Predicting and explaining students’ stress with the Demand–Control Model: does neuroticism also matter?

University students often report high stress levels, and studies even suggest a recent increase. However, there is a lack of theoretically based research on the structural conditions that influence students’ perceived stress. The current study compared the effects of Karasek’s demand–control dimensions with the influence of neuroticism to address environmental and individual characteristics related to stress. Two points of measurement were included: T1 in the middle of the term and T2 during the examination period. Participants were 146 psychology students at two German universities (Mage = 22.6 years). We applied an adapted version of Karasek’s Job Content Questionnaire, a self-developed stress scale, and the 21-item Big-Five-Inventory. At T1, both neuroticism and demands significantly predicted stress (total adjusted R² = .40), although relative weights analyses indicated that the contribution of demands was more pronounced (relative importance: 63%). Longitudinally, controlling for stress at T1, the demand–control dimensions explained additional variance in the increased stress level at T2, whereas neuroticism did not contribute additionally (R² = .52). Results indicate that self-reports on stress among university students are not only a reflection of underlying negative affectivity. We conclude that perceived stress can be explained by structural conditions rather than personality, providing opportunities to reduce stress among students.