National survey reveals distinct demographic disparities in mental health and university experiences among undergraduates, indicating specific student groups require tailored institutional support.
As universities increasingly recognise mental health and wellbeing (MHWB) as central to students’ engagement, retention, and academic success, interest has grown in understanding the factors shaping student MHWB. The close interrelationship between students’ MHWB and the quality of their university experiences is increasingly well recognised. What is less well understood is whether this relationship is relatively uniform across student populations, or alternatively whether distinct subsets of student populations appear to experience university as particularly challenging to MHWB. The current study draws upon the first national-in-scope MHWB survey of Australian undergraduates (N = 19,057). The study examined demographic mean differences in MHWB and in the quality of university experiences. LGBTQIA + students, gender minority students, and students with disability reported particularly poor MHWB outcomes. A subsequent analysis assessed whether demographic differences in MHWB were statistically mediated by differences in overall quality of university experiences. Conceptually, this mediation analysis identified student groups who seemed to experience university as particularly deleterious to MHWB. LGBTQIA + students, gender minority students, students with disability and female-identifying students appeared to experience university as especially challenging to their MHWB. In contrast, apparent supportiveness of university experiences did not meaningfully differ depending upon international student status, first-generation status, or Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander status. This study provides novel empirical insights into demographic differences in the apparent influence of university experiences upon MHWB. Examining the specific university experiences contributing to these demographic disparities illuminates data-driven targets for tailored university reforms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gilmore et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: