Cited by 111Cultural Differences and ValuesPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionChinese history and philosophy

Confucian Culture Still Matters: The Benefits of Zhongyong Thinking (Doctrine of the Mean) for Mental Health

Yang, Xueling, Zhang, Peining, Zhao, Jingbo, Zhao, Jiubo, Wang, Jiaqi, Chen, Yu, Ding, Siyuan, Zhang, Xiaoyuan·2016·Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

Abstract

Zhongyong thinking (Doctrine of the Mean) is a traditional Confucius interpersonal style with emphasis on interpersonal harmony and connection. In contemporary society, is Zhongyong thinking beneficial to, or has Zhongyong thinking become an old-fashioned idea with trivial or even detrimental influence on mental health? The current study explored the relationship of Zhongyong thinking and mental health measures in two studies. Study 1 was a cross-sectional survey involving a large representative sample of 8,178 Chinese undergraduate students. We found that Zhongyong thinking was negatively associated with anxiety ( r = −.23, p < .01) and depressive symptoms ( r = −.32, p < .01), but positively associated with self-esteem ( r = .28, p < .01). Compared with low-Zhongyong group, those who scored high on the Zhongyong Thinking Scale had substantially lower scores on anxiety and depressive symptoms, and had higher scores on self-esteem and life satisfaction. In Study 2, we experimentally intervened in Zhongyong thinking in 30 mildly depressed students, comparing mental health outcomes with a randomized control group ( n = 30) who received regular supportive group intervention. We found that training in Zhongyong thinking was more effective in alleviating depressive symptoms compared with the control group. The two studies prove from different aspects that Zhongyong thinking still plays an important role in regulating mental distress and maintaining subjective well-being among contemporary Chinese young adults. Why Zhongyong thinking is beneficial, and how to transmit this traditional cultural heritage to promote emotion regulation strategies are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022022116658260

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yang, X., Zhang, P., Zhao, J., Zhao, J., Wang, J., Chen, Y., Ding, S., & Zhang, X.
Affiliations
Southern Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Xiaoyuan
Venue
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology
Published
2016-07-28
Volume
47
Issue
8
Pages
1097-1113
ISSN
  • 0022-0221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5422
OpenAlex
W2469328972
Cited by
111
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5
FWCI
6.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Chinese history and philosophy
Keywords
Zhongyong, Confucian culture, interpersonal harmony, mental health, anxiety, depressive symptoms, self-esteem, life satisfaction, emotion regulation, Chinese undergraduates, young adults, cultural heritage transmission, group intervention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review