University Students Economic Situation During The Covid 19 Pandemic A Cross Sectional Study In Germany
Summary
A research article by Gewalt et al., published October 6, 2022 in PLOS ONE, reporting a cross-sectional study of university students' economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. The study used an online survey of 917 students in the Rhine-Neckar region, collected in May and June 2020. The abstract reports that 36.5% of students saw a decrease in income and 38.7% an increase in financial constraints. It states that students with regular income were less likely to experience financial distress (OR = 0.456), while part-time work was associated with higher financial distress (OR = 1.811). The article reviews literature on students' economic challenges, distress and gender-related differences, describes its methods and recruitment, and closes with a reference list.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“University Students Economic Situation During The Covid 19 Pandemic A Cross Sectional Study In Germany.”
Original at doi.org. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/university-students-economic-situation-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-a-0c11c09f5a/
, SHA-256 6f24a9b106dbd768e5c41da768e522588151f069a42e1f050a318f7afe25b5f1.Full text
PLOS ONE
RESEARCH ARTICLE
“University students’ economic situation
during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-
sectional study in Germany”
Sandra Claudia Gewalt ID1*, Sarah Berger ID2, Regina Krisam3, Johannes Krisam3,
Markus Breuer1
1 SRH University Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany, 2 Centre for Postgraduate Nursing Studies, University
of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand, 3 Institute of Medical Biometry, University Hospital Heidelberg,
Heidelberg, Germany
a1111111111
a1111111111 * sandra.gewalt@gmail.com
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused a major economic downturn that disproportionally affected
university students. This empirical research investigated effects and risk factors of the pan-
OPEN ACCESS demic on students’ economic situation with focus on financial distress and financial limita-
Citation: Gewalt SC, Berger S, Krisam R, Krisam J, tions. Data was collected using an online survey in May and June 2020 from students (n =
Breuer M (2022) “University students’ economic 917) enrolled at universities in Germany. 80.6% were enrolled in bachelor programs (n =
situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-
738), the mean semester was 3.8 (standard deviation (SD = 2.0) and students’ mean age
sectional study in Germany”. PLoS ONE 17(10):
e0275055. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. was 23.1 years (SD = 4.1). 51.8% (n = 472) were female and 47.4% (n = 432) male. 56.7%
pone.0275055 (n = 506) of students worked before the pandemic. More than one third reported a decrease
Editor: Rashid Mehmood, King Abdulaziz in income (36.5%; n = 334) and an increase in financial constraints (38.7%; n = 354). A multi-
University, SAUDI ARABIA variate logistic regression analysis showed that students with regular income were less likely
Received: April 14, 2022 to experience financial distress compared to those without (odds ratio (OR) = 0.456; p =
0.014). Furthermore, working part-time as associated with a higher financial distress com-
Accepted: September 10, 2022
pared to those without part-time employment (OR = 1.811; p = 0.003). Students who worked
Published: October 6, 2022
part-time before the pandemic also had a higher probability of increased financial restriction
Copyright: © 2022 Gewalt et al. This is an open (or constraint) compared to those who did not work part-time (OR = 2.094; p < 0.001). Uni-
access article distributed under the terms of the
versity students were disproportionally affected by the economic consequences of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and COVID-19 pandemic, which increased students’ economic uncertainty. To offset such prob-
reproduction in any medium, provided the original lems, financial aid schemes for students need to be made available to alleviate distress and
author and source are credited. to allow students to focus on their studies but should not compound problems by leading to
Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are financial hardship at a later point in time.
within the paper and its Supporting Information
files.
Funding: The author(s) received no specific
funding for this work. Background
Competing interests: The authors have declared The COVID-19 pandemic caused a major economic downturn. Vulnerable groups, including
that no competing interests exist. university students, were especially affected by the black swan event. Public health measures,
Abbreviations: AUC, Area under the curve; BAföG,
including temporary lockdowns, caused a standstill of non-essential activities. A multitude of
Bundesausbildungsförderungsgesetz (Federal business processes were halted and contact restrictions, strictly limiting the number of people
Education and Training Assistance Act); CI, per gathering, were introduced. Closures of educational institutions internationally impacted
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 1 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
Confidence interval; COVID-19, Coronavirus nearly 70% of the world’s student population [1]. Imposed measures to limit COVID-19 trans-
disease 2019; IQR, Interquartile range; IT, mission restricted the freedom of individuals in unprecedented ways. Public health measures
Information technology; KfW, Kreditanstalt für
restricting individual freedoms and economic uncertainty are two key factors linked to adverse
Wiederaufbau (KfW Banking Group); MINT,
Mathematics, Informatics, Natural Sciences and economic situations for university students.
Technology; OR, Odds ratio; SD, Standard
deviation; VIF, Variance inflation factor.
Students’ economic challenges during the current pandemic
The pandemic driven economic downturn created economic challenges for university students
due to a decrease or even loss of income. A recent review found that social distancing, self-iso-
lation and travel restrictions led to a loss of various jobs, especially in the service industry [2].
Some college and university students lost their part-time jobs when regional businesses were
closed [3]. A study of the National Bureau of Economic Research with more than 10,000
respondents highlighted that roughly 50% of respondents stated income and wealth losses [4].
Total consumer spending decreased 31 log percentage points, with travel and clothing seeing
the largest decreases. The introduction of lockdowns may have caused much of the decline in
employment in subsequent months, as well as a decline in consumer spending [4]. A popula-
tion-based sample of students in New York city found that most students reported a loss of
household income and half reported worries about losing housing [5]. Household spending
was reported to have declined by 40 to 50% during the COVID-19 pandemic and income
reductions have become much more common, with a mean decline of around 30% [6]. Low-
wage workers experienced much larger job losses that lasted for several months compared to
high-wage workers [7]. According to the Germany National Association for Student Affairs,
the majority of students in Germany were employed prior to the onset of the pandemic to
cover living costs and university fees: 64% of all students represented in the study (i.e. before
the pandemic) were employed, whereas only 5% were de facto full-time employees and 34%
were working one to two days per week [8]. An earlier study found that 66% of undergraduate
students worked during their studies; for half of them the part-time job was necessary to sup-
port themselves financially [9]. Most performed simple temporary jobs such as working as a
waiter, taxi driver, sales assistant, or clerical assistant, 28% worked as a student research assis-
tant and 11% as a tutor [8]. Precarious employment has been identified as risk factor for poor
mental health of young individuals [10]. A recently published study on Spanish workers identi-
fied the need for interventional and preventive programs targeting mental health in economic
crisis scenarios such as the current pandemic and highlighted the relevance of introducing
social and income policies to prevent mental health problems [11]. Equally, recent findings
from Argentina argue that countries’ policies should be supportive to workers facing economic
hardships and unemployment to counterbalance the negative impact on mental health caused
by the current pandemic [12]. With many temporary jobs (for example in the service industry)
being lost, students were likely to have experienced negative financial effects. During the pan-
demic, evidence suggests an elevated number of students may have experienced economic
hardship due to decreased or loss of income.
