Abstract
Background. Thinking styles, self-esteem, and assertiveness are essential psychological concepts that influence how individuals interact with others and express themselves effectively. Although these three variables are important and have been studied before, the mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between thinking styles and the two types of assertiveness (adaptive and aggressive) among students has been less explored. The present study aimed to examine the mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between thinking styles and two types of assertiveness among university students.
Methods. The statistical population of the current descriptive study consisted of students from several branches of Islamic Azad University in Tehran in 2024, with 306 participants recruited through convenience sampling. Data were collected using the Adaptive and Aggressive Assertiveness Scale, the Thinking Styles Inventory, and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. To test the hypothesis of self-esteem’s mediating role between thinking styles and assertiveness types, a path analysis based on structural equation modeling was conducted using SPSS and AMOS.
Results. Findings indicate that the first and second thinking styles had significant positive relationships with self-esteem, whereas the third had a negative, non-significant relationship. The first thinking style had a positive impact, while the second and third styles showed adverse effects on both adaptive and aggressive assertiveness. Self-esteem, as a mediating variable, is crucial in these relationships. The research model explained 15% of the variance in self-esteem, 17% in aggressive assertiveness, and 27% in adaptive assertiveness, demonstrating a good model fit.
Conclusion. These findings indicate that the connections between thinking styles and both types of assertiveness are intricate rather than simple or one-dimensional. Self-esteem may play a key mediating role in these relationships. Therefore, focusing on teaching effective thinking styles and enhancing self-esteem can improve adaptive assertiveness and reduce aggressive behaviors among students.
Extended Abstract
Background
Thinking styles, self-esteem, and assertiveness are essential psychological constructs that influence how individuals interact socially and express themselves. Thinking styles refer to the preferred methods individuals use to process information and solve problems, while self-esteem reflects one’s overall sense of self-worth. Both factors significantly impact how assertively individuals communicate their thoughts, needs, and boundaries. Assertiveness can be expressed in either an adaptive (respectful and constructive) or an aggressive (hostile and confrontational) form. Understanding how thinking styles and assertiveness interact, along with the possible mediating role of self-esteem, is especially crucial in university settings, where young adults are developing critical interpersonal and emotional skills. The present study aimed to examine whether self-esteem mediates the relationship between thinking styles and the two types of assertiveness among university students.
Methods
This study used a descriptive design with an applied purpose and employed structural equation modeling (SEM). Path analysis was employed to examine both direct and indirect relationships among variables and to assess the mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between thinking styles (Type I, Type II, and Type III) and types of assertiveness (adaptive and aggressive). The study population included all students at the branches of Islamic Azad University in Tehran during 2024. According to methodological recommendations, a minimum of 200 participants is required for SEM. Given the model’s complexity, a sample size of 300 was targeted to ensure adequate power. In total, 306 students were recruited using convenience sampling. Participation was voluntary and based on informed consent. Eligibility criteria included being an enrolled student at one of the Azad Universities in Tehran, and willing to participate. Exclusion criteria included incomplete questionnaire responses, recent use of psychiatric medications (within the past three months), or the presence of severe psychological disorders. Three validated instruments were used: the Adaptive and Aggressive Assertiveness Scale, the Thinking Styles Inventory by Sternberg and Wagner, and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. These instruments were selected based on the key variables of the study, and their reliability and validity have been supported by prior national and international studies. Descriptive statistics, including frequency and percentage for categorical variables, were analyzed using SPSS. Path analysis was conducted using AMOS software. Assumptions of normality were evaluated using skewness and kurtosis. Pearson’s correlation was used to assess variable relationships, and multicollinearity was checked using variance inflation factors (VIF) and tolerance indices. Model fit was assessed using chi-square/df, CFI, GFI, AGFI, NFI, and RMSEA indices. The significance level was set at 0.05.
Results The study included 306 students from several branches of Islamic Azad University in Tehran (2024), selected through convenience sampling. Among participants, 65.7% were female, 59.2% single, and 71.2% employed. The majority (35.0%) were aged 18–23. Most were enrolled in bachelor’s (40.5%) or master’s (40.8%) programs. Descriptive statistics showed that the mean scores for the three thinking styles (Type I, II, and III) were 141.25, 111.13, and 109.38, respectively. The mean self-esteem score (18.12) was above average (scale range: 0–30, average: 15), indicating generally high self-esteem among participants. The average scores for aggressive and assertive (adaptive) assertiveness were 31.57 and 49.90, respectively. Skewness and kurtosis values for all variables were within the acceptable range (±2), confirming normal distribution. Pearson correlation analysis confirmed significant correlations between all variables, satisfying assumptions for path analysis. Variance inflation factors (VIFs < 10) and tolerance indices (> 0.1) indicated no multicollinearity concerns. Path analysis using maximum likelihood estimation revealed that Type I and Type II thinking styles were significantly and positively associated with self-esteem (β = 0.33 and 0.17, respectively, P < 0.01). Type III thinking style showed a non-significant negative relationship. These results suggest that students with Type I and II thinking styles tend to have higher self-esteem. Regarding assertiveness, Type I thinking style was positively associated with adaptive assertiveness (β = 0.44, P < 0.01) and negatively with aggressive assertiveness (β = –0.20, P < 0.01). Type II and III styles were negatively associated with both types of assertiveness, with Type III showing a strong negative link to aggressive assertiveness (β = –0.28, P < 0.01). Self-esteem was negatively associated with aggressive assertiveness (β = –0.17, P < 0.01) and positively with adaptive assertiveness (β = 0.12, P < 0.05), confirming its mediating role. An indirect effects analysis showed that thinking styles explained 15% of the variance in self-esteem. Thinking styles also explained 17% and 27% of the variance in aggressive and adaptive assertiveness, respectively. Type I thinking had both significant direct and indirect effects on assertiveness. Fit indices (e.g., CFI = 0.920, GFI = 0.968, RMSEA = 0.076) supported good model fit. Overall, findings highlight the significant mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between thinking styles and assertive behaviors in students.
Conclusion
These findings suggest that the relationships between thinking styles and both adaptive and aggressive assertiveness are complex and not simply linear. Self-esteem plays a significant mediating role, influencing how thinking styles affect assertive behaviors. This highlights the importance of interventions that focus on teaching effective thinking styles alongside strategies to boost self-esteem. Doing so helps students develop better adaptive assertiveness skills, promote more constructive communication, and reduce aggressive behaviors. Such an approach can improve social interactions and emotional well-being in university settings.
Practical Implications of Research
The results can help shape training programs that promote effective thinking styles and boost students’ self-esteem. These interventions might encourage adaptive assertiveness, reduce aggressive behaviors, and be beneficial in counseling and student empowerment programs.