From National Identity to Well-being: The Crucial Mediating Role of Self-esteem in Adolescents

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-5296665/v1

This study aims to explore the relationships between national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being among adolescents, with a particular focus on the mediating role of self-esteem between national identity and subjective well-being. A questionnaire survey conducted among 1,948 Chinese adolescents revealed significant positive correlations between national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being (p < 0.01). Gender, status, and place of birth significantly influenced national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being (p < 0.05). Structural equation modeling analysis revealed that national identity has a positive and direct effect on self-esteem (estimate: 0.48, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001); self-esteem has a positive and direct effect on subjective well-being (estimate: 0.59, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001); and national identity has a positive and direct effect on subjective well-being (estimate: 0.25, SE = 0.05, p < 0.001). Additionally, self-esteem plays a crucial mediating role between national identity and subjective well-being (p < 0.001). These findings underscore the importance of national identity in adolescents’ mental health and well-being and highlight the key role of self-esteem in moderating this relationship.

national identity

self-esteem

subjective well-being

adolescents

National identity, as an individual's sense of belonging and identification with their country, constitutes an important dimension of self-cognition and plays a key role in promoting social integration and individual mental health [1]. In the contemporary context of increasing social unrest and deepening globalization, research on national identity has received growing attention. Numerous empirical studies have revealed a close positive correlation between national identity and individual psychological well-being, a finding that has been widely supported and confirmed in cross-cultural studies.In particular, Saville’s (2022) cross-cultural comparative study further confirmed the positive relationship between the strength of national identity and individual mental health and well-being, emphasizing the universal importance of national identity for individual psychological well-being across different cultural and social contexts [2].

National identity is also closely related to individual self-esteem, which is considered a core component of self-evaluation and emotional experience. Self-esteem, as a key indicator of self-worth, has long been a central topic in psychological research. Studies have shown that national identity can significantly influence individuals’ levels of self-esteem across different cultural contexts. For instance, as Wang & Yu(2016)noted, self-esteem is not only an important dimension of individual mental health but also a key factor in social adaptation and interpersonal success [3]. Cross-cultural studies have found that group identity (including national identity) has a significant positive impact on individual self-esteem [4, 5, 6], including enhancing collective self-esteem through a strengthened sense of belonging to the group and a sense of meaning in life, thereby promoting individual self-esteem levels.

The role of self-esteem in individual mental health and subjective well-being cannot be ignored. It has been proven to effectively predict changes in subjective well-being [7, 8, 9]. More importantly, self-esteem may play a mediating or moderating role between national identity and subjective well-being. According to social identity theory, individuals establish their identity and self-esteem through belonging to a group and comparing with other groups, which in turn affects their behavior and mental health [10]. This theory provides a theoretical framework for analyzing the complex relationship between national identity and individual psychological characteristics. For example, existing research supports the relationship between group identity, self-esteem, and mental health. Smokowski et al. (2014) examined adolescents from five ethnic groups (Caucasians, Indian Americans, African Americans, Latin Americans) and found that ethnic identity influenced self-esteem, which in turn affected indicators of mental health such as depression and anxiety [11]. However, ethnic identity emphasizes cultural and blood ties, while national identity also includes political, legal, and social governance dimensions. In exploring the relationship between national identity and mental health, self-esteem as a potential mediating variable has often been overlooked.

It is worth noting that adolescents are in a critical period of forming key psychological and social attributes such as self-identity and values, beginning to explore and establish their roles and status in society, including their identification with the country. This makes it particularly important to explore the interactions between national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being among adolescents. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the relationships between national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being among adolescents, with a particular focus on the mediating role of self-esteem between national identity and subjective well-being. Based on the aforementioned theories and research, this study proposes the following hypotheses: 1. There is a positive correlation between national identity and subjective well-being among adolescents; 2. There is a positive correlation between self-esteem and subjective well-being among adolescents; 3. Self-esteem mediates the relationship between national identity and subjective well-being among adolescents.

2.1 Participants

In this study, 1,948 adolescents in China were randomly selected to participate, including 995 males and 953 females, aged between 13 and 15 years. To minimize social desirability bias during the survey, participants were not informed of the questionnaire’s nature or purpose during administration, and responses were collected anonymously. Consent from parents or legal guardians was obtained for all participants under the age of 16. The study protocol was approved by the Academic Ethics Committees of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University and Fujian Normal University.

2.2 Measures

2.2.1 National Identity Scale

The National Identity Scale used in this study was originally developed by Lilli and Diehl and has been translated into Chinese for the purposes of this research. This scale is rooted in the principles of collective self-esteem and social identity theory and has been widely cited in previous studies [12]. It consists of of 20 items covering five dimensions: Membership (identification with the national identity, e.g., “I am a member of my country”), Private (personal identification with one’s national identity, e.g., “I am glad to be a member of this country”), Public (public perception of one’s national identity, e.g., “My country is considered good by others”), Identity (identification of personal relationships with the country, e.g., “National affairs have nothing to do with me”(reverse scored), and Comparison (comparing one's country with others, e.g., “My country is better than other countries in many aspects”).

The scale uses a 7-point Likert scoring method, with scores ranging from 1 to 7 (1: strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: neutral, 5: somewhat agree, 6: agree, 7: strongly agree). Higher individual scores indicate a stronger national identity. According to previous research, this scale has high reliability and validity [12], In this study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.95, indicating high internal consistency, which meets the requirements for questionnaire survey statistics.

2.2.2 The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, originally developed by Rosenberg (1965) and translated into Chinese [13], was used in this study to assess adolescents’ self-esteem. This scale consists of 10 items: 1. Overall, I am satisfied with myself. 2. At times, I think I am no good at all. 3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities. 4. I am able to do things as well as most other people. 5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of. 6. I certainly feel useless at times. 7. I feel that I'm a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others. 8. I wish I could have more respect for myself. 9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure. 10. I take a positive attitude toward myself.

The scale uses a 4-point Likert scoring method, combining positive and reverse scoring. Each item is scored from 0 to 3 (0: strongly disagree, 1: disagree, 2: agree, 3: strongly agree). Higher individual scores indicate higher levels of self-esteem. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.95, indicating high internal consistency, which meets the requirements for questionnaire survey statistics.

2.2.3 Adolescent Student Life Satisfaction Scale

The Adolescent Student Life Satisfaction Scale developed by Zhang Xinggui et al. (2004) was used in this study [14]. The scale consists of 36 items, divided into six dimensions: friendship satisfaction, family satisfaction, school satisfaction, academic satisfaction, freedom satisfaction, and environment satisfaction. Friendship satisfaction includes 8 items (e.g., “My friends respect me”), family satisfaction includes 7 items (e.g., “I like being with my parents”), school satisfaction includes 6 items (e.g., “I feel uncomfortable at school”), academic satisfaction includes 6 items (e.g., “I achieve my academic goals”), freedom satisfaction includes 5 items (e.g., “Basically, no one forces me to do things I don't like”), and environment satisfaction includes 5 items (e.g., “I wish I lived somewhere else instead of where I am now”).

The scale uses a 7-point Likert scoring method, combining positive and reverse scoring. Each item is scored from 1 to 7 (1: completely disagree, 2: disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: neutral, 5: somewhat agree, 6: agree, 7: completely agree). Higher individual scores indicate higher levels of life satisfaction. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.97, indicating high internal consistency, which meets the requirements for questionnaire survey statistics.

2.3 Statistical analysis

In this study, standardized questionnaires were used to collect data online. All data were analyzed using SPSS version 26.0 and AMOS version 24.0. During the preliminary analysis, descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and repeated difference analysis of the sample data were performed, including Pearson correlations between dependent variables and their differences across independent variables such as gender, educational stage, and household registration. Based on previous theories and research, this study proposed a model hypothesis for the variables and tested the hypothesized model using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). In this model, national identity and life satisfaction were set as latent variables, and their measurement scores were divided using an independent method. The model was estimated using the Maximum Likelihood Estimation method. The fit statistics and model evaluation criteria were as follows: GFI and AGFI ≥ 0.80, CFI, TLI, and RFI ≥ 0.80, RMSEA ≤ 0.08.

The manuscript was independently written by authors. Following the completion of the manuscript, the language was polished using the AI tool ChatGPT 4.0 to ensure clarity and adherence to academic standards. This use of AI was in line with best practices for academic writing and was not involved in the creation of the original content or the conception of the research.

3.1 Primary analyses

3.1.1 Difference analysis

Independent sample t-tests were conducted with students' gender, status, and place of birth as independent variables, and national identity and its dimensions, self-esteem, subjective well-being, and its dimensions as dependent variables. The t-test results with gender as the independent variable showed(see Table 1.1) that in terms of the total score of national identity and its dimensions, males scored significantly lower than females in the public and private dimensions [Public: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-2.35, p < 0.05; Private: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-4.30, p < 0.05]. In terms of the total self-esteem score, males scored significantly higher than females [Self-esteem: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-4.75, p < 0.05]。In terms of the total life satisfaction score and its dimensions, males scored significantly higher than females [Life Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=5.01, p < 0.05; Friendship Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=4.34, p < 0.05; Family Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=5.92, p < 0.05; School Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=3.94, p < 0.05; Academic Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=6.27, p < 0.05; Freedom Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=4.10, p < 0.05]。

Table 1.1

Gender differences in all dependent variables
Factor	Male (N = 995) M ± SD	Female (N = 953) M ± SD	t	P
National Identity	122.10 ± 19.723	123.60 ± 16.812	-1.807	0.070
Public	24.48 ± 4.374	24.90 ± 3.667	-2.336	0.019
Private	25.63 ± 4.178	26.36 ± 3.306	-4.275	0.000
Membership	22.66 ± 5.434	22.39 ± 5.380	1.122	0.262
Identity	24.38 ± 4.502	24.71 ± 4.050	-1.706	0.087
Comparison	24.95 ± 4.186	25.24 ± 3.556	-1.630	0.102
Self-esteem	21.69 ± 5.148	20.53 ± 5.672	4.753	0.000
Life Satisfaction	200.57 ± 40.957	190.99 ± 43.445	5.010	0.000
Friendship Satisfaction	39.54 ± 8.694	37.81 ± 8.894	4.340	0.000
Family Satisfaction	40.94 ± 9.035	38.37 ± 10.109	5.922	0.000
School Satisfaction	33.57 ± 8.491	32.02 ± 8.871	3.938	0.000
Academic Satisfaction	31.47 ± 8.462	29.03 ± 8.725	6.270	0.000
Freedom Satisfaction	27.70 ± 6.961	26.38 ± 7.250	4.101	0.000
Environment Satisfaction	27.34 ± 5.502	27.38 ± 5.514	-0.148	0.882

The t-test results with students' place of birth as the independent variable showed (see Table 1.2), that urban students scored higher than rural students in terms of total national identity score and in the public, private, membership, and identity dimensions [National Identity: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-3.99, p < 0.05; Public: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ =-3.34, p < 0.05; Private: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-4.91, p < 0.05; Membership: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-2.25, p < 0.05; Identity: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ =-1.94, p < 0.05]. Urban students also scored higher than rural students in terms of self-esteem [t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-5.31, p < 0.05]. In terms of life satisfaction and its dimensions, urban students scored significantly higher than rural students [Life Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-3.48, p < 0.05; Friendship Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-4.16, p < 0.05; Family Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-2.11, p < 0.05; School Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-2.79, p < 0.05; Academic Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-2.28, p < 0.05; Academic Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-4.14, p < 0.05; Environment Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-3.10, p < 0.05].

