Analysis shows that misalignments in social-responsibility values are linked to mental health issues, suggesting the role of anti-mattering.
Background/objectives Mental health problems among university students are increasing in prevalence, and it is vital to understand why. The detrimental effects of misalignments between corporate social-responsibility values and those of employees have been widely evidenced. We investigated how misalignments between the personal importance of social-responsibility values held by students versus those of their university affected their mental health. It was predicted that anti-mattering would mediate relationships between misalignments in social-responsibility values and mental health problems. Methods Student participants (N=171) completed an online survey assessing the personal importance of nine social-responsibility domains together with the perceived importance of these domains to the student’s university. Participants also completed a measure of anti-mattering which assesses perceptions of being insignificant and invisible, and a composite measure of depression-anxiety-stress. Direct and indirect pathways were assessed with linear regression models. Results There were four key findings. First, across the nine social-responsibility domains, personal importance ratings were significantly higher than those ascribed to the university. Second, misalignments in social-responsibility importance ratings were significantly associated with depression-anxiety-stress scores. Third, the relationship between the discrepancy in social-responsibility importance ratings and depression-anxiety-stress was mediated by anti-mattering. Fourth, the key characteristic of anti-mattering in this mediated pathway was perceived invisibility. Conclusion There is potential for a positive effect on mental health to be gained if institutions, such as universities, authentically co-develop, instantiate, and evaluate social-responsibility values with stakeholders in ways that genuinely combat invisibility, and instead, reflect that the views and feelings of stakeholders do matter.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gooding et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: