Examining the relationship between civic engagement and mental health in young adults: a systematic review of the literature

Abstract

Researchers have examined civic engagement as a health promotion tool among older adults and adolescents, yet less is known about its mental health implications for young adults. This systematic review identified 53 articles on civic engagement and well-being in young adults. Five key themes emerged: (1) varying associations between type of civic engagement and well-being, (2) duration and frequency of civic behaviors, (3) directionality in the civic-to-well-being pathway, (4) mediation and moderation factors affecting the civic-to-well-being pathway, and (5) civic engagement as a tool for coping with adversity or systemic oppression. Civic engagement demonstrates a heterogeneous relationship to well-being; future research should focus on the explanatory pathways for positive, negative, and null correlations particularly among historically marginalized young adults.

According to social capital theorists, participation in community life, collective action, and empowerment to create change can be harnessed for community health and well-being (Eriksson, Dahlgren, and Emmelin 2009). Robert Putnam defines social capital along three primary domains: (1) social trust (in institutions and individuals), (2) norms of reciprocity (I’ll help you today assuming you’ll help me in the future), and (3) civic networks of engagement (both quantity and quality of networks) (Putnam 1993). As both mental and physical health disparities continue to mount, researchers and policy makers alike have turned to the social capital literature for the past two decades to examine its potential as a health determinant (Shiell, Hawe, and Kavanagh 2018). Yet 28 systematic reviews encompassing over 850 studies later, research findings remain contradictory and enigmatic (Shiell, Hawe, and Kavanagh 2018). Within the mental health field, a recent systematic review concluded that social capital interventions may be effective for improving mental health outcomes, although not necessarily above and beyond control groups (Flores et al. 2018). Moreover, other reviews have noted that engagement may be contra-indicated for those from low-income countries and potentially women, given the strain that participating in civic life may place upon individuals already feeling over-burdened (Ehsan and De Silva 2015). While research has documented the decline of engagement and social trust across generations, the implications of this decline, particularly among historically disenfranchised populations, are not well-understood (Jennings and Stoker 2004). Reading one set of articles, one might come away with the conclusion that social capital leads to positive health outcomes while reading another would lead to the opposite conclusion.

Findings may be inconclusive in part due to the many definitions of social capital employed and the countless settings in which these interventions have been implemented (Flores et al. 2018). Thus, how do researchers further explicate social capital’s benefits from its burdens? Civic engagement as one component of social capital is perhaps the most actionable of the three as a behaviorally driven concept. Civic engagement, often defined as ‘individual and collective actions designed to identify and address issues of public concern’ (American Psychological Association. Civic Engagement 2009), has been studied as a stand-alone construct in order to better examine its benefits and drawbacks to individual health and well-being (Adler and Goggin 2005). Civic engagement behaviors typically fall within three activity categories: ‘civic’, which involves improving the local community (e.g. acts of volunteerism), ‘electoral’ such as voting or political campaign canvassing, and ‘political voice’ (e.g. marching and petitioning; also conceptualized as activism) which involves expressing opinions pertaining to social causes (Adler and Goggin 2005; Andolina et al. 2003; Pancer 2014)

Like the social capital literature, civic engagement research has also proven to be inconclusive. Among older adults and adolescents, civic engagement has demonstrated generally positive associations with mental health outcomes; but there is a dearth of research among young adults, particularly those without a college education (Wray-Lake et al. 2019b; Fenn et al. 2021; Flanagan and Levine 2010) Further, civic engagement and mental health outcomes have not been uniformly investigated across studies and research has focused unevenly on different forms of engagement (Wray-Lake et al. 2019a). Volunteerism has been studied with much greater frequency than other types of engagement like electoral participation and activism. The volunteerism literature has demonstrated overwhelmingly positive associations to mental and physical health, following the inverted U-shape of typical health behaviors (e.g. exercise) with the most benefits derived at moderate levels (Windsor, Anstey, and Rodgers 2008). In contrast, the literature examining electoral and activist forms of engagement has yielded mixed findings. For marginalized populations, some scholars assert that activism is a beneficial act of resistance by empowering individuals to dismantle systems of oppression and challenge the discrimination they often face daily (Hope, Keels, and Durkee 2016; Hope et al. 2018; Watts, Diemer, and Voight 2011) This approach has been studied among LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) youths and in previously incarcerated people of color with varying results (Alex Wagaman 2016), (Windsor, Jemal, and Benoit 2014). Yet just the act of engaging requires tangible, cognitive, and emotional resources to engage that disenfranchised populations may not have readily available or expendable. Researchers have investigated barriers and motivators for civic engagement among under-resourced communities (McBride, Sherraden, and Pritzker 2006), yet less is known about the mental health implications for those who choose to engage. A review is necessary to refine our knowledge of the civic engagement to well-being pathway.

Clearly civic engagement cannot be utilized as a ‘one size fits all’ health promotional tool. However, it has shown benefits that merit further investigation, particularly for young adults. Youth and young adulthood represent critical timeframes during which individuals establish their civic identity, laying the groundwork for future civic engagement and participation in political life (Flanagan and Levine 2010; Amnå 2012; Zaff, Youniss, and Gibson 2009). Young adulthood is also a critical time period for emotional and psychological development, with roughly 50% of all mental disorders diagnosed by the late teens and 75% by the mid-20s (Kessler et al. 2007). This period can be both exciting and tumultuous as individuals are seeking answers to who they are, what they value, and what they hope to accomplish (Hutchison, Leigh, and Wagner 2016). Given the psychological, civic, and political identity development milestones that occur during this transitional phase, young adults serve to benefit from clearer evidence for the use of civic engagement as a health promoter (Amnå 2012; Kessler et al. 2007). Scholars and practitioners currently lack a thorough understanding of whether civic engagement can be used to increase mental well-being, or whether they should be prepared to support civically engaged young adults through the potential negative repercussions of engagement. The current paper provides an overview of the literature examining relationships between civic engagement and mental health among young adults to clarify the current state of the literature, for application purposes, and to inform future directions in the field.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines,¹ the first three authors conducted a systematic review of the literature regarding civic engagement and well-being in young adults using PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar (Page, McKenzie, and Bossuyt 2021). Authors conducted the search from December 2020 to February 2021 with no restrictions on country or publication date. Search terms included the following three domains: (1) civic engagement, civic involvement, civic participation, community service, volunteering, donating, political participation, voting, campaigning, canvassing, phone banking, activism, petitioning, protesting, boycotting, buycotting, contacting officials, OR contacting the media; (2) well-being OR mental health; AND (3) young adults OR emerging adults. Authors also located relevant articles by scanning the references of found articles.

Criteria

Researchers utilized four main inclusion criteria: written in English with a focus on civic engagement behavior, well-being or mental health-related variables, and young adults as at least part of the investigated sample population. Researchers excluded studies if they did not focus specifically on civic engagement behaviors, did not report on well-being or mental health variables, and did not include young adult populations. Researchers excluded non-peer reviewed manuscripts and protocol, editorial, and review articles. Researchers included studies for which the sample investigated individuals within the young adulthood range (defined here as ages 18–25); however, it should be noted that we still retained studies with samples inclusive of other populations (e.g. studies that investigated older adults and young adults, or adolescents and young adults). The first three authors initially conducted their literature searches independently. Then, at least two of the three authors confirmed study inclusion for every full-text article, and the third researcher provided additional feedback if there were differences of opinion until all three authors reached consensus (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

PRISMA flow diagram for included and excluded studies.

