Alleviating social anxiety in college students: A comprehensive positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment model-based group counseling approach

Abstract

BACKGROUND

College students represent a high-risk population for social anxiety, which severely impacts their academic performance, social functioning, and mental health. Traditional interventions, such as mindfulness training and cognitive-behavioral therapy, have demonstrated limited effectiveness in addressing this issue. The positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment (PERMA) model, a theoretical framework derived from positive psychology. This multidimensional approach offers a novel perspective for improving psychosocial functioning in a more holistic manner.

AIM

To explore the effects of applying comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model on social anxiety in college students.

METHODS

One hundred college students with social anxiety from a university in the city were selected as research participants from October 2025 to December 2025. They were randomly divided into an intervention group (receiving comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model) and a control group (receiving no intervention), with 50 cases in each group. Comparisons were made between the two groups regarding social anxiety, self-esteem, interpersonal trust, interpersonal attraction, mental health level, interpersonal relationships, self-well-being, self-efficacy, and group satisfaction.

RESULTS

After the intervention, the intervention group exhibited significantly greater improvements across all measured outcomes compared to the control group. Social anxiety (Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale) decreased more substantially (42.62 ± 3.17 vs 53.28 ± 3.50), while self-esteem (Self-Esteem Scale: 24.38 ± 4.00 vs 19.56 ± 3.35) and interpersonal trust (Interpersonal Trust Scale: 52.64 ± 6.83 vs 48.78 ± 6.04) showed greater increases (all P < 0.05). Interpersonal attraction (Interpersonal Attraction Scale total: 67.74 ± 12.70 vs 58.80 ± 11.23) and all its sub-dimensions were significantly higher in the intervention group, as were conversational skills, social interaction ability, and total interpersonal relationship scores. Mental health symptoms (Symptom Checklist 90) were consistently lower across all dimensions in the intervention group, including anxiety, depression, and somatization (all P < 0.05). Additionally, self-efficacy (2.66 ± 0.30 vs 2.25 ± 0.32) and well-being (Index of Well-Being: 11.39 ± 2.53 vs 9.44 ± 2.64) were significantly elevated, and group satisfaction ratings across all aspects (e.g., guidance attitude, communication, environment) were markedly higher in the intervention group (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model can improve social anxiety and mental health levels in college students, enhance their self-esteem, interpersonal trust, interpersonal attraction, conversational and social skills, and effectively increase their self-efficacy and well-being. Moreover, the participants were relatively satisfied with the overall counseling outcomes.

Key Words: PERMA model; Comprehensive; Group counseling; College students; Social anxiety

Core Tip: This randomized controlled trial demonstrates that a comprehensive group counseling program based on the positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment model of positive psychology significantly alleviates social anxiety and improves mental health in college students. Beyond reducing anxiety symptoms, the intervention uniquely enhances multiple positive psychosocial domains, including self-esteem, interpersonal trust, interpersonal attraction, social skills, self-efficacy, and subjective well-being. This study provides a novel, effective, and well-accepted multi-dimensional psychological intervention strategy for addressing the prevalent issue of social anxiety in the student population.

INTRODUCTION

Social anxiety is an emotional reaction characterized by anxiety, fear, discomfort, and avoidance behaviors arising from the fear of negative evaluation, embarrassment, or humiliation under the observation of others, including during social interactions. It is a prevalent psychological issue among college students[1,2]. Related research indicates that in China, as many as 12%-14% of college students experience high levels of social anxiety. In severe cases, this can develop into significant social anxiety disorder, adversely affecting students’ academic performance, career development, and mental health[3]. Therefore, improving the mental health of college students is a primary goal for current higher education institutions.

