It is well documented that first-year university students often find themselves inadequately prepared for the challenges that face them at tertiary educational level (Mouton, Louw & Strydom, 2013). In South Africa, this is of particular relevance as various dynamics influence the probability of academic success of first-year intakes (Petersen, Louw & Dumont, 2009). This poses a unique challenge to the higher educational fraternity as there is increasing pressure to provide access to quality higher education to a larger portion of the country's population (Vandeyar, 2010). These pressures have emerged amidst a process of transformation and change in the higher education landscape and must be navigated cautiously (Le Grange, 2011).

The challenges that first-year university students face are many and varied. Salanova, Schaufeli, Martínez and Bresó (2009) argue that the first year of study at university poses a difficult trial as it can be considered unfamiliar terrain. Students often find that they lack the required resources to effectively deal with the challenges facing them at tertiary educational level (Reeve, Shumaker, Yearwood, Crowell & Riley, 2013). In South Africa, first-year students are the products of a secondary educational system that has undergone significant changes in recent years, including new policy directions and structures (Steenkamp, Baard & Frick, 2009). Access, funding, and quality of teaching and learning are other stressors that South African first-year students face (Mouton et al., 2013). These stressors inevitably influence the graduation rate of students in South Africa, which stands at only 15% (Department of Higher Education and Training, 2013).

The array of challenges that students have to deal with in a complex learning environment can potentially influence their levels of life satisfaction, an important component of well-being (Van Zyl & Rothmann, 2012). Bakker, Albrecht and Leiter (2011) postulate that it is important to investigate factors that influence student well-being as a means of developing interventions that could assist in the development of this part of their lives.

This study will investigate the influence of proactive behaviour towards strength use (PBSU), proactive behaviour towards deficit improvement (PBDI) and two psychological capital constructs (hope and efficacy) on the satisfaction with life levels of first-year students at a South African university.

PBSU and PBDI approaches form part of a modern school of thought known as positive psychology. This branch of psychology is focused on ascertaining insight into the potentialities and virtues of individuals (Linley, Joseph, Harrington & Wood, 2006; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Wood, Linley, Maltby, Kashdan & Hurling, 2011). It supplements the premise of traditional psychology approaches that have been concentrated on rectifying human flaw, abnormality or deficiency (Cravens, Oliver & Stewart, 2010). Positive psychology is organised around understanding what people are good at, rather than what they may be doing wrong (Compton, 2005).

PBSU can be described as the proactive behaviour that people utilise to accomplish goals (Van Woerkom, Mostert, Els, Rothmann & Bakker, in press). Moreover, it can be viewed as the inclination of not merely accepting the status quo, but actively capitalising on one's areas of strength, virtue and potentiality, mobilising one's inherent capitals of forte to ensure that development ensues (Van Woerkom et al., in press). Crant (2000) describes this as being crucial in reaching workplace and personal goals. Frese and Fay (2001) label proactive behaviour as essential in dealing with challenges and persevering, regardless of obstacles. PBSU implies pre-emptive behaviour on the part of the individual, such that this person would be positively inclined to make active use of their talents rather than accepting in a passive manner that they do not have control over a set of circumstances (Botha & Mostert, 2014). PBDI has been designated as the proactive behaviour that an individual holds to develop their areas of deficit in order to efficiently deal with personal and work-related stressors and accomplish goals (Van Woerkom et al., in press). This behaviour is critical in developing the holistic self, as one must capitalise on one's strengths whilst being equally realistic about one's shortcomings, proactively developing these areas towards becoming a rounded human being (Linley et al., 2006).

Both PBSU and PBDI have been associated with positive personal outcomes. Firstly, PBSU has been associated with meaningful experiences, satisfaction, engagement and pleasure in a working context (Seligman, 2011). Elevated and sustainable well-being has been reported through the use of personal strengths (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). In a study led by Wood et al. (2011), PBSU predicted positive affect, vitality and lower levels of perceived stress amongst community members from central and northern parts of England. PBDI has been proven as a practically significant (with large effect) predictor of work engagement amongst a sample of sport coaches (Stander & Mostert, 2013). It is also traditionally linked to the development of people through what is known as the balanced strength-and-deficit-based approach (Kaiser & White, 2009).

The broaden-and-build model holds that the positive, proactive utilisation of strengths and improvement of deficits will evoke positive emotions that harness thought-action repertoires that create personal resources (Frederickson, 2002). With regard to strengths use amongst university students, Bowers and Lopez (2010) suggest that university students who possessed the capacity to use their personal strengths were able to effectively draw on social support and were well positioned to reach successful outcomes in their tertiary educational career.

Little work exists on the relationship between a balanced strength-and-deficit-based approach and favourable personal outcomes in the context of South African students and much less so amongst specifically first-year students. This study will seek to investigate the relationship between PBSU, PBDI and satisfaction with life, a construct that has been described by Seligman (2011) as one of the very first empirical measures of happiness. Satisfaction with life comprises an individual's cognitive and emotional evaluation over the state of their life at a particular point in time (Diener, 1984). Satisfaction with life is a critical psychological construct in the context of university students as it has been proven to be a predictor of academic performance in a large sample of South African university students (Van Zyl & Rothmann, 2012). This finding is also supported by Rode et al. (2005), who found a positive relationship between satisfaction with life and academic achievement, as well as between satisfaction with life and positive assessment centre results in a sample of university students from the United States. Considering the premise of the broaden-and-build theory and the research outlined above, this paper postulates the following:

Hypothesis 1a: PBSU will predict satisfaction with life (SWL) in a sample of South African first-year university students.

Hypothesis 1b: PBDI will predict satisfaction with life (SWL) in a sample of South African first-year university students.

The use of strengths and the improvement of deficits elicit positive affects which lead to heightened motivation and subsequent better performance (Cropanzano & Wright, 2001), and can generate subjective well-being that assists in achieving goals (Kaiser & White, 2009). Psychological capital (PsyCap) has been supported in research as an emerging higher order construct associated with higher performance (Luthans, Avolio, Avey & Norman, 2007); it draws from Hobfoll's (2002) psychological resource theory and is linked to positive individual outcomes. Psychological capital, together with contextual influences, directs the perception of well-being (Singh & Mansi, 2009) and can be defined as ‘an individual's positive psychological state of development’ (Luthans, Youssef & Avolio, 2007, p. 3). PsyCap comprises four psychological resources, namely (1) being assured enough (self-efficacy) to embrace challenging tasks, (2) being positive (optimism) about achieving current and future success, (3) showing tenacity towards goal achievement and, in pursuit of success, even redirecting paths to goals (hope) when necessary and (4) when encountering adversity or problems, being resilient enough to bounce back (and beyond) in pursuit of success (Luthans et al., 2007).

According to the conservation of resources theory, individuals accrue, preserve and protect those resources they value and that they can apply to accommodate, resist or conquer threats (Hobfoll, Freedy, Lane & Geller, 1990), which may include the personal resources as contained in PsyCap (hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism). Traumatic events, such as attending university for the first time, consume these resources and might even deplete them, causing individuals to experience stress which may render them potentially inadequate to resolve imminent strains, leading to burnout (Gorgievski & Hobfoll, 2008), which then results in minimal or no engagement (Chen, Westman & Eden, 2009; Gorgievski & Hobfoll, 2008; Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti & Schaufeli, 2008).

A fundamental goal of universities is to help build human capital that will eventually become companies’ most important (competitive) assets through delivering educated, mature graduates by equipping them with knowledge, skills and competencies that will enable them to excel in the workplace. It is thus imperative to build on students’ strengths and positive psychological resources (Luthans et al., 2007). Previous research studies that investigated the relationship between the different psychological constructs that comprise PsyCap and student academic performance have consistently shown either all of the individual constructs or occasionally two of them to be strong predictors of academic success (Chemers, Hu & Garcia, 2001; Curry, Snyder, Cook, Ruby & Rehm, 1997; Martin & Marsh, 2006; Ruthig, Perry, Hall & Hladkyj, 2004; Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998). In this study, efficacy and hope as constructs of PsyCap will be investigated in relation to PBSU and PBDI of first-year university students. These constructs were selected out from the PsyCap literature due to the extensive research done in student contexts on these constructs in particular.

A number of studies have been conducted that have effectively postulated PsyCap as a mediator between various variables and positive personal and work-related outcomes. For example, Wang, Chang, Fu and Wang (2012) established that the PsyCap constructs partially mediated the relationship between between work-family conflict and burnout in a large sample (N = 1332) of Chinese nurses. In another study, it was proven that PsyCap acted as mediator between leadership and creative performance behaviours within a sample of scientists working in the research and development sector in India (Gupta & Singh, 2014). Pertaining to the university student context specifically, Riolli, Savicki and Richards (2012) confirm that PsyCap mediates between stress and physical and psychological well-being in a sample of undergraduates from a university in the United States. In the context of that study, PsyCap constructs effectively served as a buffer to reduce the stress experienced by these students as a means of enhancing satisfaction with life and augmenting positive psychological outcomes. It thus serves as a strong theoretical substantiation for the purposes of the current study. The mediating properties of PsyCap can be attributed largely to these personal capitals’ ability to equip the individual to more effectively negotiate job demands and, equally so, capitalise on job resources to attain favourable personal and work-related goals (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). It holds true of both the PsyCap constructs investigated in this article, namely hope and efficacy.

The PsyCap construct of hope has been proven to be in a reciprocal relation with engagement in a study amongst university students, led by Siu, Bakker and Jiang (2013). Furthermore, in a study amongst Slovakian university and school students, hope was proven to be a mediator between various personality factors (such as extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism) and satisfaction with life (Halama, 2010). Based on these studies and the theoretical description of PsyCap outlined in this article, it is plausible to postulate the following:

Hypothesis 4a: The PsyCap construct of hope will mediate between PBSU and satisfaction with life (SWL) in a sample of South African first-year university students.

Hypothesis 4b: The PsyCap construct of hope will mediate between PBDI and satisfaction with life (SWL) in a sample of South African first-year university students.

With regard to the PsyCap construct of efficacy, research also supports the mediating properties of this variable. In a study amongst student volunteers from a university in Canada, efficacy was proven to be a full mediator between conscientiousness and meaning in life (Lightsey et al., 2014). Based on this, this paper predicts that:

Hypothesis 5a: The PsyCap construct of efficacy will mediate between PBSU and satisfaction with life (SWL) in a sample of South African first-year university students.

Hypothesis 5b: The PsyCap construct of efficacy will mediate between PBDI and satisfaction with life (SWL) in a sample of South African first-year university students.

Mplus 7.2 (Muthén & Muthén, 2014) was used to investigate the research hypotheses. Mplus is a powerful statistical software package with the ability to investigate latent variables. In this study no item parcelling, mean or sum score techniques were implemented. The individually observed indicators (items) were therefore used to implement confirmatory factor analysis for each of the latent corresponding variables in one measurement model with maximum likelihood methodology. Regressions paths were then added to the measurement model in accordance with the research hypotheses to constitute a structural model. The following fit statistics were considered: comparative fit index (CFI; acceptable values between 0.90 and 0.99), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI; acceptable values between 0.90 and 0.99), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; acceptable values between 0.01 and 0.08) and standardised root mean residual (SRMR; acceptable values between 0.01 and 0.08) (Hooper, Coughlan & Mullen, 2008; Van de Schoot, Lugtig & Hox, 2012). Given the call for psychologists to move from reporting the problematic alpha coefficient to the better-performing omega coefficient for reliability, the omega coefficient was calculated in Mplus (cf. Dunn, Baguley & Brunsden, 2013). For correlations, the level of practical significance (r) is set at 0.30 or above for a medium effect and 0.50 or above for a large effect (Cohen, 1988). To investigate the mediating effects in the model, indirect function was specified in Mplus with a request for 5000 resampling draws in order to focus on the indirect effects in the model (Rucker, Preacher, Tormala & Petty, 2011). Moreover, mediation results would be described in terms of the contemporary suggestions by Zhao, Lynch and Chen (2010) as either complementary, competing, indirect-only, direct-only or non-mediation effects. Statistical significance (p) is set at 0.05 or above.

Results revealed that the model fit the data well for both the measurement model: CFI (0.91), TLI, (0.91), RMSEA (0.04) and SRMR (0.05), and the structural model: CFI (0.91), TLI, (0.90), RMSEA (0.04) and SRMR (0.06). Furthermore, the results of measurement invariance testing revealed configural and metric invariance based on gender, which indicates that the factor structure and loadings were similar for both men and women. Based on these results, the following results are presented: the correlation matrix for the latent variables, the structural regressions and the results for mediation testing of indirect effects in the model.

Table 1 presents the correlation matrix for the latent variables in the structural model.

Correlations revealed that PBSU and PBDI are practically significantly correlated with each other to a large degree (r = 0.62). PBSU was also practically correlated to SWL (r = 0.35; medium effect), self-efficacy (r = 0.51; large effect) and hope (r = 0.59; large effect). PBDI was practically significantly correlated with efficacy (r = 0.46; medium effect) and hope (r = 0.56; large effect). Furthermore, SWL was also practically correlated to hope with medium effect (r = 0.37), but had a borderline medium practical association with efficacy (r = 0.29).

Table 2 presents the structural regression results of the structural model from structural equation modelling.

Results from the structural relationships revealed that all of the regressions were significant, which confirmed H_1a through H_3b. PBSU had relationships with efficacy (β = 0.36), hope (β = 0.41) and SWL (β = 0.25). Similar results were evident for PBDI which had relationships with efficacy (β = 0.25) and hope (β = 0.31). However, PBDI had a negative relationship with SWL (β = −0.28). Efficacy had a relationship with SWL (β = 0.16), but the relationship between hope and SWL was stronger (β = 0.32).

Concerning the mediation hypotheses, bootstrapping revealed that there were some significant indirect effects. Hope mediated the relationship between PBSU and SWL with an indirect effect of 0.21 (95% CI [0.10; 0.31], p = 0.003), confirming H_4a and indicating a complementary mediation (direct effect and indirect in same direction). Hope also mediated the relationship between PBDI and SWL with an indirect effect of 0.12 (95% CI [0.03; 0.20], p = 0.008), confirming H_4b and indicating a competitive mediation (direct and indirect effects exist, but in opposite directions). Regarding the mediation role of efficacy in the relationship between PBSU (H_5a), PBDI (H_5b) and SWL, efficacy had a small indirect effect between PBSU and SWL: 0.07 (95% CI [0.01; 0.12], p = 0.03), but a non-significant indirect effect between PBDI and SWL was evident, which indicated no mediating action for efficacy between PBDI and SWL: 0.05 (95% CI [0.01; 0.10], p = 0.08). Thus, H_5a was confirmed as a complementary mediation, but H_5b was rejected, indicating a direct-only non-mediation (direct effect exists, but no indirect effect).

The first positive contribution of this study is the fact that all the adapted measures were proven to be reliable on all dimensions, based on the omega reliability coefficient values. This is applicable to PBSU (ω = 0.82) and PBDI (ω = 0.83) in the case of the SUDIQ, as well as for hope (ω = 0.72) and efficacy (ω = 0.77) in the case of the PCQ 12. This is significant from a practical perspective as it ensures the measures can be used with scientific reliability for further studies specifically relating to these topics within the student and tertiary educational domain. Pertaining to the hypothesised outcomes of this study, PBSU predicted SWL in the sample of first-year students from various disciplines. This holds noteworthy value from the understanding of developmental psychology as it predicts that students who display the ability and self-starting behaviours to proactively utilise their areas of potentiality will be able to effectively navigate the array of challenges presented to them during their first year of study at tertiary educational level. They will be able to achieve satisfaction with life, despite the contests during this crucial time of their academic career. It supports the work of Seligman (2011), who has established that PBSU could potentially facilitate various positive personal outcomes, such as pleasure and meaningful personal work experiences.

The power of PBSU is explained well through the research of Bowers and Lopez (2010), who established that university students who had the capacity for capitalising on their own strengths were better equipped to accumulate and utilise the resources available to them in the realm of their educational career as a means of achieving desired outcomes. From a practical perspective, it is now possible to argue that South African universities must actively seek and promote interventions that aid first-year students in utilising their strengths. Examples of such interventions can include utilising the resources already available through university staff and departments to conduct targeted strength-based development intercessions on an individual level, for example through student counselling services, as well as on the group level, through workshops on strength-based development, customised and presented at specific levels for specific year groups of students. This will lead to higher levels of satisfaction with life, which in the dominion of South African university students has been proven to be a direct predictor of academic performance (Van Zyl & Rothmann, 2012). In the context of this research, the fact that PBSU was proven as a predictor of SWL supports the notion of the broaden-and-build theory of Frederickson (2002). From a practical perspective, it is now possible to argue that South African universities must actively seek and promote interventions that aid students in utilising their strengths as a way to facilitate life satisfaction and increase likelihood for academic performance amongst these students.

Interestingly, Hypothesis 1b, which predicted that PBDI would predict SWL, revealed a negative relationship between these two constructs, meaning, on a practical level, that should a first-year student be focused on proactively and consistently working on their areas of deficit, that student is less likely to experience satisfaction with life. The correlation between PBDI and SWL, albeit negative, proved nearly as strong as the positive correlation between PBSU and SWL. This proved an intriguing part of this research. The only practical explanation one can offer for this phenomenon is the fact that, if an individual is overly focused on their areas of deficit and consistently examines and scrutinises these so-called areas of flaw, that person will be negatively inclined and is likely to experience less general satisfaction with their life. This state of affairs, as proven in this research, is a significant bolster to positive psychology which holds that a focus on potentialities and virtues has a far stronger value proposition than only focusing on what an individual is not good at (Cravens et al., 2010). It does not detract from the notion that balanced development will yield value for holistic development, but highlights the value of strength-based approaches in particular. Although the positive correlation between PBDI and SWL is salvaged by the mediating properties of PsyCap (later discussed in this article), it becomes evident that an in-depth enquiry needs to be made of the difference between PBSU and PBDI in fostering SWL, setting the scene for fruitful further research on this topic, particularly amongst South African university students.

In this study, both PBSU and PBDI were proven as predictors of efficacy, thus confirming Hypothesis 2a and Hypothesis 2b. Considering the elements of the construct, it becomes clear that self-starting, proactive behaviours of both strength use and deficit improvement will, in theory at the very least, be valuable to achieve greater levels of efficacy. Singh and Mansi (2009) commented that individuals with lower levels of perceived self-efficacy will feel less equipped to deal with challenges and will perceive themselves as being powerless in the navigation of stressors in their personal lives. This is contrary to what is implied through the PBSU and PBDI constructs which both allude to self-starting, proactive behaviours, thus inferring that an individual will take charge of a particular situation or challenge rather than merely stand back, accepting their fate as that of being unable to effectively deal with such a challenge (Van Woerkom et al., in press).

