Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized trial examines a photography-based intervention to enhance healthy behaviours in college students, suggesting implications for future health initiatives.
Although meaning in life (MIL) has been identified as an important psychological resource for promoting healthy behaviours, little is known about the mechanisms through which MIL influences health-related actions among college students. The present study examined whether a fully self-guided photography-based MIL online intervention could enhance healthy behaviours and whether future time focus (FTF) mediates the relationship between MIL and healthy behaviours. In a randomised controlled trial, 105 college students (M_age = 20.19; 64.8% female) were randomly assigned to a photo-writing group (whose members took photos and wrote expressively), a photo group (whose members took photos only), or a control group. MIL, FTF, physical activity, and healthy eating were assessed at baseline, post-intervention, one-week, and one-month follow-up. Results indicated that the members of the photo-writing group and photo group had greater MIL and physical activity (but not FTF and healthy eating) in the post-test when compared to the pre-test, and this impact was not sustained during the 1-month follow-up period. Participants in the photo-writing group showed a significantly greater increase in MIL compared to the control group; however, other between-group comparisons were not statistically significant. In addition, FTF could mediate the relationship between MIL and physical activity. A brief, fully self-guided online photography-based MIL intervention can produce short-term improvements in physical activity among college students. Findings further suggest that FTF may represent a psychological mechanism linking MIL to health-promoting physical activity. These results highlight the potential of low-cost, scalable online interventions for promoting physical activity in college students.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: