Mental Health

A student-athlete’s day does not divide neatly into an academic half and an athletic half.

A difficult morning lecture can follow someone into afternoon training. Soreness from practice can still be present while they prepare for an exam. Worry about competition can sit beside an unfinished assignment. By bedtime, the athlete may be carrying fatigue, academic stress, performance concerns and repetitive thoughts from several parts of the same day.

New research published September 7, 2026 in Frontiers in Psychology provides an unusually detailed look at how some of those experiences can coexist and change across a day.

Researchers Aozhou Wang, Can Ao, Nongqin Guan and Cong Ma followed students in sport-related university majors for 14 consecutive days. Rather than asking participants to remember how stressed they had been over the previous month, the researchers prompted them by smartphone in the morning, midday and evening.

The findings should be interpreted carefully. The final sample included only 60 students ages 18 to 22 at one university in Chongqing, China, so this is not evidence that every U.S. college athlete experiences stress in the same way. The study was also observational and cannot show that one type of stress caused another.

But its central idea is useful far beyond that particular campus: physical strain, academic demands, performance worry, mood, rumination, concentration and sleep can occupy the same daily system rather than functioning as unrelated problems.

For athletes, coaches, parents and college support staff, that changes an important question.

Instead of asking only, “Is this school stress or sports stress?” it may sometimes be more useful to ask, “What has this person been carrying across the entire day?” The Practical Guide to Recovery & Resilience After Setbacks.

Researchers Checked In Three Times A Day

The study used a method known as ecological momentary assessment, or EMA.

Researchers originally recruited 72 students. After protocol and response-quality screening, the final analytic sample contained 60 participants: 35 men and 25 women. They represented both individual and team sports and were in their first through third years of university.

For 14 days, participants received smartphone assessments during three windows:

• 7–9 a.m.
• 1–3 p.m.
• 9–11 p.m.

That produced a balanced analytic panel of 2,520 observations.

At each assessment, students rated eight immediate experiences: fatigue, soreness or bodily pain, academic stress, training or competition worry, depressed mood, tension/anxiety/irritability, repetitive negative thinking or rumination, and difficulty concentrating.

Previous-night sleep was assessed separately each morning.

This design matters because stress is dynamic.

A questionnaire asking, “How stressed were you this month?” can provide valuable information, but it compresses many different days into one answer. A morning exam, an afternoon practice and a late-evening study session disappear into an average.

Repeated assessments give researchers another view: what is happening right now, and how does that pattern change several hours later?

The full daily stress study is particularly careful about what those patterns can and cannot establish.

They reveal associations.

They do not prove a causal chain.

Physical And Mental Demands Did Not Stay In Separate Lanes

One of the more interesting findings involved physical burden.

Within the study’s temporal network, soreness and fatigue had the most prominent outgoing structural positions. In practical terms, higher soreness at one assessment was conditionally associated with higher levels of several measured states at a later assessment, including performance worry and fatigue.

That does not mean muscle soreness causes mental-health problems.

It does suggest that separating physical recovery completely from psychological and academic functioning may miss part of the daily picture.

Imagine an athlete finishing a demanding afternoon session.

Their legs are sore.

They are physically tired.

Tomorrow’s competition is on their mind.

They still have two hours of coursework waiting.

Those demands do not have to occur independently simply because one belongs to sport and another belongs to school.

The athlete experiences all of them through the same evening.

Academic Stress Can Travel Into Athletic Time

The reverse matters too.

Academic pressure does not automatically disappear when practice begins.

An athlete may be physically present at training while thinking about an examination, presentation, missed class, group project or deadline.

That does not necessarily mean the athlete has poor focus or lacks commitment.

It means people do not have an internal switch that completely isolates one role from another.

Earlier NCAA data make this especially relevant to U.S. college sports.

The NCAA Student-Athlete Health and Wellness Study was distributed to about 23,000 NCAA student-athletes across all three divisions during 2022-23. Among its mental-health findings, the NCAA identified academics, planning for the future and finances as the biggest stressors affecting student-athlete mental health.

That does not establish that academic stress produces a particular mental-health condition.

It does show why academics should not be treated as background noise when discussing athlete well-being.

For a student-athlete, school is part of the performance environment too.

The Evening Can Become A Convergence Point

The evening is especially interesting because several parts of the day may finally meet there.

Classes may be finished.

Practice may be over.

But the demands themselves may not be finished.

There can still be homework.

Recovery.

Eating.

Travel.

Messages from teammates.

Preparation for tomorrow.

Physical soreness.

Competition thoughts.

And the need to sleep.

In the Frontiers study, the evening assessment occurred between 9 and 11 p.m. Participants were not simply asked whether the day had been stressful. They rated what they were experiencing at that moment.

This helps illustrate why “just relax after practice” can be unrealistic advice.

Recovery requires time and opportunity.

An athlete who leaves training and immediately begins academic work may have little transition between physical effort and cognitive effort.

That does not mean every athlete needs the same evening routine. It does mean recovery plans should reflect the actual structure of the athlete’s day rather than an idealized schedule.

Rumination May Connect Different Parts Of The Day

Rumination was another prominent variable in the study.

In the contemporaneous network, the combined tension/anxiety/irritability indicator and rumination had particularly prominent positions.

Rumination generally refers to repetitive thinking that can become difficult to disengage from.

In an athlete’s evening, that might involve repeatedly replaying an error from practice.

Or thinking about tomorrow’s exam.

Or worrying about selection.

Or returning mentally to an uncomfortable conversation.

The study does not establish that rumination causes the other states in its network. The researchers explicitly warn against interpreting structural prominence as causal priority.

That distinction is important.

A network diagram can show that variables are connected statistically without revealing a simple sequence such as:

stress → rumination → poor sleep → worse performance.

Real life is usually less tidy.

The useful takeaway is narrower: when an athlete seems overloaded, looking only at the most visible stressor may overlook other experiences occurring alongside it.

Poorer Sleep Was Followed By A Harder Morning

The study’s sleep findings provide another important piece.

Researchers compared nights when a participant reported poorer sleep than was usual for that individual with that person’s next-morning ratings.

Poorer-than-usual sleep was prospectively associated with higher next-morning levels of all eight measured states, even after statistical adjustment for the previous evening’s level of the same outcome, study day and individual differences in sleep.

The largest associations were seen for academic stress, tension/anxiety/irritability and rumination.

Academic stress had a coefficient of 1.00 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.82 to 1.18. The tension/anxiety/irritability measure was 0.82, while rumination was 0.61.

Positive associations were also observed for fatigue, performance worry, depressed mood, soreness and concentration difficulty.

Those numbers require restraint.

They do not mean one poor night of sleep causes depression, anxiety or academic failure. The researchers specifically describe the findings as prospective associations rather than causal effects.

Unmeasured factors could influence both sleep and the following morning.

Still, the pattern reinforces an important practical point: sleep sits at the intersection of academic, athletic, physical and psychological life.

Sleep Should Not Become Another Performance Demand

Athletes already receive plenty of instructions about sleep.

Get to bed earlier.

Put the phone away.

Recover properly.

Be disciplined.

Those recommendations can become counterproductive when they ignore why someone is awake.

A student may have returned late from competition.

They may have an early class.

They may be finishing coursework after practice.

They may work for pay.

They may be dealing with an injury.

They may have a roommate whose schedule differs from theirs.

They may simply be having difficulty sleeping despite trying to maintain reasonable habits.

The new study should therefore not be reduced to “athletes need to sleep better.”

Its more useful implication is that sleep can provide information about how multiple demands are interacting.

If poor sleep repeatedly occurs alongside academic overload, late training, travel or persistent distress, the answer may require examining the surrounding schedule rather than simply demanding more sleep discipline.

A Difficult Practice Can Affect The Study Session That Comes Next

College sports often talk about recovery in physical terms.

Hydration.

Nutrition.

Mobility.

Rest.

Treatment.

Those elements matter, but recovery also occurs within a student schedule.

An athlete may leave practice physically fatigued and immediately need to concentrate on complex academic material.

The Frontiers researchers found fatigue and soreness occupying important positions in the daily network. Concentration difficulty was another repeatedly measured state.

The study does not prove that reducing training load would improve grades, nor does it provide a formula for changing practice.

Training decisions depend on the sport, athlete, competitive calendar, health status and qualified coaching and healthcare judgment.

But it supports asking a broader question:

What is expected of this athlete after training ends?

That question can reveal demands that are invisible when a team evaluates practice in isolation.

Academic Support And Athlete Support Should Communicate

Universities frequently divide services according to administrative function.

Academic advisers handle academics.

Coaches handle sport.

Athletic trainers handle physical health.

Counselors handle mental health.

Strength staff handle physical preparation.

Each specialization has a purpose.

The athlete, however, is one person moving between all of them.

The Frontiers authors specifically note that coordination among academic, sport-support and mental-health personnel may be useful when concerns cross physical, academic, performance, emotional and cognitive domains.

That does not mean everyone should have unrestricted access to an athlete’s private information.

Privacy and professional boundaries remain important.

Coordination can instead mean building systems where an athlete does not have to repeatedly explain the same overload to five disconnected departments.

Coaches May Notice The Athletic Part First

A coach might notice that an athlete seems unusually distracted during practice.

The easiest explanation is performance-based:

They are not focused.

They need to concentrate.

They need more discipline.

Sometimes that may be appropriate.

But the observable behavior does not reveal its cause.

The athlete might have slept poorly.

They might have an examination tomorrow.

They might be worried about finances.

They might be sore.

They might be dealing with a relationship problem.

They might have a mental-health concern requiring qualified care.

Or they might simply be having one difficult afternoon.

This is why recognition should not become amateur diagnosis.

The NCAA Mental Health Best Practices recommend healthy environments, validated mental-health screening, written referral pathways and licensed professionals for formal evaluation and treatment.

The guidance also explicitly recognizes coaches and other non-clinical staff as people who may notice concerns without being responsible for diagnosing them.

A coach can ask what is going on.

They do not need to decide clinically why it is happening.

One Bad Evening Is Not A Mental-Health Disorder

This boundary is essential.

The Frontiers researchers used brief momentary indicators.

Participants reported experiences such as depressed mood or tension/anxiety/irritability at particular moments.

Those measurements were not clinical diagnoses.

The researchers specifically state that the study’s single-item measures were not substitutes for validated multidimensional clinical scales.

That matters because normal human life contains unpleasant emotions.

Athletes become tired.

Students become stressed before exams.

Competitors worry about performance.

People become irritable after difficult days.

An evening containing several of these experiences does not automatically indicate a psychiatric disorder.

Concern becomes more important when difficulties are persistent, severe, worsening, interfering substantially with daily functioning or raising questions about safety.

At that point, assessment belongs with an appropriately qualified healthcare or mental-health professional.

Monitoring Patterns May Be More Useful Than Judging Individual Moments

One advantage of the 14-day study is that it shifts attention from isolated moments toward patterns.

A single bad practice tells us little.

A single poor night’s sleep tells us little.

A stressful examination week is not automatically evidence of a larger problem.

But repeated patterns may be worth noticing.

Does the athlete repeatedly reach evening exhausted and unable to complete coursework?

Does sleep consistently deteriorate around travel?

Does academic stress intensify during competition periods?

Does soreness remain elevated while concentration becomes harder?

Does the athlete have any meaningful recovery time?

These questions are not diagnostic.

They are contextual.

The researchers themselves suggest that soreness, academic stress, tension/anxiety/irritability, rumination and previous-night sleep may be candidates for closer time-sensitive monitoring in the population they studied.

They also caution that statistical centrality alone is not enough to choose an intervention.

Severity, feasibility, individual preferences and independent evidence all matter.

Student-Athletes Should Not Have To Prove Which Stress Is More Legitimate

There can be an unhelpful competition between demands.

Coaches may see sport as the central responsibility.

Professors may see coursework as the priority.

Athletes may feel that admitting difficulty in either area sounds like making excuses.

But an athlete can care deeply about both.

A person can want to compete and still be academically overwhelmed.

They can care about their degree and still be preoccupied with an important competition.

They can love their sport and need recovery.

They can be resilient and need help.

The existence of multiple demands does not prove that any one of them is excessive. It does mean support systems should avoid pretending those demands occur independently.

The New Study Has Important Limits

The September 2026 research should not be presented as a universal description of college athletes.

It involved 60 retained participants from one university in Chongqing, China.

They were students in sport-related majors who regularly trained and/or competed. That is not equivalent to sampling NCAA athletes across U.S. universities.

The researchers explicitly warn against directly generalizing the results to different collegiate sport systems, elite or professional athletes, other universities or other cultural settings.

There were additional limitations.

Twelve people from the original 72-person recruitment pool were excluded during protocol and response-quality screening, and complete pre-cleaning records were not preserved in a way that allowed all excluded responses to be reconstructed.

The momentary indicators were intentionally brief to make three assessments a day practical.

And although measurements occurred in chronological order, observational data cannot establish that one measured state caused another.

Those limitations do not make the study unimportant.

They define what it can responsibly tell us.

U.S. College Sports Already Have A Reason To Think Across Systems

The broader idea aligns with existing NCAA guidance even though the new study itself was conducted in China.

NCAA Mental Health Best Practices emphasize that athlete mental health is influenced by multiple levels of the collegiate environment. Schools are required to provide mental-health services and resources consistent with those best practices.

The framework encourages healthy environments, identification and screening procedures, mental-health action plans and access to appropriately licensed providers.

It also acknowledges the importance of collaboration.

That matters because an athlete struggling at 10 p.m. may not be dealing with a problem that belongs exclusively to athletics, academics or mental health.

The pressure may cross all three.

Recovery Is Not Just What Happens Between Workouts

Sports often define recovery according to the next training session.

Did the athlete recover enough to perform tomorrow?

For student-athletes, that definition can be too narrow.

Recovery also needs to leave enough capacity for learning, relationships, sleep and ordinary life.

That does not require eliminating demanding practices or difficult courses.

High-level sport and higher education are both challenging by design.

The goal is not a stress-free athlete.

The more realistic goal is to recognize when demands are accumulating faster than the person can recover from them and to have appropriate support available when that happens.

For some athletes, that may mean a scheduling conversation.

For others, academic assistance.

For others, recovery changes made by qualified coaching or sports-medicine staff.

Persistent or significant emotional or psychological difficulties may require a licensed mental-health professional.

There is no single solution because there is no single source of athlete stress.

The Whole Day Matters

The most useful part of the September 7 study may not be any individual coefficient.

It is the way the researchers looked at the day.

Morning.

Midday.

Evening.

Physical strain.

Academic stress.

Performance worry.

Mood.

Rumination.

Concentration.

Sleep.

Those experiences were measured together because students experience them together.

That provides a useful reminder for college athletics.

An athlete does not become only an athlete when practice begins and only a student when class starts.

The person who walks into evening practice may still be carrying the morning’s academic pressure.

The person opening a laptop after practice may still be carrying the physical and psychological demands of training.

And the person trying to sleep may be carrying both.

Supporting student-athletes therefore requires more than asking them to become better at tolerating pressure.

Sometimes the more useful question is whether the different parts of their day leave enough room for recovery, support and the transition between one demanding role and the next.

College mental-health advice often starts with a familiar instruction:

Ask for help.

Talk to a counselor. Contact student services. Visit the financial-aid office. Find a food pantry. Tell someone you are struggling.

Those can all be useful steps.

But new U.S. data highlight a problem hidden inside that advice: some of the students experiencing the greatest financial and mental-health pressures may also have the least time, energy and information available to navigate support systems.

On August 11, 2026, Trellis Strategies published Bridging the Gap: Understanding Mental Health Disparities Among College Students, an analysis of its Fall 2025 Student Financial Wellness Survey. The underlying survey collected responses from more than 65,000 undergraduate students at 153 institutions across 23 states.

Research analyst Morgan Beckham examined how mental-health indicators differed according to students’ financial circumstances and basic-needs security.

The differences were substantial.

Among students considered financially vulnerable because they could not access $500 in cash or credit for an emergency, 52% screened positive for likely anxiety, 37% screened positive for likely depression and 63% reported loneliness.

Among financially secure students, the corresponding figures were 30%, 19% and 48%.

At the same time, 24% of financially vulnerable students did not know whether their institution offered mental-health or counseling services, compared with 17% of financially secure students.

The findings do not establish that financial insecurity directly causes a particular mental-health condition. Survey screening measures are also not equivalent to a clinical diagnosis.

But the disparities make an important point:

The student who most needs support may also be the student with the least capacity to search for it.

Financial Stress Can Take Up More Than Money

Financial stress is sometimes treated as a budgeting problem.

For a college student, it can become a time problem, concentration problem, transportation problem, food problem, housing problem and emotional problem at the same time.

The broader Trellis Strategies Student Financial Wellness Survey illustrates how interconnected these pressures can become.

In the Fall 2025 survey, 54% of respondents said they would struggle to access $500 in cash or credit for an emergency expense.

Among students who had experienced financial challenges, 49% said their financial situation had made it difficult to concentrate on schoolwork.

Two-thirds of respondents worked for pay while enrolled. Among those who worked, one-quarter held more than one job.

Meanwhile, 65% had run out of money at least once since January 1, 2025, and 21% said that had happened eight or more times.

These are not simply abstract financial indicators.

Imagine trying to prepare for an exam while calculating whether a bank account can cover groceries and rent.

Or attending class after working a late shift because losing those hours would mean missing a utility payment.

Or receiving an email telling you to schedule counseling when you are already trying to coordinate work, classes and transportation.

The mental load does not necessarily disappear when the student enters a classroom.

Basic Needs And Mental Health Can Overlap

The disparities became even larger when researchers examined basic-needs insecurity.

Among students whose basic needs were secure, 30% screened positive for likely anxiety and 19% for likely depression.

Among students experiencing any basic-needs insecurity, those figures increased to 53% and 39%.

For students experiencing all three forms examined in the analysis—food insecurity, housing insecurity and homelessness—the figures rose to 68% for likely anxiety and 56% for likely depression.

Those differences should not be interpreted as diagnoses or proof of causation.

They do, however, make it difficult to discuss college mental health as though every student’s stress exists independently of their living conditions.

A breathing exercise may help someone regulate during a stressful moment.

It cannot pay rent.

A mindfulness practice may be useful for some people.

It cannot create groceries.

A counseling appointment may provide meaningful psychological support.

It cannot automatically eliminate an unstable housing situation.

Students can benefit from coping strategies while simultaneously needing practical resources.

Those ideas do not compete with each other.

More Than Four In Ten Students Reported Food Insecurity

The Fall 2025 survey provides more context for what “financial stress” can mean.

Fifty-four percent of respondents experienced at least one form of basic-needs insecurity.

Food insecurity was particularly common: 42% reported low or very low food security during the previous 30 days.

Housing problems were also widespread. Thirty-five percent experienced housing insecurity during the previous year, while 11% reported experiencing homelessness at some point during the preceding 12 months.

These figures matter when interpreting emotional distress.

A student who cannot concentrate because they have not eaten enough is not necessarily experiencing a motivation problem.

Someone worried about losing housing does not simply need to become better at managing stress.

A student working additional hours to cover essential expenses may genuinely have less time available for sleep, studying, relationships and appointments.

Mental-health support is important.

But mental wellness cannot always be separated neatly from material stability.

The Students Who Need Help May Have Less Time To Find It

One of the most useful parts of the new analysis concerns awareness.

The participating institutions offered mental-health or counseling support, yet nearly one-quarter of financially vulnerable students did not know whether those services existed.

That gap can be easy to interpret incorrectly.

Why didn’t the student look it up?

Why didn’t they read the email?

Why didn’t they visit the counseling center?

Those questions assume that searching for help is a simple task.

For someone already overloaded, it can become another project.

Find the correct webpage.

Determine eligibility.

Check the hours.

Create an account.

Complete an intake form.

Find an appointment that does not conflict with work or class.

Arrange transportation if the service is in person.

Determine whether there is a fee.

Explain the situation again.

Follow up.

Each individual step may appear small.

Together, they create friction.

Beckham told Inside Higher Ed that students dealing with multiple challenges may not have the time or availability to search for a campus mental-health center or determine how to connect with a therapist.

That changes how institutions should think about access.

A resource that technically exists is not necessarily a resource a student can realistically use.

Awareness Is Part Of Access

Colleges often measure support by availability.

Does the campus have counseling?

Is there a food pantry?

Does emergency aid exist?

Is financial counseling available?

Those are important questions.

But there is another layer:

Does the student who needs the resource know it exists, understand how to use it and have a realistic way to reach it?

Trellis Strategies reported that 23% of all Fall 2025 survey respondents were unaware of mental-health or counseling resources on their campuses despite the participating institutions offering support.

Students showing signs of anxiety or depression were also less likely to know about available resources than their peers.

That is an important design problem.

The burden of discovering support should not fall entirely on someone whose capacity may already be stretched.

Sending One Email May Not Be Enough

Universities communicate constantly.

Students receive messages about registration, tuition, financial aid, campus events, deadlines, parking, clubs, academic requirements and safety.

A mental-health resource can technically be advertised and still disappear inside that volume.

Effective outreach may need to happen repeatedly and through places students already use.

Academic advisers can know where to refer someone.

Faculty can include support information in course materials.

Financial-aid staff can recognize when financial strain intersects with other difficulties.

Basic-needs centers can connect students with mental-health services.

Counseling services can understand that financial insecurity may be part of the student’s stress.

Peer organizations can make information easier to encounter without requiring students to begin at an unfamiliar office.

The goal is not for every campus employee to become a therapist.

Formal mental-health assessment and treatment belong with appropriately qualified professionals.

The goal is to make the route to the right support shorter.

A Student May Need Two Kinds Of Help At Once

Mental-health and financial-support systems are often organized separately.

Real life is less tidy.

A student may need counseling and emergency financial assistance.

They may need help with anxiety and food access.

They may need a healthcare professional and assistance understanding financial aid.

They may need emotional support and a safer housing arrangement.

They may need someone to listen and a schedule that allows them to work fewer hours.

Trellis Strategies specifically recommends more integrated approaches connecting mental-health services with financial wellness and basic-needs support.

That makes sense because the student’s problems may already be integrated.

Requiring the student to divide them into separate administrative categories can create additional work.

Working More Can Create A Difficult Feedback Loop

Employment is an important part of college life for many students.

The Fall 2025 survey found that two-thirds of respondents worked for pay while enrolled.

About one-third identified themselves primarily as a worker who goes to school, rather than a student who works.

Employment itself should not be treated as unhealthy. Work can provide income, experience, structure and professional opportunities.

The problem arises when financial necessity requires hours that compete with education and recovery.

A student runs short of money.

They accept additional work.

That leaves less time to study.

They sleep less.

They have fewer opportunities to use campus services.

Their academic stress increases.

They may feel more isolated because they cannot attend social activities.

If something goes wrong financially, they may need still more work.

Telling that student to improve their time management misses part of the problem.

There are still only 24 hours in the day.

Loneliness Can Sit Beside Financial Pressure

The new analysis also found a notable difference in loneliness.

Sixty-three percent of financially vulnerable students reported loneliness, compared with 48% of financially secure students.

Again, this does not prove financial vulnerability causes loneliness.

But there are plausible reasons financial circumstances could shape opportunities for connection.

Social participation can cost money.

Restaurants cost money.

Transportation costs money.

Campus events sometimes cost money.

Traveling home costs money.

Even free activities require time.

A student working evenings may repeatedly miss the hours when friends socialize.

A commuter may leave campus immediately after class because remaining there creates transportation or childcare complications.

Someone worried about money may decline invitations without explaining why.

Over time, financial strain can influence not only what a student can purchase but also what parts of college life they can participate in.

Former Foster Youth Showed Another Important Disparity

Financial circumstances were not the only differences identified in the analysis.

Students with experience in foster care also reported higher levels of mental-health concerns.

Among former foster youth, 53% screened positive for likely anxiety, 41% for likely depression and 64% reported loneliness.

Among students without foster-care experience, the corresponding figures were 42%, 29% and 57%.

These data reinforce why colleges should avoid assuming a single model of the “typical student.”

Some students arrive with strong financial and family safety nets.

Others do not have someone they can call when rent is short.

Some can reduce work hours during finals.

Others may need to increase them.

Some can move home temporarily after an emergency.

Others may not have that option.

The same campus requirement can therefore create very different levels of strain.

Emergency Savings Can Reveal More Than Financial Literacy

The $500 measure used in the Trellis analysis is especially useful because it captures something practical.

Could a student access $500 in cash or credit if an unexpected expense appeared?

A car repair.

An emergency trip home.

A medical bill.

A laptop that stops working.

A security deposit.

An unexpected childcare expense.

For someone with financial reserves, an emergency can remain primarily an inconvenience.

For someone without them, the same event can threaten transportation, employment, housing or enrollment.

That does not mean having $500 determines mental health.

It illustrates why financial stability can influence the amount of uncertainty someone is carrying.

Basic-Needs Support Is Not A Substitute For Mental-Health Care

It is equally important not to swing too far in the other direction.

Giving someone food assistance does not treat depression.

Emergency financial aid does not diagnose anxiety.

Stable housing does not guarantee psychological well-being.

Mental-health conditions can affect people across income levels and living circumstances.

When students experience persistent sadness, significant anxiety, loss of interest, substantial changes in sleep or appetite, difficulty functioning, or other concerning symptoms, evaluation by an appropriate healthcare or mental-health professional may be warranted.

The practical lesson is not to choose between mental-health care and material support.

It is to recognize when someone may need both.

Financial Stress Should Not Become A Personal Failure Story

College students receive many messages about independence.

Manage your money.

Work harder.

Plan ahead.

Budget better.

Be resilient.

Some of those skills can be useful.

But financial vulnerability does not automatically indicate irresponsibility.

The Trellis survey found that only 4% of students were fully financing their education themselves. Respondents reported using an average of three funding sources, including scholarships, grants, loans, savings, employment income and family contributions.

College finances are complex.

Tuition is only part of the equation.

Students also need housing, food, transportation, textbooks, technology, healthcare and other essentials.

Unexpected events can destabilize even a careful budget.

A responsible mental-wellness approach should help students identify what they can control without implying that every financial hardship is the result of poor choices.

Colleges Can Reduce The Number Of Hurdles

Beckham’s analysis points toward a broader institutional question:

How much work should a struggling student have to do before receiving help?

A fragmented system may require students to visit one office for counseling, another for financial aid, another for food assistance, another for housing and another for academic support.

Each office may operate reasonably on its own.

The student’s experience can still be exhausting.

Integrated referrals can reduce that burden.

So can flexible appointments, virtual options, clear eligibility information, proactive outreach and staff who understand where to send someone next.

This is particularly important for students balancing employment or caregiving responsibilities.

Support should not be easiest to access only for students who have free time during traditional office hours.

Faculty And Friends Do Not Need To Solve Everything

A professor, roommate, coach or friend may be the first person to notice that something has changed.

The student stops attending class.

They seem unusually worried about money.

They repeatedly skip meals.

They stop participating socially.

They mention working late every night.

They appear overwhelmed.

Recognizing those signs does not mean diagnosing someone.

A supportive response can be much simpler.

Listen.

Avoid minimizing the financial problem.

Ask what kind of support would be useful.

Know where qualified campus or community resources can be found.

Do not promise that one service will solve everything.

If someone is experiencing an immediate mental-health crisis, emergency or suicidal thoughts, more urgent professional support is appropriate. In the United States, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline provides free, confidential crisis support by call, text or chat.

Resilience Should Not Mean Handling Every Problem Alone

Financially stressed students are often already demonstrating considerable resilience.

They may be working.

Studying.

