Personality and Individual Differences 179 (2021) 110928

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

The influence of the academic exams routine on the perceived stress,

resilience and salivary cortisol in Brazilian pharmacy
undergraduate students
Filipy Borghi a, Camila Maiara Rocha-Teles a, Samantha Kenney McFadden a,
Priscila Cristina da Silva a, Aglecio Luiz Souza b, Dora Maria Grassi-Kassisse a, *
a
LABEEST - Laboratory of Stress Study, Department of Structural and Functional Biology, Institute of Biology, University of Campinas – UNICAMP, Campinas, São
Paulo, Brazil
b
Unidade Metabólica, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), São Paulo, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The exams periods are commonly reported to be stressful experiences. The relationship between perceived stress
Cortisol and resilience is well established, however, the relationship with cortisol remains unclear. Considering the
Perceived stress stressful environment provided by the university and the lack of studies in the Brazilian context, this study aimed
Resilience
to evaluate and associate perceived stress, resilience and salivary cortisol in pharmacy students during the exams
Undergraduates
period. Seventy-nine pharmacy undergraduates answered questionnaires related to perceived stress and resil­
Saliva
ience and collected five saliva samples in an exam and a rest day for cortisol measures at the final exams at the
end of the school year. They reported higher scores of perceived stress and intermediate resilience. Women are
less resilient and their total cortisol output (AUC) on exams day is significantly higher compared to the rest day,
but this difference tends to disappear over the academic year or at the end years. Furthermore, they exhibited
cortisol rhythmicity and preserved CAR, with no changes in a short period by the exams, indicating normal,
healthy and adaptive HPA-axis reactions to stressors. This study highlighted that students can adapt to stressful
situations due to a modulation in the production of cortisol over the time.

1. Introduction Despite academic demands, the university exposes the un­

Academic examination periods are commonly reported to be stress­
ful experiences for students (Murphy, Denis, Ward, & Tartar, 2010).
Students from health professions experience higher academic stress than
their university peers due to their exhaustive nature of the study (Aftab,
Naqvi, Al-karasneh, & Ghori, 2018; Gomathi, Ahmed, & Sreedharan,
2013; Kumar et al., 2019; Sun & Zoriah, 2015). The pharmacy course
has an intense curriculum in a five-year combination of required and
elective disciplines, that includes classes and residency in healthcare
settings that predispose these students to high levels of stress (Aftab
et al., 2018). In addition to the highly demanding workload, the increase
in stress during undergraduate years may result in a negative impact on
physical and mental health, causing deterioration of academic perfor­
mance and increase of psychological distress (Dwyer & Cummings,
2001; Elias, Ping, & Abdullah, 2011).
dergraduates to many negative effects linked to psychological distress
(Byrd & McKinney, 2012; Pidgeon, Rowe, Stapleton, Magyar, & Lo,
2014). Several studies demonstrated that undergraduates with higher
psychological distress report lower resilience, suggesting that resilience
is a key factor in the university (DeRosier, Frank, Schwartz, & Leary,
2013; Pidgeon et al., 2014). Resilience was highlighted as a protective
factor and can be related to effective adaptive resources to academic
stress (Molinero, Zayas, González, & Guil, 2018). Notwithstanding, the
link between resilience and psychological distress is well established
(Färber & Rosendahl, 2018; Yasien, Abdul Nasir, & Shaheen, 2016), but
their impact on physiological response is still scarce.
The relationship between perceived stress and cortisol is unclear,
with reported disparities in the literature (González-Cabrera, Fernández-
Prada, Iribar-Ibabe, & Peinado, 2014; Murphy et al., 2010). Cortisol
maintains blood glucose, regulate metabolism, the inflammatory

* Corresponding author at: Laboratory of Stress Study, Department of Structural and Functional Biology, Biology Institute - University of Campinas (UNICAMP),
Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Monteiro Lobato Street, 255, 13083-862 Campinas, SP, Brazil.
