Next Article in Journal
What Triggers Mental Disorders? Examining the Role of Increasing Relationships between Self-Regulatory Efficacy Expectations and Behavioral Intensity
Previous Article in Journal
COVID-19 and Its Influence on Prevalence of Dementia and Agitation in Australian Residential Aged Care: A Comparative Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Psychiatry International
Volume 5
Issue 4
10.3390/psychiatryint5040047
psychiatryint-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Exploring the Moderating Role of Hedonia and Eudaimonia on the Relationship between Stress and Mental Health in Young Adults

by
Ivana Marcinko
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of J. J. Strossmayer in Osijek, Croatia, L. Jager 9, 31000 Osijek, Croatia
Psychiatry Int. 2024, 5(4), 660-671; https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint5040047
Submission received: 19 March 2024 / Revised: 26 September 2024 / Accepted: 29 September 2024 / Published: 9 October 2024
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Considering that research points to the discrepancy regarding the positive role of hedonia as opposed to eudaimonia in physical health, the aim of this study was to investigate the moderating effects of hedonia and eudaimonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health in young adults. A total of 328 participants took part in the study, 36.6% of whom were males, with ages ranging from 18 to 30, and a median age of 19 years (SD = 1.32). Questionnaires were used to measure well-being states, stress, and mental health. The results showed that hedonia moderated the relationship between low-stress conditions and general mental health. Eudaimonia, on the other hand, had a nonsignificant effect on the relationships tested. The findings indicate that an orientation toward pleasure may be the path to achieving mental health in the midst of stressful circumstances.

