Examining the Relationship Between Meaningful Engagement and Well-Being Across Men and Women

Abstract

While engagement in meaningful activities is associated with well-being, the influence of gender on this relationship is unknown. The study aims to (a) examine the difference between meaningful engagement and well-being for individuals who identify as men and women and (b) explore the association between engagement and well-being in men and women. In this observational study, 256 community-dwelling individuals completed meaningful engagement and well-being measures. Between-group t tests indicated no significant differences between men and women for engagement (t = 0.595, p = .552) and well-being (t = 0.818, p = .414). There were fair, positive correlations (rs = .376; p < .01) between engagement and well-being for men and moderate positive correlations (rs = .567; p < .01) between engagement and well-being for women. Self-identified gender may influence the relationship between engagement in meaningful activities and the sense of well-being it provides.

Plain Language Summary

Exploring Similarities and Differences in How Meaningful Activities Influence Well-being for Males and Females

The study examines the similarities and differences between meaningful engagement and well-being for males and females. Community-dwelling adults completed a demographic questionnaire, the Engagement in Meaningful Activities Survey (EMAS), and the World Health Organization–5 Well-being Index (WHO-5). A total of 256 people participated. There were no differences in the extent of meaningful engagement or well-being between males and females. However, females demonstrated a stronger relationship between engaging in meaningful activities and increased well-being. This indicates that females are more likely to improve their well-being by engaging in activities they find meaningful than males. Cultural and personal stereotypes influence what is considered meaningful and can consequently impact how meaningful engagement connects to well-being. Gender stereotypes are influential on cultural and personal levels and could be influencing the meaning males and females experience during engagement in certain activities. Increasing our understanding of the meaning people experience during everyday tasks can help inform occupational therapy interventions and enhance well-being as an outcome of therapy. More research is needed to further establish the reliability of validity of the EMAS in varied populations. In addition, future research should expand participant options for gender identity rather than restricting it to two choices (male, female).

Keywords

occupational engagement well-being women occupational choice

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Atler

K. E.

Eakman

A. M.

Orsi

(2018). College students’ experiences of hedonia and eudaimonia in their everyday activities. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 85, 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008417417727297

Bech

(2004). Measuring the dimensions of psychological general well-being by the WHO-5. QoL Newsletter, 32, 15–16.

Block

Croft

Schmader

(2018). Worth less? Why men (and women) devalue care-oriented careers. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1353. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01353

Borell

Mondaca

Luborsky

(2022). “Meaningful occupation”—challenges for occupational therapy research. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 29, 257–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2021.1954996

Brown

Horowitz

J. M.

Parker

Minkin

(2022). The experiences, challenges and hopes of transgender and non-binary U.S. Adults. Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C. (June 7, 2022). https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/07/the-experiences-challenges-and-hopes-of-transgender-and-nonbinary-u-s-adults/

Courtenay

W. H.

(2000). Constructions of masculinity and their influence on men’s well-being: A theory of gender and health. Social Sciences & Medicine, 50, 1385–1401. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00390-1

Di Tommaso

Wicks

Scarvell

Isbel

(2019). Experiences of occupation-based practice: An Australian phenomenological study of recently graduated occupational therapists. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 82, 412–421.

Eakman

A. M.

(2012). Measurement characteristics of the engagement in meaningful activities survey in an age-diverse sample. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 66, e20–29. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2012.001867

Eakman

A. M.

(2014). A prospective longitudinal study testing relationships between meaningful activities, basic psychological needs, and meaning in life. OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health, 34, 93–105.

10.

Eakman

A. M.

Carlson

M. E.

Clark

F. A.

(2010a). Factor structure, reliability, and convergent validity of the Engagement in Meaningful Activities Survey for older adults. OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health, 30, 111–121.

11.

Eakman

A. M.

Carlson

M. E.

Clark

F. A.

(2010b). The Meaningful Activity Participation Assessment: A measure of engagement in personally valued activities. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 70, 299–317.

12.

Ellemers

(2018). Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 275–298. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011719

13.

Garcia Roman

Gracia

(2022). Gender differences in time use across age groups: A study of ten industrialized countries, 2005-2015. PLOS ONE, 17(3), Article e0264411. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264411

14.

Goldberg

Brintnell

E. S.

Goldberg

(2002). The relationship between engagement in meaningful activities and quality of life in persons disabled by mental illness. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 18, 17–44.

15.

Graham

Pinto

(2019). Men without work: A global well-being and ill-being comparison. IZA World of Labor. https://doi.org/doi:10.15185/izawol.464

16.

Hammell

K. W.

(2004). Dimensions of meaning in the occupations of daily life. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71, 296–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/000841740407100509

17.

Hammell

K. W.

(2017). Opportunities for well-being: The right to occupational engagement. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 84, 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008417417734831

18.

Hanek

K. J.

Garcia

S. M.

(2022). Barriers for women in the workplace: A social psychological perspective. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 16, Article e12706. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12706

19.

Hitch

Pepin

(2021). Doing, being, becoming and belonging at the heart of occupational therapy: An analysis of theoretical ways of knowing. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 28, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2020.1726454

20.

Kennedy-Behr

Hatchett

(2017). Wellbeing and engagement in occupation for people with Parkinson’s disease. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 80, 745–751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308022617728645

21.

Kiepek

Beahan

Patten

Ausman

(2022). Reflecting on conceptualisations of “meaning” in occupational therapy. Cadernos Brasileiros de Terapia Ocupacional, 30, Article e3156. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1590/2526-8910.ctoARF24193156

22.

Koenig

A. M.

(2018). Comparing prescriptive and descriptive gender stereotypes about children, adults, and the elderly. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1086. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01086

23.

Liedberg

Hensing

(2011). Occupational therapy students’ choice of client activities: Does patients’ gender matter? British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 74, 277–283.

24.

Luo

Ding

Bauman

Negin

Phongsavan

(2020). Social engagement pattern, health behaviors and subjective well-being of older adults: An international perspective using WHO-SAGE survey data. BMC Public Health, 20, Article 99. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7841-7

25.

Nilsson

Lundgren

A. S.

Liliequist

(2012). Occupational well-being among the very old. Journal of Occupational Science, 19, 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2011.595894

26.

Novak

J. R.

Peak

Gast

Arnell

(2019). Associations between masculine norms and health-care utilization in highly religious, heterosexual men. American Journal of Men’s Health, 13, 1557988319856739. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988319856739

27.

Portney

L. G.

Watkins

M. P.

(2000). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice (2nd ed.). Pearson/Prentice Hall.

28.

Prentice

D. A.

Carranza

(2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066

29.

Pryzgoda

Chrysler

J. C.

(2000). Definitions of gender and sex: The subtleties of meaning. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 43, 553–569. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007123617636

30.

Qian

Fan

(2019). Men and women at work: Occupational gender composition and affective well-being in the United States. Journal of Happiness Studies, 20, 2077–2099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-018-0039-3

31.

Radomski

M. V.

Anheluk

Carroll

G. L.

Grabe

Halsten

J. W.

Kath

Kreiger

R. A.

Lunos

M. E.

Rabusch

Swenson

K. K.

Zola

(2022). Preliminary efficacy of an occupation-oriented purpose in life intervention after breast cancer. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 89, 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084174211073264

32.

Roberts

A. E. K.

Bannigan

(2018). Dimensions of personal meaning from engagement in occupations: A metasynthesis. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 85, 386–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008417418820358

33.

Schmelzer

Raina

K. D.

(2023). Meaningful engagement as a predictor of psychological well-being for adults with low income. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77(3), 7703205050. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2023.050003

34.

Sheshkin

D. J.

(2004). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures (3rd ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC.

35.

Sirin

S. R.

McCreary

D. R.

Mahalik

J. R.

(2004). Differential reactions to men and women’s gender role transgressions: Perceptions of social status, sexual orientation, and value dissimilarity. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 12, 119–132. https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1202.119

36.

Stav

W. B.

Herman

(2022). An occupation-based clinic makeover: Perceptions and experiences of occupational therapists. The Open Journal of Occupational Therapy, 10, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.15453/2168-6408.1831

37.

Swenson

Alldred

Nicholls

(2021). Doing gendered and being gendered through occupations: Transgender and non-binary experiences. British Jounal of Occupational Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1177/03080226211034422.

38.

Topp

C. W.

Østergaard

S. D.

Søndergaard

Bech

(2015). The WHO-5 Well-Being Index: A systematic review of the literature. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 84, 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1159/000376585

39.

Velozo

C. A.

(2021). Using measurement to highlight occupational therapy’s distinct value. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 75, 7406150010. https://doi.org/10.1054/ajot.2021.746001

40.

Wheatley

Bickerton

(2019). Measuring changes in subjective well-being from engagement in the arts, culture and sport. Journal of Cultural Economics, 43, 421–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-019-09342-7

41.

Zar

J. H.

(1999). Biostatistical analysis (4th ed.). Prentice Hall.