Group counseling is an approach that targets groups by applying appropriate counseling techniques to enable members to understand and help each other, increase social participation and interpersonal interaction, and enhance adaptability[4]. However, a meta-analysis by Dones et al[5] on social anxiety in adolescents revealed limited effectiveness of traditional mindfulness interventions and cognitive-behavioral therapy in alleviating social anxiety symptoms in this population (effect size = -0.04, 95% confidence interval: -0.58 to 0.51). This suggests that conventional intervention strategies may be insufficient to meet the specific needs of individuals with social anxiety. In another intervention study focusing on college students with social anxiety, Pu et al[6] found that solution-focused group counseling effectively reduced internet addiction behaviors, indicating that theory-specific or problem-oriented group approaches may offer greater targeting. However, this approach did not address critical issues such as the reconstruction of social functioning or the enhancement of self-worth among college students.

To address these gaps, this study adopts the positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment (PERMA) model proposed by positive psychologist Seligman as its theoretical framework. In recent years, the PERMA model has demonstrated unique advantages in the field of mental health promotion. For instance, research by Dorri Sedeh and Aghaei[7] confirmed that an educational intervention based on the PERMA model significantly increased college students’ well-being levels by 1.13 times. Research by Tan[8] found that among 1500 students at a vocational college in Guangdong Province (China), training based on positive psychological group counseling courses grounded in the PERMA concept significantly increased students’ positive emotions (t = -8.595, P < 0.001), indicating that the PERMA model can enhance individuals’ positive affect. Nevertheless, existing PERMA-based interventions have predominantly focused on general college student populations, leaving its application to specific groups such as individuals with social anxiety largely unexplored.

Based on this, this study evaluates the potential improvement effects of comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model for college students with social anxiety, aiming to provide new insights for enhancing the mental health level of college students.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

General information

A total of 100 college students with social anxiety from a university in the city were selected as research participants between October 2025 and December 2025. The two groups were comparable at baseline, as there were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in demographic characteristics, including gender, age, history of childhood psychological trauma, and parental marital status (see Table 1 for details).

Table 1 Comparison of baseline data, n (%)/mean ± SD.

Item		Intervention group (n = 50)	Control group (n = 50)	χ2/t	P value
Gender	Male	26 (52.00)	27 (54.00)	0.040	0.841
	Female	24 (48.00)	23 (46.00)
Age (years)		18.24 ± 2.18	18.16 ± 2.06	0.188	0.851
History of childhood psychological trauma	Yes	8 (16.00)	6 (12.00)	0.332	0.564
	No	42 (84.00)	44 (88.00)
Parental marital status	Stable	45 (90.00)	43 (86.00)	0.379	0.538
	Divorced or long-term separation	5 (10.00)	7 (14.00)

Inclusion criteria: (1) A score of 60 or above on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS)[9]; (2) Voluntary participation in and completion of the questionnaire survey; (3) Aged ≥ 18 years; and (4) Provision of informed consent.

Exclusion criteria: (1) Presence of physical illnesses; (2) Currently receiving psychological counseling; (3) Diagnosis of mental illness requiring pharmacological treatment; and (4) History of severe physical illness.

Methods

Control group: Received no intervention.