E-mail address: doramgk@unicamp.br (D.M. Grassi-Kassisse).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110928
Received 24 February 2021; Received in revised form 9 April 2021; Accepted 10 April 2021
Available online 20 April 2021
0191-8869/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F. Borghi et al.
response, and immune function, in addition to mediating the stress
response (Hannibal & Bishop, 2014; Oakley & Cidlowski, 2013). As part
of the body’s fight-or-flight response, cortisol levels surge to provide the
energy and substrate necessary to cope with stress-provoking stimuli or
escape from danger (Hannibal & Bishop, 2014; Jankord & Herman,
2008). Cortisol secretion follows the circadian rhythm, peaking at
30–60 min after awakening and then gradually tapering off over the day
(González-Cabrera et al., 2014). The salivary form is routinely used as a
biomarker of psychological stress and related mental or physical disease
(Corbett, Mendoza, Baym, Bunge, & Levine, 2008; Hellhammer, Wust, &
Kudielka, 2009). The fluctuation of salivary cortisol in front of academic
examinations may be a reflection of the cortisol response upon exposure
to stressors and exposure of subjects, differing in their personality traits,
to identical stressors show individual differences in the physiological
response towards identical stressors, which may explain the medium-to-
low reactivity of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis
observed (González-Cabrera et al., 2014; Martinek, Oberascher-
Holzinger, Weishuhn, Klimesch, & Kerschbaum, 2003; Weekes et al.,
2006). Furthermore, it is not well established how the acute and chronic
effects of stress triggered by the exams period affect the production of
cortisol in this population in short term. Considering the stressful
environment provided by the university and the lack of studies in the
Brazilian context, this study aimed to evaluate and associate perceived
stress, resilience and salivary cortisol in pharmacy students during the
first four years of their undergraduate program during the exams period.
2. Materials & methods
2.1. Participants
Volunteers over 18 years of both sexes enrolled at the Pharmacy
undergraduate course at the University of Campinas (Unicamp) were
invited during class and poster for general inclusion criteria. Only stu­
dents between the 1st and 4th year were allowed to enroll in the protocol
because the 5th year students don’t attend classes inside the university
due to internships, making it difficult to control daily stressors. The
undergraduates signed the free and informed consent, declaring un­
derstanding of the procedures that would be performed during the
protocol. The study was conducted according to the guidelines laid
down in the Declaration of Helsinki and ethical approval was granted
from the Research Ethics Committee of the School of Medical Sciences/
University of Campinas (CAAE: 60640416.0.0000.5404).
2.1.1. Instruments
The participants answered three questionnaires that were validated
for the Portuguese language. The first questionnaire was a sociodemo­
graphic questionnaire to identify the volunteer’s sex, age, grade and
period. The Perceived Stress Scale from Sheldon Cohen is the most
widely used psychological instrument for measuring the perception of
stress (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983). It is a measure of the
degree to which situations in one’s life are appraised as stressful. Items
were designed to assess how unpredictable, uncontrollable, and over­
loaded respondents find their lives to be. We used the Brazilian version
with a 14-question version, which a total score is 56, with higher scores
indicating a greater level of stress (Luft, Sanches, Mazo, & Andrade,
2007). The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC10) is a ques­
tionnaire based on Connor and Davidson’s operational definition of
resilience, which is the ability to “thrive in the face of adversity”. Since
its development in 2003, the CD-RISC has been tested in several contexts
with a variety of populations. This work proposes to work with the
validated 10-item version of the measure validated for the Portuguese
language, called the CD-RISC10Brasil, which total score is 40, with
higher scores indicating a greater resilience (Lopes & Martins, 2011). All
data were collected and managed using REDCap© electronic data cap­
ture tools hosted at Unicamp.
2
Personality and Individual Differences 179 (2021) 110928
2.2. Salivary cortisol collection
Participants were instructed to collect by themselves saliva samples
at home, whose Sallivetes® were to be stored under refrigeration. The
cortisol rhythmicity was evaluated by saliva collections at five times of
the day: upon awakening (6 a.m.), 30 min after awakening (6:30 a.m.),
before lunch (12 a.m.), before dinner (6 p.m.) and before bedtime (11 p.
m.). They collected saliva on two different days: an exam day (stress
day) and a rest day, which could be before or after the academic exam
day. Part of the participants did not perform the five saliva collections
per day, but all collected data were considered. All samples were
collected during the final exam/test week at the end of the semester
(June and December).
2.3. Cortisol quantification
The samples were centrifuged at 2800 rpm, at 4 ◦ C and for 20 min
and analyzed using the commercial ELISA kit (Diagnostics Biochem
Canada Inc. - Ref CAN-C-290) as conducted by Madeira et al. (2019).
Total cortisol output was measured by area under the curve (AUC) for
the four saliva samples, excluding the 30 min after awakening point. The
results were expressed in nmol/L for each sample.
2.4. Statistical analysis
Data are presented as means ± SEM. The normality was confirmed by
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and then we performed paired or unpaired
Student’s t-test for parametric and Wilcoxon or Mann-Whitney for
nonparametric data when compared sexes. For comparisons between
years, we performed One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey parametric
data and Kruskal-Wallis followed by Dunn’s for nonparametric data.
Two-tailed Pearson’s partial correlation for parametric data and
Spearman’s partial correlation for nonparametric data was performed
for correlation between psychosocial stress and resilience. All statistical
analysis was done with Graph Pad Prism version 8.00 (Graph Pad
Software, San Diego, California, USA). The acceptance level of signifi­
cance was set at p < 0.05.
3. Results
A total of 79 undergraduate students completed the questionnaires
and collected saliva for cortisol measures, 18 men (22.8%) and 61
women (77.2%). Women were shorter than men and this population
exhibited a normal body mass index (BMI) for all categories analyzed.
The demographic characteristics of these undergraduate students are
listed in Table 1.
In accordance with the perceived stress and resilience scales, this
population scored high psychosocial stress and intermediate resilience.
Perceived stress was negatively correlated with resilience, thus high
resilience scores reflect low perceived stress scores. Men and women
scored high perceived stress and intermediate resilience. However,
women were less resilient than men and showed a significant negative
correlation for resilience and perceived stress. All years scored high
perceived stress and intermediate resilience with no difference between
them. Notwithstanding, the second year was the only one that did not
show a negative correlation between perceived stress and resilience. The
division per semester maintained the same pattern obtained by the total
population, but only June’s cohort exhibited a negative correlation be­
tween perceived stress and resilience (Table 2).
All volunteers exhibited cortisol rhythmicity during the day, with
higher values in the morning and a significant decrease throughout the
day on both days. The cortisol awakening response (CAR) in these vol­
unteers was preserved, with significantly higher values 30 min upon
awakening in the exam and rest day. On the exam day, the volunteers
exhibited higher cortisol levels in the last two collection points with a
significantly higher AUC when compared to the rest day (Fig. 1A/
F. Borghi et al. Personality and Individual Differences 179 (2021) 110928

Table 1 day (Table 3). The 2nd year exhibited higher cortisol levels at the first
Subject descriptive variables (mean ± SEM). point of the exam day when compared to the rest day, which caused the
Participants Age Body mass Height BMI (kg/ loss of CAR. They also showed higher cortisol levels before bedtime,
(n) (years) (kg) (cm) m2) reflecting a higher AUC in comparison to rest day (Fig. 2B/Table 3). The
22.38 ± 61.43 ± 166.6 ± 22.05 ± 3rd year presented CAR only on the exam day. However, they did not
Total 79
2.13 1.29 0.98 0.37 exhibit any significant difference in AUC between days (Fig. 2C/
Men 18
20.79 ± 69.51 ± 177.0 ± 22.20 ± Table 3). In the 4th year, the CAR was preserved on both days but there
0.51 3.26 1.83 1.00 was not any difference in AUC between them (Fig. 2D/Table 3).
22.88 ± 58.88 163.3 22.01
In search of possible differences between semesters, we analyzed
± ± ±
Women 61
2.80 1.19 0.74* 0.38
19.46 ± 63.43 ± 165.7 ± 23.08 ± June and December cohorts separately. Both cohorts exhibited cortisol
1st 23
0.46 2.83 1.89 0.86 rhythmicity in the exam and rest day. However, we found some inter­
2nd 25
20.12 ± 61.68 ± 167.5 ± 22.03 ± esting differences. June’s cohort preserved the CAR on both days, with
0.34 1.91 1.56 0.56
higher cortisol production in stress day before dinner, and a significant
20.82 ± 58.77 ± 166.7 ± 20.88 ±
3th 22
0.31 2.11 2.03 0.49 difference in AUC between days (Fig. 3A/Table 3). On the other hand,
21.13 ± 62.20 ± 166.5 ± 22.23 ± December’s cohort did not show the CAR on the exam day and the dif­
4th 9
0.35 5.32 3.39 1.34 ference in AUC between exam and rest day was lost, besides presenting
22.82 ± 62.03 ± 166.2 ± 22.39 ± lower AUC when compared to June in both situations (Fig. 3B/Table 3).
June 61
2.72 1.51 1.14 0.44
20.67 ± 59.42 ± 168.1 ± 20.96 ±
December 18 4. Discussion
0.28 2.49 1.97 0.60
*
p < 0.05 men vs. women.
The present study included a combination of self-report and physi­
ological measures to provide a more detailed depiction of the relation­
Table 2 ships among academic examinations and cortisol secretion. Students
Results of questionnaires according to sex, year or month (mean ± SEM). from the pharmacy course reported significantly high levels of perceived
stress despite reporting intermediate resilience. Although we find a
Sheldon Cohen CD-RISC10Brasil Correlation (r)
negative correlation between perceived stress and resilience, this result
Total 34.66 ± 0.80 21.43 ± 0.72 − 0.3758** may be due to lack of time for recreation or how they interpret stressful
Men 33.44 ± 1.47 25.23 ± 1.33 − 0.2996
Sex situations. The perception of stress is subjective and significantly related
Women 35.02 ± 0.95 20.53 ± 0.80* − 0.3964**
1st 35.91 ± 1.42 20.64 ± 1.47 − 0.4321** to the person’s perception of the stressor (Oken, Chamine, & Wakeland,
2nd 36.64 ± 1.62 22.68 ± 1.20 − 0.3419
Year
3th 31.45 ± 1.23 22.05 ± 1.25 − 0.4658**
4th 34.50 ± 2.26 19.13 ± 2.24 − 0,7823** Table 3
June 34.82 ± 0.99 21.11 ± 0.84 − 0.4517** Area under de curve (AUC) (mean ± SEM).
Month
December 34.44 ± 1.28 22.31 ± 1.47 − 0.0500
AUC (nmol/L)
*
p < 0.05 men vs. women.
** Rest 658.7 ± 36.78
p < 0.05 for correlation.
Total Stress 817.7 ± 38.66*
Rest 609.1 ± 72.48
Men
Table 3). When we evaluated differences between sex, men and women Sex
Stress 842.2 ± 89.88
exhibited cortisol rhythmicity but there were no differences between Rest 682.0 ± 44.77
Women
Stress 829.0 ± 44.77*
them in both days, except that women preserved the CAR while men did Rest 726.5 ± 54.40
not show this response (Fig. 1B/C). Men did not exhibit differences in 1st
Stress 900.8 ± 63.47*
cortisol release between exam and rest day (Fig. 1B/Table 3). Women Rest 571.8 ± 55.54
2nd
exhibited higher cortisol production before bedtime on the exam day Stress 781.1 ± 67.28*
Year
Rest 571.8 ± 55.54
and a significantly higher AUC when compared to the rest day (Fig. 1C/ 3th
Stress 653.6 ± 72.00
Table 3). Rest 513.3 ± 93.05
4th
When we evaluated the volunteers by course year, all years exhibited Stress 611.8 ± 103.5
cortisol rhythmicity in the rest day. However, the 1st and the 4th years June
Rest 733.9 ± 45.96
did not show this rhythmicity on the exam day, which was preserved Stress 903.6 ± 48.49*
Month
Rest 470.1 ± 36.30#
only in the 2nd and 3rd years (Fig. 2A–D). The 1st year preserved the December
Stress 614.5 ± 56.59#
CAR on both days and showed higher cortisol levels before dinner on the
*
exam day due to a further reduction on the rest day (Fig. 2A). The 1st p < 0.05 rest vs. stress.
#
p < 0.05 June vs. December on the same day.
year presented a significantly higher AUC when compared to the rest

Fig. 1. Cortisol (nmol/L) rhythmicity by saliva samples at five different times of the day for rest and stress day in pharmacy undergraduates. A) Total; B) Men; C)
Women. The setpoints are: upon awakening (6 a.m.), 30 min after awakening (6:30 a.m.), before lunch (12 a.m.), before dinner (6 p.m.) and before bedtime (11 p.
m.). Data are presented as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05 vs. 6 a.m. in the same group; #p < 0.05 Rest day vs. Stress day at the same setpoint.

3
F. Borghi et al. Personality and Individual Differences 179 (2021) 110928

Fig. 2. Cortisol (nmol/L) rhythmicity by saliva samples at five different times of the day for rest and stress day in different years. A) 1st year; B) 2nd year; C) 3rd year;
D) 4th year. The setpoints are: upon awakening (6 a.m.), 30 min after awakening (6:30 a.m.), before lunch (12 a.m.), before dinner (6 p.m.) and before bedtime (11 p.
m.). Data are presented as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05 vs. 6 a.m. in the same group; #p < 0.05 Rest day vs. Stress day at the same setpoint.

Fig. 3. Cortisol (nmol/L) rhythmicity by saliva samples at five different times of the day for rest and stress day in different end semesters. A) June; B) December. The
setpoints are: upon awakening (6 a.m.), 30 min after awakening (6:30 a.m.), before lunch (12 a.m.), before dinner (6 p.m.) and before bedtime (11 p.m.). Data are
presented as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05 vs. 6 a.m. in the same group; #p < 0.05 Rest day vs. Stress day at the same setpoint.

2015). The way how they interpreted this perception probably mediate
their resilience. Thus, if the individual does not interpret the academic
experience as very stressful, this could enable them to be resilient. This
could be a reflect that the fact that women are less resilient than men.
