What do people find most meaningful? How representations of the self and the world provide meaning in life.

Vlad Costin,Vivian L Vignoles

doi:10.1111/jopy.12682

Abstract

Recent theories propose that global meaning in life (MIL) is based on feelings of coherence, purpose, and existential mattering. MIL has also been linked to mental representations-for example, beliefs, values, attitudes, and identities-that serve as "meaning frameworks" for interpreting the world and oneself. Combining these proposals, we predicted that beliefs, values, attitudes, and identities would foster a sense of MIL to the extent that they provide feelings of coherence, purpose, and existential mattering. Using multilevel path analysis, we tested within-person associations of coherence, purpose, and existential mattering with a sense of MIL across three studies (Study 1:208 US MTurk workers; Study 2:106 UK university students; Study 3:296 from a UK nationally representative Prolific sample). We explored the generality of these associations across mental representation types and individual differences. Participants derived greater MIL most strongly from mental representations that provided sense of purpose, followed by existential mattering. Sense of coherence was less robustly related to MIL across mental representation types and religious orientation. Integrating prior theorizing on MIL, we conclude that mental representations function as "meaning frameworks" to the extent that they provide feelings of purpose, mattering, and, sometimes, coherence.

Highlights

Having shown that mental representations were perceived as most meaningful to the extent that they provided a sense of purpose, mattering, and to a lesser extent, coherence, we explored whether our findings would differ by (a) mental representation type, and (b) individual-level characteristics
Purpose, and existential mattering were added as predictors of sense of meaning in life (MIL) to the baseline model
As in Study 1, sense of MIL was most strongly predicted by purpose, β = .37, p < .001, 95% CI [.31, .42], followed by existential mattering, β = .23, p < .001, 95% CI [.18, .28], and coherence, β = .20, p < .001, 95% CI [.15, 25]

Summary

Methods

Method ParticipantsWe aimed initially for a sample size comparable to those successfully used in previous studies with similar multilevel designs (e.g., Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010; Vignoles et al, 2006; Vignoles, Manzi, Regalia, Jemmolo, & Scabini, 2008). We expected at least a small-to-medium effect size for the associations of coherence, purpose, and mattering with sense of MIL (e.g., George & Park, 2017). Power analyses (described in the Results section) show that our achieved sample size was sufficient to detect small-to-medium effect sizes across all analyses. Of 372 complete responses, 164 participants were removed for failing any one of the three attention checks embedded within the questionnaire (e.g., “Please select somewhat disagree”). Incorrect responses to these items were taken to indicate non-engagement with the task.. The final sample consisted of complete responses from 208 participants: 108 females, 98 males and 2 self-identified as “gender queer”.

Results

Discussion

Conclusion