Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, (2000) see that individuals are naturally capable of maintaining their psychological and mental health and treating their adaptive disorders through positive innate personality traits more than negative traits. Psychological resilience is viewed as one of psychologys main topics as a positive individual force (Ercan, 2017). The psychological resilience phenomenon is one of the main research areas in contemporary psychology literature, especially in applied positive psychology. Al-Assar, (2010) sees that psychological resilience is one of the positive psychology major structures. Positive psychology is the approach that maximizes human powers as inherent forces in man versus prevailing and common aspects that focus on human shortcomings and weaknesses. Al-Assar views that the term resilience means (Hardiness, Flexibility, Prevention, and Motivation), thus exceeding the linguistic meaning of resilience to the psychological significance of the word psychological resilience in its common sense (Al-Assar, 2010), as shown in the following Fig 1:

Resilience is important for people at risk, such as those living in poverty, in disaster and war zones, or those who suffer from chronic disease conditions, because they have to effectively confront and positively coexist with these conditions (Abu Halawa A, 2013). Psychological resilience is a relatively new concept that has received the attention of researchers as an evolution of positive psychology studies and focused on the role of prevention and protection factors in managing adversity and crisis. It has taken center stage in the field of so-called risk research. Ample evidence confirms that it is dynamic, subject development, and enrichment (Al-Buhairi, 2010). Resilience plays an important role in the individuals balance events, whether internally or externally. It is closely related to optimism, hope, a sense of humor, and a sense of social support. Besides, it is negatively associated with depression, despair, and a sense of pain (Smith et al., 2008; Uddin et al., 2022).

Psychological Resilience Concept

According to the American Psychological Association, "Psychological resilience is a process of good con-formity and positive response to adversity, trauma, calamities or the psychological stress individuals face. It also means surmounting or surpassing it positively and continuing life effectively and competently (APA, 2002).

Stages of Studying Psychological Resilience

The study of the psychological resilience has gone through three different stages, (Abbas, 2010):

1. First Stage: Exploratory Stage

Here, the focus is placed on the various factors associated with psychological resilience, the most important of which are subjective, environmental, family, and societal factors.

2. Second Stage: Impact Study Stage

This stage focuses on studying the effect of family, cultural, and societal factors on achieving psychological resilience in the individual. In turn, the interactive theory emerged, which is concerned with the role of these factors in achieving positive outcomes for the individual, which in turn leads to instilling psychological resilience within him.

3. Third Stage: Developing Psychological Resilience Stage

This stage focuses on employing the outcomes of the previous two phases in developing the individuals psychological resilience. Hence, it pays attention to the study of psychological intervention programs, the most famous of which is Pennsylvania Universitys program, which focuses on emotional social learning and pays more attention to areas of societies that suffer from deprivation and marginalization. From the foregoing discussion, it becomes clear that psychological resilience means the individuals ability to resist the problems, difficulties, and hardships that confront him, so he adapts to and overcomes them. As such, he regains his psychological balance once such challenges, crises, and pressures disappear.

Theories Explaining Psychological Resilience

Psychological resilience is an essential source of mental health in a persons personality. It determines how far the individual can adapt to various environmental changes. In psychology, there are several theories for this concept, including the following:

1.     Richardsons Theory

One of the first theories to explain the psychological resilience process is Richardsons theory, formulating concepts for resilience as the inherent force within each individual that drives them to achieve self-realization, altruism, and wisdom, and that the individual has to be in total harmony with the spiritual source of strength. The basic assumption of this theory lies in the idea of spiritual, biological, psychological balance (equilibrium), which allows us to adapt (body, mind, and spirit) to current conditions of life. Psychological pressures and other unexpected and unexpected life events or urgent life requirements affect our ability to adapt. Such life events are influenced by resilience traits, reintegration with previous resilience, and the interaction between daily psychological pressures and protective factors (Richardson, 2002; Hadiloo, 2023).

Review of Literature

The study by Ismaeel (2017) aimed to identify the level of psychological resilience and the level of mindfulness, as well as identify the relation between psychological resilience and mindfulness of college education students, in addition to identifying the predictability of mindfulness through psychological resilience. The sample of (223) male and female students enrolled in the third year of college education, with an age range of 21-23. Results showed the following: low levels of psychological resilience among the study sample. There are above-average levels of mindfulness among the study sample. There is a positive statistically significant correlation at 0.01 levels between psychological resilience and mindfulness; mindfulness also contributed to the predictability of psychological resilience among the study sample. The study by Shaqoura, (2012) aimed to know the level of psychological resilience and satisfaction with life among Palestinian university students and whether there is a relationship between psychological resilience and satisfaction with life among Palestinian university students. The study sample consisted of (600) male and female students. The researcher used the analytical descriptive method. To achieve the objectives of the study, the researcher prepared a measure of "psychological resilience" and another measure of "satisfaction with life." The results of the study found that there is a high level of psychological resistance and satisfaction with life in the students, the existence of a positive correlation between psychological resilience and satisfaction with life, there are differences in statistical evidence of psychological resilience depending on the gender variable in favor of males.

The study by Shaqoura, (2012) aimed to know the level of psychological resilience and satisfaction with life among Palestinian university students and whether there is a relationship between psychological resilience and satisfaction with life among Palestinian university students. The study sample consisted of (600) male and female students. The researcher used the analytical descriptive method. In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the researcher prepared a measure of "psychological resilience" and another measure of "satisfaction with life." The results of the study found that there is a high level of psychological resistance and satisfaction with life in the students, the existence of a positive correlation between psychological resilience and satisfaction with life, there are differences in statistical evidence of psychological resilience depending on the gender variable in favor of males.

The Statement of the Study

Psychological resilience is the basis of a sound, good personality. A person capable of responding to different situations is called a flexible individual. It is the good psychological compatibility with the individuals bad circumstances and stressful life situations, reflecting their ability to overcome such hardships positively to continue life effectively and efficiently. Such is the concept of psychological resilience, which characterizes the sound good personality. Psychological Resilience is the essential part of positive psychology that deals with positive and good aspects of human behavior and morals. It intends to empower and strengthen the positive aspects and how to develop these aspects in their behavior. This study aims to encourage adults to empower their positive aspects to overcome human life challenges and difficulties. Adulthood is one of the most dangerous stages in the life of a human being, so he is vulnerable to different changes in his life. Psychological Resilience affects the structure of the personality and makes it capable of facing all the difficulties. It also helps a person solve their problems and become self-competent. This could make a positive character that has inner balance. Positive psychology empowers human strength rather than the common aspects that empower weakness and limit human life (Goldstian and Brooks, 2004).

Based on the above, and based on the role of psy-chology and psychologists in serving the community and human potential, in addition to the changes and conditions that our society is going through, which undoubtedly reflected on its various social groups in general and youth in particular, and the importance of psychological resilience as a psychological and the preventive variable as well as the scarcity of Arab studies that dealt with psychological resilience the researcher tries "to identify the level of psychological resilience among the universities students. "

The Importance of the Study

The importance of the current study stems from its target sample, which represents a significant segment of society (universitys students). This segment, involving different specializations, represents the backbone of the future of the society. universitys experience is one of the important decisive stages in the life of students. It is a test stage of a new academic and social life that includes freedom to make decisions and choose friends. It is the stage where an individuals academic and social future is shaped, a stage where an individuals personality growth takes place by coming into contact with classmates and faculty members (Al-Nimr, 2016). Psychological resilience plays an essential role in the individuals adaptation to lifes difficulties and stressful situations. Hence, this study focuses on the issue of psychological resilience. There is a dire need to identify the psychological resilience of universitys students; they should have to withstand the pressures of life as well as the current research attempts to contribute and add to the theoretical concept of psychological resilience as a worthy investigation notion.

The Objectives of the Study 

•  To identify the level of psychological resilience among universitys students.
• To know the statistically significant differences in psychological resilience among universitys students based on variables (specialization, level of study). 

The Hypothesis of the Study:

• There is no statistically significant difference between a real mean & assumed mean in the level of psychological resilience among universitys students.
• Universities students responses average on the psychological resilience scale ascribed to the gender variable (males and females) have no statistically significant differences.
• There are no statistically significant differences in the average responses of the universitys students on the psychological resilience scale ascribed to the specialization variable (Science – Humanity).
• On psychological resilience scale described to  level variable (first, Second, Third, and Fourth). University students average responses have no statistically significant differences.

