Skip to main content

The longitudinal directional associations of meaningful work with mental well-being – initial findings from an exploratory investigation

A Correction to this article was published on 07 November 2023

This article has been updated



An increasing number of studies reveal that more meaning in life is positively related to mental well-being. Meaning in life can be derived from different sources, including the workplace. The aim of this study was to explore the longitudinal directional association of meaningful work with mental well-being.


Prospective data from 292 persons at two timepoints (two-week interval) were used to estimate the cross-lagged relationship and directionality of meaningful work with mental well-being.


The cross-lagged panel model had a good fit to the data (Chi2 ms(90) = 150.9; p < 0.001; RMSEA = 0.048; p = 0.576; CFI = 0.984; TLI = 0.979; SRMR = 0.040) and showed that levels of meaningful work at t1 had a positive effect on mental well-being at t2 (β = 0.15, p = 0.010). But mental well-being at t1 did not affect meaningful work at t2 (β = 0.02, p = 0.652). Sub-analyses revealed the effects to be mainly driven by women (as opposed to men) and white-collar workers (as opposed to blue-collar workers).


This study confirmed a directional association of meaningful work on mental well-being, indicating that more meaningful work has beneficial mental well-being effects.

Peer Review reports


Growing evidence indicates that the meaning and purpose that persons perceive in life represents an independent determinant of health and well-being (e.g., [1]). Meaning in life is characterized by the extent to which individuals see their lives as having a purpose, a sense of direction, and broader goals to live for [1, 2]. Having a meaning is seen as fundamental to human existence and has been found to be related to a higher ability to handle stress and lower levels of mental discomfort and higher well-being [3,4,5,6,7].

Meaning in life can originate from different sources, including the workplace [6]. “Meaning in work is considered an intrapsychological phenomenon that emerges in the individual’s interaction with his or her working environment. Meaning in work concerns the reasons an individual has for working, what he or she seeks to accomplish by working, and the continuity that he or she experiences in work” ([8]; page 87). Initial empirical findings suggest that meaningful work and mental well-being are interrelated [9, 10]. Meaningful work might increase mental well-being by buffering the impact of work stress and by improving people’s purpose in life [10,11,12]. The relationship is, however, conceivable in both directions: more meaningful work might lead to better mental well-being, but low mental well-being might also lead to the perception of less meaningful work (e.g., [13]). Thus, longitudinal studies are needed to determine the direction of this relation [10]. Conforming the direction and knowing the strength of the relation can inform about potential interventions to improve mental well-being of employees. For this purpose, this study examines the bidirectional relationships between meaningful work and mental well-being.

It is argued that meaningful work differs in its perceived importance and experience for types of occupation (i.e., white- vs. blue-collar occupations) [14]. Lips-Wiersma and colleagues, for example, report that some aspects of meaningful work were equally important for blue- and white-collar occupations (i.e., unity with others, developing the inner self), while others were more important to white-collar than blue-collar occupations (i.e., expressing full potential and serving others) [14].

In addition to type of occupation, possible variations in meaningfulness can also be expected in terms of gender. Some studies found differences between meaningfulness and gender, but others did not [15,16,17,18]. The difference might be related to cultural factors, sample biases, or measurement problems and errors. Overall, the relationship between meaningfulness and gender is not fully understood yet [19]. Therefore it is recommended to take gender into account when researching meaningfulness [20].

Taken together, this exploratory study aims to examine the bidirectional relationships between meaningful work and mental well-being in a longitudinal set-up to generate directions for further research. In addition, potential differences in the effects for type of occupation (white- vs. blue-collar occupations), and gender were tested. This study will thus provide evidence for the contribution of meaningful work to mental well-being of employees and identify groups at risk and ultimately inform about potential preventive interventions.


Study population

The study participants were from a German online panel provided by a commercial service agent. Participants filled out an online questionnaire from 3rd to 8th of December 2018 (t1) and again two weeks later (t2; 17th to 21st December 2018). The sample was previously quoted (50% female; 50% blue-collar) in order to enable subgroup analyses. Therefore, participants were invited and selected on basis of their initial description until the pursued cell coverage was reached. Several quality checks (e.g., attention check items, filling speed) were carried out and people who did not pass them were excluded. Participants with complete data on relevant variables (i.e., meaningful work and mental well-being) at both time points were include in the analyses (complete cases; n = 292). All participants received an incentive, gave written informed consent and the Ethical Commission of the Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg approved the study (2018-514N-MA).

Meaningful work.

The selection of the items measuring meaningful work was guided by previous research and established questionnaires [21,22,23]. Accordingly, meaningful work was measured by the following three items: “I enjoy my work”, “My work adds to my sense of purpose in life”, and “I am proud of the work that I do”. All items were rated on a 5-point Likert Scale from 1 = does not apply at all to 5 = fully applies. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.88 at t1 and 0.90 at t2.

Mental well-being.

The five items of the WHO-5 Well-Being Index assessed mental well-being [24, 25]. This questionnaire asks the persons: In the last 2 weeks “… I have felt cheerful and in good spirits”, “… I have felt calm and relaxed”, “… I have felt active and vigorous”, “… I woke up feeling fresh and rested”, and ”…my daily life has been filled with things that interested me”. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.90 at t1 and 0.91 at t2.

Gender and age.

Gender and age were assessed by the standardized questionnaire (men vs. female, age in years).

Employment type.

Participants stated whether they were mainly mentally or physically active at work. The former was classified as “white-collar” while the latter were classified as “blue-collar” employees.

Statistical analyses

First, descriptive analyses were conducted, using univariate analyses with means and standard deviations or number of observations and percentage. Second, zero order correlations of the studied variables were calculated. Third, structural equation modelling tested the cross-lagged relationships between meaningful work and mental well-being using StataSE 14 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LP). A reciprocal model considering forward and reverse relationship between meaningful work and mental well-being was fitted. Estimates based on the maximum likelihood method and measurement errors were allowed to correlate. Model fit was assessed by Chi2, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), and the standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR). Sub-analyses stratified for gender and employment type (white vs. blue-collar).


The sample consisted of slightly more women (59%) than men and the average age was 41 years (Table 1). The employment types blue- and white-collar were equally distributed. On an aggregated level, meaningful work did not differ (F(1,290) = 0.87; p = 0.351), but white-collar employees had slightly better levels of mental well-being (mean 2.89 vs. 3.08; F(1,290) = 3.99; p = 0.0467). Women had significantly lower levels of meaningful work (mean 3.42 vs. 3.72; F(1,290) = 7.54; p = 0.0064), and mental well-being (mean 2.84 vs. 3.20; F(1,290) = 14.65; p = 0.0002) than men. There was no association between employment type and gender: 50.8% of men and 51.2% of women were white-collar (χ2 = 0.0031; p = 0.954).

Table 1 Description of the study population (n = 292)

The correlation of meaningful work between the two time-points was high (r = 0.858, p < 0.001; Table 2), as it was for mental well-being (r = 0.768, p < 0.001). Meaningful work at baseline was associated with mental well-being at baseline (r = 0.580, p < 0.001), and follow-up (r = 0.551, p < 0.001). Likewise, mental well-being at baseline was related to meaningful work at baseline (r = 0.549, p < 0.001), and follow-up (r = 0.585, p < 0.001).

Table 2 Zero order correlations of the studied variables (n = 292)

The cross-lagged model revealed a good fit to the data (total sample: Chi2 ms(90) = 150.9; p < 0.001; RMSEA = 0.048; p = 0.576; CFI = 0.984; TLI = 0.979; SRMR = 0.040). In the total sample, mental well-being and especially meaningful work were stable over time (β = 0.72; β = 0.91; p-values < 0.001; Fig. 1 Panel A). Meaningful work at t1 was associated with mental well-being at t2 (β = 0.15; p = 0.010), but mental well-being at t1 was not related to meaningful work at t2 (β = 0.02; p = 0.652). Stratified analyses revealed that meaningful work had a positive effect on mental well-being in women (β = 0.14; p = 0.017; Fig. 1 Panel B), and white-collar employees (β = 0.18; p = 0.002; Fig. 1 Panel C).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Simplified illustration of reciprocal structural model between meaningful work (MfW) and mental well-being (MeWe). Panel A: total sample. Panel B: gender stratification. Panel C: stratification for white- (WC) and blue-collar (BC) employees. β = Standardized regression coefficients. Significant associations are in bold. Estimates based on the maximum likelihood method. Measurement errors were allowed to correlate to improve model fit


This study revealed that more meaningful work was associated with better mental well-being two weeks later. By contrast, levels of mental well-being were not longitudinally related to meaningful work. These findings can be seen as indication that meaningful work might be a relevant determinant for mental well-being in working populations.

The effect of higher levels of meaningful work on better mental well-being were most evident in women and white-collar employees. In this study, women generally indicated lower levels of mental well-being and meaningful work, though the longitudinal associations of more meaningful work with better mental well-being were especially pronounced with them. While the relationship between meaningfulness and gender might not be fully understood, this study revealed that the relation of meaningful work with mental well-being is evident in women and women might especially benefit of meaningful work [19, 20]. Viewed the other way around, women might have a special risk of mental discomfort if they perceive little meaning in their work. Potential intervention to improve meaningful work might therefore be especially targeted on women.

Differences were also observed regarding employment type. White-collar employees reported better mental well-being and the effects of meaningful work on mental well-being were more pronounced for this group. White- and blue-collar employees did not differ in their ratings of meaningful work. With regard to the finding that the association of more meaningful work with better mental well-being was mainly driven by white-collar workers (as opposed to blue-collar workers), it should be noted that a very rough definition of blue-collar jobs was applied. Further studies might use a finer differentiation between the occupational types.

Although the perception of meaning of work might be generally seen as a relative stable construct, in this study within two weeks – albeit being generally robust (r = 0.858, Table 2) – some variability in its experience was observed; related to changes in mental well-being as well. Accordingly, it may be assumed that some short-time dynamics and within-individual fluctuations in the experience of the meaning of work exists. Thus, what applies to perceived fairness in the workplace (i.e., organizational justice) may also apply to perceived meaning of work. Matta and colleagues report that the fairness perception at work vary substantially on a daily basis [26, 27]. According to our findings, day-to-day variations in meaning of work might also exist. Further studies focusing on the variability of meaning of work are needed to verify this assumption.

Three pathways are assumed to link meaningfulness with health and well-being [28]. First, meaningfulness might enhance psychological and social resources that buffer against stress effects, because people with a higher meaning in life might perceive stressors as less difficult or might be less reactive to stressors. People with a higher meaning might thus be less likely to activate the stress-linked neurohormonal cascade. The second pathway refers to behaviors. Based on the assumption of Victor Frankl [29], that more meaning in life provides persons with a greater will to live, people might engage in more restorative health behaviors, like physical activity or the use of preventive health care, and the attempt to avoid harmful behaviors. Meaning in life might also directly influence biological processes related to health and well-being. This third pathway comprises biological aspects like inflammation, cardiac autonomic function, and biological risk factors like the metabolic syndrome [30], and allostatic load [31]. While the concrete pathway by which a higher meaning in life might affect health and well-being positively appears complex and multifactorial, the effect is evident [28, 32].

In light of this study’s findings that more meaningful work is related to better mental well-being, the question is what can enhance meaningful work? A recent study has shown that general meaning in life can be increased by mindfulness interventions in a sample of women [33]. Thus, mindfulness interventions at the workplace might be beneficial. Regarding meaningful work, Ehresmann and Badura [34] surveyed hospital employees and identified the quality of leadership, the company culture, and the quality of the personal relationships among the employees as main sources of meaningful work. Albrecht and colleagues [35] found in their study the job resources: job variety, development opportunities, and autonomy to be related to meaningful work, with job variety having the strongest correlation. Based on their literature review, Lysova and colleagues [36] recommend organizations to build and maintain work environments that provide opportunities for job crafting by offering well-designed, good-fitting, and quality jobs to enhance meaningfulness at work. In addition, supportive leaders, cultures, policies and practices, and high-quality relationships, as well as access to decent work should have beneficial effects for fostering meaningful work. Meaning in work might, however, not only be determined by work conditions alone, but also by the individual’s ability to recognize and act on what is meaningful and what is not [14, 29]. Taken together, several factors at different levels (individual, job, organizational, and societal) were identified as sources or conducive factors for meaningful work [36]. However, hitherto little can be said about the relative and independent relevance of these aspects or their interactive effects.

While this study adds further knowledge by providing evidence of the positive effects of meaningful work for mental well-being, some limitations must also be considered. The study was accomplished online, which poses the risk of studying a specific sample and the generalization to other populations cannot be taken for granted. Furthermore, the follow-up was set to two weeks and future studies might look at the effects at differing time periods and at multiple measurement points to study the variability of meaning of work. Another aspect refers to the measurement of meaningful work. The complex and multidimensional construct of meaningful work was measured by only three items adapted from different scales. Further studies should apply more comprehensive questionnaires which might also make it possible to examine its sub-dimensions (e.g., significance, broader purpose, and self-realization [37]). Another limitation refers to the measurement of type of occupation, which was rather rough in this study: participants indicated whether they were mainly mentally or physically active at work. As type of occupation seems a relevant factor for mental well-being and the effects of meaningful work, further studies with finer graduation seems therefore necessary.

In conclusion, the present study highlights the initial importance of meaningful work for mental well-being, especially for women and white-collar occupations. Future research and interventions should therefore consider meaningful work as a promising point of leverage to enhance mental well-being of employees.

Data Availability

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to German data protection regulations and the assurances in the informed consent agreement and ethic approval that the data will not be disclosed, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Change history



Akaike Information Criterion


Bayesian Information Criterion




Comparative Fit Index


mental well-being


meaningful work


root mean square error of approximation


standardized root mean squared residual


Tucker-Lewis Index




  1. McKnight PE, Kashdan TB. Purpose in life as a system that creates and sustains Health and Well-Being: an integrative, testable theory. Rev Gen Psychol. 2009;13(3):242–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ryff CD. Psychological well-being revisited: advances in the Science and Practice of Eudaimonia. Psychother Psychosom. 2014;83(1):10–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hill PL, Sin NL, Turiano NA, Burrow AL, Almeida DM. Sense of purpose moderates the Associations between Daily Stressors and Daily Well-being. Ann Behav Med. 2018;52(8):724–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Sun F-K, Wu M-K, Yao Y, Chiang C-Y, Lu C-Y. Meaning in life as a mediator of the associations among depression, hopelessness and suicidal ideation: a path analysis. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2021.

  5. Phillips WM. Purpose in life, depression, and locus of control. J Clin Psychol. 1980;36(3):661–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sørensen T, la Cour P, Danbolt LJ, Stifoss-Hanssen H, Lien L, DeMarinis V, et al. The sources of meaning and meaning in Life Questionnaire in the norwegian context: relations to mental health, quality of life, and self-efficacy. Int J Psychol Relig. 2019;29(1):32–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zika S, Chamberlain K. On the relation between meaning in life and psychological well-being. Br J Psychol. 1992;83(1):133–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Isaksen J. Constructing meaning despite the drudgery of repetitive work. J Humanistic Psychol. 2000;40(3):84–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Waltersbacher A, Zok K, Böttger SJ, Klose J. Sinnerleben bei der Arbeit und der Einfluss auf die gesundheit [Meaningful life at work and the influence on health]. In: Badura B, Ducki A, Schröder H, Klose J, Meyer M, editors. Fehlzeiten-Report 2018: Sinn erleben – arbeit und gesundheit [Absence report 2018: experience meaning - work and health]. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2018. pp. 23–46.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Allan BA, Dexter C, Kinsey R, Parker S. Meaningful work and mental health: job satisfaction as a moderator. J Mental Health. 2018;27(1):38–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Allan BA, Duffy RD, Douglass R. Meaning in life and work: a developmental perspective. J Posit Psychol. 2015;10(4):323–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Allan BA, Douglass RP, Duffy RD, McCarty RJ. Meaningful work as a moderator of the relation between work stress and meaning in life. J Career Assess. 2016;24(3):429–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Harlow LL, Newcomb MD, Bentler PM. Depression, self-derogation, substance use, and suicide ideation: lack of purpose in life as a mediational factor. J Clin Psychol. 1986;42(1):5–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lips-Wiersma M, Wright S, Dik B. Meaningful work: differences among blue-, pink-, and white-collar occupations. Career Dev Int. 2016;21(5):534–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Crumbaugh JC. Cross-validation of purpose-in-life test based on Frankl’s Concepts. J Individual Psychol. 1968;24(1):74–81.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schnell T. The sources of meaning and meaning in Life Questionnaire (SoMe): relations to demographics and well-being. J Posit Psychol. 2009;4(6):483–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Steger MF, Frazier P, Oishi S, Kaler M. The meaning in life questionnaire: assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. J Couns Psychol. 2006;53(1):80–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lips-Wiersma M, Wright S. Measuring the meaning of meaningful work: development and validation of the Comprehensive Meaningful Work Scale (CMWS). Group & Organization Management. 2012;37(5):655–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Damásio BF, Koller SH. Complex experiences of meaning in life: individual differences among Sociodemographic variables, sources of meaning and psychological functioning. Soc Indic Res. 2015;123(1):161–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bailey C, Yeoman R, Madden A, Thompson M, Kerridge G. A review of the empirical literature on meaningful work: Progress and Research Agenda. Hum Resour Dev Rev. 2019;18(1):83–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ashmos DP, Duchon D. Spirituality at work: a conceptualization and measure. J Manage Inq. 2000;9(2):134–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Steger MF, Dik BJ, Duffy RD. Measuring meaningful work:the work and meaning inventory (WAMI). J Career Assess. 2012;20(3):322–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. May DR, Gilson RL, Harter LM. The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. J Occup Organizational Psychol. 2004;77(1):11–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Topp CW, Østergaard SD, Søndergaard S, Bech P. The WHO-5 well-being index: a systematic review of the literature. Psychother Psychosom. 2015;84(3):167–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sischka PE, Costa AP, Steffgen G, Schmidt AF. The WHO-5 well-being index – validation based on item response theory and the analysis of measurement invariance across 35 countries. J Affect Disorders Rep. 2020;1:100020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Matta FK, Scott BA, Colquitt JA, Koopman J, Passantino LG. Is consistently unfair better than sporadically fair? An investigation of Justice variability and stress. Acad Manag J. 2017;60(2):743–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Matta FK, Scott BA, Guo Z, Matusik JG. Exchanging one uncertainty for another: Justice variability negates the benefits of justice. J Appl Psychol. 2020;105:97–110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kim ES, Delaney SW, Kubzansky LD. Sense of purpose in Life and Cardiovascular Disease: underlying mechanisms and future directions. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2019;21(11):135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Frankl V. Man’s search for meaning. Boston: Beacon Press; 2006. (Original work published 1946).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Alberti KG, Eckel RH, Grundy SM, Zimmet PZ, Cleeman JI, Donato KA et al. Harmonizing the metabolic syndrome: a joint interim statement of the International Diabetes Federation Task Force on Epidemiology and Prevention; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; American Heart Association; World Heart Federation; International Atherosclerosis Society; and International Association for the Study of Obesity. Circulation. 2009;120(16):1640-5.

  31. McEwen BS, Stellar E. Stress and the individual. Mechanisms leading to disease. Arch Intern Med. 1993;153(18):2093–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Czekierda K, Banik A, Park CL, Luszczynska A. Meaning in life and physical health: systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Psychol Rev. 2017;11(4):387–418.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Crego A, Yela JR, Gómez-Martínez M, Riesco-Matías P, Petisco-Rodríguez C. Relationships between Mindfulness, purpose in life, happiness, anxiety, and Depression: testing a mediation model in a sample of women. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(3):925.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Ehresmann C, Badura B. Sinnquellen in der Arbeitswelt und ihre Bedeutung für die Gesundheit [Sources of meaning in the world of work and their importance for health]. In: Badura B, Ducki A, Schröder H, Klose J, Meyer M, editors. Fehlzeiten-Report 2018: Sinn erleben – arbeit und gesundheit [Absence report 2018: experience meaning - work and health]. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2018. pp. 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Albrecht SL, Green CR, Marty A. Meaningful work, Job Resources, and Employee Engagement. Sustainability. 2021;13(7):4045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lysova EI, Allan BA, Dik BJ, Duffy RD, Steger MF. Fostering meaningful work in organizations: a multi-level review and integration. J Vocat Behav. 2019;110:374–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Martela F, Pessi AB. Significant work is about self-realization and broader purpose: defining the Key Dimensions of Meaningful Work. Front Psychol. 2018;9:363.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors thank the participants of this study. For the publication fee we acknowledge financial support by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft within the funding programme “Open Access Publikationskosten” as well as by Heidelberg University.


Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. This work was supported by a grant from the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. The funders had no role in analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



RMH: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing. LB: Resources, Data Curation, Writing - Review & Editing. BNB: Resources, Data Curation, Writing - Review & Editing. DM: Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing. JEF: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raphael M. Herr.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Joachim E. Fischer has received royalties for lectures regarding occupational health from various companies and public agents. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Commission of the Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg (2018-514 N-MA). All participants gave informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Herr, R.M., Brokmeier, L., Baron, B.N. et al. The longitudinal directional associations of meaningful work with mental well-being – initial findings from an exploratory investigation. BMC Psychol 11, 325 (2023).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: