Unveiling the royal road to happiness: the predictive role of psychological hardiness, mediated by vitality and materialistic values

ABSTRACT

The quest for happiness is highly esteemed in every culture. Based on the theory of the positive activity model, the current study examined the role of psychological hardiness in happiness among youth. The study also investigated the parallel mediating role of vitality and materialistic values in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. Data were collected from 414 youths selected through purposive sampling techniques. The variables of the study were measured through standardized instruments. Findings generated through structural equation modelling with the maximum likelihood estimation technique revealed that psychological hardiness was a significant predictor of happiness. Additionally, vitality and materialistic values partially mediated the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. The present study is one of the first to include vitality and materialistic values as a parallel intermediary mechanism to explain the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. Implications of the study are discussed in light of the study findings.

KEYWORDS:

• Psychological hardiness
• vitality
• materialistic values
• happiness
• youth

Introduction

Achieving happiness is the primary pursuit of every human’s activity or deed. In its simplest form, happiness can be understood as more positive life experiences, less negative life experiences, and life satisfaction (Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2004). However, life is not always a bed of roses, and every human being gets to face their share of ups and downs. It is relatively easier to maintain a state of happiness during the ups of life, but it is during the downs that we face hardships. It is during these times that our sense of resilience and hardiness determines our ability to cope and bounce back in the face of adversity and challenges. Psychological hardiness is relevant to thrive in this ever-changing dynamic of human life and has many implications for an individual’s adjustment and happiness (S. R. Maddi, 2004). It is an expression of strong personality traits, such as the ability to adapt to daily life in the face of stressful and difficult life events, the ability to overcome traumatic threats without any deterioration in health, and the ability to fulfill one’s duties and responsibilities despite challenging circumstances (Altınsoy & Aypay, 2023). Although everyone risks being affected by stressful or unpleasant circumstances, a psychologically hardy individual’s perception of challenging circumstances as opportunities through various coping mechanisms leads to happiness and a more positive functioning state (Tedeschi & Moore, 2021).

In the present times, the constantly evolving nature of human existence and the high penetration of social media among youngsters is marked by an excessive emphasis on materialistic ideals. This rampant culture of overemphasizing materialistic values has led to poor life satisfaction, decreased well-being, financial imprudence, and extravagant spending (Christopher & Schlenker, 2004; Dittmar, 2005; Dittmar et al., 2014; Richins, 2004). Materialistic values can be defined as the extent to which an individual gives importance to accumulating money and possessions and aims to acquire more money, status, and possessions (Kasser & Ryan, 1993; Richins & Dawson, 1992). Materialism holds implications for individual happiness as a high materialistic tendency diminishes happiness (Alexander & Ussher, 2012; Kasser & Ahuvia, 2002).

Rather than giving misplaced importance to materialistic ideals, leading life with excitement and energy, not taking any half measure, and approaching life as an adventure, not a burden, characterizes life full of vitality. In the current milieu, youngsters are so overburdened with information and work that people approach most activities halfway or half-heartedly. Peterson and Seligman (2004) defined an individual with vitality as a person whose liveliness and spirit are evident in his/her personal efficiency and day-to-day activities and infectiously influence and energize other individuals around them. It represents a form of psychological energy that enhances the ability to engage in value-driven actions and boost productivity. This heightened psychological energy has been correlated with increased positive emotions, enhanced resilience, and improved overall psychological well-being and functioning (Juhl & Routledge, 2015; Ryan & Frederick, 1997).

The transition to young adults from adolescence is usually marred with many challenges, and the phase is traditionally regarded as a crisis age with the desire to be independent, successful, and assertive in their peer group leading to various kinds of difficulties and impaired behaviour (Morinaj & Hascher, 2018). In India, the age range commonly considered for defining ‘youth’ typically spans from 15 to 29 years. This definition is in line with the United Nations’ World Youth Report, which defines youth as individuals aged 15 to 24, with some countries, including India, extending the upper limit to 29 years (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2008).

To properly handle the life demands of young adults, the development of psychological hardiness as an adaptation resource and vitality as psychological energy with a positive feeling of aliveness and energy, as well as leading life emphasizing intrinsic goals of growth and betterment whilst not falling into the trap of unrestrained materialism, becomes very important as it is responsible for facilitating the happiness of young adults (Kasser, 2006; Malkin et al., 2019; Pradhan & Jandu, 2023). Engaging oneself in an activity that fosters autonomous behaviour triggers feelings of subjective vitality, which further paves way for happiness among young adults. Hence, for a better conceptual understanding of how psychological hardiness translates to happiness, the current study aims to investigate the mediating role of vitality and materialistic values in the above-mentioned relationship. The study positions itself in the context of the Indian youth, as firstly, psychological hardiness is perceived as a personality style that holds significance for youngsters’ mental health and happiness (S. R. Maddi, 2004). Secondly, in the current millennia, youngsters are more prone to experience stress, volatility, and issues related to mental health (Meghrajani et al., 2023). Lastly, the majority of the samples were college-going students, and life at college can be exciting as well as demanding, excruciating, and complex due to various reasons such as high-pressure demands of excellence in various fields, maintaining a fine balance between study and life, and various personal and financial demands (Karyotaki et al., 2020).

