See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/316032565

Constellations of social support among underrepresented college students:

Associations with mental health

Article  in  Applied Developmental Science · April 2017

DOI: 10.1080/10888691.2017.1287568

CITATIONS READS

3 141

2 authors:

Jamie Nicole Albright Noelle M Hurd

University of Virginia University of Virginia
25 PUBLICATIONS   163 CITATIONS    42 PUBLICATIONS   694 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

SEASONS View project

Positive Children's Study View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Noelle M Hurd on 22 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Applied Developmental Science

ISSN: 1088-8691 (Print) 1532-480X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hads20

Constellations of social support among

underrepresented college students: Associations
with mental health

Jamie Nicole Albright & Noelle M. Hurd

To cite this article: Jamie Nicole Albright & Noelle M. Hurd (2017): Constellations of social support
among underrepresented college students: Associations with mental health, Applied Developmental
Science, DOI: 10.1080/10888691.2017.1287568

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1287568

Published online: 10 Apr 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hads20

Download by: [73.216.233.6] Date: 10 April 2017, At: 10:35

APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1287568

Constellations of social support among underrepresented college students:

Associations with mental health
Jamie Nicole Albright, and Noelle M. Hurd
University of Virginia

ABSTRACT
Students from underrepresented groups are increasingly enrolling in 4-year institutions, yet they
may face additional stressors upon entering college compared to majority peers. Supportive
relationships with peers, parents, and natural mentors may foster successful adjustment to college
among such students. The current study examined patterns of social support among 340
underrepresented first-year students at an elite, predominantly White, public university. Latent
profile analysis was used to characterize support networks. Four profiles of support emerged:
Average Frequency Support (AFS), Higher Frequency Support (HFS), Lower Frequency Support
(LFS), and Compensatory Mentor Support (CMS). Participants in the HFS profile started college with
the highest levels of psychological distress and also demonstrated the greatest improvements in
mental health. Results suggest that the most vulnerable students may require greater support to
have a psychologically healthy transition to college.

Over the past few decades, 4-year colleges and universities
across the country have increasingly sought to boost
enrollment of underrepresented students (historically
underrepresented racial/ethnic minority students, first-
generation college students, and students from lower
socioeconomic status backgrounds). While enrollment
of underrepresented students has indeed increased, their
retention and completion rates remain lower than their
majority group peers (Kena et al., 2015), and their college
experience may differ in ways that pose obstacles to
healthy adjustment. For most, the developmental period
of emerging adulthood—which often coincides with
college entrance—can pose increased social and psycho-
logical demands. Young adults are tasked with establish-
ing autonomy from parents/caregivers, expanding their
social network, and increasing reliance upon peers and
extrafamilial relationships for support (Allen, Hauser,
Bell, & O’Connor, 1994). Some researchers have argued
that psychological adjustment is a key predictor of a suc-
cessful college transition (Kaufman, Brown, Graves,
Henderson, & Revolinski, 1993). Furthermore, young
adulthood is considered the period in which mental
health issues are most likely to emerge for the first time
(Patel, Flisher, Hetrick, & McGorry, 2007), and
psychological distress in young adulthood strongly pre-
dicts poorer mental health later in life (Clark, Rodgers,
Caldwell, Power, & Stansfeld, 2007). Unfortunately,
among underrepresented students, the challenge of
transitioning to college can be compounded by additional
stressors—such as experiencing racial discrimination or
financial strain—which can result in poorer mental health
(Blanco et al., 2008; Hurtado & Ruiz, 2012). Race,
ethnicity, or socioeconomic status (SES), for example,
may become more salient and present more identity-
related stressors than in their home communities, as most
students at predominately White institutions (PWIs) are
white and from middle- to upper-socioeconomic
backgrounds (Pieterse, Carter, Evans, & Walter, 2010).
Attending to the potential factors that promote the
psychological functioning of underrepresented students
—who are simultaneously in the midst of a critical devel-
opmental period, adjusting to college, and coping with
unique stressors related to their marginalized status—
may be one step toward reducing the considerable
societal burden of mental illness. While predictors of
better psychosocial adjustment among underrepresented
students are understudied, there is reason to believe that
social support may be a key factor in promoting a suc-
cessful transition to college among this group. Research
suggests that social support is a valuable asset for indivi-
duals undergoing life transitions (Newman, Newman,
Griffen, O’Connor, & Spas, 2007) and for students as
they enter the unfamiliar college environment (Hefner
& Eisenberg, 2009). Social support may be particularly

CONTACT Jamie Nicole Albright jna2db@virginia.edu Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, 102 Gilmer Hall, P.O. Box 400400,
Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA.
© 2017 Taylor & Francis
2 J. N. ALBRIGHT AND N. M. HURD
valuable for underrepresented students at an elite PWI,
who can experience an even more substantial change in
context and day-to-day experience.
While much research addresses the role of social
support in improving mental health among the general
population of young adults, it is mostly limited to an
examination of support received from one type of
provider individually (e.g., peers or parents/caregivers).
To date, researchers have not established how multiple
supportive individuals might work simultaneously to
improve students’ mental health. It is unclear whether
high levels of support from one individual can compen-
sate for deficits from another, or if certain supportive
individuals are most important to confer the benefits
of social support during the transition to college. Infor-
mation about whether certain patterns of support are
more predictive of a psychologically healthy college
transition may have implications for institutions seeking
ways to support matriculating underrepresented stu-
dents. The current study examines underrepresented
students’ reported social support from three sources
(peers, parents/caregivers, and a natural mentor) using
latent profile analysis (LPA) to describe the patterns
of support received from their support network. The
current study also aims to determine whether certain
constellations of social support are associated with
mental health among underrepresented college students
across their first year of college.
Background
First-year college students tend to be exposed to a number
of challenging experiences, such as increased academic
demands and adjustment to a new peer group (Kaufman
et al., 1993). For underrepresented students in particular,
the demographic composition of the student body may
be quite different from their community of origin
(Museus & Quaye, 2009). Racial/ethnic minority students
may encounter increased discrimination and race-related
conflict (Navarro, Worthington, Hart, & Khairallah,
2009), while students from lower socioeconomic back-
grounds may encounter classism or be excluded from
some activities due to financial strain (Ostrove, 2003).
Black students have described the college campus as a
“racialized space” in which the lack of same-race peers
was surprising (Torres, 2009). Similarly, students from
lower-income families have described their university as
having an unfamiliar culture of wealth, wherein they felt
unable to relate to many of their peers’ lifestyles (Torres,
2009). Perceiving a stark contrast between one’s college
and home community (termed “culture shock”) has con-
siderable implications for the day-to-day experience of
underrepresented students, as feelings of marginalization
can contribute to psychological strain (Neville, Heppner,
Ji, & Thye, 2004; Walker, Wingate, Obasi, & Joiner,
2008; Willie, 2003). Some historically underrepresented
students may be part of racial/ethnic groups that have
demonstrated a greater endorsement of collectivist values
which foster frequent exchanges of support (e.g., Latino
culture; Crockett et al., 2007). Furthermore, students from
economically disadvantaged families may have lived in
neighborhoods that required heightened levels of interde-
pendency (e.g., sharing the burden of childcare) as a way
to persevere in the face of limited financial resources
(Dominguez & Watkins, 2003). Contexts that emphasize
community and interdependency are more likely to con-
trast sharply with the culture of elite PWIs, which are
often characterized by a focus on individual achievement
and competition. Taken together, it is clear that while
the college transition can be challenging for many young
adults, underrepresented students attending PWIs can be
exposed to a greater number of distressing experiences
and social shifts that pose additional obstacles to main-
taining mental health (Wei et al., 2010). While some pre-
vious research has described the factors that can support
underrepresented students’ mental health during the
college transition, research has primarily focused on the
general population of emerging adults and mainstream
White college students.
Social support and the college transition
Life transitions, such as entering college, can place
demands on an individual’s ability to face new stressors,
and may require individuals to draw upon support from
social relationships (I. G. Sarason & Sarason, 1985).
Social support has been defined as “the perception or
experience that one is loved and cared for by others,
esteemed and valued, and part of a social network of
mutual assistance and obligations” (Wills, 1991). That
is, social support involves the functional aspects of social
relationships (Cohen, 2004). I. G. Sarason and Sarason
(1985) suggest that social support can mitigate the nega-
tive influence of stressful experiences on health through
the provision of tangible or intangible resources that
increase one’s belief that they are capable of handling
new stressors. Similarly, Thoits (1986) posited that social
support might improve stress management—a key factor
in mental health—by providing a sense of stability, space
to process emotions, and models of healthy coping. The
potential influence of social support on mental health has
been described in detail in extant literature. In particular,
many researchers have emphasized the association
between social support and reduced depression
(e.g., Cohen & Wills, 1985; Hall-Lande, Eisenberg,
Christenson, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2007). Researchers