Despite such negative financial impacts on students during the pandemic, they still had to
meet their living costs and fees associated with their studies. According to the Federal Ministry
of Education and Research in Germany, the cost of food, accommodation, clothing and cul-
tural activities were above the European Union average [13]. Predominant cost drivers
included living costs, university tuition fees, semester fees and health insurance. Monthly liv-
ing costs typically included rent, food, clothing, books, telephone, semester and tuition fees
and were identified to add up to 867 Euro on average [13]. The German consumer price index
rose by 0.5% on annual average in 2020 compared with 2019 [14]. Yet, in November 2021,
compared to the same month a year earlier, it rose by 5,2% [15]. Semester and tuition fees still
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 2 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
had to be covered by university students. These varied considerably. In the Rhine-Neckar
region in Germany, public universities (of applied sciences) charged approximately 350–380
Euro per semester. Private institutions charged annual university fees of approximately 7,800
Euro for a bachelor’s degree and around 9,600 Euro for a master’s degree. Universities (of
applied sciences) offering co-delivered apprenticeship education programs charged roughly
365 Euro per annum, whilst the employer provided an annual income of about 18,000 Euro.
On-going living costs and tuition expenses during the COVID-19 pandemic compounded
financial challenges in the vulnerable group of university students many of whom were dealing
with income decreases or loss at the same time.
Students’ distress during the current pandemic
Whilst the COVID-19 pandemic posed an immediate risk to university students’ short and
long-term physical health [16], there is also evidence that it aggravated students’ stress levels.
Negative stress can occur when environmental demands overwhelm or surpass individuals’
coping capacities [17]. Poor mental health can be linked to rapid social change, stressful work
requirements, social exclusion, unhealthy routines and physical illness [18]. Findings of an
analysis of representative data of active members of the workforce of six European nations
indicated a significant relationship between immediate economic hardships during the
COVID-19 lockdown and feelings of depression and anxiety [19]. Furthermore, underprivi-
leged college students were more likely to show mental health symptoms such as anxiety, low
self-esteem and depression [20]. Recent studies revealed increased stress levels and anxiety in
Indian medical students due to excessive responsibilities and insufficient resources to counter-
balance during the current pandemic [21]. A cross-country comparative study with Indone-
sian, Taiwanese and Thai university students revealed the need for special attention to Thai
university students due to observed high levels of anxiety as well as the demand for a good sup-
port system for university students [22]. Economic burden, identified via self-reported finan-
cial problems, was associated with adverse mental health outcomes in Thailand [23].
Continuous socio-economic pressures, such as those caused by the pandemic, potentially
posed a risk to students’ mental health and well-being. Research on university students in Ger-
many found that pandemic-related social restrictions caused a decrease in wellbeing in the
majority of students [24]. A population-based study identified that financial hardship, unem-
ployment and major life events were strongly and independently related to mental health
symptoms [25]. High levels of food and housing insecurity were the strongest predictors of stu-
dents’ anxiety and depression [5]. A rapid review on the effects of the pandemic on mental
health identified mostly negative psychological effects, including post-traumatic stress symp-
toms and the fear of financial loss [26]. A study on the needs of students in the United States of
America showed that students faced increasing housing and food insecurity, economic hard-
ship, a lack of social-cultural connectedness and sense of belonging as well as uncertainty
about the future [27]. Furthermore, students lost jobs, internships or job offers and some fore-
casts indicated this would also impact earning potential later in life (at age 35) [28]. Students
with lower income were 55% more likely than their higher-income peers to have to delay grad-
uation due to COVID-19 [28]. Students in their final year were concerned about the job mar-
ket that they would be entering [3]. The COVID-19 pandemic created multiple challenges for
students including both health-related and economic stressors.
Gender-related differences
During the COVID-19 pandemic, women generally reported more negative emotional experi-
ences than their male counterparts [29]. Although it was observed that men were more likely
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 3 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
to experience negative health-related consequences from COVID-19, women reported higher
levels of anxiety and more negative expectations compared to men [29]. A recent study on
COVID-19 and its effects on university students’ mental health in Switzerland found that
female students showed to have poorer mental health after controlling for different levels of
social inclusion and pandemic-related stressors [30]. These results were not surprising, as
research on gender differences in relation to stress showed that women experienced more
stress than men [31]. A study of stress among medical students related to an outbreak of Mid-
dle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) identified that female students had a significantly
higher mean stress level than male students [32]. Moreover, a recent longitudinal study of the
mental health of Chinese adults found that female sex was associated with higher psychological
effects [33]. A study on suicide rates during the current pandemic showed an increase during
the second wave in 2020, with a larger increase among females [34]. Researchers investigating
gender, debt and college drop-out rates found that both women and men experienced a slower,
or even decreasing, likelihood of graduation when bearing large amounts of debt [35]. Yet,
recent research from North America found that women were more optimistic about the finan-
cial consequences of the pandemic than men [29]. Research findings indicate gender-related
differences in experiences of mental health stress and financial difficulties and this is consistent
in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Through a literature search, it was determined that there were no published studies on the
effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the financial situation and distress of students in the
Rhine-Neckar region in Germany. Similarly, no studies were available from on students’ gen-
der-specific differences in the Rhine-Neckar region in Germany. Therefore, this study exam-
ined how the COVID-19 pandemic affected university students’ economic situation with focus
on financial distress and financial constraints and sought to analyse changes in the students’
economic situation, with respect to income and consumption.
Methods
This empirical study was based on a cross-sectional study design using an online survey tool
(taking less than five minutes to complete). Data was collected anonymously via a neutral and
independent service provider. Each IP (internet protocol) address, could only access the online
survey once. This measure prevented double entry from the same IP address. Duplicate entries
were avoided by preventing participants with the same IP address to access the survey twice.
No cookies were used to assign a unique user identifier to a participant’s computer. Receiving
only the responses by the external service provider, there is no information on the view rate
(ratio of unique survey visitors/unique site visitors) or on the participation rate (ratio of
unique visitors who agreed to participate/unique first survey page visitors). There was no log
file analysis for identification of multiple entries. Data collection was undertaken over five
weeks from the end of May to the end of June 2020 in the Rhine-Neckar region in Germany.
The lockdown in Germany reached its peak in March and April 2020. However, everyday life
remained significantly affected by restrictions in May and June 2020.
Recruitment
The study population in the Rhine-Neckar region was selected using convenience sampling.
The Rhine-Neckar region in Germany is special as it includes a high density of student popula-
tion. It combines the cities Heidelberg, Mannheim and Ludwigshafen. All cities dispose of
public and private universities (of applied sciences). The respective registry offices of the eight
universities (of applied sciences) were contacted and asked to send an invitation email to all
currently enrolled students. The email contained a brief description of the purpose of the
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 4 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
survey and an electronic link. A flyer was created and attached to this email. In addition, an
invitation with an overview of the survey and a link to the survey was published on social
media channels of the universities (of applied sciences) and the student councils for each uni-
versity. In a second wave of recruiting, a reminder was sent via social media channels that
were accessed by students in the Rhine-Neckar region. Follow-up data was not collected.
