Young men aged 18 to 30 face significant mental health challenges, exhibiting high levels of stress and reduced wellbeing while simultaneously being among the least likely demographic groups to engage in help-seeking behaviours (Kessler et al., 2002; World Health Organization [WHO], 2020). This paradox has drawn increased attention from psychological researchers and practitioners, particularly in light of evidence suggesting that traditional gender norms—emphasising stoicism and emotional self-reliance—discourage young men from seeking psychological support (Seidler et al., 2019). These findings underscore the urgency of identifying modifiable, internal psychological resources that may bolster wellbeing and buffer against stress, without pathologising emotional struggle or requiring clinical intervention. One such resource, widely recognised within positive and existential psychology, is an individual’s sense of meaning in life.
Meaning in life has been conceptualised as a psychological construct reflecting one’s sense of purpose, coherence, and existential significance (Steger et al., 2006; Frankl, 1959/1985). Frankl argued that the search for meaning constitutes a fundamental human drive, particularly potent in the face of adversity. Contemporary research has built on this foundation, demonstrating that individuals who perceive their lives as meaningful are more likely to experience eudaimonic wellbeing, characterised by fulfilment and optimal functioning (Ryff & Singer, 1998; Ryan & Deci, 2001). In both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, greater perceived meaning in life has been associated with higher life satisfaction, positive affect, and lower levels of anxiety and negative mood (King et al., 2006; Steger, 2012; Zika & Chamberlain, 1992).
However, the literature has largely focused on general adult populations or mixed-gender samples, with limited exploration of young men as a distinct group. This oversight is significant. Young adulthood is a developmental stage characterised by identity formation, relational instability, and increasing autonomy, all of which contribute to heightened stress levels (Arnett, 2000). Among young men, these stressors may be compounded by restrictive masculinity norms that valorise emotional suppression and self-reliance. Such norms not only diminish help-seeking behaviours but may also affect how psychological constructs—such as stress and meaning—are experienced and reported (Seidler et al., 2019). Despite these unique psychosocial dynamics, little empirical work has investigated how meaning in life operates within this demographic. Moreover, underreporting of emotional strain among young men may further obscure how internal protective factors such as meaning function in this group (WHO, 2020).
One mechanism by which meaning may influence psychological health is through the appraisal and management of stress. According to the transactional model of stress and coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), stress is not determined solely by external events but by an individual’s appraisal of those events and their perceived ability to cope. Perceived stress—defined as the extent to which individuals experience their lives as unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overwhelming (Cohen et al., 1983)—has consistently been linked with reduced wellbeing, including lower life satisfaction, emotional dysregulation, and physical symptoms (Cohen & Janicki-Deverts, 2012; Hou et al., 2022). Prolonged exposure to high levels of perceived stress can impair an individual’s capacity for emotional balance and resilience.
Meaning in life has been posited to serve a buffering function against stress. Empirical studies support this hypothesis: individuals with higher levels of perceived meaning report lower stress responses during crises, even when controlling for baseline psychological variables (Boylan et al., 2023). For instance, research conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic found that individuals reporting higher meaning in life experienced lower levels of stress and disruption, independent of prior distress. Similarly, Lew et al. (2020) demonstrated that adolescents who were able to derive meaning from challenging life events showed reduced stress reactivity. These findings suggest that meaning enables a more adaptive cognitive framing of stressors, thereby reducing their emotional impact.
Furthermore, meaning in life is associated with more effective coping strategies. Individuals with a strong sense of purpose are more likely to engage in proactive coping, positive reappraisal, and problem-focused strategies, rather than avoidance or emotional disengagement (Folkman, 2008; Steger et al., 2008). Such coping styles are themselves associated with improved emotional and psychological outcomes, suggesting that meaning operates not only as a buffer against stress but also as a facilitator of resilience. However, the extent to which meaning functions in this way for young men specifically remains underexplored.
There is also a theoretical rationale to consider perceived stress as a potential mediator in the relationship between meaning in life and wellbeing. Meaning may enhance wellbeing directly—by fostering a sense of coherence and purpose—and indirectly, by reducing perceptions of stress and promoting adaptive coping mechanisms. This conceptual model aligns with recent calls in psychological science to move beyond bivariate associations and examine the processes underlying protective psychological constructs (Park, 2010; Hayes, 2018).
Despite the robustness of evidence linking meaning in life and wellbeing, and the emerging interest in stress as a mediating mechanism, there remains a significant gap in understanding how these constructs interact within specific demographic groups. Young men, in particular, present a compelling case for study: they face elevated stress, report lower wellbeing than older men or women in the same age group (Lin, 2016), and underutilise mental health services. Yet, most research fails to disaggregate findings by gender and age, or to consider how gendered socialisation may influence both the experience and reporting of stress and meaning.
Investigating the interaction between meaning, perceived stress, and wellbeing in young men is therefore both timely and necessary. This approach not only addresses an empirical gap but may also yield practical benefits. If meaning is found to mitigate stress and enhance wellbeing in this population, interventions grounded in meaning-centred frameworks—such as logotherapy or purpose-building activities—could provide non-clinical, self-guided tools for emotional support. These strategies may be particularly well-suited to young men, whose engagement with mental health support services is often hindered by stigma or cultural expectations.
Importantly, existing research has not sufficiently clarified whether meaning in life operates differently across genders or developmental stages. The developmental context of emerging adulthood is marked by a search for identity and autonomy, which may make the role of meaning particularly salient (Burrow & Hill, 2011). Moreover, meaning may serve as a protective factor that is accessible outside clinical frameworks, offering culturally congruent avenues for support. Given these nuances, examining the psychological pathways through which meaning influences wellbeing in young men may inform strengths-based interventions that respect individual autonomy while promoting mental health.
In summary, the present study aims to test a mediation model in which perceived stress mediates the relationship between meaning in life and general wellbeing in self-identified young men aged 18 to 30. It builds on theoretical frameworks of stress and coping, empirical evidence linking meaning to psychological health, and demographic considerations highlighting the distinct challenges faced by young men. By clarifying these pathways, this research contributes to both the theoretical literature on meaning and stress and the applied goal of enhancing wellbeing in under-supported populations.
Hypotheses
It was hypothesised that:
- Higher meaning in life would be positively associated with greater general wellbeing in young men.
- Meaning in life would predict general wellbeing independently of perceived stress.
- Perceived stress would mediate the relationship between meaning in life and general wellbeing, such that higher meaning would be associated with lower stress, which in turn would predict greater wellbeing.
Method
Design
This study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional design to explore the relationships between meaning in life, perceived stress, and general wellbeing in young men. A mediation model was tested to examine whether perceived stress mediated the relationship between meaning and wellbeing. This design aligns with a post-positivist framework, suitable for investigating predictive relationships using self-report instruments at a single time point. Multiple linear regression with mediation analysis was used, following Hayes’ (2018) PROCESS approach.
Participants
Participants were self-identified males aged between 18 and 30 years, fluent in English. Recruitment was conducted through SurveyCircle, an academic participant exchange platform. Eligibility criteria were stated in the recruitment post. A target sample size of 55 participants was determined using G*Power (Faul et al., 2007), assuming a medium effect size (f² = 0.15), α = .05, and power = .80 for regression with three predictors. This also allowed for attrition and incomplete responses.
Materials
Participants completed an online survey on Qualtrics, which included the following validated scales:
- Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ; Steger et al., 2006): 10 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale, assessing the presence of and search for meaning. Higher scores reflect greater perceived meaning in life. Internal reliability exceeds α = .80.
- Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10; Cohen et al., 1983): 10 items rated on a 5-point scale, measuring the extent to which individuals perceive life as stressful. Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress. Reported reliability > α = .75.
- General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12; Goldberg, 1978): 12 items on a 4-point scale, assessing general mental wellbeing. Higher scores indicate lower wellbeing. Internal consistency ranges from α = .80 to .90.
Demographic items (age, gender identity, and English fluency) were also collected to confirm eligibility.
Procedure
Following approval by Brunel University London’s College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences Research Ethics Committee (April 2025), participants were recruited via SurveyCircle. The landing page of the Qualtrics survey included a Participant Information Sheet (PIS) outlining the study’s aims, inclusion criteria, data protection, and withdrawal rights.
Participants gave informed digital consent before completing the 10–15-minute survey. Upon completion, a debriefing page summarised the study’s aims and included contact information and links to mental health support services (e.g., Samaritans, Mind UK).
Ethical Considerations
The study adhered to the British Psychological Society (BPS) Code of Human Research Ethics and Brunel University’s ethical standards. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and confidentiality was assured. No identifiable data were collected. Responses were anonymised and stored securely on university servers. Due to anonymity, withdrawal was possible only prior to submission; this limitation was communicated clearly.
Data Analysis
Data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics and the PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2018). Preliminary checks included assessment of missing data, outliers, and normality.
Analyses included:
- Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s correlations among all variables.
- Multiple regression using Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) to examine whether meaning in life predicted general wellbeing, controlling for perceived stress.
- Mediation analysis via PROCESS Model 4, testing the indirect effect of meaning on wellbeing through perceived stress. Bias-corrected bootstrapping with 5,000 samples was used to determine the significance of indirect effects.
All variables were mean-centred prior to regression to reduce multicollinearity. Alpha was set at .05.
THESIS
Evan John