The Population of the Study

The current study targets undergraduate students in twelve public universities in the Republic of Yemen. Three public universities, namely Sanaa University, Aden University, and Ibb University, were selected randomly to constitute 25% of public universities. Thus, the current research population is (21377) students of the three universities for the academic year 2020/2021, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: displays the Study population based on university, gender, level, and major.

As illustrated in Table 1, it is observed that the number of students in the study population reached (21377) male and female students, distributed among the three universities (Sanaa, Aden, and Ibb), where the number of males reached (11913) male students. And the number of female (9464) female students. As for the specialization, the number of practical science majors was (7709) male and female students. In the humanities, there were (13668) male and female students. With regard to the level of study, the number in the first level was (6615) male and female students. In the second level, it was (5947) male and female students; for the third level, the number was (4902) male and female students. There were (3913) male and female students in the fourth level.

Table 2: displays Study samples based on universities, gender, major subject, and student level.

The Sample of the Study

After defining the study population, a stratified random sample was chosen with a percentage of (0.05) from the students of the three universities identified in the research community, and the following table shows the distribution of the research sample. Table 2 shows the distribution of the study sample members by gender, specialization, and educational level. As illustrated in Table 2, it is observed that the number of students in the study sample reached (1060) male and female students, distributed among the three universities (Sanaa, Aden and Ibb), where the number of males reached (591) male students. and the number of female (469) female students. As for the specialization, the number of practical science majors was (381) male and female students. In humanities, the number was (679) male and female students. With regard to the level of study, the number in the first level was (329) male and female students.

In the second level, it was (295) male and female students,  and  in the third level, the number was (243)male and female students. In the fourth level, there were (193) male and female students.

Hypothesis No. 1: “There is no statistically significant difference between a real mean and assumed mean in the level of psychological resilience among Yemen University students.” For testing the hypothesis validity, the researcher used the t-test for one sample to test the difference between a real mean and an assumed mean for each psychological resilience dimension and the overall measurement score Table 7.

As shown in Table 7 and Fig. 3 above, it is observed that the mental dimension scored the highest with (44.52) Real mean. The emotional dimension was the lowest with a real mean of (35.8) on the psychological resilience scale in line with dimensions. Psychological resilience among universitys students overall score was high at (196. 27) real mean, compared to the assumed mean of (165). The findings indicate that university students psychological resilience level was high. This is a good indicator that calls for optimism and helps predict the psychological and social aspects of university students who will be the leaders of tomorrow. This is attributed to repeated hard stressful conditions experienced by university students. Dealing with such frequent hardships enables students to positively encounter and overcome these difficulties, making them more adaptive to any hardship, as with any transient daily life.

The high psychological resilience level among university students is more likely attributed to war, life hardships, crises, and traumas experienced by students of universities in the past five years, making students more adaptive, more adjusted, and more capable of dealing with all such difficulties. This particular finding of the study has proved that universitys students are capable of facing new challenges and problems and of creating suitable solutions to overcome all difficulties in such a way that turns the course of action to the best interest of the student as if he has never experienced any hardship at all.

Table 7: Shows the t-test for one sample to test the difference between a real mean and an assumed mean.

This becomes more evident especially when students exhibit more self-competence, making them more willing to take more risks, challenge, and have more resilience to overcome all problems and difficulties.

Fig. 3: Illustrating psychological resilience among universitys students based on dimensions.

The mental dimension is considered to be the first dimension among the psychological resilience dimensions as it obtained an average of (44.52). This is a normal result because the pressures and crises that students are going through make them think positively to confront them. This was proved by Richardsons theory that the biological and psychological balance allows the adaptation of the body, mind and spirit to life. The theory shows the ability of psychological resilience as a model for dealing effectively with the pressures and negative events that the individual is exposed to and maintaining their balance. The dimension of social relations ranked second among the dimensions of the psychological resilience scale among universitys students, with an average of (41.32). It provides university students with the feelings of reassurance, safety, happiness and psychological comfort that lead to a healthy and psychologically balanced personality. 

The third dimension among the dimensions of the psychological resilience scale among universities students is self-efficacy, with an arithmetic average of (38.47). This means the awareness of an individuals abilities and effectiveness in positively facing life events. The individuals understanding of his self-efficacy affects the pattern of his behavior, thoughts and emotions. The fourth dimension among the dimensions of the psychological resilience scale among universities students is the optimism dimension with an arithmetic average of (36.17). Many studies prove that optimism positively relates to the individuals ability to the perceive, confront and control stress.