have demonstrated that mental health outcomes are bet-
ter among individuals who maintain positive social rela-
tionships, and that depression remission is more likely in
the context of high social support (Butler & Randall,
2013; Marroquín, 2011).
Whereas children primarily receive encouragement,
guidance, and emotional support from parents/
caregivers, young adults begin to seek more support
from nonparental relationships as they become more
independent and, in the case of many college students,
move away from their community of origin (Leary &
DeRosier, 2012). For most, the transition to college
coincides with emerging adulthood, a period of heigh-
tened susceptibility to psychological distress. In light
of increased developmental vulnerability, social
relationships are thought to be particularly influential
during emerging adulthood (Arnett, 2000). Although
underrepresented students often face unique, emotion-
ally taxing experiences in college, some evidence sug-
gests that social support from friends, parents/
caregivers, and other important adults can facilitate bet-
ter psychological adjustment to college (Yazedjian,
Purswell, Sevin, & Toews, 2007; Bland, Melton, Welle,
& Bigham, 2012). Researchers have disagreed on the
relative importance of each individual in college
students’ support networks, with some arguing that peer
and parental support are equally valuable (Uchino,
Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Bloor, 2004), and others finding
that peers play a bigger role in the college transition
(Dennis, Phinney, & Chuateco, 2005). Some scholars
suggest that the psychological support conferred
individually by peers and parents/caregivers is not inter-
changeable, and instead is complementary (Laible,
Carlo, & Raffaelli, 2000). Parents/caregivers often do
not cease to be an important source of support after
students enter college, whether through regular com-
munication, visits, or financial assistance (Moreira &
Telzer, 2015; Mounts, Valentiner, Anderson, & Boswell,
2006). Peers are often more familiar with students’ day-
to-day college experience and are better able to relate to
the developmental challenges of young adulthood
(Dennis et al., 2005). Researchers have demonstrated
that, as a result, support received from peers during
the college transition can bolster support from parents,
thereby enhancing psychological well-being (Azmitia,
Syed, & Radmacher, 2013).
In addition to peers and parents/caregivers, natural
mentors (nonparental adults from students’ pre-existing
social networks such as extended family and teachers
who provide support and guidance) may become a
significant social support for many young adults as they
work to establish autonomy and therefore rely less on
parental relationships to meet social needs (Aquilino,
APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE 3
1997). Some research focused on the role of natural men-
tors in young adults’ lives has found that they can foster
better psychological outcomes by promoting self-efficacy,
providing advice and guidance, and serving as positive
role models (Hurd & Zimmerman, 2010; Zimmerman,
Bingenheimer, & Notaro, 2002). Other work has demon-
strated that adolescents who have one or more natural
mentors report higher levels of positive well-being and
fewer internalizing symptoms (e.g., Zimmerman et al.,
2002). Natural mentors may be able to provide informal
support that aids in adjustment to PWIs, particularly if
natural mentors have life experiences that underrepre-
sented students’ parents/caregivers may lack (e.g.,
having attended college; Campbell & Campbell, 2007).
Natural mentors can provide companionship while also
offering more informed advice about adult roles and
responsibilities than peers (Beam, Chen, & Greenberger,
2002). Thus, natural mentors may serve to supplement
parent/caregiver and peer support, or to compensate
for areas in which peers and parents/caregivers are not
fully equipped to offer guidance.
Current study
Psychosocial adjustment to college is understudied
among underrepresented college students, despite the
growing numbers enrolling in college. Emerging
adulthood is a developmental period in which young
adults face particular social and psychological
challenges, and is often when symptoms of anxiety or
depression arise for the first time (Patel et al., 2007).
Although mental health remains an important compo-
nent of the college experience for all students (Gall,
Evans, & Bellerose, 2000), due to their marginalized
status, underrepresented students may encounter many
more stressors than their mainstream peers (Breslau,
Lane, Sampson, & Kessler, 2008; Neville et al., 2004).
The extant literature points to the development or main-
tenance of a support network comprising close relation-
ships as a factor in successful college transition (Azmitia
et al., 2013). As outlined previously, peers, parents/care-
givers, and natural mentors have been identified as
important sources of support for young adults; therefore,
the current study focused on the contributions of these
three providers. It appears that peers, parents/caregivers,
and natural mentors may provide support that differs
due to their distinct roles in students’ lives—that is, peers,
parents/caregivers, and natural mentors have been shown
to individually confer support for the college transition
(Hurtado, Carter, & Spuler, 1996).
To our knowledge, research attention has not been
devoted to documenting the composition of underre-
presented students’ support networks or whether
4 J. N. ALBRIGHT AND N. M. HURD

certain configurations of support are better predictors of Table 1. Sample characteristics.

healthy adjustment. Moreover, while natural mentors Variable n (%)
have the potential to be influential in young adults’ lives, Gender
Female 236 (69)
little is known about how they operate in conjunction Male 105 (31)
with peer and parent/caregiver relationships to support Other 2 (<1)
First-generation 152 (45)
underrepresented students’ transition to college. Race/ethnicity
Identifying profiles of support received from key indivi- Black/African American 99 (29)
White/European American 80 (24)
duals in underrepresented students’ lives may provide Multiracial 68 (20)
information needed to help students capitalize upon Asian 55 (16)
their existing social resources. Latent profile analysis Hispanic/Latino 34 (10)
American Indian or Alaska Native 1 (<1)
(LPA) was the ideal approach to determine whether No reported 3 (<1)
support providers’ contributions to psychological Age
Mean 18.1 (SD ¼ .37)
adjustment work in concert, if certain providers play a
critical role, and/or if certain providers can offset lower
levels of support from other sources. between the ages of 17–20 (M ¼ 18.11, SD ¼ 0.37)
This study aimed to contribute to the current under- participated (see Table 1). Yearly family income ranged
standing of the influence of supportive individuals on from less than $4,900 to more than $105,000, with
psychosocial adjustment by examining constellations median family incomes ranging from $65,000 to
of support from multiple sources. We expected that $74,999. Racial/ethnic composition included Black/
higher levels of support from all identified members African-American (29%), White (24%), multiracial
of students’ support networks would contribute to (20%), Asian (16%), Hispanic/Latino (10%), and
improvements in mental health over the first year of American Indian/Alaska Native (<1%). Three
college. This study also aimed to determine whether participants did not report their race/ethnicity.
certain patterns of support were associated with psycho-
logical adjustment to college, and whether high levels of
support from some relationships may compensate for Procedure
lower support from others. In light of research findings
The university’s Institutional Review Board approved
that suggest peer relationships, in particular, play a key
this study. Eligible participants received an email descrip-
role in college adjustment, and that natural mentors
tion of the purpose of the study and an invitation to par-
appear to contribute to young adults’ social adjustment,
ticipate. Of 775 invited students, 340 participated (44%
we expected that high levels of support from peers or
response rate). Interested students provided written
natural mentors could compensate for lower support
consent after being informed of the confidentiality, risks,
from parents/caregivers.
benefits, and voluntary nature of the study. Students
under the age of 18 obtained parental consent and pro-
vided written assent. To further ensure confidentiality,
Method
we obtained a Certificate of Confidentiality from the
Participants National Institutes of Health. Online, self-report surveys
were conducted in the first and second semester of
The present study utilized data from an ongoing
students’ first year (Times 1 and 2, respectively), and
longitudinal project focused on the experiences and
lasted approximately one hour. At Time 1, all students
adjustment of underrepresented students at a PWI.
completed surveys on an iPad at the college campus.
Participants were recruited from a large public univer-
Participants who were no longer enrolled in the univer-
sity in the southeastern United States during their first
sity at Time 2 (n ¼ 4) were emailed a link to the survey.
semester of college. University admissions records were
After completing the survey, students were compensated
used to identify eligible students. Members of one or
with a $20 Visa gift card.
more of the following groups were selected for the
study: first-generation college students, students from
disadvantaged economic backgrounds (i.e., eligible for
Measures
the full Federal Pell Grant), and/or members of histori-
cally underrepresented racial/ethnic minority groups Social support
(i.e., Black, Hispanic, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Participants completed a modified version of Barrera’s
and/or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander). Three Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors (ISSB;
hundred forty first-year college students (68.5% female) Barrera, Sandler, & Ramsay, 1981). Three identical

versions of the ISSB were administered to assess the
frequency and types of perceived support received from
each provider: their primary caregiver, their peers (i.e.,
friends), and a natural mentor. The presence of a
natural mentor was assessed with a single item: “Other
than a parent or person who raised you, is there an adult
who is older and more experienced than you who you
go to for support and guidance?” Participants who
responded in the affirmative were then asked a series of
questions regarding support received from this individual
in the previous 30 days. The scores obtained from the
ISSB questionnaire were averaged to form a composite
score for each source (i.e., primary caregiver, peers,
natural mentor). Participants who did not report the
presence of a natural mentor received a zero value for
the composite natural mentor support variable.
We used the emotional, informational, appraisal,
and instrumental support subscales which each
comprise four items with a 5-point scale measuring
how frequently each type of support was received from
the specified provider over the prior 30 days. Response
options ranged from 0 (not at all) to 4 (every day or
almost every day). The emotional support subscale
measured how frequently a supportive individual
offered comfort (e.g., “Over the past 30 days, how often
has this person listened to you talk about your private
feelings?”). The informational support subscale mea-
sured how frequently a supportive individual offered
guidance for problem solving (e.g., “Over the past 30
days, how often has this person suggested some action
you should take?”). The appraisal subscale measured
how frequently a support provider offered their per-
spective on how an individual was performing or behav-
ing (e.g., “Over the past 30 days, how often has this
person let you know you did something well?”). Finally,
the instrumental support subscale measured how fre-
quently a supportive individual offered tangible support
(e.g., “Over the past 30 days, how often has this person
loaned or gave you something other than money?”).
Depressive symptoms
Participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory-
II (BDI-II) at each time point (Beck, Steer, & Brown,
1996). The BDI-II was used to measure depressive
symptoms over the previous two weeks. Participants
were instructed: “Pick out the one statement in each
group that best describes the way you have been feeling
during the past two weeks, including today.” Survey
items were grouped by type of depressive symptom
(e.g., feelings of sadness or worthlessness) and presented
with a 4-point response scale [e.g., 0 (“I do not feel sad”)
to 3 (“I am so sad or unhappy that I can’t stand it”)].
Cronbach’s alpha for these items indicated high
APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE 5
reliability at Time 1 and Time 2 (.91 and .92,
respectively).
Anxiety symptoms
Participants completed the Beck Anxiety Inventory II
(BAI-II) at each time point (Beck, Epstein, Brown, &
Steer, 1988). The BAI was used to measure anxiety
symptoms over the prior 30 days (e.g., “Over the past
30 days, how much have you been bothered by numb-
ness or tingling?”). Survey items were presented with
a 4-point Likert response scale ranging from 0 (rarely
or never) to 3 (almost every day). Cronbach’s alpha for
these items at Time 1 and Time 2 were .91 and .92,
respectively.
Perceived stress
The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) is a 14-item inventory
of physical symptoms and appraisal of stressful events
(Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983). Sample items
include: “In the last month, how often have you been
upset because of something that happened that you
didn’t expect?” and “In the past month, how often have
you dealt successfully with daily hassles?” Items were
presented on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0
(never) to 4 (very often). Cronbach’s alpha for these
items at Time 1 and Time 2 were .87 and .88,
respectively.
Demographics
Demographic information, including age, race/
ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic background
(SES), was collected using information from students’
admission records and survey items. Prior to conduct-
ing our analyses, we dichotomized gender (0 ¼ female
or other, 1 ¼ male) and race/ethnicity (0 ¼ person of
color, 1 ¼ White). This coding scheme allowed us to
examine potential profile differences as a function of
majority-group status. SES was measured by self-
reported estimates of total annual household income
on a 12-point Likert scale. Responses ranged from 1
(below $4,999) to 12 ($105,000 and above). Academic
records were used to obtain information about students’
Fall and Spring grade point average (GPA).
Data analysis
All analyses were conducted in R software (version
3.1.2). Multivariate imputation was conducted to handle
a small amount of missing data (<3%). In this type of
estimation imputation, each continuous variable is
assigned its own imputation model from which value
estimation is produced. For the primary analyses we
conducted LPA using the Mclust package in R software.
6 J. N. ALBRIGHT AND N. M. HURD

Latent profiles were generated from composite social
support variables. This approach generates cluster
solutions by grouping individuals with maximally
homogenous values on each variable of interest (levels
of peer, parent/primary caregiver, and natural mentor
support) to produce distinct profiles. Composite
variables were calculated by averaging scores on the
cumulative ISSB for each source (i.e., peer, parent/
primary caregiver, natural mentor), and all three com-
posite scores were used as latent profile indicators for
support network composition.
Mclust conducts model-based clustering using finite
Gaussian mixture modeling, fitted to the data by
maximum likelihood through the expectation-
maximization algorithm (Fraley, Raftery, Murphy, &
Scrucca, 2012). Most likely cluster solutions are identified
based on the Bayes factor (BIC; Bayesian Information
Criterion). In model-based clustering using Mclust, the
cluster solution with the smallest absolute BIC value
and sufficient cluster sizes (n > 25) is selected (Banfield
& Raftery, 1993). Cluster solutions with a BIC difference
of greater than six are considered to have strong
evidence. Additionally, we assessed cluster solutions
using the integrated complete likelihood (ICL) value,
which penalizes the BIC based on the entropy of cluster-
ing (Biernacki, Celeux, & Govaert, 2000). We compared
two-, three-, and four-cluster solutions, and the model
with the smallest absolute BIC, ICL, and sufficient cluster
sizes was selected. We then conducted one-way
ANOVAs to determine whether profiles differed in
composition across demographics and academic perfor-
mance. Lastly, we conducted a MANOVA to examine
mental health outcomes across profiles. A series of one-
way ANOVAs were used to conduct post-hoc analyses.
Results
Descriptive and correlation analyses
Preliminary analyses examined the relationship between
study variables. Table 2 presents descriptive statistics
and correlations among study variables.
Table 3. Model fit indices for 2-, 3-, and 4-profile solutions.
Variable 2-Profile solution 3-Profile solution 4-Profile solution
BIC 2366.3 2229.4 2197.3
ICL 2393.4 2260.6 2252.6
Note. BIC ¼ Bayesian information criterion; ICL ¼ integrated compete
likelihood.
Social support profiles
The primary analyses involved creating and categorizing
profiles of participants using model-based clustering
based upon the levels of support participants reported
from supportive individuals. LPA results indicated
that the four-class solution fit our data best while still
permitting sufficient cluster sizes (see Table 3 for cluster
solutions). We labeled the four profiles Average
Frequency Support (AFS), Higher Frequency Support
(HFS), Lower Frequency Support (LFS), and Com-
pensatory Mentor Support (CMS), based on the descrip-
tive statistics for each profile, which can be found in
Table 4. In order to examine the conceptual fit of the
latent profiles, we plotted standardized comparisons of
support by provider type within each cluster (see
Figure 1). The AFS profile (n ¼ 82) was characterized
by approximately average amounts of total support
from each provider compared to the sample means.
The AFS group reported, on average, receiving support
nearly once a week from peers, nearly once a week from
their parent/primary caregiver, and around once or
twice in the prior 30 days from natural mentors. The
HFS profile (n ¼ 34) was characterized by higher-
frequency support compared to the sample mean and
compared to the other profiles in the prior 30 days.
On average, they received support from peers more than
once a week, support from a parent/caregiver several
times per week, and support from natural mentors
nearly once a week in the prior 30 days. We assigned
the LFS label to the largest cluster (n ¼ 152), which
was characterized by lower-than-average levels of sup-
port from all providers. On average, the LFS profile
received support less than once a week from both peers

Table 2. Descriptive statistics and correlations among study variables.

M (SD) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Peer Support 1.69 (.77)
Parent Support 1.78 (.92) 0.69*
Mentor Support .63 (.79) .31* .31*
Depressive Symptoms T1 10.94 (8.61) .04 .03 .02
Depressive Symptoms T2 10.55 (9.11) .07 .06 .06 .75*
Anxiety Symptoms T1 11.20 (9.54) .17* .22* .12* .56* .42*
Anxiety Symptoms T2 10.43 (9.87) .16* .08 .04 .38* .48* .58*
Perceived Stress T1 2.79 (.56) .05 .10 .07 .17* .59* .50* .38*
Perceived Stress T2 2.80 (.58) .05 .07 .02 .54* .73* .32* .45* 0.68*
*p < .05.