The t-test results with students’ status as the independent variable showed(see Table 1.3 that student leaders scored higher than non-student leaders in terms of total national identity score, membership, and identity dimensions [National Identity: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 3.27, p < 0.05; Membership: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 5.22, p < 0.05; Identity: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 3.17, p < 0.05]. In terms of self-esteem, student leaders scored higher than non-student leaders [Self-esteem: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 5.08, p < 0.05]. In terms of life satisfaction and its dimensions, student leaders scored significantly higher than non-student leaders [Life Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 3.74, p < 0.05; Friendship Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 4.14, p < 0.05; Family Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 2.49, p < 0.05; School Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 3.01, p < 0.05; Academic Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎ = 5.51, p < 0.05; Freedom Satisfaction: t₍₁₉₄₆₎=-1.80, p < 0.05].

Table 1.2

Place of birth differences in all dependent variables
Factor	Rural (N = 734) M ± SD	Urban (N = 1214) M ± SD	t	p
National Identity	120.71 ± 18.274	124.12 ± 18.312	-3.986	0.000
Public	24.29 ± 4.190	24.92 ± 3.942	-3.343	0.001
Private	25.45 ± 4.053	26.31 ± 3.590	-4.911	0.000
Membership	22.18 ± 5.222	22.74 ± 5.509	-2.249	0.025
Identity	24.30 ± 4.426	24.69 ± 4.200	-1.943	0.052
Comparison	24.50 ± 4.086	25.45 ± 3.726	-5.286	0.000
Self-esteem	20.29 ± 4.985	21.63 ± 5.640	-5.315	0.000
Life Satisfaction	191.58 ± 40.827	198.48 ± 43.215	-3.483	0.001
Friendship Satisfaction	37.63 ± 8.852	39.34 ± 8.762	-4.161	0.000
Family Satisfaction	39.09 ± 9.597	40.04 ± 9.684	-2.106	0.035
School Satisfaction	32.10 ± 8.244	33.24 ± 8.959	-2.790	0.005
Academic Satisfaction	29.70 ± 8.148	30.63 ± 8.966	-2.284	0.022
Freedom Satisfaction	26.20 ± 6.874	27.58 ± 7.238	-4.141	0.000
Environment Satisfaction	26.86 ± 5.573	27.66 ± 5.447	-3.103	0.002

Table 1.3

Status differences in all dependent variables
Factor	Student Leader (N = 741) M ± SD	Non-Student Leader (N = 1207) M ± SD	t	p
National Identity	124.56 ± 17.580	121.77 ± 18.763	3.266	0.001
Public	24.85 ± 3.885	24.58 ± 4.144	1.425	0.154
Private	26.16 ± 3.799	25.88 ± 3.788	1.551	0.121
Membership	23.34 ± 4.852	22.03 ± 5.667	5.216	0.000
Identity	24.93 ± 4.030	24.30 ± 4.425	3.174	0.002
Comparison	25.28 ± 3.821	24.97 ± 3.932	1.695	0.090
Self-esteem	21.92 ± 5.067	20.64 ± 5.604	5.076	0.000
Life Satisfaction	200.50 ± 40.849	193.05 ± 43.180	3.773	0.000
Friendship Satisfaction	39.75 ± 8.399	38.05 ± 9.032	4.135	0.000
Family Satisfaction	40.38 ± 9.300	39.26 ± 9.853	2.484	0.013
School Satisfaction	33.57 ± 8.368	32.34 ± 8.887	3.009	0.003
Academic Satisfaction	31.65 ± 8.243	29.44 ± 8.829	5.510	0.000
Freedom Satisfaction	27.43 ± 6.880	26.83 ± 7.277	1.803	0.072
Environment Satisfaction	27.73 ± 5.362	27.13 ± 5.584	2.332	0.020

3.1.2 Correlation analysis

The correlation analysis results showed significant positive correlations among national identity and its dimensions (public, private, membership, identity, comparison), self-esteem, and life satisfaction and its dimensions (friendship satisfaction, family satisfaction, school satisfaction, academic satisfaction, freedom satisfaction, environment satisfaction) (ps < 0.01, see Table 2.).