There was no number of questionnaire items per page or number of pages as participants
could scroll down to access further questions. A moving bar on the side of the online survey
indicated the progression within the survey. The survey was designed as open survey which
allowed participation without password protection. There was no initial contact with study
participants via the internet prior to a participation. Participants were not able to review or
change their answers (eg. via a back button). We did not apply randomization of items or
adaptive questioning. There was no timeframe that was used as a cut-off point.
Participants
Students enrolled at one of the eight universities as well as universities of applied sciences in
the three cities of the Rhine-Neckar region, including Heidelberg, Mannheim and Ludwigsha-
fen, were recruited. The overarching goal was to involve the entire student body at the eight
universities and universities of applied sciences in the Rhine-Neckar region. Inclusion criteria
were enrolment at one of the eight universities or universities of applied sciences in the Rhine-
Neckar region and basic knowledge of English. The invitation to fill out the survey and the sur-
vey itself were only given in English. Participation in the study was voluntary and could be
ended at any time without risk of negative consequences. As an incentive, five gift vouchers
with a value of 10 euros per voucher were randomly drawn and given to participants.
Variables
The primary aim of this survey was to investigate short-term COVID-19-related effects on stu-
dents, resulting in two primary outcomes, financial distress and financial limitations
Due to the challenges in measuring mental health, financial distress stress levels reported by
university students were measured from zero to ten on the basis of the question "Select your
level of negative stress (. . .) 0 = no stress, 5 = medium stress, 10 = highest level of stress”. To
compare students who reported having no to low financial distress (from 0 to 4) with students
who reported having moderate to high financial distress (from 5 to 10), a binary variable was
derived.
Increased financial limitations were assessed by asking the question “How much have your
financial limitations increased since the COVID-19 pandemic?”. This outcome was captured
on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “not at all”, “very little”, “a little”, “much”, and “very
much”. Again, to compare students who reported having no increased financial limitations
(“not at all”) with students who reported at least “very little” increased financial limitations, a
binary variable was derived. In order to describe the economic situation during the COVID-
19 pandemic, participants were asked for information with regard to
• income changes,
• stress due to difficulties in paying rent,
• decrease in weekly spending,
• plans to decrease spending in the next weeks or months,
• change in spending money on healthcare,
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 5 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
• postponing purchases to the future.
Potential confounder variables were also collected. These were gender, age, university loca-
tion, field of study (business, health, information technology, MINT (mathematics, computer
science, science and technology / technical) and others), degree, semester, education, grade
point average, income and employment before the pandemic were collected.
Data sources/measurement
The self-designed questionnaire was established based on a comprehensive literature review
and was designed striving for a maximum of content validity. Data was collected on students’
financial situation as negative stress. Students could select among closed-ended questions
related to the location of their university (of science), degree, study subject, semester, age, gen-
der, financial parameters including income and purchasing behaviour before and after the
onset of the pandemic as well as levels of distress and postponement of purchases.
Bias
Selection bias was minimized by contacting registry offices of the eight universities (of applied
sciences) and asking them to send an invitation email to all currently enrolled students. Yet,
due to conducting the survey in English language only, a selection bias might have occurred.
This might have caused a higher participation in international students and those who perceive
to have a good command of English.
Sample size
We expected that about 900 participants would return a fully answered online questionnaire.
With this sample size at hand, we expected that we could develop a logistic regression model
that could provide us with adequately precise 95% confidence intervals for the odds ratios of
predictor variables of financial distress and financial limitations, as well as an adequately pre-
cise 95% confidence interval for the area under the curve (AUC) to measure the overall predic-
tive strength of our model. Assuming that between 25%-75% of all respondents were having at
least a moderate level of financial distress/at least very little increased financial limitations, the
maximal width of the 95% confidence interval of the AUC with a sample size of 900 respon-
dents amounts to 8.7 percent points (assuming the lowest possible AUC of 0.5), representing
an adequately precise estimation of the AUC of the logistic regression models. The sample size
calculation was done using the software PASS v16.0.12.
Statistical analysis
All continuous variables were summarized by number of non-missing values, mean, standard
deviation, median, first quartile (25th percentile), third quartile (75th percentile), minimum
and maximum. For binary and categorical variables, absolute and relative frequencies were
provided. The number of missing responses, if any, was reported as a separate category. We
checked responses for completeness after the questionnaires had been submitted. Percentages
were based on all non-missing values (= 100%). In order to examine differences between stu-
dents with moderate to high stress compared to students with no or low stress, univariable sta-
tistical tests were conducted with regard to differences in the distribution of risk factors. Using
t-tests for continuous variables, Mann-Whitney u-tests for ordered categorical variables or
chi-square tests for categorical variables. Analogously, univariable statistical tests were used to
identify differences in risk factor distributions for students with no increased financial limita-
tions compared to students with at least “very little” financial limitations. Furthermore, the
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 6 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
association between the primary and secondary economic outcomes was investigated by
means of univariable statistical tests. Also, gender-based differences with regard to economic
outcomes were evaluated using univariable statistical tests. Besides the univariable analyses,
multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to estimate the influence of risk factors on
the two primary economic outcomes. All relevant variables were included in the model and no
variable selection was done by the model. No weighting of items or propensity score methods
were used. Odds ratios were calculated together with 95% confidence intervals and p-values.
The AUC was calculated with a 95% confidence interval as well to estimate the predictive qual-
ity of the model. Possible multicollinearity was checked by determining variance inflation fac-
tors (VIFs), for which we assumed that a VIF larger than 5 was problematic [36]. No subgroup
analyses were done. Missing values were not imputed. No sensitivity analyses were done. Sta-
tistical analysis was done via R (version 4.2.1, http://r-project.org), where the pROC package
[37] was used for determining AUCs, and the car package [38] was used to determine VIFs. P-
values 0.05 were regarded as statistically significant. Due to the exploratory nature of the
study, derived p-values could only be interpreted descriptively.
The completed the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epi-
demiology) Checklist and CHERRIES (Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys)
is attached as S1 Checklist.
Ethics approval
Ethical approval for the research project "Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on students of
the Rhine-Neckar district with a focus on health, finances and learning. A cross-sectional
study was obtained by the Joint Ethics Committee of the Heidelberg University of Education
and the SRH University Heidelberg.
Results
Participants
1.245 participants started and 917 participants completed the survey. Thus, the completion
rate was 73.65%. The collective of 917 students who completed the survey in full, was used for
statistical analysis. Among those 917, questions which were not answered, were marked as
missing. The total of participants who were asked to fill the self-administered online survey is
not known as the invitation to participate was sent to registry offices of the eight universities
(of applied sciences) who sent invitation emails to all currently enrolled students. Due to data
protection of students’ identity, this was the procedure of choice. Information on reasons for
study drop-out or non-participation was not collected.
