Jennifer
M. Colella 
For questions or comments please feel free to e-mail me at: jcolella@anselm.edu
The present study investigated the differences in
college adjustment between freshmen that are in a long-distance romantic
relationship, and freshmen that are not. When a person goes away to college
for the first time, and becomes physically separated from a significant
other, many uncertainties arise. Various forms of depression, overwhelming
feelings of loneliness, and sometimes regret and resentment could develop.
Based on what the literature suggests, the hypothesis is that freshmen
that are not in a long-distance relationship tend to have a better adjustment
to college than those who are. To test this hypothesis, 2 questionnaires
were given to 50 college freshmen. The first was brief, and contained
11 questions. It was specifically designed for the present study,
and focused on one’s romantic status. The other was the Student Adaptation
to College Questionnaire (SACQ), designed by Robert Baker, Ph.D. and Bohdan
Siryk, M.A. An independent-samples t-test was conducted on the dependent
variables, and no significant differences were found between the groups.
However, the mean scores of the SACQ were in the predicted direction, and
indicated some differences. Practical applications and improvements
are discussed.
Participants
Participants consisted of 50 introductory psychology students from a small, Catholic, liberal arts college in New Hampshire, all 18 years of age or older. Each person was participating to earn a course credit, and all were freshmen. Although 50 participants were involved in the original experiment, data from only 28 participants was analyzed. These 28 participants were randomly selected. This was done in an attempt to even out the number of people in each group. Fourteen members of the group were involved in a long-distance romantic relationship. In order to be considered a long-distance romantic relationship, the significant other was said to live outside of the Manchester area. The other 14 members of the group did not have any romantic attachments that could be considered long-distance.
Materials
The study used two different instruments. The
first tool used was a self-report questionnaire, which was created specifically
for this experiment. In this self-report questionnaire, the participants
revealed his or her romantic status. It focuses on questions such
as whether or not the participant has a significant other, how long they
have been dating this person, how far away does the other person live,
and how often do they see the other person? The second instrument
utilized was the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ).
Robert W. Baker, Ph.D., as well as Bohdan Siryk M.A developed this instrument
in 1989.
This questionnaire includes 67 items, all of which
apply to one’s experience in college thus far. There is a full-scale
score, as well as four sub-scales that measure academic adjustment, social
adjustment, personal-emotional adjustment, and attachment. Academic
adjustment measures a student’s success in coping with the various educational
demands characteristic of the college experience. Social adjustment
measures a student’s success in coping with the interpersonal-societal
demands inherent in the college experience. Personal-emotional adjustment
focuses on a student’s mental state during his or her adjustment to college,
and the degree to which he or she is experiencing general psychological
distress and any somatic problems. Attachment is designed to measure
a student’s degree of commitment to educational goals and the degree of
attachment to the particular college that the student is attending.
The SACQ has high values of reliability and validity
for each scale. The alpha value of internal consistency reliability
for academic adjustment is .87, for social adjustment is .89, for personal-emotional
adjustment is .79, for attachment is .88, and for the full-scale it is
.94. However, validity was measured by intercorrelations among the
SACQ scales. Alpha coefficients for academic adjustment/social adjustment
are .45 and .39. For academic adjustment/personal-emotional adjustment
it is .60 and .55. For social adjustment/personal-emotional adjustment
it is .49 and .42.
The participants answered the 67 items on a nine
point scale, ranging from "applies very closely to me," to "doesn’t apply
to me at all." Examples of items include, "I have been feeling tense
or nervous lately", "I have several close social ties at college", "I’ve
put on (or lost) too much weight recently", and "I have been feeling in
good health lately."
Procedure
All 50 participants gathered in a classroom setting at one time. First, each participant was handed instructions for the study, with an informed consent form from the department of psychology. Once this task was completed, the self-report questionnaire, which inquired about his or her current and past romantic status, was handed out to every person. Also included in the self-report questionnaire were filler questions (i.e.: what is your major, do you have any siblings, etc…). This was done in order to gain a general sense of the individual. Once the participants completed this, the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ) was administered. Each participant answered the 67 items on the SACQ. When this was finished, all 50 of the participants were given a debriefing form, and asked to read through the whole thing before they left. Everyone was then thanked for his or her time and effort, and a credit slip was given to all of them.
