Applying Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional Framework Model for Building Resilience in College Students for Healthy Growth

Applying Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional Framework Model for Building Resilience in College Students for Healthy Growth | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Applying Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional Framework Model for Building Resilience in College Students for Healthy Growth Luo Guangli This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7287737/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study investigates the development of resilience in college students through the Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional (BCE) framework, which conceptualizes resilience as an interactive and adaptive process shaped by behavioral patterns, cognitive processes, and emotional experiences. The research aims to assess how this model fosters healthy growth and to identify key internal and external factors influencing resilience. Employing a quantitative research design, survey data were collected from 2,580 students admitted in 2022 and 2023 across 24 public colleges in Qingdao. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) and Quantile Regression models were utilized to examine the effects of behavioral, cognitive, and emotional dimensions on resilience across varying levels.. The findings reveal that the three domains—behavioral, cognitive, and emotional—exert significant influences on resilience, with their effects varying across resilience quantiles. Students exhibiting stronger cognitive awareness and emotional regulation demonstrated greater adaptability and stress management capabilities. Furthermore, personal, familial, school, and societal factors were identified as shaping resilience development. The BCE framework offers a holistic approach that enhances students’ internal stability, self-awareness, and capacity to cope effectively with academic and life challenges. Overall, the study highlights the need for comprehensive, multidimensional strategies to foster resilience in educational contexts, thereby contributing to the psychological well-being and personal growth of college students. Behavior Cognition Emotion Healthy Growth Stress Resistance Construction Figures Figure 1 1.0. Introduction In recent years, concerns regarding the mental health of college students have intensified. Studies conducted in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia indicate a growing prevalence of anxiety, depression, and other mental health disorders among this population [1; 2 ; 3]. In China, the prevalence of mental health issues among college students is estimated to be approximately 40%. Notably, in 2022, about 4.304 million students experiencing poor mental health graduated into the workforce or advanced to research institutes. Multiple factors contribute to this concerning trend. Significant life transitions—such as moving away from home for the first time, adjusting to heightened academic expectations, and assuming greater personal responsibilities—are common during the shift from high school to college and can place considerable strain on students’ psychological well-being. These events can exacerbate stress and anxiety [ 4 ]. Furthermore, social factors that worsen college students' mental health difficulties include social isolation, relationship problems, and peer pressure [ 5 ]. Untreated mental health problems can substantially undermine college students’ academic performance, overall well-being, interpersonal relationships, and future opportunities. Despite increasing awareness of this issue, the availability and accessibility of effective mental health services and interventions tailored to the specific needs of college students remain severely inadequate [ 6 ]. A variety of therapeutic approaches are employed to treat and manage mental health problems in both the general population and student groups. This study focuses on resilience as a key approach to addressing psychological challenges faced by college students. Resilience is defined as an individual’s capacity to recover from difficulties and setbacks, as well as to develop strong resistance to adverse situations such as mental stress and hardship. It also encompasses normal psychological development, positive emotions, and healthy behaviors. For college students, resilience is essential to maintaining stability and well-being, enabling them to withstand the physical, emotional, and psychological challenges encountered both within academic settings and in broader society. Most college students that have poor resilience would definitely fail in their academic pursuit and even in life [ 3 ]. Thus, it is necessary for the school system to develop courses and programmes that are focused on the building of resilience in students for their healthy mental growth. This study aims to analyze the behavioral-cognitive and emotional model for building resilience in students and also analyze the factors that contribute to or influence college students' resilience. 2.0. Literature review 2.1. Theoretical Rationale: Integrating the Behavioral–Cognitive–Emotional Framework into Resilience and Wellbeing Development Resilience—the capacity to adapt successfully in the face of adversity—is increasingly recognised as a critical determinant of young adults’ mental health, academic success, and long-term well-being [7; 8]. Among college students, resilience not only buffers the effects of stress but also promotes healthy growth by fostering adaptive coping, emotional regulation, and sustained motivation in the pursuit of academic and personal goals [ 9 ]. In the context of rapid social change, rising academic pressures, and diverse socio-economic challenges, a robust conceptual framework is essential for understanding and strengthening resilience. The Behavioral–Cognitive–Emotional (BCE) framework offers a holistic lens for understanding resilience by integrating three interdependent psychological domains: Behaviour, cognition and emotion. Behavior refers to an individual’s reaction within a particular environment or response to a specific situation or event. It encompasses actions, language, and other observable activities, serving as both a reflection of cognition and an expression of emotion. Behavior can be understood as an intentional effort by an individual either to bring about a change from one state of affairs to another or to preserve an existing state [ 10 ]. Behavior includes the act of doing something including physical movement and engaging in mental activities, like performing mental calculations. Cognition mainly refers to a psychological process, which is a person's ability to perceive and understand external things. It includes one’s thinking process/pattern, reasoning, thought, and intellect. Although the concept of cognition can be traced back to the ancient Greeks [ 11 ], one of the most influential modern definitions was articulated by Neisser approximately 50 years ago in his seminal textbook on cognitive psychology. Neisser defined cognition as encompassing “all the processes by which sensory input is transformed, reduced, elaborated, stored, recovered, and used. Cognition encompasses these processes even when they occur in the absence of direct sensory stimulation, as in the case of mental imagery and hallucinations. Given this broad definition, it becomes evident that cognition underlies virtually all human activities and that every psychological phenomenon can be considered a cognitive phenomenon [ 12 ]. In essence, cognition refers to the mental processes involved in the acquisition, storage, manipulation, and retrieval of information. Emotion, by contrast, pertains to an individual’s experience of external events and their influence on mental state and mood, encompassing feelings, sensations, and reactions [ 13 ]. According to the American Psychological Association (APA), emotion can be described as a multifaceted response pattern that encompasses experiential, behavioral, and physiological components. Emotions encompass the subjective responses individuals experience when exposed to stimuli that evoke strong affective states. Each emotional experience consists of three components: the subjective experience, the physiological response of the body, and the subsequent behavioral or expressive manifestation. Emotions play a pivotal role in shaping human behavior, encompassing both exemplary and detrimental actions, while also serving as a fundamental medium in interpersonal engagements [ 14 ]. Individuals exhibit different cognitions, emotions, and behavioral responses to the same event due to variations in personality traits, values, and life experiences. To attain balance within the behavioral–cognitive–emotional structure, individuals should ground their responses in personal realities, make adaptive adjustments in the face of adversity, and strive toward healthy growth [ 15 ]. Contemporary resilience literature increasingly supports transactional models [ 8 ] in which behavior, cognition, and emotion operate as a mutually reinforcing triad. For example, adaptive behaviors can enhance positive cognitive reframing, which in turn fosters more stable and constructive emotional states, ultimately creating a virtuous cycle of resilience. Conversely, maladaptive patterns in any one domain can disrupt this balance, leading to vulnerability and reduced wellbeing [ 16 ]. The BCE framework aligns with positive psychology’s broaden-and-build theory [ 17 ], which posits that positive emotions expand individuals’ thought–action repertoires, leading to the acquisition of enduring resources—cognitive, behavioral, and social—that enhance resilience. It also complements self-regulation theories [ 17 ], which emphasize the continuous monitoring and adjustment of behaviors, cognitions, and emotions to maintain goal-directed functioning under stress. While extensive literature has explored the individual components of behavior, cognition, and emotion as they relate to psychological functioning and educational outcomes, few studies have systematically integrated these three components into a unified framework for building resilience among college students. Much of the existing research tends to treat resilience as either a trait or a context-dependent response, without adequately accounting for the interactive and dynamic relationship between behavior, cognition, and emotion in the resilience formation process. This study aims to fill this gap by applying Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional (BCE) framework to investigate the interdependence of behavior, cognition, and emotion in real-life educational stress scenarios. The BCE framework addresses this gap by conceptualizing resilience as the capacity to achieve balance between behavioral adaptability, cognitive flexibility, and emotional stability in response to contextual challenges, recognizing that healthy growth in college students depends on dynamic interactions between these domains and their socio-cultural environment, including family, peers, and institutional climate and providing a practical intervention pathway that integrates psychoeducation, reflective practice, and skill-building activities across all three domains, thereby promoting sustainable wellbeing and academic success. This study therefore grounds itself in the BCE model as a multidimensional, integrative framework that reflects the complexity of resilience development in educational settings. By applying this model to Chinese college students—a population experiencing unique cultural and structural stressors—it aims to generate context-specific insights that can inform psychological support services, curriculum development, and policy design for fostering resilience and wellbeing 2.2. Definition of Resilience The scientific community has increasingly focused on the capacity of certain individuals to recover from and successfully adapt to adversities over time, while maintaining typical psychosocial development. Resilience does not refer solely to exceptional individuals who remain calm and optimistic in the face of negative circumstances, but rather to the “ordinary magic” inherent in people’s everyday abilities that can be nurtured and strengthened. This “ordinary magic” enables individuals to cope with daily challenges and derive satisfaction from life despite difficulties. As noted by [ 18 ], resilience pertains to the “ordinary many” rather than the “extraordinary few. Based on this assumption, he uses the term “routine resilience”, meaning that we can all demonstrate resilience at some degree in our daily hassles. According to [ 14 ], resilience is not a stable, permanent trait maintained throughout an individual’s lifetime; rather, it depends on the specific context, the timing, and the dynamic interaction between the individual and their surrounding environment. Metaphorically, resilience can be likened to the capacity of a coil to return to its original form after temporary deformation. As noted by [ 19 ], the term was originally used in medicine to describe a patient’s recovery following an accident or surgery. Over time, its application expanded into the social sciences, reflecting a shift from the deficit model toward a more positive and holistic perspective [ 20 ]. According to [ 21 ], resilience functions as a conceptual umbrella encompassing numerous interrelated factors, underscoring both the significance of the concept and the complexity of examining all its dimensions. Some of these aspects may be: oneself (abilities, skills, perceptions, experiences, beliefs, ideas etc.), main characteristics of somebody’s life (health, nutrition, accommodation etc.), emerging problems and solving skills (awareness, crisis managing, realistic point of view) and finally, relationships with others (colleagues, classmates, family, etc.). Resilience is a concept that appears across multiple disciplines [ 22 ], including psychology, sociology, and education. In the 1980s, researchers often employed the term “invulnerable” to describe individuals who were able to maintain a positive outlook despite adverse circumstances [ 23 ]. However, this classification implicitly divided people into two distinct categories—invulnerable and vulnerable. The former referred to individuals capable of withstanding and adapting to life’s challenges, while the latter described those who were more sensitive to difficulties and struggled to adjust. As [ 24 ] notes, resilience is not a fixed trait but rather a process shaped by the interaction of internal and external factors. [ 25 ] offers a widely accepted broad definition, describing resilience as the capacity of individuals to cope effectively with significant threats that could compromise their expected and normal progress and development. Thus, resilience is best understood not as a singular personal attribute, but as a broad and dynamic system.. Within this system, internal and external factors interact, influencing an individual’s capacity to adapt to challenges and adverse circumstances. Ultimately, a person may or may not demonstrate resilience, as this adaptive capacity is the result of complex interactions among contextual conditions, personal characteristics, situational factors, and acquired skills. According to [ 26 ], resilience can manifest in three distinct ways: (1) overcoming problems and achieving positive goals despite threats, and (2) maintaining both internal and external equilibrium under stressful conditions. . One can observe that from every aspect, as in every definition of this term, there are two main components. The first one is the threat that one has to deal with and the second one is the ability of the person to bounce back and overcome the adverse condition [ 27 ]. Many years ago, [ 28 ] specifically declared that resilience is the balance between adversities and the ability of a person to cope with these adversities. He used the word “balance” to express the dynamic process of resilience, since balance is an ever-changing condition between two worlds: the world of problems and adversities, and the world of effort and happiness. Although previous studies [ 25 ] have emphasized the dynamic and context-dependent nature of resilience, there remains limited empirical exploration into how these internal psychological structures (behavioral, cognitive, and emotional) co-develop within the educational environment and contribute to the healthy growth of students. Moreover, models that do attempt to explain resilience often neglect to integrate holistic interventions or conceptual frameworks that guide practical strategies for resilience cultivation, especially in culturally specific contexts such as Chinese higher education. This study aims to fill this gap by applying a Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional (BCE) framework to model and explain the formation of resilience in college students. It proposes a conceptual resilience model tailored to the developmental realities of Chinese college students, with implications for psychological support, curriculum design, and student affairs programming. 2.3. Construction of a resilience model for healthy growth of college students based on a behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework 2.3.1 Formation of resilience The interactive process of college students’ resilience formation is shown in Fig. 1 . It can be seen from the diagram that the formation of college students' resilience is a process that involves the interaction between behavioral-cognitive and emotional structures and the environment. When stress occurs, the environmental factor, including the family, school and society are used as carriers to challenge individual college students, enabling them to have balanced interaction. College students seek protection through cognitive reconstruction, emotional experience, and active coping. In the process of resilience, college students adapt to the environment as quickly as possible, change their internal resilience factors, as well as their cognition, emotion, behavior, until they are able to resist and fight stress. There are three outcomes of the interaction between individual college students and the environment. The reconstruction of ideal resilience, ability to adapt to stress, with the actual resilience level remaining unchanged, and maladaptive reconstruction, which indicates resilience [ 29 ]. The interactive process of college students' resilience formation shows interactivity, integrity, and difference. Regarding interactivity, college students interact with the environment, pursue balance between cognition, emotion, and behavior in the new environment, and resolve stress during interaction. For integrity, pressure-environmental factors-internal resilience factors-resilience results form a complete system. The process of college students' resilience should be analyzed holistically. There are idiosyncratic differences in the cognition, emotion, and behavior of individual college students. Different people have different cognitions, emotions, and behavioral responses to the same thing. This is because individuals have different personality traits, values, and experiences. In addition, family and school have a subtle impact on students, which makes their individual personalities and qualities different. 