Baseline demographics
27.0% (n = 247) of students were enrolled in Heidelberg, 25.1% (n = 229) in Ludwigshafen and
47.9% (n = 438) in Mannheim (914 of 917 respondents). Most students (80.6%; n = 738) were
enrolled in a bachelor’s degree. 15.9% (n = 146) were enrolled in a master’s degree, 1.0%
(n = 9) pursued a state examination and 2.5% (n = 23) were doctoral students (916 of 917
respondents). As there were only few doctoral students and students pursuing state examina-
tion, these were excluded from the univariable and multivariable analyses, which focussed
only on Bachelor and Master students. 42.8% (n = 392) of students were pursuing business
studies, with MINT / technical 16.7% (n = 153), information technology 16.3% (n = 149) and
health 16.2% (n = 148). The “others” category comprised 8.1% (n = 74) of students (916 out of
917 respondents). Mean semester was 3.8 (SD = 2.03; 896 out of 917 respondents). Students’
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 7 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
mean age was 23.1 years (SD = 4.08; 902 out of 917 respondents). 51.8% (n = 472) identified as
female and 47.4% (n = 432) identified as male. Only 0.9% (n = 8) students identified as diverse
(912 out of 917 respondents), which lead us to exclude these students from the univariable and
multivariable analyses, focusing only on students who identified themselves as male or female.
Students’ economic situation prior to the pandemic
Prior to the onset of the pandemic in Germany, 38.8% (n = 324) had a regular income from a
(student) job. 12.0% (n = 100) received regular financial support from their family. 2.8%
(n = 23) received income from the student loan scheme “BAföG” Bundesausbildungsförder-
ungsgesetz, i.e. Federal Education and Training Assistance Act, Germany’s Federal Study Assis-
tance, 8.4% (n = 70) had regular income from a loan (from a commercial bank). 8.4% (n = 70)
declared they had no income and lived off savings (834 out of 917 respondents). Details can be
found in Table 1 of the S1 File. For the univariable and multivariable analyses, the income was
simplified to a variable with three categories (no income/ irregular income/ regular income).
Most students, namely 56.7% (n = 506), held a part-time job prior to the pandemic (see
Table 2 in S1 File). Almost one in five students worked more than 20 hours per week (18.8%;
n = 168; 893 out of 917 respondents). This can be explained by students who were enrolled in
dual study apprenticeship programs, allowing them to alternate study and work in their trade
or occupation.
Outcome data
Mean levels of distress related to financial difficulties were 2.7 (SD = 3.20). A bar plot illustrat-
ing the self-perceived stress distribution is shown in Fig 1.
A total of 274 (30.1%) of participants reported having moderate to high stress (from 5 to
10). Participants reported changes in their economic situation due to the COVID-19 pan-
demic. 287 (31.3%) respondents reported at least a little increase in financial limitations. More
than one third (36.5%; n = 334) declared their income had decreased due to the pandemic. Of
these, 9.7% (n = 89) reported their income had fallen very sharply. More than one third, 38.6%
(n = 354) said their financial constraints had soared and 7.2% (n = 66) reported they had
soared significantly (916 out of 917 respondents). Details are found in Table 1.
In terms of students’ consumption, 82.3% (n = 753) reduced their weekly spending (see
Table 1). 13.3% (n = 122) declared that they had significantly reduced their weekly expendi-
tures (916 out of 917 respondents).
Changes in students’ consumption were mainly due to lower spending in the categories
“holidays”, “restaurants”, “transportation” and “fashion” (see Table 2): With 87.0% (n = 793)
the vast majority spent less on holidays (911 of 917 respondents). 82.6% (n = 752) spent less on
Table 1. Change in financial limitations, income, and weekly spending.
How much have your financial limitations How much did your income decrease during How much have you decreased your weekly
increased since the COVID-19 pandemic? n (%) the COVID-19 pandemic? n (%) spending due to the current pandemic? n (%)
very 66 (7.2%) 89 (9.7%) 122 (13.3%)
much
much 71 (7.8%) 74 (8.1%) 249 (27.2%)
a little 150 (16.4%) 112 (12.2%) 300 (32.8%)
very 67 (7.3%) 59 (6.4%) 82 (9.0%)
little
not at all 562 (61.4%) 581 (63.5%) 163 (17.8%)
missing 1 2 1
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055.t001
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 8 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
Fig 1. Distress due to financial difficulties.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055.g001
restaurants (910 of 917 respondents). 66.5% (n = 606) spent less on transportation by car or
train (911 of 917 respondents). More than half of the students (55.5%, n = 507) reported
spending less on fashion, including clothing and shoes, since the start of the pandemic.
A rather stable consumption pattern was found in the categories “healthcare”, “supermar-
kets” and the “subscription of online media” (including newspaper and entertainment ser-
vices): Students’ healthcare consumption (including medicine, consultation and treatment)
remained rather unchanged: 73.6% (n = 673) spent the same amounts (915 of 917 respon-
dents). While every second student (50.2%; n = 459) had spent the same amount in supermar-
kets since the start of pandemic, a third (34.5%; n = 316) increased spending in supermarkets
(915 of 917 respondents). Expenditure on subscribing to online media (including newspaper
and entertainment services) remained the same for most students (76.1%; n = 695).
In terms of future purchases, every second student (50.3%; n = 459) reported postponing
purchases to a future date due to the pandemic. One in five students (21.8%; n = 199) reported
postponing any purchase that was not strictly necessary, such as food and grocery shopping
(913 out of 917 respondents). Details can be found in Table 3 in the S1 File.
More than half of the respondents (54.8%; n = 495) wanted to spend less in the next few
weeks or months (902 of 917 respondents, see Table 4 in the S1 File).
Table 2. Change in spending.
Do you spend more or less money on/in . . . since the COVID-19 pandemic? n (%) more same less missing
Holidays 7 (0.8%) 111 (12.2%) 793 (87.0%) 6
Restaurants 48 (5.3%) 110 (12.1%) 752 (82.6%) 7
Transportation by car/ train 68 (7.5%) 237 (26.0%) 606 (66.5%) 6
Fashion (clothing and shoes) 98 (10.7%) 308 (33.7%) 507 (55.5%) 4
Healthcare (medicine, consultation, treatment, etc.) 74 (8.1%) 673 (73.6%) 168 (18.4%) 2
Supermarkets 316 (34.5%) 459 (50.2%) 140 (15.3%) 2
Subscription of online media 133 (14.6%) 695 (76.1%) 85 (9.3%) 4
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055.t002
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 9 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
Almost every second student (45.3%; n = 412) planned to give up holidays in 2020. 29.0%
(n = 264) indicated this was due to health-related risks of the pandemic and 16.3% (n = 148) to
save money (910 of 917 respondents).
Perceptions of the future showed a predominance of negative expectations. The onset of the
COVID-19 pandemic was a period of significant change and uncertainty for students. More
than half of the study participants, 54.8% (n = 500), believed that the pandemic would have
negative effects on internships, job search and employment opportunities in the future.
Among these, 15.6% (n = 142) expected severe negative consequences and 39.2% (n = 358)
expected negative consequences (913 of 917 respondents).
Risk factors for students’ distress
Risk factors for students with no or little negative stress were compared to students with mod-
erate to highest levels of stress. Significant differences in the comparison of students with mod-
erate to highest distress and students with no or little distress were identified linked to the field
of studies. 50.0% (n = 137) of students enrolled in business-related studies reported moderate
to highest levels of distress and 39.7% (n = 252) reported no or little stress. In health- and
MINT/Technical-related subjects, the majority of students reported no or little stress level
(17.5% vs. 13.5% and 19.2% vs. 9.9%; p < 0.001; chi square test). Details can be found in
Table 3.
