Academic adjustment and subjective well-being: Comparing life events, personality, and integrated causal models

The purpose of the present study was to (a) investigate the relationships among the components of subjective well-being and (b) determine which of three models--the life events model, the personality disposition model, and an integrated model--best explained the relationships among personality, social support, and life events and their impact on college student adjustment and subjective well-being (SWB). Ninety-two students started the study and 81 of these provided complete assessment data. Personality dispositions were assessed at the beginning of the study. Over the next five to twelve weeks, students completed life events and mood surveys 2-3 times per week. Social support was assessed in the middle of the study. Adjustment and satisfaction with life were assessed at the end of the study. The data were analyzed through Pearson correlations and structural equations modeling with LISREL 8.;Positive and negative affect were independent of each other, and life satisfaction was a related but distinguishable component of subjective well-being. Both life events and personality dispositions were found to be important in a model of SWB and adjustment. For example, in the causal modeling, the life events model fit the data fairly well but did not include the role of personality dispositions. The personality disposition model did not fit the data well and numerous modification indices suggested adding paths to include life events in the model. The integrated model provided a more complete account of the relationships among the variables in the study, although some of the hypothesized paths based on the life events and personality disposition models were not significant. In some cases, personality dispositions were found to underlie, in part, the relationships between events and other variables in the study. In other cases, life events made unique contributions to the prediction of SWB and adjustment beyond those made by the personality dispositions.;Several differences were observed between the correlational and causal modeling results. Multicollinearity and limited sample size contributed to the majority of differences, most notably with the adjustment variables.