Participants involved in long-distance romantic relationships
and participants not involved in long- distance romantic relationships
were compared on college adjustment. There was an overall (full-scale)
average of college adjustment score, as well as four sub-scale averages
(academic adjustment, social adjustment, emotional adjustment, and attachment).
All were taken from the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire, (SACQ).
The hypothesis of this comparison was that significant differences were
going to exist between the college adjustment of people who are involved
in long-distance romantic relationships, and people who are not.
The expectation was that those involved in the long-distance romance would
have a much more difficult time adjusting to college, as compared to those
who are not.
In order to test the hypothesis, an independent-samples
t-test was conducted on the dependent variables. The variable of interest
in common between the groups was college adjustment. When looking
at the values of the dependent variables, keep in mind that a higher number
indicates consistency with good adjustment to college, and a lower number
indicates consistency with poor adjustment to college.
Contrary to the expectation, no statistically significant
effects were found (see table 1). Hence, there do not exist any significant
differences between the groups and their college adjustment.
Table 1.
T-Test for Equality of Means for the Student Adaptation to College
Questionnaire Scales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However, the means for each group on each dependent variable suggests
near significance (see table 2, figure 1). For four out of the five
scales that were measured, the group not in long-distance relationships
had higher means than the group in long-distance relationships. According
to the means, those not in a long-distance relationship showed better adjustment
on the overall full-scale, as well as in social adjustment, emotional adjustment,
and attachment. Those in a long-distance relationship adjusted better only
in the area of academics. The overall direction of these means support
the hypothesis of this study.
Table 2.
Mean Statistics for Scales of the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No LDR |
14 |
448.8571 |
50.1334 |
|
|
No LDR |
14 |
151.0000 |
19.1231 |
|
|
No LDR |
14 |
135.8571 |
19.4021 |
|
|
No LDR |
14 |
95.2857 |
21.8260 |
|
|
No LDR |
14 |
112.1429 |
16.3418 |
This study investigated the effects of pre-college
romantic relationships on college adjustment for a group of college freshmen.
It was predicted that those freshmen that entered college while attempting
to maintain a romantic relationship that began prior to college were going
to experience a more difficult time adjusting to college than those who
were not were.
Overall, there were no statistically significant
differences found between the two groups. Therefore, it can be stated
that these findings are not consistent with what was expected. Although
no statistical evidence was disclosed supporting the hypothesis of this
study, it does not mean that differences do not exist between the college
adjustment of freshmen in pre-college romances and the college adjustment
of freshmen not in pre-college romances. Considering that new college
students have been found to place very high value on romantic relationships,
it would make sense that differences may emerge (Hammersla & Trease-McMahan,
1990).
In fact, the means for each group on each dependent
variable suggests near significance. The full-scale, as well as the
sub-scales of the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire, which measured
social adjustment, emotional adjustment, and attachment, all indicated
higher means for those not in a long-distance relationship. This
implies that the freshmen not involved in a pre-college romantic relationship
did in fact adjust better than those freshmen that were involved in such
a relationship. The group that were in a relationship only scored
higher in the area of academic adjustment. Hence, the overall direction
of the means support the hypothesis of the study.
These findings are important because they suggest
that being in a long-distance relationship as a freshman in college may
be a deciding factor in how well a person adjusts to college. For
students who are involved in a long-distance romantic relationship, and
are having a difficult experience in college, these findings could explain
a lot.
Some literature proposes that no differences in
college adjustment exist between people in long-distance relationships
and people not in long-distance relationships. According to one study,
individuals in long-distance relationships report the same levels of relationship
satisfaction, intimacy, trust and commitment as do individuals in proximal
relationships (Guldner & Swenson, 1995). Consequently, if being
in a long-distance relationship does not cause any emotional problems unique
to the distance issues, then Guldner and Swenson (1995) would argue that
there is no reason to believe it would cause any college adjustment problems
unique to that issue.
Attridge (1994) contended an idea similar to what
Guldner and Swenson (1995) claimed. This researcher pointed out that long-distance
relationships are very common among college students, including freshmen.
This indicates that maybe one’s romantic status does not affect his or
her college adjustment at all (Attridge, 1994). If it did, then the
number of people pursuing a long-distance romantic relationship while in
college would not be nearly as high. If such a relationship were
an attribute to poor college adjustment, then why would it be so common?
Nonetheless, the indications of the mean scores
uphold the findings of most of the literature relative to this issue.
It has been reported that tension and depression can result from romantic
relationship difficulties, and in turn one’s adjustment to college can
suffer (Paul, Poole, & Jakubowyc, 1998). This goes along with
the means of this study. Distance can be included as a difficulty
in a relationship, so it can be considered a reason why one may have a
hard time adjusting to college. One explanation for an individual experiencing
difficulty adjusting to college due to relationship problems, is because
there is continued over-involvement in pre-college romantic relationships
and failure to invest in college relationships (Paul et al, 1998).
The near significance that was uncovered with the
four out of five scales measured in this study also vindicate what Holmbeck
and Wandrei (1993) attested. Their study suggests that depression
and physical symptom scores were at the highest levels for people who also
demonstrated the highest levels of separation anxiety from family, or a
romantic partner (Holmbeck & Wandrei, 1993). These same people
scored lowest when measuring their adaptability to change. According
to the mean scores of this study, the idea that a relationship does exist
between romantic status and college adjustment can be confirmed.
This study confirms the ideas that Holmbeck and Wandrei identified (1993).
Lokitz and Sprandel (1976) emphasize this same point.
When it comes to prioritizing in the lives of college students, relationships
tend to come before academics, or other goals. This may be because
college students’ whole world revolves around friends and romantic partners
when away at college. If those things are distressing, then the person
may have a hard time concentrating on school work, as well as other activities
in his or her life (Lokitz & Sprandel, 1976). This also supports
the contention that people in long-distance romantic relationships have
a harder time with college adjustment than others. Hence, it also supports
what the mean scores of this study testify.
Of course it needs to be kept in mind that no statistical
significance was detected with this study. There may be many reasons why
significant effects were not found with this particular study.
One explanation may be because of the sample size.
In the end, the responses of only 28 participants could be included when
analyzing the data. Due to personal limitations and time constraints,
finding a larger sample of the college population was not possible. With
future research, a much larger sample should be used. This would
increase the chances of obtaining more even numbers of people in each group.
The intention behind using 50 participants was to increase the chances
of obtaining a high number of people involved in a long-distance relationship,
and obtaining just as high of a number of people not involved in one.
This did not work out the way it was hoped. Surprisingly, only 14
people out of 50 were involved in a long-distance relationship. This
happened because the sign-up sheet for the study did not specify that people
in long-distance relationships were needed, because the focus of the study
may have been suggested, and results could have been influenced.
This was certainly a drawback for this study, and may have affected the
results.
Another factor that should be taken into account
when considering reasons as to why no significant effects were found, is
whether or not the participants answered the Student Adaptation to College
Questionnaire honestly. Although anonymity was greatly emphasized,
it is possible that they were embarrassed to admit that they were having
difficulty in certain areas of college. This could be due to the
fact that the researcher was present while they were answering the questions,
and feared their questionnaires would be looked at immediately following
them being handed back.
It is also important to remember that the participants
did not get involved with this study on a completely volunteer basis.
They did it to earn credit requirements for a class. Therefore, it
is possible that some, if not all, participants rushed through the questionnaires
administered to them, in order to be able to leave the study sooner.
If this is the case, then one can be sure they did not carefully read,
think about, and answer the questions in front of him or her. Both of these
possibilities have definite potential to alter the integrity of the results.