Table 4. Unstandardized characteristics of latent classes among respondents.
AFS (n ¼ 82) M(SD) HFS (n ¼ 34) M(SD)
Peer support 1.65 (.75)a 2.52 (.69)b
Parent support 1.91 (.85)a 3.22 (.51)b
Natural mentor support .57 (.20)a 2.07 (.64)b
Note. ISSB values range from 0 (no support over the prior 30 days) to 4 (received support about every day over the prior 30 days).
AFS ¼ average frequency support; HFS ¼ higher frequency support; LFS ¼ lower frequency support; CMS ¼ compensatory mentor support.
Means that do not share a subscript differ significantly at p < .05.
*p < .05.
Figure 1. Standardized latent profile comparisons. AFS ¼
Average frequency support, HFS ¼ higher frequency support,
LFS ¼ lower frequency support, CMS ¼ compensatory mentor
support.
and their parent/caregiver. No individuals in the LFS
cluster, regardless of whether they identified a natural
mentor, received any mentor support over the prior
30 days. The CMS profile (n ¼ 72) displayed signifi-
cantly lower levels of parent/caregiver support (less than
once a week) than the AFS and HFS profiles, and
significantly lower levels of peer support (nearly once
a week) than the HFS profile. However, they reported
significantly higher levels of natural mentor support
(nearly once a week) compared to the AFS and LFS
groups, who received natural mentor support not at
all or once or twice over the prior 30 days. Overall,
approximately 67% of participants affirmed the pres-
ence of a natural mentor. All individuals with AFS,
HFS, and CMS profiles reported having a mentor, and
37 individuals with LFS network profile identified a
natural mentor (notably, participants in the LFS
group did not report any support from these mentors
in the past 30 days). The HFS and CMS profiles
displayed higher-than-average levels of natural mentor
support by more than one standard deviation. The
composition of support profile groups did not
significantly differ in terms of proportion of male parti-
cipants [X2(6) ¼ 5.82, ns], proportion of White students
[X2(3) ¼ 4.36, ns], family income [F(3, 336) ¼ 0.99, ns]
or cumulative GPA [F(3, 336) ¼ 2.5, ns].
APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE 7
LFS (n ¼ 152) M(SD) CMS (n ¼ 72) M(SD) F statistic
1.50 (.76)c 1.76 (.48)a 122.5*
1.58 (.85)c 1.41 (.52)d 299.5*
0.00 (.00)c 1.36 (.61)d 2566*
Profile differences in mental health
The change from Time 1 to Time 2 for each mental
health outcome was calculated to assess improvements
or deterioration of students’ mental health over the first
year of college and this was used as an outcome variable
in subsequent analyses. Results of the MANOVA
showed a significant multivariate effect for the mental
health variables as a group in relation to support profiles
[F ¼ 10.1, p < .05, Wilk’s Λ ¼ 0.96]. We then conducted
a series of ANOVAs as a follow-up to the significant
MANOVA results. ANOVAs revealed group-level
differences in Time 1, Time 2, and change scores for
depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and perceived
stress (see Table 5). Tukey’s post hoc comparisons
revealed that the AFS profile displayed the overall
lowest levels of anxiety symptoms, depressive symp-
toms, and perceived stress at Time 1.
At Time 1, the HFS profile displayed the highest level
of anxiety and perceived stress; however, by Time 2 they
experienced a reduction in symptoms wherein Time 2
symptomatology fell to approximately average or
below-average levels for the sample. At Time 2, the
HFS profile endorsed significantly fewer depressive
symptoms than the LFS profile and had lower perceived
stress than the LFS and CMS profiles. The HFS profile
remained significantly higher in anxiety symptoms at
Time 2 than the AFS profile, but did not retain its
initially higher anxiety symptoms when compared to
the other two profiles. The LFS profile had poorer men-
tal health at Time 2, with significantly higher depressive
symptoms than the AFS and HFS profiles, higher
anxiety symptoms than the AFS profile, and higher
perceived stress than the AFS and HFS profiles.
A series of ANOVAs revealed significant differences
in change in depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms,
and perceived stress from Time 1 to Time 2 among
the four profiles. Post-hoc Tukey’s tests were then con-
ducted to detect group-specific differences. The only
group-specific difference in change in mental health
outcomes between the two time points in the sample
was found for the HFS profile. The HFS profile dis-
played the largest improvements across all mental
health variables from Time 1 to Time 2, with significant
reductions in depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms,
8 J. N. ALBRIGHT AND N. M. HURD
Table 5. Profile difference in mental health.
AFS M (SD) HFS M (SD)
Depressive symptoms
Time 1 9.39 (7.98)a 11.85 (9.14)b
Time 2 9.3 (8.83)a 8.87 (8.16)a
D .09 (5.99)a 2.99 (5.54)b
Anxiety symptoms
Time 1 9.58 (8.65)a 16.93 (13.70)b
Time 2 9.34 (8.85)a 11.92 (11.34)b
D .24 (8.10)a 5.02 (10.35)b
Perceived stress
Time 1 2.68 (.55)a 2.88 (.58)b
Time 2 2.73 (.63)a 2.65 (.46)a
D .05 (.47)a .23 (.50)b
Note. AFS ¼ average frequency support; HFS ¼ higher frequency support; LFS ¼ lower frequency support; CMS ¼ compensatory mentor support. Means that
do not share a subscript differ significantly on Tukey post hoc comparisons.
*p < .05.
and perceived stress. No other between-group differ-
ences were detected.
Discussion
The results of the current study indicate that high levels
of support from multiple individuals in underrepre-
sented students’ support networks may be particularly
influential for adjustment among those experiencing
more distress upon entering college. These findings
are consistent with previous research, which has
demonstrated that social relationships can support
psychological functioning during the college transition
among underrepresented students (Yazedjian et al.,
2007) and reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression
for distressed individuals (Marroquín, 2011). The
current study extends previous work by exploring
whether certain constellations of social support received
from multiple sources in underrepresented students’
social networks were associated with improvements in
students’ mental health over the first year of college.
Students who reported the most frequent support
from peers, their parent/caregiver, and a natural mentor
(HFS profile) in their first semester experienced a
reduction in depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms,
and perceived stress by their second semester.
Notably, while participants in the HFS profile
reported the highest levels of anxiety and perceived
stress during the Fall semester, their symptom reduction
was so considerable that by the Spring semester, their
levels of psychological distress were comparable to the
rest of the sample. In fact, on average, members of
the HFS profile achieved levels of perceived stress and
depressive symptoms that were lower than two of the
other profile groups in the Spring. Drawing upon the
work of Cutrona (1986), Sarason, Pierce, and Sarason
(1990) point out, “much of what we often call socially
supportive behavior is offered only when a person is
clearly experiencing stress” (1990, p. 98). Thus,
LFS M (SD) CMS M (SD) F statistic
11.87 (9.00)b 10.85 (7.71)a 10.7*
11.76 (9.50)b 10.63 (8.55)c 10.8*
.11 (6.60)a .22 (6.64)a 12.1*
11.21 (9.11)c 11.24 (8.33)c 28.2*
10.71 (10.21)b 11.32 (9.13)b 5.46*
.50 (9.04)a .07 (7.71)a 17.4*
2.84 (.56)b 2.83 (.54)b 11.7*
2.85 (.57)b 2.92 (.54)b 14.0*
.02 (.41)a .09 (.44)a 22.9*
members of the HFS profile may have received more
social support compared to their peers, in part, due to
heightened, perceptible distress in their first semester.
Their higher-than-average levels of baseline distress in
the Fall semester may have mobilized social network
members to provide more support, or motivated stu-
dents to engage in support-seeking behavior. Some
research suggests that individuals experiencing greater
psychological distress are more likely to engage in sup-
port-seeking behaviors than their less-distressed peers,
particularly when looking for reassurance (Lee, Dick-
son, Conley, & Holmbeck, 2014; B. R. Sarason, Sarason,
Hacker, & Basham, 1985). While excessive reassurance
seeking can perpetuate or exacerbate symptoms of
depression and anxiety, higher levels of support-seeking
are not inherently problematic, particularly during
major life transitions. In contrast, research suggests that
for some individuals, psychological distress can impede
the ability to reach out for help (Rickwood, Deane,
Wilson, & Ciarrochi, 2005). However, it is worth noting
that the HFS and LFS groups, at baseline, displayed
similar levels of depressive symptoms in the Fall sem-
ester. Students in the group receiving lower levels of
support (LFS) with relatively higher depressive symp-
toms did not experience a change in distress levels,
while the levels of support reported by the HFS group
appeared to produce significant improvements on all
indicators of mental health. If distress level were inter-
fering with support receipt, we would not expect to find
a highly distressed group that experienced improve-
ments in mental health, which appeared to occur as a
function of level of support. The HFS group displayed
higher than average levels of baseline distress in the Fall
semester, which may have motivated support-seeking
behavior, or mobilized social network members to pro-
vide more support. Thus, it seems that our pattern of
findings was not attributable to greater levels of psycho-
logical distress impeding support seeking. Although the
study design limits the ability to draw conclusions about