Table 2

Correlation analysis among all variables
	National Identity	Public	Private	Membership	Identity	Comparison	Self-esteem	Life Satisfaction	Friendship Satisfaction	Family Satisfaction	School Satisfaction	Academic Satisfaction	Freedom Satisfaction	Environment Satisfaction
National Identity	1	.877^**	.832^**	.825^**	.892^**	.867^**	.566^**	.569^**	.480^**	.483^**	.558^**	.431^**	.494^**	.570^**
Public	.877^**	1	.685^**	.614^**	.717^**	.787^**	.419^**	.461^**	.387^**	.378^**	.470^**	.319^**	.399^**	.509^**
Private	.832^**	.685^**	1	.518^**	.693^**	.754^**	.358^**	.371^**	.284^**	.318^**	.400^**	.210^**	.310^**	.476^**
Membership	.825^**	.614^**	.518^**	1	.721^**	.566^**	.668^**	.599^**	.530^**	.516^**	.559^**	.525^**	.519^**	.478^**
Identity	.892^**	.717^**	.693^**	.721^**	1	.683^**	.496^**	.503^**	.417^**	.435^**	.492^**	.389^**	.431^**	.501^**
Comparison	.867^**	.787^**	.754^**	.566^**	.683^**	1	.409^**	.458^**	.390^**	.383^**	.432^**	.337^**	.418^**	.481^**
Self-esteem	.566^**	.419^**	.358^**	.668^**	.496^**	.409^**	1	.689^**	.614^**	.594^**	.608^**	.641^**	.612^**	.517^**
Life Satisfaction	.569^**	.461^**	.371^**	.599^**	.503^**	.458^**	.689^**	1	.894^**	.890^**	.881^**	.887^**	.904^**	.751^**
Friendship Satisfaction	.480^**	.387^**	.284^**	.530^**	.417^**	.390^**	.614^**	.894^**	1	.717^**	.724^**	.838^**	.772^**	.568^**
Family Satisfaction	.483^**	.378^**	.318^**	.516^**	.435^**	.383^**	.594^**	.890^**	.717^**	1	.711^**	.723^**	.799^**	.657^**
School Satisfaction	.558^**	.470^**	.400^**	.559^**	.492^**	.432^**	.608^**	.881^**	.724^**	.711^**	1	.718^**	.744^**	.705^**
Academic Satisfaction	.431^**	.319^**	.210^**	.525^**	.389^**	.337^**	.641^**	.887^**	.838^**	.723^**	.718^**	1	.779^**	.507^**
Freedom Satisfaction	.494^**	.399^**	.310^**	.519^**	.431^**	.418^**	.612^**	.904^**	.772^**	.799^**	.744^**	.779^**	1	.629^**
Environment Satisfaction	.570^**	.509^**	.476^**	.478^**	.501^**	.481^**	.517^**	.751^**	.568^**	.657^**	.705^**	.507^**	.629^**	1

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

3.2 Measurement model and hypothesized Model

Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted on the factors of national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being, as shown in Table 3. The factor loadings for each factor were all greater than 0.5, indicating that the model has a good basic fit. Based on existing theories and research, this study hypothesized that national identity can directly affect subjective well-being and indirectly affect subjective well-being through the mediating role of self-esteem (see Fig. 1).

Table 3

Structural Equation Model Parameter Estimates
			Regression Estimate	S.E.	C.R.	P	Standardized Regression Weights	SMC(R2)
Self-esteem	<---	National Identity	.714	.033	21.783	***	.483	.234
Well-being	<---	National Identity	.523	.041	12.674	***	.252	.559
Well-being	<---	Self-esteem	.831	.028	29.304	***	.593	.545
Comparison	<---	National Identity	1.000				.945	.777
Identity	<---	National Identity	1.032	.023	45.075	***	.886	.751
Membership	<---	National Identity	.816	.022	37.104	***	.792	.713
Private	<---	National Identity	.906	.023	38.807	***	.824	.693
Public	<---	National Identity	1.000				.863	.745
Friendship Satisfaction	<---	Well-being	1.055	.023	45.515	***	.832	.678
Family Satisfaction	<---	Well-being	.965	.020	47.494	***	.844	.627
School Satisfaction	<---	Well-being	.986	.016	63.366	***	.866	.784
Academic Satisfaction	<---	Well-being	.978	.018	53.514	***	.871	.871
Freedom Satisfaction	<---	Well-being	.825	.015	56.457	***	.894	.894
Environment Satisfaction	<---	Well-being	.504	.013	37.342	***	.707	.707

*** represents p < 0.001.

The initial model was fitted continuously using the maximum likelihood estimation (ML) method, and all factors were considered based on modification indices (M.I.). The analysis and fitting of the initial model showed that the model fit indices did not meet the fit standards. Given the strong similarity in the descriptions of items for the “Private” and “Membership” factors of national identity, the “Membership” factor was removed from the model after comprehensive consideration of modification indices and the standardized residual covariance matrix. Significant correlations were found between the “Comparison” factor and the “Identity” factor, and between the “Public” factor and the “Private” factor of national identity. Significant correlations were also found between the “Friendship” and “Academic” factors, the “Friendship” and “Environment” factors, the “Family” and “Environment” factors, the “Family” and “Freedom” factors, the “School” and “Environment” factors, the “School” and “Freedom” factors, and the “Academic” and “Environment” factors of subjective well-being. The final model was represented by adding bidirectional arrows to indicate the covariance of the model (see Fig. 2). When the sample size is large, the chi-square test usually shows statistically significant model fit results. This study is based on a large sample (N > 1000), so the chi-square test is not the primary indicator of model fit. The fit results indicated that the model is generally acceptable [X² = 506.08 (df = 3452), p < 0.001, GFI = 0.9682, CFI = 0.9789, AGFI = 0.9173, RMSEA = 0.0815, RFI = 0.9686, TLI = 0.9686]. Except for the chi-square test and RMSEA, the other model fit indices indicate a good fit. See Table 4 for the fit indices and evaluation criteria.

