Front Psychol. 2026 Aug 3;17:1878259. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1878259. eCollection 2026.
ABSTRACT
INRODUCTION: Loneliness is a common and universal human experience associated with adverse psychological outcomes. Therefore, identifying psychological factors that reduce loneliness and strengthen individuals’ coping capacity may contribute to the development of more effective psychological interventions.
METHODS: The primary aim of this study was to examine the associations among self-efficacy, psychological flexibility, and loneliness, with particular emphasis on the indirect association between self-efficacy and perceived loneliness through psychological flexibility in a cross-sectional model. Data were collected using a Personal Information Form, the SELSA-S Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale, the Psychological Flexibility Scale, and the Self-Efficacy Scale. Pearson product-moment correlation analysis was conducted to examine the associations among the variables, and regression analysis was performed to examine the associations between self-efficacy, perceived loneliness, and psychological flexibility. The bootstrapping mediation analysis using the PROCESS macro (Model 4, 5000 bootstrap resamples) was conducted to examine the indirect association between self-efficacy and perceived loneliness through psychological flexibility. The sample consisted of 412 young adults recruited through convenience sampling.
RESULTS: The findings indicated that self-efficacy was positively associated with psychological flexibility and negatively associated with perceived loneliness, whereas psychological flexibility was negatively associated with perceived loneliness. Furthermore, a statistically significant indirect association between self-efficacy and perceived loneliness through psychological flexibility was observed in the cross-sectional model, whereas the direct association was not statistically significant.
DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that psychological flexibility may be relevant to the association between self-efficacy and perceived loneliness. However, given the cross-sectional design and convenience sampling, the findings should not be interpreted as evidence of causal mediation.
PMID:42609416 | PMC:PMC13478243 | DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1878259
