .68 for all subscales (Al-Dababi et al., 2019). In this study, reverse coding was done for the negative items, and Cronbach’s alpha was .72. The construct validity of each item was also evaluated using the Pearson correlation analysis by comparing the results to the critical value table and comparing them to the total value. The findings are, therefore, valid and significant. The r value ranged from .044 to .601.

Emotional Regulation Questionnaire: ER was evaluated using the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ). It included 10 Items divided into two subscales; Reappraisal and Suppression. The items were rated on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) (Gross & John, 2003). Validity and reliability for the Arabic version were measured, and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .87 to .75 for the subscales (Abdelrahman & Khaldoun, 2019). In this study, reverse coding was done for the negative items, and Cronbach’s alpha was .76. The construct validity of each item was evaluated using the Pearson correlation analysis by comparing the results to the critical value table and comparing them to the total value. The findings are, therefore, valid and significant. The r value ranged from .386 to .633.

Ethical Consideration

The study was conducted with ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), with the approval number IRB-2022-04-306. The study procedure and surveys had received prior approval from the IRB before initiating participant recruitment. The participants were nursing students at the College of Nursing at IAU. Prior to participation, students were provided with a comprehensive information sheet and verbal instructions, which explained the voluntary nature of participation and the right to withdraw from the study without providing any reason, with no effect on the student’s teaching or rights. The participants were also provided with a detailed explanation of the study, including the risks and benefits of participation, and were given the opportunity to ask questions before providing verbal consent. Participants were assured that their confidentiality and privacy would be protected throughout the study, in accordance with the study’s guidelines. The information sheet also outlined the research goals, significance, and advantages of the study.

Data Collection Procedure

Data for this study was collected during lectures, with students given 30 min to complete the self-administered questionnaire containing 83 questions, including demographic variables. The questionnaire used statements or scenarios on a Likert scale to gather responses, allowing for quantitative analysis of the collected data.

Data Analysis

Data was collected and analyzed using SPSS (version 22). Categorical variables were evaluated using frequencies and percentages, while continuous variables were expressed using means and standard deviations. Scales were evaluated for reliability using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients. The normality of data was examined using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Parametric test was used for the normally distributed data, and a non-parametric test was used for the non-normally distributed data to find the difference between groups and relationships between the variables. Correlation analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between different variables. To predict happiness levels, a Multiple Stepwise regression analysis was conducted on personality traits, including extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism, as well as the cognitive reappraisal strategy. A p-value was considered statistically significant if it was <.05.

Missing data, which was more than 20% of the total, were removed, and the residual was replaced with the mean for the continuous variables and the median for the categorical variables. Mahalanobis Distance was used to evaluate the outliers, and the results showed that values greater than 26.124 should be removed (df = 8, p = .001, X ² = 26.124). Two outliers were consequently removed from the data set. The relationships between the dependent (DV) and the independent (IV) variables was examined for multicollinearity using the Pearson correlation. The findings showed that the data satisfied the assumption of a lack of multicollinearity except for age and suppression, which were eliminated since they had no relationship with DV.

Based on the large sample size in our study, we assume that the data is normally distributed. To support this assumption, we conducted Shapiro-Wilk tests on our variables. The results of the Shapiro-Wilk tests showed that the variables “Happiness,” “Extraversion,” “Conscientiousness,” and “Neuroticism” have Shapiro-Wilk test statistics close to 1 and p-values greater than .05, indicating normal distribution. However, the variables “Agreeableness,” “Openness,” “Cognitive Reappraisal,” and “Suppression” have Shapiro-Wilk test statistics with p-values less than .05, indicating non-normal distribution. Nonetheless, the large sample size in our study suggests that violations of the normality assumption are unlikely to cause serious problems (Allende-Alonso et al., 2019; Bachrach et al., 2007; Pallant, 2020).

Results

Demographic Characteristics

The response rate in the study was 41%. The sample consisted of 411 nursing students with an average age of 19.6 (SD 1.7), comprising 231 men with an average age of 19.3 (SD 1.5) and 180 women with an average age of 20.1 (SD 1.5). More than half of the participants were males (56.2%), and their age was equal to or less than 19 years (55.0%). Most were single (94.9%), and 47% were in their first year (Table 1).

Table 1.

Demographic Characteristics of Participants.

Demographic Characteristic	Frequency	Percent
Gender
Male	231	56.2
Female	180	43.8
Age
≤19	226	55.0
>19	185	45.0
Marital status
Single	390	94.9
Married	21	5.1
Education level
1st year	193	47.0
2nd year	64	15.6
3rd year	48	11.7
4th year	77	18.7
Intern	29	7.1

The happiness level among the student was 3.5 (70% out of 100). The highest-scored personality traits were agreeableness (79%) and conscientiousness (69%). On the other hand, the lowest-scored trait was neuroticism (57%). For ER, cognitive reappraisal had the highest level (70%) compared to suppression (61%) (Table 2).

Table 2.

Level of Happiness, Personality Trait, and Emotional Regulation.

Variable\Category	Mean (percent out of 100)	SD
Happiness
Happiness	3.5 (70%)	0.5
Personality trait
Extraversion	23.0 (58%)	4.5
Agreeableness	35.6 (79%)	4.5
Conscientiousness	31.2 (69%)	5.3
Neuroticism	22.8 (57%)	5.9
Openness	33.6 (67%)	5.5
Emotional regulation
Cognitive reappraisal	21.1 (70%)	4.1
Suppression	12.2 (61%)	3.3

Difference Between Groups for Happiness Level

Students in the third year were happier than those in the first year (p = .024) using post hoc with ANOVA. Other variables did not significantly differ between the groups (Table 3).

Table 3.

The Difference Between Demographic Characteristics of Students and Happiness.

Demographic Characteristic	Mean (SD)	t/f	Sig.
Gender
Male	3.5 (0. 5)	0.700	.485
Female	3.5 (0.5)	0.700	.485
Age (year)
≤19	3.6 (0.5)	1.82	.070
>19	3.5 (0.5)	1.82	.070
Marital status
Single	3.5 (0.5)	0.263	.609
Married	3.6 (0.5)	0.263	.609
Education level
1st year	3.6 (0.5)	2.762	.027^a
2nd year	3.4 (0.5)
3rd year	3.4 (0.5)
4th year	3.5 (0.5)
Intern	3.5 (0.6)

Tukey HSD test: 1st versus 2nd year, p < .037.

Difference Between Groups for ER

Cognitive reappraisal was higher among single (p = .010) students and students aged 19 years or less (p < .001). The first-year students had lower cognitive reappraisal compared to the fourth-year students (p < .032) and interns (.017). Suppression was higher among males (p < .001), single (p = .015) students and those aged 19 years or less (p < .001). Interns had higher suppression compared to the first (p < .001), second (p < .001), and third (p < .041) year students (Table 4).

Table 4.

The Difference Between Demographic Characteristics of Students and Emotional.

Demographic Characteristic	Cognitive reappraisal			Suppression
	Mean (SD)	t/f	Sig.	Mean (SD)	t/f	Sig.
Gender
Male	21.2 (3.9)	0.746	.456	12.9 (2.9)	5.63	.001
Female	20.9 (4.4)	0.746	.456	11.2 (3.5)	5.63	.001
Age (year)
≤19	21.8 (3.9)	3.779	.001	12.7 (3.1)	3.724	.001
>19	20.3 (4.2)	3.779	.001	11.5 (3.5)	3.724	.001
Marital status
Single	21.2 (4.1)	6.732	.010	12.3 (3.3)	5.909	.015
Married	18.9 (3.5)	6.732	.010	10.5 (3.3)	5.909	.015
Education level
1st year	3.9 (0.3)	4.527	.001^a	3.1 (0.2)	5.319	.001^b
2nd year	3.6 (0.5)			3.0 (0.4)
3rd year	3.3 (0.5)			3.5 (0.5)
4th year	4.6 (0.5)			3.6 (0.4)
Intern	4.7 (0.8)			3.7 (0.7)

Tukey HSD test: 1st versus 4th year, p < .032; 1st versus Intern, p < .017.

Tukey HSD test: 1st versus Intern, p < .001; 2nd versus Intern, p < .001; 3rd versus Intern, p < .041.

Difference Between Groups for Personality Traits

Extraversion was higher among males (p = .04) than females. On the other hand, the students in the first year had higher agreeableness than those in the third year (p < .02). Conscientiousness was higher among females (p = .029), and the students in the first year had higher conscientiousness compared to the students in the second year (p < .041). Furthermore, neuroticism was higher among females (p < .001) than males (Table 5).

Table 5.

The Difference Between Demographic Characteristics of Students and Trait of Personality.

Variable	Extraversion			Agreeableness			Conscientiousness			Neuroticism			Openness
Variable	Mean (SD)	t/F	p	Mean (SD)	t/F	p	Mean (SD)	t/F	p	Mean (SD)	t/F	p	Mean (SD)	t/f	p
Gender
Female	22.5 (4.8)	2.057	.040	35.7 (4.8)	−0.197	.844	31.9 (5.4)	−2.193	.029	24.1 (5.9)	−3.906	.001	34.2 (5.9)	−1.818	.070
Male	23.4 (4.2)	2.057	.040	35.6 (4.3)	−0.197	.844	30.7 (5.2)	−2.193	.029	21.8 (5.6)	−3.906	.001	33.2 (5.1)	−1.818	.070
Age
≤19	23.1 (4.3)	0.447	.655	35.9 (4.4)	1.358	.175	31.2 (5.3)	−0.401	.689	22.5 (5.8)	−1.242	.215	33.3 (5.1)	−1.245	.214
>19	22.9 (4.6)			35.3 (4.7)			31.4 (5.3)			23.2 (5.9)			33.9 (5.9)
Marital status
Single	23.0 (4.4)	0.002	.963	35.6 (4.6)	0.082	.775	31.3 (5.3)	0.008	.928	22.7 (5.8)	1.657	.199	33.6 (5.4)	0.085	.771
Married	23.0 (5.4)	0.002	.963	35.9 (3.8)	0.082	.775	31.1 (5.8)	0.008	.928	24.4 (6.4)	1.657	.199	33.9 (6.1)	0.085	.771
Education level
1st year	23.2 (4.2)	1.173	.322	36.3 (4.3)	2.939	.020^a	31.8 (5.3)	2.555	.039^b	22.1 (5.7)	2.292	.059	33.3 (5.1)	0.458	.766
2nd year	23.3 (4.8)			35.1 (4.4)			29.7 (5.4)			23.2 (5.8)			34.2 (5.3)
3rd year	21.8 (4.4)			34.1 (4.9)			30.4 (4.9)			24.7 (5.4)			33.6 (5.5)
4th year	23.5 (4.4)			35.4 (5.0)			31.4 (4.9)			22.8 (5.9)			33.6 (5.7)
Intern	22.6 (5.3)			35.2 (4.1)			32.2 (5.9)			23.9 (6.8)			34.3 (7.3)

Tukey HSD test: 1st versus 3rd year, p < .02.

Tukey HSD test: 1st versus 2nd year, p < .041.

Correlation Between Variables

Happiness was highly significantly related to all variables except suppression. Personality traits were significantly related to each other. And the emotional subscales were highly significantly related to one another as well (Table 6).

Table 6.

Correlations Between Happiness, Personality Traits, Emotional Regulation and Age.

Variable	Happiness	Extraversion	Agreeableness	Conscientiousness	Neuroticism	Openness	Cognitive reappraisal	Suppression
Age	−.081	−.010	−.059	.013	.075	.067	−.190**	−.176**
Happiness		.478**	.554**	.526**	−.561**	.286**	.382**	.001
Extraversion			.294**	.365**	−.270**	.232**	.192**	−.127*
Agreeableness				.506**	−.371**	.283**	.365**	.060
Conscientiousness					−.353**	.314**	.200**	−.051
Neuroticism						−.052	−.261**	−.136**
Openness							.270**	.072
Cognitive reappraisal								.256**

Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

Multiple regression was performed to evaluate the predictive ability of personality and ER on happiness. Extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and cognitive reappraisal statistically significantly predicted happiness level, F(6, 404) = 87.8, p < .001, accounting for 75.2% of the variability in happiness with adjusted R ² = 57%. For example, for each unit of increase in extraversion, happiness increased by 0.02 to 0.033 points. Furthermore, for each unit increase in neuroticism, happiness decreased by 0.033 to 0.021 points. Openness did not show any significant relation with happiness (Table 7).

Table 7.

The Predictors Variables of Happiness Among Students.

Variable	B	SE B	β	R ²	F	Adj R²
Constant	1.704	0.203	—	.57	87.8	.56
Personal trait
Extraversion	0.025	0.004	.225**
Agreeableness	0.023	0.004	.216**
Conscientiousness	0.016	0.004	.175**
Neuroticism	−0.027	0.003	−.323**
Openness	0.006	0.003	.068
Emotional regulation
Cognitive reappraisal	0.015	0.004	.123**

p < .01.

Discussion

The study found that nursing students had a moderate level of happiness, which is consistent with several previous studies (Milić et al., 2019; Shafiq et al., 2015; Shiv et al., 2021; Ziapour et al., 2018). However, the result of the study is inconsistent with some studies (Amani Nezhad et al., 2022; Amiri et al., 2018; Ebadi et al., 2017). The difference in the level of happiness between the current study and previous studies can be explained by different influential factors related to students’ family relationships, cultural norms, lifestyles, and environment (Amiri et al., 2018).

The current study found that students in higher academic years reported a higher level of happiness than those in lower academic years. This finding is supported by Kumar et al. (2022), who reported similar results in Indian students. In contrast, other studies conducted in Iran (Amani Nezhad et al., 2022) and Thailand (Saito et al., 2011) have reported opposing results. This finding can be rationalized by the fact that first-year students may struggle with their grades initially because academic life is new to them, and the psychological well-being of students depends on their grades (Kim, 2011). Additionally, the high happiness levels among third-year students can be explained by the fact that they have generally settled down in the university environment by then, become familiar with study requirements, and formed good friendships as their academic year has progressed (Chakraborty et al., 2019; Kumar et al., 2022).

This study found that the personality traits most commonly expressed by students were agreeableness and conscientiousness. This result is consistent with the study done by Milić et al. (2019). In addition, the study findings have shown that the extraversion trait was higher among males, whereas neuroticism was higher among females. This is similar to what was found among Egyptian university students (Abdel-Khalek, 2021; Abdel-Khalek et al., 2022). However, it is inconsistent with another study in Iran (Abedi et al., 2013). The result of the current study of high levels of neuroticism among females can be explained by the fact that Arab women’s personalities are generally more introverted and reserved compared to Arab men’s personalities (Abdel-Khalek et al., 2022). Additionally, differences in results between the current study and previous studies may be explained by cultural differences among the students and the use of different measuring tools.

This study has revealed that cognitive reappraisal was higher among single students and those aged 19 years or less. This result is supported by several studies (Amani Nezhad et al., 2022; Ghahramani et al., 2019; Sahraian et al., 2011). However, some studies have reported that age was weakly positively correlated with subjective happiness (Milić et al., 2019). This result can be explained by the effect of socioeconomic status, as in developing countries with increasing age, happiness decreases, while in developed countries, happiness stays stable throughout an individual’s lifespan (Morgan et al., 2015).

In addition, this study found that cognitive reappraisal was higher among single students. This finding is supported by prior studies (Amani Nezhad et al., 2022; Kobau et al., 2013; Milić et al., 2019). However, some studies have reported no relationship between happiness and students’ marital status (Lesani et al., 2016; Rahdar et al., 2019). It has been reported that marriage enhances social relationships, reinforces positive feelings, and improves psychological well-being, leading to increased individual happiness (Khodarahimi, 2015). Therefore, the result of the current study should be interpreted with caution since around 95% of the students were single, and only 5% were married.

The current study found that the predictors of happiness level were extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and cognitive reappraisal. Several studies have reported similar results, such as the predictors of happiness level being extraversion (Furnham & Christoforou, 2007; Jalil et al., 2017; Robbins et al., 2010; Ziapour et al., 2018), agreeableness (Aziz et al., 2014; Ziapour et al., 2018), conscientiousness (Chamorro-Premuzic et al., 2007; Ghaderi & Ghaderi, 2012; Robbins et al., 2008; Ziapour et al., 2018), neuroticism (Salimi, 2014), and cognitive reappraisal (Salimi, 2014; Ziapour et al., 2018). However, some studies have shown contradictory results, such as conscientiousness predicting happiness (Chamorro-Premuzic et al., 2007; Momeni et al., 2011; Soto et al., 2013), and the positive relationship between extraversion and happiness being disputed (Momeni et al., 2011; Salimi, 2014).