The dimension of emotions ranked last among the dimensions of the psychological resilience scale among universities students with an arithmetic average of (35.80). This proves that the university students possess an emotional balance that enables them to control their emotions and adapt to the difficulties and stressful situations they face. So they do not get confused or collapse due to the pressures or difficulties facing them. Further, universities students have become capable of developing a stronger character with sharper academic thinking skills and better interaction with student activities. Besides, university students have sufficient understanding and knowledge, the ability to make use of the available alternatives and the needed ability to think positively from different angles which in turn helps enhance students psychological resilience to overcome all challenges successfully. 

The findings of this Research come in agreement with those of other studies, including Al-Musawa, (2016), Shaqoura, (2012), Al-Zuhairi, (2012), and  Al-Ghazal, (2008), all of which concluded that psychological resilience among universities students was high. Hypothesis No. 2: “Universities students responses average on the psychological resilience scale ascribed to the gender variable (males, females) have no statistically significant differences. To validate the hypothesis and to identify differences significant based on gender variables, T-test independent samples were used as illustrated in Table 8 below:

Table 8: Showing (t) test independent sample results for measuring psychological resilience based on gender.

From Table 8 and Fig. 4 above, it is noticed reflected statistically significant differences at (0.01) in male and female mean scores in the emotion dimension (9.36), social relations dimension (4.14), and mental dimension (5.39). Psychological resilience overall score was (6.06). The differences were in favor of male students. There were no significant statistical differences among university students regarding the optimism dimension (1.61) or self-efficacy dimension (1.93). The absence of difference among male and female students in (optimism and self-efficiency) can be attributed to the fact that, upon embarking on the university life and social life arena. 

Fig. 4: Illustrating psychological resilience among universities students based on gender variables.

Female students seek change and start reconsidering social and political values, underestimating female abilities. Studies in psychological resilience have proved that change and adjustment are always possible for males and females of various ages. The older a person becomes, the more change and adjustment they have (Graber et al., 2015).

The result is logical concerning the existing differences among male and female university students in (emotional, social relations, and mental) dimensions and the overall score of psychological dimensions. This is ascribed to the fact that male students are more capable of facing life risks than females because of the male student lifestyle. Male students exhibit the ability to maintain psychological build-up when facing dangers and challenges through higher psychological resilience, which they enjoy. In addition, they have the ability to cope with frustration. Moreover, they have the needed social and emotional skills to deal with and overcome pressures and the ensuing negative outcomes. Male students differ from female ones in dealing with the problems they encounter. The differences may be attributed to the fact that females are easily influenced by emotion in their perception of events, which is reflected in their behavior.

In contrast, males are guided more by mind and logic; their actions result from mental cognition. The present Research findings come in agreement with those of Al-Sheikh, (2017) and Shaqoura, (2012) in that there are statistically significant differences in psychological resilience measurement based on gender variables in favor of male students. Like Al Shuwail and Nasr, (2012), this study reveals that there are statistically significant differences in the positive psychological resilience increase and decrease based on gender variables in favor of male students.

Hypothesis No. 3: “There are no statistically significant differences in the average responses of university students on the psychological resilience scale described to specialization variable (Science – Humanity)”. To ensure the hypothesiss validity and identify the significance of the difference based on the specialization variable, the Independent-Samples (t) test was used, as illustrated in Table 9 below.

Table 9: Showing Independent-Samples T-Test results of psychological resilience difference measurements based on specialization variable.

As illustrated in Table 9 and Fig. 5 above, it is observed that there are no statistically significant differences in the level of psychological resilience. The t value was at (0.57) which is insignificant, being greater than the value at (0.05) among universities students in both science and humanities specializations with reference to psychological resilience level and dimensions. The absence of statistically significant differences in all dimensions (optimism, emotions, social relations, mental aspect, and self-efficacy) and the overall psychological resilience score is ascribed to the fact that the university environment in which male and female students find themselves is almost the same.  Besides, male and female students experience the same conditions and share the same study and assignment burdens, regardless of the specialization/ major of the students. Students with higher psychological resilience are unique in the sense that they attend classes, participate actively in discussions, answer questions from their instructors, have no hesitation in inquiring about ambiguous information, and prepare well for exams without fear. All these qualities almost apply to the study sample in both science and humanities specializations. This explains the absence of any differences among male and female students.

Fig. 5: Illustrating psychological resilience level among universities students based on specialization variable.

Providing universities students with the freedom of opting for the desired specializations on their own has enhanced their sense of self-efficacy as a starting point for a new life full of a lot of hardships. As a result, students develop a sense of real optimism for a promising future, and they take life positively with the hope of a better tomorrow. This is justified by the fact that nothing is complicated as long as it can be overcome. The researcher also attributes this result to the fact that the previous specialization of the university (the secondary stage) for most of the sample members was the same (the scientific section). This is due to the fact that most students join the scientific specialization in the secondary school stage. Like the findings of this Research, Al-Sheikh, (2017), Youssef, (2014) and Al-Zuhairi, (2012), the present study arrived at the finding that there are no statistically significant differences in psychological resilience ascribed to the major of the survey. 

Hypothesis No. 4: The psychological resilience scale ascribed to level variable (first, Second, Third, Fourth). The average responses of university students have no statistically significant differences. A ‘One-Way ANOVA test was used to test the validity of the hypothesis and identify the significance of the difference. Table 10 is an illustration. 

Table 10: Showing ‘One-Way ANOVA test results of psychological resilience level differences on level of study.

As shown in Table 10 above, it is observed that there are no statistically significant differences at (0.05) among universities students in the psychological resilience level and its sub-dimensions are based on the study level. The values were (1.05) with an optimism dimension, (0.83) with the dimension of emotions, (0.37) with the dimension of social relations, (2.13) with a mental dimension, (2.03) with a dimension of self-efficacy, and (0.33) in terms of the overall mean score. The absence of differences among universities students in psychological resilience level based on level of study is ascribed to frequent repeated hard times and traumatic events experienced by the whole nation, including university students. Such experience has generated a higher level of adjustment and ability within students to face real life no matter how bitter or painful, solve problems, realize goals and accept criticism and other opinions. Students dealt with events almost in the same manner. They hence overcame challenges, actualized their goals, looked positively at such challenges, and took them as opportunities to boost their self-efficacy and develop more capability for future risks. As a result, such hardships have not impacted students psychological resilience throughout their four years of study at university, confirming Abu Halawas finding that “resilience is an indicator of the individuals ability to interact with their environment. The environmental circumstances create preventive elements in individuals against traumas and ensuing negative impacts (Abu Halawa, 2013). Like the findings of this Research, Al-Musawa, (2016) and Al-Zuhairi, (2012), the current study revealed that there are no differences in psychological resilience level concerning the study level variable.

The level of psychological resilience among univer-sities students in relation to the total score on the scale is high. The results indicated that there were statis-tically significant differences between the average scores of males and the average scores of females in the level of psychological resilience in favor of males, and  There were no statistically significant differences between the average scores of males and those of females in the dimensions of the self-efficacy, opti-mism on the psychological resilience scale. The results indicated no statistically significant differences in the level of psychological resilience among university students of scientific and humanitarian specializations. The results indicated no statistically significant differences in the level of psychological resilience among students of the level of study (first, second, third, fourth) on the psychological resilience scale and its dimensions for university students.

Based on the findings of the current research, the researcher recommends the following:

1. Psychological and social support should be pro-vided to university students through specialized guidance and educational programs to raise psychological resilience, which may contribute to creating a balanced personality capable of adap-ting to stressful life conditions by the Ministry of Higher Education.
2. A positive psychology should be adopted in all universities disciplines to develop the positive aspects of students personality by the Ministry of Higher Education.
3. Seminars and workshops should be held in uni-versities to raise students awareness of the importance of building a positive personality for a bright future for students because they will have the responsibility to create a new society by the universities.
4. Financial support should be provided to students from various sources to overcome the problem of fees, textbooks, and other issues that constitute an obstacle to students and affect their psychological adjustment by the Ministry of Higher Education.
5. The role of University Theater should be activated in forming a positive image of psychological counseling centers, as there is a prevailing societal view that looks at everyone who visits such places with a look of shame and disgrace by the Ministry of Higher Education.

The authors express a profound sense of gratitude and respect to all those who helped them out, in one way or another, to finish the research article. Special thanks are extended to the research respondents in the Uni-versities. 

No conflicts of interest are related to this work.