whether students sought out support or received unsol-
icited support, the observed improvements across all
indicators of psychological distress suggest that students
benefited from the higher levels of support provided by
key members of their social networks.
The AFS, LFS, and CMS groups did not experience
significantly different changes in mental health from
the Fall to Spring semester. This may indicate that the
support offered by individuals in their social network
—in comparison to the HFS profile—was not frequent
enough to facilitate large improvements in their mental
health. In addition, the AFS and CMS groups had better
baseline mental health than the HFS profile; thus, they
had relatively less “room for improvement.” Encoura-
gingly, the entire sample reported, on average, receiving
support approximately once per week in the 30 days
prior to the study from both peers and their parent/
caregiver in their support network, regardless of profile
assignment. Underrepresented students attending elite
PWIs may share the experience of having developed
strong support networks, which could have contributed
to their pre-college success and in turn, their ability to
maintain their mental health over their first year of
college. These characteristics of underrepresented
students, in part, may have contributed to the absence
of differences among the AFS, LFS, and CMS profiles,
as the variability of reported support may not have been
large enough to produce significant effects on the
groups’ mental health outcomes.
One aim of the study was to build upon previous
natural mentoring research by investigating how natural
mentor support operates in concert with support from
other individuals in emerging adults’ social networks.
Analyses identified four profiles of support networks,
three of which reported natural mentor support.
However, the differences between the emergent profiles
limited our ability to test the compensatory and comp-
lementary models of natural mentoring in a meaningful
way. All groups received peer and parental support
nearly once per week or more, on average, and all pro-
files were characterized relative to each other. Future
research aimed toward examining potential compensa-
tory mentor effects among underrepresented students
may require a sample that is characterized by meaning-
fully lower support in the peer or parent/caregiver
domain. It is also possible that individuals with certain
areas of lower support (such as peer support) also have
lower natural mentor support simply as a result of
individual factors (e.g., elevated shyness) that impede
the formation of social relationships more broadly
(Erickson, McDonald, & Elder, 2009). Still, we found
that the group receiving the most frequent support
across domains from all individuals in their social
APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE 9
network experienced the greatest improvements in
mental health, which may indicate that for this sample,
natural mentor support may have had additive effects
above and beyond the benefits associated with peer
and parent/caregiver support. Results of the current
study suggest that natural mentor support may be an
important factor to consider when examining the effects
of cumulative support received by underrepresented
college students.
Study limitations and directions for future
research
Several study limitations are important to note. First,
the study is limited by its heavy reliance on self-reported
data. Self-report of support received in the prior 30 days
may introduce recall bias or inaccurately capture
enacted support. However, some evidence suggests that
subjective perceptions of social support are more pre-
dictive of psychological functioning than objective mea-
sures of received support (Barrera, 1986). We assessed
the contributions of only three support providers in
students’ social networks, which limited our ability to
identify whether broader social networks differed in
ways that contributed to change or stability in students’
mental health. Notably, we did not include the support
contributions of participants’ romantic partners, who
may be an important source of support among college
students (Furman & Wehner, 1997); however, a rela-
tively small proportion of students in the current study
identified romantic partners. It is possible that more
exhaustive information about all social support receipt
might be useful in order to better characterize the com-
position of students’ social networks. Nevertheless, the
current study focused on individuals who have been
established in the literature as most influential during
the transition to adulthood, particularly among margin-
alized groups (Bland et al., 2012; Campbell & Campbell,
2007). We did not examine the nature of the stressors
experienced by our sample, which limits our ability to
determine whether distress level was affected by chal-
lenges related to specific social identity statuses.
However, given that we did not find differences in
demographic composition across profile groups, we
have no reason to think that our findings are biased
as a function of unique identity-related stressors experi-
enced by students.
Notwithstanding its limitations, this study offers
novel information about the potential of social support
to aid in underrepresented students’ psychological
adjustment to college. The focus on change in symp-
toms across the first year of college enhanced our ability
to infer direction of influence between social support
10 J. N. ALBRIGHT AND N. M. HURD
and mental health. The LPA approach identified differ-
ent constellations of support among participants’ sup-
port networks, which allowed us to identify
associations between profile membership and change
in mental health outcomes. In short, this study lays
the groundwork for additional research focused on bet-
ter understanding the role of comprehensive support
networks in fostering more resilient outcomes during
transitional developmental spaces and among margina-
lized groups.
Conclusion
Underrepresented students at elite PWIs may experience
heightened feelings of stress, isolation, and discrimi-
nation during the college transition, which may contrib-
ute to decrements in psychological functioning (Johnson,
Wasserman, Yildirim, & Yonai, 2013). This underscores
the broader importance of investigating factors that con-
tribute to better mental health among underrepresented
students throughout their college careers. Promoting
mental health among marginalized young adults in
college is an important step toward alleviating the con-
siderable burden of mental illness on society. Improving
mental health outcomes among underrepresented
students is an important goal in itself and also may be
accompanied by additional benefits such as closing
college completion gaps between White, middle class,
continuing-generation college students and their peers.
Students face numerous vulnerabilities to psychological
problems, including the concurrent developmental tasks
of emerging adulthood and the stressors associated with
the college transition (Patel et al., 2007). Underrepre-
sented students face not only these risk factors, but also
may be exposed to marginalizing experiences that
threaten their psychological well-being (Blanco et al.,
2008). Findings of the current study indicate that under-
represented students who are experiencing high levels of
distress upon entering college may benefit most from
high levels of support from multiple providers.
Given underrepresented students’ heightened risk of
encountering distressing experiences in college, there is
a need to identify and bolster assets that may facilitate
their effective coping with stressors. Findings of the
current study suggest that increasing social support
may be one way to promote positive mental health
outcomes, particularly among those underrepresented
students who are more distressed upon entering college.
The current study represents an initial foray into the
role of support from multiple key sources in facilitating
the transition to college among underrepresented
students. Findings from this study may have implica-
tions for institutional mental health service provision.
For example, mental health professionals working in
university settings may be able to capitalize on the
pre-existing social support available to distressed
students in their first year, help students to identify
potential sources of support, or aid in support-seeking
behavior. Four-year institutions of higher education
are well positioned to create spaces that facilitate
supportive peer and natural mentoring relationships
among underrepresented students.
References
Allen, J. P., Hauser, S. T., Bell, K. L., & O’Connor, T. G.
(1994). Longitudinal assessment of autonomy and
relatedness in adolescent-family interactions as predictors
of adolescent ego development and self-esteem. Child
Development, 65, 179–194. doi:10.2307/1131374
Aquilino, W. S. (1997). From adolescent to young adult:
A prospective study of parent-child relations during the
transition to adulthood. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 3, 670–686. doi:10.2307/353953
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of develop-
ment from the late teens through the twenties. American
Psychologist, 5, 469–480. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.55.5.469
Azmitia, M., Syed, M., & Radmacher, K. (2013). Finding your
niche: Identity and emotional support in emerging adults’
adjustment to the transition to college. Journal of Research
on Adolescence, 23, 744–761. doi:10.1111/jora.12037
Banfield, J. D., & Raftery, A. E. (1993). Model-based Gaussian
and non-Gaussian clustering. Biometrics, 49, 803–821.
doi:10.2307/2532201
Barrera, M. (1986). Distinctions between social support con-
cepts, measures, and models. American Journal of Com-
munity Psychology, 14, 413–445. doi:10.1007/bf00922627
Barrera, M., Sandler, I. N., & Ramsay, T. B. (1981). Prelimi-
nary development of a scale of social support: Studies on
college students. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 9, 435–447. doi:10.1007/bf00918174
Beam, M. R., Chen, C., & Greenberger, E. (2002). The nature
of adolescents’ relationships with their “very important”
nonparental adults. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 30, 305–325. doi:10.1023/a:1014641213440
Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1988). An
inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric
properties. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
56, 893–897. doi:10.1037//0022-006x.56.6.893
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Manual for
the Beck Depression Inventory-II. San Antonio, TX: The
Psychological Corporation.
Biernacki, C., Celeux, G., & Govaert, G. (2000). Assessing a
mixture model for clustering with the integrated completed
likelihood. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and
Machine Intelligence, 22, 719–725. doi:10.1109/34.865189
Blanco, C., Okuda, M., Wright, C., Hasin, D. S., Grant, B. F.,
Liu, S. M., & Olfson, M. (2008). Mental health of college
students and their non–college-attending peers: Results
from the national epidemiologic study on alcohol and
related conditions. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65,
1429–1437. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.65.12.1429

Bland, H. W., Melton, B. F., Welle, P., & Bigham, L. (2012).
Stress tolerance: New challenges for millennial college
students. College Student Journal, 46, 362–375.
Breslau, J., Lane, M., Sampson, N., & Kessler, R. C. (2008).
Mental disorders and subsequent educational attainment
in a US national sample. Journal of Psychiatric Research,
42, 708–716. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2008.01.016
Butler, E. A., & Randall, A. K. (2013). Emotional coregulation
in close relationships. Emotion Review, 5, 202–210.
doi:10.1177/1754073912451630
Campbell, T. A., & Campbell, D. E. (2007). Outcomes of men-
toring at‐risk college students: Gender and ethnic matching
effects. Mentoring & Tutoring, 15, 135–148. doi:10.1080/
13611260601086287
Clark, C., Rodgers, B., Caldwell, T., Power, C., & Stansfeld, S.
(2007). Childhood and adulthood psychological ill health as
predictors of midlife affective and anxiety disorders: The
1958 British Birth Cohort. Archives of General Psychiatry,
64, 668–678. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.64.6.668
Cohen, S. (2004). Social relationships and health. American
Psychologist, 59(8), 676.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global
measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, 24, 385–396. doi:10.2307/2136404
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the
buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357.
doi:10.1037//0033-2909.98.2.310
Crockett, L. J., Iturbide, M. I., Torres Stone, R. A., McGinley, M.,
Raffaelli, M., & Carlo, G. (2007). Acculturative stress, social
support, and coping: Relations to psychological adjustment
among Mexican American college students. Cultural Diversity
and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 347.
Cutrona, C. E. (1986). Behavioral manifestations of social
support: A microanalytic investigation. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 51, 201–208. doi:10.1037//
0022-3514.51.1.201
Dennis, J. M., Phinney, J. S., & Chuateco, L. I. (2005). The role
of motivation, parental support, and peer support in the
academic success of ethnic minority first-generation
college students. Journal of College Student Development,
46, 223–236. doi:10.1353/csd.2005.0023
Dominguez, S., & Watkins, C. (2003). Creating networks for
survival and mobility: Social capital among African-American
and Latin-American low-income mothers. Social Problems,
50, 111–135.
Erickson, L. D., McDonald, S., & Elder, G. H. (2009). Informal
mentors and education: Complementary or compensatory
resources? Sociology of Education, 82, 344–367.
doi:10.1177/003804070908200403
Fraley, C., Raftery, A. E., Murphy, T. B., & Scrucca, L. (2012).
mclust Version 4 for R: normal mixture modeling for model-
based clustering, classification, and density estimation
(p. 597). Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
Furman, W., & Wehner, E. A. (1997). Adolescent romantic
relationships: A developmental perspective. New Directions
for Child and Adolescent Development, 78, 21–36.
doi:10.1002/cd.23219977804
Gall, T. L., Evans, D. R., & Bellerose, S. (2000). Transition to
first-year University: Patterns of change in adjustment
across life domains and time. Journal of Social and Clinical
Psychology, 19, 544–567. doi:10.1521/jscp.2000.19.4.544
APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE 11
Hall-Lande, J. A., Eisenberg, M. E., Christenson, S. L., &
Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2007). Social isolation, psychologi-
cal health, and protective factors in adolescence.
Adolescence, 42, 265–286.
Hefner, J., & Eisenberg, D. (2009). Social support and mental
health among college students. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 79, 491.
Hurd, N. M., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2010). Natural
mentoring relationships among adolescent mothers: A
study of resilience. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20,
789–809. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00660.x
Hurtado, S., Carter, D. F., & Spuler, A. (1996). Latino student
transition to college: Assessing difficulties and factors in
successful college adjustment. Research in Higher
Education, 37, 135–157. doi:10.1007/bf01730113
Hurtado, S., & Ruiz, A. (2012). The climate for underrepre-
sented groups and diversity on campus. American Academy
of Political and Social Science, 634, 190–206.
Johnson, D. R., Wasserman, T. H., Yildirim, N., & Yonai,
B. A. (2013). Examining the effects of stress and campus
climate on the persistence of students of color and White
students: An application of Bean and Eaton’s psychological
model of retention. Research in Higher Education, 55,
75–100. doi:10.1007/s11162-013-9304-9
Kaufman, K. L., Brown, R. T., Graves, K., Henderson, P., &
Revolinski, M. (1993). What, me worry? A survey of adoles-
cents’ concerns. Clinical Pediatrics, 32, 8–14. doi:10.1177/
000992289303200102
Kena, G., Musu-Gillette, L., Robinson, J., Wang, X., Rathbun,
A., Zhang, J., … Velez, E. D. V. (2015). The Condition of
Education 2015 (NCES 2015–144). Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department
of Education.
Laible, D. J., Carlo, G., & Raffaelli, M. (2000). The differential
relations of parent and peer attachment to adolescent
adjustment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 45–59.
Leary, K. A., & DeRosier, M. E. (2012). Factors promoting
positive adaptation and resilience during the transition to
college. Psychology, 3, 1215–1222. doi:10.4236/psych.2012.
312a180
Lee, C., Dickson, D. A., Conley, C. S., & Holmbeck, G. N.
(2014). A closer look at self-esteem, perceived social sup-
