Associations of the will to live with loneliness and psychological resilience in young and middle-aged Turkish adults

Abstract

The will to live is a key motivational resource related to meaning, adaptation, and well-being. Most previous research has focused on older adults in Western countries, with limited evidence in younger populations and non-Western contexts. This study examined the relationships between the will to live, loneliness, and psychological resilience among young and middle-aged adults in Türkiye. It was hypothesized that the will to live would be negatively related to loneliness and positively related to psychological resilience. In this cross-sectional study, the sample consisted of 306 adults aged 19 to 63 years (M = 33.65, standard deviation = 7.74) in Türkiye. Data were collected using an online self-report survey including the Will to Live Scale, University of California, Los Angeles-8 Loneliness Scale, and Brief Resilience Scale. Participants were recruited via convenience and snowball sampling. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations, and two-step hierarchical regression analyses were conducted using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Demographic variables (age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level) were controlled in regression models. Correlation analyses showed the will to live was significantly and negatively associated with loneliness (r = −.44, P < .01) and positively associated with psychological resilience (r = .32, P < .01). Loneliness was negatively associated with psychological resilience (r = −.45, P < .01). Hierarchical regression analyses also indicated that the will to live was significantly related to lower loneliness (β = −.42, P < .001) and higher psychological resilience (β = .32, P < .001) beyond demographic variables. The models explained 22% of the variance in loneliness and 15% of the variance in psychological resilience. The findings suggest that higher levels of the will to live are related to lower levels of loneliness and higher levels of psychological resilience in young and middle-aged adults. The results extend prior research by demonstrating its relevance beyond older populations in a Turkish cultural context. Meaning-centered perspectives may be relevant for further investigating the relationships between the will to live, loneliness, and psychological resilience.

Key messages.

• The will to live is a significant psychological resource that is related to lower loneliness and higher psychological resilience among young and middle-aged adults.

• This study extends existing literature by demonstrating the relevance of the will to live beyond older populations and in a Turkish cultural context.

• Meaning-centered approaches may provide a basis for further investigating the relationships between the will to live, loneliness, and psychological resilience.

1. Introduction

Striving for eternity is the common inner driving force of all living beings. For humans, this force, influenced by individual and social factors, is conceptualized in the psychological literature as the will to live.^[1,2] Carmel^[3] defines the will to live as a psychological expression of the fundamental, natural, and innate instinct of all living beings. The will to live is an existential drive that reflects a commitment to life and the desire to continue living.^[2] This existential motivation can be said to parallel Freud’s life instinct.^[4] Indeed, both the will to live and the life instinct represent a fundamental energy that promotes the continuation of life. Furthermore, considering the close relationship between the will to live, meaning in life, and psychological resilience, even under the most challenging conditions, this aspect can also be associated with Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy.^[5]

Empirical studies have provided evidence suggesting that the will to live is a fundamental existential resource that plays a central role in an individual’s psychological functioning. For example, these studies have found that the will to live is negatively associated with adverse factors such as loss of function, social isolation, depression, anxiety, and shortness of breath, and is positively associated with well-being.^[6–8] In this context, comprehensive studies on older adults have revealed that a decline in the will to live is not a consequence of depressive symptoms but rather a factor that predicts the development of depressive symptoms over time (e.g., Carmel et al^[6]).

The existing literature theoretically suggests that the will to live may not be limited to individual psychological functioning, but could also be related to social processes, such as maintaining social relationships and reducing the experience of loneliness. Loneliness is defined as a subjective and negative emotional state arising from the discrepancy between desired interpersonal relationships and perceived current relationships.^[9,10] Studies emphasize that factors such as poor mental health and limited close social contact are associated with greater loneliness, whereas perceived access to cultural opportunities and a sense of belonging to the community can mitigate the risk of loneliness.^[11] In this context, the will to live has been empirically found to be negatively associated with loneliness. For instance, Carmel et al^[1] revealed that the will to live was negatively related to loneliness among individuals aged 75 and over, while Neto and Neto^[12] found a similar negative association between the will to live and workplace loneliness.

The will to live is regarded not only in relation to an individual’s social relationships but also as a fundamental existential resource associated with the motivation to cope with adversity.^[5,13,14] In this respect, the will to live conceptually overlaps with psychological resilience, defined by Masten^[15] and Southwick et al^[16] as the capacity to adapt to and recover from stressful life events. Accordingly, individuals who perceive life as meaningful and worth living may also report more effective coping strategies in the face of stressful life conditions and higher levels of psychological resilience.^[17,18] Indeed, although not directly examining the will to live, Kira et al^[19] found that the will to exist, live, and survive as a composite construct was positively associated with psychological resilience across samples from Türkiye, Syria, Egypt, the United Kingdom, and Kuwait.

1.1. The present study

Although the existing literature highlights that the will to live is a significant existential resource related to individuals’ psychological functioning^[1,5,6]studies investigating its relationships with both social and coping processes remain limited. In particular, the relationship between the will to live and key variables such as loneliness and psychological resilience, reflecting individuals’ subjective social experiences and their capacity to adapt to adversity, has not been sufficiently examined.

Moreover, a large body of research on the will to live has focused on older adult samples (e.g., Carmel et al^[6]; Gvili & Bodner,^[20]). As noted above, although the relationship between the will to live and loneliness has been examined, these studies have been conducted with individuals aged 75 and above^[1] as well as in specific contexts such as workplace loneliness (e.g., Neto & Neto,^[12]). In addition, although Kira et al^[19] did not directly investigate the will to live, they found that the will to exist, live, and survive was positively associated with psychological resilience.

Furthermore, empirical evidence regarding the relational validity of the will to live in the Turkish cultural context remains limited. Therefore, the present study aims to examine the associations between the will to live, loneliness, and psychological resilience among young and middle-aged adults in Türkiye. Accordingly, the following hypotheses were tested:

H1: Loneliness would be significantly associated with psychological resilience.

H2: The will to live would be significantly negatively associated with loneliness after controlling for age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level.

H3: The will to live would be significantly positively associated with psychological resilience after controlling for age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level.

2. Methods

2.1. Procedure

A cross-sectional design was used in this study. After obtaining approval from the Agri Ibrahim Cecen University Ethics Committee (reference number: E.105131), data were collected between January and February 2025 in Türkiye. Participants were recruited using a convenience and snowball sampling method via an online questionnaire created with Google Forms. Potential participants were invited to participate in the study through various recruitment channels, including short message service, WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram. The survey link was initially distributed through the researchers’ networks, and participants were encouraged to share the link with other eligible adults, thus facilitating snowball sampling. The online survey was open to adults residing throughout Türkiye. Since the survey was distributed using a convenience and snowball sampling strategy, the total number of invited participants was unknown. Therefore, an approximate response rate could not be computed. All eligible participants (N = 306) were included in the analyses. Several strategies were employed to minimize potential sources of bias, such as providing anonymity and confidentiality to mitigate social desirability bias and standardizing data collection by using the same self-report scales for all participants. Completing the measures took approximately 5 minutes.

2.2. Participants

All participants provided informed consent prior to taking part in the study. No specific exclusion criteria were applied, other than incomplete responses and being under the age of 18 years. To determine the required sample size, an a priori power analysis was run via G*Power 3.1. Based on an effect size of f² = .15, an alpha level of .05, a statistical power of .95, and 6 predictors, the analysis revealed that a minimum sample size of 146 participants was needed. The final sample (N = 306) exceeded this requirement by more than twofold, showing adequate statistical power.

Therefore, the sample consisted of 306 young and middle-aged adults residing in Türkiye. Slightly more than half of the participants were female (55.2%). Participants’ ages ranged from 19 to 63 (M = 33.65, standard deviation = 7.74). Of the participants, 150 (49.0%) were married, 139 (45.4%) were single, and 17 (5.6%) were divorced or widowed. The majority held an undergraduate degree (59.2%), followed by a postgraduate degree (23.2%) and a high school degree (17.6%). Regarding income level, 24 (7.8%) participants were from low-income households, 245 (80.1%) from middle-income households, and 37 (12.1%) from high-income households.

2.3. Measures

2.3.1. The will to live scale

The Will to Live Scale, developed by Carmel^[21] is a self-report measure and consists of 5 items. An example item is: “In comparison to people your age, how would you evaluate your will to live?” The scale is rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale (0 = I have no will to live, 5 = very strong). Higher scores on the scale indicate higher levels of will to live. Previous studies have reported that the Will to Live Scale has strong internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from.82 to.93 (e.g., Carmel^[21]; Çağiş,^[22]). The scale, adapted into Turkish by Çağiş,^[22] yielded a Cronbach’s alpha of.87 in this study.

2.3.2. The university of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) loneliness scale

The UCLA Loneliness Scale^[23] is widely used to measure loneliness. Hays and DiMatteo^[24] developed a short form of the scale. The UCLA-8 is a self-report measure consisting of 8 items. An example item is: “People are around me, but not with me.” The scale is rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = never, 4 = often). The scale was adapted into Turkish by Yildiz and Duy^[25] indicates good reliability and validity across different cultures (e.g., Asnani et al^[26]). In the current study, Cronbach’s alpha was.79.

2.3.3. The brief resilience scale

The Brief Resilience Scale by Smith et al^[27] assesses individuals’ ability to bounce back from stress. The scale consists of 6 items (e.g., “I tend to bounce back quickly after hard times”) and is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Higher scores on the scale indicate greater levels of psychological resilience. The Brief Resilience Scale was adapted into Turkish by Doğan^[28] and has good psychometric properties across cultures (e.g., Rodríguez-Rey et al^[29]). In this study, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.77.

2.4. Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were examined before the main hypotheses were tested. Skewness and kurtosis, along with their cutoff points (−2, +2), were used to assess the assumption of normality.^[30] To evaluate the potential for common method bias associated with the use of self-report scales, Harman’s single-factor test was carried out. It should be noted that Harman’s single-factor test provides only a preliminary diagnostic indication and cannot conclusively eliminate the possibility of common method bias. All items from the study scales were entered simultaneously into a principal component analysis without rotation. The first component accounted for 33.10% of the total variance, which was below the commonly used 50% threshold, indicating that common method bias did not considerably affect the findings.^[31,32] Subsequently, Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient was examined for the internal reliability estimates of the scales. Pearson’s correlation analysis was carried out to reveal the relationships between the variables. Then, to test the main hypotheses, 2 hierarchical regression analyses, each consisting of 2 steps, were run. The will to live was entered as the independent variable, while loneliness and psychological resilience were examined as the respective dependent variables. Moreover, age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level were controlled for in the regression models. All continuous variables were treated as continuous in line with their scale scores, and no categorical grouping was carried out for these variables, whereas gender, marital status, educational level, and income level were analyzed as categorical variables. There were no missing data because all items were required in the online questionnaire. All analyses were conducted with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20 for Windows.

3. Results

Descriptive statistics indicated that skewness and kurtosis values were within acceptable limits, ranging from −0.52 to 0.57.^[30] The internal consistency coefficients of the scales ranged between α = .77 and α = .87 (see Table 1). The will to live was significantly and negatively correlated with loneliness (r = −.44, P < .01) and significantly and positively correlated with psychological resilience (r = .32, P < .01). Loneliness was also significantly and negatively correlated with psychological resilience (r = −.45, P < .01). All effect sizes were of medium magnitude.^[33]

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alphas, and correlations of the study variables (N = 306).

Variable	Descriptive statistics					Correlations
	Mean	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis	α	1	2	3
1. Will to live	3.16	0.98	–0.52	–0.25	.87	–	–.44*	.32*
2. Loneliness	1.77	0.58	0.57	–0.31	.79		–	–.45*
3. Psychological resilience	3.22	0.64	–0.20	0.15	.77			–

SD = standard deviation, α = Cronbach alpha.

^*. P < .01.

Following the preliminary analyses, 2 hierarchical multiple regression analyses were run to investigate the associations of the will to live with loneliness and psychological resilience after controlling for sociodemographic factors (see Table 2, Table 3 and Fig. 1). In each regression analysis, age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level were entered into the analysis in Step 1, while the will to live was entered in Step 2.

Table 2.

Hierarchical regression analysis predicting loneliness from the will to live.