There are three paths producing direct effects in the model: national identity has a positive and direct effect on self-esteem (estimate: 0.48, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001); self-esteem has a positive and direct effect on subjective well-being (estimate: 0.59, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001); and national identity has a positive and direct effect on subjective well-being (estimate: 0.25, SE = 0.05, p < 0.001) (see Fig. 2). Additionally, self-esteem serves as a mediating variable between national identity and subjective well-being. National identity has a positive indirect effect on subjective well-being through self-esteem, with an indirect effect of 0.29. The total effect of national identity on subjective well-being is the sum of the direct effect and the indirect effect (0.25 + 0.29 = 0.54), with the direct effect accounting for 46.30% and the indirect effect accounting for 53.70%. The bias-corrected percentile bootstrap method (2000 repetitions) was used to test the mediating effect, and the upper and lower limits of the 95% CI were observed through bias correction. The results showed that the upper limit of the indirect effect of national identity on subjective well-being was 0.682, and the lower limit was 0.511, indicating that the CI did not include 0. The partial mediating effect through self-esteem was significant (estimate: 0.59, SE = 0.043, p < 0.05), accounting for 53.13% of the total effect. Therefore, we can see that the higher the self-esteem of adolescents, the higher their subjective well-being. Similarly, the stronger the national identity of adolescents, the higher their subjective well-being.

Table 4

Model Fit Indices and Fit Criteria
Indices	X²/df	P	GFI	CFI	AGFI	RMESA	RFI	TLI
Fit criteria	1–5	> 0.05	> 0.8	> 0.9	> 0.8	< 0.08	> 0.90	> 0.90
The model	14.885	< 0.001	0.956	0.974	0.914	0.084	0.955	0.957

4.1 The Influence of Gender, Position, and Place of Origin on Adolescents’ National Identity, Self-esteem, Subjective well-being

The findings of this study reveal significant gender differences in the “public” and “private” dimensions of national identity, with female adolescents exhibiting a stronger sense of value in belonging to their country and perceiving a higher level of recognition from others compared to male adolescents. This finding is consistent with previous research, such as the study by Juskeviciene (2022), which found that females have a stronger emotional identification with their country and are more likely to recognize and agree with the cultural and historical values of the nation [15]. The reason for this may be that females are more inclined to seek social connections and a sense of belonging [16], and are more likely to exhibit prosocial behaviors, including loyalty and identification with the country [17]. Therefore, females may emphasize community awareness and relational values more when expressing patriotism. However, there were no significant gender differences in the dimensions of membership, comparison, and identity, indicating that both female and male adolescents have similar levels of participation in national affairs, identity with belonging to the country, and a sense of superiority when comparing their country with others.

This study also found that male adolescents scored significantly higher than female adolescents in terms of self-esteem. One of the important theoretical foundations for exploring the influence of gender differences on adolescent self-esteem is the social comparison theory [18], which posits that individuals evaluate their abilities and opinions by comparing themselves to others. For adolescents, these comparisons often revolve around aspects such as appearance, achievements, and social status [19]. The prevalence of social media intensifies these comparisons, especially in terms of appearance and lifestyle. Research indicates that female adolescents are more likely to engage in social comparisons through social media and consequently feel dissatisfied and stressed, which can negatively impact their self-esteem [20]. Additionally, the gender norms theory [21] suggests that societal expectations for males and females differ, shaping individuals' behaviors, beliefs, and self-evaluations. Males are typically encouraged to exhibit independence and confidence, traits closely associated with high self-esteem.

Moreover, students' roles and backgrounds significantly impact their national identity and self-esteem. Compared to rural students, urban students exhibit stronger performance in multiple dimensions of national identity and self-esteem, likely due to the rich resources and opportunities provided by urban environments, which help adolescents shape a firmer sense of national belonging and personal values [22]. Similarly, students holding leadership positions generally demonstrate higher national identity and self-esteem than those without leadership roles, possibly due to the social recognition and self-efficacy associated with leadership roles [23].

4.2 Relationship between National Identity and Self-esteem

There are significant positive correlations between adolescents' national identity and its dimensions with self-esteem. This finding aligns with the perspectives of social identity theory [24] and self-determination theory [25]. Social identity theory emphasizes that individuals derive self-esteem from their belonging to social groups, while self-determination theory posits that fulfilling the needs for belonging and self-worth is crucial for self-esteem.

Numerous studies have found that a strong sense of national identity or ethnic identity is often associated with higher levels of self-esteem. For example, Smith and Henry (1996) demonstrated how group identification, when it becomes part of an individual's self-concept, enhances self-esteem [26]. Additionally, Jetten et al. (2001) showed how individuals strengthen their identification with their own group to maintain and enhance self-esteem when perceiving discrimination from mainstream society [27]. Ferrari et al. (2015) further revealed the importance of confirming national identity in enhancing individual self-esteem, especially for those with a strong sense of national identity [28]. Moordiningsih et al. (2021) used structural equation modeling to analyze the influence of religious importance, self-esteem, multicultural attitudes, and intergroup relations on Indonesian national identity, finding a positive relationship between self-esteem and national identity [23].

However, the relationship between national identity and individual self-esteem is not static and may be influenced by multiple factors. Spinner-Halev and Theiss-Morse (2003) suggested that while national identity can enhance individual self-esteem, this relationship is not always stable due to the competitive nature of intergroup relations, which can lead to negative consequences such as intergroup hostility [29]. Additionally, the relationship between ethnic identity and majority group identity shows complexity, indicating that an individual's self-esteem is related not only to their ethnic identity but also to how they identify with and integrate into the majority group. Studies on Uyghur college students in China have further confirmed this complexity, showing a positive correlation between cultural identity and self-esteem, as well as the mediating role of cultural adaptation attitudes [30]. Therefore, the relationship between national identity and self-esteem may be influenced by a combination of factors such as cultural adaptation attitudes, ethnic identity, and other social and psychological factors.

4.3 Relationship between National Identity and Subjective well-being

This study found a significant positive correlation between adolescents’ national identity and their life satisfaction. Social identity theory [31] emphasizes the importance of an individual's social identity and group identification on their self-esteem and psychological well-being. Recent studies have deepened our understanding of the relationship between national identity and life satisfaction. For example, a study on different ethnic groups in the UK found a positive correlation between British national identity and life satisfaction [32]. This suggests that even in multicultural social environments, a strong sense of national identity is associated with higher life satisfaction. Additionally, a study on Holocaust survivors and their descendants in the Czech Republic and Slovakia found that despite severe historical trauma, national identity still plays an important role in enhancing life satisfaction [33]. This study highlights the importance of national identity in transgenerational transmission and its impact on individuals' subjective well-being. Another study from the perspective of cultural adaptation explored the relationship between ethnic identity, cultural adaptation, and life satisfaction, finding significant positive correlations among these factors [34]. This study provides insights into how ethnic identity and cultural adaptation influence life satisfaction by affecting individuals' national identity and social belonging.

It is important to note that some studies, although not directly focusing on the relationship between national identity and life satisfaction, reveal various factors influencing life satisfaction, such as individual psychological states, gender roles, and social class. These factors may interact with national identity to shape individuals' life experiences and satisfaction. For example, a study in China found that national music courses could improve university students' subjective well-being, although the study did not find a direct impact of national identity or self-esteem [35]. A study on emerging adults in the Philippines found that the relationship between national resilience and life satisfaction was mediated by depressive emotions and moderated by gender [36]. Another study explored the relationship between subjective social class and life satisfaction, considering the roles of class consistency and identity uncertainty [37].

Overall, both direct and indirect research indicates a complex association between national identity and individuals' life satisfaction. Understanding this relationship requires considering multiple aspects, including individual psychology, socio-cultural, and socio-economic factors.

4.4 Relationship between Self-esteem and Subjective well-being

Consistent with this study, the positive correlation between self-esteem and subjective well-being has been confirmed in many studies. This aligns with Rosenberg (1965) self-esteem theory, which emphasizes the core role of self-esteem in individual mental health and well-being, positing that self-esteem is a general feeling of self-worth and is crucial for mental health. This theory has been supported by numerous recent studies. For example, a study explored how self-esteem influences the relationship between social support and subjective well-being, finding a significant positive correlation between self-esteem and subjective well-being [38]. Additionally, a study on Chinese school-age children found significant correlations between gender equality awareness, self-esteem, and subjective well-being [39]. This study further confirms the positive impact of self-esteem on individuals' subjective well-being and highlights the role of gender roles and social expectations in shaping self-esteem and subjective well-being. Diener et al. (2002) showed that there is a bidirectional relationship between subjective well-being and self-esteem, where self-esteem can enhance subjective well-being, and subjective well-being can also enhance self-esteem [40]. A study on Filipino adolescents found that gender and various dimensions of subjective well-being significantly predicted self-esteem, with life satisfaction being the strongest predictor of self-esteem [41].

When exploring the relationship between self-esteem and subjective well-being, some studies also examined the role of other variables. For example, one study found that self-esteem mediated the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being, suggesting that self-esteem not only directly affects individuals' subjective well-being but may also serve as a bridge between other positive psychological traits and subjective well-being [42]. In the context of social media, a study examined the relationship between social network use, social comparison, and subjective well-being, finding strong associations among social comparison, reflection, identity distress, identity clarity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being [43]. Furthermore, a study on Chinese school-age children found significant correlations between gender equality awareness, self-esteem, and subjective well-being, further confirming the positive impact of self-esteem on subjective well-being and emphasizing the role of gender roles and social expectations in forming self-esteem and subjective well-being [39].

In summary, the positive correlation between self-esteem and subjective well-being has received widespread support. Self-esteem, as a general feeling of self-worth, is an important component of individual mental health and well-being. Enhancing self-esteem can effectively increase individuals’ subjective well-being, and vice versa.

4.5 Role of Self-esteem in Predicting Subjective well-being from National Identity

When discussing the relationship among national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being, our research results reveal several key findings. Firstly, national identity has a significant positive direct impact on self-esteem, and secondly, self-esteem has a positive direct impact on subjective well-being, both of which have been discussed earlier and will not be elaborated here. The more critical finding is that adolescents’ national identity can have a positive indirect effect on subjective well-being through self-esteem. Social identity theory provides a theoretical basis for this, emphasizing the importance of an individual’s social identity and group identification on their self-esteem and psychological well-being [24].

A study on Tibetan students in China found significant correlations among ethnic identity, self-esteem, and life satisfaction, with self-esteem playing a mediating role between ethnic identity and life satisfaction [44]. Another study found that gratitude and self-esteem directly predicted subjective well-being, with self-esteem mediating the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being [42]. Research on adolescents also showed that self-esteem mediated the relationship between peer victimization and subjective well-being, with forgiveness moderating this relationship, emphasizing how self-esteem and forgiveness jointly influence individuals' subjective well-being when facing negative social experiences [45].

Furthermore, a study explored how perceived threats during the Qatar blockade affected adolescents' well-being through self-esteem and examined the buffering role of national identity. The results showed that perceived threats reduced well-being by lowering self-esteem, and the strength of national identity did not change this relationship, highlighting the mediating role of self-esteem between national identity and subjective well-being [46]. Additionally, a study investigated how occupational identity verification, self-esteem, and identity salience influenced managers’ mental health, including psychological distress and depression, further confirming the mediating role of self-esteem between individual identity and psychological well-being [47].

Another study found that problematic internet use and self-esteem played a chain mediating role in the relationship between internet use time and subjective well-being, suggesting that self-esteem not only mediates the relationship between national identity and subjective well-being but may also mediate the relationship between other psychological and behavioral factors and subjective well-being [48].

Through empirical analysis, this study reveals the interrelationships between adolescents’ national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being, particularly the mediating role of self-esteem in linking national identity and subjective well-being. The results provide empirical support for social identity theory and self-esteem theory and offer practical guidance for promoting adolescents' mental health and well-being. Education and social policies should emphasize cultivating adolescents' national identity and self-esteem to enhance their subjective well-being.

Despite providing valuable insights, this study has several limitations. First, due to the use of a survey research design, causal relationships cannot be determined. Future research could use experimental methods to further explore the causal relationships among these variables. Second, this study mainly relied on self-report data, which may have social desirability bias. Future research could use multiple methods and sources to enhance the reliability of the results. Additionally, the sample of this study was limited to Chinese adolescents, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings. Future research should consider cross-cultural factors and explore the relationships among national identity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being in different cultural contexts.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Approval was obtained from the ethics committees of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University and Fujian Normal University. The procedures used in this study adhere to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. For participants under the age of 16, informed consent was obtained from their parents or legal guardians.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing Interests

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that might be construed as a conflict of interest.

Funding

This work was supported by the Fujian Normal University psychology School talent introduction research start-up funds, Outstanding Youth Program of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University (No.XJQ201931), the Research Funds for the Zhejiang Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory for the Mental Health and Crisis Intervention of Children and Adolescents at Zhejiang Normal University(No.YS131X23002), and Open Research Fund of College of Teacher Education, Zhejiang Normal University (No. jykf20019)

Author Contribution

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Yue Yang, Jun Zhan and Yan WenFan. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Yue Yang and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the participants in this study for their participation.

Availability of data and materials

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors with reasonable request.

Chai M, Guan J. (2018). From individual identity to national identity: A social psychological approach. Nanjing Social Sci(11), 76–81.
Saville CW. Health and mental health disparities between national identity groups in Wales. J Racial Ethnic Health Disparities. 2022;9(1):270–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-020-00951-z.
Wang B, Yu G. The relationship between group identity and individual mental health: moderating variables and mechanisms. Adv Psychol Sci. 2016;24(8):1300. https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1042.2016.01300.
Jetten J, Branscombe NR, Haslam SA, Haslam C, Cruwys T, Jones JM, Cui L, Dingle G, Liu J, Murphy S. Having a lot of a good thing: Multiple important group memberships as a source of self-esteem. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(5):e0124609. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131035.
Kiang L, Fuligni AJ. Meaning in life as a mediator of ethnic identity and adjustment among adolescents from Latin, Asian, and European American backgrounds. J Youth Adolesc. 2010;39:1253–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9475-z.
Yap SC, Donnellan MB, Schwartz SJ, Kim SY, Castillo LG, Zamboanga BL, Weisskirch RS, Lee RM, Park IJ, Whitbourne SK. Investigating the structure and measurement invariance of the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure in a multiethnic sample of college students. J Couns Psychol. 2014;61(3):437. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036253.
De la Barrera U, Schoeps K, Gil-Gómez J-A, Montoya-Castilla I. Predicting adolescent adjustment and well-being: The interplay between socio-emotional and personal factors. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(23):4650. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234650.
Katsantonis I, McLellan R, Marquez J. Development of subjective well-being and its relationship with self‐esteem in early adolescence. Br J Dev Psychol. 2023;41(2):157–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12436.
Odacı H, Kınık Ö. Evaluation of early adolescent subjective well-being in terms of submissive behavior and self-esteem. J Social Service Res. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2018.1481175.
Tajfel H, Turner JC. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Political psychology. Psychology; 2004. pp. 276–93. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16.
Smokowski PR, Evans CB, Cotter KL, Webber KC. Ethnic identity and mental health in American Indian youth: Examining mediation pathways through self-esteem, and future optimism. J Youth Adolesc. 2014;43:343–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9992-7.
Lilli W, Diehl M. (1999). Measuring national identity.
Martín-Albo J, Núñez JL, Navarro JG, Grijalvo F. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: translation and validation in university students. Span J Psychol. 2007;10(2):458–67. https://10.1017/S1138741600006727.
Zhang X, He L, Zheng X. The structure and scale development of life satisfaction among adolescent students. Psychol Sci. 2004;27(5):1257–60.
Juskeviciene A. Can Expression and Formation of Adolescents' National Identity be Predetermined by the Gender? J Humanit Social Sci Stud. 2022;4(3):124–9. https://doi.org/10.32996/jhsss.2022.4.3.9.
Gilligan C. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harv Univ press. 1993. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjk2wr9.
Eagly AH, Wood W, Johannesen-Schmidt MC. (2004). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: Implications for the partner preferences of women and men. https://doi.org/10.5040/9798216000129.ch-009
Festinger L. A theory of social comparison processes. Hum Relat. 1954;7(2):117–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202.
Myers TA, Crowther JH. Social comparison as a predictor of body dissatisfaction: A meta-analytic review. J Abnorm Psychol. 2009;118(4):683. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016763.
Vogel EA, Rose JP, Roberts LR, Eckles K. Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychol popular media Cult. 2014;3(4):206. https://doi.org/10.1037/e512142015-699.
Wood W, Eagly AH. (2012). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behavior. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 46, pp. 55–123). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-394281-4.00002-7
Teli S, Natekar DS, Hanagandi PR, Ajagarani S, Bellihal S, Tenginakayi M, Dinni R, Hakkal S, Hosamani T. Comparative Study to Assess the Academic Stress and Self Esteem among School Going Children of both Urban Rural Areas of Bagalkot. J Life Sci. 2023;9(5):3290–8. https://doi.org/10.21276/ssr-iijls.2023.9.5.1.
Moordiningsih M, Rahardjo W, Ruhaena L, Uyun Z, Supartini N. Indonesian national identity model: The importance of religion, self-esteem, and relations between groups among Muhammadiyah students. Jurnal Psikologi Integratif. 2021;9(2):150–74. https://doi.org/10.14421/jpsi.v9i2.2236.
Tajfel H, Turner JC, Austin WG, Worchel S. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. Organizational identity: Read. 1979;56(65):9780203505984–9780203505916. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199269464.003.0005.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000;55(1):68. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68.
Smith ER, Henry S. An in-group becomes part of the self: Response time evidence. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1996;22(6):635–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296226008.
Jetten J, Branscombe NR, Schmitt MT, Spears R. Rebels with a cause: Group identification as a response to perceived discrimination from the mainstream. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2001;27(9):1204–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201279012.
Ferrari L, Ranieri S, Barni D, Rosnati R. Transracial adoptees bridging heritage and national cultures: Parental socialisation, ethnic identity and self-esteem. Int J Psychol. 2015;50(6):413–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12195.
Spinner-Halev J, Theiss-Morse E. National identity and self-esteem. Perspect politics. 2003;1(3):515–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592703000379.
Dong L, Lin C, Li T, Dou D, Zhou L. The relationship between cultural identity and self-esteem among Chinese Uyghur college students: The mediating role of acculturation attitudes. Psychol Rep. 2015;117(1):302–18. https://doi.org/10.2466/17.07.pr0.117c12z8.
Turner JC, Brown RJ, Tajfel H. Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism. Eur J social Psychol. 1979;9(2):187–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420090207.
Jaspal R, da Silva Lopes BC, Breakwell GM. British national identity and life satisfaction in ethnic minorities in the United Kingdom. Natl Identities. 2021;23(5):455–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/14608944.2020.1822793.
Preiss M, Fňašková M, Nečasová M, Heissler R, Bob P, Prokopová A, Šamánková D, Sanders E, Rektor I. Wellbeing and national identity in three generations of Czech and Slovak Holocaust survivors. Front Behav Neurosci. 2022;16:919217. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2022.919217.
Tian Y, Ding C, Yang D, Yan M. (2018). The Relationship between Ethnic Identity, Cultural Adaptation and Life Satisfaction among Junior High School Students in Ecological Migrants Area. https://doi.org/10.12677/ap.2018.83051
Fu H, Tu J. Exploring the influence of national music lessons on subjective well-being, self-esteem, and national identity among university students: a case study from China. Front Psychol. 2023;14:1151007. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1151007.
Cleofas JV. Gender, society and mental health: The moderated mediating role of depression and gender on national resilience and life satisfaction among emerging adults. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.13272.
Tang BW, Tan JJ. Subjective social class and life satisfaction: Role of class consistency and identity uncertainty. Asian J Soc Psychol. 2022;25(1):60–74. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/tk8mn.
Anque T, Ceballo E. The Moderating Effect of Self-esteem on the Relationship Between Perceived Social Support and Psychological Well-being. Psychol Education: Multidisciplinary J. 2023;12:217–29. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4597842.
Li Y, Zuo M, Peng Y, Zhang J, Chen Y, Tao Y, Ye B, Zhang J. Gender differences influence gender equality awareness, self-esteem, and subjective well-being among school-age children in China. Front Psychol. 2022;12:671785. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.671785.
Diener E, Lucas RE, Oishi S. (2002). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. Handbook of positive psychology, 2, 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195187243.013.0017
Datu JAD. Can happiness boost self-worth? Exploring the impact of subjective well-being on the global self-esteem. J Asia Pac Couns. 2013;3(2):131–8. https://doi.org/10.18401/2013.3.2.2.
Yildirim M, Alshehri NA, Aziz IA. Does self-esteem mediate the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being? Pol Psychol Bull. 2019;50(2):149–56. https://doi.org/10.24425/ppb.2019.126030.
Diel S, Hall K, Mützel C. (2021). The Double-Edged Sword of Social Comparison on Social Networking Sites-Effects on Subjective Well-Being. ECIS 2021 Research Papers. 33.
Bao S, Huang H. The relationship between national identity and subjective well-being among junior high school students in the Tibetan class in the mainland: the mediating role of self-esteem. Adv Educ. 2023;13:8837. https://doi.org/10.12677/ae.2023.13111365.
Liu J, Li D, Jia J, Liu Y, Lv Y, Zhai B. Peer victimization and subjective well-being among Chinese adolescents: Moderated mediation by forgiveness and self-esteem. J interpers Violence. 2023;38(11–12):7355–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605221145721.
Amin A, Van Assche J, Abdelrahman M, McCashin D, Al-Adwan D, Hasan Y. Can Identity Buffer Against the Detrimental Effects of Threat? The Case of the Qatar Blockade. Front Psychol. 2022;13:750471. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.750471.
Hamouche S, Marchand A. (2023). Unraveling the effects of occupational identity verification, self-esteem and identity salience on managers’ mental health: examining psychological distress and depression in the workplace. Management Research Review(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/mrr-03-2023-0224
Lin M-P, Tseng H-Y, Lee Y-T, Tang W-C, Cheng L-H, Wu JY-W, You J. Internet use time and subjective well-being during the COVID-19 outbreak: serial mediation of problematic internet use and self-esteem. BMC Psychol. 2023;11(1):438. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01483-x.

No competing interests reported.

From National Identity to Well-being: The Crucial Mediating Role of Self-esteem in Adolescents

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1 Introduction

2 Methods