The coping strategies that human beings habitually employ in the management of conflict situations are key factors in order to be able to perform adequately in different contexts and will determine the way we relate to others and the changes we wish to achieve in order to improve our psychological and emotional well-being. Each person faces similar conflicts in a different way and they depend more on the emotions generated by the interpretation made by each subject, than on the scenario itself. In this sense, it was key the Transactional Theory of Stress and Cognitive Processes of Lazarus and Folkman (1986), which highlights the cognitive evaluation that each person makes of a supposedly stressful situation; while for some, these demands are perceived as threats, others see them as opportunities for conflict transformation, which helps them to overcome their objectives (López-Paz, 2021).

University students are, as a general rule, a vulnerable group, since they face numerous uncertainties related to various issues, such as academic success, future employment, mental health, social and personal relationships (Brown et al., 2024), and the way they manage these challenges can generate anxiety, stress or any other consequence that harms their well-being (Adasi et al., 2020; Castro-Sánchez et al., 2022; Rose et al., 2021). Addressing the coping strategies they use in these situations is to understand that this is one of the determining factors for students to be able to perform well in the academic context. The next step is for the university institution, due to the diversity of the student body, to be able to adapt and update all its human and organizational resources to facilitate mediation in the effective management of these conflicts (Alcover, 2023; Dayagbil, 2023; Gonzalo, 2022).

In the field of higher education, the study of the different coping strategies of students in conflict is often neglected, and the literature on this issue is scarce, since usually, in universities, the academic results of students tend to be prioritized over their general well-being (Lubis et al., 2024; Madhuri and Senel, 2021).

Studies on this topic associate coping styles with coping strategies, which, although they do not have the same meaning, complement each other. In general terms, historical and recent works on these two concepts (Gustems et al., 2020; Lazarus and Folkman, 1986; Morales, 2020; Popescu, 2023; Savage and Woloshyn, 2022; Sosa and Zubieta, 2010; Yavuz, 2020), allow defining coping styles as the more or less stable, consistent and habitual ways that an individual presents to face the stress produced by a scenario he/she considers difficult. It corresponds to a personality characteristic, since it defines the different reactions of the subject to these situations, and the use of one style or another is what will determine individual preferences in the use of different coping strategies. This last notion, inseparable from the previous one, is usually defined as the specific cognitive or behavioral actions (thoughts, sensations and actions) that a subject implements to face stressful or disturbing realities. Its denomination is very varied (methods, techniques) and, therefore, its conceptual limitation is less precise than styles.

Some research (Gustems et al., 2020; Morales, 2020; Savage and Woloshyn, 2022; Popescu, 2023, among others) shows that there are different strategies associated with general coping styles, organized as shown in Table 1.

On the other hand, different research (Halama and Bakosová, 2009; Morales and Trianes, 2010) indicates that individuals who habitually use problem-focused styles adapt better to situations and have a more effective functioning, so they can achieve greater success in the tasks they carry out. However, emotion-directed and avoidance styles are related to an increase in emotional and behavioral problems.

Although it is clear that the response to conflicts depends on each person and on each context and situation, there are some variables that seem to be totally related to the use of different types of coping and to the difference in their impact, depending on the diversity of the group (Lubis et al., 2024). Authors such as Pekrun (2017) and Nieto et al. (2024), define these variables as distal determinants, being factors that can modify emotional competences, when managing situations that they consider conflictive.

With reference to the gender variable, numerous studies establish differences in the use of these coping styles and strategies between men and women in the resolution of a conflict, although there is no unanimous agreement on this issue. Thus, Adasi et al. (2020); Luna and Laca (2014) or Lubis et al. (2024), indicate that women tend to use more emotion-focused strategies, which Frydenberg and Lewis (1996), call “non-productive” or “non-coping”; on the contrary, men tend to use those focused on the solution of the problem and the situation, facing the conflict (Reyes et al., 2017). However, Viñas et al. (2015) and Yelpaze (2020), highlight that males tend to ignore problems or keep them to themselves, employing passive coping styles. In this situation, authors such as Adasi et al. (2020) and Avalos and Trujillo (2021) highlight that the results that differentiate the use of coping between the sexes are not consistent, especially in adolescence.

As for the variable related to belonging to culturally diverse groups, studies show that the subjective evaluation that each subject makes of a situation will be conditioned, to a large extent, by the values and normative structure transmitted by each culture (Leiva, 2007). This factor, the cultural, as well as the biological, social and psychological, directly influences the different ways of coping with a stressful situation, since when contact is made between people from different cultures, in the same context and space, numerous psychosocial factors come into play and determine the responses to difficulties and the strategies and mechanisms for coping with them (Alemany-Arrebola et al., 2024; Sosa and Zubieta, 2010). Thus, the greater the cultural contrasts and the greater the influence of the different stereotypes on this issue, the more difficult the adaptation and the higher the level of stress, with these problems decreasing as cultural similarity increases.

First, the descriptive statistics of the Coping Strategies Inventory were analyzed; the data are shown in Table 5.

Next, the coping strategies were analyzed according to the sex variable (Table 6), the results indicate that there are significant differences, with women using Emotional Expression (EEM), Desiderative Thinking (PSD) and Social Support (APS) strategies, the effect size being small in all cases. On the contrary, men are the ones who use more Self-Criticism (AUC), Problem Avoidance (EVP) and Social Withdrawal (RES), being the effect size medium.

As for the variable religion professed by the university students, only the majority groups (Christian, Islamic and those responding no religion) were taken into account for the inferential analyses. The results indicate that there are only significant differences in the strategies of Social Support (APS) (F = 2.819; p = 0.024, ηp2 = 0.09, small effect size) and Problem Solving (REP) (F = 4.454; p = 0.001; ηp2 = 0.014, small effect size), being in both cases the students of Western origin, with Christian religion, the ones who use them the most. On the contrary, it is the student of Islamic religion who most uses the Problem Avoidance (PAD) (F = 2.456; p = 0.044, ηp2 = 0.04, small effect size) and Social Withdrawal (SR) strategies (F = 2.456; p = 0.044, ηp2 = 0.014, small effect size). Thus, the results indicate that university students of Catholic religion and of Western origin use more active strategies than students of Islamic religion, of Berber origin, who use more passive strategies (Berber, Denomination used by different researchers to refer to the cultural group of Muslim origin residing in Melilla (Ministry of Education, 2010)).

Subsequently, a MANCOVA was performed to find out the influence of sex and religion on coping strategies (Table 7), the results indicate that there are significant differences (F = 3.066; p = 0.026; ηp2 = 0.015). Thus, if the data are analyzed according to the subscales, the results indicate that there are differences only in the strategies: Problem Avoidance (F = 3.467; p = 0.016; ηp2 = 0.015; ηp2 = 0.037) and Social Withdrawal (F = 5.356; p = 0.026; ηp2 = 0.015 ηp2 = 0.080), both of which are considered passive styles in conflict resolution. Moreover, in relation to the former, it is men of Christian religion who obtain the highest scores versus women who profess no religion who obtain the lowest scores. As for the Social Withdrawal strategy, it is women who do not profess any religion who obtain the lowest means compared to Christian men. It can be said that Christian men use more passive strategies than agnostic/atheist women.

The aim of this research has been to know the coping strategies used by university students when faced with a conflict that may be a source of personal discomfort. The results indicate that there are differences in the problem-solving strategies used by university students, depending on the different variables studied. Thus, according to the data, women, when faced with conflicts, tend to express their emotions and release them in order to let off steam, set thoughts and desires in motion not to find themselves in that situation and seek the help of others to get out of the problem. Their most common strategies are those of emotional expression and social support, which correspond to the so-called active and more emotion-focused ones, coinciding with the work of Adasi et al. (2020), Luna and Laca (2014) and Lubis et al. (2024). However, the occurrence of desiderative thoughts in the face of a problematic situation, belonging to the passive and avoidance-focused ones, is another of the most employed strategies among the participating women. In either of the two classifications of responses to the resolution of a conflict, women tend to use strategies focused on emotion and avoidance, so they would have more difficulties in adapting to different situations and a lower rate of success in resolving the issue, as well as reflecting the presence of certain emotional problems and, therefore, this would harm their psychological well-being in the academic context.

According to this study, men tend to blame themselves for difficulties, reject thoughts about these situations or downplay their importance, and usually avoid sharing them with others, ignoring stressful situations. Self-criticism, avoidance and social withdrawal correspond to passive and avoidance-focused coping strategies. These results differ from those obtained by Luna and Laca (2014), in which they highlight that males tend to act actively and directly in the solution of problems, or the work of Cabras and Mondo (2018), who indicate that males tend to report the use of avoidance strategies in a higher percentage than females. In this line, Alemany-Arrebola et al. (2024) conclude that women and men face conflicts differently, thus girls use social support-seeking strategies and boys use conflict avoidance. Although, as indicated by Adasi et al. (2020) and Avalos and Trujillo (2021), the results that differentiate the use of coping between the sexes are not consistent, especially at the age of adolescence, so further research on this variable is needed, especially in multicultural contexts.

Thus, in this research we observed differences in coping strategies according to gender, which may be due to the traditional socialization patterns between men and women, the so-called gender socialization (Alemany-Arrebola et al., 2019), by which culture is divided into a feminine and a masculine one, which are recognized and assumed by people within a sociocultural context, being the main agents of transmission of these roles the family and school, although not the only ones. This process of transmission of cultural patterns associated with gender influences the way of coping with difficulties, with women using more emotion-focused coping strategies. These differences between men and women are supported by the different gender roles, since while men are educated in more aggressive and competitive attitudes, women are socialized towards a greater rejection of conflict and a greater bonding with others.

As for the culture variable, the data indicate that it is the students of European origin who most frequently use the strategy of seeking support in the face of a conflict (active strategy, centered on emotion); on the contrary, the habitual strategies of the group of Berber origin are, for the most part, avoiding problems and isolating themselves from others (passive, centered on avoidance). Neither group reflects the habitual use of effective skills to resolve difficulties, although what is most notable is the use that each group makes of the people around them to resolve the situation; those of European origin resort to the support of others (active) and those of Berber origin withdraw into themselves (passive), avoiding coping with the situation. This may be due to Alemany-Arrebola et al. (2024), Leiva (2007) and Sosa and Zubieta (2010), who note that, in multicultural contexts, the evaluation, attitude and different forms of communication and interaction that each subject uses in different situations is conditioned by the different patterns, the values transmitted by each culture and their own life experiences.

Finally, when analyzing the gender and culture variables together, we found that women of European origin use more frequently the search for resolution of their problems (active), the search for social support (active) and the expression of their emotions to others (active), in contrast to women of Berber origin, who respond more frequently with desiderative thoughts (passive). Men of European origin, on the other hand, use more passive strategies: self-criticism and problem avoidance. These results are in line with Viñas et al. (2015) and Yelpaze (2020), who conclude that men tend to ignore or reserve problems for themselves. Continuing with this idea, it is men of Berber background who score lower in both passive strategies (self-criticism and desiderative thinking) and active strategies (emotional expression and social support), so they do not implement strategies when faced with conflict resolution, neither active nor passive. Therefore, it can be observed that the gender differences found are accentuated by the culture factor; these results coincide with the research of Sánchez and Mesa (2002) who conclude that there are differences between the roles of women and men depending on the cultural group of origin. Although the group of Berber origin considers that the situation of women has changed a lot, the situation of differentiation between sexes remains.

To conclude:

There are differences in the use of coping strategies according to gender, with women using both active strategies (emotional expression and search for social support), focused on emotions, and passive strategies, with the use of desiderative thinking, which reflects the desire to change reality. In contrast, men use more passive strategies, both self-criticism and problem avoidance.

Finally, one of the limitations found in this study is the use of an empirical-analytical methodology, with the application of a scale to measure coping strategies and styles. This research should continue to deepen in this subject by working, in addition, with a qualitative methodology, collecting information with a focus group and in-depth interviews. With this mixed methodology, the coping styles and strategies of university students and their relationship with the emotional well-being/discomfort generated by conflictive situations will be studied in depth. In addition, it is necessary to include other variables that are necessary to work on this topic from a more holistic viewpoint, such as analyzing academic performance, emotional intelligence competencies, student resilience, anxiety in stressful situations, social skills, satisfaction of university students with the degree, among others. All these variables will provide a wide range of information that will help to analyze in more detail what external and internal factors explain the use of different coping strategies and styles and will help to implement, from the university counseling office or from the university mediation services, support and advice to students.