Intervention group: Received comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model: (1) Group formation: The group was led by one main facilitator with a background in positive psychology and assisted by one undergraduate student with a foundation in psychological counseling or mental health education. They collaboratively developed the PERMA group counseling manual and social growth record cards. The manual outlined the core procedures and exercises for 13 sessions and was distributed during the first session; and (2) Intervention protocol: The group counseling sessions were conducted twice a week, each lasting 1.5 hours, over a period of 7 weeks, totaling 13 sessions. Forming stage (sessions 1-3): The first session involved paired introductions through a “smiling greetings” activity, an explanation of the PERMA model, signing of group norms, and anonymous sharing of worries in an “anxiety box”. The second session featured cumulative self-introductions, drawing a “three self-states” diagram, and drawing and sharing stories related to positive character strengths. The third session included writing and sharing “I am...” sentences, setting specific social goals on a PERMA tree diagram, and establishing an online support group. Transition stage (sessions 4-5): The fourth session consisted of a “trust fall” activity and a “strengths bombardment” positive feedback exercise. The fifth session involved explaining cognitive distortion types such as “mind reading” and practicing filling out “thought records”. Working stage (sessions 6-10): Skills training and cognitive restructuring. Session 6 involved a three-minute impromptu speech, practicing confident body language, and learning the “three good things” recording method. Session 7 required designing and completing a team challenge task requiring close collaboration, followed by a discussion on growth-oriented attribution. In session 8, participants drew social situation cards for role-playing exercises, followed by group debriefing and feedback. Session 9 employed Socratic questioning and evidence testing to guide members in identifying their negative beliefs and collaboratively creating “alternative thought cards”. Session 10 included anonymous gratitude expressions, collaborative creation of a group painting, and assignment of “social experiment” homework. Termination stage (sessions 11-13): Session 11 focused on sharing the most surprising changes recorded in the social growth record cards. In session 12, groups presented their “social growth story” PowerPoint presentations and an award ceremony was held. Session 13 featured a “back blessings” message-writing activity and farewell sharing. Daily integration: Members were required to record at least three “three good things” entries and conduct one “social experiment” per week. They were encouraged to actively share their experiences in the support group. The facilitator reviewed the homework at the beginning of each session.

Observation indicators

Social anxiety, self-esteem, and interpersonal trust: Before and after the intervention, the LSAS[9] was used to assess the social anxiety of college students. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the scale is 0.94. It consists of two subscales: Social fear and social avoidance, each containing 24 items scored on a scale from 0 to 3. The total score ranges from 0 to 144, with a score ≥ 60 defined as indicative of high anxiety symptoms. Higher scores indicate more severe social anxiety in college students. The Self-Esteem Scale (SES)[10] was employed to measure the self-esteem level of college students through self-assessment. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the scale exceeds 0.80. It contains 10 items using a 4-point Likert scale, with a total score ranging from 10 to 40. Higher scores are proportional to a higher level of self-acceptance among college students. The Interpersonal Trust Scale (ITS), with a Cronbach’s α coefficient of 0.75, was used to evaluate the degree of interpersonal trust among college students. The scale consists of 25 items using a 5-point Likert scale, resulting in a total score ranging from 25 to 125. Higher scores indicate a greater degree of trust.

Interpersonal attraction: Before and after the intervention, the Interpersonal Attraction Scale[11] was used to assess the interpersonal attraction level of the college students. It includes three dimensions: Task attraction, social attraction, and physical attraction, comprising a total of 15 items. The scale uses a 7-point Likert scoring system, with total scores ranging from 15 to 105. Higher scores indicate greater interpersonal attraction.

Mental health level: Before and after the intervention, the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90)[12] was employed to assess the mental health level of the college students. This checklist consists of 90 items covering a range of psychiatric symptoms including sensations, emotions, thoughts, consciousness, behavior, and lifestyle habits. The results are interpreted based on the number of positive items (score > 2 points) and the scores of individual factors. A higher total score indicates stronger psychological discomfort. Tests have shown that the SCL-90 has good reliability and validity in the general population.

Interpersonal relationships: Before and after the intervention, the College Student Interpersonal Relationship Diagnostic Comprehensive Scale[13] was used to assess interpersonal relationships. It covers four aspects: Conversation, making friends, social interactions, and interactions with the opposite sex, totaling 28 items. A total score in the range of 0-8 indicates no interpersonal difficulties; 9-14 indicates some degree of difficulty; and 15-28 indicates significant interpersonal difficulties. Higher scores signify more pronounced interpersonal difficulties. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for this scale is 0.803.

Self-well-being and self-efficacy: Before and after the intervention, the Index of Well-Being (IWB)[14] was used to assess the subjective well-being of the college students. This scale consists of two subscales: The General Affect Index (8 items including happiness, interest, loneliness, etc.) and a Life Satisfaction Questionnaire. The final total score ranges from 2.1 to 14.7, with higher scores indicating greater subjective well-being. The General Self-Efficacy Scale[15], which has a Cronbach’s α coefficient of 0.87, was used to evaluate the self-efficacy of the college students. This scale contains 10 items scored on a 4-point scale, where 1 corresponds to “completely incorrect” and 4 to “completely correct”. Higher scores on this scale indicate stronger self-efficacy.

Group satisfaction: The satisfaction levels of the two groups of college students were compared across five dimensions: Counseling attitude, communication, environment, work motivation, and sense of responsibility. Each dimension had a total score of 100 points, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction with the counseling.

Statistical analysis

SPSS 27.0 software was used. Measurement data were first tested for normality. If they followed a normal distribution, they were expressed as mean ± SD, and comparisons between two groups were performed using the independent samples t-test. Count data were expressed as n (%) and analyzed using the χ² test or Fisher’s exact probability test. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Comparison of social anxiety, self-esteem, and interpersonal trust between the two groups before and after guidance

Prior to the intervention, no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed between the two groups in terms of LSAS, SES, or ITS scores. After guidance, the LSAS score of the intervention group (42.62 ± 3.17) was significantly lower than that of the control group (53.28 ± 3.50), while the SES score (24.38 ± 4.00) and ITS score (52.64 ± 6.83) were significantly higher than those of the control group (19.56 ± 3.35, 48.78 ± 6.04; P < 0.05), as shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Comparison of social anxiety, self-esteem, and interpersonal trust, mean ± SD (points).

Group	LSAS		SES		ITS
	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance
Intervention group (n = 50)	70.78 ± 2.90	42.62 ± 3.17a	17.72 ± 4.45	24.38 ± 4.00a	45.92 ± 8.31	52.64 ± 6.83a
Control group (n = 50)	70.16 ± 2.38	53.28 ± 3.50a	17.98 ± 3.26	19.56 ± 3.35a	47.84 ± 6.56	48.78 ± 6.04
t	1.169	15.954	0.333	6.532	1.283	2.993
P value	0.245	0.000	0.740	0.000	0.203	0.004

^aP < 0.05 vs the same group before guidance.

LSAS: Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale; SES: Self-Esteem Scale; ITS: Interpersonal Trust Scale.

Comparison of interpersonal attraction status between the two groups before and after guidance

Before the intervention, no significant differences were found between the two groups in task attraction, social attraction, physical attraction, or the total interpersonal attraction score (P > 0.05). After guidance, the scores of the intervention group in task attraction (24.14 ± 4.91), social attraction (21.06 ± 3.99), physical attraction (22.32 ± 3.80), and total score (67.74 ± 12.70) were all significantly higher than those of the control group (21.46 ± 4.98, 18.00 ± 4.24, 18.80 ± 4.19, 58.80 ± 11.23; P < 0.05), as shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Comparison of interpersonal attraction status, mean ± SD (points).

Group	Task attraction		Social attraction		Physical attraction		Total score
	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance
Intervention group (n = 50)	17.42 ± 4.58	24.14 ± 4.91a	14.52 ± 3.95	21.06 ± 3.99a	15.36 ± 3.91	22.32 ± 3.80a	47.94 ± 12.34	67.74 ± 12.70a
Control group (n = 50)	17.80 ± 4.14	21.46 ± 4.98a	14.88 ± 3.47	18.00 ± 4.24a	15.74 ± 3.56	18.80 ± 4.19a	48.62 ± 11.08	58.80 ± 11.23a
t	0.435	2.711	0.484	3.714	0.508	4.396	0.290	3.729
P value	0.664	0.008	0.629	0.000	0.612	0.000	0.773	0.000

^aP < 0.05 vs the same group before guidance.

