**9. Discussion of the results of testing hypothesis H3**

We can state that the groups differ in three indicators of global wellbeing, namely, general indicator of mental health continuum (Н = 15.97; р < 0.003), overall level of satisfaction, which reflects satisfaction with one's life, oneself, relationships (Н = 23.38; p < 0.000), general indicator of social well-being, which integrates different aspects of wellness in society (Н = 17.58; p < 0.002). It should be noted that groups with different types of personal resourcefulness differ significantly in the experience of subjective well-being, which is manifested in the predominance of positive emotional background (Н = 31.15; р < 0.000) over negative emotional experiences (Н = 17.47; р < 0.002). We also note that students experience psychological (Н = 19.99; р < 0.001) and hedonic (Н = 16.95; р < 0.002) well-being in different ways depending on the type of resourcefulness. Psychological well-being manifests itself in a non-judgemental attitude towards the events of the inner world (Н = 10.68; р < 0.031), which allows an individual to maintain emotional balance: not to immerse themselves too much in certain experiences and not to ignore negative feelings and thoughts. We would like to remark that we received a lot of conflicting data from the two tests regarding indicators of social well-being, which does not allow us to talk about a significant influence of the type of resourcefulness.

We obtained more detailed information about each type of resourcefulness in a comparative analysis using the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U-test.


**Table 6** includes a brief description of each type of resourcefulness.

#### **Table 6.**

*Characteristics of different types of personal resourcefulness.*


#### **Table 7.**

*Transformation of indicators of Ukrainian students' resourcefulness in a long-term stressful situation (war on the territory of Ukraine).*