Future research conducted on this question should
pay attention to each of these inherent flaws. A system of guaranteed
anonymity should be developed. Maybe it would be a good idea for
the researcher to leave the room, and oversee the study from an observation
room. Also, when they finish filling out the questionnaires, they
should leave it in a pile. When the researcher sees that everyone
has finished, he or she can enter the room again. This way, participants
will be less likely to feel threatened or embarrassed upon answering the
questions, and more honest answers will be given.
It would also be a good idea to include strictly volunteers as participants.
This method will reduce the likelihood of individuals rushing through the
study. If they take their time assessing each question, people may
be more truthful as well. Volunteers may also increase the chances
of gaining participants with the demand characteristics that are essential
to making the study a success (such as being in a long-distance relationship).
Despite the faults within this study, it can still
be considered important. Although there are no statistically significant
outcomes, the directions of the means support the hypothesis of this study.
This study contributes to society because it suggests
that long-distance romantic relationships may play a role in the college
adjustment process. This particular piece of information could be
useful to colleges everywhere. Guidance counselors or health services
may want to investigate this possibility further, when dealing with particular
students who are having a hard time adjusting to college. Outreach
programs or seminars that pertain to this issue could also prove helpful.
Further research should be conducted. If college
students are fully aware of the potential consequences of pursuing a pre-college
romantic relationship upon entering college, he or she may think more carefully
about doing it. If they are going to do it regardless of what the
literature claims, then maybe he or she will handle the situation better.
For example, the individual will be aware that even though he or she has
a significant other that is far away, it is still important for them to
get involved with their college, and meet new people. The individual
will better understand that if he or she holds back from doing these things
because they are pre-occupied with their long-distance relationship, his
or her college experience will be difficult, and less enjoyable.
Either way it can still be said that college students place romantic relationships
very high on their lists of concerns (Hammersla & Trease-McMahan, 1990).
It is clear that not every person entering college is going to break up
with their boyfriend or girlfriend. If anything, the hope of this
study is to emphasize the importance of maintaining a healthy balance of
one’s new college life and one’s past or present romance. If that
can be done, then the college adjustment will not be negatively affected,
and neither will the romantic relationship.
Attridge, M. (1994). Keeping in touch when out of touch.
USA
Today Magazine, 122 (2586), 10.
Gerdes, H. & Mallinckrodt, B. (1994). Emotional, social,
and academic adjustment of college students: a longitudinal study of retention.
Journal
of
Counseling and Development, 72 (3), 281-296.
Guldner, G. (1996). Long-distance romantic relationships:
prevalence separation-related symptoms in college students. Journal
of College Student
Development, 37 (3), 289-296.
Guldner, G. & Swenson, C. (1995). Time spent together
and relationship quality: long-distance relationships as a test case. Journal
of Social and Personal
Relationship, 12 (2), 313-320.
Hammersla, J.F., & Trease-McMahan, L. (1990). University students’ priorities: life-goals vs. relationships. Sex Roles, 23, 1-14.
Helgeson, V. (1994). The effects of self-beliefs on adjustment to a relationship stressor. Personal Relationships, 1 (3), 241-258.
Holmbeck, G. & Wandrei, M. (1993). Individual and relational
predictors of adjustment in first year college students. Journal
of Counseling Psychology,
40 (1), 73-78.
Lokitz, B.D., & Sprandel, H.Z. (1976). The first year: a look at the freshmen experience. Journal of College Student Personnel, 17, 274-279.
Paul, E., Poole, A., & Jakubowyc, N. (1998). Intimacy
development and romantic status: implications for adjustment to the college
transition. Journal of
College Student Development, 39 (3), 274-288.
Reske, J. & Stafford, L. (1990). Idealization and communication in long-distance premarital relationships. Family Relations, 39 (3), 274-279.
Van-Horn, R., Arnone, A., Nesbitt, K., Desilets, L., Sears, T., Giffin,
M., & Brudi, R. (1997). Physical distance and interpersonal
characteristics in college
students’ romantic relationships. Personal
Relationships, 4 (1), 25-34.