Preamble

Holding the Mean to Achieve Harmony: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Zhongyong Thinking and Mental Health
Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China

Based on the Zhongyong practical thinking system and the dual-factor model of mental health, this study employs a three-level meta-analysis to explore the relationship between Zhongyong thinking and mental health, as well as its moderating factors. Literature published up to early 2025 was retrieved, resulting in the inclusion of 56 papers exploring the relationship between Zhongyong thinking and positive mental health (comprising 60 independent samples and 139 effect sizes) and 43 papers exploring the relationship between Zhongyong thinking and negative mental health (comprising 45 independent samples and 136 effect sizes), with a total of 35,596 participants.

The results indicated that Zhongyong thinking is significantly and positively correlated with positive mental health indicators ($r = 0.24$) and significantly and negatively correlated with negative mental health indicators ($r = -0.21$); both represent medium-level effect sizes. Specifically, the correlation between Zhongyong thinking and resilience, job satisfaction, and workplace well-being was higher than its correlation with life satisfaction. No significant differences were found between the correlations of Zhongyong thinking with well-being, flourishing, or positive affect compared to its correlation with life satisfaction. Furthermore, the effect sizes measured using the Zhongyong Belief-Value Scale, the Zhongyong Opinion Expression Scale, and the Zhongyong Value Orientation Scale showed minimal differences among themselves, yet they differed significantly from the effect sizes measured by the Zhongyong Practical Thinking Scale. Based on these meta-analytic findings, this paper discusses the theoretical connotations and measurement methods of Zhongyong thinking, as well as its relationship with mental health. It highlights the theoretical significance of understanding Zhongyong thinking and mental health through the perspective of "holding the mean to achieve harmony," which transcends binary oppositions.

Keywords

Zhongyong thinking, mental health, three-level meta-analysis

Zhongyong Thinking and Mental Health: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Zhongyong thinking (the Doctrine of the Mean) is a core cognitive style in Chinese culture, characterized by holistic perspective-taking, multi-angle reasoning, and the pursuit of harmony. While numerous studies have explored the relationship between Zhongyong thinking and mental health, findings regarding the strength and direction of these correlations remain inconsistent. This study employs a three-level meta-analytic approach to systematically evaluate the relationship between Zhongyong thinking and various indicators of mental health. By synthesizing data from existing empirical research, we aim to clarify the overall effect size and identify potential moderating variables that may influence this relationship.

1 Introduction

As one of the most representative concepts in traditional Chinese culture, the Doctrine of the Mean (Zhongyong) has exerted a profound and subtle influence on the cognitive styles of the Chinese people. Psychological research on Zhongyong thinking has become a rapidly developing field within indigenous psychology in recent years \cite{2022}. It was also one of the earliest important theories to enter the discourse on the construction of an independent Chinese psychological knowledge system and the discussion of iconic concepts \cite{2019, 2024}. Furthermore, it represents a critical topic in recent discussions regarding how excellent traditional Chinese culture can address the social and psychological adaptation of contemporary Chinese people \cite{2023}. Research has found that Zhongyong thinking continues to hold positive applied value for the psychological and behavioral adaptation of modern Chinese individuals \cite{2015, 2009, 2016}.

Numerous correlational studies conducted across diverse populations have found significant associations between Zhongyong thinking and various indicators of mental health. For instance, Zhongyong thinking is conducive to enhancing individual life satisfaction and well-being while reducing negative emotions such as anxiety and depression \cite{2013, 2014, 2006, 2014, 2014, Yang et al. 2016}. However, the degree of correlation identified in existing research varies; while some studies report a significant positive correlation, others have failed to find a significant relationship. Meta-analysis can effectively avoid the biases caused by sample deviations or statistical errors in individual studies, thereby yielding more robust conclusions.

2 Methods

2.1 Literature Search and Selection

We conducted a comprehensive search of both English and Chinese databases (including CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, and Web of Science) for studies published up to April 2025. Keywords included "Zhongyong thinking," "Doctrine of the Mean," "mental health," "well-being," and "psychological distress." Studies were included if they provided sufficient statistical information to calculate effect sizes (e.g., Pearson's $r$) and utilized validated measures of Zhongyong thinking.

2.2 Data Coding and Extraction

For each included study, we extracted the following information: author(s), publication year, sample size, participant characteristics (e.g., age, gender, occupation), and the specific type of mental health outcome measured. Outcomes were categorized into "positive indicators" (e.g., life satisfaction, happiness) and "negative indicators" (e.g., depression, anxiety, stress). Inter-rater consistency in this study was excellent ($Kappa = 0.92$).

2.3 Statistical Analysis

Given that most studies reported more than one effect size from the same sample, a three-level random-effects model was employed to conduct the main effect test, heterogeneity test, moderation analysis, publication bias test, and sensitivity analysis. This method accounts for the dependency between effect sizes originating from the same study.

3 Results

3.1 Main Effects and Heterogeneity

The results indicate a significant positive correlation between Zhongyong thinking and positive mental health indicators ($r = 0.24, 95\% \text{ CI } [0.29, 0.40], p < .001$). Conversely, a significant negative correlation was observed with negative mental health indicators ($r = -0.21, 95\% \text{ CI } [-0.32, -0.21], p < .001$). In both meta-analyses, the sampling error was less than 75%, suggesting that moderator variables should be analyzed to explain the heterogeneity.

3.2 Publication Bias and Sensitivity Analysis

Egger’s regression results for the relationship between Zhongyong thinking and positive mental health were non-significant ($SE = 1.04, p > .05$), as were the results for negative mental health ($SE = 0.83, p > .05$). Sensitivity analysis using the "leave-one-out" method showed that no single study or effect size disproportionately influenced the results, indicating that the findings are robust.

3.3 Moderation Effects

The type of positive mental health indicator exerted a significant moderating effect ($Q_b(6, 11) = 2.84, p < 0.05$). The correlation was strongest for occupational well-being ($r = 0.35$) and psychological resilience ($r = 0.35$), and weakest for life satisfaction ($r = 0.17$). Regarding Zhongyong measurement types, the Zhongyong Value Orientation Scale yielded the strongest correlation ($r = 0.38$), while the sub-dimensions of the Zhongyong Practice Self-Rating Scale (e.g., "composure and restraint") showed weaker or non-significant correlations.

For negative mental health, the year of publication had a significant moderating effect ($F(1, 134) = 6.98, p < 0.01$), suggesting that the negative correlation has strengthened in more recent studies.

4 Discussion

4.1 Relationship Between Zhongyong Thinking and Mental Health

Zhongyong thinking serves as a positive cultural resource for mental health in the Chinese context. It reduces depression and anxiety through emotion regulation strategies like cognitive reappraisal and fosters social support. However, the correlation coefficients are lower than those of Western constructs like self-efficacy. This may be because Zhongyong thinking emphasizes "moderation" rather than "maximization" of positive states. Furthermore, the dynamic and context-dependent nature of the "Mean" is difficult to capture using static self-report scales.

4.2 Moderating Role of Indicators and Scales

The higher correlation with resilience and job satisfaction reflects the practical essence of Zhongyong thinking. Resilience involves flexible adaptation to adversity, which aligns with the holistic and flexible self-positioning of Zhongyong. Similarly, the workplace provides a complex environment where the "timely balance" of Zhongyong thinking is most effectively applied.

The differences between scales suggest that while value-based measures (Belief-Value, Opinion Expression) are consistent, behavioral frequency measures (Practical Self-Rating) may not fully capture the field-dependent nature of the "Acting Self." Behaviors like "retrospective reflection" might be mistaken for maladaptive rumination if not contextualized correctly.

5 Conclusion

This study confirms that Zhongyong thinking is a stable predictor of mental health. It is positively associated with well-being and resilience and negatively associated with psychological distress. The strength of these relationships depends on the specific mental health indicators and the measurement tools used. Future research should utilize longitudinal designs and explore the dynamic "Acting Self" to further clarify the causal mechanisms of Zhongyong thinking in psychological adaptation.