A comparison of students with moderate to highest distress and students with no or little
distress showed that those who worked part-time before the onset of the pandemic reported
higher stress (65.7%; n = 178) compared to those who did not work part-time before the onset
of the pandemic (34.3%; n = 93; p < 0.001; chi square test). Significant differences were identi-
fied in students who reported their financial limitations had increased with the pandemic.
71.5% (n = 196) of those with higher distress reported increased financial limitations com-
pared to those with no or little stress (24.3%; n = 154; p < 0.001; chi square test).
Association between students’ distress and secondary economic outcomes
In terms of participants’ change in income, significant differences were identified. Students
reporting that their income had decreased, had significantly higher distress compared to those
whose income did not decrease. This was especially notable among students whose income
had decreased very much (29.9%; n = 82 vs. 1.1%; n = 7) or much (16.4%; n = 45 vs. 4.4%;
n = 28; p < 0.001; Wilcoxon test). Further significant differences were identified in comparing
students’ stress levels and changes in spending. Students with moderate to high levels of
Table 3. Stress level due to financial difficulties.
Field of studies Moderate to highest stress level (n = 274) n No or little stress level (n = 636) n P-value
(%) (%)
business 137 (50.0%) 252 (39.7%) <0.001
health 37 (13.5%) 111 (17.5%)
IT 43 (15.7%) 106 (16.7%)
MINT/ 27 (9.9%) 122 (19.2%)
technical
other 30 (10.9%) 44 (6.9%)
missing 0 1
IT: Information technologies; MINT: mathematics, informatics, natural sciences and technology
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055.t003
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 10 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
negative stress decreased their weekly spending (very) much compared to students with no or
little negative stress.
Planned decrease in spending in the near future (weeks or months) was reported signifi-
cantly more often by students with higher stress (very) much (35.9%; n = 98 vs. 6.7%; n = 42;
p < 0.001; Wilcoxon test). Also, students with moderate to high distress reported significantly
more (strong) negative consequences of the pandemic on their internship, job search and
employment opportunities (74.0%; n = 202 vs. 46.3%; n = 294; p < 0.001; Wilcoxon test).
Risk factors for students’ increase in financial limitations
In terms of students’ increase in financial limitations, no significant difference was found
between male and female students (p = 0.509; chi square test). However, relevant differences
relating to students’ field of studies were identified. Students who reported that financial limi-
tations had increased were significantly more often enrolled in business-related subjects com-
pared to other subjects (50.0%; n = 177; p < 0.001; chi square test). Details can be found in
Table 4.
Students who worked part-time before the beginning of the pandemic reported signifi-
cantly more often an increase in financial limitations due to the pandemic compared to those
who did not work part-time (67.0%; n = 233 vs. 33.0%; n = 115; p < 0.001; chi square test). Stu-
dents who reported an increase in financial limitations due to COVID-19 disclosed signifi-
cantly more often moderate to highest stress (56.0%; n = 196) compared to those with no or
little stress (44.0%; n = 154; p < 0.001; chi square test). Students with increased financial limi-
tations reported significantly more often (strong) negative consequences of the pandemic on
the job market (71.2%; n = 252) compared to those without increased financial limitations
(44.3%; n = 247; p < 0.001; Wilcoxon test).
Economic outcome differences between male and female students
An analysis of results stratified by gender related to a potential decrease in income, identified a
significant difference between males and females. More female students reported a decrease in
income compared to male students (40.4%; n = 190 vs 31.0%; n = 138; p = 0.032; Wilcoxon
test). Significant differences were found in relation to a comparison of part-time work: Female
students worked more in the categories of 1 to 12 hours compared to male students (29.4%;
n = 136 versus 18.9%; n = 79). A comparison of those who worked most hours (more than 20
hours) per week, more male students worked part-time before the beginning of the pandemic:
22.1% (n = 93) male students versus 15.8% (n = 73) female students (p = 0.022; Wilcoxon test).
No significant differences were identified related to gender and level of negative stress due to
financial difficulties (p = 0.366; t test). In terms of a potential decrease in future spending,
Table 4. Comparison of financial limitations and field of studies.
Are you postponing purchases to the future? No (n = 562) Yes (n = 354) P-value
n (%) n (%)
Business 214 (38.1%) 177 (50.0%) <0.001
Health 87 (15.5%) 61 (17.2%)
IT 104 (18.5%) 45 (12.7%)
MINT/technical 124 (22.1%) 29 (8.2%)
Other 32 (5.7%) 42 (11.9%)
Missing 1 0
IT: Information technologies; MINT: mathematics, informatics, natural sciences and technology
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055.t004
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 11 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
females decreased their spending significantly more compared to males: 60.5%; n = 280 versus
48.5%; n = 207; p = 0.005; Wilcoxon test). Anticipated consequences (negative or positive) on
students’ internship, job search and employment opportunities, showed that significantly
more female students assumed negative consequences: 58.5% (n = 275) compared to 50.6%
(n = 218) males (p = 0.043, chi-squared test).
Multivariate regression of increase in stress level and financial limitations
Multivariable logistic regression assessed risk factors for financial distress are shown in Table 5.
The odds ratio for work part-time was 1.811 with p = 0.003 revealing that participants working
part-time had a higher probability of financial distress compared to participants not working
part-time. Also, the odds ratio for regular income before the pandemic was 0.456 with p = 0.014,
indicating that students with regular income were less likely to experience financial distress com-
pared to participants with no income (“I live from savings”). Differences with regard to university
location and field of study were identified. The AUC of the logistic regression model amounted to
0.699 (95%-CI = [0.655, 0.742]). The assessment of variance inflation factors to check for multicol-
linearity revealed no multicollinearity issue, with all VIFs being below 1.74.
Multivariable logistic regression assessed risk factors for financial limitations are shown in
Table 6. The odds ratio for working part-time was 2.094 with p<0.001, meaning that partici-
pants who worked part-time have a higher probability of increased financial limitations com-
pared to participants without part-time working. Differences with regard to university
location and field of study were identified. The AUC of the logistic regression model
amounted to 0.755 (95%-CI = [0.718, 0.792]). The assessment of variance inflation factors to
check for multicollinearity revealed no multicollinearity issue, with all VIFs being below 1.75.
Discussion
This study examined effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the economic situation of univer-
sity students in Germany with a focus on financial limitations and financial distress and
Table 5. Logistic regression results for financial distress.