Thus, the current study examines the role of psychological hardiness in improving the young adults’ happiness. The happiness experienced during youth age can forecast future well-being and life contentment. Those who report elevated happiness levels during adolescence commonly exhibit enhanced subjective well-being and life satisfaction in adulthood (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). Investigating psychological hardiness, vitality, and materialistic values in the youth may further advance the body of knowledge on happiness.

Literature review

Theoretical framework

Theoretically, the study draws insight from the Positive Activity Model (Lyubomirsky & Layous, 2013). The positive activity model states that as people perform positive activities, they become happier. Indulgence in positive activities, such as living life with vigour and enthusiasm, leads to enhanced positive emotions, positive thought patterns, positive behaviours, and need satisfaction, all of which improve the happiness and well-being of an individual (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Through its different motivational and attitudinal factors, psychological hardiness fosters a sense of optimism or efficacy regarding one’s life, leading to happiness (S. R. Maddi, 2004). A psychologically hardy individual has a sense of control over their life, which leads to the experience of positive energy, a sense of autonomy and integration, and self-actualization, which in turn leads to the perception of happiness (Deci & Ryan, 1991; Ryan & Frederick, 1997). The experience of vitality corresponds to the energy perceived as arising from the self, i.e. the internal perceived locus of control, which in turn is an optimistic attributional style enhancing happiness among the individual.

Overemphasizing materialism is viewed as the dark side of human behaviour (Hirschman, 1991), and excessive indulgence in it harms the individual’s happiness and well-being (Dittmar et al., 2014). Based on the theoretical backdrop of the positive activity model, the current research tries to explain how the subjective perception of vitality and materialistic values can act as an intermediary mechanism to explain the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness.

Psychological hardiness and happiness

Psychological hardiness as a personality trait refers to the individual ability to manage and deal with stressful life events using coping strategies that turn an unfavourable situation into learning opportunities (Bartone, 1999). This personality style was first coined by Suzanne C. Kobasa in 1979, and it consists of three components, i.e. commitment, control, and challenge. Commitment, refers to individual identification with the work they are doing. Control refers to individual belief in how much they can control life events, and finally, challenge refers to an individual tendency to perceive stressful life events as an opportunity to grow.

Individuals high on psychological hardiness are called Type-H personalities and are characterized by enhanced well-being, better coping mechanisms, social support, and proper adjustment to their environment (Duan, 2010; Eschleman et al., 2010; Liang, 2004; S. R. Maddi & Khoshaba, 1994).

Yağan and Kaya (2022) found a significant positive relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. Psychological hardiness dimensions, i.e. control, commitment, and challenge, also showed a significant positive relationship with happiness.

Psychological hardiness leads to happiness by bringing a new perspective towards a stressful situation, perceiving it as an opportunity for growth and development (Kennison, 2022). Similarly, DeAlmeida and Mattos (2022) reported that individuals who can quickly adapt to changes are proactive to situational demands and possess coping skills that lead to health and happiness. In their post-traumatic growth model, Altınsoy and Aypay (2023) stated that psychological hardiness and happiness-increasing strategies are positively related to each other.

Abdollahi et al. (2014) concluded that psychological hardiness is a protective factor against stressful circumstances and a facilitating factor for happiness in nurses. Psychological hardiness positively predicts happiness, life satisfaction, and mental and physical health (Cunningham & De La Rosa, 2008; Delahaij et al., 2010; Schreurs et al., 2010). Based on the above literature, the following hypothesis was formulated:

H1:

Psychological hardiness will positively predict Happiness.

Vitality as a mediator

Vitality is a fuel available to everybody to fulfill the demands of everyday life (Lavrusheva, 2020). It does not simply mean the presence of physical energy but also relates to enthusiasm and spirit (Ryan & Frederick, 1997). Lavrusheva (2020) conceptualized vitality through five major characteristics, i.e. ‘subjectivity,’ ‘positivity’, ‘fluctuation,’ ‘adaptivity,’ and ‘simultaneous involvement of psychological and physiological energy.’ It is an individual’s subjective positive perception of aliveness and is associated with positive constructs such as happiness, enthusiasm, and euphoria (Hoegh & Bourgeois, 2002; Ryan & Frederick, 1997). Vitality, through its fluctuating characteristics, can be renewed, revived, and restored (Rozanski & Kubzansky, 2005) and further leads to the development of positive coping resources that can be employed or managed to perform intentional behaviours (Ryan & Frederick, 1997).

A thorough review of past research brings to attention the dearth of sufficient studies that explored the relationship between psychological hardiness and vitality. Through its control, commitment, and challenge, psychological hardiness provides us with a new perspective to perceive stressful situations as an opportunity to learn. Through this cognitive restructuring, individuals perceive life with more vigour and enthusiasm, leading to enhanced happiness and well-being. Peterson and Seligman (2004) reported that vitality is one of the most paramount strengths and correlates highly with happiness and well-being. Vitality is thought to be more directly related to the ‘eudaimonic’ aspect of well-being, which emphasizes a way of life that is inherently good, consistent with human nature, and fulfilling of one’s virtuous potentials (Deci & Ryan, 2008). Vitality can foster happiness and well-being outcomes as it is one of the indicators of ‘life force’ for it refers to the ability of an individual to thrive or lead a life with self-fulfilment (Yu et al., 2023). As per the Self-Determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 2008), vitality is one of the central determinants of happiness and well-being as a life full of vigour and enthusiasm leads to the fulfilment of innate psychological needs of autonomy, relatedness, and competence. Individuals with higher levels of vitality have been found possessing enhanced levels of happiness and positive affect (Wizior, 2020).

Individuals with psychologically hardy personalities believe they can control the critical events in their lives and initiate and regulate action. Psychological hardiness is characterized by a sense of control and commitment towards life through which an individual approaches life with a sense of energy, spirit, and vigour leading to greater happiness. On the backdrop of the above literature, the second hypothesis of the study was formulated:

H2:

Vitality will complementarily mediate the relationship between Psychological hardiness and Happiness.

Materialistic values as a mediator

The two major conceptualizations of materialism come from the work Belk (1985) and Richins and Dawson (1992). Belk (1985) conceptualized materialism as the combination of three personality traits, i.e. possessiveness, non-generosity, and envy, whereas Richins and Dawson’s (1992) conceptualization of materialistic values assessed through the materialistic values subscale is comprised of three subscales: the centrality of possession or money in life, the extent to which possession will provide happiness in life, and the success component, which states individual achievement in life is through the accumulation of possession. While the two conceptualizations mentioned above of materialism differ significantly, both agree that over-indulgence in materialistic tendencies may hamper fulfilling the higher objectives in life, such as personal growth and well-being, including happiness (Segev et al., 2015).

Shrum et al. (2021), in the review of psychological causes, correlates, and consequences of materialism, stated that certain personality factors, such as low control over life, lead to high materialism. The psychologically hardy individual perceives a sense of control over their life, leading to less materialistic values. Low levels of perception of power regarding the control of life are associated with higher levels of materialistic values among adults (Kashdan & Breen, 2007; Kim et al., 2017). Psychological hardiness through commitment to life identifies with day-to-day activities, which leads to high self-esteem (Ghalyanee, 2016), and high self-esteem leads to low materialistic values (Chang & Arkin, 2002; Reeves et al., 2012). As per the Self-Determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2008), the self-autonomous belief leads to the experience of energy vigour, and aliveness, which leads to happiness and well-being (Ryan & Frederick, 1997).

Individuals holding materialistic values or aspirations fared low across multiple well-being indicators, such as happiness (Dittmar et al., 2014; Donnelly et al., 2016; Shrum et al., 2014). Kasser (2016) compared materialists and non-materialists and found that materialists experience lower levels of happiness and life satisfaction, engage in more compulsive and impulsive consumption, exhibit heightened anxiety and depression, and maintain diminished vitality levels. Gap theory by Solberg et al. (2004) explains how materialistic tendency leads to decreased happiness and well-being. The theory further states that materialists usually have very high expectations of the happiness that the purchased products will bring them. However, after the acquisition of the products, it does not fulfill their unrealistic expectation, leading to a vicious cycle of unhappiness, adverse effects, and chronic dissatisfaction (Roberts et al., 2015). Based on the above arguments, the third hypothesis of the study was formulated:

H3:

Materialistic values will complementarily mediate the relationship between Psychological hardiness and Happiness.

Vitality and materialistic values as parallel mediators

Psychological hardiness plays a significant role in enhancing positive psychological outcomes, such as happiness, and reducing negative outcomes, such as stress and anxiety (S. R. Maddi, 2004). Individuals can better deal with negative life stressors as psychological hardiness equips them with protective factors that act as a buffer against adverse situations (Connor & Davidson, 2003). Psychologically hardy individuals are more likely to experience vitality as they perceive themselves having greater control of their situations and view life hassles as an opportunity to grab, which create a state of aliveness, enthusiasm, and vigour, leading to enhanced happiness and well-being status (Yağan & Kaya, 2022). A positive feeling of having energy available to self by virtue of psychological hardiness reflects indicators of well-being such as happiness and life satisfaction (Niemiec et al., 2006). Psychological hardy individuals have the tendency to emphasize intrinsic goals over extrinsic goals and do not get swayed by the rat race of possessions and consumerism. Emphasizing intrinsic goals and being committed to the larger goal of life leads to elevated happiness and well-being (Kasser, 2016). Both vitality and materialistic values have their own unique effects and can act as potential parallel mediators to explain the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. Hence, it was hypothesized that

H4:

Vitality and Materialistic values will parallelly mediate the relationship between Psychological hardiness and Happiness.

The current study

Since time immemorial, happiness has been conceived as the final utility. From the classical work of Aristotle to Bentham, happiness has been studied in various realms. As Lane (2000) emphasized the importance of the ‘quality of a person’ and the distinction between the liveability of the environment and the life-ability of the person, it becomes imperative to examine the role of personality variables such as psychological hardiness, which results from the culmination of attitudes, cognitions, and actions in happiness and enrichment of the life. The current generation is characterized by increasing complexity, uncertainty, and volatility, which has led to heightened stress and anxiety. Psychologically hardy individuals are better able to sail through the inherently stressful modern world, which is marred by rapid technological changes (Bartone, 2012). India, with an average age of 29 years, is one of the youngest countries globally (Meryl, 2021). To reap the benefit of this demographic dividend, it becomes paramount to ensure that Indian youths are happy. To fulfill this objective, the paper focuses on psychological hardiness as a potential pathway to happiness.

Based on the extant literature and theoretical model, the current study aimed to examine the mediating role of vitality and materialistic values in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. Correspondingly, we proposed a parallel mediation model to illustrate the role of materialism and vitality in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Research model.

Source: Authors’ own model.

Materials and methods

Sample and data collection procedure

The sample consisted of 414 participants (39.8% males, 60.2% females). The age range of participants was 18–29 years, with a mean age of 21.17 years. The sampling technique utilized in the study was purposive sampling. The inclusion criteria for respondents were that the participants should be in the age category of 18–29 years, well-versed and proficient in comprehending English, and free from any psychological disorders. The purposive sampling technique relies on the researcher’s assessment of the intended target audience. Hence, it is also referred to as Judgemental Sampling (Pradhan et al., 2023). It permits the researchers to identify the respondents based on the study objectives (Etikan et al., 2016). The predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria facilitate the identification of suitable potential participants (Pradhan et al., 2023).The sample was taken from all the major geographic zones of India, namely North Zone (24.6%), East Zone (28.4%), West Zone (14.9%), South Zone (11.6%), Central Zone (12.8%), and North East Zone (7.7%) to make it the representative of the Indian population. Both online and physical methods were used to collect data. The study participants were approached via emails, social media platforms, and in person. After the informed consent of the participants, a Google form consisting of study questions was emailed or sent via social media to online participants. In the case of offline participants, a sheet containing study questions was physically handed to the participants. The educational qualifications of the participants were as follows: undergraduates (20.1%), graduates (38.9%), postgraduates (33.4%), and pursuing doctorate (7.6%). Out of all the participants, 50.6% were students, 10.2% were government employees, 19.4% were working in the private sector, and 19.8% were unemployed. And 19.6% of the participants were residing in rural settings, 27.8% were residing in semi-urban settings, and 52.6% were residing in urban settings. Informed consent were solicited from all the participants.

All the study measures were in the English language and were as per the comprehension level of the participants. Proper briefing about the aim and nature of the study was given to the participants, and the participant’s rights, like autonomy, dignity, and privacy, were taken care of. Participants were informed about their right to withdraw from the study at any point. All the participants’ queries pertaining to the study were resolved. The data were collected from March to June 2023.

Measures

Dispositional resilience scale-15 (DRS-15)

DRS-15, developed by Bartone (1995), was used to measure the extent of psychological hardiness among the participants. The scale consists of 15 items divided into three dimensions, i.e. challenge, commitment, and control, rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all true) to 3 (completely true). Each dimension of the scale has five items. In the current study, Cronbach’s α-value for the entire scale was .82, and for the commitment, control, and challenge dimensions were 0.77, 0.74, and 0.81, respectively; indicating acceptable reliability.

Subjective vitality scale

The scale developed by Ryan and Frederick (1997) measured vitality among participants. The scale consisted of seven items rated on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true). In the current study, Cronbach’s α-value for the scale was .77, indicating acceptable reliability.

Materialistic value

The materialistic value scale – short form developed by Richins (2004), was used to assess materialistic values among the participants. The scale consists of nine items rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The scale has three dimensions, i.e. success, centrality, and happiness. In the current study, Cronbach’s α-value for the entire scale was 0.84, and for success, centrality, and happiness dimensions were 0.79, 0.72, and 0.80, respectively, indicating acceptable reliability.

Subjective happiness scale

The subjective happiness scale (SHS) developed by Lyubomirsky and Lepper (1999) was used to assess an individual’s overall happiness. The scale consists of four items rated on a seven-point Likert scale. The higher the scores on the items, the greater the happiness. In the current study, Cronbach’s α-value for the scale was .75, indicating acceptable reliability.

Results

Data analysis

The data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS V 26). Mean and standard deviation were calculated for descriptive statistics. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation was used to estimate the parallel mediation model via AMOS graphics. The structural model was examined after the confirmation of the measurement model as per the recommendation meted out by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). The significance of the mediation analysis was assessed through the Bootstrapping technique using AMOS graphics. The present research utilized 5000 bias-corrected bootstraps with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) that should not include zero between them for the indirect effect to be significant.

Common method variance

One of the pitfalls of survey research is the common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). In order to eliminate common method bias at the data collection stage, anonymity was secured by not gathering any such information from the participants that may link the responses associated with their identity. Furthermore, the participants were instructed that there were no right or wrong answers and that they should respond as honestly as possible. Statistically, Harman’s single-factor test was used to deal with the possibility of common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Based on the analysis of the results, it was found that a single factor that emerged from exploratory factor analysis using the principal axis factorization method accounted for only 19.9% of the variance, which is less than the expected cut-off value of 50% of the variance among measures indicating common method bias was not a problem for the study. Additionally, the common latent factor method was used to address the issue of common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). It was found that the confirmatory factor analysis had a poor model fit (χ²/df = 7.45, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.31, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.36, normed fit index (NFI) = 0.45, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.99) (Hu & Bentler, 1999); thus, the possibility of the common method variance was ruled out in the present study.

Descriptive statistics and intercorrelation among variables

Means and standard deviation for all the study variables are mentioned in Table 1. Skewness for these scales ranged from −.33 to −.03, and kurtosis ranged from −.42 to .03, indicating data were distributed normally. The intercorrelation between psychological hardiness, materialistic values, vitality, and subjective happiness is shown in Table 1. Psychological hardiness is negatively associated with materialistic values (r = −.16, p < 0.01), positively associated with vitality (r = .50, p < 0.001) and happiness (r = .55, p < 0.001). Materialistic values were negatively associated with vitality (r = −.20, p < 0.01) and happiness (r = −.23, p < 0.01). Vitality was positively associated with happiness (r = .55, p < 0.001)

Table 1. Mean, standard deviation (SD), and intercorrelations of the study variables.

Variable	Descriptive statistics				Intercorrelation
	M	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis	1	2	3	4
1. Psychological hardiness	34.12	6.17	−.03	−.42	^−	−.16**	.50***	.55***
2. Materialistic values	26.90	6.05	−.15	.03	–	–	−.20**	−.23**
3. Vitality	33.58	7.45	−.21	−.41	–	–	–	.55***
4. Happiness	18.66	5.01	−.33	−.21	–	–	–	–

N = 414, M = mean; SD= standard deviation; ***p <.001, **p < .01.

Reliability and validity analysis

Convergent validity and discriminant validity were calculated to assess the validity of the constructs. Average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability (CR) were examined to calculate the convergent validity, whereas maximum shared variance (MSV) and average shared variance (ASV) were calculated to assess discriminant validity. All the items’ loadings to their respective constructs ranged from 0.40 to 0.80 and were in the acceptable range (Hair et al., 2010). It is advisable that AVE and CR values should be greater than 0.5 and 0.7, respectively, to establish convergent validity and that both the MSV and ASV values be less than the AVE value to establish discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). From Table 2, it can be concluded that for all the constructs, the AVE and CR values were greater than the threshold value, indicating convergent validity, and both the MSV and ASV values for all the constructs were less than the AVE and CR values, indicating discriminant validity.

Table 2. Convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs.

	Convergent validity		Discriminant validity
Construct	AVE	CR	MSV	ASV
Psychological hardiness	0.72	0.97	0.30	0.19
Vitality	0.60	0.85	0.05	0.03
Materialistic values	0.59	0.81	0.30	0.19
Happiness	0.70	0.94	0.30	0.22

AVE = average variance extracted, CR= composite reliability, MSV = maximum shared variance, ASV = average shared variance.

Confirmatory factor analysis of individual constructs

Before running the full measurement model, the CFA of individual constructs was also performed. The present study examined multiple indices of model fit such as the goodness-of-fit Index (GFI), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker and Lewis Index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) along with chi-square difference ratio to check the appropriateness of model fit (Bollen, 1990). The recommended cut-off values for all the fit indices are mentioned in Table 3. Initially, all the study measures showed acceptable model fit based on the criteria meted out by Hu and Bentler (1999) as well as by Kline (2005) (Table 4).

Table 3. Summary of the recommended cut-off values for fit indices.

	Recommended level		Source
	Good fit	Acceptable fit
Chi-square (χ^2)	The lower the value, the better the effect (in relation to df) with a significance level <.05		Hair et al. (2010); Kline (2005)
Normed Chi-square (χ^2/df)	1 ≤Normed χ^2≤ 3,	3 ≤ Normed χ^2≤ 5	Kline (2005)
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)	0 ≤ RMSEA ≤ 0.05	0.05 ≤ RMSEA ≤ 0.08	Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2000)
Goodness of fit (GFI)	0.95 ≤ GFI ≤ 1.00	0.90 ≤ GFI ≤ 0.95	Hu and Bentler (1999)
Comparative fit index (CFI)	0.95 ≤ GFI ≤ 1.00	0.90 ≤ GFI ≤ 0.95	Kline (2005)
Tucker–Lewis index (TLI)	0.95 ≤ GFI ≤ 1.00	0.90 ≤ GFI ≤ 0.95	Tucker and Lewis (1973); Kline (2005)
Standardized root mean square residual (SRMR)	0 ≤ SRMR ≤ 0.05	0.05 ≤ SRMR ≤ 0.08	Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2000)

Table 4. Goodness-of-fit indices of variables under study.

Construct	Model	χ^2	χ^2/df	p	NFI	TLI	CFI	SRMR	RMSEA
Psychological hardiness	CFA1	210.6	2.34	0.001	0.90	0.92	0.92	0.076	0.078
Vitality	CFA1	36.26	2.59	0.001	0.91	0.93	0.94	0.064	0.068
Materialistic values	CFA1	48.60	1.80	0.001	0.90	0.91	0.93	0.052	0.058
Happiness	CFA1	21.58	2.94	0.001	0.94	0.95	0.97	0.003	0.004

Measurement model

After assessing the model fit of the individual constructs, the CFA of the full measurement model, which comprised four latent factors, namely psychological hardiness, vitality, materialistic values, and happiness, was done. The measurement model fit the data well with (χ² = 1542.57, χ²/df = 2.88, CFI = .93, NFI = .90, TLI = .91, SRMR = 0.054, and RMSEA = 0.067). Therefore, it was concluded that latent variables can be represented by the data.

Structural model

Path analysis was performed after getting an appropriate full measurement model to test the hypothesized parallel mediational model. The first structural model comprised psychological hardiness as an independent variable and happiness as a dependent variable. As per the results, the model showed good fit indices (χ² = 388.83, χ²/df = 2.57, CFI = .94, NFI = .91, TLI = .90, SRMR = 0.057, and RMSEA = 0.067).

In the second model, vitality and materialistic values were introduced as parallel mediators in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. The model exhibited a good fit as indicated by model fit indices values (χ² = 1402.63, χ²/df = 2.64, CFI = .92, NFI = .94, TLI = .90, SRMR = 0.06, and RMSEA = 0.063).

The results of the path analysis (Figure 2) revealed that psychological hardiness positively affects happiness (β = 0.26, p < 0.01); thus, hypothesis H1 is accepted. Further, hardiness positively predicted vitality (β = 0.39, p < 0.001) and negatively affected materialistic values (β = −.29, p < 0.01). The results further reveal that vitality has a significant positive effect on happiness (β = 0.41, p < 0.001). Lastly, materialistic values affect happiness negatively (β = −.38, p < 0.001).

Figure 2. Research model with regression coefficients.

N = 414, **p< 0.01, ***p< 0.001

Mediation analysis

The mediating effect of vitality and materialistic values in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness was examined. Further, the bootstrapping technique was used to assess the significance of the indirect effect. The indirect effect of psychological hardiness on happiness through vitality was statistically significant (β = 0.16) thus leading to the acceptance of hypothesis H2. The indirect effect of psychological hardiness on happiness through materialistic values was also found to be statistically significant (β = 0.11); providing evidence for accepting hypothesis H3. (Table 5).

Table 5. Mediation analysis results for indirect path.

Indirect Path	Indirect effect	Boot SE	95% CI		Decision
			Lower limit	Upper limit
H2: PH → VIT → HAP	.16***	.03	.12	.21	Accepted
H3: PH → MV →HAP	.11**	.05	.07	.15	Accepted

N = 414; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, Bootstrap sample = 5000; PH = psychological hardiness; VIT = vitality; HAP = happiness; MV = materialistic values.

The combined indirect effect of psychological hardiness on happiness due to the parallel mediation of vitality and materialistic values was (β = 0.27, p < .01), leading to the acceptance of hypothesis H4.

Discussion

This study investigated the mediating role of vitality and materialistic values in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. As per the result, psychological hardiness was reported to explain happiness both directly and indirectly through vitality and materialistic values.

The external protective factors of psychological hardiness, such as problem-solving skills, social competence, positive peer support, and secure relationships, have positively predicted happiness (Olsson et al., 2003). Internal protective factors of psychological hardiness comprise optimism, self-esteem, and internal locus of control (Friborg et al., 2005). All the above-mentioned internal factors have been found to be positive predictors of happiness (Dogan et al., 2013; Pannells & Claxton, 2008; Trudel-Fitzgerald et al., 2019). Therefore, it can be concluded that psychological hardiness positively contributes to happiness.

Psychological hardiness showed a significant positive relationship with happiness and vitality. The finding is in line with the studies of Yağan and Kaya (2022), Kennison (2022), and Altınsoy and Aypay (2023). Psychological hardiness and its role in human adaptation are growing traction in the current world. Today’s happiness is determined by physical and psychological strength (Işık, 2016). The psychologically hardy individual can generate alternative options to deal with new and different situations, which helps them to cope effectively in difficult circumstances (Yağan & Kaya, 2022).

As the result states, psychological hardiness predicts happiness through vitality. Psychologically hardy individuals approach life with vigour and zeal; every day they wake up, they identify with their day-to-day activities (S. R. Maddi, 2004). This role identification and commitment of psychologically hardy individuals regarding life leads to increased vitality (Avey et al., 2009), which further increases the happiness of the individual (Peterson & Seligman, 2004).

Psychological hardiness leads to the formation of coping mechanisms among individuals through which they are equipped with enough skills to deal with challenging situations and perceive the situations as an opportunity to grow (Crowley et al., 2003; Tedeschi & Moore, 2021). Positive perception of psychologically hardy individuals initiates an upward spiral loop, triggering vibrant, positive energy leading to enhanced happiness and well-being (Fredrickson, 2001; Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005). In the face of complex and stressful circumstances, the psychological hardiness of an individual comes to the rescue by creating a buffer mechanism (Kobasa et al., 1982). It helps develop attribution among the individuals that they are in control of their lives (S. Maddi, 2016). This sense of control and autonomy due to psychological hardiness may lead to subjective feelings of aliveness and energy, which eventually leads to enhanced happiness (Peterson & Seligman, 2004).

The development of enduring positive resources that help an individual become more resilient to chronic and traumatic stress is also a functional attribute of psychological hardiness. This further leads to increased energy and enthusiasm regarding life events, creating a state of happiness (Hobfoll, 1998). An individual has an inherent need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness to foster personal growth; these needs, when fulfilled, lead to enhanced vitality and happiness (Deci & Ryan, 2008)

Psychological hardiness was negatively related to materialistic values, and it showed a partial mediating effect between psychological hardiness and happiness. Past literature suggests that the direct relationship between psychological hardiness and materialistic values has hitherto remained unexplored. Studies have found that certain personality factors, such as low control over life, low self-esteem, and external locus of control, are positive predictors of high materialistic values (Kashdan & Breen, 2007; Kim et al., 2017; Shrum et al., 2021). The traits mentioned above are negatively associated with psychological hardiness (Ghalyanee, 2016; S. R. Maddi, 2004; Maslova, 2021). High levels of materialistic values or aspiration led to low scores on multiple indicators of well-being, including happiness (Dittmar et al., 2014; Donnelly et al., 2016; Shrum et al., 2014). Individuals with strong materialistic values are less happy and anxious, have negative physical symptoms, and have less vitality (Kasser & Ahuvia, 2002; Saunders & Munro, 2000). Highly materialistic people’s intrinsic needs, such as safety, competency, self-worth, and belongingness, are not fulfilled (Chang & Arkin, 2002; Kasser & Ahuvia, 2002). They usually turn to external sources, such as material possessions, for gratification (Reeves et al., 2012). Materialists tend to compare their possessions with people having more possessions, which creates chronic dissatisfaction among them regarding their inability to buy more possessions, eventually leading to less happiness (Sirgy et al., 1998).

Furthermore, the parallel mediating role of vitality and materialistic values in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness was examined. The study findings reported that psychological hardiness predicted happiness both directly and indirectly via the parallel mediating mechanism of vitality and materialistic values leading to the acceptance of H4. These findings are in line with the previous research evidence which suggest that the individuals high on psychological hardiness are characterized by vitality and aliveness (Avey et al., 2009) and lower levels of materialistic values (Kasser & Ahuvia, 2002), which in turn leads to greater happiness and well-being (Kashdan & Breen, 2007).

Implications

Theoretical implications

Psychological hardiness as a happiness-inducing strategy (Altınsoy & Aypay, 2023) leads to a positive state of vitality, which not only corresponds to physical and mental ability but also the ability to move towards the goals and, in turn, enhances the happiness of the individual (Logan et al., 2023). Being psychologically hardy helps perceive the demands of life for what it is: manageable and as a growth opportunity, making individuals happier by leading life with beaming energy, spontaneity, and positivity. Psychological hardiness promotes the utilization of techniques to enhance happiness. Engaging in activities that boost happiness can aid in overcoming challenges and fostering personal growth by emphasizing functional features rather than fixating on one’s difficulties (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005).

Practical implications

The current study is one of the first to assess the role of vitality and materialistic values on the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. The concerned variables of psychological hardiness, vitality, materialistic values, and happiness influence and impact various facets of a youngster’s life and have large implications for individuals and society. A youth with psychological hardiness leads life with vigour and enthusiasm, which leads to enhanced happiness, and a happy youth makes a happy society. Psychological hardiness builds enduring personal resources through which an individual can perceive and analyse a situation better and can effectively deal with it. The study found too much emphasis on materialism leads to less happiness. The rising rat race of accumulating possession and wealth in the community and how it makes an unhappy and dis-contended society must be discussed. Interventions, policies, and awareness programs regarding the ill impact of materialism should be discussed.

Clinical implication

The study also has a clinical implication: promoting psychological hardiness would lead to an increase in tolerance of uncertainty, adaptability under stress, fewer stressors and strains, and active coping mechanism leading to positive social support and happiness (Eschleman et al., 2010; Hasel et al., 2011; Oral & Karakurt, 2022). All the above-mentioned correlates of psychological hardiness have implications for an individual’s positive mental health. Vitality is essential for physical and mental health as it is related to less psychological distress, positive physical function, improved health, quality of life, and subjective happiness (Rouse et al., 2015; Yıldırım et al., 2020).

Limitations and future directions

Despite the contribution, the study had certain limitations. The first limitation is related to the sampling method and the characteristics of the sample. Most of the samples consisted of urban college-going students and were chosen through a purposive sampling method, leading to the issue of the generalizability of study findings. The study utilized a cross-sectional correlational research design, which does not allow for the study of the variables over a more extended period. Due to correlational design, the study could not establish the necessary conditions for establishing causation. Apart from vitality and materialistic values, other factors may also play a role in explaining the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness among youth.

The research opens up many future research avenues regarding happiness in the contemporary world. More studies need to be done using different sampling methods and using different sets of youth belonging to different strata of society to increase the generalizability of the results. Future studies should include the influence of social media usage patterns on the role of materialistic values in the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness. More mediators, such as environmentalism and positive identity, and moderators, such as socio-economic status and contentment, must be examined to explore the relationship between psychological hardiness and happiness.

Conclusion

The world is constantly changing and churning; instability has become the new normal, and changes, whether big or minuscule, are becoming unpredictable and dramatic. Prognosticating the change has never been so challenging. The current study aimed to examine the factors that lead to happiness in this chaotic world among the youths. Psychological hardiness equips an individual with adequate coping mechanisms to deal with a complex and ambiguous world through more control and commitment regarding life, cultivating enthusiasm and energy leading to happiness. Overemphasizing materialistic values harms an individual’s happiness. Youth with materialistic tendencies generally compare themselves to individuals with more wealth and possessions, leading to dissatisfaction, discontentment, and unhappiness.

Ethical approval information

The authors followed all ethical guidelines applicable to this survey research. However, prior consent was obtained from participants of the study for data collection.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data will be available on reasonable request.