It has been suggested that extraversion increases personal social activities, enjoyment of life, sharing of feelings with others, and goal setting for achievement instead of focusing on negative life experiences (Das Gupta & Kumar, 2010). Furthermore, it has been confirmed that students’ time spent participating in leisure activities and with their families was related to their happiness levels (Reddy, 2023). Therefore, future studies should explore the effect of family bonds and leisure activities on nursing students’ happiness levels.

Moreover, happiness among nursing students was predicted by cognitive reappraisal, which is supported by a study conducted in Indonesia by Purnamaningsih (2017). Reappraisal is a method of cognitive change that involves interpreting a potentially triggering emotion in a situation differently and altering its emotional impact. Therefore, emotions play a vital role in maintaining health, and in daily life, they must be appropriately regulated (Liliana & Nicoleta, 2014). Cognitive reappraisal is predicted to lead to emotional stability, which would result in higher levels of happiness among nursing students.

Limitations of the Study

It is the first research of its kind that has investigated the link between nursing students’ personality traits, ER, and happiness in Saudi Arabia. Nonetheless, the study has certain limitations that must be acknowledged when analyzing the results. Firstly, the research did not explore factors that might have influenced the happiness of the subjects, such as their general health, stress levels, or religious convictions. Secondly, although the sample size was adequate, it was limited to a single nursing college at a public university, so the findings should be cautiously extrapolated to other institutions. Thirdly, the study used a self-reported cross-sectional methodology, which makes it difficult to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables. Future research should employ a longitudinal and mixed-methods approach to monitor the students’ progress over different academic years. Lastly, the use of convenience sampling might have introduced bias, which could limit the applicability of the results. Future studies might consider using a structural equation modeling (SEM) design, with a particular focus on emotional regulation as a potential mediating variable. This approach could shed light on the underlying mechanisms linking personality traits, emotional regulation, and happiness in nursing students.

Conclusion

The outstanding qualities of agreeableness and conscientiousness among the personality traits expressed illustrate the special character of nursing students. These traits, often associated with empathy and hard work, align with the demands and expectations of the nursing profession. Emotional regulation, an essential aspect of nursing students’ psychological well-being, also emerged as a noteworthy dimension. Crucially, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and cognitive reappraisal collectively predict happiness levels and account for a significant portion of the variability. This statistical finding highlights the connection between personality traits and emotional regulation in influencing nursing students’ overall happiness. These findings suggest that personality traits, happiness, and emotional regulation are interrelated elements in a nursing student’s life. The results signal an opportunity for nursing educators to consider the complexity of well-being in their teaching approaches. Promoting emotional regulation strategies could potentially lead to improvements in happiness levels, thereby promoting a conducive learning environment and overall student satisfaction. This study advances our understanding of the complex interplay between individual characteristics, emotional experiences, and the pursuit of happiness in nursing students. The implications extend beyond just academia.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge sincerely grateful for student cooperation in carrying out this study.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical Approval

Ethical approval was gained from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at IAU University. The study procedure and surveys were approved prior to initiating any participant recruitment. Students were given a comprehensive information sheet along with verbal instructions. It explained in detail the voluntary nature of participation and the right to withdraw from the study without providing any reason, with no effect on the student’s teaching or rights. It also outlined the study’s research goals, significance, and advantages.

ORCID iD

Emad Shdaifat

Data Availability Statement

Research data are available with the study’s researchers based on reasonable request.

References

Abdel-Khalek

A. M.

(2021). Big-five personality factors and gender differences in Egyptian college students. Mankind Quarterly, 61(3), 478–496. https://doi.org/10.46469/MQ.2021.61.3.6

Abdel-Khalek

A. M.

Carson

Patel

Shahama

(2022). The big five personality traits as predictors of life satisfaction in Egyptian college students. Nordic Psychology, 75(2), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2022.2065341

Abdelrahman

Khaldoun

A. D.

(2019). Causal relationship modeling of the implicit theories of emotion and emotion regulation in view of the cognitive reappraisal strategy and happiness. Journal of Educational and Psychological Studies [JEPS], 13(3), 538–557. https://doi.org/10.24200/JEPS.VOL13ISS3PP538-557

Abedi

Mohammadi

Alizadeh

Hoseini

Yahyazadeh

(2013). A survey on the relationship between personality factors and sex in students of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, 22(98), 114–122. http://jmums.mazums.ac.ir/article-1-1869-en.html

