PURPOSE
This correlational study was undertaken to examine the relationship among daily life stress, self-efficacy, hardiness, and health behavior of university students.
METHODS
Two hundred sixty five university students were gathered from the undergraduate classes. Data were collected through self-reported questionnaires which included daily life stress scale, self-efficacy scales, hardiness scales, and health behavior scales.
RESULTS
The daily life stress level had a maximum score of 4 with a mean score of 2.09 and the mean score of health behavior was 2.56. A negative correlation exists among daily life stress, self-efficacy, and health behavior. The self-efficacy is positively correlated with the health behavior. According to the hardiness factor, health behavior is positively correlated with hardiness. In the subareas, health behavior is positively correlated with control, commitment, and challenge. The self-efficacy factor was positively correlated with challenge.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, based onthe results of this study, both self-efficacy and hardiness are useful concepts in reducing the stress level and in increasing the health promoting behavior. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a program based on both self-efficacy and hardiness.

PURPOSE
This study was performed to identify relationships among stress, hardiness, and the level of self-care in kidney transplant patients and use the results of this study as baseline data for developing self-care promotion programs.
METHOD
Subjects were 41 patients who undergone a kidney transplantation surgery at least one month before and were receiving regular follow-up care via OPD. Four researchers interviewed each subjects by filling out questionnaires.
RESULTS
The mean score of the level of stress was 2.32(SD=0.54) on a 4 point scale and the mean score of hardiness was 4.68(SD=0.62) on a 6 point scale. The mean score of self-care among the subjects was 3.83(SD=0.55). There was statistically a significant positive relationship between self-care and hardiness(r=0.42). Especially, relationships between self-care and commitment (r=.51) and control(r=.36) as the sub- dimensions of hardiness were significant. The item suggested as most stressful was economic burden and the item suggested as least stressful was sexual activity.
CONCLUSION
Although transplant patients have various stressors, the positive self-care activities of the patients could be increased if the commitment and control were enhanced by proper intervention programs.

PURPOSE
This study was conducted to meta-analyze the effects of hardiness on health-related variables. METHOD: After review of 19 studies performed by Korean nurses, research variables, statistical data(r or F), and other methodological data were extracted and coded. Research variables were categorized under 5 groups such as health-related behavior, well-being, adaptation, stress, and support according to conceptual similarity. Using SAS program, 20 research variables and 34 effect sizes were calculated after eliminating heterogeneous data by Q-test, RESULTS: Effects of hardiness on whole research variables was .512 and ranged from .322 to .643 by categories. The greatest effect was obtained from well-being category, whereas the smallest effect from stress category. All effect sizes were statistically significant. But fail-safe numbers were small and failed to achieve reasonable tolerance level. CONCLUSION: Results of meta-analysis indicated that hardiness has a moderate effect on health-related variables. But for improving the reliability of the results by minimizing publication bias, the more hardiness studies should be done.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to identify patterns and trends of hardiness studies and to suggest the direction of further research. METHOD : Forty-seven hardiness studies were collected through internet searching and were reviewed by some criteria. RESULT : The results showed that hardiness studies have increased rapidly since 1990's. Eighteen studies were thesis' for degrees and others were for non- degree research studies. All studies employed the non-experimental design, particularly correlational studies. In the sampling method, all studies used non-probability sampling. Most commonly used instrument for hardiness measurement was Pollock(1986)'s HRHS. In the majority of research, hardiness was treated both as a composite measure and 3 subscales. Hardiness-related concepts were 27 and classified into 5 categories such as health behavior, stress, adaptation, support, and others. Most common statistical technique was Pearson's correlation coefficient, followed by regression, ANOVA, path analysis. CONCLUSION: To be utilized as practical nursing knowledge, hardiness studies should be done with more empirical analysis such as experimental research, and Meta-analysis is needed to compare the effect size and significance of composit and 3 subscales of hardiness construct.

PURPOSE
This study was conducted to investigate the relationship of hardiness, job stress, and burnout in nurses, and to identify predictors of burnout.
METHOD
Empirical data were collected from 154 staff nurses at one university hospital in Gwangju city. Self- reported questionnaires were composed of the Personal Views Survey(PVS), job stress scale, Tedium scale, and 7 items asking nurse's general characteristics. Data analysis was done with a SAS package.
RESULT
In correlation analysis, hardiness, job stress, and nursing satisfaction had significant correlation with burnout. In stepwise multiple regression, 28.7% of the variance in burnout was accounted for by nursing satisfaction(19.9%), job stress(6.0%), and hardiness(2.8%). Among subscales of hardiness, only commitment was a significant predictor, so nursing satisfaction, job stress, and commitment explained 28.9% of variance in burnout.
CONCLUSION
Based on the findings of this study, the development of program for nurses to increase nursing satisfaction is needed, and more studies to examine causal relationship between nursing satisfaction and burnout is also highly recommended.

This study was undertaken in order to examine the effect of hardiness on future stress-related physical symptoms in the female students in a longitudinal design. The subjects who participated in this study were 97 female nursing students (in the analysis of data after 1 year). The instruments used for this study were a survey of general characteristics, stress (43 items), hardiness(25 items), and physical symptoms(35 items). Analysis of data was done by use of mean and hierarchical multiple regression with the SAS program. The results of this study were as follows. 1) Main effects of hardiness on future stress-related physical symptoms was found. 2) The stress buffering effects of hardiness were not found.