1. Introduction

The belief that the average human has the abilities and skills to promote resilience and channel growth despite encountering adversities [1] has encouraged research in the realm of well-being and its relationship with health. Early research focused on how well-being, in broad terms, is related to somatic health, and the association between greater well-being and positive physical health outcomes has been confirmed on numerous occasions [2,3]. Subsequent studies examined the effects of well-being on mental health, confirming the established trend and indicating that cognitive–affective factors, also known as well-being, preserve mental health by broadening an individual’s mindset, and building personal resources and coping [4]. The significance of these findings lies in the understanding that mental health is a result of negative affect regulation as well as positive emotion regulation. Positive emotion regulation has been shown to be important for the identification and regulation of various mental health outcomes such as drug and alcohol misuse, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder [5].
Different types of positive states are linked to different sets of cognitions, judgments, and biases [6]. This is an important acknowledgment if one investigates the association between well-being and mental health because there are two distinct conceptualizations of well-being: hedonia and eudaimonia. These two forms of well-being are different not only because they stem from different philosophical schools and practices regarding how to achieve a good life, but also because of how these different types of well-being affect somatic health [7]. Alternative approaches view them as part of a single spectrum, with hedonia at one end (e.g., unhealthy eating habits) and eudaimonia (healthy eating habits) at the other. Every individual possesses both components but to a different degree. An increase in one component decreases the value of the other component, and vice versa [8].
In traditional terms, hedonia is typically described as a life of pleasure and experience of subjective well-being and positivity. It has consistently been shown to be positively related to positive affect and negatively to negative affect, according to both within-person and between-person analyses. This suggests that its main function is the regulation of emotions [9]. The effects of hedonic activities on the increase in positive experiences are most profound immediately after the activity, indicating that hedonia produces strong but short-term positive effects on mood while, in the long run, its effects are less observable. These findings stem from a series of studies comparing the effects of hedonia and eudaimonia on positive and negative affect, as well as on carefreeness and vitality at immediate and 3-month follow-ups [9]. Hedonic activities are also associated with adaptive coping strategies such as using humor and positive reinterpretation [10], as well as with a broadened mindset that builds personal resources such as social closeness [4]. In sum, engaging in pleasurable activities may be the approach to reducing the risk of developing symptoms of mental disorders during exposure to stress [11].
Due to the affect-regulative properties of hedonic activities, pleasure-oriented activities are found to be associated with disorders involving impaired emotion regulation such as depression or anxiety [10]. Among mentally disadvantaged people participating in emotion-focused treatment, a greater degree of positive emotions has been linked to the initiation and preservation of symptom reduction and lower relapse rates [12], by facilitating innovative ways of thinking allowing a more creative approach to problem solving as well as enhanced coping abilities [13,14]. For example, daily positive affectivity is associated with reduced suicidal ideation [15], while lower state and trait-positive emotions predict outcomes in depression [16]. Eudaimonia, or the other type of well-being, arises from living a life of virtue and purpose, whilst unleashing one’s potential to achieve the best version of oneself. Since eudaimonia is oriented toward greatness and growth, it is commonly believed to promote mental health. Research on practitioners of Loving-Kindness meditation, the kind of meditation which cultivates the propensity for warmth and kindness towards others, has shown that they experience a reduction in symptoms of depression as a result of meditation practices [17]. Furthermore, studies on individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, anxiety, and PTSD have demonstrated the presence of low levels of eudaimonia among those groups [18,19,20,21]. Some aspects of eudaimonia have been shown to predict symptoms of anxiety, PTSD, and distress at follow-up, above and beyond the initial psychopathology [22]. Also, people with low eudaimonia are twice as likely to be depressed ten years later in comparison to those with high levels of eudaimonia [23]. Therefore, all of this points to the conclusion that a lack of eudaimonia is a common denominator among mentally disadvantaged people.