Women exhibit more sensitivity to specific life events than men,
becoming susceptible to interpreting more stressors that may result in
less resilience (Boardman, Blalock, & Button, 2008; Pinto et al., 2019;
Saleh, Camart, & Romo, 2017).
Undergraduates from pharmacy reported significantly higher levels
of perceived stress than the general population (Beall, DeHart, Riggs, &
Hensley, 2015), but the level of perceived stress in the present sample is
higher than those found in the literature. Marshall et al. evaluated the
perceived stress among third-year pharmacy students at a university in
the southeastern US and they scored 26.5, while Gallagher et al. eval­
uated students in a professional pharmacy degree in the United Kingdom
and get the score of 26.42 (Gallagher et al., 2014; Marshall, Allison,
Nykamp, & Lanke, 2008). Comparison of these data may indicate that
undergraduate pharmacy students from Brazil were more stressed than
the US and the UK, which even comparing different programs did not
show differences. The perceived stress scores evaluated in this study is
closer to the results obtained by medical undergraduate students from
Pakistan at the beginning of the semester (score = 30.84) and from Iran
(score = 32.02) (Borjalilu, Mohammadi, & Mojtahedzadeh, 2015; Shah,
Hasan, Malik, & Sreeramareddy, 2010). This suggests that the difference
in demographic, educational, and psychosocial factors may directly in­
fluence perceived stress in undergraduate students around the world.
The resilience scores for pharmacy undergraduates in Brazil were
lower than those reported in the literature. The average score for CD-
RISC10 reported in the literature ranges from 27.2 to 32.0 in un­
dergraduates from different countries (Campbell-Sills & Stein, 2007;
Chamberlain et al., 2016; Notario-Pacheco et al., 2011). Our results are
equivalent to those obtained by patients with posttraumatic stress dis­
order (PTSD) (score = 19.9–20.1) (Davidson et al., 2012). This score
equivalence may be a consequence of the preparation for the Brazilian
university entrance examinations. The process is fraught with inherent
uncertainties and insecurities to their performance, the demand of their
family, friends and society to obtain approval. Relationships and basic
activities, such as sleep and eating, are re-signified during this

4
F. Borghi et al.
preparation, generating situations very similar to those experienced by
patients with PTSD (Karatsoreos & McEwen, 2013).
The CAR is considered a reliable measure for the acute reagibility of
the HPA axis, which is a highly stress-responsive system (Fries, Det­
tenborn, & Kirschbaum, 2009). Although participants report high levels
of perceived stress, we demonstrate that this population is healthy, since
they maintain the rhythm of daily cortisol production and preserved and
intact CAR. However, some groups, such as men, did not present CAR.
This could be a variation effect of stress-related factors on the CAR
during stressful conditions. Some individuals develop a hypoactive HPA
axis when chronic stress persists over a long period, causing the absence
of this response (Fries et al., 2009; Fries, Hesse, Hellhammer, & Hell­
hammer, 2005). Reduced CAR also appears to be associated with post­
traumatic stress, fatigue, burnout, or exhaustion, whereas severely
stressful conditions that cannot be addressed by active behavioural re­
sponses may show the reverse effect (Chida & Steptoe, 2009; Steptoe &
Serwinski, 2016).
Changes in the diurnal cortisol rhythm represent an important in­
dicator of acute and chronic stress exposures and have been linked to
flatter cortisol decline (Joseph & Golden, 2017). In this study, cortisol
AUC tended to be higher on the exam day compared with the rest day.
These higher levels of cortisol on stressor days could reflect anticipation
of stressful events over the course of the day and would be consistent
with previous research showing associations among anticipation of
stressors and elevations in cortisol (Stawski, Cichy, Piazza, & Almeida,
2013). However, men did not show any difference in cortisol response
when rest day and exam day were compared, which may be a reflection
of their higher resilience scores when compared to women in this study.
This response may indicate that the AUC can be influenced by the
resilience of the volunteers, since it is related to amortize the feeling of
anticipation of stressors.
Day-to-day variation in ongoing stressors, such as differences in
work-related stress levels between weekdays and weekend days, can
mask long-term changes in cortisol rhythms (Adam, Hawkley, Kudielka,
& Cacioppo, 2006; Karlamangla, Friedman, Seeman, Stawksi, &
Almeida, 2013). Thus, as the course progresses, undergraduates adapt to
the exhaustive academic routine of classes and exams, resulting in few
fluctuations in AUC triggered by a stressor stimulus. This effect is also
observed during the academic year. McGregor et al. reported that the
cortisol AUC was slightly reduced at the end of the academic year in
university students (McGregor, Murphy, Albano, & Ceballos, 2016).