Researchers extracted information regarding independent and dependent variables used and study design characteristics from the articles. Information gathered from each article included the type of study (e.g. cross-sectional, longitudinal), target population, methodology including measures used, results, and any noteworthy conclusions made by the investigators (Table 1). Researchers developed an a priori thematic coding scheme based upon the literature and refined the coding process as shared characteristics emerged across studies. At least two of three authors confirmed thematic coding for each study, and the third researcher provided additional feedback and acted as a ‘tie-breaker’ for any discrepancies (Table 2 presents the breakdown of studies categorized by theme). Researchers then categorized results as demonstrating a positive, negative, or null relationship to every mental health variable under consideration. Where studies employed multiple analyses, each finding received its own coding (e.g. civic engagement positively associated with quality of life and meaning in life would be coded as two positive relationships; civic engagement positively associated with well-being among men but not women would be coded as one positive and one null relationship). Negative correlations such as ‘greater volunteerism was correlated with reduced depressive symptoms’ were coded as ‘positive relationships’ to represent the positive nature of these findings.

Table 1.

Summary of research methods and findings from studies examining the relationship between civic engagement and mental health.

Study	Design	Country	Independent variable	Dependent variable	Results
Tanskanen and Danielsbacka (2016)	Cross-sectional; Younger adults (aged 23–54; N = 1701)	Finland	Charity Volunteering	Happiness (self-report, 11-point Likert scale)	Positive association No association
Ballard, Hoyt, and Pachucki (2019)	Longitudinal; Adolescents and young adults (ages Wave 1: 11–20 Wave 2: 18–27 Wave 4: 24–32; N = 9471)	US	Voting Volunteerism Activism	Depressive symptoms (mean of 10 items from the CES-D) Risky health behavior (created 6-item index)	Negative associations Negative associations Positive association with risky health behavior
Klar and Kasser (2009)	Study 1: Cross-sectional; College students (mean age = 19.2; N = 341)	US	Conventional activism High-risk activism	Life satisfaction Positive Affect Negative Affect Meaning in Life Self-actualization Psychological needs satisfaction Hope Agency	Conventional positively associated with 6/8 factors High-risk associated with self-actualization only
	Study 2: National sample matched with activist sample (mean age = 32; N = 718)	US	Conventional activism vs. High-risk activism	Life satisfaction Positive Affect Negative Affect Psych well-being (Ryff 6 scales) Social well-being (Keyes scale)	Positive associations with 4/5 factors (strong) Positive associations with 2/5 factors (weak)
	Study 3: Randomized block design; College students (N = 296)	US	Activist behavior vs. Non-activist behavior, Control group	Meaning (MLQ) Life Satisfaction (SWLS) Vitality Positive/Negative Affect (PANAS)	Activist group reported significantly more vitality; no other findings significant between groups
Chan, Ou, and Reynolds (2014)	Cross-sectional and longitudinal; low-income racial minority youth into young adulthood (age 22 and 24; N = 854)	US (Chicago)	Civic engagement in young adulthood (participation in youth orgs, church activities, neighborhood clubs)	Life satisfaction (single item, 5-point Likert scale)	Positive association
Gilster (2012)	Cross-sectional; Adults (aged 18–92; N = 3105)	US (Chicago)	Civic activism vs. Volunteerism	Personal and neighborhood mastery Social ties in the community Hopelessness (4-item scale) Depressive symptoms (CES-D)	Activism demonstrated stronger associations with mastery and social ties. Volunteers had lower hopelessness. Neither were associated with depressive symptoms.
Ziersch and Baum (2004)	Cross-sectional survey: (N = 530) and interviews (N = 16); aged 18+	Australia	Civil Society Group participation	Mental health (SF-12)	Survey data: No association Interview data: Negative association
Kaplan, Salzer, and Brusilovskiy (2012)	Cross-sectional of secondary data; Emerging adults (aged 17–30; n = 233) and mature adults (aged 31+; n = 1,594) with serious mental illness	US	Community participation: Volunteering Group membership Civic engagement	Quality of life (QOL) Meaning of life (MOL) Recovery (RAS)	Civic engagement positively associated with QOL All three positively associated with meaning and recovery
Gates and Dentato (2020)	Cross-sectional; Adults who identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (aged 21–89; N = 71)	US	Volunteerism	Well-being (# of poor mental health days)	Median days for poor mental health were higher for non-volunteers than volunteers.
Balashov et al. (2018)	Cross-sectional; Italian college students (aged 20–30, N = 104) and Ukrainian college students (aged 17–28; N = 122)	Italy and Ukraine	Volunteering commitment	Overall well-being Social well-being Psychological well-being Emotional well-being (MHC-SF)	Positive association Positive association No association Positive association (Italian participants)
Doerksen et al. (2014)	Weekly assessment; College students (aged 15+; N = 33)	US	Club attendance Volunteer activity	Anxiety (STAI) Depression (CES-D) Stress (PSS) Affect (Kuppens Affect Scale) Life satisfaction (SWLS)	Club attendance associated with positive affect, life satisfaction, less depression Volunteering associated with life satisfaction
Hayhurst (2014)	Cross-sectional; Adolescents and emerging adults (aged 16-32; N = 682)	New Zealand	Civic engagement (intentions, behaviors, beliefs)	Well-being (Keyes 2013)	Positive association
Lin et al. (2014)	Cross-sectional; Adults (aged 20-70+; N = 13)	Taiwan	Volunteering Donating money to charities	Subjective well-being (13 item assessment, 10-point Likert scale)	Positive association Positive association
Ballard, Ni, and Brocato (2020)	Cross-sectional; College students across 28 universities (N = 10,822)	US	Political engagement: Activism Expressive Traditional	Happiness, life satisfaction, self-esteem, meaning Anxiety, depression, loneliness (Wellbeing Assessment, 2019)	Activism behaviors positively associated with loneliness, negatively associated with self-esteem. Expressive political behaviors positively associated with anxiety. Traditional political behaviors positively associated with happiness, life satisfaction, self-esteem, and sense of meaning. Negatively associated with depression and anxiety.
Ni, Li, and Pang (2016)	Longitudinal; Adults (aged 18–65+; N = 909)	Hong Kong	Exposure to protests	Depressive symptoms (PHQ-9)	Level of direct exposure not associated with depressive symptoms. Social media use about protests positive associated with depressive symptoms.
Ni, Yao, and Leung (2020)	Longitudinal; Adults (aged 18–83, oversampled 18–35) (N = 1213 at T1 and N = 1736 at T2)	Hong Kong	Exposure to protests	Depressive symptoms (PHQ-9) PTSD (PTSD Checklist – Civilian Version)	Level of direct exposure not associated with depressive or PTSD symptoms. Social media use about protests positive associated with depressive symptoms and PTSD.
Choudhary and Gupta (2017)	Cross-sectional; Young adults (aged 18–28; N = 300)	Urban India	Civic engagement (CES)	Well-being (SWLS)	Civic engagement accounted for 58% of the variance in a regression model examining well-being; women less likely to engage than men
Albright et al. (2020)	Cross-sectional; Veteran college students (mean age = 30; n = 2658) vs. non-veteran students (mean age = 22; n = 112,158)	US	Civic engagement (volunteering)	Depressive symptoms (within the past 30 days)	Civic engagement associated with decreased likelihood of depression.
Alfieri, Marzana, and Cipresso (2019)	Cross-sectional; Immigrant young adults (aged 19–29; N = 510)	Italy	Community engagement (expressive, social, political, civic)	Well-being (self-esteem, mastery of host language, knowledge of host country’s culture)	Engaged young adults had higher well-being than disengaged young adults; no gender differences.
Ballard et al. (2021)	Experimental; Young adults (aged 18–30; N = 128)	US	Civic speech vs. Neutral speech	Affect (Harmon-Jones et al., 2016) Empowerment (single item) Physiological stress response (ANS)	Civic speech givers demonstrated marginally lower affect, more empowerment.
Smith, Hibbing, and Hibbing (2019)	Cross-sectional; Community sample (aged 18–90; N = 800)	US	Political participation Discussing politics Voting	Health (32-items of physical, emotional, social health and regretted behavior)	Negative association Negative association No association
Ojeda (2015)	Cross-sectional; Adults (aged 18–89; N = 2832)	US	Voting	Depressed mood (4 items regarding past 30-day depressive symptoms)	Probability of voting decreases as severity of depressed mood increases.
Ojeda and Pacheco (2017)	National Longitudinal Survey of Youth; (ages 1997: 12–16 2004: 19–23 2006: 21–25 2008: 23–27 2010: 25–29; N = 9000)	US	Voting	Depression (devised scale of mental health and physical limitations)	Increased likelihood of voter turnout at next election among those with improved depression; No change in likelihood of voting among those whose depression worsened.
Li (2020)	Cross-sectional; Immigrant women (aged 15+; N = 1,872)	Canada	Civic engagement (Civic Engagement Index)	Life satisfaction (single item, Likert scale) Self-rated mental health (single item, Likert scale)	Positive association Positive association
Elias, Sudhir, and Mehrotra (2016)	Cross-sectional and semi-structured interviews; (aged 21–50; N = 41)	India	Long-term volunteering (1x/month for 1 yr) vs. short-term volunteering (1x/month for 6 mos)	Psychological well-being (PWB-20) Positive affect Negative affect Life satisfaction (SWLS)	Long-term volunteering more positively associated with psych well-being. No differences between groups on other measures.
Bowman et al. (2010)	Longitudinal; College students (aged 17–19) into adulthood (aged 30–32; N = 416)	US	College volunteering and service-learning	Well-being in adulthood (3 scales from Ryff 1989)	Young adult volunteerism was positively associated with prosocial attitudes and adult volunteerism, which were then positively associated to well-being in adulthood.
Fink (2014)	Cross-sectional; two college student samples (N = 1161; N = 1459)	US	Engagement with the college environment Living-Learning community membership	Flourishing (MHC-SF) Civic engagement, Flourishing.	No association Stronger association compared to non-members.
Payne, Hawley, and Morey (2020)	RCT two arm; Community-dwelling individuals at least 1-year post traumatic brain injury (aged 18+; N = 74)	US	Volunteering (HOPE intervention)	Satisfaction with Life (SWLS) Flourishing (FS) Psychological distress (BSI-18) Pos/Neg Affect (SPANE) Purpose in Life (Ryff subscale)	Significant improvement in SWLS and FS in the intervention group in comparison to the control group.
Hayhurst, Hunter, and Ruffman (2019)	Cross-sectional; Young adults following a terrorist attack (mean age = 20.9; N = 530)	New Zealand	Civic engagement	Well-being (MHC-SF; Flourishers vs. Moderates) Resilience	Flourishers demonstrated greater civic engagement, resilience.
Bloemraad and Terriquez (2016)	Semi-structured interviews; Youths from low-income and immigrant communities (aged 13–26; N = 1210)	California	Community-based organization (CBO) participation	Social connectedness Collective self-efficacy Community well-being (as described by participants)	Youths reported positive mental health outcomes because of CBO participation.
Ortega-Williams et al. (2020)	4 focus groups at 3 CBOs; Youth of Color (aged 14–24; N = 43)	US (Brooklyn)	CBO youth organizing	Hopefulness, self-efficacy to change oppressive systems, social support; Strain between CBO culture of support, belongingness, and their reality (as described by participants)	Youth reported both positive and negative outcomes because of CBO participation.
Hope, Cryer-Coupet, and Stokes (2020)	Cross-sectional; Black participants (aged 14–29; N = 286)	US	Race-related stress: Psychological & Physiological anticipation (Prolonged Activation and Anticipatory Race-Related Stress Scale)	Low risk activism High risk activism	Positive associations with psych & physio anticipation Positive association with physio anticipation
Okun et al. (2011)	Cross-sectional; Respondents of the 2008 Arizona Health Survey (AHS) (aged 18–96; N = 4,161)	US (Arizona)	Volunteer status with age moderator Volunteer status with number of chronic health conditions moderator	Positive affect (WHO-5) Negative affect (K10) Resilience (CD-RISC)	1.No significant interactions 2.Significant interaction: Volunteer status x number of chronic health conditions predicting pos. affect 2.No significant interaction: volunteer status x number of chronic health conditions predicting neg. affect 2.Significant interaction: Volunteer status x number of chronic health conditions predicting resilience

