What does it truly mean for a Ukrainian student to feel included in a European university? And what role do tutors, administrative staff, and intergroup contact play in promoting their well-being and academic success? These are the central questions driving the research activities of the UkraStud project.

The research component of UkraStud — developed under Work Package 2 and led by the University of Padova (Italy) — is built on a solid psychosocial framework inspired by well-established theories in social psychology, including intergroup contact theory (Allport, 1954; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006) and validated measures of psychological well-being, social self-efficacy, and European identification.

The study was conducted on a sample of 310 Ukrainian university students, of whom:

• 211 were international students hosted in universities in Croatia, Italy, Romania, and Turkey;
• 99 were university students still residing in Ukraine.

This transnational design allowed the research team to compare some aspects of the experiences of students living abroad with those continuing their studies in their home country — providing a picture of the psychosocial condition of Ukrainian university students.

The study examined four key areas:

1. Satisfaction with inclusion policies — how students perceive the support offered by their host university, including administrative assistance, tutor support, and buddy systems;
2. Psychological and social well-being — measured through the Flourishing Scale (Diener et al., 2010), self-expansion (Paolini et al., 2016), and social self-efficacy (Fan & Mak, 1998);
3. Intergroup contact and attitudes — quality and frequency of their interactions (Meleady et al., 2021) with local peers and the host population, and their attitudes toward the host country and other European countries;
4. European identification — the degree to which Ukrainian students identify with the European Union, measured both through a graphical scale (Aron et al., 1992) and a four-item identification scale (adapted from Meyer et al., 1993).

The results of the study offer both encouraging insights and important directions for action.

Ukrainian international students across all four host countries report satisfaction with inclusion policies and demonstrate positive levels of psychological and social well-being. Crucially, the research confirms that positive intergroup contact — with local students and the host population — is a significant predictor of well-being. 

A particularly striking finding emerged from the data collected in Ukraine: for students still residing there, positive intergroup contact with international students significantly predicts not only well-being but also academic performance — an effect not observed among students hosted abroad. This suggests that the impact of intergroup contact extends well beyond psychological outcomes, reaching into the academic sphere.

The study also confirms a secondary transfer effect: positive contact with the host population is linked to more favorable attitudes not only toward that specific country, but toward other European countries as well. Moreover, positive attitudes toward the host population, promoted by positive intergroup contact, are also associated with higher Ukrainian students’ identification with the European Union.

The findings of this study are not intended to remain on paper. They directly feed into the two other key outputs of the UkraStud project:

• the Online Course for University Tutors (WP3), which translates research insights into practical training modules and situational learning scenarios;
• the Guidelines and Protocols for the Inclusion of Ukrainian Students (WP4), which provide universities with evidence-based tools to improve their inclusion practices.

By grounding its practical outputs in rigorous research, UkraStud aims to contribute to a more evidence-based, student-centered approach to inclusion in European higher education.

Reference List

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.

Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596 –612. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596

Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/sll205-009-9493-y

Fan, C., & Mak, A. S. (1998). Measuring social self-efficacy in a culturally diverse student population. Social Behavior and Personality: An international Journal, 26(2), 131-144. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.1998.26.2.131

Meleady, R., Seger, C. R., & Vermue, M. (2021). Evidence of a dynamic association between intergroup contact and intercultural competence. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 24(8), 1427-1447. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220940400

Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538 –551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538

Paolini, S., Wright, S. C., Dys‐Steenbergen, O., & Favara, I. (2016). Self-expansion and intergroup contact: Expectancies and motives to self-expand lead to greater interest in outgroup contact and more positive intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 72(3), 450-471. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12176

Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751