2.4. The Significance of Cultivating College Students’ Healthy Growth and Resilience Resilience, as conceptualized in the Behavioral–Cognitive–Emotional (BCE) framework, is not merely an innate trait but a dynamic capacity shaped by internal and external factors. For college students, cultivating resilience is central to fostering healthy growth and ensuring the ability to cope effectively with academic, social, and personal challenges. Within this framework, behavioral responses reflect underlying cognitive and emotional processes, which can be strengthened through intentional development strategies. Building strong resilience enables students to process events and difficult situations constructively, confronting pressures with a positive mindset. This reduces the burden of stress on mental health and enhances adaptability in the face of adversity. As students’ emotional cognitive abilities improve, they can resist setbacks more effectively, approach challenges with greater composure, and advance to new stages of personal growth. Such progress not only bolsters immediate well-being but also contributes to long-term developmental outcomes [ 30 ]. Beyond academic demands, many students face pressures arising from family expectations and societal norms, which can significantly impact mental health. Resilient students are more adept at identifying early signs of psychological strain, recognizing shifts in mood and emotional states, and actively reinforcing their psychological strengths and environmental adaptability. They are more likely to analyze problems rationally, adopt a balanced and dialectical perspective, and maintain optimism and stability—behaviors that reduce the likelihood of mental health problems and help prevent extreme or maladaptive responses [ 31 ]. Resilience also plays a vital role in regulating resistant behavior. While emotional cognition and regulation vary according to resilience levels, these factors fundamentally shape students’ coping strategies. Those with high resilience can standardize resistant behavior under the guidance of positive emotional cognition—avoiding both passive withdrawal and reckless confrontation. Instead, they adopt context-appropriate actions that support problem-solving and effective navigation of competitive academic and social environments. In line with the BCE framework, such capacity-building helps students develop constructive coping mechanisms, strengthens their sense of efficacy, promotes balanced personal development, and ultimately supports sustained healthy growth [ 32 ]. The reviewed literature underscores the centrality of resilience—particularly within the Behavioral–Cognitive–Emotional (BCE) framework—in fostering healthy growth, emotional stability, and adaptive coping in college students. Existing research has demonstrated that resilience is shaped by an interplay of personal, familial, school, and societal factors, and that targeted interventions can enhance students’ cognitive, emotional, and behavioral capacities for managing adversity. However, while the theoretical foundations are well established, there is a need for empirical evidence that quantifies the relative contributions of these dimensions to resilience across different student populations and resilience levels. Guided by the BCE framework, the present study employs a quantitative approach to examine the behavioral, cognitive, and emotional determinants of resilience among college students in Qingdao, thereby bridging the gap between conceptual understanding and data-driven insights. 3.0 Research Methods 3.1. Research Design This study employed a cross-sectional survey design guided by the Behavioral–Cognitive–Emotional (BCE) framework to examine the interplay of personal, family, school, and social factors in shaping college students’ resilience. The design combined robust psychometric measurement with econometric modeling to provide both depth of psychological assessment and precision in statistical estimation. Two complementary regression approaches were applied: the Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression model and Quantile Regression. OLS estimated the average effect of independent variables on students’ resilience scores, identifying linear relationships between resilience and multiple predictors. Quantile regression allowed the analysis of differential effects across low, medium, and high resilience levels, capturing heterogeneity often missed in mean-based models. This dual-method approach improved robustness, ensured a more comprehensive understanding of resilience determinants, and addressed distributional differences among students. 3.2. Data sources/study population The data used in this study were collected electronically through structured online questionnaires administered by the National Student Research Center (NSRC) as part of the Healthy Growth Tracking Survey of College Students. The survey was conducted across 24 public colleges in Qingdao, targeting students admitted in 2022 and 2023. Participation was facilitated through institutional digital platforms, ensuring confidentiality and broad accessibility. A stratified random sampling method was applied to select a representative sample of 2,580 students from the dataset for quantitative analysis. The demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 1 . The resilience score of the surveyed college students was 77.8 points, with a standard deviation of 10.8 points. Although generally the resilience level of the college students is good, there are some college students whose resilience performance is not satisfactory. Regarding households, the descriptive analysis of the surveyed samples is shown in Table 2 . Table 1 Definition and description of study variables. Variable classification Variable name Description Dependent variable Resilience Measured by scores across three dimensions—self-confidence, capability, and resistance to adversity—to reflect students’ overall resilience level Independent variables Family factors Family social class, family income, number of parents and, family atmosphere School factors Teacher-student relationship, peer relationship, leadership roles, and part-time work participation Social factors Access to practical opportunity and level of policy support available to students Personal factors Life goals and plans, emotional management, self-control, participation in practical activities Continuous variable age Current age of the college students Categorical variables gender Coded as Male = 0;Female ≠ 0 Health status Self-assessed health on a 1–5 scale (Unhealthy = 1;Health = 5, convertedinto a standard percentage Table 2 Demographic characteristics of respondents (N = 2,580) Variable Category Frequency (n) Percentage (%) Gender Male 1,260 48.8% Female 1,320 51.2% Age group 18–20 years 1,145 44.4% 21–23 years 1,075 41.7% 24 years and above 360 13.9% Academic level Freshman (1st year) 645 25.0% Sophomore (2nd year) 690 26.7% Junior (3rd year) 620 24.0% Senior (4th year) 625 24.2% School type Humanities & Social Sci. 880 34.1% Science & Technology 925 35.9% Health-related Disciplines 775 30.0% 3.3. Research Instruments: Validity and Reliability The survey measured resilience (dependent variable) and a set of predictors representing personal (emotional regulation, cognitive appraisal, behavioral coping), family (income, parental education, perceived family support), school (teacher–student relationship, campus support), and social factors (peer support, extracurricular participation). All scales used were established instruments with proven validity and reliability in both international and Chinese contexts, adapted for cultural appropriateness. Construct validity was examined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) for multi-item scales; model fit indices met recommended thresholds (CFI > 0.90, RMSEA < 0.08) [ 33 ]. Reliability was assessed via Cronbach’s α, with all scales exceeding the acceptable threshold of 0.70. Measurement of Resilience Resilience was measured using the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-25) developed by [ 34 ]. The scale consists of 25 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale, yielding scores from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater resilience. Previous studies report high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.89) and good test–retest reliability (r = 0.87). The scale demonstrated strong convergent validity with measures of stress coping and psychological well-being, and factorial validity has been confirmed across different cultural settings, including Chinese student populations [ 35 ]. In this study, the Cronbach’s α for this sample was 0.91, indicating excellent reliability Measurement of Emotional Regulation Emotional regulation was assessed using the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) by [ 36 ]. The ERQ includes 10 items that measure two strategies: Cognitive Reappraisal (6 items) and Expressive Suppression (4 items), scored on a 7-point Likert scale. Original validation studies reported α = 0.79 for reappraisal and α = 0.73 for suppression, demonstrating robust construct validity. The sample of this present study obtained α = 0.82 for cognitive reappraisal and α = 0.76 for expressive suppression, indicating good reliability. Measurement of Cognitive Appraisal Cognitive appraisal was measured using the Cognitive Appraisal Scale (CAS) adapted from [ 37 ], which assesses primary appraisal (perceived threat, challenge) and secondary appraisal (perceived coping ability). The CAS uses a 5-point Likert scale. The Cronbach’s α values were 0.80 (primary appraisal) and 0.84 (secondary appraisal), indicating good reliability. Measurement of Behavioral Coping Behavioral coping was measured using selected subscales from the Brief COPE Inventory (Carver, 1997), covering active coping, planning, and seeking social support (12 items). Responses are recorded on a 4-point Likert scale. In the present study, α values ranged from 0.75 to 0.83. Family Factors Family predictors included, Family income: Self-reported monthly household income in RMB, categorized into quintiles according to national student income distributions. Parental education: Highest education level attained by either parent (coded 1–6, from primary school or below to graduate degree ). Perceived family support: Measured using the Family APGAR Scale [ 38 ], a 5-item measure of family functioning rated on a 3-point Likert scale. In this study, α = 0.83. School Factors School predictors included, Teacher–student relationship quality: Measured using the Teacher–Student Relationship Scale adapted from [ 39 ], focusing on closeness and support (8 items, 5-point Likert scale). In this study, α = 0.84. Perceived campus support: Measured with a 4-item subscale from the Perceived School Climate Scale [ 40 ]. In this study: α = 0.80. Social Factors Social predictors included, Peer support: Measured using the Friends subscale of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) [ 41 ], with items rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = very strongly disagree , 7 = very strongly agree ). In this study, α = 0.87. 3.4. Data Analysis For quantitative analysis, the OLS regression model served as the baseline: Resilience i = β 0 ​+ β 1 ​X 1i ​+ β 2 ​X 2i​ +⋯+β k ​X ki ​+ ε i ​ Where: Resilience i is the resilience score for individual I ; X 1i, …, X ki ​ represent the independent variables (e.g., family income, teacher-student relationship, emotional management); β 0 ​is the intercept; β k ​are the estimated coefficients and ε i ​ is the error term. To complement OLS, Quantile Regression estimated predictor effects at the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of resilience: Qr​ (Resilience i ​​∣X i ) = β 0τ​ + β 1τ​ X 1i+ ⋯ + β k ​ r X ki ​ ​ Where Qr​ (Resilience i ​​∣X i ) is the conditional quantile (e.g., median) of resilience given the predictors and β k​r are the quantile-specific coefficients for predictor k at quantile τ. Both methods were used to quantitatively analyze the internal and external factors that affect college students' resilience. The methods help us to understand the relationship between the independent and dependent variables (Table 3 ). This approach revealed whether certain factors—such as emotional regulation or peer support—were more influential for students with lower resilience than for those already functioning at higher resilience levels. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata 17, with model diagnostics performed to check multicollinearity, heteroskedasticity, and normality of residuals. By integrating both OLS and quantile regression models, the study ensured robustness of the coefficient estimates, and comprehensiveness in interpreting the effects across the resilience spectrum. This dual-method approach enhances the reliability of the findings by accounting for variation in the distribution of resilience levels across the student population [ 42 ]. Table 3 Family profile of the surveyed college students Classification Description Family social class Proportion of college students from upper-class families 24.2% Proportion of college students from middle-class families 67.6% Proportion of college students from low-income families 8.2% Household income Monthly income below 1w 42.1% Monthly income 1w to 2w 43.2% Monthly income of more than 20,000 14.7% School teacher-student, inter-student relationship variables Intimate relationship variables between teachers and students 24.28分 Inter-natal intimacy variables 63.18分 Proportion of students who have served as student leaders 12.8% Average number of clubs joined 1.5个 Average number of part-time jobs 1个 The psychological and physiological level of students good = 1 4.0. Result 4.1. Hypotheses Testing Using OLS Regression The Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression model was employed to estimate the average effect of each predictor variable on resilience scores (Table 4 ). The hypotheses related to personal, family, school, social, and demographic factors were tested as follows: Table 4. OLS model coefficient estimation results Variable Coefficient estimate Standard error t-value P-value Age 0.15 0.17 0.86 0.372 Gender（male =0） -0.21 0.30 -7.03 0.000 Health status 0.14 0.02 10.25 0.000 Student leaders（no =0） 0.31 0.32 0.94 0.341 Relationship between teachers and students 0.04 0.01 4.58 0.000 Relationship between life and death 0.04 0.01 4.38 0.000 Not participating in off-campus part-time jobs -0.76 0.64 -1.21 0.223 Participation in societies 0.21 0.07 2.41 0.015 Family social class（Lower floor =0） 0.01 0.25 0.03 0.970 Logarithm of income（ln） 0.67 0.17 4.08 0.000 Personal psychological and physiological level 1.21 0.02 2.41 0.015 Constant term 51.09 4.28 11.91 0.106 Adj-R-Square 11.02% Personal psychological and physiological levels were found to be significant predictors of resilience. Emotional management and internal strength played a crucial role in fostering resilience, validating the emotional and cognitive domains of the behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework. This result supports Hypothesis H₁₁. H₁₂: Family factors significantly affect resilience. Family social class was not significant; however, the logarithm of family income had a positive and significant effect (β = 0.67), indicating that students from higher-income households exhibited greater resilience. This partially supports Hypothesis H₁₂, suggesting that while perceived social class may not directly influence resilience, actual material resources (income) do matter. It can be seen that family factors have an important impact on the healthy growth and development of resilience in college students, which is in line with [ 43 ]. H₁₃: School-related factors significantly influence resilience. Positive teacher-student and peer relationships significantly enhanced resilience. For each unit increase in relationship closeness, resilience rose by 0.04 (p = 0.000). Participation in student clubs increased resilience by 0.21, while student leadership roles and part-time work were not statistically significant in the OLS model. The table data show that for every club they join, the level of resilience increases by 0.21. For every unit increase in the experience of student leaders, the level of resilience increases by 0.31. These findings provide partial support for H₁₃ and suggest that while leadership titles alone may not predict resilience, actual engagement and interpersonal quality within school environments play a more critical role. H₁₄: Social factors significantly influence resilience Regarding influence of social factors, the OLS model did not include direct measures for social-level constructs such as policy support or practical opportunity provision, making it difficult to empirically test Hypothesis H₁₄ within the OLS framework. As such, this hypothesis was not supported by the OLS findings, although it is better addressed in the quantile regression analysis. H₁₅: Demographic variables (age, gender, health status) significantly predict resilience Gender and health status significantly influenced resilience; male students exhibited higher resilience scores (by 2.1 points), and better health status correlated positively with resilience. Age was not significant. These findings support Hypothesis H₁₅, which posited that demographic variables would significantly predict resilience, though only partially since age was not significant. The adjusted R² = 11.02% indicates the OLS model explained a modest proportion of the variance in resilience. The results partially supported H₁₁, H₁₂, H₁₃, and H₁₅, while H₁₄ was unsupported. Hypotheses Testing Using Quantile Regression Quantile regression (Table 5 ) assessed effects at Q25 (low resilience), Q50 (median), and Q90 (high resilience): Table 5: Results of quantile regression model (sample 2580) Variable Q25(bracket value) Q50 （ bracket t val ） Q90 （ bracket t val ） Age 0.15（0.61） 0.17（1.01） 0.34（1.50） Gender (male=0) -2.15 *** （-6.92） -1.91 *** （-4.81） -1.73 *** （-3.12） Health status 0.14 *** （7.36） 0.12 *** （5.92） 0.11 *** （3.78） Student leaders (no=0) 0.61（1.36） 0.32（1.32） 0.04（0.05） Relationship between teachers and students 0.04 ** （2.36） 0.05 *** （4.01） 0.04 ** （0.01） Relationship between life and death 0.08 *** （4.36） 0.08 *** （3.36） 0.05（0.61） Participation in off-campus part-time jobs -1.46（-1.55） -2.68 * （-2.39） -2.21 * （-2.51） Participation in societies 0.21 ** （4.36） 0.17（4.36） 2.41 * （1.36） Family social class (lower class = 0) -0.28（-0.52） -0.25（-0.42） -0.013（-0.08） Logarithm of income (ln) 0.67 ** （4.36） 0.67 * （2.36） 4.08（1.46） Personal psychological and physiological level 0.21 ** （4.36） 0.17（4.86） 2.41 * （1.36） General universities (elite universities = 0) 1.18 ** (2.73) 1.27 * (2.14) 0.42(0.58) High-end universities (elite universities=0) 1.01(1.82) 1.20 * (2.35) 0.11(0.14) Constant term 41.09 *** （4.36） 45.09 *** （8.36） 71.09 *** （14.36） Adj-R-Square 0.07 0.07 0.06 Note： * p＜0.05， ** p＜0.01， *** p＜0.001。 Health status was highly significant at all quantiles (p < 0.001), with the strongest effect at Q25. Psychological and physiological levels were significant across all quantiles. Personal psychological and physiological level was significant at all quantiles ( p < 0.05 to p < 0.01 ), confirming personal emotional management and self-control contribute significantly to resilience development. H₁₂: Family factors Family social class was not significant at any quantile (Q25: t = -0.52; Q90: t = -0.08). This suggests family class or background does not have a direct, measurable effect on students' resilience in this study. Family income was significant only at Q25 and Q50. Family income has a significant effect on college students at the bottom and middle of the distribution, but has no significant effect on college students at the top of the distribution. H₁₃: School factors Teacher-student and peer relationships were significant at Q25 and Q50( p < 0.01 to < 0.001 ), but not at Q90. Society participation was significant at Q25 and Q90. Part-time work was significant (negative effect) at Q50 and Q90. Participation in societies had mixed results—significant at Q25 and Q90, suggesting it plays a stronger role at lower and higher resilience levels. H₁₄: Social factors Although policy support and practical opportunities were not isolated as variables here, the significance of university tier (i.e., general or high-end universities vs elite) may indirectly reflect social capital or institutional opportunity. General universities were significant at Q25 and Q50, showing that institutional background may influence lower and mid-level resilience. High-end universities were significant only at Q50. Taking the 50% percentile as an example, the average resilience level of elite universities is 1.20 higher than that of high-end schools, which means that elite universities have made great efforts to cultivate the resilience of college students.. H₁₅: Demographic variables significantly predict resilience. Gender (male = 0) was highly significant at all quantiles ( p < 0.001 ) with negative coefficients, indicating that female students generally report higher resilience scores than males. Age was not significant across all quantiles. Health status was again strongly significant across all quantiles, reinforcing its predictive role in resilience. 5.0. Discussion The results provide empirical support for the main hypothesis that internal and external factors significantly influence college students’ resilience, as conceptualised in the behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework 5.1. Personal / Demographic Factors Personal psychological and physiological well-being emerged as consistent predictors of resilience, aligning with prior research emphasising self-regulation and emotional management as foundational to coping with adversity. The OLS regression results reveal that gender and health status significantly influence resilience among college students. Gender was negatively associated with resilience scores, indicating that the resilience of male students is generally higher than that of female students, a difference of 2.1. Health status was also positively and significantly associated with resilience, suggesting that students who perceive themselves as healthier tend to demonstrate stronger resistance to adversity. If college students are in good health, their resilience will be enhanced accordingly, and physical and mental health is the basis for cultivating resilience. If college students are in good physical and psychological condition, their level of resilience will be significantly enhanced. However, age did not show a statistically significant effect on resilience. Generally speaking, the expansion of psychological flexibility will significantly increase the level of resilience. When college students are faced with stress, their cognitive changes play a key role in stress coping and resistance actions. For freshmen, their interest in learning will be weakened due to unclear academic goals, which will double their academic pressure in the future. For sophomores and juniors, they will easily fall into conflicts once they are undecided between continuing their studies and internship and employment. Senior students mainly face employment pressure. If they blindly seek employment due to a lack of sense of purpose, their future career development will encounter many obstacles [ 44 ]. 5.2 Family Factors While perceived family social class was not significant, actual material resources (income) positively affected resilience at lower and middle resilience levels. This suggests that economic stability offers tangible coping advantages, such as access to supportive resources, better living conditions, and reduced financial stress. As seen in Table 4 , the higher the family social class and the greater the family income, the stronger the resilience of the college students. Students from higher-income households tend to have more access to supportive resources, better living conditions, and enhanced coping mechanisms, all of which may contribute to greater resilience. Generally speaking, if the family's material conditions are good and the family atmosphere is warm, college students will have stronger resilience [ 45 ]. Families with good conditions will provide more resilience training opportunities for their children, which will strengthen college students' resilience. The more harmonious the family atmosphere, the closer the parent-child relationship. When college students encounter pressure or difficulties, they will communicate and express their feelings to their parents immediately. This can help to release stress. When parents give appropriate guidance and encouragement, it will help to enhance college students’ self-confidence in resisting adversity and promoting problem solving. 5.3. School Factors Supportive teacher–student and peer relationships played a critical role in resilience development, particularly for students with lower and moderate resilience. Participation in student societies also contributed to resilience, especially among high-resilience students, by fostering social integration, leadership skills, and a sense of belonging. However, it has no significant impact on the resilience of college students in the middle of the distribution [ 46 ]. The table data show that for every club they join, the level of resilience increases by 0.21. This is because college student associations are a platform for students to express themselves, have self-discipline, and self-improvement. Peer relationship or social bonding also positively and significantly affects resilience. There is a certain degree of competition within their associations, which help to cultivate resilience in them, as reported by [ 44 ]. Participation in student societies is associated with higher resilience levels, possibly due to increased social interaction, leadership exposure, and belonging. For every unit increase in the experience of student leaders, the level of resilience increases by 0.31. For college students who have not participated in off-campus part-time jobs, their resilience shows a downward trend. Reverse thinking shows that off-campus part-time jobs can, to a certain extent, train college students to resist setbacks. However, leadership titles alone were insufficient predictors, highlighting the importance of active engagement over formal roles. For mental health teachers, it is necessary to attach great importance to the cultivation of college students' resilience and pay dynamic attention to the mental health of college students. On the contrary, if the school ignores the cultivation of college students' resilience, then students will not receive reliable knowledge support in cultivating their ability to resist setbacks 5.4. Social Factors Although not directly measured in the OLS model, quantile regression suggested that institutional type (university tier) may indirectly reflect social capital and opportunity structures, influencing resilience particularly for students in lower and mid-resilience categories. College students have relatively few opportunities to contact the society. When students really enter the society, it is easy to encounter setbacks in life, work, social interaction, etc. However, the occurrence of setbacks is the best opportunity to train college students' resilience. College students learn to face setbacks, face themselves, problems, and find solutions, thereby enhancing their level of resilience [ 47]. In other words, the social environment is an important environment for cultivating college students' resilience. The social environment is mutually supportive and friendly, which is conducive to mobilizing the enthusiasm of college students and allowing them to fully use their initiative in solving problems. On the contrary, if the social environment is chaotic and the social atmosphere is indifferent, then the resilience of college students cannot be effectively improved, which will make them to become helpless. In all, several variables (e.g., gender, health status, part-time job, teacher-student relationship, society participation) showed different levels of significance and coefficient sizes across the Q25, Q50, and Q90 quantiles. For example: Health status had stronger influence at Q25 ( t = 7.36 ) than Q90 ( t = 3.78 ). Participation in part-time work was only significant at higher quantiles (Q50 and Q90), suggesting work-related stress may be more prominent for higher-resilience students managing multiple responsibilities. Participation in societies had greater effect at Q90 ( β = 2.41 ) than at lower quantiles, possibly indicating stronger social integration benefits for already resilient students. 5.4.. Study Limitation Despite the significance of this study, it has some limitations. While the study is strong in its local context, the focus on only public universities in Qingdao limits the external validity of the findings. The results may not apply to private institutions, other regions, or different cultural setting. Another limitation is that the study's measures of resilience and its related factors may not capture the full range of relevant constructs, which could limit the accuracy of the findings. Also, the study does not provide longitudinal data, which would be useful in understanding the development of resilience over time. Despite these limitations, the study has been able to develop a behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework to understand resilience in college students, which provides a comprehensive approach to understanding the complex interactions between individual and environmental factors. And also, the study's findings can inform the development of interventions and programs aimed at promoting resilience and healthy growth in college students. 6.0.Conclusion and Recommendation To sum up, the healthy growth of college students is a process. The cognitive level, emotional experience, behavioral performance and other dynamic changes of college students during their growth stage drive college students to seek balance in the process of resilience through behavioral-cognitive and emotional architecture. The level of resilience among college students increases when they interact with the environment. This has a positive impact on students' personal development and healthy growth. In addition, families create a harmonious environment, schools provide strong support, and society provides assistance to maximize the effectiveness of college students’ resilience model. Based on the study's findings, the following recommendations are proposed. 1. Targeted interventions that focus on enhancing college students' cognitive, emotional, and behavioral skills need to be developed to promote resilience and healthy growth. 2. Emotional regulation strategies in interventions, such as mindfulness, self-awareness, and self-regulation techniques should be emphasized , to help students manage stress and adversity. 3. There is need to foster positive relationships between students, family, and school to provide a supportive environment that promotes resilience. 4. Opportunities for social support, such as peer support groups, mentoring programs, and counseling services, need to be provided to help students build resilience. 5. Self-awareness and self-reflection skills need to be promoted in students to help them understand their strengths, weaknesses, and coping strategies. 6. Stress management programs that teach students effective coping strategies and provide resources for managing stress and adversity need to be developed. Declarations Declaration of competing interest The author declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Ethical statement : the research was carried out following the guidelines of the ethics committee listed in the ethics statement. For example, the protocol was approved from Guangzhou Institute of Science and Technology. The study was approved by the Guangzhou Institute of Science and Technology from the ethics committee The approval number ( LGL2023-12 ) Start of Date 12/31/2024 End of date 5/31/2025 Clinical Trial Number NOT APPLICABLE Consent to Publish declaration NOT APPLICABLE Consent to Participate declaration consent to participate’ section, informed consent to participate was obtained from all of the participants in the study. Data Availability Statement All data is provided within the manuscript Funding statement This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NOT APPLICABLE Author contributions Conceptualization: Luo Guangli Data curation: Luo Guangli Formal analysis: Luo Guangli Funding acquisition: Luo Guangli Investigation: Luo Guangli. Methodology: Luo Guangli, Project administration: Luo Guangli Visualization: Luo Guangli Writing—original draft: Luo Guangli Writing—review & editing: Luo Guangli. References Stallman HM. Psychological distress in university students: A comparison with general population data. Australian Psychol. 2010;45(4):249–57. Auerbach RP, Alonso J, Axinn WG, Cuijpers P, Ebert DD, Green JG, Bruffaerts R. Psychol Med. 2016;46(14):2955–70. Mental disorders among college students in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. Ibrahim AK, Kelly SJ, Adams CE, Glazebrook C. A systematic review of studies of depression prevalence in university students. J Psychiatr Res. 2013;47(3):391–400. Bruffaerts R, Mortier P, Kiekens G, Auerbach RP, Cuijpers P, Demyttenaere K, Kessler RC. Mental health problems in college freshmen: Prevalence and academic functioning. J Affect Disord. 2018;225:97–103. Moir F, Henning M, Hassed C. Stress management and the role of Rhodiola rosea: a review. Int J Psychiatry. 2018;21(1):50–5. Zivin K, Eisenberg D, Gollust SE, Golberstein E. Persistence of mental health problems and needs in a college student population. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(3):180–5. Masten AS. Resilience of children in disasters: A multisystem perspective. Int J Psychol. 2021;56(1):1–11. Ungar M. Designing resilience research: Using multiple methods to investigate risk exposure, promotive and protective processes, and contextually relevant outcomes for children and youth. Child Abuse Negl. 2019;96:10409. Wolf AM, Fontham ET, Church TR, Flowers CR, Guerra CE, LaMonte SJ, Smith RA. Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(4):250–81. Osorio JKK. Dismembering Lāhui: A history of the Hawaiian nation to 1887. University of Hawaii; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780824845407 . Chaney DW. An Overview of the First Use of the Terms Cognition and Behavior. Behav Sci. 2013;3:143–53. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs3010143 . De HouwerJ. Using the implicit association test does not rule out an impact of conscious propositional knowledge on. evaluative conditioning Learning and Motivation; 2006. Qu P. Research on ways to improve the psychological resilience of college students in higher vocational colleges [J]. J Kaifeng Cult Art Vocat Coll. 2024;44(1):94–8. Kabir A. (2023). A Review of Emotions, Behavior and Cognition. Journal of Biomedical and Sustainable Healthcare Applications 3(2)(2023). Zhang S. (2023). Application of painting art therapy in improving college students’ resilience [J]. Popular Literature Art, (21):216–8. Gross JJ, John OP. Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J Personal Soc Psychol. 2003;85(2):348–62. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348 . Carver CS, Scheier MF. On the self-regulation of behavior. Cambridge University Press; 1998. Neenan M. Developing resilience. Hove: Routledge; 2009. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203874417 . Luthar SS, Cicchetti D, Becker B. The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Dev. 2000;71:543–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00164 . Boyden J, Cooper E. (2007). Questioning the power of resilience: are children up to the task of disrupting the transmission of poverty? Manchester: Chronic Poverty Research Centre. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1753009 Williams MJ. (2011). Home, school, and community factors that contribute to the educational resilience of urban, African American high school graduates from low-income, single-parent families (PhD thesis, University of Iowa). https://doi.org/10.17077/etd.kwvxp62o Masten AS, Obradovic J. Competence and Resilience in Development. New York Acad Sci. 2006;1094:13–27. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1376.003 . Cicchetti D, Curtis J. Multilevel perspectives on pathways to resilient functioning. Dev Psychopathol. 2007;19:627–9. Dimakos I, Papakonstantopoulou A. (2012). Resilience and self-efficacy of elementary school students. Margalit M. Second-Generation Research on Resilience: Social-Emotional Aspects of Children with Learning Disabilities. Learn Disabil Res Pract. 2004;19:45–8. Masten AS. Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for research, practice, and translational synergy. Dev Psychopathol. 2011;23:493–506. Masten AS, Coatsworth JD. The development of competence in favorable and unfavorable environments: Lessons from research on successful children. Am Psychol. 1998;53(2):205–20. Masten AS, Riley JR. (2005). Resilience in Context. In R. D. Peters, B. Leadbeater, & R. J. McMahon, editors, Resilience in children, families, and communities: Linking context to practice and policy (pp. 13–25). https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23824-7_2 Rutter M. Resilience: Some Conceptual Considerations. J Adolesc Health. 1993;14:626–31. Huang S, Jiang Y. (2023). Current situation and improvement strategies for the resilience of junior high school students from single-parent families [J]. Mental Health Educ Prim Secondary Schools, (17):10–7. Ma X, Wang M. (2023). Construction of ideological and political course teaching model in colleges and universities based on college students’ resilience [J]. J Mudanjiang Inst Educ, (9):68–71. Li X, Teaching. and Educating (High Educ Forum), (24):69–73. Wu M, Ke L. The relationship between medical students’ negative emotions and sense of professional mission—the mediating role of resilience [J]. Chin J Social Med. 2023;40(3):281–5. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct equation modeling: multidisciplinary J. 1999;6(1):1–55. Connor KM, Davidson JRT. Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depress Anxiety. 2003;18(2):76–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113 . Yu X, Zhang J. Factor analysis and psychometric evaluation of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) with Chinese people. Social Behav Personality: Int J. 2007;35(1):19–30. Peacock EJ, Wong PT. The stress appraisal measure (SAM): A multidimensional approach to cognitive appraisal. Stress Med. 1990;6(3):227–36. Smilkstein G. The Family APGAR: A proposal for a family function test and its use by physicians. J Fam Pract. 1978;6(6):1231–9. Pianta RC. Enhancing relationships between children and teachers. American Psychological Association; 1999. https://doi.org/10.1037/10314-000 . Haynes NM, Emmons C, Ben-Avie M. School climate as a factor in student adjustment and achievement. J Educational Psychol Consultation. 1997;8(3):321–9. Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess. 1988;52(1):30–41. Wang Z, Zhang B. Cultivation of college students’ resilience during major public health events [J]. J Honghe Univ. 2023;21(3):42–6. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis,J. P., … Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration.Bmj, 339. Jiang M. (2023). Analysis of factors affecting college students’ resilience and improvement strategies [J]. Fujian Text, (5):75–6. Yan J, Su H. Research on positive psychological intervention to improve the resilience level of college students [J]. Educational Observation. 2023;12(2):17–20. Chen L, Liu Y. (2022). Application of growth mindset in cultivating college students’ resilience [J]. Shanxi Youth, (24):184–6. Zhao N, Peng D. Analysis of external influencing factors on college students’ resilience—taking Beijing universities as an example [J]. Acad Forum. 2019;42(6):134–42. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7287737","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":521727010,"identity":"021e48b4-56df-47a1-b65b-560c4f1a92ee","order_by":0,"name":"Luo Guangli","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Guangzhou Institute of Science and Technology","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Luo","middleName":"","lastName":"Guangli","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-04 06:53:18","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7287737/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7287737/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":92420152,"identity":"f2d2796b-6200-4f00-91c1-dd42d595bc0e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":50630,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"behave25.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/c214eab1e0deeadfd7b2ef97.docx"},{"id":92420155,"identity":"34316649-ac10-4f62-863c-2d4f4014ae0e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":18075,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure1.doc.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/65d25581ed3e9221ef214e8e.docx"},{"id":92420151,"identity":"1d18dd77-3e37-4bd0-8d24-3f92523870fd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":13000,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table1.doc.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/3b0acdd9beae968dbb6b6a23.docx"},{"id":92420154,"identity":"e65dcbd9-9f1f-404c-a34c-0d5e3d5024da","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"docx","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":12874,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table2.doc.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/9cbd0d5d13c3eff8f436de3e.docx"},{"id":92420358,"identity":"b5429ab7-72a5-46d1-b8b3-358dd6c63b4d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:20:12","extension":"docx","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":12947,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table3.doc.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/2a13d8ea27b730064e904901.docx"},{"id":92421560,"identity":"25d59f02-37dd-44e8-9082-2055214707a0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:28:12","extension":"docx","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":13260,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table4.doc.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/f12b868af98d4a9cd7590f31.docx"},{"id":92420360,"identity":"eb092156-1717-47ec-b7f0-e13e4b0f2323","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:20:12","extension":"docx","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":13964,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table5.doc.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/f8642c3d75c80a8e919f1f34.docx"},{"id":92420163,"identity":"41492f93-80b8-4e4e-9c3b-500b8b2887c8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"json","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":3740,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"61b3a028876a43419a8812acef41ad52.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/746f2a7807d58f6f5777b481.json"},{"id":92420160,"identity":"c78df578-495c-42ce-93bc-27edcf69eb5c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"xml","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":138797,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"61b3a028876a43419a8812acef41ad521enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/2ba91296d1a7d4ea730a643d.xml"},{"id":92420361,"identity":"0514372a-be10-4b71-b8c0-9858575807c9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:20:12","extension":"emf","order_by":9,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":41088,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.emf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/20c80d9cd1b554f3f8be4011.emf"},{"id":92420362,"identity":"22d16f7a-2219-4d1d-af23-76a1c3bcdc2a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:20:12","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":208064,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/9cc60119c45da70beec36ea8.png"},{"id":92420363,"identity":"c87e2c13-54a8-402f-9550-5b2aa0c0ce55","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:20:12","extension":"xml","order_by":11,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":137075,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"61b3a028876a43419a8812acef41ad521structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/ed095c260144bad18ae1aaa1.xml"},{"id":92420161,"identity":"80ab5ffe-385c-44ff-aa30-163af7aef1c8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"html","order_by":12,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":145655,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/c9946c5ed08f5b57a6f3ba22.html"},{"id":92420150,"identity":"6284ebe2-269f-413b-a0ea-850ff5dbee8b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-29 14:12:12","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":38671,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe interactive process of college students’ resilience formation\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/ed6432427b9fb351f1035be7.png"},{"id":97111090,"identity":"b29c29e5-876a-4235-ba5d-f6fca5c30da6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-01 06:24:15","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1364031,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7287737/v1/e4f1b7b6-60bf-47f9-b969-2855e403d527.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Applying Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional Framework Model for Building Resilience in College Students for Healthy Growth","fulltext":[{"header":"1.0. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn recent years, concerns regarding the mental health of college students have intensified. Studies conducted in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia indicate a growing prevalence of anxiety, depression, and other mental health disorders among this population [1; 2 ; 3]. In China, the prevalence of mental health issues among college students is estimated to be approximately 40%. Notably, in 2022, about 4.304\u0026nbsp;million students experiencing poor mental health graduated into the workforce or advanced to research institutes. Multiple factors contribute to this concerning trend. Significant life transitions\u0026mdash;such as moving away from home for the first time, adjusting to heightened academic expectations, and assuming greater personal responsibilities\u0026mdash;are common during the shift from high school to college and can place considerable strain on students\u0026rsquo; psychological well-being. These events can exacerbate stress and anxiety [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, social factors that worsen college students' mental health difficulties include social isolation, relationship problems, and peer pressure [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUntreated mental health problems can substantially undermine college students\u0026rsquo; academic performance, overall well-being, interpersonal relationships, and future opportunities. Despite increasing awareness of this issue, the availability and accessibility of effective mental health services and interventions tailored to the specific needs of college students remain severely inadequate [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA variety of therapeutic approaches are employed to treat and manage mental health problems in both the general population and student groups. This study focuses on resilience as a key approach to addressing psychological challenges faced by college students. Resilience is defined as an individual\u0026rsquo;s capacity to recover from difficulties and setbacks, as well as to develop strong resistance to adverse situations such as mental stress and hardship. It also encompasses normal psychological development, positive emotions, and healthy behaviors. For college students, resilience is essential to maintaining stability and well-being, enabling them to withstand the physical, emotional, and psychological challenges encountered both within academic settings and in broader society. Most college students that have poor resilience would definitely fail in their academic pursuit and even in life [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. Thus, it is necessary for the school system to develop courses and programmes that are focused on the building of resilience in students for their healthy mental growth. This study aims to analyze the behavioral-cognitive and emotional model for building resilience in students and also analyze the factors that contribute to or influence college students' resilience.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2.0. Literature review","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1. Theoretical Rationale: Integrating the Behavioral\u0026ndash;Cognitive\u0026ndash;Emotional Framework into Resilience and Wellbeing Development\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience\u0026mdash;the capacity to adapt successfully in the face of adversity\u0026mdash;is increasingly recognised as a critical determinant of young adults\u0026rsquo; mental health, academic success, and long-term well-being [7; 8]. Among college students, resilience not only buffers the effects of stress but also promotes healthy growth by fostering adaptive coping, emotional regulation, and sustained motivation in the pursuit of academic and personal goals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. In the context of rapid social change, rising academic pressures, and diverse socio-economic challenges, a robust conceptual framework is essential for understanding and strengthening resilience. The Behavioral\u0026ndash;Cognitive\u0026ndash;Emotional (BCE) framework offers a holistic lens for understanding resilience by integrating three interdependent psychological domains: Behaviour, cognition and emotion. Behavior refers to an individual\u0026rsquo;s reaction within a particular environment or response to a specific situation or event. It encompasses actions, language, and other observable activities, serving as both a reflection of cognition and an expression of emotion. Behavior can be understood as an intentional effort by an individual either to bring about a change from one state of affairs to another or to preserve an existing state [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. Behavior includes the act of doing something including physical movement and engaging in mental activities, like performing mental calculations. Cognition mainly refers to a psychological process, which is a person's ability to perceive and understand external things. It includes one\u0026rsquo;s thinking process/pattern, reasoning, thought, and intellect. Although the concept of cognition can be traced back to the ancient Greeks [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e], one of the most influential modern definitions was articulated by Neisser approximately 50 years ago in his seminal textbook on cognitive psychology. Neisser defined cognition as encompassing \u0026ldquo;all the processes by which sensory input is transformed, reduced, elaborated, stored, recovered, and used. Cognition encompasses these processes even when they occur in the absence of direct sensory stimulation, as in the case of mental imagery and hallucinations. Given this broad definition, it becomes evident that cognition underlies virtually all human activities and that every psychological phenomenon can be considered a cognitive phenomenon [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. In essence, cognition refers to the mental processes involved in the acquisition, storage, manipulation, and retrieval of information. Emotion, by contrast, pertains to an individual\u0026rsquo;s experience of external events and their influence on mental state and mood, encompassing feelings, sensations, and reactions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. According to the American Psychological Association (APA), emotion can be described as a multifaceted response pattern that encompasses experiential, behavioral, and physiological components. Emotions encompass the subjective responses individuals experience when exposed to stimuli that evoke strong affective states. Each emotional experience consists of three components: the subjective experience, the physiological response of the body, and the subsequent behavioral or expressive manifestation. Emotions play a pivotal role in shaping human behavior, encompassing both exemplary and detrimental actions, while also serving as a fundamental medium in interpersonal engagements [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndividuals exhibit different cognitions, emotions, and behavioral responses to the same event due to variations in personality traits, values, and life experiences. To attain balance within the behavioral\u0026ndash;cognitive\u0026ndash;emotional structure, individuals should ground their responses in personal realities, make adaptive adjustments in the face of adversity, and strive toward healthy growth [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e]. Contemporary resilience literature increasingly supports transactional models [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e] in which behavior, cognition, and emotion operate as a mutually reinforcing triad. For example, adaptive behaviors can enhance positive cognitive reframing, which in turn fosters more stable and constructive emotional states, ultimately creating a virtuous cycle of resilience. Conversely, maladaptive patterns in any one domain can disrupt this balance, leading to vulnerability and reduced wellbeing [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe BCE framework aligns with positive psychology\u0026rsquo;s broaden-and-build theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e], which posits that positive emotions expand individuals\u0026rsquo; thought\u0026ndash;action repertoires, leading to the acquisition of enduring resources\u0026mdash;cognitive, behavioral, and social\u0026mdash;that enhance resilience. It also complements self-regulation theories [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e], which emphasize the continuous monitoring and adjustment of behaviors, cognitions, and emotions to maintain goal-directed functioning under stress.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile extensive literature has explored the individual components of behavior, cognition, and emotion as they relate to psychological functioning and educational outcomes, few studies have systematically integrated these three components into a unified framework for building resilience among college students. Much of the existing research tends to treat resilience as either a trait or a context-dependent response, without adequately accounting for the interactive and dynamic relationship between behavior, cognition, and emotion in the resilience formation process. This study aims to fill this gap by applying Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional (BCE) framework to investigate the interdependence of behavior, cognition, and emotion in real-life educational stress scenarios. The BCE framework addresses this gap by conceptualizing resilience as the capacity to achieve balance between behavioral adaptability, cognitive flexibility, and emotional stability in response to contextual challenges, recognizing that healthy growth in college students depends on dynamic interactions between these domains and their socio-cultural environment, including family, peers, and institutional climate and providing a practical intervention pathway that integrates psychoeducation, reflective practice, and skill-building activities across all three domains, thereby promoting sustainable wellbeing and academic success. This study therefore grounds itself in the BCE model as a multidimensional, integrative framework that reflects the complexity of resilience development in educational settings. By applying this model to Chinese college students\u0026mdash;a population experiencing unique cultural and structural stressors\u0026mdash;it aims to generate context-specific insights that can inform psychological support services, curriculum development, and policy design for fostering resilience and wellbeing\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2. Definition of Resilience\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe scientific community has increasingly focused on the capacity of certain individuals to recover from and successfully adapt to adversities over time, while maintaining typical psychosocial development. Resilience does not refer solely to exceptional individuals who remain calm and optimistic in the face of negative circumstances, but rather to the \u0026ldquo;ordinary magic\u0026rdquo; inherent in people\u0026rsquo;s everyday abilities that can be nurtured and strengthened. This \u0026ldquo;ordinary magic\u0026rdquo; enables individuals to cope with daily challenges and derive satisfaction from life despite difficulties. As noted by [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e], resilience pertains to the \u0026ldquo;ordinary many\u0026rdquo; rather than the \u0026ldquo;extraordinary few. Based on this assumption, he uses the term \u0026ldquo;routine resilience\u0026rdquo;, meaning that we can all demonstrate resilience at some degree in our daily hassles. According to [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e], resilience is not a stable, permanent trait maintained throughout an individual\u0026rsquo;s lifetime; rather, it depends on the specific context, the timing, and the dynamic interaction between the individual and their surrounding environment. Metaphorically, resilience can be likened to the capacity of a coil to return to its original form after temporary deformation. As noted by [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e], the term was originally used in medicine to describe a patient\u0026rsquo;s recovery following an accident or surgery. Over time, its application expanded into the social sciences, reflecting a shift from the deficit model toward a more positive and holistic perspective [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. According to [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e], resilience functions as a conceptual umbrella encompassing numerous interrelated factors, underscoring both the significance of the concept and the complexity of examining all its dimensions. Some of these aspects may be: oneself (abilities, skills, perceptions, experiences, beliefs, ideas etc.), main characteristics of somebody\u0026rsquo;s life (health, nutrition, accommodation etc.), emerging problems and solving skills (awareness, crisis managing, realistic point of view) and finally, relationships with others (colleagues, classmates, family, etc.).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience is a concept that appears across multiple disciplines [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e], including psychology, sociology, and education. In the 1980s, researchers often employed the term \u0026ldquo;invulnerable\u0026rdquo; to describe individuals who were able to maintain a positive outlook despite adverse circumstances [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. However, this classification implicitly divided people into two distinct categories\u0026mdash;invulnerable and vulnerable. The former referred to individuals capable of withstanding and adapting to life\u0026rsquo;s challenges, while the latter described those who were more sensitive to difficulties and struggled to adjust. As [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e] notes, resilience is not a fixed trait but rather a process shaped by the interaction of internal and external factors. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e] offers a widely accepted broad definition, describing resilience as the capacity of individuals to cope effectively with significant threats that could compromise their expected and normal progress and development. Thus, resilience is best understood not as a singular personal attribute, but as a broad and dynamic system.. Within this system, internal and external factors interact, influencing an individual\u0026rsquo;s capacity to adapt to challenges and adverse circumstances. Ultimately, a person may or may not demonstrate resilience, as this adaptive capacity is the result of complex interactions among contextual conditions, personal characteristics, situational factors, and acquired skills. According to [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e], resilience can manifest in three distinct ways: (1) overcoming problems and achieving positive goals despite threats, and (2) maintaining both internal and external equilibrium under stressful conditions. .\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne can observe that from every aspect, as in every definition of this term, there are two main components. The first one is the threat that one has to deal with and the second one is the ability of the person to bounce back and overcome the adverse condition [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e]. Many years ago, [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e] specifically declared that resilience is the balance between adversities and the ability of a person to cope with these adversities. He used the word \u0026ldquo;balance\u0026rdquo; to express the dynamic process of resilience, since balance is an ever-changing condition between two worlds: the world of problems and adversities, and the world of effort and happiness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough previous studies [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e] have emphasized the dynamic and context-dependent nature of resilience, there remains limited empirical exploration into how these internal psychological structures (behavioral, cognitive, and emotional) co-develop within the educational environment and contribute to the healthy growth of students. Moreover, models that do attempt to explain resilience often neglect to integrate holistic interventions or conceptual frameworks that guide practical strategies for resilience cultivation, especially in culturally specific contexts such as Chinese higher education. This study aims to fill this gap by applying a Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional (BCE) framework to model and explain the formation of resilience in college students. It proposes a conceptual resilience model tailored to the developmental realities of Chinese college students, with implications for psychological support, curriculum design, and student affairs programming.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.3. Construction of a resilience model for healthy growth of college students based on a behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3.1 Formation of resilience\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe interactive process of college students\u0026rsquo; resilience formation is shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. It can be seen from the diagram that the formation of college students' resilience is a process that involves the interaction between behavioral-cognitive and emotional structures and the environment. When stress occurs, the environmental factor, including the family, school and society are used as carriers to challenge individual college students, enabling them to have balanced interaction. College students seek protection through cognitive reconstruction, emotional experience, and active coping. In the process of resilience, college students adapt to the environment as quickly as possible, change their internal resilience factors, as well as their cognition, emotion, behavior, until they are able to resist and fight stress. There are three outcomes of the interaction between individual college students and the environment. The reconstruction of ideal resilience, ability to adapt to stress, with the actual resilience level remaining unchanged, and maladaptive reconstruction, which indicates resilience [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe interactive process of college students' resilience formation shows interactivity, integrity, and difference. Regarding interactivity, college students interact with the environment, pursue balance between cognition, emotion, and behavior in the new environment, and resolve stress during interaction. For integrity, pressure-environmental factors-internal resilience factors-resilience results form a complete system. The process of college students' resilience should be analyzed holistically. There are idiosyncratic differences in the cognition, emotion, and behavior of individual college students. Different people have different cognitions, emotions, and behavioral responses to the same thing. This is because individuals have different personality traits, values, and experiences. In addition, family and school have a subtle impact on students, which makes their individual personalities and qualities different.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4. The Significance of Cultivating College Students\u0026rsquo; Healthy Growth and Resilience\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience, as conceptualized in the Behavioral\u0026ndash;Cognitive\u0026ndash;Emotional (BCE) framework, is not merely an innate trait but a dynamic capacity shaped by internal and external factors. For college students, cultivating resilience is central to fostering healthy growth and ensuring the ability to cope effectively with academic, social, and personal challenges. Within this framework, behavioral responses reflect underlying cognitive and emotional processes, which can be strengthened through intentional development strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBuilding strong resilience enables students to process events and difficult situations constructively, confronting pressures with a positive mindset. This reduces the burden of stress on mental health and enhances adaptability in the face of adversity. As students\u0026rsquo; emotional cognitive abilities improve, they can resist setbacks more effectively, approach challenges with greater composure, and advance to new stages of personal growth. Such progress not only bolsters immediate well-being but also contributes to long-term developmental outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBeyond academic demands, many students face pressures arising from family expectations and societal norms, which can significantly impact mental health. Resilient students are more adept at identifying early signs of psychological strain, recognizing shifts in mood and emotional states, and actively reinforcing their psychological strengths and environmental adaptability. They are more likely to analyze problems rationally, adopt a balanced and dialectical perspective, and maintain optimism and stability\u0026mdash;behaviors that reduce the likelihood of mental health problems and help prevent extreme or maladaptive responses [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience also plays a vital role in regulating resistant behavior. While emotional cognition and regulation vary according to resilience levels, these factors fundamentally shape students\u0026rsquo; coping strategies. Those with high resilience can standardize resistant behavior under the guidance of positive emotional cognition\u0026mdash;avoiding both passive withdrawal and reckless confrontation. Instead, they adopt context-appropriate actions that support problem-solving and effective navigation of competitive academic and social environments. In line with the BCE framework, such capacity-building helps students develop constructive coping mechanisms, strengthens their sense of efficacy, promotes balanced personal development, and ultimately supports sustained healthy growth [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe reviewed literature underscores the centrality of resilience\u0026mdash;particularly within the Behavioral\u0026ndash;Cognitive\u0026ndash;Emotional (BCE) framework\u0026mdash;in fostering healthy growth, emotional stability, and adaptive coping in college students. Existing research has demonstrated that resilience is shaped by an interplay of personal, familial, school, and societal factors, and that targeted interventions can enhance students\u0026rsquo; cognitive, emotional, and behavioral capacities for managing adversity. However, while the theoretical foundations are well established, there is a need for empirical evidence that quantifies the relative contributions of these dimensions to resilience across different student populations and resilience levels. Guided by the BCE framework, the present study employs a quantitative approach to examine the behavioral, cognitive, and emotional determinants of resilience among college students in Qingdao, thereby bridging the gap between conceptual understanding and data-driven insights.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3.0 Research Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e\u003cb\u003e3.1. Research Design\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study employed a cross-sectional survey design guided by the Behavioral\u0026ndash;Cognitive\u0026ndash;Emotional (BCE) framework to examine the interplay of personal, family, school, and social factors in shaping college students\u0026rsquo; resilience. The design combined robust psychometric measurement with econometric modeling to provide both depth of psychological assessment and precision in statistical estimation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTwo complementary regression approaches were applied: the Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression model and Quantile Regression. OLS estimated the average effect of independent variables on students\u0026rsquo; resilience scores, identifying linear relationships between resilience and multiple predictors. Quantile regression allowed the analysis of differential effects across low, medium, and high resilience levels, capturing heterogeneity often missed in mean-based models. This dual-method approach improved robustness, ensured a more comprehensive understanding of resilience determinants, and addressed distributional differences among students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2. Data sources/study population\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe data used in this study were collected electronically through structured online questionnaires administered by the National Student Research Center (NSRC) as part of the Healthy Growth Tracking Survey of College Students. The survey was conducted across 24 public colleges in Qingdao, targeting students admitted in 2022 and 2023. Participation was facilitated through institutional digital platforms, ensuring confidentiality and broad accessibility. A stratified random sampling method was applied to select a representative sample of 2,580 students from the dataset for quantitative analysis. The demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. The resilience score of the surveyed college students was 77.8 points, with a standard deviation of 10.8 points. Although generally the resilience level of the college students is good, there are some college students whose resilience performance is not satisfactory. Regarding households, the descriptive analysis of the surveyed samples is shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDefinition and description of study variables.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable classification\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable name\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDependent variable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMeasured by scores across three dimensions\u0026mdash;self-confidence, capability, and resistance to adversity\u0026mdash;to reflect students\u0026rsquo; overall resilience level\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndependent variables\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily factors\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily social class, family income, number of parents and, family atmosphere\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSchool factors\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeacher-student relationship, peer relationship, leadership roles, and part-time work participation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocial factors\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccess to practical opportunity and level of policy support available to students\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersonal factors\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLife goals and plans, emotional management, self-control, participation in practical activities\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eContinuous variable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eage\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCurrent age of the college students\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCategorical\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003evariables\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003egender\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCoded as Male\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0;Female\u0026thinsp;\u0026ne;\u0026thinsp;0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHealth status\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSelf-assessed health on a 1\u0026ndash;5 scale (Unhealthy\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1;Health\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5, convertedinto a standard percentage\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDemographic characteristics of respondents (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2,580)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrequency (n)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePercentage (%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1,260\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e48.8%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1,320\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e51.2%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAge group\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e18\u0026ndash;20 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1,145\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e44.4%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e21\u0026ndash;23 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1,075\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e41.7%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e24 years and above\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e360\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13.9%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcademic level\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFreshman (1st year)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e645\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25.0%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSophomore (2nd year)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e690\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26.7%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eJunior (3rd year)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e620\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e24.0%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSenior (4th year)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e625\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e24.2%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSchool type\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHumanities \u0026amp; Social Sci.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e880\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e34.1%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eScience \u0026amp; Technology\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e925\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e35.9%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHealth-related Disciplines\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e775\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e30.0%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3. Research Instruments: Validity and Reliability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe survey measured resilience (dependent variable) and a set of predictors representing personal (emotional regulation, cognitive appraisal, behavioral coping), family (income, parental education, perceived family support), school (teacher\u0026ndash;student relationship, campus support), and social factors (peer support, extracurricular participation). All scales used were established instruments with proven validity and reliability in both international and Chinese contexts, adapted for cultural appropriateness. Construct validity was examined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) for multi-item scales; model fit indices met recommended thresholds (CFI\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.90, RMSEA\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.08) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e]. Reliability was assessed via Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α, with all scales exceeding the acceptable threshold of 0.70.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMeasurement of Resilience\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience was measured using the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-25) developed by [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e]. The scale consists of 25 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale, yielding scores from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater resilience. Previous studies report high internal consistency (Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89) and good test\u0026ndash;retest reliability (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe scale demonstrated strong convergent validity with measures of stress coping and psychological well-being, and factorial validity has been confirmed across different cultural settings, including Chinese student populations [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. In this study, the Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α for this sample was 0.91, indicating excellent reliability\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMeasurement of Emotional Regulation\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEmotional regulation was assessed using the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) by [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e]. The ERQ includes 10 items that measure two strategies: Cognitive Reappraisal (6 items) and Expressive Suppression (4 items), scored on a 7-point Likert scale. Original validation studies reported α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.79 for reappraisal and α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.73 for suppression, demonstrating robust construct validity. The sample of this present study obtained α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.82 for cognitive reappraisal and α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.76 for expressive suppression, indicating good reliability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMeasurement of Cognitive Appraisal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCognitive appraisal was measured using the Cognitive Appraisal Scale (CAS) adapted from [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e], which assesses primary appraisal (perceived threat, challenge) and secondary appraisal (perceived coping ability). The CAS uses a 5-point Likert scale. The Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s α values were 0.80 (primary appraisal) and 0.84 (secondary appraisal), indicating good reliability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMeasurement of Behavioral Coping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBehavioral coping was measured using selected subscales from the Brief COPE Inventory (Carver, 1997), covering active coping, planning, and seeking social support (12 items). Responses are recorded on a 4-point Likert scale. In the present study, α values ranged from 0.75 to 0.83.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFamily Factors\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily predictors included,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily income: Self-reported monthly household income in RMB, categorized into quintiles according to national student income distributions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParental education: Highest education level attained by either parent (coded 1\u0026ndash;6, from \u003cem\u003eprimary school or below\u003c/em\u003e to \u003cem\u003egraduate degree\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePerceived family support: Measured using the Family APGAR Scale [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e], a 5-item measure of family functioning rated on a 3-point Likert scale. In this study, α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.83.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan type=\"BoldUnderline\" class=\"BoldUnderline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003eSchool Factors\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSchool predictors included,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeacher\u0026ndash;student relationship quality: Measured using the Teacher\u0026ndash;Student Relationship Scale adapted from [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e], focusing on closeness and support (8 items, 5-point Likert scale). In this study, α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.84.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePerceived campus support: Measured with a 4-item subscale from the Perceived School Climate Scale [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. In this study: α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.80.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocial Factors\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocial predictors included,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePeer support: Measured using the \u003cem\u003eFriends\u003c/em\u003e subscale of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e], with items rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003every strongly disagree\u003c/em\u003e, 7\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003every strongly agree\u003c/em\u003e). In this study, α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.4. Data Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor quantitative analysis, the OLS regression model served as the baseline:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003e=\u0026thinsp;β\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e​+\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e​X\u003csub\u003e1i\u003c/sub\u003e​+\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e​X\u003csub\u003e2i​\u003c/sub\u003e+⋯+β\u003csub\u003ek\u003c/sub\u003e​X\u003csub\u003eki\u003c/sub\u003e​+ ε\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e​\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhere:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResilience\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e is the resilience score for individual \u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eI\u003c/em\u003e;\u003c/sub\u003e X\u003csub\u003e1i, \u0026hellip;,\u003c/sub\u003eX\u003csub\u003eki\u003c/sub\u003e​ represent the independent variables (e.g., family income, teacher-student relationship, emotional management); \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e ​is the intercept; β\u003csub\u003ek\u003c/sub\u003e​are the estimated coefficients and ε\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e​ is the error term.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo complement OLS, Quantile Regression estimated predictor effects at the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of resilience:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003csub\u003eQr​\u003c/sub\u003e(Resilience \u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e​​∣X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e) \u003csub\u003e=\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e0τ​ +\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e1τ​\u003c/sub\u003eX\u003csub\u003e1i+ ⋯ +\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ek\u003c/sub\u003e​\u003csub\u003er\u003c/sub\u003eX\u003csub\u003eki\u003c/sub\u003e​\u003csub\u003e​\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhere\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003csub\u003eQr​\u003c/sub\u003e(Resilience\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e ​​∣X\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e) is the conditional quantile (e.g., median) of resilience given the predictors and \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ek​r\u003c/sub\u003e are the quantile-specific coefficients for predictor \u003cem\u003ek\u003c/em\u003e at quantile \u003cem\u003eτ.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBoth methods were used to quantitatively analyze the internal and external factors that affect college students' resilience. The methods help us to understand the relationship between the independent and dependent variables (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). This approach revealed whether certain factors\u0026mdash;such as emotional regulation or peer support\u0026mdash;were more influential for students with lower resilience than for those already functioning at higher resilience levels. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata 17, with model diagnostics performed to check multicollinearity, heteroskedasticity, and normality of residuals. By integrating both OLS and quantile regression models, the study ensured robustness of the coefficient estimates, and comprehensiveness in interpreting the effects across the resilience spectrum. This dual-method approach enhances the reliability of the findings by accounting for variation in the distribution of resilience levels across the student population [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily profile of the surveyed college students\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eClassification\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily social class\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProportion of college students from upper-class families\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e24.2%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProportion of college students from middle-class families\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e67.6%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProportion of college students from low-income families\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8.2%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHousehold income\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMonthly income below 1w\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e42.1%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMonthly income 1w to 2w\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e43.2%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMonthly income of more than 20,000\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14.7%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSchool teacher-student, inter-student relationship variables\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIntimate relationship variables between teachers and students\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e24.28分\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eInter-natal intimacy variables\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e63.18分\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProportion of students who have served as student leaders\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12.8%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAverage number of clubs joined\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.5个\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAverage number of part-time jobs\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1个\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe psychological and physiological level of students\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003egood\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4.0. Result","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e\u003cb\u003e4.1. Hypotheses Testing Using OLS Regression\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression model was employed to estimate the average effect of each predictor variable on resilience scores (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The hypotheses related to personal, family, school, social, and demographic factors were tested as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eOLS model coefficient estimation results\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" class=\"fr-table-selection-hover\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCoefficient estimate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStandard error\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003et-value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eP-value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.372\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender（male =0）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-7.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHealth status\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudent leaders（no =0）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.341\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelationship between teachers and students\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelationship between life and death\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNot participating in off-campus part-time jobs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.223\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParticipation in societies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.015\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFamily social class（Lower floor =0）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.970\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLogarithm of income（ln）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePersonal psychological and physiological level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.015\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConstant term\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.106\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdj-R-Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.02%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersonal psychological and physiological levels were found to be significant predictors of resilience. Emotional management and internal strength played a crucial role in fostering resilience, validating the emotional and cognitive domains of the behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework. This result supports Hypothesis H₁₁.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH₁₂: Family factors significantly affect resilience.\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily social class was not significant; however, the logarithm of family income had a positive and significant effect (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.67), indicating that students from higher-income households exhibited greater resilience. This partially supports Hypothesis H₁₂, suggesting that while perceived social class may not directly influence resilience, actual material resources (income) do matter. It can be seen that family factors have an important impact on the healthy growth and development of resilience in college students, which is in line with [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH₁₃: School-related factors significantly influence resilience.\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePositive teacher-student and peer relationships significantly enhanced resilience. For each unit increase in relationship closeness, resilience rose by 0.04 (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.000). Participation in student clubs increased resilience by 0.21, while student leadership roles and part-time work were not statistically significant in the OLS model. The table data show that for every club they join, the level of resilience increases by 0.21. For every unit increase in the experience of student leaders, the level of resilience increases by 0.31. These findings provide partial support for H₁₃ and suggest that while leadership titles alone may not predict resilience, actual engagement and interpersonal quality within school environments play a more critical role.