Commuting.

Caring for children.

Managing debt.

Finding food.

Helping relatives.

Trying to remain enrolled.

Continuing under those conditions requires effort.

The answer should not always be asking them to tolerate more.

Sometimes resilience means knowing where to seek assistance.

Sometimes it means accepting emergency aid.

Sometimes it means reducing a course load after discussing the implications with an academic or financial-aid adviser.

Sometimes it means speaking with a counselor.

Sometimes it means addressing the financial problem directly.

And sometimes institutions need to change the environment instead of asking the student to become better at surviving it.

Help Works Better When Students Can Actually Reach It

The August 2026 Trellis Strategies analysis exposes a difficult mismatch.

The students reporting the greatest financial vulnerability also reported substantially higher levels of anxiety, depression screening indicators and loneliness.

Yet 24% did not know whether mental-health or counseling services were available at their institution.

That is not merely a communication statistic.

It is a reminder that the ability to seek help depends partly on capacity.

A student worried about food, rent, transportation, employment and coursework may not have spare time to investigate a complicated support system.

That student does not necessarily need another message telling them to be more resilient.

They may need someone to make the next step easier.

Mental-health care matters.

Financial support matters.

Food and housing stability matter.

Social connection matters.

Academic flexibility can matter.

For students carrying several of those pressures at once, effective support may begin when colleges stop asking them to navigate each problem as though it exists separately.

The better question is not only:

Does help exist?

It is:

Can the student who needs it actually find it, reach it and use it before the situation becomes worse?

The advice given to a lonely college student often sounds simple:

Get involved.

Join a club.

Go to campus events.

Volunteer.

Play an intramural sport.

Meet more people.

There is good reason behind that advice. Social connection and belonging matter for well-being, and student organizations can create places where friendships, routines and shared identities develop.

But there is an important difference between being connected and being constantly involved.

New U.S. research involving more than 78,000 college students at 125 institutions suggests that the relationship between student-organization participation and mental health is more complicated than “more is always better.”

Researchers Brandy Reeves-Doyle of Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, Olutosin Sanyaolu of Fort Lewis College in Durango, Colorado, and Karly Scott-Hillis Geller of Miami University analyzed data from the Spring 2023 American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment III.

Their study, accepted on August 19, 2026 and published in Frontiers in Education, examined student-organization involvement alongside belonging, loneliness and psychological distress.

Among the more than 78,000 students surveyed, 88.3% reported a sense of belonging, while 50.8% reported loneliness. More than half—52.4%—reported no student-organization involvement.

Greater involvement was generally associated with greater belonging and modestly lower loneliness. But the pattern for psychological distress was not simply linear. Distress was lower at low-to-moderate levels of involvement and increased slightly at the highest levels.

The finding does not establish that joining many organizations causes psychological distress. The researchers analyzed cross-sectional survey data, meaning participation and mental-health measures were assessed rather than experimentally assigned.

Still, the results support a more realistic message for students:

Connection can help. Turning connection into another achievement contest may not.

Belonging And Busyness Are Not The Same Thing

College campuses provide an extraordinary number of ways to participate.

Academic societies.

Student government.

Cultural organizations.

Volunteer groups.

Sports.

Faith communities.

Music and theater.

Professional associations.

Fraternities and sororities.

Identity-based organizations.

Political groups.

Outdoor clubs.

Campus media.

For a student struggling to make friends, that variety can be useful. An organization provides something that unstructured socializing often does not: a reason to be in the same place with the same people repeatedly.

Friendship does not have to begin with walking into a room and immediately finding someone fascinating.

It can develop because two people keep arriving at the same Tuesday-night meeting.

The new 2026 study supports the potential value of participation. Belonging generally increased as organization involvement increased, although the benefit plateaued at higher levels of participation.

That plateau matters.

It suggests that involvement and belonging should not be treated like points on a scoreboard.

A student does not necessarily become twice as connected by joining twice as many organizations.

More Than Half Of Students Reported Feeling Lonely

One of the most striking findings is that 50.8% of participants reported loneliness, even though 88.3% reported a sense of belonging.

At first glance, those numbers might appear contradictory.

They are not necessarily.

Belonging and loneliness measure related but different experiences.

A student can believe they belong at their university and still feel lonely on Friday night.

They can have classmates and teammates but lack someone they trust with personal problems.

They can participate in a club while wishing their relationships were deeper.

They can have close friends back home while feeling socially disconnected on campus.

They can be surrounded by people almost constantly and still experience loneliness.

The CDC describes loneliness as the feeling of being alone, disconnected or not close to others. Social connection, meanwhile, includes the size and diversity of someone’s social network, the roles those relationships serve and their positive or negative qualities. CDC social connection data emphasize that meaningful connection is an important component of mental and physical well-being.

That distinction helps explain why counting activities cannot tell us whether a student feels genuinely connected.

One Good Group May Matter More Than Five Memberships

Imagine two students.

The first belongs to one campus organization.

They attend most weeks. People know their name. Someone notices when they are absent. They have gradually become comfortable enough to ask two members to get dinner after meetings.

The second student belongs to five organizations.

They rush between meetings, arrive late, leave early and know dozens of people casually. Their calendar is full, but there is little time for relationships to deepen.

Which student is more socially connected?

We cannot know from the number of memberships.

That is the limitation of treating involvement as a quantity rather than an experience.

For someone who is lonely, the more useful question may not be:

How many activities should I join?

It may be:

Where am I likely to see the same people often enough for familiarity to grow?

The Highest Level Of Involvement Had A Different Distress Pattern

The 2026 study found a curvilinear relationship between organization participation and psychological distress.

In plain language, psychological distress tended to be lower with low-to-moderate participation, but the pattern changed at the highest levels of involvement, where distress increased slightly.

That finding deserves restraint.

It does not prove overinvolvement caused distress.

Students experiencing distress might become more involved for reasons the study cannot determine.

Highly involved students may differ from less-involved students in other ways.

Leadership positions may also carry different responsibilities than ordinary membership.

Academic workload, employment, financial stress, caregiving, sleep, health conditions and numerous other factors could influence psychological well-being.

The researchers themselves identify the cross-sectional design as an important limitation.

So this study should not be turned into a formula such as:

Two clubs are healthy, but four clubs are unhealthy.

The evidence does not support that claim.

What it supports is questioning the assumption that increasing involvement indefinitely will necessarily keep improving well-being. Athlete Mental Health Should Be Monitored Before Performance Starts Falling Apart.

Activities Can Become Responsibilities

Joining a group sounds social.

Running one can feel like work.

A student who becomes highly involved may eventually be responsible for:

Budgets.

Meetings.

Event planning.

Recruitment.

Travel.

Fundraising.

Emails.

Social media.

Conflict between members.

Leadership transitions.

Late-night events.

Those responsibilities may be worthwhile.

Leadership can be meaningful. Students can gain experience, confidence, friendships and professional skills.

But meaningful work still consumes capacity.

The student who originally joined an organization because it was enjoyable may eventually become the person responsible for making the experience enjoyable for everyone else.

That is a different role.

College Students Already Have Competing Demands

Student activities do not occur in isolation.

The same person may also be taking five courses.

Working part time.

Playing a sport.

Managing a health condition.

Commuting.

Applying for internships.

Maintaining a long-distance relationship.

Helping family members.

Trying to sleep enough.

Managing financial stress.

One additional club meeting might be energizing for one student and exhausting for another.

The difference is not necessarily motivation.

It can be capacity.

This is why recommendations to “get involved” should leave room for the rest of someone’s life.

Connection Should Not Become Another Productivity Goal

College culture can turn almost anything into optimization.

Get good grades.

Exercise.

Network.

Build a résumé.

Find internships.

Volunteer.

Develop leadership experience.

Make friends.

Attend events.

Build a professional profile.

Have memorable experiences.

When social connection gets added to that list, students can start approaching friendship like another requirement.

I need to meet more people.

I should attend more events.

I need to say yes more often.

Everyone else seems more involved than I am.

At that point, an activity intended to reduce stress can become another source of pressure.

A student who skips an event because they need sleep has not failed at social connection.

Someone who leaves a club because it no longer fits their life has not failed at resilience.

A quieter social life is not automatically an unhealthy one.

Quality Of Connection Matters

A separate U.S. study using the 2023–2024 Healthy Minds Study adds useful context.

Researchers analyzed 27,965 students from 148 institutions and examined participation across 18 activity types grouped into academic or major-related, athletic or dance, service or identity, and social categories.

Students who participated in activities generally reported greater belonging than nonparticipants. Greater diversity of activity participation was also associated with greater belonging.

Again, this was an observational association rather than proof that activities directly caused greater belonging.

Together, the findings point toward something more nuanced than either “join everything” or “clubs do not matter.”

Participation can create opportunities for connection.

What happens inside those opportunities matters too.

Repetition Can Be More Useful Than Intensity

People often imagine making friends through a significant social moment.

A long conversation.

A party.

A weekend trip.

An immediate connection.

Many relationships develop more quietly.

You see someone every Wednesday.

Eventually you remember their name.

Then you sit near each other.

Then you talk before the meeting starts.

Weeks later, you know something about their life.

This is one reason recurring activities can be useful for students who find direct friend-making exhausting.

The activity provides structure.

Conversation does not have to carry the entire interaction.

There is something else to do.

That can lower the social stakes.

A running club can involve running.

A chess group can involve chess.

A volunteer project gives people a shared task.

A student does not have to enter every activity with the explicit goal of making friends.

Familiarity can develop first.

A Full Calendar Can Hide Loneliness

There is another reason activity counts should be interpreted carefully.

Being busy can disguise social needs.

A student may interact with people from morning until evening without feeling known by any of them.

Classmates are not automatically friends.

Teammates are not automatically confidants.

Club members are not automatically a support system.

Followers are not automatically relationships.

The difference often appears when something goes wrong.

Who could you call after receiving bad news?

Who would notice that you have been unusually quiet?

Who can you spend time with without performing competence?

Who knows something about you beyond your résumé, sport, major or campus role?

Those questions tell us something a crowded calendar cannot.

Rest Is Not Social Failure

A student who wants stronger connections still needs recovery.

That can create a difficult tension.

Someone may think:

If I stay home tonight, I might miss the chance to meet people.

Occasionally pushing beyond comfort can be worthwhile.

But consistently sacrificing sleep, study time or recovery to remain socially available can create another problem.

There is no universal amount of social activity that is psychologically ideal.

People differ in how much interaction they find restorative.

They also differ across circumstances.

A student might enjoy three social evenings during a relatively easy week and need much more quiet during exams.

The goal is not maximizing participation.

It is creating enough connection without eliminating the capacity needed for everything else.

Leadership Can Change The Mental Load

Universities should also distinguish participation from responsibility.

Attending a photography club once a week is not equivalent to being its president.

Playing recreational soccer is not equivalent to organizing the league.

Going to a cultural event is not equivalent to coordinating it.

Leadership can offer meaningful developmental benefits, but it may introduce administrative and interpersonal demands.

Universities encouraging involvement should therefore pay attention not only to whether students participate but also to what participation requires from them.

A student can be socially connected and overextended simultaneously.

Those experiences are not mutually exclusive.

Students Who Are Not Involved Should Not Be Shamed

The 2026 study found that 52.4% of participants reported no involvement in student organizations.

That number should not become a reason to portray uninvolved students as doing college incorrectly.

Students may have good reasons.

Some commute.

Some work.

Some care for relatives.

Some have disabilities or chronic health conditions that affect available energy.

Some participate in communities outside the university.

Some have close relationships that do not involve campus organizations.

Some simply have not found a group that fits.

Universities can make participation more accessible without assuming every student needs the same type of involvement.

That might include activities at different times, lower-commitment options, commuter-friendly programming, accessible spaces and events that do not require people to arrive with an established friend group.

Universities Should Build Conditions For Belonging

The new research has implications beyond individual student behavior.

If belonging matters, universities should not make students entirely responsible for manufacturing it themselves.

A student can make an effort to connect.

Institutions create the environment in which that effort occurs.

The CDC’s broader work on social connection emphasizes that organizations and communities can create conditions that promote meaningful relationships rather than treating loneliness solely as an individual problem. CDC approaches to social connection include community organizations and educational settings as places where stronger relationships can be supported.

For colleges, that can mean asking practical questions.

Are activities affordable?

Are they accessible?

Do commuter students have realistic opportunities to participate?

Can students join after the semester begins?

Are new members welcomed?

Do meeting times exclude students who work?

Are there low-pressure ways to participate without immediately taking on responsibilities?

Belonging is influenced by culture as much as programming.

Joining Something Is Not The Same As Belonging There

A student can technically belong to an organization and still feel peripheral.

They can attend meetings without speaking.

They can feel different from most members.

They can experience discrimination.

They can believe nobody would notice if they stopped attending.

They can be included administratively but excluded socially.

That is why membership numbers alone are an incomplete measure of campus connection.

The more useful outcome is whether students experience relationships characterized by some combination of familiarity, acceptance, support, reciprocity and trust.

A club can create the opportunity.

People create the relationship.

Leaving An Activity Can Sometimes Be A Healthy Decision

Students are frequently encouraged to persist.

That makes sense when discomfort reflects the normal awkwardness of entering a new environment.

The first meeting may feel strange.

People may already know each other.

Conversation may require effort.

A student might need several visits before deciding whether a group fits.

But persistence should not become an obligation to remain somewhere indefinitely.

An organization may consume too much time.

The culture may feel unhealthy.

The activity may no longer be enjoyable.

Academic demands may change.

A student may discover they prefer spending more time with two friends rather than attending four organized groups.

Reducing involvement is not necessarily withdrawal.

Sometimes it is prioritization.

Loneliness Deserves More Than A Busy Schedule

When loneliness is significant, the solution may require more than adding activities.

A student may need help with social anxiety.

They may be grieving.

They may have experienced rejection.

They may be depressed.

They may be struggling with a transition.

They may be dealing with discrimination or bullying.

They may simply not have found compatible people yet.

Persistent loneliness or psychological distress should not be dismissed as something a student can fix by joining another club.

Qualified campus counselors, mental-health professionals, healthcare providers or other appropriate support services may be useful when distress is persistent, worsening or interfering substantially with daily life.

If someone is in immediate danger or experiencing a mental-health crisis in the United States, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline provides free, confidential crisis support by calling or texting 988. 988 crisis support is available 24 hours a day.

A Better Question Than “How Involved Are You?”

The new 2026 study gives colleges and students an opportunity to ask a better set of questions.

Not only:

How many organizations have you joined?

But:

Do you feel like you belong anywhere?

Are there people who know you beyond your role in the group?

Do your activities leave enough room for sleep, school and recovery?

Are you participating because you enjoy it or because you feel you should?

Has something that used to restore you become another responsibility?

Would one deeper connection serve you better than another membership?

These questions acknowledge what the data suggest without turning an observational study into a prescription.

The Goal Is Connection, Not Maximum Involvement

The 2026 Frontiers in Education study offers both an encouraging and cautionary message.

Among more than 78,000 students from 125 U.S. institutions, greater student-organization participation was associated with stronger belonging, and loneliness declined modestly across participation levels.

That is meaningful.

Campus involvement can provide structure for relationships and create opportunities to become part of a community.

But the psychological-distress pattern was not a straight line toward ever-better outcomes. Distress was lower at low-to-moderate involvement and slightly higher at the greatest levels of participation.

The study cannot tell an individual student how many activities are right for them.

It should not be used that way.

Instead, it challenges a familiar assumption:

If some involvement is helpful, more involvement must be even healthier.

Human connection rarely works that neatly.

One recurring group where a student feels welcomed may be enormously valuable.

Five memberships that eliminate every unscheduled hour may not be.

Sometimes the healthier social goal is not becoming more involved.

It is finding enough connection to feel supported while leaving enough space to remain a person outside the calendar.

A college athlete can finish morning training, hurry to class, study for an exam, meet with an athletic trainer, return for team activities—and still have another job waiting on their phone.

Record a video.

Answer comments.

Send content to a sponsor.

Check whether a post performed well.

Negotiate an opportunity.

Maintain a public image.

Compare deals with teammates.

Make sure an agreement complies with current name, image and likeness rules.

For some college athletes, NIL has added a third identity to an already demanding combination: student, athlete, and influencer or brand representative.

That does not make NIL inherently harmful. The ability to earn money from one’s name, image and likeness can provide financial opportunities, professional experience, autonomy and motivation that previous generations of NCAA athletes did not have.

But new research published online on August 29, 2026 suggests that these opportunities can also create psychological demands worth recognizing.

Researchers Sarah Xuan Guo, Rose Chepyator-Thomson, Shelby N. Glasgow, James J. Zhang and Yi Zhang conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 Division I athletes—six men and eight women, with an average age of 22—about NIL and psychological well-being. The participants represented sports including basketball, diving, swimming, cheerleading, cross country, track, volleyball, football and golf.

Published in INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing, the study describes what the researchers call a “triple identity”: student, athlete and influencer. NIL was associated with both motivation and psychological strain, with social-media demands, unequal access to opportunities and inconsistent institutional support emerging as important themes. The new NIL and athlete well-being study provides the complete research findings.

The study is small and qualitative. It does not establish how common these experiences are across NCAA sports, and its findings should not be generalized to every college athlete.

But it identifies a useful question for modern college sports:

What happens when being a student-athlete also means managing a public-facing business identity?

NIL Can Be An Opportunity And A Stressor At The Same Time

Discussions about NIL sometimes fall into two extremes.

One says athletes are finally receiving opportunities they deserve.

The other says money and commercialization are damaging college sports.

Psychological well-being does not require choosing between those positions.

Something can be valuable and demanding simultaneously.

An athlete might appreciate earning money from a sponsorship while finding the required content stressful.

They might enjoy developing a personal brand while becoming increasingly preoccupied with engagement statistics.

They might gain valuable business experience while feeling uncomfortable comparing their opportunities with teammates’.

They might appreciate visibility while disliking the expectation that they remain visible constantly.

The August 2026 study reflects this complexity. Researchers found that NIL could serve as a source of motivation while also creating psychological strain.

That is more useful than assuming the opportunity itself is either good or bad for mental health.

The practical issue is how the opportunity interacts with the athlete’s workload, identity, relationships, resources and support.

The Student Identity Already Has Demands

Before adding NIL, consider what the word student-athlete already contains.

There is the student.

Classes.

Assignments.

Exams.

Group projects.

Academic advising.

Choosing a major.

Maintaining eligibility.

Planning a career.

Then there is the athlete.

Training.

Competition.

Travel.

Strength and conditioning.

Film sessions.

Rehabilitation.

Team meetings.

Recovery.

Nutrition.

Media responsibilities.

Relationships with coaches and teammates.

The NCAA describes academic support, health and wellness, elite competition, career preparation, travel and NIL as different components of today’s student-athlete experience. NCAA student-athlete resources show just how many developmental areas can coexist during a college career.

For many athletes, those responsibilities already require careful time management.

NIL can add another layer.

The Influencer Identity Has Its Own Workload

“Influencer” can sound like someone simply posts photographs and gets paid.

The reality can involve much more.

A commercial social-media presence may require deciding what to publish, creating content, communicating with businesses, maintaining an audience, reviewing agreements, keeping financial records and responding to public reactions.

Current NCAA NIL guidance also creates administrative responsibilities.

For example, Division I athletes must report certain third-party NIL deals. The NCAA states that reportable third-party deals worth $600 or more generally must be entered through NIL Go, the College Sports Commission’s compliance platform, under applicable reporting requirements. The NCAA also advises athletes to understand campus policies and relevant state law and to keep accurate records because NIL income is generally taxable.

Those responsibilities are not necessarily unreasonable.

They are still responsibilities.

For an athlete already moving between classrooms, practices and competition, even small additional tasks consume time and attention.

Social Media Can Turn Identity Into A Performance

Sport already involves evaluation.

Statistics are recorded.

Times are measured.

Film is reviewed.

Coaches evaluate performance.

Fans react.

Rankings change.

Social media can introduce another scoreboard.

Followers.

Views.

Comments.

Shares.

Engagement.

An athlete may therefore experience two very different kinds of performance simultaneously.

How did I perform in competition?

And:

How did I perform online?

The August 2026 NIL study specifically identified social-media demands as one of the factors mediating NIL-related psychological strain. The researchers argue that the influencer role introduces audience management and impression management into the athlete’s identity.

That can matter because the online audience does not disappear when practice ends.

The Phone Can Make Work Feel Continuous

Traditional boundaries in sport are already imperfect.

Athletes think about competition outside practice.

Students study outside classrooms.

But social media creates the possibility of continuous public exposure.

A post can receive comments at midnight.

A sponsor request can arrive during study time.

A bad performance can continue generating reactions long after an athlete leaves the stadium.

A promotional obligation can appear during a recovery day.

The athlete may physically leave practice without psychologically leaving sport, school, business or public evaluation.

That does not mean athletes should stop using social media.

It means digital work deserves to be counted as work.

The NCAA’s Spring 2026 social-media and well-being guidance reported that about 20% of student-athletes said social-media engagement makes it difficult to sleep at night, while nearly 30% of female student-athletes said social media frequently makes them feel worse about their bodies. The NCAA recommends strategies including filtering negative words, limiting comments, blocking harmful accounts, setting boundaries around sharing and taking regular social-media breaks.

Those statistics describe student-athletes broadly rather than NIL participants specifically.

But they demonstrate why adding commercial incentives to online visibility deserves thoughtful attention.

More Visibility Can Mean More Exposure To Harassment

Visibility has another cost.

People can respond.

Sometimes aggressively.

The NCAA reported in February 2026 that its 2025 Growth, Opportunities, Aspirations and Learning of Students study included responses from more than 20,000 student-athletes across all three NCAA divisions.

Among Division I men’s basketball players, 51% reported receiving social-media abuse related to athletic performance. Another 46% reported negative or threatening messages from someone who had bet on their game.

Those findings are not evidence that NIL causes harassment.

They show that college athletes already operate in an online environment where public exposure can have psychological consequences.

For athletes whose commercial opportunities depend partly on maintaining an audience, simply “getting off social media” may not always feel straightforward.

The platform can simultaneously be a source of opportunity and a source of pressure.

Comparing NIL Deals Can Change Team Dynamics

Money introduces comparison.

Who received a deal?

How much?

Why them?

Why not me?

Does follower count matter more than performance?

Does position matter?

Does appearance matter?

Does gender matter?

Does the sport matter?

Does the university matter?

The August study identified unequal access to NIL opportunities as one of the factors associated with psychological strain in participants.

That deserves careful interpretation.

The research does not show that unequal NIL opportunities necessarily create mental-health disorders.

But perceived inequality can become another form of comparison inside environments where athletes are already comparing playing time, scholarships, performance and status.

A teammate’s success can be genuinely celebrated while still prompting private questions about one’s own value.

Those reactions do not make someone selfish.

They make comparison psychologically complicated.

An Athlete’s Market Value Is Not Their Human Value

NIL creates a marketplace around attributes connected to an athlete’s public identity.

Markets rank things.

People do too.

The danger appears when commercial feedback becomes personal feedback.

A company choosing another athlete does not establish that the other person is more talented, more deserving or more valuable.

Having fewer followers does not make someone less important to their team.

Receiving fewer sponsorship opportunities does not measure character.

A campaign ending does not mean an athlete’s identity has failed.

These distinctions may sound obvious from the outside.

They can become harder to maintain when metrics are constantly visible.

Sport already gives athletes numerical representations of performance.

Social media gives them numerical representations of attention.

NIL can attach financial value to that attention.

Maintaining psychological separation between those metrics and personal worth becomes increasingly important.

Not Every Athlete Wants To Become A Personal Brand

One subtle pressure in modern college sports is the assumption that opportunity must always be maximized.

If NIL exists, why wouldn’t an athlete build a brand?

If brands want content, why not post more?

If followers create opportunities, why not pursue followers?

Because people differ.

One athlete may love entrepreneurship.

Another may want only occasional sponsorships.

Someone else may have no interest in turning private life into public content.

An athlete can be ambitious about sport without wanting to become an influencer.

They can value financial opportunities without wanting constant visibility.

They can decline an opportunity because the time requirement is not worth the return.

A healthy NIL environment should leave room for those differences.

Role Overload Is Not A Character Flaw

The concept of role overload is particularly useful here.

It describes situations where the demands attached to someone’s roles exceed the time or resources available to meet them comfortably.

For a student-athlete, the roles can multiply quickly.

Student.

Athlete.

Teammate.

Roommate.

Friend.

Partner.

Family member.

Employee or entrepreneur.

Brand ambassador.

Content creator.

Public figure.

Community representative.

None of those roles is inherently harmful.

The difficulty comes when several demand attention simultaneously.

An athlete who struggles to manage everything is not necessarily disorganized or insufficiently resilient.

There may simply be too much to manage.

More Efficient Time Management Cannot Create More Hours

College athletes frequently receive advice about organization.

Use a calendar.

Create routines.

Batch content.

Schedule posts.

Plan study time.

Protect sleep.

Prepare meals.

These strategies can be useful.

But productivity advice has a limit.

A calendar cannot create a 25th hour.

Sometimes the appropriate response to overload is not performing every role more efficiently.

It is reducing demands.

That might mean declining an NIL opportunity.

Posting less frequently.

Delegating business administration where appropriate and financially realistic.

Protecting periods when commercial communication is off.

Choosing fewer partnerships.

Separating study time from content creation.

Asking for help understanding contracts or compliance obligations.

The best solution depends on the individual athlete and the rules governing their situation.

Institutions Should Not Treat NIL Education As Only A Compliance Problem

The new study makes an especially useful recommendation for universities.

The researchers argue that athletic departments should integrate mental-health literacy into NIL orientation, helping athletes recognize stress responses and seek appropriate support before distress becomes more serious.

That would expand the definition of NIL preparation.

Athletes clearly need information about compliance.

They may need financial education.

They may need guidance on contracts, taxes, marketing and brand relationships.

But if NIL participation can also involve social-media pressure, comparison, role overload and identity strain, then education should acknowledge those experiences too.

The NCAA’s current Mental Health Best Practices already recognize NIL and social media as factors institutions should consider when creating environments that support student-athlete well-being. NCAA schools are required to make mental-health services and resources available consistent with those best practices. NCAA Mental Health Best Practices also emphasize referral pathways to qualified providers and licensed professionals for formal mental-health evaluation and treatment.

That creates an important boundary:

An NIL staff member can help with NIL.

A coach can support an athlete.

A teammate can listen.

But formal assessment and treatment of mental-health conditions belong with qualified licensed professionals.

Asking About NIL May Belong In Mental-Health Conversations

The August 2026 researchers make another practical recommendation.

Sports psychologists and counselors working with college athletes should consider NIL-related stressors as a distinct contemporary source of identity strain, role overload and social-media anxiety. They suggest that clinical assessment can include questions about NIL participation, social-media management burden and perceived inequalities between teammates.

That does not mean NIL should be blamed whenever an athlete experiences anxiety or burnout.

Mental health is more complicated than that.

It means clinicians may need to understand the athlete’s actual environment.

For today’s Division I athlete, asking only about training, academics and relationships may leave out an increasingly important part of daily life.

Families May Need To Update Their Questions Too

Parents and families often ask athletes familiar questions.

How is school?

How is practice?

Are you playing?

How is the injury?

NIL creates another useful area for conversation.

Not:

How much money are you making?

But:

How much time is this taking?

Do you still enjoy doing it?

Do you feel pressure to stay online?

Are you comfortable with what sponsors expect from you?

Do you have people helping you understand the business side?

Does it ever feel like too much?

Those questions focus on workload and well-being rather than commercial success.

They also give athletes permission to say that a valuable opportunity is becoming difficult.

Coaches Should Be Careful About Commercial Comparisons

Coaches can help establish culture even when they are not directly managing athletes’ NIL arrangements.

Team environments can avoid treating NIL earnings as another unofficial ranking system.

A highly compensated athlete should not automatically receive greater social status within the team.

An athlete without deals should not be portrayed as someone who failed to capitalize on an opportunity.

And athletes should not feel pressured to create public personas that do not fit them.

This becomes especially important when commercial visibility and athletic performance begin influencing one another socially, even when they are formally separate.

Teams function best when an athlete’s role as a teammate remains larger than their follower count.

International Athletes Can Face Different Circumstances

The August 2026 study also contains an important limitation.

The authors note that international athletes excluded from NIL participation under the regulatory circumstances represented in their sample were not included, and those athletes may have meaningfully different experiences. Division II and Division III athletes and athletes with little or no NIL access were also absent.

That matters because “college athlete NIL experience” is not one experience.

Sport.

Gender.

School.

Visibility.

Immigration status.

Market size.

Athletic performance.

Social-media following.

Institutional resources.

All can change the situation.

A qualitative study of 14 Division I athletes can identify themes.

It cannot tell us how every athlete experiences NIL.

The Research Should Not Be Used To Diagnose Athletes

The study’s limitations deserve emphasis.

Researchers conducted detailed interviews with 14 Division I athletes, and data collection began in July 2022, during the relatively early period after NCAA NIL policy changed in 2021. The authors explicitly state that the small qualitative sample limits generalization and that NIL policies, markets and athlete responses continue to evolve.

The study therefore does not demonstrate that NIL causes anxiety, depression or burnout.

It does not show that athletes participating in NIL are psychologically worse off than athletes who do not.

And it cannot establish prevalence.

Its value is different.

It provides detailed evidence that some athletes experience NIL as part of a complicated identity transition involving commercial opportunity, social media, comparison, institutional support and additional role demands.

Those themes can guide better questions and future research.

A Third Identity Can Make Recovery More Complicated

Recovery is usually discussed in athletic terms.

Rest days.

Sleep.

Nutrition.

Training load.

Physical rehabilitation.

But psychological recovery also requires periods when demands decrease.

For an athlete managing three major identities, those periods may become harder to find.

Leave practice, and school remains.

Finish schoolwork, and content remains.

Post the content, and the audience remains.

Finish the sponsorship, and tomorrow’s training remains.

This does not mean every athlete needs to disconnect completely.

It means programs and athletes should recognize that attention itself is a limited resource.

A recovery period filled with notifications, public evaluation and commercial obligations may not function like a genuine break.

College Athletes Need Places Where They Are Not Performing

The most protective part of an athlete’s week may sometimes be an environment where nothing is being measured.

Not their grade.

Not their time.

Not their shooting percentage.

Not their body.

Not their follower count.

Not their engagement.

Not their earning potential.

Just a place where they can exist without converting the experience into performance.

For some athletes, that may come from family.

For others, close friendships, hobbies, faith communities, time outdoors, creative activities or ordinary relationships away from sport.

That does not replace professional mental-health care when someone needs it.

It protects something different: an identity broader than achievement.

That distinction also matters during injury, when athletes can suddenly lose access to one of the roles around which they have organized daily life. CPCWA’s discussion of coping with depression after a sports injury explores why emotional support can matter when sport participation and athletic identity are disrupted.

Success Should Not Require Maximizing Every Identity

The NIL era has created genuine possibilities for college athletes.

A student can learn entrepreneurship.

An athlete can build relationships with businesses.

A public platform can support causes that matter to them.

Income can reduce some financial pressures.

A personal brand may continue creating opportunities after competitive sport ends.

None of those benefits needs to be minimized to take psychological strain seriously.

The August 29, 2026 study offers a more useful framework: NIL can be both an opportunity and another demanding social identity. Its 14 Division I participants described a world in which academic responsibility, athletic performance and commercial visibility can intersect rather than remain separate.

That means resilience should not be defined as successfully maximizing all three roles at all times.

Sometimes resilience means noticing that one role is consuming too much capacity.

Sometimes it means declining an opportunity.

Sometimes it means asking for help.

Sometimes it means letting a post perform badly and going to sleep.

And sometimes it means remembering that student, athlete and influencer are all roles a person can occupy. None of them is the whole person.

Adolescent suicidal thoughts are not an abstract public health topic. They represent young people who may be frightened, isolated, overwhelmed, or unsure how to ask for help. Recent U.S. data suggests a difficult picture: some measures appear lower than earlier pandemic-era peaks, while the number of affected adolescents remains deeply concerning.

For families, coaches, teachers, and youth-serving adults, the goal is not to diagnose a teen from a survey statistic. The goal is to understand what the data can and cannot tell us, then respond with steadier support, clearer referral pathways, and less stigma around distress.

What Adolescent Suicidal Thoughts Data Shows

Adolescent Suicidal Thoughts In 2025

The 2025 National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported that, among adolescents ages 12 to 17, about 2.6 million, or 10.4%, had serious thoughts of suicide in the past year. The same release reported that 1.3 million, or 5.1%, made a suicide plan, and 738,000, or 2.9%, attempted suicide in the past year, according to SAMHSA’s 2025 NSDUH release.

Those numbers should be read carefully. A survey cannot explain every cause, and it cannot tell us what any one young person needs. It can, however, show that adolescent suicidal thoughts affect a large group of teens across the country. Even a percentage that seems small in a chart can represent hundreds of thousands or millions of young people.

High School Survey Signals

The CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey data from 2023 found that 20.4% of U.S. high school students seriously considered attempting suicide in the past year, 16.4% made a suicide plan, and 9.5% attempted suicide. The same CDC mental health data page also reports that in May 2026 there were 160 emergency department visits for suspected suicide attempts per 100,000 total emergency department visits among youth, based on National Syndromic Surveillance Program data from CDC suicidal thoughts and behavior data.

These measures are not identical to the SAMHSA figures. The age groups, survey methods, and questions differ. That is one reason the numbers should not be treated as interchangeable. Still, both sources point toward the same practical concern: many adolescents report serious distress, and some move from thoughts to planning or attempts.

Why Recent Numbers Can Look Conflicting

Different Surveys Ask Different Questions

One reason conversations about adolescent suicidal thoughts can become confusing is that national datasets use different samples. Some focus on adolescents ages 12 to 17. Others focus on high school students. Some ask about serious thoughts of suicide; others ask about seriously considering an attempt. These wording differences matter.

In training, small measurement differences can change how we interpret performance. A mile time, a treadmill pace, and a field test may all describe endurance, but they are not the same assessment. Mental health data works in a similar way. A cautious reading compares patterns without pretending that every number measures exactly the same experience.

A Lower Rate Is Not A Low Burden

Some recent data points suggest declines from earlier highs in certain adolescent measures. That can be encouraging, but it should not create complacency. A lower rate can still leave many young people at risk, especially when the population is large.

This distinction is emotionally important. Adults sometimes hear “the rate is improving” and assume the problem is fading. Teens in distress may hear the same statement and feel even more unseen. A better interpretation is more balanced: progress in a dataset may be real, while the remaining need is still substantial.

Patterns That Deserve Careful Attention

Gender And Identity Disparities

The research notes for 2023 show marked differences by gender and sexual orientation among high school students. Female students had higher reported rates of suicide-related behaviors than male students, and students identifying as LGBTQ+ reported much higher rates than their peers who did not identify as LGBTQ+.

These disparities should be handled with care. They should not be used to stereotype any student or assume risk based only on identity. They should push schools, families, and community programs to ask whether young people have safe adults, affirming environments, and timely access to qualified support when distress appears.

Emergency Department Signals

Emergency department data can add a different view because it reflects acute episodes that reach medical settings. It does not capture every crisis, and it may be affected by access to care, family response, local reporting systems, and how suspected attempts are classified.

Still, these data can help public health teams notice changes over time. For parents and coaches, the practical lesson is narrower: if a young person appears to be in immediate danger or may harm themselves, this is not a moment for motivational language, punishment, or waiting to see if they “snap out of it.” Contact local emergency services or a qualified crisis professional right away.

How Adults Can Respond Without Diagnosing

Start With Safety And Connection

Most adults are not clinicians, and they do not need to act like clinicians to be useful. A calm response can begin with listening, staying nearby, reducing immediate access to obvious dangers when possible, and connecting the teen with a qualified professional. The exact next step may depend on urgency, local resources, and the young person’s circumstances.

Language matters. Statements such as “you are not in trouble,” “I am glad you told me,” and “we are going to get help from someone trained for this” may support connection. They do not replace professional care, but they may reduce shame in the moment.

For readers tracking broader patterns in youth distress, CPCWA has also covered youth mental health trends, including anxiety and behavior concerns among adolescents.

Support Training, Sleep, And Routine Realistically

As a performance writer, I often think about how stress shows up in the body. Training, school pressure, social conflict, poor sleep, and identity strain can interact in ways that leave a teen feeling depleted. Physical activity may support mood and routine for some adolescents, but it is not a substitute for mental health care when suicidal thoughts are present.

Adults should be careful not to frame exercise as proof of wellness. A teen can attend practice, lift weights, compete well, or smile in public while still experiencing severe distress. Performance does not rule out pain.

Some families also draw on faith, reflection, or values-based community support. Those supports may offer comfort for some people, though they should not delay urgent care. Readers interested in broader wellness and meaning-centered reflection can find related writing at Spiritual Endeavors.

• Ask directly and calmly if the young person feels safe right now.
• Stay with them or make sure another trusted adult is present if risk seems immediate.
• Contact a qualified clinician, school mental health professional, crisis service, or emergency service based on urgency.
• Avoid debating whether their feelings are reasonable; focus first on safety and support.

Understanding The Rise In Suicidal Thoughts Among Adolescents

The phrase “rise” needs careful use. Some long-term indicators have increased across past years, while some recent measures appear lower than earlier pandemic-era levels. The safer reading is that adolescent suicidal thoughts remain a major concern, even where some indicators have improved.

For adults, the data should create urgency without panic. Urgency means taking disclosure seriously, building clear help pathways before crisis, and reducing shame around mental health conversations. Panic can make adults overreact, interrogate, or withdraw from the young person because the topic feels frightening.

A steady approach is more useful. If a teen reports suicidal thoughts, has a plan, has made an attempt, or seems unable to stay safe, involve qualified help promptly. If concerns are less immediate but still troubling, discuss them with a pediatrician, licensed mental health clinician, school counselor, or another qualified professional. Ask what warning signs to monitor, what resources are available after hours, and how family members can support safety without turning home life into surveillance.

Data can point us toward the size of the problem. Human response determines whether a young person feels alone with it.

Youth mental health trends deserve careful reading because the same data can show concern and modest improvement at the same time. Anxiety symptoms remain common among U.S. adolescents, while some depression-related indicators appear to have eased from their 2021 levels. That mixed picture should not be used to minimize distress, but it can help families, schools, coaches, and community programs respond with better questions rather than panic.

As a performance-focused writer, I often see the mental side of training treated as either motivation or weakness. Young people need a broader frame. Anxiety, low mood, irritability, withdrawal, school avoidance, conflict, and risk-taking may appear in different settings, and none of those signs should be reduced to character. At the same time, an article cannot diagnose a young person or tell a family what care is appropriate. The safer goal is education: understand the public health signals, notice changes early, and involve qualified professionals when concerns persist or escalate.

What The Youth Mental Health Data Shows

Youth Mental Health Measures Are Not All The Same

The 2025 National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported that about 18.0% of U.S. adolescents ages 12 to 17, or roughly 4.6 million young people, had moderate or severe anxiety symptoms in the prior two weeks. The same survey reported that 15.1%, or about 3.7 million adolescents, had experienced a major depressive episode in the past year. SAMHSA released those findings on July 27, 2026, through its annual NSDUH update SAMHSA survey release.

Those two measures are related, but they do not mean the same thing. Anxiety symptoms over two weeks capture a recent symptom window. A past-year major depressive episode reflects a different time frame and a specific survey category. Comparing them too casually can make the situation look clearer than it is.

The CDC also reported that, in the 2023 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, approximately 40% of U.S. high school students said they had felt so sad or hopeless nearly every day for at least two weeks that they stopped doing some usual activities. That was slightly lower than 42.3% in 2021. The same CDC page notes that about 19.7% of U.S. youth reported anxiety symptoms in the previous two weeks during July 2021 through December 2022 CDC mental health data.

Signals Of Improvement Still Require Attention

For youth mental health, a decline from a high point can be encouraging without being reassuring enough. A rate near 40% for sadness or hopelessness among high school students still suggests that many students are struggling with daily functioning, relationships, learning, or recovery from stress. A small improvement does not mean families and schools can step back.

It may be more accurate to say that the data point toward pressure that remains high, with some indicators moving in a better direction after the acute disruption seen around 2021. Public health data are useful because they show patterns across millions of young people. They are less useful for deciding what is happening with one teenager in one household, classroom, or locker room.

Why Anxiety And Behavioral Issues Can Overlap

Behavior Can Be A Signal, Not A Label

Anxiety in young people does not always look like quiet worry. It may show up as avoidance, anger, perfectionism, repeated reassurance seeking, stomach complaints before school, difficulty sleeping, or conflict around routines. Behavioral issues can also have many possible causes, including stress, developmental stage, family strain, learning challenges, substance exposure, trauma, peer pressure, sleep loss, or a diagnosable condition. An article cannot sort those causes for an individual child.

The youth mental health discussion often becomes unhelpful when adults ask only, “How do we stop this behavior?” A better first question may be, “What might this behavior be communicating?” That does not mean every behavior should be excused. Boundaries, safety, and accountability still matter. But young people usually benefit when adults pair limits with curiosity.

In training environments, this matters because athletes and active students may hide anxiety behind effort. A teen who never misses practice may still be distressed. Another may become irritable, distracted, or oppositional when pressure rises. Coaches and instructors should not try to diagnose, but they can notice patterns and refer concerns to parents, school supports, or licensed professionals.

Performance Pressure Can Complicate Reporting

Young people may hesitate to say they are anxious if they fear losing a starting role, disappointing a parent, being viewed as dramatic, or being removed from activities they care about. That fear can shape behavior. A student may push harder until they crash, avoid the setting entirely, or act out before anyone sees vulnerability.

Performance culture often praises grit. Grit can be useful when it means steady effort, realistic persistence, and learning through discomfort. It becomes less useful when it teaches young people to ignore distress until it disrupts school, sleep, relationships, or safety. Mental toughness should include the ability to ask for help, not just the ability to endure.

How Adults Can Read The Trends Carefully

Use Population Data As A Prompt For Better Observation

Survey percentages can support planning, but they should not be turned into assumptions about a specific child. A teen who appears successful may still be anxious. A teen who is struggling behaviorally may not have a mental health disorder. Both points can be true.

Adults can watch for changes from a young person’s usual baseline: sleep patterns, appetite, motivation, friendships, school attendance, emotional outbursts, withdrawal, substance use, or loss of interest in activities. These observations are not diagnoses. They are reasons to ask calm questions and, when needed, seek professional guidance.

Families may also benefit from thinking about the whole environment. Academic expectations, sport schedules, social media exposure, family stress, bullying, identity-related stress, and limited downtime can all affect how a young person copes. Public health data cannot identify which factor matters most for one child, but it can remind adults that distress is common enough to deserve open conversation.

Build Support Before A Crisis Point

Support does not need to begin only after a crisis. Schools, youth sports programs, and community groups can normalize help-seeking, clarify who students can talk to, and avoid language that shames anxiety or emotional distress. General wellness and care literacy resources, such as those available through HealthScope wellness resources, can also help families think more clearly about health information before they are under pressure.

Practical supports may include predictable routines, reasonable recovery time, consistent sleep expectations, trusted adults, and clear pathways to school counselors or healthcare professionals. These steps may support well-being, but they are not substitutes for evaluation when a young person has persistent, worsening, or safety-related symptoms.

• Ask what has changed rather than starting with blame.
• Separate discipline from emotional dismissal.
• Keep communication open after a difficult incident.
• Encourage professional support without framing it as failure.

What The Data Cannot Tell One Family

Trends Do Not Replace Individual Assessment

Even strong public health data have limits. Surveys rely on specific questions, time frames, and reporting methods. They can estimate how common symptoms are, but they cannot explain every cause or predict what one student needs. A young person with anxiety symptoms may need school support, family changes, therapy, medical evaluation, crisis care, or some combination. That decision belongs with qualified professionals who know the young person’s history and circumstances.

That distinction is especially relevant for behavioral concerns. Defiance, withdrawal, risk-taking, or intense emotional reactions may reflect many different patterns. Treating every behavior as “just anxiety” can miss other needs. Treating every behavior as willful misconduct can miss distress. A careful response leaves room for both accountability and assessment.

Equity And Access Remain Part Of The Conversation

Youth mental health can be shaped by access to care, family income, school staffing, transportation, insurance literacy, language access, stigma, and community safety. The two national sources cited here do not answer every equity question, but they make clear that mental health symptoms among adolescents are common enough to be a shared public concern rather than a private family failure.

For families, the practical issue is often not whether support sounds helpful, but whether it is available, affordable, and culturally respectful. Schools and community programs can help by making referral pathways clear and by avoiding vague advice that leaves parents unsure what to do next.

Youth Mental Health Questions For Clinicians

The most useful response to anxiety and behavioral concerns is usually specific, calm, and collaborative. Families do not need to arrive with a diagnosis. They can arrive with observations.

Parents and caregivers may want to discuss questions such as: What changes are most concerning? Could sleep, school stress, substance exposure, bullying, trauma, medication effects, or medical conditions be contributing? What signs would require urgent help? What school supports may be appropriate? How should adults respond when anxiety and behavior problems appear together? If treatment is recommended, what are the expected benefits, limits, and follow-up plan?

Young people can be included in these conversations in age-appropriate ways. They may know which settings feel hardest, which adults feel safe, and which pressures they have been hiding. Listening does not mean adults surrender judgment. It means the plan is more likely to match the young person’s real life.

If a young person talks about self-harm, suicide, feeling unsafe, or being unable to stay safe, families should seek immediate professional or emergency support through local crisis services, emergency departments, or emergency numbers. For non-emergency concerns, a pediatrician, licensed mental health professional, school counselor, or qualified healthcare clinician can help decide what assessment and support may fit the situation.