Odds ratio 95% Confidence interval P-value
Gender: male vs. female (ref.) 0.974 [0.672, 1.412] 0.888
Age (years) 1.037 [0.987, 1.09] 0.148
Site: Ludwigshafen vs. Heidelberg (ref.) 0.598 [0.374, 0.955] 0.031
Site: Mannheim vs. Heidelberg (ref.) 0.313 [0.191, 0.514] <0.001
Studies: health vs. business (ref.) 0.291 [0.161, 0.523] <0.001
Studies: IT vs. business (ref.) 0.922 [0.558, 1.522] 0.75
Studies: MINT/technical vs. business (ref.) 0.667 [0.369, 1.205] 0.18
Studies: other vs. business (ref.) 1.325 [0.713, 2.462] 0.373
Part-time working vs. no part-time working (ref.) 1.811 [1.225, 2.676] 0.003
Grade: good vs. very good (ref.) 1.037 [0.67, 1.605] 0.871
Grade: average vs. very good (ref.) 1.261 [0.736, 2.159] 0.399
Grade: poor vs. very good (ref.) 2.426 [0.413, 14.237] 0.326
Semester 0.961 [0.875, 1.055] 0.399
Income before (irregular income) vs. no income (ref.) 0.486 [0.184, 1.282] 0.145
Income before (regular income) vs. no income (ref.) 0.456 [0.245, 0.851] 0.014
Degree: master vs. bachelor (ref.) 0.977 [0.582, 1.64] 0.93
IT: Information technologies; MINT: mathematics, informatics, natural sciences and technology
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055.t005
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 12 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
Table 6. Logistic regression: Financial limitations analysis.
Odds ratio 95% Confidence interval P-value
Gender: male vs. female (ref.) 1.281 [0.882, 1.861] 0.194
Age (years) 1.037 [0.987, 1.089] 0.146
Site: Ludwigshafen vs. Heidelberg (ref.) 0.459 [0.288, 0.733] 0.001
Site: Mannheim vs. Heidelberg (ref.) 0.183 [0.111, 0.302] <0.001
Studies: health vs. business (ref.) 0.42 [0.247, 0.714] 0.001
Studies: IT vs. business (ref.) 0.517 [0.309, 0.865] 0.012
Studies: MINT/technical vs. business (ref.) 0.39 [0.214, 0.71] 0.002
Studies: other vs. business (ref.) 1.362 [0.723, 2.567] 0.339
Part-time working vs. no part-time working (ref.) 2.094 [1.427, 3.075] <0.001
Grade: good vs. very good (ref.) 1.405 [0.911, 2.168] 0.124
Grade: average vs. very good (ref.) 1.316 [0.765, 2.264] 0.321
Grade: poor vs. very good (ref.) 1.995 [0.316, 12.609] 0.463
Semester 0.932 [0.851, 1.022] 0.133
Income before (irregular income) vs. no income (ref.) 0.462 [0.172, 1.242] 0.126
Income before (regular income) vs. no income (ref.) 0.61 [0.323, 1.152] 0.127
Degree: master vs. bachelor (ref.) 0.965 [0.573, 1.624] 0.892
IT: Information technologies; MINT: mathematics, informatics, natural sciences and technology
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055.t006
associated risk factors. The COVID-19 pandemic had both negative health-related and eco-
nomic consequences on study participants. Findings demonstrated that more than one third
of participants had decreased income. Financial constraints increased and economic uncer-
tainty was experienced as a result of the pandemic.
Economic uncertainty during the COVID-19 pandemic has been shown to have a positive
correlation with job uncertainty and a negative correlation with wellbeing [39]. In Japan,
almost 50% of working students lost their employment due to the pandemic, affecting their
lives, studies and health, resulting in the need to offer a safety net for underprivileged students
[40]. Consequently, more than one third of students were concerned with living costs and uni-
versity fees and those being aware of their financial insecurity reported poor health [40]. These
findings correspond to students’ responses in our study with their increased financial limita-
tions, reduced weekly consumption and the planned reduction of future expenditures. Find-
ings from US American students showed that caused by the current pandemic, 13% of
students postponed graduation, 40% lost employment, internship or offer and 29% expected
to earn less at the age of 35 (15 years after the onset of the pandemic) [28]. Also, students who
had lower incomes were 55% more likely compared to higher-income students to have delayed
graduation due to COVID-19 [28].
In our study, decreased income and increased financial limitations were associated with
higher distress. Those students with sources of regular income experienced less financial dis-
tress but results showed that students with decreased income, particularly those with only
part-time work, were at risk of increased financial distress and pressure to modify consump-
tions patterns. Half of this group of students were from business programs. Work-related
stressors such as high job insecurity were linked with poor mental health of young workers
[41]. Further US American research reported that those who became unemployed after March
1, 2020 (compared to those who kept their job) stated more than twice as many days of being
mentally ill [42]. Those in the lowest household income groups (prior to the pandemic)
reported worst mental health [42]. A correlation between poor mental health and job
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 13 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
insecurity and job loss is reciprocal: Mental ill health among students is linked to impaired aca-
demic success, lower levels of occupational preparedness and poorer future occupational per-
formance [43]. In addition, work-related stressors such as high job insecurity have been linked
to poor mental health among young workers [41]. Financial hardship and economic uncer-
tainty went hand-in-hand with distress and subsequent negative impacts on mental health.
Gender-related differences concerning students’ financial situation were identified in this
study. Gender differences related to job insecurity and mental health have been also reported
in the literature: Women had a 24% higher chance to permanently lose their job compared to
men, women expected a decrease in income by 50% more compared to men. Also, women
were more likely to reduce consumption and raise savings [44]. Also, females and those with-
out social support systems reported significantly poorer mental health outcomes [42]. Yet,
women adopted more coping strategies that led to more positive mental health outcomes [45].
Financial challenges impacted more female students during the COVID-19 pandemic.
German response to student financial hardship
To ease financial distress in pandemic or other emergency situations, a temporary loan might
offer vulnerable students a certain amount of relief. In Germany, information on interest-free
student loans, such as the KfW (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) student loan, could be shared
widely to offer students ways to alleviate financial hardship and to secure continued basic
needs [46]. A total of 100 mEUR in interim aid was available from the federal government for
the months of June, July and August 2020 [47]. Yet, criticism has been raised as interest was
only waved for several months and the loan was not accessible to anyone 45 years or older, in
the 11th semester or higher or who was studying at vocational/apprenticeship academies [48].
In addition, students recipients are required to start paying off these loans by October 2022,
which can only be postponed if the credit is used for a longer period [48]. The interest free
period was to attract students but there would be difficulty with repayment for those who lost
their part-time job during the pandemic to pay back a loan starting from October 2022 [47].
The Free Democratic Party university expert, Jens Brandenburg, argued that the “KfW offered
a half-hearted discount for new customers, but not a sustainable student loan” [49]. Further
criticism addressed the maximum pay-out sum of 650 Euro which was considered “insuffi-
cient” in some cities [47]. From April 2021 the regular interest rate with an effective rate of
4.36% will apply, which is the highest rate of all providers of study credits [47]. Consumer
advocates even called for urged caution as the repayment of debts begins in the middle of the
rush hour of life when every cent is needed to start a family and live [47]. Despite the federal
response to address financial hardship issues for students, this aid poses future financial chal-
lenges especially due to interest rates.
Strengths and limitations
A key strength of this study was the response rate and the large amount of data from the
Rhine-Neckar region, including universities and universities of applied sciences with 1,246
students, of which a total of 917 students successfully submitted the questionnaire. Neverthe-
less, this study has limitations that need to be considered when interpreting results. Firstly, the
questions were not based on a validated questionnaire, but on a self-designed questionnaire
built following a literature review. This represents a limitation with regard to direct regional or
international comparisons. The second limitation is that convenience sampling was used.