The first limitation of the present study is that the self-report mea­
sures considered the framework of an individual’s subjective perception
of stress and resilience. Other limitations include its small N, the
adherence due to the protocol for collection of salivary cortisol and some
consideration about the menstrual cycle phase in women. Furthermore,
it is important to consider that is a possibility that some salivary samples
could be contaminated with blood cortisol due to gum injuries in the
volunteers, reflecting higher values and errors, since salivary cortisol
represents only 5% of circulating blood cortisol.
5. Conclusions
In summary, these results demonstrate that there is a significant in­
crease in cortisol during the exams day among pharmacy un­
dergraduates, reflecting a significantly higher total cortisol output
(AUC) on exams day compared to the rest day. However, this difference
tends to disappear over the academic year or at the end of years. Stu­
dents reported higher scores of perceived stress and intermediated
resilience and women are less resilient than men. Furthermore, they
exhibited cortisol rhythmicity and preserved CAR, which were not
affected in a short period by the exams, indicating normal, healthy and
adaptive HPA-axis reactions to stressors. Therefore, this study high­
lighted that students can adapt to stressful situations due to a modula­
tion in the production of cortisol over the time.
5
Personality and Individual Differences 179 (2021) 110928
CRediT authorship contribution statement
All authors had full access to all the data in the study and take re­
sponsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data
analysis. Conceptualization, D.M.G.K.; Methodology, F.B., S.K.M.F. and D.
M.G.K.; Investigation, F.B., C.M.R.T., S.K.M.K., P.C.S. and A.L.S.; Formal
Analysis, F.B. and D.M.G.K.; Resources: D.M.G.K; Writing – Original Draft,
F.B. and D.M.G.K.; Writing – Review & Editing, F.B. and D.M.G.K.; Visu­
alization, F.B., S.K.M.F. and D.M.G.K.; Supervision, D.M.G.K.; Funding
Acquisition, D.M.G.K.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank all the volunteers. This study was sup­
ported by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Supe­
rior - Brasil (CAPES - Finance Code 001), Serviço de Apoio ao Estudante
da Unicamp (SAE-Unicamp), Fundo de Apoio ao Ensino, Pesquisa e
Extensão (Faepex-PRP), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cien­
tífico e Tecnológico (PIBIC/CNPq) and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa
do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP). Part of these results was presented in
the XXIV Congresso de Iniciação Científica da Unicamp (PIBIC) – 2016
and in the 17ª Congresso de Stress do ISMA-BR – 2017, as a research
reported poster. We state there are no competing financial interests in
the work described.
References
Adam, E. K., Hawkley, L. C., Kudielka, B. M., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2006). Day-to-day
dynamics of experience—Cortisol associations in a population-based sample of older
adults. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,
103(45). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0605053103.
Aftab, M. T., Naqvi, A. A., Al-karasneh, A. F., & Ghori, S. A. (2018). Impact of religiosity
on subjective life satisfaction and perceived academic stress in undergraduate
pharmacy students. Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences, 10(4), 192–198.
https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_65_18.
Beall, J. W., DeHart, R. M., Riggs, R. M., & Hensley, J. (2015). Perceived stress, stressors,
and coping mechanisms among doctor of pharmacy students. Pharmacy (Basel,
Switzerland), 3(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy3040344.
Boardman, J. D., Blalock, C. L., & Button, T. M. M. (2008). Sex differences in the
heritability of resilience. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 11(1), 12–27. https://
doi.org/10.1375/twin.11.1.12.
Borjalilu, S., Mohammadi, A., & Mojtahedzadeh, R. (2015). Sources and severity of
perceived stress among Iranian medical students. Iranian Red Crescent Medical
Journal, 17(10), Article e17767. https://doi.org/10.5812/ircmj.17767.
Byrd, D. R., & McKinney, K. J. (2012). Individual, interpersonal, and institutional level
factors associated with the mental health of college students. Journal of American
College Health, 60(3), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2011.584334.
Campbell-Sills, L., & Stein, M. B. (2007). Psychometric analysis and refinement of the
Connor-davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of
resilience. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 20(6). https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.20271.
Chamberlain, D., Williams, A., Stanley, D., Mellor, P., Cross, W., & Siegloff, L. (2016).
Dispositional mindfulness and employment status as predictors of resilience in third
year nursing students: A quantitative study. Nursing Open, 3(4), 212–221. https://
doi.org/10.1002/nop2.56.
Chida, Y., & Steptoe, A. (2009). Cortisol awakening response and psychosocial factors: A
systematic review and meta-analysis. Biological Psychology, 80(3), 265–278. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.10.004.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress.
Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385–396.
Corbett, B. A., Mendoza, S. P., Baym, C. L., Bunge, S. A., & Levine, S. (2008). Examining
cortisol rhythmicity and responsivity to stress in children with Tourette Syndromea.
Psychoneuroendocrinology, 33(6), 810–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
psyneuen.2008.03.014.
Davidson, J., Stein, D. J., Rothbaum, B. O., Pedersen, R., Szumski, A., & Baldwin, D. S.
(2012). Resilience as a predictor of treatment response in patients with
posttraumatic stress disorder treated with venlafaxine extended release or placebo.
Journal of Psychopharmacology, 26(6), 778–783. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0269881111413821.
DeRosier, M. E., Frank, E., Schwartz, V., & Leary, K. A. (2013). The potential role of
resilience education for preventing mental health problems for college students.
Psychiatric Annals, 43(12), 538–544. https://doi.org/10.3928/00485713-20131206-
05.
Dwyer, A. L., & Cummings, A. L. (2001). Stress, self-efficacy, social support, and coping
strategies in university students. Canadian Journal of Counselling, 35(3), 208–220.
Elias, H., Ping, W. S., & Abdullah, M. C. (2011). Stress and academic achievement among
undergraduate students in Universiti Putra Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 29, 646–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.288.
F. Borghi et al.
Färber, F., & Rosendahl, J. (2018). The association between resilience and mental health
in the somatically ill. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 115(38). https://doi.org/
10.3238/arztebl.2018.0621.
Fries, E., Dettenborn, L., & Kirschbaum, C. (2009). The cortisol awakening response
(CAR): Facts and future directions. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 72(1),
67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.03.014.
Fries, E., Hesse, J., Hellhammer, J., & Hellhammer, D. H. (2005). A new view on
hypocortisolism. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 30(10), 1010–1016. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.04.006.
Gallagher, C. T., Mehta, A. N. V., Selvan, R., Mirza, I. B., Radia, P., Bharadia, N. S., &
Hitch, G. (2014). Perceived stress levels among undergraduate pharmacy students in
the UK. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching & Learning, 6(3), 437–441. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.cptl.2014.02.004.
Gomathi, K. G., Ahmed, S., & Sreedharan, J. (2013). Causes of stress and coping
strategies adopted by undergraduate health professions students in a university in
the United Arab Emirates. Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal (Vol. 13,,
437–441.
González-Cabrera, J., Fernández-Prada, M., Iribar-Ibabe, C., & Peinado, J. M. (2014).
Acute and chronic stress increase salivary cortisol: A study in the real-life setting of a
national examination undertaken by medical graduates. Stress, 17(2). https://doi.
org/10.3109/10253890.2013.876405.
Hannibal, K. E., & Bishop, M. D. (2014). Chronic stress, cortisol dysfunction, and pain: A
psychoneuroendocrine rationale for stress management in pain rehabilitation.
Physical Therapy, 94(12). https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20130597.
Hellhammer, D. H., Wust, S., & Kudielka, B. M. (2009). Salivary cortisol as a biomarker
in stress research. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 34(2), 163–171. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.psyneuen.2008.10.026.
Jankord, R., & Herman, J. P. (2008). Limbic regulation of hypothalamo-pituitary-
adrenocortical function during acute and chronic stress. Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, 1148. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1410.012.
Joseph, J. J., & Golden, S. H. (2017). Cortisol dysregulation: The bidirectional link
between stress, depression, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, 1391(1), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13217.
Karatsoreos, I. N., & McEwen, B. S. (2013). Resilience and vulnerability: A
neurobiological perspective. F1000Prime Reports, 5, 13. https://doi.org/10.12703/
P5-13.
Karlamangla, A. S., Friedman, E. M., Seeman, T. E., Stawksi, R. S., & Almeida, D. M.
(2013). Daytime trajectories of cortisol: Demographic and socioeconomic
differences. Findings from The National Study of Daily Experiences.
Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
psyneuen.2013.06.010.
Kumar, B., Shah, M. A. A., Kumari, R., Kumar, A., Kumar, J., & Tahir, A. (2019).
Depression, anxiety, and stress among final-year medical students. Cureus, 11(3).
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.4257.
Lopes, V. R., & Martins, M.d. C. F. (2011). Factorial validation and adaptation of the
connor-davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC-10) for brazilians. Revistade Psicologiadel
Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 11(2), 36–50.
Luft, C. D. B., Sanches, S.d. O., Mazo, Z. M., & Andrade, A. (2007). Brazilian version of
the Perceived Stress Scale: Translation and validation for the elderly. Revista de
Saúde Pública, 41(4), 606–615. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-
89102007000400015.
Madeira, L. P., Borghi, F., Wilson, V. D., Souza, A. L., Pires-da-Rocha, M. C.,
Ferreira, H. A., … Schwartz, G. M. (2019). Perceived stress and salivary cortisol on
rock climbing. Translational Sports Medicine, 2, 370–375. https://doi.org/10.1002/
tsm2.104.
Personality and Individual Differences 179 (2021) 110928
Marshall, L. L., Allison, A., Nykamp, D., & Lanke, S. (2008). Perceived stress and quality
of life among doctor of pharmacy students. American Journal of Pharmaceutical
Education, 72(6).
Martinek, L., Oberascher-Holzinger, K., Weishuhn, S., Klimesch, W., &
Kerschbaum, H. H. (2003). Anticipated academic examinations induce distinct
cortisol responses in adolescent pupils. Neuro Endocrinology Letters, 24(6).
McGregor, B. A., Murphy, K. M., Albano, D. L., & Ceballos, R. M. (2016). Stress, cortisol,
and B-lymphocytes: A novel approach to understanding academic stress and immune
function. Stress, 19(2), 185–191. https://doi.org/10.3109/
10253890.2015.1127913.
Molinero, R. G., Zayas, A., González, P. R., & Guil, R. (2018). Optimism and resilience
among university students. International Journal of Developmental and Educational
Psychology, 1(1), 147–154.
Murphy, L., Denis, R., Ward, C. P., & Tartar, J. L. (2010). Academic stress differentially
influences perceived stress, salivary cortisol, and immunoglobulin-A in
undergraduate students. Stress, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.3109/
10253891003615473.
Notario-Pacheco, B., Solera-Martínez, M., Serrano-Parra, M. D., Bartolomé-Gutiérrez, R.,
García-Campayo, J., & Martínez-Vizcaíno, V. (2011). Reliability and validity of the
Spanish version of the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (10-item CD-RISC)
in young adults. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/
10.1186/1477-7525-9-63.
Oakley, R. H., & Cidlowski, J. A. (2013). The biology of the glucocorticoid receptor: New
signaling mechanisms in health and disease. The Journal of Allergy and Clinical
Immunology, 132(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2013.09.007.
Oken, B. S., Chamine, I., & Wakeland, W. (2015). A systems approach to stress, stressors
and resilience in humans. Behavioural Brain Research, 282. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.bbr.2014.12.047.
Pidgeon, A. M., Rowe, N. F., Stapleton, P., Magyar, H. B., & Lo, B. C. Y. (2014).
Examining characteristics of resilience among university students: An international
study. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2(11), 14. https://doi.org/10.4236/
jss.2014.211003.
Pinto, A.d. A., Claumann, G. S., Medeiros, P.d., Barbosa, R. M.d. S. P., Nahas, M. V., &
Pelegrini, A. (2019). Association between perceived stress in adolescence, body
weight and romantic relationships. Revista Paulista de Pediatria, 35(4), 422–428.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-0462/;2017;35;4;00012.
Saleh, D., Camart, N., & Romo, L. (2017). Predictors of stress in college students. Frontiers
in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00019.
Shah, M., Hasan, S., Malik, S., & Sreeramareddy, C. T. (2010). Perceived stress, sources
and severity of stress among medical undergraduates in a Pakistani Medical School.
BMC Medical Education, 10, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-2.
Stawski, R. S., Cichy, K. E., Piazza, J. R., & Almeida, D. M. (2013). Associations among
daily stressors and salivary cortisol: Findings from the National Study of Daily
Experiences. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
psyneuen.2013.06.023.
Steptoe, A., & Serwinski, B. (2016). Cortisol awakening response. In G. Fink (Ed.), Vol. 1.
Stress: Concepts, cognition, emotion, and behavior (pp. 277–283). Elsevier.
Sun, S. H., & Zoriah, A. (2015). Assessing stress among undergraduate pharmacy students
in University of Malaya. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, 49
(2), 99–105. https://doi.org/10.5530/ijper.49.2.4.
Weekes, N., Lewis, R., Patel, F., Garrison-Jakel, J., Berger, D. E., & Lupien, S. J. (2006).
Examination stress as an ecological inducer of cortisol and psychological responses
to stress in undergraduate students. Stress, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/
10253890601029751.
Yasien, S., Abdul Nasir, J., & Shaheen, T. (2016). Relationship between psychological
distress and resilience in rescue workers. Saudi Medical Journal, 37(7). https://doi.
org/10.15537/smj.2016.7.15004.