Akhtar

Saleem

(2020). Happiness and personality traits as predictors of optimism in school and college teachers. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 34(4), 739–751. https://doi.org/10.33824/PJPR.2020.35.4.40

Al-Dababi

Abdelrahman

(2019). Causal relationship modeling of the big-five factors, self-efficacy, and happiness of Jordan University of Science and Technology Students. Journal of Educational and Psychological Studies [JEPS], 13(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.24200/jeps.vol13iss1pp46-64

Aldao

Jazaieri

Goldin

P. R.

Gross

J. J.

(2014). Adaptive and maladaptive emotion regulation strategies: Interactive effects during CBT for social anxiety disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 28(4), 382–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JANXDIS.2014.03.005

Allende-Alonso

Bouza-Herrera

C. N.

Rizvi

S. E. H.

Sautto-Vallejo

J. M.

(2019). Big data and the central limit theorem: A statistical legend. Revista Investigacion Operacional, 40(1), 112–123. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos-Bouza/publication/11342882_Bias_in_Visual_Attention_Behavior_in_a_Normal_School-Aged_Population/links/5d1de73c92851cf440636d40/Bias-in-Visual-Attention-Behavior-in-a-Normal-School-Aged-Population.pdf

Amani Nezhad

Abazari

Mardani

Maleki

Hebda

. (2022). Happiness and achievement motivation among Iranian nursing students: A descriptive correlational study. BioMed Research International, 2022(1), 4007048. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4007048

10.

Amiri

Chaman

Mohammadnejad

Khosravi

(2018). The correlation between happiness and spiritual health with academic self-efficacy among medical sciences students. International Journal of Health Studies, 4(1), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.22100/IJHS.V4I1.373

11.

Argyle

Martin

(1995). Testing for stress and happiness: The role of social and cognitive factors. In C. D. Spielberger, I. G. Sarason, J. M. T. Brebner, E. Greenglass, P. Laungani, & A. M. O'Roark (Eds.), Stress and Emotion (pp. 173–187). Taylor & Francis. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-98529-010

12.

Aziz

Mustaffa

Samah

N. A.

Yusof

(2014). Personality and happiness among academicians in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4209–4212. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SBSPRO.2014.01.918

13.

Bachrach

D. G.

Wang

Bendoly

Zhang

(2007). Importance of organizational citizenship behaviour for overall performance evaluation: Comparing the role of task interdependence in China and the USA. Management and Organization Review, 3(2), 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2007.00071.x

14.

Barańczuk

(2019). The five factor model of personality and emotion regulation: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PAID.2018.11.025

15.

Behrouian

Ramezani

Dehghan

Sabahi

Ebrahimnejad Zarandi

(2021). The effect of the emotion regulation training on the resilience of caregivers of patients with schizophrenia: A parallel randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychology, 9(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/S40359-021-00542-5

16.

Chakraborty

Maji

Sen

Mallik

Baidya

Dwibedi

(2019). A study on happiness and related factors among Indian college students. Journal of Quantitative Economics, 17(1), 215–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40953-018-0125-8

17.

Chamorro-Premuzic

Bennett

Furnham

(2007). The happy personality: Mediational role of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(8), 1633–1639. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PAID.2006.10.029

18.

Conklin

L. R.

Cassiello-Robbins

Brake

C. A.

Sauer-Zavala

Farchione

T. J.

Ciraulo

D. A.

Barlow

D. H.

(2015). Relationships among adaptive and maladaptive emotion regulation strategies and psychopathology during the treatment of comorbid anxiety and alcohol use disorders. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 73, 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BRAT.2015.08.001

19.

Côté

Gyurak

Levenson

R. W.

(2010). The ability to regulate emotion is associated with greater well-being, income, and socioeconomic status. Emotion, 10(6), 923. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0021156

20.

Das Gupta

Kumar

. (2010). Psychological correlates of happiness psychological correlates of happiness psychological correlates of happiness psychological correlates of happiness psychological correlates of happiness. Indian Journal of Social Science Researches, 7(1), 60–64.

21.

Demirtaş

A. S.

(2018). The predictive roles of emotion regulation strategies and self-esteem on happiness. Turkish Studies, 13(11), 487–503.

22.

Demirtaş

A. S.

(2020). Optimism and happiness in undergraduate students: Cognitive flexibility and adjustment to university life as mediators. Anales de Psicología, 36(2), 320–329. https://doi.org/10.6018/ANALESPS.36.2.381181

23.

