Skip to main content
Log in

Nuanced associations among fatalism, socioeconomic status, and mental health among undergraduate students

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous research suggested the negative implications of fatalism for mental health. The present study addressed more nuanced associations between fatalism and mental health by taking the multidimensionality of fatalism and socioeconomic status (SES) into consideration. Students in an introductory undergraduate course (208 included; mean age: 19.3 [SD = 3.9]) completed an online questionnaire related to demographic characteristics, fatalism, and mental health. Their data was analyzed using sets of regression models to examine whether the five dimensions of fatalism, such as helplessness and (low) internality, mediated the associations of SES with depressive symptoms and perceived stress and whether SES moderated the associations between each fatalism dimension and these mental health outcomes. The mediation was found for helplessness, but not for the other fatalism dimensions, in which lower SES predicted higher helplessness, which in turn predicted greater depressive symptoms and perceived stress. In addition, the moderation of SES was found only for the association between internality and depressive symptoms: internality predicted greater depressive symptoms for those with lower SES. This indicated negative implications of internality contrary to previous findings. The present study also highlighted the importance of specifically addressing helplessness, rather than fatalism in general, as a potential risk factor for mental health.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Notes

  1. Some other potential factors that may have contributed to having the inconsistent findings for the links between fatalism (or locus of control) and mental health are religiosity and culture. With regard to religiosity, beliefs in divine control have been identified as one dimension of fatalism that is not associated with negative mental health (Esparza et al., 2015). In addition, opposed to the approach of treating fatalism as unitary construct, in their study for religious individuals, Shahid et al. (2020) suggested different forms of fatalism: active fatalism versus passive fatalism. Unlike passive fatalism (i.e., traditionally defined fatalism), active fatalism involves a combination of accepting situations and maintaining individual agency to influence their future outcomes and is actually inversely linked to external locus of control as well as depressive symptoms. With regard to culture, in a meta analysis (C. Cheng et al., 2013b), the associations between external locus of control and anxiety were weaker for those in collectivist societies compared to those in individualist societies. For example, Chinese culture promotes an approach to proactively dealing with life adversities to have better outcomes while acknowledging the uncontrollability of those events, so having fatalistic beliefs may not necessarily have negative implications for mental health among Chinese individuals (T. Cheng et al., 2013b; Lu et al., 2022). Although we acknowledged the importance of taking these factors into consideration in investigating the links of fatalism to mental health, we narrowed our focus by only addressing the multidimensionality of fatalism and SES in the present study.

  2. Our target power was 0.80. Since we analyzed a mediation model consisting of two sets of regression submodels for each mental health outcome, we conducted multiple power analyses. First, using G*Power 3.1 (Faul et al., 2007), we calculated a desired sample size for each regression submodel with the following settings: α = 0.05 (two-tail), f2 = 0.15 (i.e., medium effect), power = 0.90, and the number of predictors = 6 (for the regression submodel that included the largest number of predictors, including SES and five fatalism dimensions, than the other submodels). For this specific analysis, we selected a power of 0.90 considering our focus on indirect effects involving coefficients in combinations of submodels (i.e., 0.90 × 0.90 = 0.81, which would exceed our target power). The analysis indicated the total sample size should be at least 73. In addition, using the MedPower developed by David A. Kenny (https://davidakenny.shinyapps.io/MedPower/), we calculated the sample size with a power of 0.80 to detect an indirect effect a × b (with standardized regression coefficients of 0.30 × 0.30 = 0.09) and obtained the result showing the minimum sample size should be 113. Our sample size (N = 208) exceeded the minimum sizes suggested by these power analyses.

  3. To check the assumptions of linearity, homoscedasticity, and normality, we obtained a scatterplot for standardized predicted values and standardized residuals for the outcome of each regression submodel (i.e., each fatalism dimension predicted by SES or each mental health outcome predicted by SES and/or the five fatalism dimensions) using SPSS. We then conducted visual inspections for the patterns of the residuals in each scatterplot (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). For linearity, we inspected whether non-linear or curvilinear patterns were observed (if not, the assumption was met). For homoscedasticity, we inspected whether heteroscedasticity patterns, or uneven spreads of residuals (e.g., the variances of residuals increasing or decreasing with increases in the predicted values), were observed (if not, the assumption was met). For normality, we inspected whether the residuals were spread out asymmetrically from the center of the scatterplot (if not [i.e., if spread out symmetrically], the assumption was met). Additionally, we inspected the P-P plots obtained with SPSS to see whether any major deviations of the data from the reference line for the theoretical distribution (indicating major violations for normality) were observed. In all the visual inspections, we found no major violations for these assumptions. To check potential multicollinearity or the lack thereof, we obtained collinearity statistics, including values of tolerance and variance inflation factor (VIF), for the submodels including multiple predictors (i.e., those with SES and five fatalism dimensions predicting each mental health outcome). We used the criteria of tolerance < 0.10 and VIF > 10 as potential multicollinearity. All the values of tolerance (greater than 0.58) and VIF (between 1 and 2) in the regression submodels did not indicate any concerns of multicollinearity.

References

Download references

Funding

The current study did not receive any funding.

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

The institutional review board at Marshall University reviewed the study protocol and granted Exempted approval.

Consent to participate

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

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masahiro Toyama.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Toyama, M., Morris, K.L. Nuanced associations among fatalism, socioeconomic status, and mental health among undergraduate students. Curr Psychol 43, 19906–19917 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05812-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05812-0

Keywords

Navigation