Predictor	Model 1						Model 2
	B	SE	β	t	P	95% CI	B	SE	β	t	P	95% CI
Age	–0.01	0.01	–0.02	–0.34	.737	(–0.010, 0.007)	0.01	0.01	0.03	0.57	.571	(–0.006, 0.010)
Gender	0.21	0.07	0.18	3.13	.002	(0.076, 0.334)	0.13	0.06	0.11	2.16	.031	(0.012, 0.250)
Marital status	0.06	0.06	0.07	1.14	.253	(–0.045, 0.171)	–0.01	0.05	–0.01	–0.16	.871	(–0.108, 0.092)
Educational level	–0.12	0.06	–0.13	–2.15	.032	(–0.231,–0.010)	–0.09	0.05	–0.10	–1.79	.074	(–0.193, 0.009)
Income level	–0.07	0.08	–0.05	–0.84	.401	(–0.234, 0.094)	–0.06	0.08	–0.04	–0.74	.460	(–0.206, 0.093)
Will to live	–	–	–	–	–	–	–0.24	0.03	–0.42	–7.80	.000	(–0.303,–0.181)
Model fit indices
F				4.18						14.31
R2				.07						.22
Adjusted R2				.05						.21
ΔR2				–						.15

Gender was coded as 1 = female and 2 = male; marital status was coded as 1 = married, 2 = single, and 3 = divorced/widowed; educational level was coded as 1 = high school, 2 = undergraduate, and 3 = postgraduate; income level was coded as 1 = low, 2 = middle, and 3 = high.

B = unstandardized coefficient, CI = confidence interval, SE = standard error, β = standardized coefficient.

Table 3.

Hierarchical regression analysis predicting psychological resilience from the will to live.

Predictor	Model 1						Model 2
	B	SE	β	t	P	95% CI	B	SE	β	t	P	95% CI
Age	0.01	0.01	0.12	1.98	.048	[0.000, 0.019]	0.01	0.01	0.08	1.39	.166	[–0.003, 0.016]
Gender	0.03	0.07	0.02	0.42	.676	[–0.112, 0.173]	0.09	0.07	0.07	1.32	.188	[–0.045, 0.230]
Marital status	0.03	0.06	0.03	0.53	.594	[–0.087, 0.152]	0.09	0.06	0.09	1.56	.119	[–0.024, 0.208]
Educational level	0.22	0.06	0.22	3.53	.000	[0.097, 0.342]	0.20	0.06	0.20	3.30	.001	[0.079, 0.312]
Income level	–0.05	0.09	–0.03	–0.49	.628	[–0.226, 0.137]	–0.06	0.09	–0.04	–0.64	.523	[–0.229, 0.117]
Will to live	–	–	–	–	–	–	0.20	0.04	0.32	5.66	.000	[0.132, 0.273]
Model fit indices
F				3.71						8.75
R2				.06						.15
Adjusted R2				.04						.13
ΔR2				–						.09

Gender was coded as 1 = female and 2 = male; marital status was coded as 1 = married, 2 = single, and 3 = divorced/widowed; educational level was coded as 1 = high school, 2 = undergraduate, and 3 = postgraduate; income level was coded as 1 = low, 2 = middle, and 3 = high.

B = unstandardized coefficient, CI = confidence interval, SE = standard error, β = standardized coefficient.

Figure 1.

Hierarchical regression models depicting the predictive effects of will to live on loneliness and psychological resilience after controlling for age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level.

The results of the hierarchical regression analysis in which loneliness was considered the dependent variable revealed that Model 1 was significant [F(5, 300) = 4.18, P < .01, R² = .07]. Age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level explained 7% of the variance in loneliness. Only gender (β = .18, P < .01) and educational level (β = −.13, P < .05) were significantly related to loneliness. Model 2, in which the will to live was entered, was also significant (F[6, 299] = 14.31, P < .001, R² = .22). In Model 2, gender remained significantly related to loneliness (β = .11, P < .05), whereas the relationship between educational level and loneliness was no longer statistically significant (β = −.10, P > .05). More importantly, the will to live accounted for additional variance in loneliness beyond the effects of age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level (β = −.42, P < .001).

The findings of the second hierarchical regression analysis, in which psychological resilience was considered as the dependent variable, indicated that Model 1 was significant (F[5, 300] = 3.71, P < .01, R² = .06). Model 1 accounted for 6% of the variance in psychological resilience. Both age (β = .12, P < .05) and educational level (β = .22, P < .001) were positively related to psychological resilience. Model 2 was also significant (F[6, 299] = 8.75, P < .001, R² = .15). Age was no longer significantly related to psychological resilience (β = .08, P > .05), whereas educational level remained significantly related to psychological resilience (β = .20, P < .01). The will to live made a significant unique contribution to the explained variance in psychological resilience, accounting for an additional 9% beyond the effects of age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level. The will to live was significantly and positively related to psychological resilience (β = .32, P < .001). Both hierarchical regression analyses revealed that higher levels of will to live were related to lower levels of loneliness and higher levels of psychological resilience (see Fig. 1).

4. Discussion

In the current study, the associations of the will to live with loneliness and psychological resilience among Turkish young and middle-aged adults were examined. The results revealed that the will to live was significantly and negatively related to loneliness and significantly and positively related to psychological resilience, even after controlling for age, gender, marital status, educational level, and income level. These findings generally support the relevant literature, which emphasizes that the will to live is associated with social and psychological adaptation processes.^[1,5]

More specifically, the finding that the will to live was negatively related to loneliness can be interpreted in light of theoretical approaches addressing social bonding processes. In particular, Baumeister and Leary^[34] propose that individuals’ tendency to form meaningful and enduring social bonds is a fundamental psychological need. Similarly, self-determination theory emphasizes that the satisfaction of relatedness, one of the basic psychological needs, is essential for optimal psychological functioning.^[35] In this context, individuals who perceive life as meaningful may be more motivated to invest in and maintain social relationships. Accordingly, the relationship between the will to live and lower levels of loneliness may reflect greater engagement with social connections among individuals who perceive their lives as meaningful. Moreover, a limited number of studies have also reported findings consistent with the present study, demonstrating a negative relationship between the will to live and loneliness (e.g., Carmel et al^[1]; Neto & Neto,^[12]).

However, this negative relation should not necessarily be interpreted as unidirectional, as experiences of loneliness may also be related to a lower will to live. Supporting the possibility of reciprocal relationships between related constructs, He et al^[36] demonstrated bidirectional longitudinal relationships between loneliness and the presence of meaning among Chinese adolescents, with greater loneliness predicting lower subsequent presence of meaning and stronger presence of meaning predicting lower subsequent loneliness. Although presence of meaning is conceptually distinct from the will to live, the 2 constructs share a focus on individuals’ sense of meaning and purpose,^[5] making this finding relevant to understanding the potential reciprocal relationship between loneliness and the will to live.

On the other hand, the present findings demonstrated that the will to live was positively related to psychological resilience. This finding is in line with theoretical approaches that describe stress coping and adaptation processes. Psychological resilience refers to individuals’ capacity to adapt to and recover from challenging experiences as a result of the interaction between individual and environmental protective factors.^[15,16] In this context, the will to live and active coping processes may represent related aspects of psychological adaptation in the face of aversive life events, as motivation to sustain life and the capacity to cope with adversity may be closely related. In addition, the broaden-and-build theory suggests that positive emotions such as love, interest, and joy broaden individuals’ thought and action repertoires and contribute to the development of long-term psychological resources.^[37,38] The sense of meaning and purpose embedded in the will to live may be related to processes underlying psychological resilience.

At the same time, the positive relationship described above should not necessarily be interpreted as unidirectional. Psychological resilience may also be related to the will to live, as individuals’ capacity to adapt to adversity may be related to their motivation to sustain life. Recent studies on the relationship between meaning in life and psychological resilience has similarly highlighted that these constructs may be linked in both directions, noting that psychological resilience may also contribute to meaning in life.^[39] Although this evidence concerns meaning in life rather than the will to live directly, it suggests that psychological resilience may also be relevant to other aspects of individuals’ existential functioning, including their will to live. Thus, the positive relationship found in this study may reflect an interplay between existential motivation and adaptive capacity.

The relationships found between the will to live, loneliness, and psychological resilience can also be considered in light of Frankl’s existential perspective. Indeed, Frankl^[13] suggests that the pursuit of meaning in life is closely related to individuals’ ability to maintain psychological integrity even under challenging conditions. The will to live is regarded not only as a survival instinct but also as a reflection of the meaning and purpose individuals attribute to their lives.^[5] In this context, the will to live, social relationships, and coping with difficulties may represent interconnected aspects of broader psychological adaptation, with their relationships to loneliness and psychological resilience potentially being dynamic rather than unidirectional.

4.1. Implications

The present study provides some theoretical and practical implications. One of the contributions of this study is that it provides evidence that the will to live is not limited to older adults and may also be relevant among young and middle-aged adults. Although the will to live has predominantly been examined in older age groups in the existing literature (e.g., Carmel et al^[6]; Gvili & Bodner,^[20]), the present findings broaden the empirical basis for understanding the correlates of the will to live by indicating its relationships with both social and psychological adaptation variables, namely loneliness and psychological resilience, in young and middle-aged adults.

The relevant literature has highlighted the relevance of the will to live to psychological functioning, particularly in clinical and end-of-life samples. Studies conducted with end-of-life patients have revealed that higher levels of the will to live are positively associated with life satisfaction, happiness, and purpose in life; and negatively associated with the wish to die, suicidal intent, and depressive symptoms.^[40] The findings of the current study suggest that the will to live may be relevant to psychological functioning not only in clinical contexts but also in the general population. From this perspective, the will to live may be considered a motivational construct that is relevant to both social and psychological adaptation, as represented in loneliness and psychological resilience. Accordingly, in counseling and psychotherapy processes, individuals’ sense of meaning in life and hope may represent potentially relevant areas of intervention when addressing loneliness and psychological resilience. In particular, existential approaches and meaning-centered interventions that address the will to live may have relevance for social relationships and psychological functioning, although their effectiveness in reducing loneliness and enhancing psychological resilience remains to be investigated in intervention studies.^[5,13]

The will to live literature has predominantly been based on studies carried out in specific cultural contexts such as Israel (e.g., Carmel et al^[1,6]) and Canada (e.g., Chochinov et al^[7,8]). This has led to limited evidence regarding the cross-cultural relevance of the will to live. The present study extends this literature by focusing on the will to live in the Turkish cultural context, which may provide a relevant context for understanding the interplay between relational connectedness and personal autonomy.^[41]

Self-determination theory suggests that relatedness, defined as the need to feel connected to and cared for by others, is a basic psychological need shared across individuals.^[35] However, the ways in which relatedness is experienced and incorporated into the self may vary across cultural contexts. This distinction is represented in cultural perspectives on the self, which differentiate between more independent and interdependent self-construals. In interdependent self-construals, interpersonal relationships and group memberships tend to be central to individuals’ sense of self.^[42] In this broader cultural perspective, Kağitçibaşi^[41] proposed the “autonomous-related self” in the Turkish cultural context to characterize the coexistence of relational connectedness and personal autonomy.

Within such a cultural context, interpersonal relationships may be particularly relevant to psychological functioning, because cultural orientations can shape how individuals experience and interpret their relationships with others.^[43] Accordingly, the centrality of relational connectedness may provide a relevant context for understanding the relationship between the will to live and loneliness in the Turkish cultural context. Given that the will to live is closely related to individuals’ sense of meaning and purpose,^[5] its relationship with social connectedness may also have implications for broader existential and psychological functioning. Similarly, relational resources may be relevant to individuals’ capacity to adapt to adversity,^[15] representing a possible context for understanding the relationship between the will to live and psychological resilience. Against this cultural background, the current findings reveal that the will to live is related to both loneliness and psychological resilience among Turkish young and middle-aged adults, thereby extending existing studies on the construct beyond the cultural contexts in which it has predominantly been examined.

4.2. Limitations and future direction

As in almost all studies, the present study also has some basic limitations. First, although the will to live is commonly conceptualized in the literature as a core existential motive and an antecedent psychological resource,^[1,5] the cross-sectional design of the current study limits causal interpretations and the determination of the direction of relationships between variables. Therefore, although the findings indicate relationships between the will to live, loneliness, and psychological resilience, they do not provide information about the temporal ordering or directionality of these relationships. Longitudinal studies are needed to clarify the temporal ordering of these relationships, whereas experimental studies would be required to provide stronger evidence regarding their causal nature.

Second, the fact that the study was based on self-report data collected at a single time point may have increased the risk of social desirability and common method bias. Given that the variables examined in the study are subjective psychological constructs, participants’ responses may have been influenced by self-report biases, including the tendency to present themselves in a socially desirable manner. Accordingly, future studies should consider incorporating multiple data sources (e.g., behavioral measures, informant reports) to reduce the potential influence of common method bias and provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the relationships found in this study.

Third, the participant group consisted of young and middle-aged Turkish adults and was recruited using a snowball sampling strategy. As a non-probability sampling method, snowball sampling may introduce selection bias because recruitment proceeds through participants’ social networks, which may result in some individuals being more likely to be included than others.^[44] This may limit the external validity of the findings, and caution is therefore warranted when generalizing the results beyond the characteristics of the present sample. Future studies using probability-based sampling strategies and more diverse samples would help further evaluate the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, because this study employed snowball sampling, the response rate could not be calculated, which introduces potential uncertainties regarding sample selection.

Finally, this study examined the relationship of the will to live only with loneliness and psychological resilience. However, other psychological factors that may help explain or contextualize these associations were not considered. For instance, meaning in life could be examined as potential mediators of the relationships between the will to live and loneliness and psychological resilience. Meaning in life may be particularly relevant as a potential mediator because the will to live is conceptually linked to individuals’ sense of meaning and purpose.^[5] Moreover, previous research has revealed that the will to live explains additional variance in life satisfaction and flourishing beyond meaning in life,^[22] suggesting that, although the 2 constructs are conceptually related, they may capture distinguishable aspects of psychological functioning. Therefore, future research could focus on whether meaning in life represents 1 pathway through which the will to live is related to broader psychological functioning.

Hope may also be worth examining in relation to the will to live. Hockley^[45] conceptually discussed hope and the will to live as closely related experiences in the context of palliative care. Therefore, future research could examine the extent to which these related constructs are related to other indicators of psychological functioning and whether they reflect distinct patterns of relationship with such outcomes.

Future research could examine whether self-construal moderates the relationships between the will to live and loneliness and psychological resilience. In particular, the relationship between the will to live and loneliness may be stronger among individuals with a more relational or interdependent self-construal than among those with a more independent self-construal, because interpersonal relationships may play a more central role in the sense of self among individuals with a more relational or interdependent self-construal.^[42]

It is important to examine whether self-construal moderates the relationship between the will to live and psychological resilience. This possibility is particularly relevant given that social relationships and supportive resources play a central role in psychological resilience processes,^[15] while relational self-construal may shape the extent to which individuals benefit from social support, with social support being particularly beneficial for individuals with higher relational self-construal.^[46]

Taken together, mediation and moderation analyses, particularly when carried out within longitudinal and cross-lagged designs, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms, temporal dynamics, and boundary conditions underlying the relationships found in this study.

5. Conclusions

The present study demonstrates that the will to live is significantly associated with both social and psychological functioning among young and middle-aged adults in Türkiye. The findings indicate that higher levels of the will to live are associated with lower levels of loneliness and higher levels of psychological resilience, even after controlling for relevant sociodemographic factors. These results extend previous research, which has primarily focused on older adults and clinical populations, by suggesting that the will to live is relevant to social and psychological functioning across different developmental stages and in a Turkish cultural context. The findings further highlight the potential relevance of the will to live as a psychological resource in understanding individuals’ experiences of loneliness and psychological resilience.

From a practical perspective, the present findings highlight the potential relevance of the will to live in psychological interventions, particularly given its conceptual relationship with individuals’ sense of meaning, purpose, and hope, and its associations with loneliness and psychological resilience. Although the cross-sectional design prevents causal conclusions, the findings suggest that the will to live may reflect a potentially relevant focus for prevention and intervention programs aimed at enhancing psychological well-being. Future longitudinal and cross-cultural studies are needed to clarify the mechanisms underlying these relationships and to investigate whether factors such as social support, meaning in life, and hope help explain the relationship between the will to live and psychological adjustment.

Acknowledgments

The authors affirm that no generative AI was used in the creation of the manuscript’s scientific content. During the preparation of this work, ChatGPT 5 was employed solely to enhance grammar and readability. All text generated was carefully reviewed and edited by the authors, who take full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and final content of the published article.

Author contributions

Conceptualization: Zafer Güney Çağiş.

Funding acquisition: Juan Gómez-Salgado.

Investigation: Zafer Güney Çağiş.

Methodology: Zafer Güney Çağiş.

Supervision: Murat Yildirim.

Validation: Murat Yildirim, Samet Makas, Farzana Ashraf, Juan Gómez-Salgado.

Writing – original draft: Zafer Güney Çağiş, Murat Yildirim.

Writing – review & editing: Zafer Güney Çağiş, Nihat Curun, Mehmet Emin Şakar, Gülçin Güler Öztekin, Samet Makas, Farzana Ashraf, Murat Yildirim, Juan Gómez-Salgado.