“How Do I Start Strong?”: Exploring the Subjective Well-Being, Beliefs, and Lifestyles of First-Year University Students in the UK

Abstract

Mental well-being is an integral part of university students’ overall well-being, and has been a matter of increasing concern in the UK. The main purpose of this study was to examine the subjective well-being of first-year university students in the UK by investigating the impact of their beliefs and lifestyles on their overall well-being, as well as the factors contributing to such changes. A total of 197 participants, including domestic and international students with ages ranging from 18 to 24, completed a survey assessing subjective well-being, beliefs, lifestyles, and demographic information. Thirty-one of the participants took part in the follow-up interviews. The findings revealed diverse experiences among students, including variations in well-being, belief systems, and lifestyles. Key findings of the research include all three categories of subjective well-being (i.e., emotional, social, and physical well-being) were positively correlated with both philosophical and religious beliefs, and negatively correlated with inactive community engagement. This study also revealed that personal beliefs and lifestyles had an important impact on these changes. This paper discusses the implications of these findings for university support services, and offers insights into the challenges and experiences of first-year students.

1. Background

1.1. Introduction

Subjective well-being (SWB) is an integral part of university students’ overall well-being, and has become a matter of increasing concern in the UK (e.g., [1,2]). SWB encompasses students’ evaluations of their own lives, including emotional experiences and life satisfaction, and is closely interconnected with social, psychological, and physical well-being, making it a key indicator of their mental health and quality of life. For example, according to the UK Office for Students (2020) [2], in the 2018–2019 academic year, about 3.9% of higher education students in England reported a mental health condition. In addition, in recent years, the number of students leaving courses due to poor mental health has also increased [3]. Mental ill health has become a longstanding concern for many universities around the world [4,5].

The existing literature shows that the transition to university life is a significant milestone for young adults, marked by personal growth, exploration, and adaptation [6]. For example, this period offers opportunities for development and brings a mix of excitement and adventure as students face new academic and social environments, along with increased personal responsibilities. These experiences can lead to significant changes in their well-being, belief systems, and lifestyles (e.g., [5,6]).

However, while going to university can be exciting for some, for many new students, starting university can be challenging. Many researchers highlight the importance of understanding the challenges faced by university students and the factors that contribute to their overall well-being [7,8,9,10]. For example, some researchers argue that first-year university students are a unique group that is vulnerable to a variety of risks (e.g., low levels of social support; [5,9]). Many students experience loss of sleep, anxiety, loneliness, and depression during their first year of study (e.g., [5,9,10]). In particular, some first-year students find the simultaneous changes in multiple domains of life (e.g., accommodation, social network) to be mentally distressing [10,11,12,13]. These studies show that entering university bears many characteristics of transition-linked challenges; often, these are turning points capable of producing developmental changes that affect one’s overall well-being. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for creating effective support systems within universities.

The connection between student well-being and academic adaptation is widely acknowledged in educational research. For example, Bradley (2017) [1] explores the dilemmas faced by UK undergraduates, such as the pressure of making decisions about their academic futures. These challenges are often influenced by emotional and psychological factors, which can significantly impact academic persistence and success. Similarly, Ecclestone and Hayes (2009) [7] discuss the importance of emotional well-being in education, asserting that emotional resilience not only helps students to cope with academic challenges, but also plays a central role in their academic development and overall well-being. Both studies underscore the need for addressing emotional and psychological factors to improve students’ academic adaptation and long-term success.

The international literature also indicates that belief systems and lifestyles—including dietary habits, physical activity, and sleep patterns—play crucial roles in shaping university students’ overall well-being (e.g., [6,11]). Students with strong belief systems, whether religious or philosophical, often have a framework for understanding their experiences and challenges. Furthermore, maintaining healthy eating habits, staying physically active, and ensuring adequate rest have been linked to higher levels of well-being [9,14].

These findings align with the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) proposed by Albert Bandura (2023) [15], which also emphasises the significance of social influence and self-regulation in shaping behaviour. SCT suggests that social support and self-efficacy are essential in encouraging individuals to adopt and sustain healthy lifestyle habits, which, in turn, contribute to improved mental and physical health outcomes. Therefore, the interplay between belief systems, lifestyle choices, and social factors offers a comprehensive framework for understanding university students’ well-being.

In today’s rapidly changing global context, marked by wars and post-pandemic challenges, the significance of students’ mental health has grown, emphasising the urgent need to support smooth transitions to university life. It is therefore critical to implement proactive policies and innovative programmes which promote student mental health, and the first step to achieve this is to explore and understand the various aspects of university students’ well-being [7].

1.2. UK Context

Each year in the UK, a significant number of students begin their university studies. For instance, in the 2021–2022 academic year, a total of 767,000 young people were accepted through the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) to start undergraduate courses [16]. The increasing diversity of student populations, particularly with the growing number of international students, adds complexity to understanding their well-being.

Recent research in the UK has explored some factors affecting university students’ mental health (e.g., [1,17]). For instance, factors such as academic pressures, homesickness, and community involvement have been shown to significantly impact students’ well-being [5,18]. These studies have shown that academic pressures can lead to stress and anxiety, while homesickness often exacerbates feelings of isolation. Community involvement, on the other hand, can provide crucial support and a sense of belonging, but may also present challenges for students balancing multiple responsibilities. Other factors, such as accommodation and social class (e.g., [1,17]), also play a critical role in shaping students’ experiences, influencing both their mental health and academic success.

Recognising the importance of student mental health, universities worldwide, including those in the UK, are increasingly acknowledging their responsibility to enhance students’ well-being (e.g., [4,9,14]). Many UK institutions have implemented services such as mental health counselling, academic advisory services, and wellness programmes to address the diverse needs of their students [1]. However, despite these efforts, a significant gap remains in understanding and supporting the SWB of university students in the UK. The impact of university education during the first year, in particular, has received limited attention, underscoring the need for further investigation into how this transitional period influences students’ holistic well-being. Additionally, the connections between students’ beliefs, lifestyles, and their overall SWB in the UK context are not well-documented. Further research is crucial to bridging this gap and improving the overall experience of first-year students.

2. Research Design and Methodology

This study focuses on students’ beliefs and lifestyles, given their strong association with SWB and their crucial role in the holistic development of young people [19,20,21]. The research seeks to examine the SWB of first-year university students in the UK by exploring the inter-relationships between SWB, personal beliefs, and lifestyles, and the roles these factors play in overall well-being, as well as factors contributing to changes in SWB. Reflecting on the existing literature, the study seeks to answer the following questions:

• How do the beliefs and lifestyles of first-year university students in the UK relate to their subjective well-being?
• How do first-year university students in the UK perceive the influence of their personal beliefs and lifestyles on their overall well-being?

2.1. Theoretical Framework and Methodology

The choice of method is influenced by the need to capture the multifaceted aspects of SWB, including both individual cognitive processes and social influences [15]. Based on Albert Bandura’s (2023) [15] SCT, to explore SWB, it is also essential to consider the influence of social interactions and observational learning, as these factors play a crucial role in shaping individuals’ behaviours and perceptions. In the context of this study, the social cognitive framework also provides a lens through which to understand how first-year university students’ well-being, beliefs, and lifestyles are influenced by their social environment, self-perceptions, and learned behaviours.

Due to SCT’s comprehensive approach, encompassing social influences and individual cognitive processes, a mixed-methods approach was chosen. This approach enhances the understanding of students’ SWB, balancing data limitations with complementary strengths. In sum, the study’s use of both quantitative and qualitative methods enhances the depth of analysis, offering a holistic understanding of the research questions and a well-rounded perspective on the complexities of student well-being. Grounded in the literature and in an understanding that both intrinsic factors, such as belief systems, and extrinsic factors, such as lifestyle choices, are critical to well-being, the following hypotheses were formulated:

H1. 

There will be significant variations in SWB scores among first-year university students based on their beliefs. Specifically, students with religious or philosophical beliefs are expected to show a positive correlation between their beliefs and SWB scores. In contrast, students without religious or philosophical beliefs are not expected to show a correlation between beliefs and SWB.

H2. 

There will be significant variations in SWB scores among first-year university students based on their lifestyles, including dietary habits, community engagement, physical activity, and sleep patterns.

Additionally, qualitative data were collected to offer deeper insights into students’ personal experiences and perspectives, providing a more comprehensive understanding of how beliefs and lifestyles affect their well-being. The qualitative components contextualise the quantitative findings, offering a comprehensive view.

2.2. Definitions of Key Terms

Definitions of key terms used in the study are provided below to ensure clarity and consistency in the discussion.

SWB is operationally defined as an individual’s self-reported evaluation of their overall mental well-being, encompassing emotional, social, and physical well-being. Emotional well-being refers to one’s overall positive emotional experiences (e.g., happiness, gratitude), often measured by life satisfaction, happiness, a sense of purpose, and hope (e.g., [6,18]). Social well-being involves social adjustment and social support [22]. Social adjustment includes satisfaction with relationships, social roles, and adapting to one’s environment, while social support refers to the number and quality of contacts in one’s social network [20]. Physical well-being refers to the overall condition of the body, including physical health, fitness, and the ability to perform daily activities without undue fatigue or physical stress [23].

The term “belief” is defined as an idea that a person holds as being true [20]. It is multifaceted and often used to describe one’s axioms (e.g., assumptions) and values (i.e., what is important to a person). For the purpose of this paper, “belief” is broadly defined to include religious and philosophical beliefs. Religious beliefs are personal convictions or principles concerning the existence and nature of a higher power or spiritual reality, often associated with organised religious practices [24]. Philosophical beliefs are fundamental ideas or principles about life, knowledge, existence, and values, shaped by philosophical theories or personal philosophies [20].

“Lifestyle” refers to the way in which a person lives, which resonates with personal identity and reflects an individual’s attitudes/opinions, activities, and interests in various aspects of life, including nutrition, stress management, and relationships (e.g., [23,25]). It encompasses various aspects of personal conduct and routines, including dietary habits, community engagement, physical activity, and sleep patterns.

Dietary habits are the specific food choices, eating patterns, and nutritional practices that individuals adopt regularly. Community engagement refers to the degree and frequency of participation in various social, academic, recreational, and religious activities, both in-person and online. This can include participation in campus clubs, sports teams, volunteer work, cultural events, or other organised activities that contribute to social interaction, skill development, and community engagement.

The term physical activity refers to any bodily movements that require energy expenditure and contribute to physical fitness and health. It includes structured exercise routines, sports participation, recreational activities, active commuting (e.g., walking or cycling), and other forms of physical exertion performed as part of daily routines or leisure pursuits. Sleep patterns denote the regularity, duration, and quality of sleep that individuals experience on a nightly basis. It encompasses bedtime routines, sleep duration (number of hours slept per night), sleep quality (e.g., interruptions or restfulness), and adherence to consistent sleep schedules.

2.3. Procedure

Institutional ethical approval was obtained before data collection commenced. In phase one, students were invited to complete surveys at the start of their first year. The invitation was extended to a diverse group, including domestic and international full-time and part-time students across UK universities, through university email lists and social media platforms. Participants received an information sheet outlining the study’s purpose, eligibility criteria (first-year students in the UK), and privacy assurances prior to their participation in the study. Key terms used in the study were presented in the participant information sheet and explained to the participants prior to the interview. The survey, available for approximately one month, also included an option for participants to express interest in a follow-up interview.

Phase two involved inviting participants who opted for further involvement to a 30 min semi-structured online interview. Invitations were sent with a minimum of three days’ notice to provide adequate time for reconsideration.

2.4. Instruments

Two instruments were developed and utilised in this study, with their questions carefully designed to align with the research objectives and informed by the existing literature and validated scales.

In phase one, a 35-question survey was designed and distributed to address the study’s aims. The survey (Appendix A) included four sections: demographic information, SWB, beliefs, and lifestyles. SWB was assessed using the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), the Social Adjustment Scale (SAS), and the Social Support Scale (SSS), all of which are recognised for their reliability and cross-cultural applicability (e.g., [20,22,25]). The SWLS has demonstrated strong reliability, with a Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.85 to 0.90 across studies, indicating high internal consistency (e.g., [26,27]). Similarly, the SAS has shown reliability coefficients typically exceeding 0.80 [28,29], while the SSS has reported alpha values between 0.84 and 0.87 [30], reflecting its robustness in measuring perceived social support. These reliability measures further affirm the suitability of these instruments for evaluating subjective well-being in diverse contexts.

The interview protocol (Appendix B) was developed during phase two, using research on SWB, beliefs, and lifestyles (e.g., [20,21,27]). It included items aimed at gaining deeper insights into these well-being indicators, such as ratings of statements like “I am happy” on a seven-point scale. The protocol was pre-tested with three students for clarity and revised based on their feedback, followed by a review from two field experts.

Online interviews were selected for their efficiency and convenience, conducted via video conferencing to provide flexibility. The semi-structured format allowed for adherence to the protocol while adapting to participants’ responses. This combination of quantitative survey data and qualitative interview insights provided a comprehensive understanding of students’ SWB, beliefs, and lifestyles.

2.5. Data Collection

A total of 197 participants completed the survey. Of these, 50 agreed to participate in follow-up interviews, but only 31 were able to attend, due to time constraints. The demographic information of the participants is summarised in

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of participants.

Participant Composition	Number of Participants
Age
16–18	26
19–21	150
22–24	21
Gender
Male	100
Female	90
Prefer not to say	7
Status
Domestic	156
International	41
Ethnicity
Caucasian	107
Asian	60
African	20
Other	10
Religion
Christian	40
Catholic	30
Buddhist	15
Muslim	20
Hindu	10
No religion	82
Dietary Preferences
Balanced	97
Unbalanced	100
Physical Activity
Active	118
Inactive	79
Sleep Patterns
Regular	89
Irregular	108
Community Engagement
Active	128
Inactive	69
Majors
Science	50
Engineering	40
Arts	30
Business	50
Social sciences	27

Note: N = 197.

.

Given that students in the UK typically attend university from age 16 onward, the three age groups of 16–18, 19–21, and 22–24 were selected to represent the varying stages of university life. The first group, 16–18, captures those entering university directly after secondary school, while the 19–21 age group includes students who may have taken a gap year or have different educational paths before university. The 22–24 group represents mature students or those who have entered university later in life, offering a broader perspective on the student experience. These age groups were chosen to explore how age influences SWB at different points of the university journey.

Out of the 197 participants, 31 chose to be interviewed, representing a mix of ages, genders, and ethnicities. The majority were aged 19–21, with a balanced gender distribution (17 males, 14 females). Nineteen were domestic students, while a smaller proportion were international (n = 12). Participants came from various ethnic backgrounds, including Caucasian, Asian, and African, and studied across a range of academic majors, such as science, engineering, business, and arts. This diverse group provides valuable insights into the factors influencing subjective well-being among first-year university students.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Quantitative Results

The following section summarises and analyses data from the surveys.

To examine links between the participants’ subjective SWB and demographic factors, Pearson correlational analyses were performed and calculated using SPSS (Version 29) software. ANOVA and t-tests were conducted to analyse variations in SWB scores based on demographic factors. The results indicated significant differences in well-being scores among different age groups, with students aged 16–18 reporting higher well-being scores (mean = 5.5) compared to those aged 19–21 (mean = 4.8) and 22–24 (mean = 4.2). Additionally, female students reported slightly higher well-being scores (mean = 5.0) compared to male students (mean = 4.7). International students reported lower well-being scores (mean = 4.5) compared to domestic students (mean = 5.2). Participants with religious affiliations generally reported higher levels of emotional well-being compared to those with no religious affiliation. Other demographic factors, such as major and ethnicity, did not show significant variations in SWB scores; please refer to

Table 2. ANOVA and T-Test Results for SWB Scores.

Demographic Factor	Category	Mean SWB Score	Standard Deviation	Statistical Significance (p-Value)	Test Type	Sum of Squares (SS)	Degrees of Freedom (df)	Mean Square (MS)	Correlation with SWB
Age Group	16–18	5.5	1.2	p < 0.01	ANOVA	15.72	2	7.86	0.45
	19–21	4.8	1.1
	22–24	4.5	1.1
Gender	Male	4.7	1.3	p < 0.01	t-test	4.36	1	4.36	0.30
	Female	5.0	1.2
Student Type	Domestic	5.2	1.0	p < 0.05	t-test	6.80	1	6.80	0.40
	International	4.5	1.4
Religion	Christian	5.3	1.1	p < 0.01	ANOVA	8.95	5	1.79	0.35
	Catholic	5.0	1.2
	Buddhist	4.8	1.3
	Muslim	5.1	1.0
	Hindu	4.7	1.2
	No Religion	4.4	1.3
Major	Science	5.1	1.1	p < 0.01	ANOVA	5.23	4	1.31	0.20
	Engineering	4.9	1.2
	Arts	4.8	1.3
	Business	5.0	1.1
	Social Sciences	4.7	1.4
Ethnicity	Caucasian	5.0	1.2	p < 0.01	ANOVA	4.82	4	1.20	0.25
	Asian	4.9	1.3
	African	4.7	1.3
	Other	5.2	1.1

Note. Correlation with SWB reflects the strength and direction of the relationship between each demographic factor and SWB. Positive values indicate a positive relationship. The Statistical Significance column indicates the level of significance for the observed differences in SWB scores. The Mean SWB Score represents the average subjective well-being score for each category. For Major and Ethnicity, correlation values are given despite no significant variation reported in SWB scores.

for further details.

The initial analyses, including t-tests and ANOVAs, showed significant differences in subjective well-being across various factors. The fact that the t-test (for gender and student type) and ANOVA (i.e., age group, religion) results are significant indicates that the differences in SWB between groups are statistically meaningful. This suggests that factors such as gender, student type, religion, and age group play a role in shaping students’ well-being experiences. When examining the relationship between SWB and students’ major and ethnicity, no statistically significant differences were observed. This indicates that, based on the data, students across different academic disciplines and ethnic backgrounds did not show substantial variation in their SWB scores, as determined by the statistical tests employed (e.g., t-tests and ANOVAs).

Since the study aimed to explore general relationships between beliefs, lifestyles, and well-being, post hoc tests were not necessary. These tests are typically used to examine specific group differences, but the focus of the study was on broader connections, making such detailed comparisons unnecessary for addressing the research questions. As a result, Pearson zero-order correlations were conducted to examine the relationships between SWB, beliefs, and lifestyles. The results (

Table 3. Correlations between Subjective Well-being and Beliefs/Lifestyles.

Beliefs					Lifestyles
		Philosophical Beliefs	Religious Beliefs	No Belief	Dietary Habits Balanced Unbalanced	Physical Activity Active Inactive	Community Engagement Active Inactive	Sleep Patterns Regular Irregular
Subjective Well-being	Emotional well-being	0.39 **	0.89 **	0.18	0.26 * 0.05	0.04 −0.39 **	0.04 −0.26 *	0.12 * −0.38 **
	Social well-being	0.77 **	0.84 **	0.29 *	0.07 0.04	0.05 0.09	0.11 0.7	0.27 0.04
	Physical well-being	0.87 **	0.71 **	0.00	0.08 −0.25 *	0.05 −0.34 **	0.02 0.24	0.29 * −0.49 **

Note: N = 197. Pearson’s correlations were conducted to determine relationships between subjective well-being and beliefs/lifestyles. * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (p < 0.05). ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (p < 0.01).

) provide preliminary support for the study’s hypotheses.

The correlations presented in the table provide insight into the relationships between SWB and both beliefs and lifestyles. These findings are particularly pertinent to the hypotheses of this study. Notably, the data suggest two key trends. First, there appears to be a positive correlation between all three dimensions of SWB—emotional, social, and physical—and both philosophical and religious beliefs. Second, the analysis reveals a negative correlation between SWB and inactive community engagement across the same dimensions. Furthermore, as shown in Table 2, emotional and physical well-being are also negatively associated with inactive physical activity and irregular sleep patterns.

However, no significant correlation was found between SWB and dietary habits, as indicated in the table. This may be due to the complexity of factors influencing subjective well-being beyond dietary preferences alone, such as relationships and environmental influences. However, the correlations between SWB and beliefs, community engagement, physical activity, and irregular sleep patterns are consistent with previous research (e.g., [6,23], supporting the study’s hypotheses.

3.2. Qualitative Results

Qualitative responses were analysed thematically using NVivo, focusing on transcripts from 31 interviews and open-ended survey responses to identify recurring themes and patterns. The analysis uncovered key themes related to SWB among first-year students, illustrating a blend of positive experiences and challenges. Overall, participants’ responses also highlighted their perceptions of the impact of their personal beliefs and lifestyles on their SWB. These findings are presented in

Table 4. Key Qualitative Findings.

SWB	Beliefs	Lifestyles	Additional Influences on SWB	Transition-Linked Challenges
Positive and negative well-being experiences	Influence of Beliefs on SWB	Influence of Lifestyles on SWB	Effective time management	Stress related to coursework and exams
Positive emotions: happiness and gratitude Optimism	Higher emotional well-being among students with religious beliefs	Balanced diet linked to improved SWB	Mindfulness	Challenges of leaving home for the first time
Negative emotions: anxiety and frustration	Changes in beliefs & openness to new perspectives during university	Regular physical activity as a contributor to improved SWB	Seeking support	Struggles in building a new social network
		Consistent sleep patterns positively impacted SWB	Engaging in hobbies

and outlined below.

3.2.1. Positive and Negative Well-Being Experiences

The analysis revealed varied experiences among first-year university students. Life satisfaction scores ranged from 3 to 6, indicating varying levels of contentment. Positive emotions, such as happiness and gratitude, were frequently reported by 60% (n = 118) of participants, while 30% (n = 59) experienced them occasionally. Conversely, negative emotions like anxiety and frustration were prevalent, with 35.5% (n = 70) reporting frequent occurrences.

A minority (n = 30; 15.2%) expressed optimism, citing clear career goals and supportive networks as key factors. For example, one student mentioned, “I feel optimistic about the future, thanks to having a clear career path and supportive family and friends” (Participant 23, personal communication, 28 November 2023). Another noted, “I focus on my goals despite the challenges of transitioning to university life” (Participant 25, personal communication, 29 November 2023). These factors were crucial in aiding students to navigate university demands and sustain well-being.

3.2.2. Influence of Beliefs on SWB

Qualitative data indicate a diverse range of belief systems among participants. Out of 197 students, approximately 40 (20%) identified as Christian, 30 (15%) as Catholic, 15 (8%) as Buddhist, 20 (10%) as Muslim, and 10 (5%) as Hindu. Around 82 students (41%) reported no religious affiliation. About 25% (n = 49) of students experienced changes in their beliefs, reflecting openness to new perspectives during their university experience.

Data from the interviews suggest that students with religious beliefs reported higher levels of emotional well-being. This aligns with the survey results (Table 2), which show that the SWB scores of religious students were higher than those of non-religious students. This suggests that belief systems may help students to cope with university challenges and positively contribute to their SWB, as reported by some of the students themselves. Some examples are given here:

Participant 45, who grew up in a conservative environment, noted a shift to a more liberal stance on social issues after engaging with diverse perspectives at university. He indicated that this change seemed to enhance his personal alignment and overall well-being.

Participant 38, from a secular background, mentioned that developing an interest in spirituality through religious studies lectures appeared to improve her sense of purpose and emotional well-being.

Participant 191, initially holding libertarian views, shared that adopting socialist perspectives after discussions on social justice seemed to lead to a more nuanced understanding of societal issues, which he felt positively impacted his well-being.

Participant 154, from a culturally homogeneous community, experienced a shift in philosophical beliefs through interactions with international students and participation in cultural exchange programmes. Her belief system evolved to embrace a more utilitarian perspective, which she found helped her to align her actions with a broader sense of purpose and societal benefit, potentially enhancing her overall well-being.

Overall, the findings suggest that the university environment may promote intellectual and personal growth, prompting students to reassess and adapt their belief systems through new experiences and social interactions. The impact of belief systems on well-being appears to be significant, which aligns with existing research indicating that philosophical and spiritual/religious beliefs might serve as protective factors for mental health (e.g., [6,24,31]).

3.2.3. Influence of Lifestyles on SWB

Lifestyles among participants appeared to vary significantly in several ways:

Dietary Preferences. Participants’ dietary habits were nearly evenly split, with 49% (n = 97) reporting balanced diets and 51% (n = 100) following unbalanced diets.

Physical Activity. Around 60% (n = 118) of students reported being physically active, while 40% (n = 79) indicated leading more sedentary lifestyles.

Sleep Patterns. Approximately 45% (n = 89) of students reported having regular sleep patterns, achieving the recommended 7–8 h of sleep per night. In contrast, 55% (n = 108) reported irregular sleep patterns, with some getting less than 6 h of sleep.

Community Engagement. Involvement in on- and off-campus communities varied among participants. Approximately 65% (n = 128) reported active engagement in community activities, while 35% (n = 69) were less involved. A significant portion (n = 79; 40.1%) of students emphasised the importance of extracurricular activities for forming friendships and fostering a sense of community, which enhanced their personal development, social connections, and belonging within the university.

Social support networks were found to be crucial to students’ emotional well-being. Analysis showed that students with strong support from family and friends reported higher levels of well-being. Some students (n = 15; 8%) expressed appreciation for the emotional support provided by their communities, including clubs and churches. Peer relationships were particularly important, offering emotional support and a sense of belonging. Engagement in social activities, such as joining clubs or societies, appeared to enhance social well-being.

Additionally, students valued initiatives that fostered a sense of community and provided practical support, such as workshops on relationships and time management. Overall, participants reported that a balanced diet, engagement in regular physical activity, and consistent sleep patterns were linked to enhanced SWB.

3.2.4. Additional Influences on SWB

Other factors that contributed to SWB included effective time management, which emerged as a key factor in maintaining well-being. Students reported that when they managed their time well, they had lower stress and higher satisfaction, whereas poor time management led to feelings of overwhelm and reduced performance. Coping strategies, such as mindfulness, seeking support, and engaging in hobbies, were reported to be crucial for managing stress, though their effectiveness varied.

The data also indicated that about 71% (n = 140) of students experienced significant lifestyle changes during their university years. For example, some shifted from a sedentary to a more active lifestyle, and some reported changes in dietary habits. One participant noted transitioning from an omnivorous diet to veganism for ethical reasons.

The analysis highlighted the multifaceted nature of student lifestyles, including dietary choices, physical activity levels, community engagement, and changes over time. The relationship between lifestyles and well-being was evident, with balanced diets, regular physical activity, and consistent sleep patterns seemingly contributing to higher levels of well-being. Additionally, students who reported engaging in physical activities and community events tended to describe higher levels of emotional stability and satisfaction with their university experience. Active involvement in community activities might play a role in personal development and overall satisfaction. These findings indicate that healthy lifestyle choices could potentially impact students’ subjective well-being, offering them the resilience and emotional stability needed to manage the demands of academic life.

3.3. Transition-Linked Challenges That Negatively Affected SWB

Data accrued from interviews revealed the varied challenges that students faced during the transition from secondary education to university. A key finding was that regardless of background, the majority of students (n = 76; 38.5%) reported high levels of stress during their first year of study, due to various challenges. Common themes included the stress associated with coursework and exams, the impact of leaving home for the first time, and the struggle to build a new social network.

Academic pressures were reported by 89 out of 197 students (45.2%) to negatively impact well-being and sleep quality, due to heavy workloads and high expectations. International students (n = 18; 9.1%) particularly faced challenges related to homesickness and adapting to a new cultural environment. Not surprisingly, these students reported feelings of isolation and a sense of disconnection from their families and familiar surroundings.

Many students (n = 36; 18.2%) identified financial concerns and the complexities of managing relationships with roommates, family members, and romantic partners as significant stressors.

A significant proportion of students (n = 60; 30.4%) reported being surprised by the challenges they faced during their first year of university, expressing a desire for better guidance to navigate this transitional period. For instance, one student shared, “I did not know that my first year at university could be so hard…I wish there was someone who could tell me how to start strong” (Participant 93, personal communication, 21 November 2023). This sentiment was echoed by many others, who described feelings of confusion, overwhelm, and being lost during the initial stages of university life. Several students highlighted a lack of clarity regarding academic expectations, time management, and available resources, all of which compounded their struggles.

Overall, while the transition to university life posed challenges, a great number of students (n = 36; 18.2%) also recognised opportunities for personal growth and positive aspects of their experiences. For example, some reported that they were able to remain focused on their goals and believed in their abilities to succeed. Many students expressed a sense of hope and optimism regarding their studies and future careers. Additionally, 37 students (18.8%) reported that their belief systems were crucial in helping them to navigate these challenges.

4. Implications, Limitations, and Conclusions

This research examined the SWB of first-year UK university students, using a mixed-method approach to capture both quantitative and qualitative aspects of their well-being, beliefs, and lifestyles. The findings highlight diverse experiences among students, showing that while some adapt well to university life, others face significant challenges. These results underscore the complexity of well-being, influenced by demographic factors, belief systems, and lifestyles.

4.1. Implications

The study’s findings offer practical implications for universities.

Students with strong religious or philosophical beliefs reported higher emotional well-being, suggesting that universities should support students’ spiritual and philosophical needs as part of a holistic well-being approach (e.g., [31,32,33]). Seligman’s (2002) [32] framework of authentic happiness suggests that when students’ psychological, emotional, and spiritual needs are met, they are better equipped to face academic and personal challenges, leading to greater success in their academic pursuits and life beyond university. By fostering positive emotions and personal strengths, including spiritual well-being, universities can enhance resilience, meaning, and overall mental health, supporting both academic success and personal growth.

Enhancing social support networks is also crucial. Universities could foster social engagement by actively supporting student clubs, organising inclusive events, and creating accessible spaces for interaction. Initiatives such as pairing first-year students with local families as friendship partners can provide additional relational support, aligning with SCT’s emphasis on the role of social factors in shaping behaviours and well-being [15].

Similarly, orientation programmes could be enhanced by incorporating elements that foster community building, resilience, and the adoption of healthy lifestyles. It is also recommended that these programmes address the needs of both domestic and international students, such as managing expectations, stress, and homesickness. Additionally, tailored support services for international students, including language assistance and cultural adjustment programmes, are essential, alongside regular evaluations based on student feedback.

Academic pressures were identified as significant stressors, highlighting the need for robust academic support services, including study skills and time management training. Universities should also consider the interplay between emotional, physical, and social dimensions, tailoring support services to diverse student needs (e.g., [19,31]). Promoting healthy lifestyles through nutritious food options, fitness facilities, and programmes for balanced diets, regular physical activity, and good sleep hygiene is also important.

The findings also show significant differences in subjective well-being (SWB) scores across various demographic groups, such as age, gender, student type, religion, and major (Table 2). For instance, younger age groups (16–18) reported higher SWB scores compared to older age groups, and domestic students generally reported higher well-being than international students. These findings suggest that factors such as age and student status may influence well-being, which could be further explored in relation to social activity and academic adaptation. It would be valuable to consider how these differences in well-being might be shaped by the level of social engagement and the ability to adapt academically, particularly in terms of physiological, communicative, and motivational components of adaptation.

As also mentioned previously, many students were surprised by the difficulties of their first year, and expressed a wish for better guidance. These accounts highlight a widespread need for early-stage support systems to help students to acclimate more effectively to university life. Enhanced guidance could empower students to build confidence and navigate their new environment with greater ease, ultimately improving their overall experience and well-being.

Finally, the study emphasises the essential role of institution-wide support in fostering student well-being. UK universities can implement evidence-based initiatives like those developed by Student Minds (studentminds.org.uk, accessed on 20 February 2025), which offers peer support programmes, mental health training for staff, and campaigns such as Student Mental Health Week to reduce stigma around mental health. Additionally, the Office for Students’ well-being projects (officeforstudents.org.uk, accessed on 20 February 2025) provides funds for universities to enhance mental health services, provide targeted support for vulnerable students, and develop strategies to integrate well-being into the wider student experience. By aligning institutional policies with students’ lived experiences and perceptions—as highlighted in this study—universities can create an inclusive environment that supports not only academic success, but also personal development, mental health, and overall well-being.

4.2. Limitations

The study’s limitations include its reliance on self-reported data, which may be subject to bias. Future research could address this by incorporating more objective measures of well-being, such as physiological indicators or third-party assessments. Additionally, the study’s focus on students in the UK may limit the generalizability of its findings to other contexts. Further research is also needed to explore the experiences of students across different years of study and a diverse range of countries, adopting a longitudinal approach to capture changes and trends over time.

4.3. Conclusions

Indeed, the transition from secondary school to university life presents both challenges and opportunities for personal growth among first-year students. Understanding the well-being, beliefs, and lifestyles of these students is crucial for developing effective support systems within universities. This study provides valuable insights into the diverse experiences of first-year university students in the UK. The findings underscore the significance of belief systems and lifestyles in SWB, emphasising the crucial role that universities play in supporting students’ mental health. By adopting a holistic approach that considers the emotional, physical, and social dimensions of well-being, universities can create supportive environments that promote the success and well-being of first-year university students.