Ebadi

B. N.

Hosseini

M. A.

Rahgoi

Fallahi Khoshknab

Biglarian

(2017). The relationship between spiritual health and happiness among nursing students. Journal of Nursing Education, 5(5), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.21859/JNE-05054

24.

Flynn

D. M.

MacLeod

(2015). Determinants of happiness in undergraduate university students. College Student Journal, 49, 452–460.

25.

Furnham

Christoforou

(2007). Personality traits, emotional intelligence, and multiple happiness. North Amirican Journal of Psychology, 9(3), 439–462. https://www.academia.edu/download/46440669/happiness_20and_20personality_20traits.pdf

26.

Ghaderi

(2012). Survey the relationship between big five factor, happiness and sport achievement in Iranian athletes. Annals of Biological Research, 3(1), 308–312. http://scholarsresearchlibrary.com/archive.html

27.

Ghahramani

Jahromi

Khoshsoroor

Seifooripour

Sepehrpoor

(2019). The relationship between emotional intelligence and happiness in medical students. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 31(1), 29–38. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6589629/

28.

Gross

J. J.

John

O. P.

(2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348

29.

Husain

M. I.

Carvalho

A. F.

(2020). The importance of assessing personality traits and disorders in clinical trials of major depressive disorder. Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry, 42(1), 3–4. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-4446-2019-0645

30.

Jalil

Huber

J. W.

Sixsmith

Dickens

G. L.

(2017). Mental health nurses’ emotions, exposure to patient aggression, attitudes to and use of coercive measures: Cross sectional questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 75, 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.07.018

31.

John

O. P.

Donahue

E. M.

Kentle

R. L.

(1991). The big five inventory–versions 4a and 54. University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.

32.

Joormann

Stanton

C. H.

(2016). Examining emotion regulation in depression: A review and future directions. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 86, 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BRAT.2016.07.007

33.

Khodarahimi

(2015). The role of marital status in emotional intelligence, happiness, optimism and hope. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 46(3), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.3138/JCFS.46.3.351

34.

Kim

(2011). Nursing students’ relationships among resilience, life satisfaction, psychological well-being, and attitude to death. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 31(3), 251. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6715896/

35.

Kobau

Bann

Lewis

Zack

M. M.

Boardman

A. M.

Boyd

Lim

K. C.

Holder

Hoff

A. K. L.

Luncheon

Thompson

Horner-Johnson

Lucas

R. E.

(2013). Mental, social, and physical well-being in New Hampshire, Oregon, and Washington, 2010 behavioral risk factor surveillance system: Implications for public health research and practice related to healthy people 2020 foundation health measures on well-being. Population Health Metrics, 11(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7954-11-19

36.

Kobylińska

Kusev

(2019). Flexible emotion regulation: How situational demands and individual differences influence the effectiveness of regulatory strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 72. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2019.00072/FULL

37.

Kumar

T. K. A.

Khakha

D. C.

Joshi

Das

Manu

K. J.

(2022). Happiness and its determinants among nursing students. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 31(2), 293–298. https://doi.org/10.4103/IPJ.IPJ_127_21

38.

Lee

D. S.

Padilla

A. M.

(2016). Predicting South Korean University students’ happiness through social support and efficacy beliefs. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 38(1), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10447-015-9255-2/TABLES/3

39.

Lesani

Mohammadpoorasl

Javadi

Ansari

Fakhari

(2016). Happiness among college students: a cross-sectional web-based study among iranian medical students. Biotechnology and Health Sciences, 3(2), e36029. https://doi.org/10.17795/bhs-36029

40.

Liliana

Nicoleta

(2014). Personality, family correlates and emotion regulation as wellbeing predictors. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 142–146. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042814064763

41.

Louangrath

(2017). Minimum sample size method based on survey scales. International Journal of Research & Methodology in Social Science, 3(3), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1322593

42.

McCabe

K. O.

Fleeson

(2016). Are traits useful? Explaining trait manifestations as tools in the pursuit of goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(2), 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0039490

43.

Merkebu

(2019). A mixed-methods investigation of metacognitive reflection, emotional regulation, and career decision-making in undergraduate students. George Mason University.

44.

Milić

Škrlec

Milić Vranješ

Podgornjak

Heffer

(2019). High levels of depression and anxiety among Croatian medical and nursing students and the correlation between subjective happiness and personality traits. International Review of Psychiatry, 31(7–8), 653–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2019.1594647

45.

Momeni

Seyed Kalali

Reza Akhavan Anvari

Raoofi

Zarrineh

(2011) What kind of people are the happiest? An empirical study. International Review of Business Research Papers, 7(3), 42–54.

46.

Morgan

Robinson

Thompson

(2015). Happiness and age in European adults: The moderating role of gross domestic product per capita. Psychology and Aging, 30(3), 544–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/PAG0000034

47.

Mudgal Shiv

Satyaveer

Sheela

Rakhi

Khan

. (2021). Predictors of happiness among budding nurses: Across-sectional web-based study among Indian nursing students. Saudi Journal of Nursing and Health Care, 4(8), 256–262. https://doi.org/10.36348/sjnhc.2021.v04i08.008

48.

Pallant

(2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Open University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=CxUsEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&ots=n38AvGCe4V&sig=2HibIDC6bl2YuTKsNInrn4I3nos

49.

Purnamaningsih

E. H.

(2017). Personality and emotion regulation strategies. International Journal of Psychological Research, 10(1), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.2040

50.

Rahdar

Arbabisarjou

Shahroudi

(2019). The relationship of happiness and quality of educational services with academic burnout among students of Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Strides in Development of Medical Education, 16(1), e82679. https://www.academia.edu/download/65411131/10.pdf

51.

Reddy

N. Y.

(2023). Perceived wellbeing, happiness, and related challenges among Indian college students. Psychological Studies, 68(1), 70–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12646-022-00705-3

52.

Robbins

Francis

L. J.

Edwards

(2010). Happiness as stable extraversion: Internal consistency reliability and construct validity of the oxford happiness questionnaire among undergraduate students. Current Psychology, 29(2), 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12144-010-9076-8

53.

Robbins

Francis

L. J.

Edwards

(2008). Prayer, personality and happiness: A study among undergraduate students in Wales. Mental Health, Religion and Culture, 11(1), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670701702548

54.

Sahraian

Gholami

Omidvar

(2011). The relationship between religious attitude and happiness in medical students in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. The Horizon of Medical Sciences, 17(1), 69–74. https://imtj.gmu.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-1-269&slc_lang=en&sid=1

55.

Saito

A. S.

Voraharn

Senarak

(2011). Happiness of undergraduate nursing students, faculty of nursing, Khon Kaen University. Journal of Nursing Science & Health, 34(2), 70–79. https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/10072/61579/1/95450_1.pdf

56.

Salimi

(2014). Association between happiness and essential five factors in personality. Quarterly Journal of Social Work, 3(2), 41–49. http://www.socialworkmag.ir/browse.php?a_id=30&slc_lang=en&sid=1&printcase=1&hbnr=1&hmb=1

57.

Shafiq

Naz

Ansar

Nasrulla

Bushra

Imam

(2015). Happiness as related to mental health among university students. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 5(9), 124–132.

58.

Soto

C. J.

(2015). Is happiness good for your personality? Concurrent and prospective relations of the big five with subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 83(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/JOPY.12081

59.

Soto

C. J.

Luhmann

(2013). Who can buy happiness? Personality traits moderate the effects of stable income differences and income fluctuations on life satisfaction. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(1), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612444139

60.

Troy

A. S.

Shallcross

A. J.

Brunner

Friedman

Jones

M. C.

(2018). Cognitive reappraisal and acceptance: Effects on emotion, physiology, and perceived cognitive costs. Emotion, 18(1), 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/EMO0000371

61.

Ziapour

Khatony

Jafari

Kianipour

(2018). Correlation of personality traits with happiness among university students. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 12(4), CC26–CC29. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2018/31260.11450

Personality Traits,Emotional Regulation,and Happiness in Nursing Students: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

Plain language summary

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Site and Setting

Sampling Technique and Size

Survey Instrument

Ethical Consideration

Data Collection Procedure

Data Analysis

Results

Demographic Characteristics

Difference Between Groups for Happiness Level

Difference Between Groups for ER

Difference Between Groups for Personality Traits

Correlation Between Variables

Discussion

Limitations of the Study

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

Ethical Approval

ORCID iD

Data Availability Statement

References