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH₁₄: Social factors significantly influence resilience\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRegarding influence of social factors, the OLS model did not include direct measures for social-level constructs such as policy support or practical opportunity provision, making it difficult to empirically test Hypothesis H₁₄ within the OLS framework. As such, this hypothesis was not supported by the OLS findings, although it is better addressed in the quantile regression analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH₁₅: Demographic variables (age, gender, health status) significantly predict resilience\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender and health status significantly influenced resilience; male students exhibited higher resilience scores (by 2.1 points), and better health status correlated positively with resilience. Age was not significant. These findings support Hypothesis H₁₅, which posited that demographic variables would significantly predict resilience, though only partially since age was not significant. The adjusted R\u0026sup2; = 11.02% indicates the OLS model explained a modest proportion of the variance in resilience. The results partially supported H₁₁, H₁₂, H₁₃, and H₁₅, while H₁₄ was unsupported.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eHypotheses Testing Using Quantile Regression\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eQuantile regression (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) assessed effects at Q25 (low resilience), Q50 (median), and Q90 (high resilience):\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eResults of quantile regression model (sample 2580)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"101%\" class=\"fr-table-selection-hover\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQ25(bracket value)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQ50\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e（\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ebracket t val\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e）\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQ90\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e（\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ebracket t val\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e）\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.15（0.61）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17（1.01）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.34（1.50）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender (male=0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.15\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（-6.92）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.91\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（-4.81）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.73\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（-3.12）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHealth status\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.14\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（7.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（5.92）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.11\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（3.78）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudent leaders (no=0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.61（1.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.32（1.32）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04（0.05）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelationship between teachers and students\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e（2.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.05\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（4.01）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.04\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e（0.01）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelationship between life and death\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（4.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.08\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（3.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.05（0.61）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParticipation in off-campus part-time jobs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.46（-1.55）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.68\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e（-2.39）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.21\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e（-2.51）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParticipation in societies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e（4.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17（4.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.41\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e（1.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFamily social class (lower class = 0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.28（-0.52）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.25（-0.42）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.013（-0.08）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLogarithm of income (ln)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e（4.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e（2.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.08（1.46）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePersonal psychological and physiological level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e（4.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17（4.86）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.41\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e（1.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGeneral universities (elite universities = 0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.18\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e(2.73)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.27\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e(2.14)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.42(0.58)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh-end universities (elite universities=0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.01(1.82)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.20\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e(2.35)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.11(0.14)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConstant term\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.09\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（4.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.09\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（8.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e71.09\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e（14.36）\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 38px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdj-R-Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 22px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNote：\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003ep＜0.05，\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003ep＜0.01，\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003ep＜0.001。\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHealth status was highly significant at all quantiles (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), with the strongest effect at Q25. Psychological and physiological levels were significant across all quantiles. Personal psychological and physiological level was significant at all quantiles (\u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 to p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01\u003c/em\u003e), confirming personal emotional management and self-control contribute significantly to resilience development.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH₁₂: Family factors\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily social class was not significant at any quantile (Q25: \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = -0.52; Q90: \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = -0.08). This suggests family class or background does not have a direct, measurable effect on students' resilience in this study. Family income was significant only at Q25 and Q50. Family income has a significant effect on college students at the bottom and middle of the distribution, but has no significant effect on college students at the top of the distribution.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH₁₃: School factors\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeacher-student and peer relationships were significant at Q25 and Q50(\u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01 to \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/em\u003e), but not at Q90. Society participation was significant at Q25 and Q90. Part-time work was significant (negative effect) at Q50 and Q90. Participation in societies had mixed results\u0026mdash;significant at Q25 and Q90, suggesting it plays a stronger role at lower and higher resilience levels.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eH₁₄: Social factors\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough policy support and practical opportunities were not isolated as variables here, the significance of university tier (i.e., general or high-end universities vs elite) may indirectly reflect social capital or institutional opportunity. General universities were significant at Q25 and Q50, showing that institutional background may influence lower and mid-level resilience. High-end universities were significant only at Q50. Taking the 50% percentile as an example, the average resilience level of elite universities is 1.20 higher than that of high-end schools, which means that elite universities have made great efforts to cultivate the resilience of college students..\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eH₁₅: Demographic variables significantly predict resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender (male\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0) was highly significant at all quantiles (\u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/em\u003e) with negative coefficients, indicating that female students generally report higher resilience scores than males. Age was not significant across all quantiles. Health status was again strongly significant across all quantiles, reinforcing its predictive role in resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5.0. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results provide empirical support for the main hypothesis that internal and external factors significantly influence college students\u0026rsquo; resilience, as conceptualised in the behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e\u003cb\u003e5.1. Personal / Demographic Factors\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersonal psychological and physiological well-being emerged as consistent predictors of resilience, aligning with prior research emphasising self-regulation and emotional management as foundational to coping with adversity. The OLS regression results reveal that gender and health status significantly influence resilience among college students. Gender was negatively associated with resilience scores, indicating that the resilience of male students is generally higher than that of female students, a difference of 2.1. Health status was also positively and significantly associated with resilience, suggesting that students who perceive themselves as healthier tend to demonstrate stronger resistance to adversity. If college students are in good health, their resilience will be enhanced accordingly, and physical and mental health is the basis for cultivating resilience. If college students are in good physical and psychological condition, their level of resilience will be significantly enhanced. However, age did not show a statistically significant effect on resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGenerally speaking, the expansion of psychological flexibility will significantly increase the level of resilience. When college students are faced with stress, their cognitive changes play a key role in stress coping and resistance actions. For freshmen, their interest in learning will be weakened due to unclear academic goals, which will double their academic pressure in the future. For sophomores and juniors, they will easily fall into conflicts once they are undecided between continuing their studies and internship and employment. Senior students mainly face employment pressure. If they blindly seek employment due to a lack of sense of purpose, their future career development will encounter many obstacles [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.2 Family Factors\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile perceived family social class was not significant, actual material resources (income) positively affected resilience at lower and middle resilience levels. This suggests that economic stability offers tangible coping advantages, such as access to supportive resources, better living conditions, and reduced financial stress. As seen in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, the higher the family social class and the greater the family income, the stronger the resilience of the college students. Students from higher-income households tend to have more access to supportive resources, better living conditions, and enhanced coping mechanisms, all of which may contribute to greater resilience. Generally speaking, if the family's material conditions are good and the family atmosphere is warm, college students will have stronger resilience [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e]. Families with good conditions will provide more resilience training opportunities for their children, which will strengthen college students' resilience. The more harmonious the family atmosphere, the closer the parent-child relationship. When college students encounter pressure or difficulties, they will communicate and express their feelings to their parents immediately. This can help to release stress. When parents give appropriate guidance and encouragement, it will help to enhance college students\u0026rsquo; self-confidence in resisting adversity and promoting problem solving.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.3. School Factors\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSupportive teacher\u0026ndash;student and peer relationships played a critical role in resilience development, particularly for students with lower and moderate resilience. Participation in student societies also contributed to resilience, especially among high-resilience students, by fostering social integration, leadership skills, and a sense of belonging. However, it has no significant impact on the resilience of college students in the middle of the distribution [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e]. The table data show that for every club they join, the level of resilience increases by 0.21. This is because college student associations are a platform for students to express themselves, have self-discipline, and self-improvement. Peer relationship or social bonding also positively and significantly affects resilience. There is a certain degree of competition within their associations, which help to cultivate resilience in them, as reported by [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e]. Participation in student societies is associated with higher resilience levels, possibly due to increased social interaction, leadership exposure, and belonging. For every unit increase in the experience of student leaders, the level of resilience increases by 0.31. For college students who have not participated in off-campus part-time jobs, their resilience shows a downward trend. Reverse thinking shows that off-campus part-time jobs can, to a certain extent, train college students to resist setbacks. However, leadership titles alone were insufficient predictors, highlighting the importance of active engagement over formal roles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor mental health teachers, it is necessary to attach great importance to the cultivation of college students' resilience and pay dynamic attention to the mental health of college students. On the contrary, if the school ignores the cultivation of college students' resilience, then students will not receive reliable knowledge support in cultivating their ability to resist setbacks\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.4. Social Factors\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough not directly measured in the OLS model, quantile regression suggested that institutional type (university tier) may indirectly reflect social capital and opportunity structures, influencing resilience particularly for students in lower and mid-resilience categories. College students have relatively few opportunities to contact the society. When students really enter the society, it is easy to encounter setbacks in life, work, social interaction, etc. However, the occurrence of setbacks is the best opportunity to train college students' resilience. College students learn to face setbacks, face themselves, problems, and find solutions, thereby enhancing their level of resilience [ 47]. In other words, the social environment is an important environment for cultivating college students' resilience. The social environment is mutually supportive and friendly, which is conducive to mobilizing the enthusiasm of college students and allowing them to fully use their initiative in solving problems. On the contrary, if the social environment is chaotic and the social atmosphere is indifferent, then the resilience of college students cannot be effectively improved, which will make them to become helpless.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn all, several variables (e.g., gender, health status, part-time job, teacher-student relationship, society participation) showed different levels of significance and coefficient sizes across the Q25, Q50, and Q90 quantiles. For example: Health status had stronger influence at Q25 (\u003cem\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.36\u003c/em\u003e) than Q90 (\u003cem\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.78\u003c/em\u003e). Participation in part-time work was only significant at higher quantiles (Q50 and Q90), suggesting work-related stress may be more prominent for higher-resilience students managing multiple responsibilities. Participation in societies had greater effect at Q90 (\u003cem\u003eβ\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.41\u003c/em\u003e) than at lower quantiles, possibly indicating stronger social integration benefits for already resilient students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.4.. Study Limitation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the significance of this study, it has some limitations. While the study is strong in its local context, the focus on only public universities in Qingdao limits the external validity of the findings. The results may not apply to private institutions, other regions, or different cultural setting. Another limitation is that the study's measures of resilience and its related factors may not capture the full range of relevant constructs, which could limit the accuracy of the findings. Also, the study does not provide longitudinal data, which would be useful in understanding the development of resilience over time. Despite these limitations, the study has been able to develop a behavioral-cognitive-emotional framework to understand resilience in college students, which provides a comprehensive approach to understanding the complex interactions between individual and environmental factors. And also, the study's findings can inform the development of interventions and programs aimed at promoting resilience and healthy growth in college students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6.0.Conclusion and Recommendation","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo sum up, the healthy growth of college students is a process. The cognitive level, emotional experience, behavioral performance and other dynamic changes of college students during their growth stage drive college students to seek balance in the process of resilience through behavioral-cognitive and emotional architecture. The level of resilience among college students increases when they interact with the environment. This has a positive impact on students\u0026apos; personal development and healthy growth. In addition, families create a harmonious environment, schools provide strong support, and society provides assistance to maximize the effectiveness of college students\u0026rsquo; resilience model.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the study\u0026apos;s findings, the following recommendations are proposed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1. Targeted interventions that focus on enhancing college students\u0026apos; cognitive, emotional, and behavioral skills need to be developed to promote resilience and healthy growth.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2. Emotional regulation strategies in interventions, such as mindfulness, self-awareness, and self-regulation techniques should be emphasized , to help students manage stress and adversity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3. There is need to foster positive relationships between students, family, and school to provide a supportive environment that promotes resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4. Opportunities for social support, such as peer support groups, mentoring programs, and counseling services, need to be \u0026nbsp; provided to help students build resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5. Self-awareness and self-reflection skills need to be promoted in students to help them understand their strengths, weaknesses, and coping strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6. \u0026nbsp;Stress management programs that teach students effective coping strategies and provide resources for managing stress and adversity need to be developed.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of competing interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical statement\u003c/strong\u003e: the research was carried out following the guidelines of the ethics committee listed in the ethics statement. For example, the protocol was approved \u0026nbsp;from Guangzhou Institute of Science and Technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the Guangzhou Institute of Science and Technology from the ethics committee\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe approval number ( LGL2023-12 )\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStart of Date 12/31/2024\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnd of date 5/31/2025\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical Trial Number\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNOT APPLICABLE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNOT APPLICABLE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Participate declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003econsent to participate\u0026rsquo; section, informed consent to participate was obtained from all of the participants in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability Statement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll data is provided within the manuscript\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eACKNOWLEDGEMENT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNOT APPLICABLE\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConceptualization:\u0026nbsp;Luo Guangli\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData curation:\u0026nbsp;Luo Guangli\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFormal analysis:\u0026nbsp;Luo Guangli\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFunding acquisition: Luo Guangli\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInvestigation:\u0026nbsp;Luo Guangli.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMethodology: Luo Guangli,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProject administration: Luo Guangli\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVisualization: Luo Guangli\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWriting\u0026mdash;original draft: Luo Guangli\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWriting\u0026mdash;review \u0026amp; editing: Luo Guangli.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStallman HM. Psychological distress in university students: A comparison with general population data. Australian Psychol. 2010;45(4):249\u0026ndash;57.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuerbach RP, Alonso J, Axinn WG, Cuijpers P, Ebert DD, Green JG, Bruffaerts R. Psychol Med. 2016;46(14):2955\u0026ndash;70. Mental disorders among college students in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIbrahim AK, Kelly SJ, Adams CE, Glazebrook C. A systematic review of studies of depression prevalence in university students. J Psychiatr Res. 2013;47(3):391\u0026ndash;400.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBruffaerts R, Mortier P, Kiekens G, Auerbach RP, Cuijpers P, Demyttenaere K, Kessler RC. Mental health problems in college freshmen: Prevalence and academic functioning. J Affect Disord. 2018;225:97\u0026ndash;103.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoir F, Henning M, Hassed C. Stress management and the role of Rhodiola rosea: a review. Int J Psychiatry. 2018;21(1):50\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZivin K, Eisenberg D, Gollust SE, Golberstein E. Persistence of mental health problems and needs in a college student population. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(3):180\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasten AS. Resilience of children in disasters: A multisystem perspective. Int J Psychol. 2021;56(1):1\u0026ndash;11.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUngar M. Designing resilience research: Using multiple methods to investigate risk exposure, promotive and protective processes, and contextually relevant outcomes for children and youth. Child Abuse Negl. 2019;96:10409.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWolf AM, Fontham ET, Church TR, Flowers CR, Guerra CE, LaMonte SJ, Smith RA. Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(4):250\u0026ndash;81.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOsorio JKK. Dismembering Lāhui: A history of the Hawaiian nation to 1887. University of Hawaii; 2017. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1515/9780824845407\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1515/9780824845407\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChaney DW. An Overview of the First Use of the Terms Cognition and Behavior. Behav Sci. 2013;3:143\u0026ndash;53. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/bs3010143\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/bs3010143\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDe HouwerJ. Using the implicit association test does not rule out an impact of conscious propositional knowledge on. evaluative conditioning Learning and Motivation; 2006.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQu P. Research on ways to improve the psychological resilience of college students in higher vocational colleges [J]. J Kaifeng Cult Art Vocat Coll. 2024;44(1):94\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKabir A. (2023). A Review of Emotions, Behavior and Cognition. Journal of Biomedical and Sustainable Healthcare Applications 3(2)(2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang S. (2023). Application of painting art therapy in improving college students\u0026rsquo; resilience [J]. Popular Literature Art, (21):216\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGross JJ, John OP. Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J Personal Soc Psychol. 2003;85(2):348\u0026ndash;62. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarver CS, Scheier MF. On the self-regulation of behavior. Cambridge University Press; 1998.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNeenan M. Developing resilience. Hove: Routledge; 2009. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203874417\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9780203874417\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLuthar SS, Cicchetti D, Becker B. The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Dev. 2000;71:543\u0026ndash;62. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00164\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1467-8624.00164\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBoyden J, Cooper E. (2007). Questioning the power of resilience: are children up to the task of disrupting the transmission of poverty? Manchester: Chronic Poverty Research Centre. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1753009\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2139/ssrn.1753009\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilliams MJ. (2011). Home, school, and community factors that contribute to the educational resilience of urban, African American high school graduates from low-income, single-parent families (PhD thesis, University of Iowa). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.17077/etd.kwvxp62o\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.17077/etd.kwvxp62o\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasten AS, Obradovic J. Competence and Resilience in Development. New York Acad Sci. 2006;1094:13\u0026ndash;27. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1376.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1196/annals.1376.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCicchetti D, Curtis J. Multilevel perspectives on pathways to resilient functioning. Dev Psychopathol. 2007;19:627\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDimakos I, Papakonstantopoulou A. (2012). Resilience and self-efficacy of elementary school students.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMargalit M. Second-Generation Research on Resilience: Social-Emotional Aspects of Children with Learning Disabilities. Learn Disabil Res Pract. 2004;19:45\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasten AS. Resilience in children threatened by extreme adversity: Frameworks for research, practice, and translational synergy. Dev Psychopathol. 2011;23:493\u0026ndash;506.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasten AS, Coatsworth JD. The development of competence in favorable and unfavorable environments: Lessons from research on successful children. Am Psychol. 1998;53(2):205\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasten AS, Riley JR. (2005). Resilience in Context. In R. D. Peters, B. Leadbeater, \u0026amp; R. J. McMahon, editors, Resilience in children, families, and communities: Linking context to practice and policy (pp. 13\u0026ndash;25). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23824-7_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/0-387-23824-7_2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRutter M. Resilience: Some Conceptual Considerations. J Adolesc Health. 1993;14:626\u0026ndash;31.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuang S, Jiang Y. (2023). Current situation and improvement strategies for the resilience of junior high school students from single-parent families [J]. Mental Health Educ Prim Secondary Schools, (17):10\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMa X, Wang M. (2023). Construction of ideological and political course teaching model in colleges and universities based on college students\u0026rsquo; resilience [J]. J Mudanjiang Inst Educ, (9):68\u0026ndash;71.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi X, Teaching. and Educating (High Educ Forum), (24):69\u0026ndash;73.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWu M, Ke L. The relationship between medical students\u0026rsquo; negative emotions and sense of professional mission\u0026mdash;the mediating role of resilience [J]. Chin J Social Med. 2023;40(3):281\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct equation modeling: multidisciplinary J. 1999;6(1):1\u0026ndash;55.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConnor KM, Davidson JRT. Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor\u0026ndash;Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depress Anxiety. 2003;18(2):76\u0026ndash;82. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/da.10113\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYu X, Zhang J. Factor analysis and psychometric evaluation of the Connor\u0026ndash;Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) with Chinese people. Social Behav Personality: Int J. 2007;35(1):19\u0026ndash;30.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeacock EJ, Wong PT. The stress appraisal measure (SAM): A multidimensional approach to cognitive appraisal. Stress Med. 1990;6(3):227\u0026ndash;36.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmilkstein G. The Family APGAR: A proposal for a family function test and its use by physicians. J Fam Pract. 1978;6(6):1231\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePianta RC. Enhancing relationships between children and teachers. American Psychological Association; 1999. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/10314-000\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/10314-000\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaynes NM, Emmons C, Ben-Avie M. School climate as a factor in student adjustment and achievement. J Educational Psychol Consultation. 1997;8(3):321\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess. 1988;52(1):30\u0026ndash;41.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Z, Zhang B. Cultivation of college students\u0026rsquo; resilience during major public health events [J]. J Honghe Univ. 2023;21(3):42\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., G\u0026oslash;tzsche, P. C., Ioannidis,J. P., \u0026hellip; Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration.Bmj, 339.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJiang M. (2023). Analysis of factors affecting college students\u0026rsquo; resilience and improvement strategies [J]. Fujian Text, (5):75\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYan J, Su H. Research on positive psychological intervention to improve the resilience level of college students [J]. Educational Observation. 2023;12(2):17\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen L, Liu Y. (2022). Application of growth mindset in cultivating college students\u0026rsquo; resilience [J]. Shanxi Youth, (24):184\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao N, Peng D. Analysis of external influencing factors on college students\u0026rsquo; resilience\u0026mdash;taking Beijing universities as an example [J]. Acad Forum. 2019;42(6):134\u0026ndash;42.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Behavior, Cognition, Emotion, Healthy Growth, Stress Resistance, Construction","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7287737/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7287737/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study investigates the development of resilience in college students through the Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional (BCE) framework, which conceptualizes resilience as an interactive and adaptive process shaped by behavioral patterns, cognitive processes, and emotional experiences. The research aims to assess how this model fosters healthy growth and to identify key internal and external factors influencing resilience. Employing a quantitative research design, survey data were collected from 2,580 students admitted in 2022 and 2023 across 24 public colleges in Qingdao. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) and Quantile Regression models were utilized to examine the effects of behavioral, cognitive, and emotional dimensions on resilience across varying levels.. The findings reveal that the three domains—behavioral, cognitive, and emotional—exert significant influences on resilience, with their effects varying across resilience quantiles. Students exhibiting stronger cognitive awareness and emotional regulation demonstrated greater adaptability and stress management capabilities. Furthermore, personal, familial, school, and societal factors were identified as shaping resilience development. The BCE framework offers a holistic approach that enhances students’ internal stability, self-awareness, and capacity to cope effectively with academic and life challenges. Overall, the study highlights the need for comprehensive, multidimensional strategies to foster resilience in educational contexts, thereby contributing to the psychological well-being and personal growth of college students.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Applying Behavioral-Cognitive-Emotional Framework Model for Building Resilience in College Students for Healthy Growth","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-29 14:12:07","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7287737/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"e30b86f5-e3e1-411b-8b9d-68af714e08cb","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 29th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-01T06:23:58+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-29 14:12:07","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7287737","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7287737","identity":"rs-7287737","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}