Convenience sampling does not provide representative results; therefore, the results of this
study cannot be generalized to a wider population. Nonetheless, due to the high response rate,
the results add useful knowledge and improve understanding of the key implications and
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 14 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
challenges for students in the area who can help others design similar studies in other loca-
tions. The third limitation is due to the cross-sectional study design, thus not allowing to assess
distress and increased financial limitations over the course of time, thus not allowing to model
causal effects of the pandemic. A further limitation may consider the fact that the survey was
conducted in English language only and students’ command of English language skills was not
verified prior to the survey participation.
Conclusion
Negative consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the economic situation of students
were identified in this cross-sectional survey. The most prominent risk factors for financial
distress and increased financial limitations were working part-time and no regular income.
University students were disproportionally affected by the economic consequences of the
COVID-19 pandemic, which increased students’ economic uncertainty. To offset such prob-
lems, financial aid schemes for students need to be made available to alleviate distress and to
allow students to focus on their studies but should not compound problems by leading to
financial hardship at a later point in time. Also, implications for university education and psy-
chology practice (e.g. proactive risk-stratification, early screening programs, financial counsel-
ing and mental health support programs) should be assessed to alleviate students’ distress.
Supporting information
S1 Checklist.
(PDF)
S1 File.
(DOCX)
Acknowledgments
We express our sincere gratitude to students for their time and honesty in sharing their experi-
ences during the current pandemic. We thank universities (of applied sciences) and their
employees for their cooperation in communicating the invitation of this study to their
students.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: Sandra Claudia Gewalt, Markus Breuer.
Data curation: Sandra Claudia Gewalt.
Formal analysis: Regina Krisam, Johannes Krisam.
Investigation: Sandra Claudia Gewalt.
Methodology: Sandra Claudia Gewalt, Markus Breuer.
Project administration: Sandra Claudia Gewalt.
Supervision: Markus Breuer.
Writing – original draft: Sandra Claudia Gewalt.
Writing – review & editing: Sandra Claudia Gewalt, Sarah Berger, Regina Krisam, Johannes
Krisam.
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 15 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
References
1. UNESCO. Education: From disruption to recovery; 2020. Available from: URL: https://en.unesco.org/
covid19/educationresponse.
2. Nicola M, Alsafi Z, Sohrabi C, Kerwan A, Al-Jabir A, Iosifidis C et al. The socio-economic implications of
the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): A review. Int J Surg 2020; 78:185–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijsu.2020.04.018 PMID: 32305533
3. Lee J. Mental health effects of school closures during COVID-19. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health
2020; 4(6):421. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30109-7 PMID: 32302537
4. Coibion O, Gorodnichenko Y, Weber M. The Cost of the Covid-19 Crisis: Lockdowns, Macroeconomic
Expectations, and Consumer Spending. Cambridge, MA; 2020.
5. Jones HE, Manze M, Ngo V, Lamberson P, Freudenberg N. The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on
College Students’ Health and Financial Stability in New York City: Findings from a Population-Based
Sample of City University of New York (CUNY) Students. J Urban Health 2021; 98(2):187–96. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11524-020-00506-x PMID: 33570739
6. Hacioglu Hoke S, Känzig D, Surico P. Consumption in the time of Covid-19: Evidence from UK transac-
tion data; CEPR Discussion Papers. C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers; 2020 14733. Available from: URL:
https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:14733.
7. Chetty Raj, Friedman John, Hendren Nathaniel, Stepner Michael, The Opportunity Insights Team. The
Economic Impacts of COVID-19: Evidence from a New Public Database Built Using Private Sector
Data; 2020.
8. German National Association for Student Affairs. Ermittlung der Lebenshaltungskosten von Studieren-
den: Aktualisierte Berechnung anhand der 21. Sozialerhebung des Deutschen Studentenwerks; 2019.
9. German National Association for Student Affairs. Studienfinanzierung: Zwei Drittel der Studierenden
jobben; 2011. Available from: URL: https://www.studentenwerke.de/de/content/zwei-drittel-der-
studierenden-jobben.
10. Canivet C, Bodin T, Emmelin M, Toivanen S, Moghaddassi M, Östergren P-O. Precarious employment
is a risk factor for poor mental health in young individuals in Sweden: a cohort study with multiple follow-
ups. BMC Public Health 2016; 16:687. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3358-5 PMID: 27485322
11. Miquel C de, Domènech-Abella J, Felez-Nobrega M, Cristóbal-Narváez P, Mortier P, Vilagut G et al.
The Mental Health of Employees with Job Loss and Income Loss during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The
Mediating Role of Perceived Financial Stress. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022; 19(6). https://doi.
org/10.3390/ijerph19063158 PMID: 35328846
12. Trógolo MA, Moretti LS, Medrano LA. A nationwide cross-sectional study of workers’ mental health dur-
ing the COVID-19 pandemic: Impact of changes in working conditions, financial hardships, psychologi-
cal detachment from work and work-family interface. BMC Psychol 2022; 10(1):73. https://doi.org/10.
1186/s40359-022-00783-y PMID: 35303966
13. Federal Ministry of Education and Research. 4. Start to prepare funding; 2021. Available from: URL:
https://www.study-in-germany.de/en/plan-your-studies/preparation/funding/.
14. Destatis Statistisches Bundesamt. Press: Inflation rate in 2020: +0.5% on the previous year; 2021.
Available from: URL: https://www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2021/01/PE21_025_611.html;jsessionid=
B2A0803388F729FB6242A6A4B7F79DEE.live732.
15. Destatis Statistisches Bundesamt. Press: Inflation rate at +5.2% in November 2021; 2021. Available
from: URL: https://www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2021/12/PE21_564_611.html;jsessionid=
1CF8DBAD7DCA0EA4D848BC3BA8DAB3D7.live732.
16. Callard F, Perego E. How and why patients made Long Covid. Soc Sci Med 2021; 268:113426. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113426 PMID: 33199035
17. Cipresso P, Gaggioli A, Serino S, Raspelli S, Vigna C, Pallavicini F et al. Inter-reality in the evaluation
and treatment of psychological stress disorders: the INTERSTRESS project. Stud Health Technol
Inform 2012; 181:8–11. PMID: 22954818
18. World Health Organization. Mental health: strengthening our response; 2018. Available from: URL:
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-our-response.
19. Witteveen D, Velthorst E. Economic hardship and mental health complaints during COVID-19. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A 2020; 117(44):27277–84. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2009609117 PMID:
33046648
20. Zhang Q, Ni X, Liu J, Zhao J. Research on Psychological Health of Poor College Students. In: Educa-
tion Management, Education Theory and Education Application. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin
Heidelberg; 2012. p. 445–9.
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 16 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
21. Sharma R, Bansal P, Chhabra M, Bansal C, Arora M. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-
2-associated perceived stress and anxiety among indian medical students: A cross-sectional study.
Asian J Soc Health Behav 2021; 4(3):98.
22. Pramukti I, Strong C, Sitthimongkol Y, Setiawan A, Pandin MGR, Yen C-F et al. Anxiety and Suicidal
Thoughts During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Country Comparative Study Among Indonesian, Tai-
wanese, and Thai University Students. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22(12):e24487. https://doi.org/10.
2196/24487 PMID: 33296867
23. Ruengorn C, Awiphan R, Wongpakaran N, Wongpakaran T, Nochaiwong S. Association of job loss,
income loss, and financial burden with adverse mental health outcomes during coronavirus disease
2019 pandemic in Thailand: A nationwide cross-sectional study. Depress Anxiety 2021; 38(6):648–60.
https://doi.org/10.1002/da.23155 PMID: 33793028
24. Holm-Hadulla RM, Klimov M, Juche T, Möltner A, Herpertz SC. Well-Being and Mental Health of Stu-
dents during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Psychopathology 2021; 54(6):291–7. https://doi.org/10.1159/
000519366 PMID: 34564075
25. Molarius A, Berglund K, Eriksson C, Eriksson HG, Lindén-Boström M, Nordström E et al. Mental health
symptoms in relation to socio-economic conditions and lifestyle factors—a population-based study in
Sweden. BMC Public Health 2009; 9:302. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-9-302 PMID: 19695085
26. Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N et al. The psychological
impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet 2020; 395
(10227):912–20.
27. Lederer AM, Hoban MT, Lipson SK, Zhou S, Eisenberg D. More Than Inconvenienced: The Unique
Needs of U.S. College Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Health Educ Behav 2021; 48(1):14–
9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198120969372 PMID: 33131325
28. Aucejo EM, French J, Ugalde Araya MP, Zafar B. The impact of COVID-19 on student experiences and
expectations: Evidence from a survey. J Public Econ 2020; 191:104271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpubeco.2020.104271 PMID: 32873994
29. Alsharawy A, Spoon R, Smith A, Ball S. Gender Differences in Fear and Risk Perception During the
COVID-19 Pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology 2021; 12:3104. Available from: URL: https://www.
frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.689467. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.689467 PMID:
34421741
30. Elmer T, Mepham K, Stadtfeld C. Students under lockdown: Comparisons of students’ social networks
and mental health before and during the COVID-19 crisis in Switzerland. PLoS ONE 2020:e0236337.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236337 PMID: 32702065
31. Matud MP. Gender differences in stress and coping styles. Personality and Individual Differences 2004;
37(7):1401–15.
32. Al-Rabiaah A, Temsah M-H, Al-Eyadhy AA, Hasan GM, Al-Zamil F, Al-Subaie S et al. Middle East
Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus (MERS-CoV) associated stress among medical students at a uni-
versity teaching hospital in Saudi Arabia. J Infect Public Health 2020; 13(5):687–91. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jiph.2020.01.005 PMID: 32001194
33. Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, Tan Y, Xu L, McIntyre RS et al. A longitudinal study on the mental health of
general population during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Brain Behav Immun 2020; 87:40–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.028 PMID: 32298802
34. Tanaka T, Okamoto S. Increase in suicide following an initial decline during the COVID-19 pandemic in
Japan. Nat Hum Behav 2021; 5(2):229–38. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-01042-z PMID:
33452498
35. DWYER RE, HODSON R, MCLOUD L Gender, debt and dropping out of college. Gend Soc 2012; 27
(1):30–55.
36. James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. An introduction to statistical learning: With applications in R.
Corrected at 8th printing 2017. New York: Springer; 2017. (Springer texts in statistics). Available from:
URL: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kxp/detail.action?docID=6312402.
37. Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A, Tiberti N, Lisacek F, Sanchez J-C et al. pROC: an open-source package
for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics 2011; 12:77. https://doi.org/10.
1186/1471-2105-12-77 PMID: 21414208
38. Fox J. An R companion to applied regression. 2nd edition. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singa-
pore, Washington DC: Sage; 2011.
39. Godinic D, Obrenovic B, Khudaykulov A. Effects of Economic Uncertainty on Mental Health in the
COVID-19 Pandemic Context: Social Identity Disturbance, Job Uncertainty and Psychological Well-
Being Model. IJIED 2020; 6(1):61–74.
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 17 / 18
PLOS ONE University students’ economic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Germany
40. Tsurugano S, Nishikitani M, Inoue M, Yano E. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on working students:
Results from the Labour Force Survey and the student lifestyle survey. J Occup Health 2021; 63(1):
e12209. https://doi.org/10.1002/1348-9585.12209 PMID: 33665926
41. Law PCF, Too LS, Butterworth P, Witt K, Reavley N, Milner AJ. A systematic review on the effect of
work-related stressors on mental health of young workers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2020; 93
(5):611–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-020-01516-7 PMID: 31932956
42. Guerin RJ, Barile JP, Thompson WW, McKnight-Eily L, Okun AH. Investigating the Impact of Job Loss
and Decreased Work Hours on Physical and Mental Health Outcomes Among US Adults During the
COVID-19 Pandemic. J Occup Environ Med 2021; 63(9):e571–e579. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.
0000000000002288 PMID: 34091576
43. Winzer R, Lindberg L, Guldbrandsson K, Sidorchuk A. Effects of mental health interventions for stu-
dents in higher education are sustainable over time: a systematic review and meta-analysis of random-
ized controlled trials. PeerJ 2018; 6:e4598. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4598 PMID: 29629247
44. Dang H-AH, Viet Nguyen C. Gender inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic: Income, expenditure,
savings, and job loss. World Dev 2021; 140:105296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105296
PMID: 34548740
45. Menéndez-Espina S, Llosa JA, Agulló-Tomás E, Rodrı́guez-Suárez J, Sáiz-Villar R, Lahseras-Dı́ez HF.
Job Insecurity and Mental Health: The Moderating Role of Coping Strategies From a Gender Perspec-
tive. Frontiers in Psychology 2019; 10:286. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00286 PMID: 30833919
46. Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau. Interest-free loans for students during corona crisis; 2020 [cited 2020
Jul 5]. Available from: URL: https://www.kfw.de/stories/society/education/interview-kfw-student-loan/.
47. Gillmann B. Corona treibt die Studienkredite; 2020. Available from: URL: https://www.handelsblatt.com/
politik/deutschland/bildung-corona-treibt-die-studienkredite/25964232.html?ticket=ST-17761896-
BaOcWWohlB4ZEQPca9ax-ap5.
48. Iost O. Beschlossene Corona-„Soforthilfen”für Studierende enttäuschend; 2020. Available from: URL:
https://www.bafoeg-rechner.de/Hintergrund/art-2363-corona-soforthilfe-beschlossen.php.
49. Handelsblatt. Corona treibt die Studienkredite 2021 Mar 18. Available from: URL: https://www.
handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/bildung-corona-treibt-die-studienkredite/25964232.html?ticket=
ST-4919293-1THBTgD4jfIuFfg4cvea-ap5.
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275055 October 6, 2022 18 / 18
File and source
- File
- university-students-economic-situation-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-a-cross-sectional-study-in-germany.pdf
- Size
- 571,537 bytes
- SHA-256
- 6f24a9b106dbd768e5c41da768e522588151f069a42e1f050a318f7afe25b5f1
- Original
- doi.org