Efficacy is a construct of well-being and should thus be strengthened through PBSU and PBDI when considering the broaden-and-build theory (Frederickson, 2002). Efficacy is directly related to how an individual feels about their ability to deal with a particular challenge. It should thus be reflected by an individual's capacity to proactively seek the use of their psychological faculties to utilise strengths and improve deficits as a means of dealing with trials (Luthans, Avey, Avolio & Peterson, 2010). As in the case of SWL, efficacy has also been proven to be a significant predictor of academic success amongst students (Bandura, 1993; Zimmerman, 1995); further ensuring that the contribution of this study, particularly within the context of South African university students, becomes a practical one. It can now be argued that PBSU and PBDI should be actively encouraged within South African universities and amongst the students, as a way of stimulating these students’ perceptions of their ability to overcome challenge and effectively deal with the various stressors associated with the first year of study at an institution of higher learning.

Both PBSU and PBDI were proven as predictors of the PsyCap construct of hope, thereby confirming Hypothesis 3a and Hypothesis 3b. It can therefore be argued with scientific merit that, by incorporating PBSU and PBDI interventions within the realm of South African universities, progress may be achieved towards stimulating PsyCap constructs such as hope. This must be understood from the perspective of what hope essentially represents. According to Snyder (2000), hope entails both the will to achieve a particular goal or end result as well as the ability to actively seek and find ways as to achieve the said goal or result. Considering the self-starting nature of both PBSU and PBDI (Van Woerkom et al., in press), it becomes evident that an individual who actively seeks opportunities to utilise their strengths and develop their deficits will more likely experience higher levels of hope. Such a person will feel in better control of their future and will seek pragmatic pathways towards reaching the stated goals, as postulated by Snyder. This supports the hypotheses outlined above.

Hope has directly correlated with a number of positive work-related outcomes, such as financial performance, employee retention and job satisfaction (Peterson & Luthans, 2003), as well as organisational commitment (Larson & Luthans, 2006; Youssef & Luthans, 2007). It is thus reasonable to argue that hope as a construct will also be a valuable commodity in the arsenal of the first-year South African student towards achieving desired outcomes such as academic performance. In this instance, PBSU and PBDI can serve as valuable personal resources to facilitate higher levels of hope amongst these students.

The following hypotheses of this study predicted that hope would serve as mediator between PBSU and SWL (Hypothesis 4a) and PBDI and SWL (Hypothesis 4b), respectively. This was postulated, based on evidence from two research studies in particular. Firstly, Siu et al., (2013) proved that hope was an effective facilitator of engagement amongst a sample of students from a Hong Kong university. Secondly, Halama (2010) proved that hope could effectively mediate between a variety of personality factors and SWL, particularly in a large sample of Slovakian secondary and tertiary educational students. In the context of this study, it was established that hope served as a mediator between PBSU and SWL (confirming Hypothesis 4a), through complementary mediation with direct effect. It can thus be argued that hope will act in strengthening the relationship between PBSU and SWL, and must be actively promoted in the context of South African universities as a means of ensuring that first-year students experience higher levels of SWL. Hope also proved to be a mediator between PBDI and SWL (confirming Hypothesis 4b), with indirect effect. This proves the significant value of hope, particularly amongst first-year university students, as a negative correlation was actually established between PBDI and SWL in this study. Thus, although direct paths exist between PBSU and SWL, as well as hope and SWL, hope can serve as a mobilising agent between PBSU and SWL. Further, hope can also translate the capacity for PBDI towards a state of SWL as a mediator.

Within the context of this study, efficacy was established as a mediator between PBSU and SWL, thus confirming Hypothesis 5a, albeit with small indirect effect. This supports the work of Lightsey et al. (2014), who established efficacy as a full mediator between conscientiousness and meaning in life in a sample of Canadian university students. Through this study, it can now be argued that university management teams in South Africa should actively look for and implement interventions to raise students’ levels of self-efficacy as a means of strengthening the relationship between PBSU and SWL. This is particularly true of first-year students who are likely to experience various stressors, perhaps even feeling unequipped to effectively deal with the transition from secondary to tertiary educational level (Mouton et al., 2013). Hypothesis 5b, which postulated that efficacy would mediate between PBDI and SWL, could not be conclusively proven. This can be directly attributed to the fact that PBDI had a negative correlating relationship with SWL, which is highly enthralling and should be further explored.