Comparison of mental health levels between the two groups after guidance

After the intervention, the intervention group showed significantly lower scores than the control group across all assessed dimensions: Phobia (12.67 ± 1.72 vs 15.50 ± 2.68), anxiety (15.85 ± 2.66 vs 28.66 ± 2.89), obsession (16.65 ± 1.65 vs 18.68 ± 2.99), somatization (23.67 ± 2.80 vs 35.30 ± 6.68), psychoticism (15.77 ± 2.67 vs 17.86 ± 1.60), eating and sleeping (11.56 ± 1.00 vs 17.56 ± 1.77), and depression (21.85 ± 4.66 vs 38.74 ± 6.76) (all P < 0.05), as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Comparison of mental health levels, mean ± SD (points).

Group	Phobia	Anxiety	Obsession	Somatization	Psychoticism	Diet and sleep	Depression
Intervention group (n = 50)	12.67 ± 1.72	15.85 ± 2.66	16.65 ± 1.65	23.67 ± 2.80	15.77 ± 2.67	11.56 ± 1.00	21.85 ± 4.66
Control group (n = 50)	15.50 ± 2.68	28.66 ± 2.89	18.68 ± 2.99	35.30 ± 6.68	17.86 ± 1.60	17.56 ± 1.77	38.74 ± 6.76
t	6.301	23.080	4.220	11.361	4.769	20.863	14.557
P value	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000

Comparison of differences in interpersonal relationships between the two groups before and after guidance

Before the intervention, there were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups in terms of conversation skills, making friends, interpersonal interactions, interactions with the opposite sex, or the total interpersonal relationship score (all P > 0.05). After guidance, the intervention group showed significantly better scores than the control group in conversation (1.52 ± 1.09 vs 2.02 ± 1.18), making friends (1.51 ± 1.09 vs 1.95 ± 1.06), interpersonal interaction (0.89 ± 0.90 vs 1.25 ± 0.85), heterosexual interaction (1.15 ± 0.96 vs 1.55 ± 0.94), and interpersonal total score (5.14 ± 2.89 vs 6.34 ± 2.95; P < 0.05), as shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Comparison of interpersonal relationship differences, mean ± SD (points).

Group	Conversation		Making friends		Interpersonal interaction		Heterosexual interaction		Interpersonal total score
	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance
Intervention group (n = 50)	1.95 ± 1.03	1.52 ± 1.09a	1.76 ± 1.02	1.51 ± 1.09	1.10 ± 0.87	0.89 ± 0.90	1.53 ± 0.88	1.15 ± 0.96a	6.12 ± 3.45	5.14 ± 2.89
Control group (n = 50)	1.87 ± 1.10	2.02 ± 1.18	1.68 ± 0.97	1.95 ± 1.06	0.98 ± 0.79	1.25 ± 0.85	1.38 ± 0.79	1.55 ± 0.94	5.64 ± 3.33	6.34 ± 2.95
t	0.376	2.203	0.362	2.049	0.725	2.065	0.949	2.115	0.708	2.058
P value	0.708	0.030	0.718	0.043	0.470	0.042	0.345	0.037	0.481	0.042

^aP < 0.05 vs the same group before guidance.

Comparison of self-well-being and self-efficacy between the two groups before and after guidance

Prior to the intervention, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in self-efficacy or IWB scores (P > 0.05). After the guidance, however, the intervention group demonstrated significantly higher scores in self-efficacy (2.66 ± 0.30) and IWB (11.39 ± 2.53) compared to the control group (self-efficacy: 2.25 ± 0.32; IWB: 9.44 ± 2.64; P < 0.05), as shown in Table 6.

Table 6 Comparison of self-well-being and self-efficacy, mean ± SD (points).

Group	Self-efficacy		IWB
	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance	Pre-guidance	Post-guidance
Intervention group (n = 50)	2.50 ± 0.37	2.66 ± 0.30a	5.52 ± 1.42	11.39 ± 2.53a
Control group (n = 50)	2.44 ± 0.53	2.25 ± 0.32a	5.24 ± 1.45	9.44 ± 2.64a
t	0.662	6.770	0.976	3.749
P value	0.509	0.000	0.331	0.000

^aP < 0.05 vs the same group before guidance.

IWB: Index of Well-Being.

Group satisfaction status

The intervention group scored significantly higher than the control group in guidance attitude (92.60 ± 2.42 vs 85.76 ± 2.80), communication (91.40 ± 2.42 vs 86.28 ± 2.34), environment (92.04 ± 2.37 vs 88.66 ± 2.41), work enthusiasm (92.15 ± 2.31 vs 87.30 ± 2.44), and responsibility (93.20 ± 2.34 vs 86.30 ± 2.40; P < 0.05), as shown in Table 7.

Table 7 Group satisfaction status, mean ± SD (points).

Group	Guidance attitude	Communication	Environment	Work enthusiasm	Responsibility
Intervention group (n = 50)	92.60 ± 2.42	91.40 ± 2.42	92.04 ± 2.37	92.14 ± 2.31	93.20 ± 2.34
Control group (n = 50)	85.76 ± 2.80	86.28 ± 2.34	88.66 ± 2.41	87.30 ± 2.44	86.30 ± 2.40
t	13.049	10.766	7.063	10.173	14.556
P value	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000

DISCUSSION

College students are a high-risk population for social anxiety, with a lifetime prevalence exceeding 12%. Notably, up to 48% of these individuals also suffer from comorbid depression, which severely impacts their academic development[16]. In response, this study designed and implemented a comprehensive group counseling intervention based on the PERMA model. These elements are mutually independent yet synergistic, providing a systematic framework for addressing social anxiety across multiple dimensions. The results demonstrate that this integrated intervention significantly improved the psychosocial functioning of college students with social anxiety.

The present study showed that after the intervention, the intervention group exhibited lower scores on the LSAS and various dimensions of the SCL-90 compared to the control group. These findings are consistent with the results of Yang et al[17], indicating that the comprehensive PERMA model-based group counseling can alleviate social anxiety and improve mental health levels among college students. The underlying mechanisms can be attributed to the pivotal roles played by the positive emotion and engagement components of the PERMA model in mitigating core symptoms of social anxiety. In terms of cultivating positive emotions, the intervention employed activities such as having each member take turns as the focal point to receive sincere feedback from peers regarding observed strengths or admirable qualities. This allowed socially anxious students to concentrate on receiving positive peer feedback, thereby disrupting their patterns of self-negation and shifting their attention from potential negative evaluations to actual positive recognition, effectively reducing anticipatory anxiety. Additionally, through progressively designed activities such as role-playing, impromptu speeches, and “social mini-experiments”, members repeatedly confronted and successfully navigated increasingly anxiety-provoking situations. This systematic desensitization facilitated a shift in social behavior from avoidance to proactive coping, thereby reducing psychological exhaustion[18]. Concurrently, collaborative group activities, such as creating a collective painting, provided tangible and positive shared memories born from the joint efforts of all members. This fostered a sense of collective efficacy, enabling members to develop trust in and reliance on the group, which in turn alleviated feelings of loneliness and stress[19] and enhanced psychological resilience. Wu et al[20] explored this dynamic using a cross-lagged model with 392 college students and found a positive correlation between rumination and social anxiety (r = 0.18), suggesting that positive emotional experiences can directly disrupt this ruminative cycle. Regarding the engagement component, this study designed tasks such as team challenges and social scenario role-playing, creating highly focused activities for socially anxious students. These tasks encouraged members to redirect their attention from excessive negative self-concerns toward external task objectives, thereby interrupting rumination and reducing self-focused attention. Furthermore, through activities such as sharing stories of character strengths and guiding members to document specific anxiety-provoking social situations - including automatic thoughts, emotions, and physiological reactions - the intervention helped participants distinguish thoughts from facts and reinterpret the personal significance of social interactions. This process enhanced their perceived value of social activities, reduced avoidance tendencies, and collectively alleviated social anxiety levels[21].

The relationships component of the PERMA model directly contributed to multidimensional improvements in social functioning in this study. The results showed that the intervention group exhibited higher scores on the SES, ITS, and Interpersonal Attraction Scale (including its total score and all sub-dimensions), indicating that the comprehensive PERMA model-based group counseling effectively enhanced interpersonal attraction and improved conversational and social skills among college students with social anxiety. The underlying mechanisms can be attributed to several factors. First, experiential activities such as “trust fall” and “blind walk” strengthened members’ trust in the group, directly promoting an increase in interpersonal trust levels. Meanwhile, tools such as social growth record cards and social goal-setting helped members reflect on specific activities experienced during the counseling process, fostering a sense of achievement and thereby boosting their self-esteem. Second, the group counseling in this study incorporated team challenge tasks, and during discussions about factors contributing to success or difficulties after task completion, positive outcomes were attributed to members’ individual efforts and teamwork. This helped participants recognize and reinforce their positive traits, gradually correct negative self-perceptions, and thereby regain confidence and a sense of social belonging. As a result, members exhibited greater confidence and ease in interpersonal interactions, naturally enhancing their interpersonal appeal. Simultaneously, this study designed numerous exercises simulating real social situations, such as “smiling greetings” practice, role-playing, impromptu speeches, and team challenges. These activities provided members with opportunities to practice social skills, enabling them to refine their conversation techniques and collaboration abilities through repeated practice and immediate feedback. Consequently, their conversational and social interaction abilities were directly improved. Sun[22] through a questionnaire survey of college students, found a positive correlation between interpersonal relationships and mental health among college students, with interpersonal relationships serving as a positive predictor of mental health.

This study also found that after the group counseling, the self-efficacy and IWB scores of the intervention group improved significantly, indicating that comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model can enhance the self-efficacy and well-being of socially anxious college students. This can be attributed to the activation of the meaning and accomplishment components within the PERMA model, which fosters key positive psychological resources. On one hand, the group counseling designed a series of step-by-step, achievable challenge tasks, creating numerous opportunities for members to experience small successes. During the “growth-oriented attribution discussions” held after each activity, members were guided to attribute their successes to their own efforts and strategies, thereby directly translating behavioral successes into a solid belief in “I can do it” and reinforcing self-efficacy. On the other hand, through activities such as gratitude expression, strengths bombardment, and character strengths sharing, the group counseling consistently guided members to focus on and amplify positive aspects of their lives. This process weakened their original automatic tendency to prioritize scanning for negative social cues in their environment and increased their experience of positive emotions. Additionally, anonymous gratitude expression provided a zero-pressure environment free from evaluation, directly interrupting members’ self-censorship and anticipatory anxiety during the expression process, thereby reducing psychological exhaustion[23]. Together, these aspects contributed to an enhancement in their overall well-being. Furthermore, the study revealed that after the counseling, the group satisfaction scores of the intervention group increased significantly, indicating that participants were generally satisfied with the overall effectiveness of the comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model. Within the PERMA model, positive emotions promote engagement, engagement deepens relationships, relationships support the discovery of meaning, meaning drives the pursuit of accomplishment, and accomplishment, in turn, reinforces positive emotions. This synergistic interaction yields holistic benefits that surpass the sum of its individual components. These benefits are directly reflected in the intervention group’s exceptionally high levels of multidimensional group satisfaction, demonstrating the participants’ recognition of the integrated PERMA experience.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive group counseling based on the PERMA model significantly improves social anxiety, mental health, self-esteem, interpersonal functioning, self-efficacy, and well-being among college students. The intervention is well-received by participants and offers a promising, multi-dimensional approach for university mental health services. Further research with larger, multi-center samples is recommended to validate and refine the intervention.