Do Coping Strategies Explain the Relationship Between Purpose in Life and Life Satisfaction?

IF 3.7 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2026-05-05 DOI:10.1007/s10902-026-01050-2

Matthew Sala, Tapan Patel, Fallon Goodman, Jesse Cougle

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose in life is positively associated with several markers of subjective well-being, but potential mechanisms of this effect are not well understood. We examined how the use of different coping strategies was associated with the relationship between purpose in life and overall life satisfaction. We examined associations between purpose in life, life satisfaction, and coping strategies in Waves 2 and 3 of the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study, encompassing 3,754 adults assessed over a nine-year period. Results indicated that greater endorsement of purpose in life prospectively predicted significantly more problem-focused coping and less emotion-focused coping. In turn, this pattern of coping strategy use predicted greater life satisfaction. These findings indicate that coping strategies may be a pathway for purpose in life to influence life satisfaction, such that individuals who endorse higher purpose in life are more likely than individuals lower in purpose to employ adaptive strategies in response to stress.

查看原文本刊更多论文

应对策略能解释生活目标和生活满意度之间的关系吗？

生活目标与主观幸福感的几个标志呈正相关，但这种影响的潜在机制尚未得到很好的理解。我们研究了不同应对策略的使用是如何与生活目标和总体生活满意度之间的关系相关联的。我们在美国中年研究（MIDUS）的第二和第三阶段中研究了生活目标、生活满意度和应对策略之间的关系，该研究涵盖了3754名成年人，为期9年。结果表明，对生活目标的认同程度越高，对问题导向的应对能力越强，对情绪导向的应对能力越弱具有前瞻性。反过来，这种应对策略的使用模式预示着更高的生活满意度。这些发现表明，应对策略可能是生活目标影响生活满意度的途径，因此，生活目标较高的个体比生活目标较低的个体更有可能采用适应策略来应对压力。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Happiness Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

6.50%

发文量

110

期刊介绍： The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?