port, and coping strategy: A prospective study of depressive
symptomatology across the transition to college. Journal of
Social and Clinical Psychology, 33, 560–585. doi:10.1521/
jscp.2014.33.6.560
Marroquín, B. (2011). Interpersonal emotion regulation as a
mechanism of social support in depression. Clinical
Psychology Review, 31, 1276–1290. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.
09.005
Moreira, J. F. G., & Telzer, E. H. (2015). Changes in family
cohesion and links to depression during the college tran-
sition. Journal of Adolescence, 43, 72–82. doi:10.1016/j.
adolescence.2015.05.012
Mounts, N. S., Valentiner, D. P., Anderson, K. L., & Boswell,
M. K. (2006). Shyness, sociability, and parental support for
the college transition: Relation to adolescents’ adjustment.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 68–77. doi:10.1007/
s10964-005-9002-9
Museus, S. D., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Toward an intercultural
perspective of racial and ethnic minority college student
 12 J. N. ALBRIGHT AND N. M. HURD
persistence. The Review of Higher Education, 33, 67–94.
doi:10.1353/rhe.0.0107
Navarro, R. L., Worthington, R. L., Hart, J., & Khairallah, T.
(2009). Liberal and conservative political ideology, experi-
ences of harassment, and perceptions of campus climate.
Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2, 78–90.
doi:10.1037/a0015174
Neville, H. A., Heppner, P. P., Ji, P., & Thye, R. (2004). The
relations among general and race-related stressors and
psychoeducational adjustment in Black students attending
predominantly White institutions. Journal of Black Studies,
34(4), 599–618. doi:10.1177/0021934703259168
Newman, B. M., Newman, P. R., Griffen, S., O’Connor, K., &
Spas, J. (2007). The relationship of social support to
depressive symptoms during the transition to high school.
Adolescence, 42, 441.
Ostrove, J. M. (2003). Belonging and wanting: Meanings of
social class background for women’s constructions of their
college experiences. Journal of Social Issues, 59, 771–784.
doi:10.1046/j.0022-4537.2003.00089.x
Patel, V., Flisher, A. J., Hetrick, S., & McGorry, P. (2007).
Mental health of young people: A global public-health chal-
lenge. The Lancet, 369, 1302–1313. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736
(07)60368-7
Pieterse, A. L., Carter, R. T., Evans, S. A., & Walter, R. A.
(2010). An exploratory examination of the associations
among racial and ethnic discrimination, racial climate,
and trauma-related symptoms in a college student popu-
lation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57, 255–263.
doi:10.1037/a0020040
Sarason, B. R., Pierce, G. R., & Sarason, I. G. (1990). Social
support: The sense of acceptance and the role of relation-
ships. In B. R. Sarason, I. G. Sarason, & G. R. Pierce
(Eds.), Social support: An interactional view (pp. 97–128).
New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I. G., Hacker, T. A., & Basham, R. B.
(1985). Concomitants of social support: Social skills, physical
attractiveness, and gender. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 49, 469–480. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.49.2.469
Sarason, I. G., & Sarason, B. R. (1985). Social support: Theory,
research and applications. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Martinus Nijhoff.
View publication stats
Thoits, P. A. (1986). Social support as coping assistance.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54,
416–423.
Torres, K. (2009). “Culture shock”: Black students account for
their distinctiveness at an elite college. Ethnic and Racial
Studies, 32, 883–905. doi:10.1080/01419870701710914
Uchino, B. N., Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. W., & Bloor, L.
(2004). Heterogeneity in social networks: A comparison
of different models linking relationships to psychological
outcomes. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23,
123–139. doi:10.1521/jscp.23.2.123.31014
Vogel, D. L., & Wei, M. (2005). Adult attachment and
help-seeking intent: The mediating roles of psychological
distress and perceived social support. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 52, 347–357. doi:10.1037/0022-
0167.52.3.347
Walker, R. L., Wingate, L. R., Obasi, E. M., & Joiner, T. E., Jr.
(2008). An empirical investigation of acculturative stress
and ethnic identity as moderators for depression and
suicidal ideation in college students. Cultural Diversity
and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 14, 75–82. doi:10.1037/
1099-9809.14.1.75
Wei, M., Liao, K. Y. H., Chao, R. C. L., Mallinckrodt, B.,
Tsai, P. C., & Botello-Zamarron, R. (2010). Minority stress,
perceived bicultural competence, and depressive
symptoms among ethnic minority college students. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 57, 411–422. doi:10.1037/
a0020790
Willie, S. S. (2003). Acting black: College, identity, and the
performance of race. New York: Routledge.
Wills, T. A. (1991). Social support and interpersonal
relationships. In M. S. Clark (Ed.), Prosocial behavior
(pp. 265–289). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Yazedjian, A., Purswell, K., Sevin, T., & Toews, M. (2007).
Adjusting to the first year of college: Students’ perceptions
of the importance of parental, peer, and institutional
support. Journal of the First-Year Experience & Students
in Transition, 19, 29–46.
Zimmerman, M. A., Bingenheimer, J. B., & Notaro, P. C.
(2002). Natural mentors and adolescent resiliency: A study
with urban youth. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 30, 221–243. doi:10.1023/a:1014632911622