Study	Design	Country	Predictor and outcome variables	Results
Fang et al. (2018)	Longitudinal; (ages Wave 1: 21–25 Wave 2: 32 Wave 3: 43; N = 690)	Canada	Happiness > Civic engagement model Civic engagement > Happiness model Happiness < > Civic engagement bidirectional model Happiness = How happy are you with your life? Likert 1, 2, 3 Civic engagement = Past 12-mo participation in variety of groups, summed 0–5	Happiness driven model most predictive of civic engagement Gender did not moderate this relationship
Landstedt et al. (2016)	Longitudinal; (ages T1 = 16 T2 = 21 T3 = 30 T4 = 42; N = 1001)	Sweden	Bidirectional relationship between civic engagement (group membership) and depressive symptoms (6-item scale constructed)	Women: No longitudinal effect Men: Higher levels of engagement predictive of lower levels of depressive symptoms
Ding, Berry, and O’Brien (2015)	Longitudinal; Adults (N = 9498)	Australia	Mental well-being > civic engagement Mental well-being > political participation Civic engagement > mental well-being Political participation > mental well-being Mental well-being = 5 measures from the SF-36 Civic engagement = 4-item composite Political participation = 3-item composite of activism	No association Negative association Moderate positive association No association
Oosterhoff, Hill, and Slonaker (2020)	Longitudinal; College students (aged 18–25; N = 235)	US	Community service and burdensomeness, belongingness Environmentalism and burdensomeness, belongingness Political behavior and burdensomeness, belongingness Social movement and burdensomeness, belongingness	Lower burden, greater belonging; lower belonging predicted increased community service Lower burden, greater belonging; no cross-lagged effects Greater burden; no cross-lagged effects Greater burden, lower belonging; no cross-lagged effects
Wray-Lake et al. (2019b)	Longitudinal; Adolescents to young adults (7th-12th graders in 1994–1995, N = 15,701)	US	Civic engagement (voting, community engagement, political behaviors) and depressive symptoms (5-item scale modified from CES-D)	Depressive symptoms predictive of decrease in voting Community engagement predictive of decrease in depressive symptoms Political behavior predictive of increase in depressive symptoms

Study	Design	Country	Independent variable	Mediators/moderators	Dependent variable	Results
Guilmette et al. (2019)	Cross-sectional; College students (aged 18–25; N = 401)	Canada	Extracurricular activity participation (clubs)	Persistence, Positive reappraisals of adverse situations	Positive affect (PANAS)	Positive association
Nicotera, Brewer, and Veeh (2015)	Two-timepoint survey; College students (mean age = 18.16; N = 225)	US	Faith, parental civic activity	Community engagement (service, exploration and skill-building, action)	Student efficacy (College Self-Efficacy Scale) Flourishing (MHC-SF) Alcohol Problems (CAPS-r)	Positive association Positive association No association
Cicognani et al. (2015)	Cross-sectional; Adolescents and young adults (aged 16–26; N = 835)	Italy	Group membership, Gender differences considered.	Empowerment, Sense of community	Social well-being (5 items from MHC-SF)	Positive association; leisure activity (more popular among men) more strongly associated with social well-being; civic activity more strongly associated with empowerment.
Ochoa O’Leary & Romero, 2011	Cross-sectional; College students of Mexican descent (Mean age = 20.22; N = 99)	US	Stress levels Stress levels	Civic engagement (19-item composite) Civic engagement & Ethnic identity	Self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale) Depressive symptoms (CES-D)	Buffered negative impact of stress on self-esteem. Did not buffer negative impact of stress on depressive symptoms.
Piliavin and Siegl (2007)	Longitudinal; Adults (1957 high school graduates, 1975, 1992, 2004; N = 4000)	US	Volunteerism	Mattering	Well-being (4 Ryff subscales) Self-rated health (single item, Likert scale)	Volunteerism no longer predictive of well-being after controlling for mattering. Greater consistency and forms of volunteering related to greater mental health.
Khawaja et al. (2006)	Cross-sectional; Palestinian refugees (aged 15–65+; N = 1615)	Jordan	Club/civic association membership vs. Non-members	Gender	Self-rated health (single item, Likert scale)	Club members more likely to report greater health; after controlling for confounds, no longer significant effect for women.
Fenn et al. (2021)	Cross-sectional; College student men (mean age = 20.64; n = 119) and women (mean age = 20.22; n = 317)	US	Civic Electoral Sociopolitical	Self-efficacy (SETS) Meaning in life (MLQ)	Well-being (MHC-SF)	Positive direct effect, positive mediation through self-efficacy Positive direct effect, no mediation Negative direct effect, positive mediation through meaning in life
Kulik (2019)	Cross-sectional; Participants with physical disabilities (aged 18–75; N = 160)	Israel	Level of resources (socioeconomic, health, family support religiosity)	Volunteering	Self-esteem (Rosenberg self-esteem questionnaire) Meaning in life (28-item MIL questionnaire)	Positive association Positive association
Chan and Mak (2020)	Cross-lagged panel: Emerging adults (mean age = 20.5; Mainland China, N = 252; Hong Kong, N = 268)	China/Hong Kong	Sociopolitical control	Civic engagement (Active and Engaged Citizenship Scale)	Psychological Social & Emotional Well-being (MHC-SF)	Positive association Positive association No association
Hope et al. (2018)	Longitudinal; Black and Latinx college students (44% Black) (mean age = 18.2; N = 504)	US	Racial-ethnic (R/E) microaggressions	Political activism	Stress (PSS) Anxiety (GAD Screener) Depression (HANDS)	Black students: Increased political activism exacerbated the effect of R/E microaggressions on stress and anxiety. Latinx students: Increased political activism buffered the effect of R/E microaggressions on stress and depression.
Liu, Modrek, and Sieverding (2019)	Longitudinal; Young people (aged 2009: 10–29 2013/2014: 14–33; N = 10,916)	Egypt	Exposure to protests	Gender	Mental health (SRQ-20)	Women: Positive association Men: Negative association
Yeung, Passmore, and Packer (2012)	Cross-sectional SEM; Adults (aged 18–30; N = 434)	Australia	Citizen communication networks Social milieu	Life satisfaction (Life Situation Survey) Self-efficacy (Generalized Self-Efficacy)	Social participation Civic participation (29-item composite)	Networks and social milieu > life satisfaction and self-efficacy > social participation > civic participation
Chan et al. (2020)	Longitudinal; Youth participating Hong Kong Umbrella Movement (aged 18–29; N = 490)	Hong Kong	Activism level: Minimal Onsite Online Avid	Perceived responsiveness of Hong Kong gov/People’s Republic of China gov Policy control Leadership competence	Emotional, Social and Psychological Well-being (MHC-SF)	Avid participators had higher levels of well-being, competence, and policy control. At 1 yr follow-up, avid participators with lower HK gov perceived responsiveness experienced declines in well-being.
Yeung and Towers (2013)	Cross-sectional SEM; Young adults with disabilities (aged 18–30; N = 119)	Australia	Community participation (4-item composite) Social participation (5-item composite)	Self-efficacy Participation satisfaction	Quality of life (Life Situation Survey)	Positive association
Johnstone, Swingler, and Reid (2018)	Semi-structured interviews; Young adults (aged 18–22; N = 6)	UK	Volunteering for charity	Social belonging	Subjective wellbeing (as described by interviewees)	Positive association
Wray-Lake et al. (2019a)	Daily diary study; College students (aged 18-23; N = 267)	US	Daily helping Pro-environmental Volunteering Charity	Psychological needs satisfaction	Well-being (PANAS + SWLS + Ryan & Frederick’s Vitality scale)	Positive association Positive association No association No association

Table 2.

Results by theme and type of civic engagement examined.

Citation	Theme	Civic composite	Volunteer	Donate	Activism	Protest	Vote/ electoral	Group member
Choudhary and Gupta (2017)	1; 4	+
Hayhurst, Hunter, and Ruffman (2019)	5	+
Albright et al. (2020)	1		+
Bloemraad and Terriquez (2016)	5				+
Oosterhoff, Hill, and Slonaker (2020)	1; 3		+		−		−
Alfieri, Marzana, and Cipresso (2019)	1; 4	+
Ortega-Williams et al. (2020)	5				+ −
Hope, Cryer-Coupet, and Stokes (2020)	4; 5				++ − 0
Ballard et al. (2021)	1				+ −
Smith, Hibbing, and Hibbing (2019)	1					−	0
Ojeda (2015)	1						+
Yeung, Passmore, and Packer (2012)	4	+
Chan et al. (2020)	2; 4				+ −
Yeung and Towers (2013)	4	+
Ojeda and Pacheco (2017)	1						+
Okun et al. (2011)	4; 5		++++ 00
Johnstone, Swingler, and Reid (2018)	4		+
Kaplan, Salzer, and Brusilovskiy (2012)	1, 5	+++	++ 0					++ 0
Payne, Hawley, and Morey (2020)	5		++ 000
Gates and Dentato (2020)	1; 5		+
Kulik (2019)	4		++
Balashov et al. (2018)	1		+
Chan and Mak (2020)	4	+ 0	+ 0
Doerksen et al. (2014)	1		+ 0000					+++ 00
Hayhurst (2014)	1	+
Lin et al. (2014)	1		+	+
Wray-Lake et al. (2019b)	1, 3	+					− −
Li (2020)	1	++
Hope et al. (2018)	4; 5				++ − −
Ballard, Ni, and Brocato (2020)	1				− − 00000		+++++ + 0
Ni, Yao, and Leung (2020)	1					00
Ni, Li, and Pang (2016)	1					0
Liu, Modrek, and Sieverding (2019)	1; 4					+ −
Tanskanen and Danielsbacka (2016)	1		0	+
Ballard, Hoyt, and Pachucki (2019)	1		++		− 0		++
Elias, Sudhir, and Mehrotra (2016)	2		+
Fang et al. (2018)	3							+
Guilmette et al. (2019)	4							+
Nicotera, Brewer, and Veeh (2015)	4	++ 0
Wray-Lake et al. (2019a)	1, 2; 3		0	0
Bowman et al. (2010)	2		+
Cicognani et al. (2015)	4							+
Klar and Kasser (2009)	1				++++++++++++ ++ 000000000000000
Ochoa O’Leary & Romero (2011)	4; 5				+ 0
Chan, Ou, and Reynolds (2014)	1	+
Landstedt et al. (2016)	3							+ 0
Fink (2014)	2	+ 0
Gilster (2012)	1		+++ 0		++ 00
Piliavin and Siegl (2007)	2; 4		++
Fenn et al. (2021)	1; 4	+			+ −		+
Khawaja et al. (2006)	4							+ 0
Ziersch and Baum (2004)	1							− 0
Ding, Berry, and O’Brien (2015)	1, 3	+ 0			− 0

Note: + = positive relationship between civic engagement and mental health; − = negative relationship between civic engagement and mental health; 0 = no relationship between civic engagement and mental health; 1 = type; 2 = duration and frequency; 3 = directionality; 4 = mediational and moderation factors; 5 = coping with adversity or systemic oppression.

Results

A total of 53 articles met full criteria and were included for analysis in this systematic review (Figure 1). Of note, 23 studies (43%) included a young adult sample exclusively, while 30 studies (57%) encompassed a sample inclusive of both young adults and individuals at other stages of life. Of the studies conducted solely with young adults, 16 (70%) utilized college samples. Overall, studies reported 97 positive, 19 negative, and 59 null relationships between civic engagement and mental health variables, defined broadly; many studies reported a combination of positive, negative or null findings dependent upon the type of civic activity examined or other mediators and moderators involved.

Regarding methodologies employed, 26 articles reported on cross-sectional data, 17 on longitudinal data, and three reported a combination of cross-sectional and longitudinal findings (Chan, Ou, and Reynolds 2014; Chan et al. 2020; Klar and Kasser 2009) One study used a daily diary approach, examining both daily and average well-being scores (Wray-Lake et al. 2019a), and one used a weekly assessment approach across over 300 weeks (Doerksen et al. 2014). Two articles presented findings from semi-structured interviews (Johnstone, Swingler, and Reid 2018; Bloemraad and Terriquez 2016) and one reported findings from focus groups (Ortega-Williams et al. 2020). Two studies utilized a mixed methods approach analyzing cross-sectional data and interviews (Ziersch and Baum 2004; Elias, Sudhir, and Mehrotra 2016). Of the longitudinal studies, three employed experimental designs: one two-arm randomized controlled trial (Payne, Hawley, and Morey 2020) and two laboratory-based experimental manipulations (Klar and Kasser 2009; Ballard et al. 2021). Findings from these methodologically robust experimental studies demonstrated four positive, one slightly negative, and six null relationships between civic engagement and well-being. Qualitative data, which can elicit both breadth and depth of information, suggest both mental health benefits (e.g. hopefulness, social connectedness) and drawbacks (e.g. additional stress) from participating in civic engagement.

Five key themes emerged from the literature: (1) varying associations between type of civic engagement and well-being, (2) duration and frequency of civic behaviors, (3) directionality in the civic-to-well-being pathway, (4) mediation and moderation factors affecting the civic-to-well-being pathway, and (5) civic engagement as a tool for coping with adversity or systemic oppression. Results are summarized under each theme in narrative form; complete information can be found within Tables 1 and 2.

Theme 1: type of engagement matters

As civic engagement is a broad construct, 29 studies classified engagement into specific types in order to better understand the often-nuanced relationships between engagement and well-being (Tables 1 and 2). Theme 1 consists of studies with an emphasis on type of engagement; some used a comparative approach to evaluate how different types of civic engagement relate to well-being while others used composite measures of civic engagement (where multiple types were merged to form a single construct). However, every study inherently investigated some ‘type’ of civic engagement, and so evidence from all 53 studies is included in the narrative overview of this themed section to comprehensively evaluate each type of engagement as it relates to mental health in young adults. Types under investigation included volunteerism, donating to charity, helping behaviors, pro-environmental behaviors, activism, protesting, voting, political participation, group membership, and composite measures. Volunteerism, one of the more commonly examined types of engagement examined among 18 studies, demonstrated 27 positive and 14 null relationships to well-being. In a study of 4000 young and older adults, volunteerism was associated with greater psychological well-being (Piliavin and Siegl 2007). However, in a study of younger adults in Finland (defined as 23–54-year-olds) compared with older adults (62–67-year-olds), volunteering demonstrated a non-significant relationship to happiness (Tanskanen and Danielsbacka 2016). Authors speculated that since most young adults were employed or living with children, it is plausible that volunteerism was perceived as an added stressor instead of a stress reliever. Interestingly, charity was associated with happiness among younger adults but not among older adults in this Finland study, suggesting that different forms of civic engagement may be conditioned by age (Tanskanen and Danielsbacka 2016). Similarly, a daily diary study among 276 college students reported that neither volunteering nor charity was associated with daily or average well-being levels; however, pro-environmental behaviors and helping behaviors were associated with greater well-being (Wray-Lake et al. 2019a). The authors posited that perhaps helping and pro-environmental behavior can be incorporated into daily life more efficiently, requiring less time and advanced planning.

Like volunteerism, activism also demonstrated mixed findings. Measured among 14 studies in this review, activism demonstrated 26 positive, 12 negative, and 28 null relationships to well-being (Tables 1 and 2). Activism has been linked to greater social ties in the community, feelings of empowerment, happiness, life satisfaction, self-esteem, sense of meaning, lower depression and decreased anxiety (Ballard et al. 2021; Gilster 2012; Ballard, Ni, and Brocato 2020). However, activism has also been linked to feelings of loneliness, lower daily belongingness, lower self-esteem, greater burdensomeness, and greater anxiety (Ballard, Ni, and Brocato 2020; Oosterhoff, Hill, and Slonaker 2020). In a longitudinal study of US adolescents and young adults, Ballard and colleagues (Ballard, Hoyt, and Pachucki 2019) reported that activism was associated with more high-risk health behaviors. In a cross-sectional study of US college students, activism (called ‘sociopolitical voice’) was negatively associated with well-being, although positively associated with well-being when mediated by meaning in life (Fenn et al. 2021). Some researchers have drawn distinctions between ‘conventional’ activism (e.g. contacting an elected official) and ‘high risk’ activism (e.g. getting arrested for a cause) that may differentially impact mental health outcomes; in two separate studies evaluating college students and community individuals, conventional activism was related to well-being while high risk activism was not (Klar and Kasser 2009). Thus, it is plausible that certain forms of activism (e.g. boycotting a business vs. participating in a protest that turns hostile) have different associations with one’s health.

Protesting, one specific form of activism, revealed null findings in two studies and mixed findings in one study (Tables 1 and 2). Researchers investigated adult protest participation during the Occupy Central Movement in Hong Kong, China and its relation to depressive symptoms (Ni, Li, and Pang 2016; Ni, Yao, and Leung 2020). In two studies, they found that level of direct exposure to Occupy Central, defined as the degree of participation in the protests, was not associated with depressive outcomes six months after the protests (Ni, Li, and Pang 2016) and was not associated with probable depression or post-traumatic stress disorder over a ten-year period (Ni, Yao, and Leung 2020). In Egypt, exposure to protests was associated with greater well-being among women but lower well-being among men (Liu, Modrek, and Sieverding 2019).

In this review, eight studies examined voting and electoral behaviors, or engagement with the electoral process (sometimes called political participation). Findings revealed 11 positive, four negative, and two null relationships between electoral engagement and mental health (Tables 1 and 2). In a study examining the ‘costs of politics’ among US adults, investigators reported a null relationship between voting and emotional health and a negative relationship between political participation and emotional health (Smith, Hibbing, and Hibbing 2019). A survey study among college students found a positive association between electoral participation and well-being (Fenn et al. 2021). Similarly, two separate studies by Ojeda and colleagues with US adult community samples demonstrated that voting behavior decreases as depression increases (Ojeda 2015), while improvement in depression was related to increased likelihood of voting (Ojeda and Pacheco 2017).

Eight studies used group membership as a measure of civic engagement. Findings revealed 10 positive, one negative, and six null relationships between group membership and mental health (Tables 1 and 2). Group membership encompasses belonging to any form of group affiliation including religious, recreational, social, community service or social justice-oriented organizations. Group membership often involves a strong social component, and not surprisingly, group membership was positively correlated with social well-being in a group of 835 Italian adolescents (ages 16–19) and young adults (ages 20–26) (Cicognani et al. 2015). Group membership has also been associated with self-rated health and lower levels of depression among men in both longitudinal and cross-sectional studies (Khawaja et al. 2006; Landstedt et al. 2016). While group membership is often associated with positive mental health outcomes, one study of Australian civil society groups found that there was no association, and further, qualitative data suggested poor mental health outcomes for those belonging to civic groups (Ziersch and Baum 2004). Authors noted that there may have been a potential selection bias among those who opted to participate in the qualitative data collection process, although their findings importantly highlight how engagement often comes with certain drawbacks and stressors for individuals.

Fifteen studies examined composite measures of civic engagement. Findings demonstrated 20 positive, one negative, and five null relationships with well-being (Tables 1 and 2). Measurement greatly varied; some composites included a 19-item summation of multiple types of engagement (Ochoa O’Leary and Romero 2011), asked about participation in various clubs, organizations, and activities within the past 12 months (Chan, Ou, and Reynolds 2014), or combined intentions, behaviors, and beliefs into a single score (Hayhurst 2014). Among studies that used composite measures, civic engagement was related to mental health factors such as life satisfaction, quality of life, meaning of life, and self-esteem (Chan, Ou, and Reynolds 2014; Kaplan, Salzer, and Brusilovskiy 2012; Choudhary and Gupta 2017; Alfieri, Marzana, and Cipresso 2019)

Taken together, acts of volunteerism and charity demonstrated predominantly positive relationships with well-being. Group membership studies reported positive or null relationships, with one exception. Electoral engagement and activism yielded more mixed findings, indicating the need to further explore their respective roles in health promotion. While measurement of composite civic engagement indices greatly varied, findings overall suggest a positive relationship between completing multiple types of engagement and well-being.

Theme 2: duration and frequency

The research examining typology alluded to other factors that might attenuate the civic-to-well-being pathway, including duration and frequency of civic behaviors. Six of the 53 studies reviewed include findings relevant to duration and frequency (Tables 1 and 2). As Wray-Lake, DeHaan, and colleagues (Wray-Lake et al. 2019a) proponed in their daily diary study among college students, small helping behaviors like holding the door open for someone or pro-environmental behaviors such as placing trash in a garbage can are relatively unobtrusive tasks that can be incorporated into someone’s daily lifestyle. However, as volunteerism and charity were not associated with well-being in their sample, investigators discussed the possibility that these forms may yield more long-term benefits as opposed to short-term gratification. In a longitudinal study examining the effects of college volunteerism, young adult volunteering was associated with adult volunteering, which was then positively associated with well-being in adulthood (Bowman et al. 2010). This finding suggests that early civic engagement may set the stage for later in life well-being when engagement is continued. In another study comparing long-term volunteers (volunteer at least once per month, for at least one year) and short-term volunteers (at least once per month for 6 months) in India found that long-term volunteers experienced greater well-being than short-term volunteers (Elias, Sudhir, and Mehrotra 2016). Similarly, a longitudinal study examining consistency and diversity of volunteer activities found no evidence that ‘one can get too much of a good thing’ (Piliavin and Siegl 2007).

In a study of 490 youth ages 18–29 participating in the Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong, researchers used latent class analysis to group individuals into four categories: minimal, onsite, online, and avid participation (Chan et al. 2020). Avid participators, those who engaged with greatest frequency, demonstrated higher psychological and social well-being, and stronger leadership competence (Chan et al. 2020). In another study exploring what factors may lead to flourishing among college students, student engagement with the college environment did not significantly add to the variance of mental health scores when added to regression models (Fink 2014). However, students in Living-Learning Programs that provided students with enhanced programming activities reported a greater sense of civic engagement and had higher well-being scores. Fink (Fink 2014) postulated that those immersed in environments that foster shared sense of community engagement may reap greater social and personal well-being benefits. Of course, this relationship is correlational only, as is the case with 50% of the aforementioned findings; variables of duration and frequency must be further examined to better understand their role in the larger relationship between civic engagement and well-being.

Theme 3: directionality

When examining civic engagement as a potential health promotional tool, it is crucial that investigators consider the possibility that perhaps those who already enjoy high levels of well-being are apt to be more engaged. Alternatively, it is plausible that those experiencing low levels of well-being or social disconnection may seek out civic engagement opportunities to boost their mood and connectivity (Oosterhoff, Hill, and Slonaker 2020). Five studies investigated the directionality of relationships between civic engagement and well-being (Tables 1 and 2). One such study examining pathways between civic engagement and happiness among 690 Canadian youths into early midlife found that happiness predicted civic engagement (Fang et al. 2018); investigators did not find evidence that civic engagement predicted happiness, nor a bidirectional relationship between the two. However, these results run counter to a study by Ding, Berry, and O’Brien (2015) in which civic engagement (i.e. volunteering or group membership) was somewhat predictive of well-being, while well-being did not predict civic engagement the following year. Interestingly, greater well-being predicted a decline in political participation, while political participation did not predict future well-being. Thus, it is likely that directionality may depend upon the type of engagement under investigation.

Two studies explored bidirectional relationships between civic engagement and depressive symptoms. The first (Wray-Lake et al. 2019b) found that engaging in extracurricular activities during adolescence predicted decreases in depressive symptoms during young adulthood, while political engagement predicted increases in depressive symptoms. Alternatively, depressive symptoms in adolescence predicted later decreases in voting and community engagement. These findings indicate bidirectional, negative relationships specifically between political forms of participation and mental health. In a Swedish survey of 1001 men and women across the lifespan at ages 16 (T1), 21 (T2), 30 (T3), and 42 (T4) (Landstedt et al. 2016), results showed that higher levels of civic engagement at T1 predicted lower depressive symptoms at T2 for men only. No longitudinal effects were found for women, which authors speculated may be a result of women historically engaging in more emotionally burdensome activities (Landstedt et al. 2016). Taken together, findings are inconclusive regarding directionality of the civic-to-well-being pathway; future studies should investigate how variables such as type of engagement and gender may alter directionality of this pathway.

Theme 4: mediating and moderating factors

As is evident from these studies, there are many plausible factors that either moderate or mediate the relationship between civic engagement and mental health. Factors such as age, race-ethnicity, and gender are all important constructs to include in conceptual frameworks, especially given the way in which systemic power structures may inhibit civic participation among individuals from historically marginalized backgrounds (Hope et al. 2018; Hope, Cryer-Coupet, and Stokes 2020). Of the 53 reviewed, 20 studies examined factors that attenuate the civic-to-well-being pathway (Tables 1 and 2).

Seven studies examined gender differences. In a sample of refugees living in camps in Jordan, belonging to a club or civic association (e.g. youth, women, sports, social, cultural groups) was linked to greater self-reported health among males, and non-club members were more likely to report lower levels of perceived health even after controlling for confounds (Khawaja et al. 2006). The same was true for women, but this relationship disappeared after controlling for confounds. Authors posited that in a highly patriarchal society, very few women are actively engaged in clubs and associations, and this scarcity in engagement may have limited the observed effects of civic engagement on self-rated health for this sample. However, it is important to consider that societal expectations to civically engage might not always yield positive outcomes. In a study investigating the effects of political protest exposure during the Arab Spring in Egypt, researchers found that young men were more likely to report a small decline in mental health while young women reported an improvement in mental health (Liu, Modrek, and Sieverding 2019). Researchers attributed this divergence to the increased expectations of men to more actively participate in protests, as well as other demands such as neighborhood watches. Given that some studies did not find gender differences (Fenn et al. 2021; Alfieri, Marzana, and Cipresso 2019; Fang et al. 2018) while others did (Liu, Modrek, and Sieverding 2019; Khawaja et al. 2006; Landstedt et al. 2016; Choudhary and Gupta 2017), additional work is needed to examine gender as a moderator.

Researchers have proposed the need to consider civic engagement’s indirect relationship with well-being by exploring mediational factors. In Piliavin and Siegl (2007) study comparing volunteerism among young and older adults, they found that volunteerism was no longer predictive of well-being after controlling for ‘mattering’, the concept that people acknowledge their own importance and impact in the world. Other studies have investigated mediators like sense of community, empowerment, self-efficacy, and dynamics between social well-being and emotional well-being (Fenn et al. 2021; Johnstone, Swingler, and Reid 2018; Cicognani et al. 2015; Balashov et al. 2018; Yeung, Passmore, and Packer 2012; Yeung and Towers 2013) One study of 401 Canadian university students found that greater frequency of extracurricular activity was associated with greater persistence and more positive reappraisals of adverse situations, which in turn were both associated with greater positive affect (Guilmette et al. 2019). Two studies found that participation satisfaction and perceived responsiveness of government mediated relationships between various forms of civic engagement and psychological well-being (Chan et al. 2020; Yeung and Towers 2013). These findings suggest that our appraisal of the civic engagement experience, rather than the behavior itself, may be important links between civic engagement and well-being.

In four of the reviewed studies, civic engagement served as a mediator or moderator between other predictor variables and well-being. Nicotera, Brewer, and Veeh (2015) found that among 225 first-year undergraduates, civic engagement mediated the relationship between background variables like faith and parental civic engagement and subsequent well-being. In another study of undergraduates, Ochoa O’Leary and Romero (2011) were interested in examining how the Arizona Senate Bill 1108, positioned to de-fund studies of ethnicity among federal institutions, impacted stress levels among 326 students of Mexican descent. Researchers reported that directly confronting SB1108 buffered students from the potentially negative impact of stress on their self-esteem, although activism like writing letters did not moderate relationships between stress and depressive symptoms (Ochoa O’Leary and Romero 2011). In a study of 160 Israeli participants, Kulik (2019) found that volunteering mediated the relationship between high family support/economic resources and self-esteem/meaning in life. Similarly, civic engagement was found to be a mediator between sociopolitical control and psychological well-being among university students in Hong Kong and China (Chan and Mak 2020). The authors explained that empowering this population to gain control over their social and political systems may increase civic engagement, and in turn, build a positive relationship with their society while simultaneously increasing their own psychological well-being (Chan and Mak 2020). These examples provide preliminary support for civic engagement as a potential mediational or moderation factor as opposed to an initial predictor or outcome variable.

Theme 5: coping with adversity or systemic oppression

Ten studies discussed the potential benefits of civic engagement to help individuals and communities cope with adversity or systemic oppression (Tables 1 and 2). One study reported that volunteering increased well-being among individuals following traumatic brain injury (TBI) (Payne, Hawley, and Morey 2020). Given the social and cognitive skills deficits those with TBI may experience coupled with the lack of understanding about TBI among community members, authors discussed volunteering as one strategy to enhance well-being. Similarly, Okun and colleagues (Okun et al. 2011) found a significant interaction between volunteerism and chronic health conditions on resiliency and positive affect, such that relations between resiliency/positive affect and volunteerism increased as number of chronic health conditions increased. Among young adults with serious mental illness, greater community participation was associated with increased meaning and quality of life (Kaplan, Salzer, and Brusilovskiy 2012). In another study, Hayhurst and colleagues (Hayhurst, Hunter, and Ruffman 2019) explored relationships between civic engagement, well-being, and resiliency among youth in New Zealand following the Christchurch terrorism attack. Findings showed that civic engagement was associated with greater resiliency and well-being, and authors concluded that civic engagement may help buffer against feelings of hopelessness following tragedy.

Six studies explored civic engagement as a strategy to cope with systemic forms of oppression such as race-based discrimination, income inequality, and unfair treatment of the LGBTQ+ community. Bloemraad and Terriquez (2016) surveyed Californian youths of Latinx, Black, and Asian-Pacific Islander descent from low-income communities who had participated with a community-based organization on projects like environmental advocacy work and improving school climate and anti-bullying initiatives for LGBTQ+ youth. Respondents reported a sense of social connectedness, collective self-efficacy and community well-being as a result of their participation (Bloemraad and Terriquez 2016). In New York, researchers conducted focus groups to ascertain the benefits and drawbacks of community-based organization involvement among youth of color ages 14–24 (Ortega-Williams et al. 2020). Young leaders discussed how calling out systemic forces helped them shift from inner shame to hopefulness and self-efficacy while finding social support among peers who had had similar lived experiences. Conversely, youth reported experiencing strain between this sense of hope and belonging that their organizing provided with the current reality they faced.

The literature on activism specifically for Black youth and youth of color has demonstrated inconclusive findings. Among Black college students in the US, higher levels of political activism exacerbated experiences of racial-ethnic microaggressions and related to increased stress and anxiety compared with Black students who were less politically involved (Hope et al. 2018). However, political activism mitigated the negative effect of racial-ethnic microaggressions on stress and depressive symptoms for Latinx students (Hope et al. 2018). In a study of Black individuals ages 14–29, psychological and physiological anticipation of race-related stress were both related to low-risk activism, moderated by age and racial identity (Hope, Cryer-Coupet, and Stokes 2020). Physiological anticipation was related to high-risk activism, moderated by racial identity. Authors posited that youth and young adults who understand the realities of systemic racial oppression may be more likely to take action to correct these unjust systems (Hope, Cryer-Coupet, and Stokes 2020). Taken together, findings point towards the protective role of civic engagement to buffer against poor mental health outcomes among those facing systemic injustice, but more research is needed among communities of color to make strong conclusions.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this review is the first of its kind examining relationships between civic engagement and mental health variables in a young adult population beyond strictly college samples. Findings revealed a range of themes underscoring which types of engagement are more or less closely linked to well-being, how duration and frequency of civic behavior may alter the civic engagement to well-being pathway, directionality of this pathway, potential third variables that may attenuate this pathway, and the role of civic engagement as a coping tool for those facing adversity or systemic oppression.

One of the key themes from this review is that types of engagement differentially relate to mental health variables for young adults. While volunteerism and group membership were associated with primarily positive findings, there were some exceptions. It is possible that these forms of engagement provide a more immediate sense of good will, as volunteerism and group membership often encompass a strong social component. It is also plausible that those already experiencing better mood are more inclined to participate in these forms of engagement. However, some study outcomes suggested that group membership and volunteerism may be construed as an extra time commitment, and thus, these forms of engagement may be more of an added stressor than a source of health promotion (Wray-Lake et al. 2019a; Ziersch and Baum 2004). Further, the role of activism and electoral engagement in young adult mental health continues to remain inconclusive. Several studies explored activism to foster empowerment to create change, develop specific skill competencies, and connect with community (Klar and Kasser 2009; Bloemraad and Terriquez 2016; Ortega-Williams et al. 2020; Gilster 2012; Ochoa O’Leary and Romero 2011). Still, other studies found activism to be associated with increased high-risk behaviors and poor mental health (Wray-Lake et al. 2019b; Ballard, Hoyt, and Pachucki 2019). It could be that these two are not mutually exclusive, as one can create change while still engaging in high-risk health behaviors. Activism is often challenging work that requires chronic exposure to sources of injustice or discrimination. Yet, especially for individuals who may face discrimination regardless of whether they choose to civically engage or not, actively engaging may be a viable way to cope with these life stressors (Hope, Keels, and Durkee 2016; Hope, Cryer-Coupet, and Stokes 2020). For all the above types, future research should consider the motivational forces that prompt an individual to participate. Engaging out of a position of conflict or obligation rather than engaging for social or personal benefit may drastically shift mental health outcomes (Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995; Theiss-Morse and Hibbing 2005).

In addition to type, five studies highlighted the importance of considering duration and frequency of civic behavior. As is common with most health behaviors, the greatest benefit is often achieved in moderation (Windsor, Anstey, and Rodgers 2008). For civic engagement, this may mean engaging enough to produce the desired effect while not reaching the point of overextension. Importantly, this point will differ across individuals, especially young adults who may be juggling course loads, work schedules, relationships, and parenting. Duration and frequency would then be even more important when considering how to tailor any foreseeable intervention to specific population needs. Given that half of the reviewed studies were predominantly correlational in nature, limiting any causal conclusions about duration and frequency, future studies should utilize longitudinal approaches to better assess for optimal amounts of civic engagement among young adults.

Five studies attempted to tackle the question of directionality between civic engagement and mental health. However, the directionality of this relationship remains indeterminate, and studies investigating causality are too scarce to draw conclusions in a young adult population. The research shows preliminary signs of a positive bidirectional relationship, with potential for a negative relationship between activism and well-being, but more research is needed to better solidify these findings. Given that civic engagement does not have a standard definition and measures are still being developed to appropriately capture the construct, directionality becomes even more complicated. Furthermore, outcomes of interest have differed across studies, with researchers examining mental health variables such as well-being, anxiety, resiliency, and depressive symptomology. Given the lack of definitional agreement and the multitude of outcomes explored, it can be challenging to infer causality. Moving forward, investigators might employ more randomized controlled trials or matched samples studies in their examination of civic engagement as a health behavior. Measure development is also of critical importance to refine our conceptualization and standardization of civic engagement.

Despite the many discrepancies between studies, several projects clarified the importance of mediational and moderation factors central to the relationship between engagement and well-being. Factors like mattering, empowerment, and participation satisfaction all demonstrated merit as crucial mediators while gender, age, and race-ethnicity emerged as areas for continued study. Further, studies revealed that sometimes civic engagement may serve as a mediator as opposed to the predictor or outcome of interest. This information is critical from an interventional standpoint; according to developmental cascades theory, changes in developmental domains are interactional and occur across time and context (Masten and Cicchetti 2010). Success or failure in one developmental area can have a ‘spillover’ effect onto other areas (Masten and Cicchetti 2010). In other words, civic engagement could be utilized to improve other health outcomes during the young adulthood timeframe. Researchers have examined specific ways in which civic engagement might bolster outcomes like academic performance, physical health, or reintegration back into community life (Kaplan, Salzer, and Brusilovskiy 2012; Brown, Hudson, and Chui 2017). Or engagement might be one part of broader interventions that target persistence, meaning in life, perceptions of the engagement experience, and empowerment to facilitate greater well-being. Civic engagement is a multi-faceted construct, and hence, interventions might consider encouraging certain types of engagement carefully adapted to the cultural and practical needs of a given population.

Finally, civic engagement emerged as a valuable tool to consider promoting among those coping with adversity or systemic forms of oppression. In the face of tragedy, loss, or chronic illness, civic engagement may be a buffer against feelings of hopelessness while bolstering resiliency and social connectedness (Payne, Hawley, and Morey 2020; Okun et al. 2011; Hayhurst, Hunter, and Ruffman 2019). At other times, civic engagement may be useful as a tool to combat social injustice, consistent with critical consciousness theory, which describes how oppressed people learn to analyze social conditions and devise ways to change them (Watts, Diemer, and Voight 2011). It is clear from several studies conducted with communities of color that activism can be simultaneously empowering and stressful (Hope et al. 2018; Ortega-Williams et al. 2020). This nuanced relationship between activism and mental health is critical for providers and researchers to consider before prescribing or devising any type of civic engagement related intervention. And, if certain forms of civic engagement do yield negative mental health repercussions, this information is crucial so that organizers and practitioners know to better equip young engagers with the requisite tactical, socio-emotional, and legal skills in advance of activism events. Practitioners and communities must also be prepared to provide young adults with safe spaces to process their civic engagement experiences alongside other coping tools to effectively manage the array of emotional responses these types of activities often elicit. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that the burden to change discriminatory power structures should not fall to those directly suffering from their inequity. Activism may be an empowering tool to bolster well-being among historically disenfranchised populations, but the best pathway toward well-being will be to dismantle systems creating disenfranchisement in the first place.

This review has several notable strengths and weaknesses that warrant discussion. The inclusion of international and cross-cultural studies across 14 countries increases the generalizability of findings. Similarly, studies employed diverse methodology including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches while exploring multiple types of civic engagement, which enhances the field’s overall understanding of civic engagement. However, this review has several limitations that should be noted. Though we view the cross-cultural nature of this review as a strength, it is possible (and probable) that attitudes and circumstances under which civic engagement is performed differ cross-culturally. This might then translate into differing mental health-related outcomes. The definition of ‘young adult’ as a developmental timeframe also differs cross-culturally. For this reason, studies with wider age ranges were included for review, although this approach makes it more difficult to generalize findings strictly to young adult populations. Additionally, 70% of studies strictly composed of young adults were focused on college populations. Many college students have had access to resources and support systems in place that facilitated their admission to college, making them a unique subset of the population that does not necessarily generalize to other young adults (Flanagan and Levine 2010). This literature base would benefit from more research investigating non-college populations.

The current review provides important updates for stakeholders (practitioners, researchers, policymakers) in the field of health behavior: volunteering and group membership (depending on the type of group) might be encouraged among young people to boost well-being. Activism and electoral participation warrant greater supportive services to help young adults navigate experiences that can yield both benefits and drawbacks. Greater health benefits seem to be derived with continuous participation, although stakeholders should consider the unique needs of every individual before encouraging specific frequencies. Critical gaps remain for operationally defining and measuring civic engagement and its various types. The field would also benefit from more longitudinal, randomized studies to better investigate causality of the civic-wellbeing pathway. Finally, for historically disenfranchised populations (e.g. communities of color, individuals without a college education), clarifying the benefits and burdens of civic engagement is critical to reduce health inequities.