According to some, one way to explain the positive effects of eudaimonia on mental health is through a reduced conserved transcriptional response to adversity (CTRA) [24]. CTRA promotes increased inflammation and reduced antiviral responses that are believed to contribute to better coping and adaptation to social stressors in individuals leading the life of virtue [23]. Others suggest that positive mental health outcomes for those with high eudaimonia result from optimal sleep patterns and fitness routines [25], or the implementation of highly functional coping strategies such as planning, positive revaluation, and seeking social support [26]. Ideas on the mechanisms through which eudaimonia affects mental health can also be drawn from research on meaning-focused coping, a strategy in which people rely on their values, life goals, and deeply held beliefs when facing challenges. Practicing such an approach to coping has been shown to increase the levels of positive affect during uncontrollable circumstances [27], which comes as a breather during stress, allowing one to recuperate and renew their sense of purpose. The study on the relationship between meaning-focused coping and mental disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that this coping strategy is negatively associated with the symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression [28].
When talking about mental health or health in general, the diathesis-stress approach is the most contemporary perspective one could take. It suggests that a person’s predisposition or vulnerability to a certain health condition is not sufficient to explain the presence of a disorder unless an encountered stressful experience is taken into account, which explains the development and the presence of abnormality. In the same fashion, it is believed that mental health disturbances emerge not because of biological susceptibility towards the disorder but due to the exposure to adverse life conditions. Findings from longitudinal studies confirm this line of argument. Negative life events are associated with a higher prevalence of anxiety and depression [29,30]. Homeless youth are twice as likely to develop mental illness later in life in comparison to their healthy counterparts [31,32], while adults with higher levels of psychological stress report greater levels of depression and anxiety [33].
In the context of these findings, it seems that capitalizing on activities or well-being states that arise from those activities and are shown to prevent or reduce the presence of mental health problems is a desirable and sought-after goal. This seems to be especially important now, as people are exposed to greater levels of uncertainty over the ongoing post-pandemic effects and undermined world peace and stability. However, the literature provides no insight into comparable effects of hedonia and eudaimonia on the stress–mental health relationship. There is no evidence on whether, or how, particular forms of well-being ameliorate the effects of stress on mental health.
Some inferences can be drawn from the work on the relationship between hedonic and eudaimonic activities and stress-related processes. Daniels et al. [34] demonstrated that pursuing hobbies (i.e., hedonic activities) during the COVID-19 pandemic predicted higher levels of positive affect and lower negative affect. Similarly, Giuntoli et al. [10] demonstrated that pleasure orientation is positively related to positive experiences and negatively to negative experiences. It is argued that, under adverse circumstances, enjoyable activities increase positive affect, allowing a person to take a step-back approach and gain a clearer perspective on the stressor. This replenishes inner resources and increases resilience in the face of the stressor [35].
Eudaimonic pursuits have been associated with active coping and positive experiences during stress, which also suggests their important role in acquiring wellness. However, in comparison to pleasurable activities, eudaimonic pursuits have low negative associations with positive experiences and no relationship with negative experiences, suggesting that eudaimonia does not significantly impact the level of distress [10].
In light of the shortcomings in the literature, it seems important to conduct a study that examines the moderating effects of hedonia and eudaimonia on the relationship between stress and mental health. After all, studies indicate that positive experiences and meaning matter not only for overall psychosocial adjustment but also for mental health [36,37]. The findings will provide insight into which pursuits one should invest in to mitigate the negative impact of stressors on mental health. Considering the limited knowledge about the effects of hedonia and eudaimonia on mental health among the young population, this study is focused on investigating the mentioned relationships among young adults.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Ethics Statement

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of J. J. Strossmayer in Osijek, Croatia. The Ethical Approval Reference Number is 2158-83-06-23-2 (CLASS: 602-04/23-04/255). All the participants were given verbal and written information about the study and provided their verbal consent to participate along with their data to be used for research purposes by approving the administration of the questionnaires.

2.2. Participants

A total of 328 students took part in this study, of which 120 (36.6%) were male and 208 (63.4%) female. The participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 30, with the average being M = 19.78, SD = 1.32. An analysis of the socioeconomic structure of the participants reveals that 6.3% reported below-average socioeconomic status, 74.8% reported average status, and 18.9% indicated above-average socioeconomic status.

2.3. Instruments

A sociodemographic questionnaire was constructed for this research to collect information on gender, age, socioeconomic status (with response options ranging from 1—extremely below average to 5—extremely above average), the year of study, and the course of study.
The Hedonic and Eudaimonic Motives for Activities [8] questionnaire was used for measuring hedonia and eudaimonia. Five items that measured hedonia resembled the following: “Seeking fun?” or “Seeking pleasure?”, whilst four items that measured eudaimonia were as follows: “Seeking to pursue excellence or personal ideal?” and “Seeking to do what you believe in?”. Subjects were asked to indicate the degree to which they typically approach activities in the mentioned way by providing an answer on a 7-point scale (1—not at all to 7—very much). The composite results for each scale were obtained by summing the answers across the scale items. The theoretical range of the results for the Hedonia scale is 5–35, while for the Eudaimonia scale, it is 4–28. The scales were translated and validated in this study. The original factor analytic structure was confirmed, while the reliability of the scales was similar to those reported by the authors. In this study, Cronbach’s alpha for the Hedonia scale was 0.81 and for the Eudaimonia scale was 0.76.
The Perceived Stress Scale [38] is a 10-item measure used to define a perceived level of stress subjects experience during a particular period. Stress level is defined by the degree to which a person finds life unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overwhelming. An example item is “In the last month, how often have you felt on top of things?”. The answers were provided on a 5-point scale (0—never, 4—very often). The result was obtained by summing answers across the items, with a higher score indicating a greater degree of perceived stress. The range of results was 10–50. The scale had been previously translated and validated in research on a Croatian student sample [39]. The Cronbach’s alpha for this scale in this study was 0.84.
The Mental Health Inventory [40] was used to assess general mental health. The instrument is comprised of two scales that measure negative (23 items) and positive mental health (15 items). The Negative Mental Health Scale measures various symptoms of depression, anxiety, and loss of behavioral/emotional control (“How often have you been crying for the last month?”). The items of the Positive Mental Health Scale measure emotional relationships and the positive mood of a person (“How long have you been happy and carefree in the last month?”). All the items are scored on a six-point scale (range 1–6), except for two items that are scored on a five-point scale (range 1–5). The results for the General Mental Health Index were obtained by summing the items with a higher score indicating a greater degree of general mental health. The range of the results was 38–226. The questionnaire was translated and validated on the sample of the study, and the original factor analysis structure was confirmed, while the reliability coefficients were comparable to the ones reported by the authors. In this study, Cronbach’s alpha for the General Mental Health Index was 0.96.

2.4. Design

The study was cross-sectional. The inclusion criteria for participation in the study were that the participant had to be a male or female between the ages of 18 and 30. For this reason, three faculties of J. J. Strosmayer University in Osijek, Croatia, were randomly selected for this study. Departments within these faculties, as well as study groups within those departments, kept being randomly selected until the desired number of participants was reached. The participants were approached during compulsory lectures to ensure access to the entire study group that was selected. General instructions containing information about the study’s aim and the participants’ rights were provided before they were asked to consent to participate in the study. They were also instructed to read the guidelines for each scale before answering the questions. The results of participants who did not complete the questionnaires were omitted from the sample.

2.5. Data Analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 20 computer software. To determine which statistical test to apply to the data, the normality of the distributions of the study’s results was investigated through the investigation of the skewness and kurtosis of the values. As it has been shown that the results of the study’s variables form normal distributions, parametric tests were used to analyze the data.
Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data set, and a Pearson correlation was used to assess the degree to which variables are interrelated. The hierarchical regression analysis was used to test the potential moderating effects of hedonia and eudaimonia on the relationship between stress and mental health. In the regression analyses, sociodemographic variables that significantly correlated with other measures of significance (gender and socioeconomic status) were controlled. Therefore, in the first step of the analyses, the sociodemographic variables were entered, followed by stress in the second step, and hedonia/eudaimonia in the third step. The interaction between predictor and moderator (i.e., stress and hedonia/eudaimonia) was introduced in the fourth step. Prior to the analyses, all the variables included in the interaction were centered to avoid multicollinearity [41]. The criterion variable was general mental health. Analysis of variance was employed to graphically portray the moderation effects.

3. Results

First, descriptive statistics were performed to describe the data of the research variables (Table 1).
By looking at the average values and the theoretical range of results it can be concluded that subjects reported moderate levels of general mental health, while the eudaimonia and hedonia levels established in our sample were relatively high. Perceived stress levels were moderately high.
In the next step, correlational coefficients between research variables were calculated (Table 2).
Of all sociodemographic variables, gender and socio-economic status were the only variables that were weakly correlated with mental health. Older participants and those with better socio-economic status had lower stress levels and more pronounced general mental health.
Eudaimonia and hedonia were weakly and negatively related to perceived stress and had a weak positive association with general mental health. In other words, participants with greater eudaimonia and hedonia had lower perceived stress levels and a higher presence of general mental health.
The results of the hierarchical regression analyses in which hedonia and eudaimonia were tested as the moderators of the relationship between stress and general mental health are shown in Table 3 and Table 4.
As can be seen, hedonia significantly moderated the relationship between stress and general mental health.
On the other hand, the moderating effects of eudaimonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health were nonsignificant.
To understand the findings on the moderating role of hedonia even further, the analyses of variance were performed to graphically demonstrate the results. Prior to the analyses, independent variables (hedonia and stress perception) had been categorized into groups of high and low scores by extracting 20% of the lowest and 20% of the highest results from the distributions. The graphic illustration of the moderating effects of hedonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health is shown in Figure 1.
It is evident that high hedonia moderated the relationship between low-stress conditions and general mental health. The best general mental health status was found among participants who had low levels of stress and high hedonia, whereas, in comparison to that group, somewhat worse mental health was found among those with low stress and low hedonia. On the other hand, under high-stress circumstances, participants reported detrimental mental health, and there was no difference between the high and low hedonia groups.

4. Discussion

Considering the array of research that highlights the differences between the effects of hedonia and eudaimonia on physical health, a far lesser number of studies tried to examine how hedonia, as opposed to eudaimonia, affects mental health functioning. So, this study aimed to explore the role of these well-being states in mental health by examining their moderating effects on the stress–mental health relationship among young adults. It was demonstrated that hedonia, but not eudaimonia, moderated the relationship between stress and mental health for young adults. Hedonia moderated the relationship between low stress and general mental health. That is, the greatest general mental health was reported by young adults who had low stress and high hedonia. Somewhat worse mental health was present among the low-stress and low-hedonia subjects. Interestingly, when stress was high, general mental health was adverse, and no difference was found between individuals who practiced hedonic behaviors as opposed to those who did not.
The findings demonstrate that the easiest way to reduce the negative effects of stressors on mental health is through activities that not only initiate the presence of positive affect, enjoyment, and pleasure but that raise these experiences fairly quickly and easily because people enjoy doing things that initiate them. By taking such an approach, a sequence of all-around positive cognitive, psychological, and motivational processes is activated, enabling a person to see a negative event from a higher perspective and regulate emotional experiences successfully, which in turn minimizes physiological responses to a stressor [4]. We believe that such an experience of being mentally and emotionally in control of oneself and one’s situation is perceived as a state of optimal mental health and functioning. The contribution of hedonistic activities to mental health is already reported in the literature. Participating in physical leisure activities, such as cycling or running, increases vigor [42] and decreases fatigue levels assessed 15 months later [43]. Physical activities have been found to correlate with psychosocial states and depression [44]. Spending time outdoors and engaging in hobbies contributed to positivity and lowered negativity [45,46]. Also, pleasure orientation is found to be negatively associated with anxiety and depression and positively with coping strategies such as humor and positive reinterpretation [10]. Overall, the findings accentuate the importance of subjective experiences, especially positive ones, for the mental health of young adults. The same conclusions were drawn from studies that compared the experiences of staff and students between two universities before, during, and after COVID-19. It was found that positive experiences of students and university personnel before, as well as during, the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to psychosocial adjustment [37]. Similar effects of positive experiences on mental health were demonstrated across different therapeutic interventions in a study by Kralik et al. [36].
The answer to why seeking pleasure has a significant relationship with stress levels and mental health can be sought in the biological processes. According to Salamone and Correa [47], aversive stimuli stimulate the release of dopamine in the brain, which activates hedonistic behaviors. Jia et al. [48] argue that seeking hedonistic activity during stressful encounters represents an adaptive reaction to negative circumstances because such activities represent an attempt to regulate mood and mood-repairing processes [49,50,51]. The results of their study confirmed that greater involvement in hedonic activities occurs in the period after threat exposure, i.e., earthquake. The greater the level of earthquake intensity, the greater the presence of hedonic behavior and communication after the earthquake. Furthermore, there are studies that suggest a shared biological background between hedonistic behaviors and mental health. An increase in dopamine is associated with positive mood and reward-seeking behaviors, while apathy is linked to decreased levels [52,53,54]. Also, reward-seeking behaviors activate the ventral striatal region in the brain due to dopamine release, signaling the presence of a reward. Hagele et al. [55], on the other hand, observed a reduction in the ventral striatal region during the reward expectation among patients with depression and alcohol dependence, while that pattern of neurological activity was not present among healthy controls.
Another discovery of our study is that the positive effects of hedonia were observed in low-stress but not high-stress life circumstances. In other words, pursuing pleasure and achieving a relaxed state of mind through pleasure-seeking endorsements during stressful periods may work only under conditions where the perception of threat is low. For high-stress conditions, hedonic orientation seems inadequate to protect a person from negative consequences that stress may cause in the domain of mental health. Considering that individuals in hedonic orientation, more than those oriented towards eudaimonic pursuits, experience a fast rise of positive affect that is most pronounced immediately after the activity [8], this overflow of positive affect seems to be sufficient to overcome daily hassles or minimally irritating but frequently present events. However, high-stress situations or chronic stressors have an overwhelming impact on an entire being, and short-term exposure to positive affect resulting from hedonic endeavors cannot dampen or erase the negative effect of such adverse events.
This exact point brings us to consider a reason why eudaimonia did not have a significant effect on stress–mental health association in this study. Eudaimonic activities, in comparison to hedonic ones, are not always as pleasurable, so their positive effects are not apparent immediately after the activity but are rather created cumulatively, sometimes being evident months after the behavior was initiated [8]. Since this was a cross-sectional study, this was most likely the reason why we could not observe the full effects of eudaimonia on the stress–mental health relationship. We believe that with a longitudinal approach it would not only be feasible to observe the moderating role of eudaimonia on the tested relationship, but it is likely that, in comparison to hedonia, its effects would be evident in low-stress and high-stress conditions due to its enduring, all-around effect that eudaimonia has on the person pursuing higher good.
Recognizing the beneficial effects of hedonia on the stress–mental health relationship brings about an important realization for the practice of clinical psychology by identifying factors that promote mental health as well as those which help create treatments that bring positive outcomes for young adults. First and foremost, it allows an understanding of mental health as a byproduct of the interaction between well-being and stress. Secondly, encouraging activities that increase the levels of positive emotions fairly quickly may not only be a way to prevent psychological disturbances that often arise during stressful periods but also a way forward for someone who is already suffering from signs of deteriorated mental health. Support for this line of argument is found in studies that demonstrated the buffering effects of optimism on the association between life events and psychological outcomes [56], as well as in research on how different levels of positive affectivity contribute to the likelihood of experiencing psychopathological symptoms [15].
The current findings should be observed in light of the limitations of the study. The study was cross-sectional as well as correlational, so any possibility of drawing causal conclusions or conclusions about the direction of the tested relationships is limited. The inability to observe the positive effects of eudaimonia may be due to time-limited space in which the tested relationships were observed. As eudaimonia arises from processes oriented towards excellence and growth that naturally take time to unfold, it is unsurprising that we could not witness its moderating effects on stress–mental health relationships in this study. Not testing the associations longitudinally also limited us from concluding the role that hedonia and eudaimonia may have in the stress–mental health relationship during chronic, high-stress times. After all, Frankl [57] argued that during high-stress life situations, meaning, i.e., eudaimonia, was the only variable that differentiated between those who were adapted to such life-threatening circumstances as opposed to those who were not. Another shortcoming of the study that limits the generalizability of the findings is that the study used young, healthy people. They are, in their daily life, mainly exposed to low-stress situations that give rise to their stressful reactions and frustrations. Practicing hedonistic behavior as opposed to eudaimonic pursuits is a more favorable way of regulating stress-related tension considering the capabilities and age-specific tendencies of the study’s participants. The development of eudaimonic dimensions, such as personal growth or positive relationships, needs time. Young people need to exercise their potential in different personal and professional situations and manage different life roles to acquire some level of personal excellence. The average age of the subjects in this study was 19, so they did not have much life experience in these matters, which could explain why the effects of eudaimonia were not apparent. Studies also show that hedonia may be of greater value for people diagnosed with psychiatric conditions [58], so perhaps this type of well-being could have a significant impact on high-stress conditions if the clinical population was used. This also provides an understanding of why we may have observed the moderator role of hedonia in low-stress circumstances only. Thus, to reveal the true nature of hedonic and eudaimonic effects on the relationship between stress and mental health, the upcoming research should use a diverse sample of people (with different ages, religious and educational backgrounds, SESs, and mental health statuses). For example, it is known that older people with higher education or religious backgrounds have more pronounced eudaimonic orientation [59], which could tip the results in favor of eudaimonia. Finally, the effects of personality traits were not controlled in the analyses, so this precaution should be taken in future studies since dispositional traits affect subjective measures of well-being, subjective health measures, and their relationships [60].

5. Conclusions

The results indicate that the study of well-being needs to be approached by understanding that different well-being states, being defined by different emotional and motivational processes, lead to different outcomes. Previous research points to the conclusion that eudaimonia, in comparison to hedonia, has a superior role in the domain of physical health [7], while the current study indicates that hedonia may have a more important role in mental health functioning, at least when young adults are concerned. Hedonia has been shown to moderate the negative effects of stress on mental health.
Although the findings provide insight into the differences between hedonia as opposed to eudaimonia in the realm of mental health, it has to be noted that the benefits of hedonia were evident in low-stress conditions only. Its advantages were not demonstrated in high-stress conditions. Thus, for young adults who are dealing with daily hassles, the general experience of mental health is a direct result of the degree of pleasurable activities that are pursued during stress.
The practical implications of the results are that hedonic pursuits can alleviate the negative effects of struggles young people encounter daily, such as study problems and problems with relationships or peers. Thus, teaching young adults in therapy or counseling to engage in hedonic activities during stressful times can prevent them from having psychological problems and protect their mental health.
On the other hand, longitudinal studies with a more diverse sample of participants (older age, different mental health statuses) are advisable to further understand the contribution of hedonia and eudaimonia to mental health during exposure to high-stress conditions.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of J. J. Strossmayer in Osijek, Croatia.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are openly available in Figshare under reference number: 10.6084/m9.figshare.24548845.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Seligman, M.E.P.; Csikszentmihalyi, M. Positive psychology: An introduction. Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Cohen, S.; Tyrrell, A.J.; Smith, A.P. Negative life events, perceived stress, negative affect and susceptibility to the common cold. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1993, 64, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ryff, C.D.; Love, D.G.; Urry, H.L.; Muller, D.; Rosenkranz, M.A.; Friedman, E.M.; Davidson, R.J.; Singer, B. Psychological well-being and ill-being: Do they have distinct or mirrored biological correlates? Psychother. Psychosom. 2006, 75, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Fredrickson, B.L. Positive emotions broaden and built. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2013, 47, 1–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Weiss, N.H.; Forkus, S.R.; Contractor, A.A.; Dixon-Gordon, L.K. The interplay of negative and positive emotion dysregulation on mental health outcomes among trauma-exposed community individuals. Psychol. Trauma Theory Res. Pract. Policy 2020, 12, 219–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Shiota, M.N.; Campos, B.; Oveis, C.; Hertenstein, M.J.; Simon-Thomas, E.; Keltner, D. Beyond happiness: Building a science of discrete positive emotions. Am. Psychol. 2017, 72, 617–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Miquelon, P.; Vallerand, R.J. Goal motives, well-being, and physical health: Happiness and self-realization as psychological resources under challenge. Motiv. Emot. 2006, 30, 259–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Petrovic, F.; Murgas, F.; Kralik, R. Food, exercise and lifestyle are predictors of a hedonic or eudaimonic quality of life in university students. Acta Missiol. 2023, 17, 99–114. [Google Scholar]
  9. Huta, V.; Ryan, R.M. Pursuing pleasure or virtue: The differential and overlapping well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. J. Happiness Stud. 2010, 11, 735–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Giuntoli, L.; Condini, F.; Ceccarini, F.; Huta, V.; Vidotto, G. The different roles of hedonic and eudaimonic motives for activities in predicting functioning and well-being experiences. J. Happiness Stud. 2021, 22, 1657–1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Klaiber, P.; Wen, J.H.; DeLongis, A.; Sin, N.L. The ups and downs of daily life during COVID-19: Age differences in affect, stress, and positive events. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. 2021, 76, e30–e37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Ehrenreich, J.T.; Fairholme, C.P.; Buzzella, B.A.; Ellard, K.K.; Barlow, D.H. The role of emotion in psychological therapy. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 2007, 14, 422–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Aspinwall, L.G. Rethinking the role of positive affect in self-regulation. Motiv. Emot. 1998, 22, 1–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Fredrickson, B.L.; Joiner, T. Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychol. Sci. 2000, 13, 172–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Husky, M.; Swendsen, J.; Ionita, A.; Jaussent, I.; Genty, C.; Courtet, P. Predictors of daily life suicidal ideation in adults recently discharged after a serious suicide attempt: A pilot study. Psychiatry Res. 2017, 256, 79–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Morris, B.; Bylsma, L.M.; Rottenberg, J. Does emotion predict the course of major depressive disorder? A review of prospective studies. Br. J. Clin. Psychol. 2009, 48, 255–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Fredrickson, B.L.; Cohn, M.A.; Coffey, K.A.; Pek, J.; Finkel, S.M. Open hearts build lives: Positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2008, 95, 1045–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Davison, T.E.; McCabe, M.P.; Knight, T.; Mellor, D. Biopsychosocial factors related to depression in aged care residents. J. Affect. Disord. 2012, 142, 290–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Feder, A.; Ahmad, S.; Lee, E.J.; Morgan, J.E.; Singh, R.; Smith, B.W.; Southwick, S.; Charney, D.S. Coping and PTSD symptoms in Pakistani earthquake survivors: Purpose in life, religious coping and social support. J. Affect. Disord. 2013, 147, 156–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rafanelli, C.; Park, S.K.; Ruini, C.; Ottolini, F.; Cazzaro, M.; Fava, G.A. Rating well-being and distress. Stress. Health 2000, 16, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Valiente, C.; Cantero, D.; Vázquez, C.; Sanchez, Á.; Provencio, M.; Espinosa, R. Implicit and explicit self-esteem discrepancies in paranoia and depression. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 2011, 120, 691–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Mastropieri, B.M. Psychological Well-Being and Its Effects on Mental Health and Program Outcome among Homeless Young Adults. Ph.D. Thesis, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA, 2017. Available online: https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D84F1QWG (accessed on 10 December 2023).
  23. Ruini, C.; Cesetti, G. Spotlight in eudaimonia and depression. A systematic review of the literature over the past 5 years. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2019, 30, 767–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Cole, S.W.; Levine, M.E.; Arevalo, M.J.; Ma, J.; Weir, D.R.; Crimmins, E.M. Loneliness, eudaimonia and the human conserved transcriptional response. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2015, 62, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Edwards, D.J.; Edwards, S.D.; Basson, C.J. Psychological well-being and physical self-esteem in sport and exercise. Int. J. Ment. Health Promot. 2004, 6, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Freire, C.; del Mar Ferradas, M.; Nunez, J.C.; Valle, A.; Vallejo, G. Eudaimonic well-ebing and coping with stres sin university students: The mediating/moderating role of self-efficacy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Folkman, S. The case for positive emotions in the stress process. Anxiety Stress. Coping 2008, 21, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Eisenbeck, N.; Carreno, D.F.; Perez- Escobar, J.A. Meaning-centered coping in the era of Covid-19: Direct and moderating effects on depression, anxiety and stress. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 648383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Waaktaar, T.; Borge, A.I.H.; Fundingsrud, H.P.; Christie, H.J.; Torgersen, S. The role of stressful life events in the development of depressive symptoms in adolescence: A longitudinal community study. J. Adolesc. 2004, 27, 153–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ystgaard, M.; Tambs, K.; Dalgard, O.S. Life stress, social support and psychological distress in late adolescence: A longitudinal study. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 1999, 34, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kamieniecki, G.W. Prevalence of psychological distress and psychiatric disorders among homeless youth in Australia: A comparative review. Aust. New Zealand J. Psychiatry 2001, 35, 352–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Slesnick, N.; Prestopnik, J. Dual and multiple diagnosis among substance using runaway youth. Am. J. Drug Alcohol. Abuse 2005, 31, 179–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lara-Cabrera, M.L.; Betancort, M.; Munoz-Rubilar, C.A.; Rodrigez Novo, N.; De Las Cuevas, C. The mediating role of resilience in the relationship between perceived stress and mental health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 9762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Daniels, A.; Wellan, S.A.; Walter, H. Learning it hard way—How enjoying life and positive appraisal buffer the negative effects of stressors on mental health in the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Affect. Disord. Rep. 2021, 6, 100200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Waugh, C.E. The regulatory power of positive emotions in stress: A temporal functional approach. In Handbook of Resilience Approaches to Stress and Trauma; Kent, M.F.D., Reich, J., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 73–85. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kralik, R.; Zimny, J.; Haringa, I.; Roubalova, M.; Akimjakova, B. The relevance of therapeutic approaches in accompaniment for social work students with post-COVID-19 syndrome. Acta Missiol. 2023, 17, 97–105. [Google Scholar]
  37. Sirotkin, A.V.; Pavlikova, M.; Hlad, L.; Kralik, R.; Zarnadze, I.; Zarnadze, S.; Petrikovicova, L. Impact of COVID-19 on University Activities: Comparison of Experiences from Slovakia and Georgia. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Cohen, S.; Kamarck, T.; Mermelstein, R. A global measure of perceived stress. J. Health Soc. Behav. 1983, 24, 385–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Marcinko, I.; Ajdukovic, D. Povezanost temperamenta, percepcije stresa i uspješne prilagodbe adolescenata. Ljetop. Soc. Rada 2013, 20, 363–386. [Google Scholar]
  40. Veit, C.T.; Ware, J.E. The structure of psychological distress and well-being in general populations. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1983, 51, 730–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Aiken, L.S.; West, S.G. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions; Sage: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1992; p. 212. [Google Scholar]
  42. Hansen, C.J.; Stevens, L.C.; Coast, J.R. Exercise duration and mood state: How much is enough to feel better? Health Psychol. 2001, 20, 267–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Eriksen, W.; Bruusgaard, D. Do physical leisure time activities prevent fatigue? A 15 month prospective study of nurses’ aides. Br. J. Sports Med. 2004, 38, 331–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Pressman, S.D.; Matthews, K.A.; Cohen, S.; Martire, L.M.; Scheier, M.; Baum, A.; Schulz, R. Association of enjoyable leasure activities with psychological and physical well-being. Psychosom. Med. 2009, 71, 725–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lades, L.K.; Laffan, K.; Daly, M.; Delaney, L. Daily emotional well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Br. J. Health Psychol. 2020, 25, 902–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Stieger, S.; Lewetz, D.; Swami, V. Emotional well-being under conditions of lockdown: An experience sampling study in Austria during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Happiness Stud. 2021, 22, 2703–2720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Salamone, J.D.; Correa, M. The mysterious motivational functions of mesolimbic dopamine. Neuron 2012, 76, 470–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Jia, J.S.; Jia, J.; Hsee, C.K.; Shiv, B. The role of hedonic behavior in reducing perceived risk: Evidence from postearthquake mobile-app data. Psychol. Sci. 2017, 28, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hikosaka, O. The habenula: From stress evasion to value-based decision-making. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2010, 11, 503–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Li, B.; Piriz, J.; Mirrione, M.; Chung, C.; Proulx, C.D.; Schulz, D.; Henn, F.; Malinow, R. Synaptic potentiation onto habenula neurons in the learned helplessness model of depression. Nature 2011, 470, 535–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Salovey, P.; Mayer, J.D.; Goldman, S.L.; Turvey, C.; Palfai, T.P. Emotional attention, clarity, and repair: Exploring emotional intelligence using the Trait Meta-Mood Scale. In Emotion, Disclosure, and Health; Pennebaker, J.W., Ed.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 1995; pp. 125–154. [Google Scholar]
  52. Drevets, W.C.; Gautier, C.; Price, J.C.; Kupfer, D.J.; Kinahan, P.E.; Grace, A.A.; Price, J.L.; Mathis, C.A. Amphetamine-induced dopamine release in human ventral striatum correlates with euphoria. Biol. Psychiatry 2001, 49, 81–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Heinz, A.; Knable, M.B.; Coppola, R.; Gorey, J.G.; Jones, D.W.; Lee, K.S.; Weinberger, D.R. Psychomotor slowing, negative symptoms and dopamine receptor availability—An IBZM SPECT study in neuroleptic-treated and drug-free schizophrenic patients. Schizophr. Res. 1998, 31, 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Schmidt, K.; Nolte-Zenker, B.; Patzer, J.; Bauer, M.; Schmidt, L.G.; Heinz, A. Psychopathological correlates of reduced dopamine receptor sensitivity in depression, schizophrenia, and opiate and alcohol dependence. Pharmacopsychiatry 2001, 34, 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hagele, C.; Schlagenhauf, F.; Rapp, M.; Sterzer, P.; Beck, A.; Bermpohl, F.; Stoy, M.; Strohle, A.; Wittchen, H.-U.; Dolan, R.J.; et al. Dimensional psychiatry: Reward dysfunction and depressive mood across psychiatric disorders. Psychopharmacology 2015, 232, 331–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Lai, J.C.L. Dispositional optimism buffers the impact of daily hassles on mental health in Chinese adolescents. Pers. Individ. Differ. 2009, 47, 247–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Frankl, V. Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy; Washington Square Press: New York, NY, USA, 1984; p. 214. [Google Scholar]
  58. Kashdan, T.B. Social anxiety spectrum and diminished positive experiences: Theoretical synthesis and meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2007, 27, 348–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Murgas, F.; Podzimek, M.; Petrovic, F.; Tirpakova, A.; Kralik, R. The impact of religiosity on quality of life. Acta Missiol. 2023, 17, 169–186. [Google Scholar]
  60. Watson, D.; Pennebaker, J.W. Health complaints, stress, and distress: Exploring the central role of negative affectivity. Psychol. Rev. 1989, 96, 234–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Psychiatryint 05 00047 g001
Figure 1. The moderation effects of hedonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health.
Figure 1. The moderation effects of hedonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health.
Psychiatryint 05 00047 g001
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the research variables (N = 328).
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the research variables (N = 328).
VariableMSD
General mental health157.2627.22
Hedonia29.164.20
Eudaimonia23.243.21
Perceived stress27.376.58
M—mean, SD—standard deviation.
Table 2. The correlation coefficients between research variables.
Table 2. The correlation coefficients between research variables.
1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.
1. Gender
2. Age−0.04
3. Year of study0.21 **0.39 **
4. SES−0.08−0.010.14 *
5. Hedonia−0.08−0.04−0.10−0.02
6. Eudaimonia0.020.090.03−0.020.33 **
7. Perceived stress0.10−0.030.04−0.13 *−0.23 **−0.17 **
8. General mental health−0.11 *0.100.010.19 **0.27 **0.19 **−0.80 **
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Table 3. Testing the moderating role of hedonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health.
Table 3. Testing the moderating role of hedonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health.
CriterionModel PredictorR2∆R2Fβ
General mental healthStep 1 0.04 *** 7.40 ***
Gender −0.09
SES 0.18 **
Step 2 0.65 ****0.61 ****200.80 ****
Gender −0.02
SES 0.08 *
Stress −0.79 ***
Step 3 0.66 **0.01 **155.26 ****
Gender −0.02
SES 0.08 *
Stress −0.76 ***
Hedonia 0.10 *
Step 4 0.67 *0.01 *126.28 ****
Gender −0.02
SES 0.08 **
Stress −0.76 ****
Hedonia 0.10 **
Hedonia x Stress −0.07 *
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.001; R2: proportion of variance in the criterion variable explained by the predictor variable; ∆R2: difference in R2 between previous and current step; F: F-ratio; β: degree of change in the outcome variable for every 1 unit of change in the predictor variable.
Table 4. Testing the moderating role of eudaimonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health.
Table 4. Testing the moderating role of eudaimonia on the relationship between stress and general mental health.
CriterionModel PredictorR2∆R2Fβ
General mental healthStep 1 0.04 *** 7.40 ***
Gender −0.09
SES 0.18 **
Step 2 0.65 ****0.61 ****200.80 ****
Gender −0.02
SES 0.08 *
Stress −0.78 ***
Step 3 0.650.00151.89 ****
Gender −0.02
SES 0.08 *
Stress −0.78 ***
Eudaimonia 0.05
Step 4 0.650.00121.17 ****
Gender −0.02
SES 0.08 **
Stress −0.78 ****
Hedonia 0.05
Eudaimonia × Stress −0.01
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.001; R2: proportion of variance in the criterion variable explained by the predictor variable; ∆R2: difference in R2 between previous and current step; F: F-ratio; β: degree of change in the outcome variable for every 1 unit of change in the predictor variable.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Marcinko, I. Exploring the Moderating Role of Hedonia and Eudaimonia on the Relationship between Stress and Mental Health in Young Adults. Psychiatry Int. 2024, 5, 660-671. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint5040047

AMA Style

Marcinko I. Exploring the Moderating Role of Hedonia and Eudaimonia on the Relationship between Stress and Mental Health in Young Adults. Psychiatry International. 2024; 5(4):660-671. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint5040047

Chicago/Turabian Style

Marcinko, Ivana. 2024. "Exploring the Moderating Role of Hedonia and Eudaimonia on the Relationship between Stress and Mental Health in Young Adults" Psychiatry International 5, no. 4: 660-671. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint5040047

APA Style

Marcinko, I. (2024). Exploring the Moderating Role of Hedonia and Eudaimonia on the Relationship between Stress and Mental Health in Young Adults. Psychiatry International, 5(4), 660-671. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint5040047

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop