Abstract
Objective:
Positive youth development (PYD) can be enhanced through dynamic interactions between individuals and their environments. While previous research has primarily focused on its social-emotional learning mechanisms, the cognitive and motivational pathways of PYD were seldom explored. To address this gap, this study investigated the associations of parent -child relationships, teacher–student relationships, and friendships with adolescents' prosocial behavior, with a focus on the mediating role of meaning in life.
Methods:
A three-wave temporally ordered mediation analysis was conducted using three waves of data collected at six-month intervals from 671 Chinese junior high school students.
Results:
The findings revealed that the quality of parent–child relationships and friendships at Wave 1 was positively associated with both the presence and search for meaning in life at Wave 2, with friendships showing stronger associations, whereas teacher–student relationships were not significantly associated with either dimension of meaning in life. Furthermore, only the presence of meaning in life at Wave 2 was positively associated with prosocial behavior at Wave 3, while the search for meaning in life was not significantly associated with prosocial behavior.
Conclusion:
These findings provide practical insights into China's moral education framework, rooted in Confucian doctrine, by suggesting that high-quality relationships are associated with adolescents' sense of societal contribution as an aspect of life's meaning. Possible reasons for the nonsignificant roles of teacher–student relationships and the search for meaning in life were discussed, along with the study's limitations and directions for future research.
1 Introduction
Prosocial behavior is defined as voluntary actions aimed at benefiting others, such as helping, sharing, and comforting (). A growing body of scientific research suggests that prosocial behavior can predict various positive developmental outcomes, including well-being (e.g., ) and academic success (e.g., ). Therefore, gaining a deeper understanding of the factors that promote prosocial behavior is crucial for fostering the positive development of adolescents.
The positive youth development (PYD) framework asserts that all youth possess the potential for growth and development, which can be optimized through the dynamic interactions between individuals and their environments (). Prosocial behavior, as a component of PYD, arises from reciprocal relationships between individuals and their social contexts (e.g., parent-child relationships, teacher-student relationships, and friendships), which contribute to the well-being of both parties (). Extending the PYD perspective to the Chinese cultural context, the present study considers prosocial behavior through the lens of Confucian ethics, particularly the principle of benevolence, which emphasizes compassion, interpersonal care, and moral responsibility toward others ().
A great number of studies have examined the underlying mechanism of this process through the lens of social-emotional learning (e.g., ). Specifically, high-quality relationships can foster adolescents’ prosocial behavior in two primary ways: by serving as models of prosocial behavior and by providing a warm, supportive relational context (). According to social learning theory, adolescents acquire prosocial behaviors by observing and imitating the actions of others, particularly within close relationships (). Furthermore, strong, supportive relationships with family members and peers can enhance the internalization of prosocial values and behaviors (). When adolescents experience secure attachments with family and friends and feel accepted and supported, they are better equipped to recognize others’ needs and exhibit prosocial behaviors ().
However, relatively few studies have examined this process from cognitive and motivational perspectives. Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior suggest that attitudes and behavioral intentions guide behavior (–). Cognitive dissonance theory further suggests that individuals are motivated to reduce inconsistencies among their beliefs, values, and actions (, ). Meaning in life reflects the extent to which individuals experience their lives as coherent, purposeful, and significant (). Meaning-maintenance and meaning-making models propose that broader beliefs and goals help individuals interpret experience and maintain coherence (, ). When prosocial values are integrated into adolescents’ life goals, helping others may represent behavior that is consistent with those goals. Consistent with this reasoning, the presence of meaning has been positively associated with prosocial behavior (), and prosocial behavior may, in turn, strengthen meaning in life (–).
Social relationships are an important source of meaning in life. Supportive relationships with parents, teachers, and peers may provide adolescents with a sense of belonging and connectedness, which are associated with greater meaning in life (, ). Meaning in life may, in turn, orient adolescents toward behaviors that are consistent with their values and goals, including prosocial behavior. Accordingly, the present study examines whether the presence of meaning in life and the search for meaning in life serve as potential mediating pathways linking parent–child relationships, teacher–student relationships, and friendship quality with prosocial behavior among Chinese adolescents. This study will have both theoretical and practical significance. Theoretically, it enriches the understanding of PYD mechanisms by exploring them from cognitive and motivational perspectives. Practically speaking, this aligns with the goals of China’s ideological and political education, which emphasize cultivating inspiration and a collectivist spirit, offering insights into educational practices that promote prosocial behavior among Chinese youth.
1.1 Relationship quality and prosocial behavior
Familial, school, and peer relationships form the primary social contexts for adolescents. Research consistently indicates that the quality of these relationships is a positive predictor of adolescents’ prosocial behavior. For instance, Li et al. () suggested that positive parent–child attachment fosters prosocial behavior in children and adolescents. Longobardi et al. () found that the teacher–student relationship was positively associated with students’ prosocial behavior. Zhou et al. () revealed bidirectional relationships between positive friendship quality and prosocial behavior. Therefore, in the present study, we hypothesize that higher-quality parent–child relationships, teacher–student relationships, and friendships at T1 will be positively associate with higher levels of prosocial behavior at T3 (H1).
H1a: The quality of parent–child relationships positively will associate with adolescents’ prosocial behavior.
H1b: The quality of teacher–student relationships positively associate with adolescents’ prosocial behavior.
H1c: The quality of friendships positively associates with adolescents’ prosocial behavior.
1.2 Relationship quality and meaning in life
Meaning in life encompasses an individual’s comprehensive understanding of themselves, their environment, their role in the world, and their life’s purpose, goals, and mission (–). A central feature of meaning in life is its broad perspective, incorporating considerations that extend beyond the self (). Meaning in life comprises two dimensions: the presence of meaning, reflecting a sense of coherence, purpose, and significance in life, and the search for meaning, representing an active effort seeking to understand and enhance life’s purpose and significance (, ). Social support and connection play a crucial and bidirectional role in shaping meaning in life (, , ). Research indicates that socially grounded feelings, such as a sense of belonging () or connectedness (), significantly enhance meaning in life. Daily diary studies reveal that individuals perceive days with positive social events as the most meaningful (). Furthermore, the quality of social connections is strongly associated with aspects of meaning in life, with individuals reporting a greater sense of purpose on days with better social interactions () and in relationships characterized by higher support and lower strain (). Conversely, experiences of social exclusion () or interpersonal rejection () are linked to diminished perceptions of life’s meaning. Among the important relationships, familial relationships have been consistently identified as the most significant contributors to meaning in life (, ). However, there is a relative scarcity of studies examining the associations between teacher–student relationships and meaning in life (), as well as between friendships and meaning in life ().
In the present study, we hypothesize that the quality of parent–child relationships, teacher–student relationships, and friendships positively influences adolescents’ presence of meaning in life (H2) and search for meaning in life (H3). Specifically, supportive and nurturing relationships within these primary social contexts are expected to be associated with adolescents’ greater sense of purpose and significance in life and their motivation to actively explore life’s deeper significance. High-quality parent–child relationships, characterized by warmth, trust, and emotional support, provide a secure foundation for adolescents to develop a coherent and purposeful understanding of their lives. These relationships also foster an environment where adolescents feel encouraged to explore and reflect on their personal goals and values, driving their search for meaning. Similarly, positive teacher–student relationships, marked by encouragement, mutual respect, and constructive feedback, not only contribute to academic and personal growth but also help adolescents perceive their lives as meaningful and purposeful. Teachers, as role models and mentors, can inspire students to seek answers to life’s broader questions and cultivate a deeper understanding of their roles in society. Friendships, a vital source of emotional support and social learning during adolescence, play a key role in fostering feelings of belonging and connectedness, which are closely associated with a sense of life meaning. Additionally, engaging in meaningful conversations and shared experiences with friends can stimulate adolescents’ curiosity and motivate their search for life’s purpose. In summary, we propose that the quality of these three key relationships positively associate with both the presence and pursuit of meaning in life.
H2a: The quality of parent–child relationships positively associate with adolescents’ presence of meaning in life.
H2b: The quality of teacher–student relationships positively associate with adolescents’ presence of meaning in life.
H2c: The quality of friendships positively adolescents’ presence of meaning in life.
H3a: The quality of parent–child relationships positively associate with adolescents’ search for meaning in life.
H3b: The quality of teacher–student relationships positively associate with adolescents’ search for meaning in life.
H3c: The quality of friendships positively associates with adolescents’ search for meaning in life.
1.3 Meaning in life and prosocial behavior
Previous studies suggest that the two dimensions of meaning in life may relate differently to prosocial behavior. Evidence for the presence of meaning is relatively consistent, with longitudinal studies showing positive associations with subsequent prosocial behavior (, ). A clear sense of purpose and significance may provide direction for behavior and support actions that are consistent with personal values. Thus, adolescents with a stronger presence of meaning may be more likely to engage in prosocial behavior.
In contrast, the role of the search for meaning is more complex. Searching for meaning may reflect constructive exploration of life goals and values, but it may also arise from uncertainty or a perceived lack of meaning and be accompanied by psychological distress (, , ). Xie et al. () found no longitudinal association between the search for meaning and prosocial behavior, and its implications may vary with the presence of meaning and stressful life events (). Given this mixed evidence, we examine the association between the search for meaning and prosocial behavior.
H4: Adolescents’ presence of meaning in life positively associates with their prosocial behavior.
H5: Adolescents’ search for meaning in life is associated with prosocial behavior.
1.4 The present study
In this study, we aim to examine the prospective associations between parent–child relationships, teacher–student relationships, and friendships on adolescents’ prosocial behavior, with a particular focus on the mediating roles of the presence of meaning in life and the search for meaning in life. To establish a temporal ordering among the focal constructs, we adopted a three-wave longitudinal research design, with the independent variables, mediators, and outcome variables measured at three successive time points, each six months apart. The research model is summarized in Figure 1.
Figure 1
2 Methods
2.1 Participants and procedures
The participants of this study were students from a junior high school in Hunan Province, selected through cluster sampling by class. Informed consent was obtained from the school, students, and their parents. The first measurement (T1) was conducted in May 2021 to assess parent–child relationships, teacher–student relationships, and friendships. The second measurement (T2) took place in November 2021, focusing on the presence of meaning in life and the search for meaning in life. The third measurement (T3) was conducted in May 2022 to evaluate prosocial behavior. Data were collected using paper-and-pencil questionnaires at all three assessment periods. Although the number of valid responses varied slightly across the three waves due to absences and student transfers, the overall retention rate was high. After screening and matching the questionnaires from all three measurements, a total of 671 valid responses were included in the final analysis. Compared with the valid T1 sample, 18 participants were not retained in the matched longitudinal sample, resulting in a retention rate of 97.4% and an attrition rate of 2.6%. Attrition analyses revealed no significant differences between retained and unmatched participants in baseline demographic characteristics and study variables (ps >.05), suggesting that attrition was unlikely to introduce substantial bias into the longitudinal. There was no structured participant attrition across the surveys. After a rigorous evaluation and merging of the questionnaires from all three measurements, a total of 671 valid responses were included in the final analysis. Among them, 347 were male students (51.7%) and 324 were female students (48.2%). At T2, the participants’ ages ranged from 11 to 15 years, with a mean age of 13.33 years (SD = 0.63).
2.2 Measures
2.2.1 Parent–child relationship
The Parent–Child Closeness Scale, originally developed by Buchanan et al. () and revised by Zhang et al. (), was used to assess the relationships between adolescents and their fathers and mothers separately. The scale consists of 9 items for father–child relationships and 9 items for mother–child relationships, rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“not at all true”) to 5 (“very true”). Higher scores indicate closer parent-child relationships. For statistical analysis, the mean score of all 18 items (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.948) was calculated as the measure of parent–child relationships.
2.2.2 Teacher–student relationship
The Teacher–Student Relationship Subscale from the My Class Questionnaire, developed by Jiang (), was used to measure students’ perceptions of the relationships with their head teachers. The subscale includes 8 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 indicates “never” and 5 indicates “always”. Higher mean scores reflect better teacher–student relationships in this study, with a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.952.
2.2.3 Friendship
This study employed the Friendship Quality Questionnaire–Short Form, revised by Zhou et al. (), to measure friendship quality among children and adolescents. The questionnaire assesses six dimensions of friendship quality: (1) affirmation and care, (2) help and guidance, (3) companionship and recreation, (4) intimacy and communication, (5) conflict resolution strategies, and (6) conflict and betrayal. The first five dimensions capture the positive aspects of friendship quality, while the sixth dimension reflects its negative aspects. In line with prior research (), the mean score of the items from the first five dimensions (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.908) was used to represent positive friendship quality in this study, with higher scores indicating better friendship quality; the sixth dimension was excluded from the analyses.
2.2.4 Meaning in life
The Chinese Meaning in Life Questionnaire, originally developed by Steger et al. () and validated by Wang and Dai (), was used in this study. The questionnaire employs a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 7 (“strongly agree”). The presence of meaning in life and the search for meaning in life were each measured using 5 items (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.767 and 0.911, respectively), with higher mean scores indicating higher levels of the respective variables.
2.2.5 Prosocial behavior
The Prosocial Tendencies Measure, revised by Kou et al. (), was used in this study. The scale consists of 26 items covering six dimensions: public, anonymous, altruistic, compliant, emotional, and dire prosocial tendencies. Participants rated each item on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 indicates “not at all like me” and 5 indicates “very much like me”. In this study, the mean score of all 26 items (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.973) was calculated as the measure of prosocial behavior, with higher scores indicating greater prosocial tendencies.
2.3 Data analysis
Data analysis, including descriptive statistics and mediation analyses, was conducted using Statistical Product and Service Solutions Automatically (SPSSAU, https://spssau.com/indexs.html) in this study. Relying on its standard algorithms and automated output. While it has limitations, such as in highly customized programming, these do not affect the analyses in this study, as conventional mediation modeling via PROCESS Model 4 was employed.
3 Results
3.1 Common method bias test
To assess potential common method bias, Harman’s single-factor test was conducted (). Thirteen factors had eigenvalues greater than 1, with the first factor accounting for 24.83% of the variance. The variance explained by the first factor was below the 40% threshold, suggesting that common method bias was not a serious concern in this study.
3.2 Descriptive statistics
The means, standard deviations, and Pearson correlation coefficients of the variables are presented in Table 1.
Table 1
| Variable | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Parent–child relationship (T1) | 3.429 | 0.905 | 1 | |||||
| 2. Teacher–student relationship (T1) | 4.295 | 0.897 | 0.228** | 1 | ||||
| 3. Friendship (T1) | 3.537 | 0.851 | 0.243** | 0.176** | 1 | |||
| 4. Presence of meaning in life (T2) | 4.662 | 1.329 | 0.224** | 0.140** | 0.205** | 1 | ||
| 5. Search for meaning in life (T2) | 5.306 | 1.477 | 0.148** | 0.043 | 0.207** | 0.622** | 1 | |
| 6. Prosocial Behavior (T3) | 3.746 | 0.737 | 0.144** | 0.125** | 0.158** | 0.156** | 0.088* | 1 |
Descriptive statistics.
p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
3.3 Mediation analyses
As shown in Figure 2, the results of the longitudinal mediation analysis revealed that the total effects of relationship quality on prosocial behavior were significant across all three models. Specifically, parent–child relationships at T1 positively predicted prosocial behavior at T3, and the same pattern was observed for teacher–student relationships and friendships, thereby supporting H1. Among the three types of relationships, friendships demonstrated the strongest total effect on prosocial behavior.
Figure 2
In terms of mediation effects, the results showed that the pathway from relationship quality to prosocial behavior through the presence of meaning in life was significant for parent–child relationships and friendships. Specifically, parent–child relationships at T1 significantly predicted the presence of meaning in life at T2, which in turn positively predicted prosocial behavior at T3. Similarly, friendships at T1 were positively associated with the presence of meaning in life at T2, which mediated their effect on prosocial behavior at T3. In contrast, teacher–student relationships at T1 did not significantly predict the presence of meaning in life at T2, indicating that the mediating role of the presence of meaning in life was not significant in the teacher–student relationship model. These findings supported H2a, H2c, and H4 but not H2b.
However, unlike the presence of meaning in life, the search for meaning in life did not exhibit significant mediation effects in any of the three models. Although both parent–child relationships and friendships at T1 significantly predicted the search for meaning in life at T2, the search for meaning in life did not significantly predict prosocial behavior at T3, supporting H3a and H3c but not H5. The search for meaning in life was not significantly associated with prosocial behavior at T3. Thus, H3a and H3c were supported, whereas the exploratory association proposed in H5 was not significant. Additionally, teacher–student relationships at T1 did not significantly predict the search for meaning in life at T2, thereby rejecting H3b.
When controlling for the mediators, the direct effects of relationship quality on prosocial behavior varied across the three models. For the parent–child relationship model, the direct effect on prosocial behavior was nonsignificant, indicating a full mediation effect through the presence of meaning in life. In contrast, for the friendship model, the direct effect on prosocial behavior remained significant, suggesting a partial mediation effect, with the indirect effect accounting for 15.34% of the total effect.
In summary, the findings highlight the distinct roles of various relationships and different dimensions of meaning in life in shaping adolescents’ prosocial behavior.
4 Discussion
4.1 Primary findings and implications
The primary findings of this study reveal that the total effects of relationship quality on prosocial behavior were significant for all three types of relationships, with friendships showing the strongest effect. The presence of meaning in life mediated the effects of parent–child relationships and friendships on prosocial behavior, with a full mediation observed in the parent–child relationship model and a partial mediation in the friendship model. However, no significant mediation effects were found for the search for meaning in life in any of the models. Teacher–student relationships did not significantly predict either type of meaning in life, and their influence on prosocial behavior was weaker compared to parent–child relationships and friendships. These results underscore the differential roles of various relationships and dimensions of meaning in life in shaping adolescents’ prosocial behavior.
The effects of relationship quality on adolescents’ prosocial behavior found in the current study align with prior research, such as Li et al. (), Longobardi et al. (), and Zhou et al. (). However, this study might be the first to directly compare the effects of different types of relationships on adolescents’ prosocial behavior. The finding that friendships exerted the strongest effect highlights the critical role of peer relationships during adolescence. Adolescence is a developmental stage marked by increased reliance on peers as sources of emotional support, social learning, and identity formation. Strong, high-quality friendships can foster a sense of belonging and connectedness, which are crucial for promoting prosocial behavior (–). This suggests that interventions aimed at enhancing adolescents’ social development should focus on cultivating healthy and supportive peer relationships. From an ecological systems perspective (), these efforts can be extended across multiple relational contexts. At the peer level, schools can implement structured peer mentoring and cooperative learning to systematically strengthen friendships. At the family level, parents should create supportive environments and engage children in shared community activities to nurture a sense of social contribution. At the teacher level, training programs may incorporate affective communication modules to help educators balance their authoritative role with emotional support. These strategies, working in concert across proximal and distal contexts, may reinforce adolescents’ prosocial development in a more sustained and coherent manner. For example, schools could implement peer mentoring programs or cooperative learning activities to strengthen friendships and encourage positive social interactions. Additionally, parents and educators should be aware of the growing importance of peer relationships during adolescence and create environments that support the development of strong, prosocial peer bonds. These efforts can help adolescents build the social skills and empathy needed to engage in prosocial behaviors, ultimately contributing to their overall well-being and positive social development.
The significant mediating role of the presence of meaning in life, while not directly studied in prior research, is consistent with existing findings, such as those of Zhang et al. () and Xie et al. (), and underscores its importance as a psychological mechanism through which high-quality relationships promote prosocial behavior in adolescents. These findings reveal that the mechanisms of PYD extend beyond social-emotional learning to include cognitive and motivational perspectives. This is particularly significant in the context of Chinese education, which places a strong emphasis on ideological and moral development. Rooted in Confucian traditions, Chinese education has long promoted life purposes centered on societal contribution, encapsulated in the ideals of “cultivating oneself, managing one’s family, governing the state, and bringing peace to the world” (59–61). This Confucian vision finds its contemporary expression in China’s core socialist values, notably “friendship”, which explicitly promotes mutual care and helping behavior as civic virtues (62). The findings of this study provide empirical support for these efforts by demonstrating that high-quality relationships play a key role in fostering a sense of purpose oriented toward prosocial contributions. This highlights the potential for expanding the scope of moral education in China to focus on nurturing meaningful relationships that inspire adolescents to see societal contribution as a central element of their life purpose. By doing so, these findings offer a broader, evidence-based pathway for strengthening moral education and cultivating prosocial behavior among Chinese youth.
Importantly, the mediation patterns differed across relationship contexts, suggesting that meaning in life represents an important but not exclusive pathway linking adolescents’ social relationships with prosocial behavior. The full mediation observed in the parent–child relationship model indicates that the association between supportive family relationships and prosocial behavior may be primarily explained by adolescents’ internalization of meaning and values derived from family experiences. Parents may foster adolescents’ prosocial orientations through emotional security, value transmission, and moral socialization processes (63).
In contrast, the partial mediation found in the friendship model suggests that friendships may contribute to adolescents’ prosocial behavior through additional peer-related mechanisms beyond meaning construction. During adolescence, friendships provide important contexts for social learning, behavioral modeling, and the development of peer norms. Recent empirical studies have shown that adolescents’ prosocial behaviors can be shaped by peer environments through processes of peer modeling and normative influence (64–66). For example, adolescents tend to adjust their behavioral norms according to the prosocial norms expressed by peers, particularly within meaningful social networks (65), and positive peer contexts can facilitate the development of prosocial behavior over time (64). Therefore, the remaining direct association between friendship quality and prosocial behavior may reflect the unique role of peers as immediate socialization agents who provide opportunities for observing, practicing, and reinforcing prosocial behaviors. These mediation patterns should be interpreted as statistical associations and do not, by themselves, establish causal mechanisms (67).
4.2 The nonsignificant context of teacher–student relationship
The nonsignificant effect of teacher–student relationships on the presence and search for meaning in life may stem from several contextual and developmental factors.
First, the emotional depth of teacher–student relationships is often more limited compared to parent–child relationships and friendships. While teachers play a crucial role in academic guidance and behavioral support, their interactions with students may lack the intimacy and personal investment needed to foster a strong sense of belonging or connectedness (68). The formal and structured nature of these relationships may constrain their influence on adolescents’ internalization of life’s meaning.
Second, cultural expectations and role perceptions rooted in the Confucian tradition within Chinese educational settings may further contribute to the nonsignificant findings (59, 61). In Chinese cultural contexts, teacher–student relationships are shaped by both relational closeness and hierarchical expectations. The Confucian tradition of respecting teachers and valuing education emphasizes teachers’ roles not only as transmitters of knowledge but also as moral guides, as reflected in the classical educational text Xueji (69, 70). In Confucian-heritage cultures, teacher–student relationships have historically been characterized by hierarchical expectations, with teachers occupying positions of authority and moral guidance (71). This cultural legacy continues to influence contemporary understandings of teachers’ professional roles in Chinese societies, where teachers are often positioned as both educators and moral exemplars (72). At the same time, recent research suggests that respect for teachers in Confucian cultural contexts is multidimensional, involving both positive appreciation and authority-related orientations, which may have different implications for students’ perceptions of teacher–student relationships (73). Although Confucian educational traditions emphasize meaningful teacher–student relationships and moral cultivation (74), the coexistence of teacher authority and relational closeness may shape the extent to which adolescents perceive teachers as sources of emotional support and personal meaning. In many Chinese schools, teacher–student relationships are often characterized by a focus on discipline, authority, and academic achievement rather than emotional connectedness (60). Adolescents may primarily view teachers as authority figures rather than sources of emotional support, which could weaken the potential impact of these relationships on their broader developmental outcomes.
Finally, the nonsignificant findings may also be attributed to the variability and complexity of teacher–student relationship quality. One important factor is the continuity of teacher–student relationships; for instance, whether teachers continue to instruct the same students as they progress to higher grades. Disruptions in these relationships could weaken their influence on adolescents’ personal and social development. Additionally, students are often influenced by multiple teachers, not just their head teacher. Given differences in teachers’ personalities and teaching styles, some students may form stronger emotional connections with certain subject teachers rather than their head teacher. However, the measures used in this study focused solely on the relationship with the head teacher, which may not have been comprehensive enough to capture the broader and more nuanced effects of teacher–student relationships on the outcomes.
4.3 The nonsignificant mediator of search for meaning in life
The nonsignificant mediating role of the search for meaning in life observed in this study is consistent with prior research that underscores the complex and often inconclusive effects of this construct. While the presence of meaning in life has been strongly associated with positive outcomes such as well-being, life satisfaction, and resilience (e.g., , 75), the search for meaning operates in a more nuanced manner, serving as both a stressor and a facilitator of developmental outcomes (, , ).
On the one hand, the search for meaning can reflect unmet needs and an absence of life purpose, often linked to maladjustment and psychological distress (, 76, 77). For individuals actively searching for meaning, the process may be accompanied by heightened existential anxiety or distress, as it highlights the gap between their current state and an idealized sense of purpose or coherence (78). Adolescents, in particular, may struggle with this search if they lack supportive resources or a clear framework to construct meaning from their experiences.
On the other hand, the search for meaning can serve as a powerful growth-oriented mechanism, allowing individuals to reinterpret negative experiences, integrate challenging perspectives, and overcome adversity (79, 80). This constructive aspect of the search for meaning may facilitate long-term well-being and personal growth, as individuals adapt to challenges and redefine their goals and values in the face of adversity. This dual nature of the search for meaning underscores its complexity, as it can lead to either adaptive or maladaptive outcomes depending on individual and contextual factors.
In the present study, the nonsignificant findings may also be partially explained by the developmental stage of the participants. The sample consisted of early adolescents, who are generally in the exploratory phase of constructing meaning. During this phase, the search for meaning is often less goal-directed and more experimental, reflecting the process of identity formation and self-discovery rather than yielding immediate, measurable behavioral outcomes such as prosocial actions. Unlike the presence of meaning, which provides a coherent framework for guiding behavior, the exploratory nature of the search for meaning may have less direct influence on prosocial tendencies at this stage.
4.4 Limitations and future directions
This study has several limitations that should be noted. First, the sample was drawn from a single region in China, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other cultural or regional contexts; future research should include more diverse populations. Second, the focus on head teacher–student relationships excluded the potential influence of relationships with other teachers, like subject teachers and counselors, which could be explored in future studies. Third, the six-month intervals between measurements may not fully capture the dynamic nature of these relationships; more frequent measurements could provide greater insight. Fourth, potential moderators such as adolescents’ self-construal, which might influence the nonsignificant findings regarding the search for meaning in life, should be considered in future research. Lastly, reliance on self-report measures introduces potential biases; future studies should incorporate multi-informant or observational methods. Fifth, all study variables were assessed using adolescent self-reports. This single-informant design may introduce common method variance and social desirability bias and does not capture the perspectives of parents, teachers, or peers. Future studies should incorporate multi-informant or observational assessments. By addressing these limitations, future research can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the factors that shape adolescents’ prosocial development.
5 Conclusions
In this study, we explored how parent–child relationships, teacher–student relationships, and friendships associate with adolescents’ prosocial behavior through the mediating roles of meaning in life. Using a longitudinal mediation model, the results showed that the quality of parent–child relationships and friendships at T1 positively predicted both the presence and search for meaning in life at T2, but only the presence of meaning in life at T2 positively predicted prosocial behavior at T3. These findings not only deepen our understanding of the PYD mechanism by highlighting the cognitive and motivational pathways through which relationships foster prosocial behavior, but also offer valuable insights for enhancing the moral education framework in China, emphasizing the role of meaningful relationships in shaping adolescents’ sense of purpose and societal contribution.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by Biomedical Research Ethics Committee of Hunan Normal University. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardians/next of kin.
Author contributions
LM: Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CL: Software, Writing – review & editing. TD: Investigation, Writing – review & editing. SZ: Resources, Writing – review & editing. BZ: Funding acquisition, Project administration, Writing – review & editing. QY: Supervision, Resources, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. The Third Hunan Province Basic Education Teaching Reform Research Project (25JGYB567) to Li Meng; Hunan Provincial Social Science Fund Project: Heterogeneous Impacts, Mechanisms and Intervention Countermeasures on Parents' Mental Health Under the "Double Reduction" Policy (No. 25WTC32) to Bi Zhang; National Social Science Fund General Project in Education (BRA250236) to Shaojun Zhang.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
EisenbergNFabesRASpinradTL. Prosocial development. In: EisenbergNDamonWLernerRM, editors. Handbook of Child Psychology: Social, Emotional, and Personality Development. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley (2006). p. 646–718.
2
CurryOSRowlandLAVan LissaCJZlotowitzSMcAlaneyJWhitehouseH. Happy to help? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of performing acts of kindness on the well-being of the actor. J Exp Soc Psychol. (2018) 76:320–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.014
3
GerbinoMZuffianòAEisenbergNCastellaniVLuengo KanacriBPPastorelliCet al. Adolescents’ prosocial behavior predicts good grades beyond intelligence and personality traits. J Pers. (2018) 86:247–60. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12309
4
ShekDTDouDZhuXChaiW. Positive youth development: Current perspectives. Adolesc Health Med Ther. (2019) 10:131–41. doi: 10.2147/AHMT.S179946
5
LernerRMLernerJVAlmerigiJTheokasC. Positive youth development: A view of the issues. J Early Adolescence. (2005) 25:10–6. doi: 10.1177/0272431604273211
6
ZhouHLongL. Statistical remedies for common method biases. Adv Psychol Sci. (2004) 12:942–50. Available online at: https://journal.psych.ac.cn/adps/EN/Y2004/V12/I06/942.
7
van MeegenMVan der GraaffJCarloGMeeusWBranjeS. Longitudinal associations between support and prosocial behavior across adolescence: The roles of fathers, mothers, siblings, and friends. J Youth Adolescence. (2024) 53:1134–54. doi: 10.1007/s10964-023-01885-5
8
EisenbergNSpinradTLKnafo-NoamA. Prosocial development. In: LambMLernerRM, editors. Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science. Socioemotional Processes, 7th ed, vol. 3 . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley (2015). p. 610–56.
9
HoffmanML. Empathy and prosocial behavior. In: LewisMHaviland-JonesJMBarrettLF, editors. Handbook of Emotions, 3rd ed.New York, US: Guilford Press (2008). p. 440–55. doi: 10.1016/b978-012370877-9.00056-6
10
HastingsPDMcShaneKEParkerRLadhaF. Ready to make nice: Parental socialization of young sons’ and daughters’ prosocial behaviors with peers. J Genet Psychol. (2007) 168:177–200. doi: 10.3200/GNTP.168.2.177-200
11
ShaverPRMikulincerMCassidyJ. Attachment, caregiving in couple relationships, and prosocial behavior in the wider world. Curr Opin Psychol. (2019) 25:16–20. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.02.009
12
ArmitageCJConnerM. Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol. (2001) 40:471–99. doi: 10.1348/014466601164939
13
FishbeinMAjzenI. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company (1975).
14
KashifMSarifuddinSHassanA. Charity donation: Intentions and behaviour. Marketing Intell Plann. (2015) 33:90–102. doi: 10.1108/mip-07-2013-0110
15
FestingerL. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson and Company: Stanford University Press (1957).
16
McGrathA. Dealing with dissonance: A review of cognitive dissonance reduction. Soc Pers Psychol Compass. (2017) 11:e12362. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12362
17
GeorgeLSParkCL. Meaning in life as comprehension, purpose, and mattering: Toward integration and new research questions. Rev Gen Psychol. (2016) 20:205–20. doi: 10.1037/gpr0000077
18
HeineSJProulxTVohsKD. The meaning maintenance model: On the coherence of social motivations. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. (2006) 10:88–110. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_1
19
ParkCL. Making sense of the meaning literature: An integrative review of meaning making and its effects on adjustment to stressful life events. psychol Bull. (2010) 136:257–301. doi: 10.1037/a0018301
20
ZhangSFuY-NLiuQTurelOHeQ. Psychological capital mediates the influence of meaning in life on prosocial behavior of university students: A longitudinal study. Children Youth Serv Rev. (2022) 140:106600. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2022.106600
21
KleinN. Prosocial behavior increases perceptions of meaning in life. J Positive Psychol. (2017) 12:354–61. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1209541
22
van TongerenDRGreenJDDavisDEHookJNHulseyTL. Prosociality enhances meaning in life. J Positive Psychol. (2016) 11:225–36. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2015.1048814
23
XieJWenZShenJTanYLiuXYangYet al. Longitudinal relationship between prosocial behavior and meaning in life of junior high school students: A three-wave cross-lagged study. J Adolescence. (2023) 95:1017–32. doi: 10.1002/jad.12172
24
LambertNMStillmanTFHicksJAKambleSBaumeisterRFFinchamFD. To belong is to matter: Sense of belonging enhances meaning in life. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. (2013) 39:1418–27. doi: 10.1177/0146167213499186
25
StavrovaOLuhmannM. Social connectedness as a source and consequence of meaning in life. J Posit Psychol. (2016) 11:470–9. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2015.1117127
26
LiZYuCCaoYNieYTuWLiuBet al. The association between parent–child attachment and prosocial behavior: A longitudinal study. Curr Psychol. (2024) 43:2432–41. doi: 10.1007/s12144-023-04474-8
27
LongobardiCSettanniMLinSFabrisMA. Student–teacher relationship quality and prosocial behaviour: The mediating role of academic achievement and a positive attitude towards school. Br J Educ Psychol. (2021) 91:547–62. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12378
28
ZhouZShenRHuebnerESTianL. The longitudinal reciprocal relations among friendship quality, positivity and prosocial behavior in Chinese early adolescents. Curr Psychol. (2023) 42:26341–55. doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-03743-2
29
BattistaJAlmondR. The development of meaning in life. Psychiatry. (1973) 36:409–27. doi: 10.1080/00332747.1973.11023774
30
BaumeisterRFVohsKD. The pursuit of meaningfulness in life. In: SnyderCRLopezSJ, editors. Handbook of Positive Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press (2002). p. 608–18.
31
StegerMF. Meaning in life. In: LopezSJ, editor. Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology, 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009).
32
CaiYZengTGaoRGuoYWangYDingD. A cross-lagged longitudinal study of bidirectional associations between meaning in life and academic engagement: The mediation of hope. Appl Res Qual Life. (2024) 19:2665–84. doi: 10.1007/s11482-024-10348-3
33
LiJBDouKLiangY. The relationship between presence of meaning, search for meaning, and subjective well-being: A three-level meta-analysis based on the meaning in life questionnaire. J Happiness Stud. (2021) 22:467–89. doi: 10.1007/s10902-020-00230-y
34
StegerMFFrazierPOishiSKalerM. The meaning in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. J Couns Psychol. (2006) 53:80–93. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80
35
GoldAIRyjovaYAvivECCornerGWRasmussenHFKimYet al. Social contributions to meaning in life: The role of romantic relationship quality, parenting, and gender. Front Psychol. (2024) 15:1349642. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1349642
36
GolovchanovaNOwireduaCBoersmaKAndershedHHellfeldtK. Presence of meaning in life in older men and women: The role of dimensions of frailty and social support. Front Psychol. (2021) 12:730724. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.730724
37
ChenYWeziak-BialowolskaDLeeMTBialowolskiPMcNeelyEVander WeeleTJ. Longitudinal associations between domains of flourishing. Sci Rep. (2022) 12:2740. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-06626-5
38
MachellKAKashdanTBShortJLNezlekJB. Relationships between meaning in life, social and achievement events, and positive and negative affect in daily life. J Pers. (2015) 83:287–98. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12103
39
PfundGNHoferMAllemandMHillPL. Being social may be purposeful in older adulthood: A measurement burst design. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. (2022) 30:777–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2021.11.009
40
WestonSJLewisNAHillPL. Building sense of purpose in older adulthood: Examining the role of supportive relationships. J Posit Psychol. (2020) 16:398–406. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2020.1725607
41
StillmanTFBaumeisterRFLambertNMCrescioniAWDeWallCNFinchamFD. Alone and without purpose: Life loses meaning following social exclusion. J Exp Soc Psychol. (2009) 45:686–94. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.007
42
TwengeJMCataneseKRBaumeisterRF. Social exclusion and the deconstructed state: Time perception, meaninglessness, lethargy, lack of emotion, and self-awareness. J Pers Soc Psychol. (2003) 85:409–23. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.409
43
LambertNMStillmanTFBaumeisterRFFinchamFDHicksJAGrahamSM. Family as a salient source of meaning in young adulthood. J Posit Psychol. (2010) 5:367–76. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2010.516616
44
GlawXKableAHazeltonMInderK. Meaning in life and meaning of life in mental health care: An integrative literature review. Issues Ment Health Nurs. (2017) 38:1–13. doi: 10.1080/01612840.2016.1253804
45
LiJBWangYSDouKShangYF. On the development of meaning in life among college freshmen: Social relationship antecedents and adjustment consequences. J Happiness Stud. (2022) 23:1709–35. doi: 10.1007/s10902-021-00470-6
46
PezirkianidisCGalanakiERaftopoulouGMoraitouDStalikasA. Adult friendship and wellbeing: A systematic review with practical implications. Front Psychol. (2023) 14:1059057. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1059057
47
ChenQWangXQHeXXJiLJLiuMFYeBJ. The relationship between search for meaning in life and symptoms of depression and anxiety: Key roles of the presence of meaning in life and life events among Chinese adolescents. J Affect Disord. (2021) 282:545–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.12.156
48
LinLWangSLiJ. Association between the search for meaning in life and well-being in Chinese adolescents. Appl Res Qual Life. (2021) 16:2291–309. doi: 10.1007/s11482-021-09913-x
49
BuchananCMMaccobyEEDornbuschSM. Caught between parents: Adolescents’ experience in divorced homes. Child Dev. (1991) 62:1008–29. doi: 10.2307/1131149
50
ZhangJLiuQDengLFangXLiuCLanJ. Parents-adolescents’ relations and adolescent’s Internet addiction: The mediation effect of loneliness. Psychol Dev Educ. (2011) 27:641–7. doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2011.06.003
51
JiangG. Classroom environment in primary and secondary schools: Structure and measurement. Psychol Sci. (2004) 27:839–43. doi: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2004.04.018
52
ZhouZSunXZhaoDHsuehY. The test of the mediator variable between peer relationship and loneliness in middle childhood. Acta Psychologica Sin. (2005) 37:776–83.
53
WangMDaiX. Applicability of the Chinese Meaning in Life Questionnaire (C-MLQ) among college students. Chin J Clin Psychol. (2008) 16:459–61. doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2008.05.020
54
KouYHongHTanCLiL. Revising the prosocial tendencies measure for adolescents. Psychol Dev Educ. (2007) 23:112–7. doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2007.01.020
55
BrownBBLarsonJ. Peer relationships in adolescence. In: LernerRMSteinbergL, editors. Handbook of Adolescent Psychology: Contextual Influences on Adolescent Development, 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc (2009). p. 74–103. doi: 10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy002004
56
GlickGCRoseAJ. Prospective associations between friendship adjustment and social strategies: Friendship as a context for building social skills. Dev Psychol. (2011) 47:1117–32. doi: 10.1037/a0023277
57
WentzelKRCaldwellK. Friendships, peer acceptance, and group membership: Relations to academic achievement in middle school. Child Dev. (1997) 68:1198–209. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1997.tb01994.x
58
BronfenbrennerU. The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. (1979). doi: 10.4159/9780674028845
59
GaoRZhangJLiuYZengJWuDHuangXet al. A sustainability lens on the paradox of Chinese learners: Four studies on Chinese students’ learning concepts under Li’s “Virtue–Mind” framework. Sustainability. (2022) 14:3334. doi: 10.3390/su14063334
60
LiJ. Cultural Foundations of Learning: East and West. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press (2012).
61
LiuYGaoRLanXZhouXHuangSWuDet al. A comparison of Chinese and European American university students’ virtue and mind learning beliefs and academic achievement in global cultural exchange. Sustainability. (2022) 14:5788. doi: 10.3390/su14105788
62
EryongXLiJ. What is the ultimate education task in China? Exploring “strengthen moral education for cultivating people” (“Li De Shu Ren”). Educ Philos Theory. (2021) 53(2):128–39. doi: 10.1080/00131857.2020.1754539
63
GrusecJEDavidovM. Integrating different perspectives on socialization theory and research: A domain-specific approach. Child Dev. (2010) 81:687–709. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01426.x
64
BuschingRKrahéB. With a little help from their peers: The impact of classmates on adolescents’ development of prosocial behavior. J Youth Adolescence. (2020) 49:1849–63. doi: 10.1007/s10964-020-01260-8
65
PinhoASMollemanLBraamsBRvan den BosW. Majority and popularity effects on norm formation in adolescence. Sci Rep. (2021) 11:12884. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-92482-8
66
ChávezDVSalmivalliCGarandeauCFBergerCLuengo KanacriBP. Bidirectional associations of prosocial behavior with peer acceptance and rejection in adolescence. J Youth Adolescence. (2022) 51:2355–67. doi: 10.1007/s10964-022-01675-5
67
AglerRDe BoeckP. On the interpretation and use of mediation: Multiple perspectives on mediation analysis. Front Psychol. (2017) 8:1984. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01984
68
YanJLuoNHeMChenZGuoR. The role of perceived need-supportive teaching in promoting willingness to communicate in EFL: Variable-and person-centered examinations of self-determination theory among Chinese high school students. Asia-Pacific Educ Res. (2024) 34:949–63. doi: 10.1007/s40299-024-00910-w
69
ChanW. A source book in Chinese philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (1963). doi: 10.1515/9781400820030
70
DiXMcEwanH (Eds.). Chinese philosophy on teaching and learning: Xueji in the twenty-first century. SUNY Press. (2016). doi: 10.1515/9781438459721
71
HoLALinCYKuoTHKuoYKKuoYL. Applying deeper learning and Confucian values in enhancing school effectiveness: Empirical results and findings. Urban Educ. (2008) 43(5):561–86. doi: 10.1177/0042085907304965
72
LinMZhaoW. Untangling the making and governing of Hong Kong teachers through neoliberal, Confucian, and affective technologies: With and beyond Foucault. Asia-Pac J Teach Educ. (2023) 51(2):147–61. doi: 10.1080/1359866X.2023.2174074
73
ChienCLHsuSCLinTH. Is respect for teachers beneficial or harmful to students? The predictive effects of dual dimensions of respect-for-teachers on teacher-student relationships and academic engagement in a Confucian cultural context. Soc Psychol Educ. (2024) 27(5):2343–66. doi: 10.1007/s11218-024-09905-3
74
TanC. Teacher-directed and learner-engaged: Exploring a Confucian conception of education. Ethic Educ. (2015) 10(3):302–12. doi: 10.1080/17449642.2015.1101229
75
LinLShekDTL. The influence of meaning in life on adolescents’ hedonic well-being and risk behaviour: Implications for social work. Br J Soc Work. (2019) 49:5–24. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcy029
76
BaumeisterRF. Meanings of Life. New York, NY: Guilford (1991).
77
KlingerE. The search for meaning in evolutionary perspective and its clinical implications. In: WongPTPFryPS, editors. The Human Quest for Meaning: A Handbook of Psychological Research and Clinical Application. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1998). p. 27–50.
78
KiangLFuligniAJ. Meaning in life as a mediator of ethnic identity and adjustment among adolescents from Latin, Asian, and European American backgrounds. J Youth Adolescence. (2010) 39:1253–64. doi: 10.1007/s10964-009-9475-z
79
BrassaiLPikoBFStegerMF. Existential attitudes and eastern European adolescents’ problem and health behaviours: Highlighting the role of the search for meaning in life. psychol Rec. (2012) 62:719–34. doi: 10.1007/bf03395831
80
FranklVE. Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy. New York, NY: Washington Square Press (1963).
Summary
Keywords
friendship, longitudinal mediation model, meaning in life, parent-child relationship, prosocial behavior, teacher-student relationship
Citation
Meng L, Li C, Dai T, Zhang S, Zhang B and Yang Q (2026) Longitudinal associations between relationship quality and prosocial behavior in Chinese adolescents: the mediating role of meaning in life. Front. Psychiatry 17:1915264. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2026.1915264
Received
21 June 2026
Revised
15 August 2026
Accepted
24 August 2026
Published
11 September 2026
Volume
17 - 2026
Edited by
Tianyi Zhang, Southeast University, China
Reviewed by
Qingyun Yu, Jingchu University of Technology, China
Xiaofeng Wang, Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, China
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Meng, Li, Dai, Zhang, Zhang and Yang.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Shaojun Zhang, zhangshaojun520@sina.com; Bi Zhang, 004590@hnucm.cn; Qin Yang, yq@csnu.edu.cn
†These authors have contributed equally to this work
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.