Gender Differences in Perceived Mental Health and Wellbeing Among Engineering Students in Finland

Research Paper Recommended citation: Bairoh, S. M. (2025). Gender Differences in Perceived Mental Health and Wellbeing Among Engineering Students in Finland. In Kangaslampi, R., Langie, G., Järvinen, H.-M., & Nagy, B. (Eds.), SEFI 53rd Annual Conference. European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI), Tampere, Finland. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17631824. This Conference Paper is brought to you for open access by the 53rd Annual Conference of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI) at Tampere University in Tampere, Finland. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN PERCEIVED MENTAL HEALTH AND WELLBEING AMONG ENGINEERING STUDENTS IN FINLAND S. Bairoh 1 Academic Engineers and Architects in Finland TEK Helsinki, Finland ORCID 0000-0003-3232-1127 Conference Key Areas: Diversity, equity and inclusion in our universities and in our teaching; The attractiveness of engineering Keywords: mental health and wellbeing, engineering students, gender, non-binary ABSTRACT This study investigates gender differences in perceived mental health and wellbeing (MHW) among engineering/technology students in Finland. Data were collected through annual student surveys conducted by a professional organization for university-educated engineers in 2024, 2021 and 2019. The statistical analysis of 2024 data revealed significant gender disparities, with men consistently reporting better MHW compared to women and non-binary students. Comparison to previous years indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic worsened MHW scores, but the impact was temporary. The findings highlight the need to support the MHW of women and non-binary students. In line with certain international studies, this study calls for a culture change towards increasing wellness in the engineering education culture. 1 Corresponding Author S. Bairoh [email protected] 1 INTRODUCTION Concerns over the increase in mental health problems among young people have intensified in recent years, albeit the causes of the crisis remain debated (e.g., Kurki & Rask, 2025; Asghar et al., 2023). The body of research on the topic has also been growing, exacerbated by the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. This applies also to engineering education, although mental health and wellbeing (MHW) in engineering education is still an emerging field of research (Asghar et al., 2023; Jensen & Cross, 2021). Therefore, different studies tend to use varying conceptualizations and measurements of MHW (Kamal et al., 2024). Some U.S. studies indicate that engineering students are particularly susceptible to issues with mental health and wellbeing (e.g., Danowitz & Beddoes, 2022; Jensen & Cross, 2021; Jensen et al., 2023). Jensen and Cross (2021) discuss that engineering students may suffer from particularly high levels of stress, anxiety, and depression due to a culture of suffering and rigor. “By defining high stress as the norm, engineering students can perceive a culture of stress that can be passed on to incoming students through their interactions and the advice that they provide about courses, instructors, and the departmental norms” (Jensen & Cross, 2021, p. 372; emphasis in the original). Furthermore, a recent U.S. study finds that engineering culture is the main barrier for engineering faculty and staff to engage in activities supportive of students’ MHW (Sanders et al., 2024). In their review of the international literature, Asghar et al. (2023) identify three recurrent themes related to the state of mental health and wellbeing (MHW) of undergraduate students in engineering. These are: (1) Undergraduate students experience a variety of mental health issues that negatively affect their experiences in engineering education; (2) The MHW of undergraduate students is affected by engineering cultural norms; and (3) The MHW of undergraduate students in engineering may be supported through targeted interventions. Somewhat surprisingly, most studies on MHW in engineering education do not make explicit comparisons between the majority and minority students in engineering, including women and students from racialized minorities (Asghar et al., 2023). The studies that report such comparisons find that the MHW of women and minorities is poorer than that of (‘white’) men. For example, Danowitz and Beddoes (2022) find that women were statistically more likely than men to screen positive for all anxiety disorders and major depression, and Jensen and Cross (2021) find that female students reported higher levels of stress and anxiety than men. Whilst these findings reflect the general trend, Danowitz and Beddoes (2022, p. 8) highlight that “the magnitude at which women versus men screen positive for these conditions indicates that some aspects of engineering culture and campus life are especially burdensome for women in engineering”. While approximately half of the studies reviewed by Asghar et al. (2023) originate from the United States, studies on MHW in engineering education have also been conducted in several countries in Asia and some countries in Europe. Nonetheless, no such studies (to our knowledge) have been conducted in the Nordic countries. Therefore, it is of particular interest to see how engineering/technology students perceive their MHW in Finland, the ”happiest country in the world” (World Happiness Report, 2025). Besides lack of studies comparing men and women, Asghar et al. (2023) did not come across any studies that provided information about the MHW outcomes of students identifying as non-binary. As Haverkamp et al. (2021) underline, transgender and gender nonconforming students and professionals are often invisible in engineering education research and theory. Hence, this study aims to fill these gaps by investigating the mental health and wellbeing (MHW) of engineering/technology students in universities in Finland, comparing men, women, and non-binary respondents. 2 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Research questions The main objective of this study was to examine gender differences in how university students of engineering/technology in Finland experience and perceive their mental health and wellbeing. Further, it was explored whether these perceptions have changed compared to previous years. The objectives were pursued by seeking to answer the following research questions: Q1. What kind of gender differences can be discerned in how engineering students in Finland perceive their mental health and wellbeing (MHW)? Q2. How have these perceptions changed in recent years? 2.2 Data Data for this study was collected by a professional organization for universityeducated engineers in Finland whose members also include students of engineering/technology, computer science, and natural sciences. The data used in this study was derived from the organization’s student surveys from 2019, 2021, and 2024. The student survey is an annual online survey, conducted in SeptemberOctober, targeting all student members except first-year students. The purpose of the student survey is to collect information on wellbeing and coping, employment situation and salaries, and to gather data on timely, varying topics. The overall number of respondents and response rates were the following: 2,870 persons (20%) in 2019; 3,260 persons (18%) in 2021; and 2,284 persons (11%) in 2024. While the number of respondents and the response rate varies, the number of participants each year was deemed sufficient for statistical analysis and for making inferences about student members in general. For this study, only students of engineering/technology were selected (see Table 1 for number of respondents). Gender as a binary variable (Male/Female) based on the Finnish ID could be derived from the organization’s membership register, and therefore the gender distribution of the population was known for 2019 and 2024 surveys . On the other hand, the 2021 survey was anonymous. However, as of 2021, the respondents have been asked to identify their gender on a 4-point scale (Male/Female/Other/Does not want to disclose). Please see Table 1 for the gender distribution for 2019, 2021, and 2024, respectively (without missing answers). Those with missing data as well as those who responded ‘does not want to disclose’ were coded as missing in this study. Table 1. Number (n) and percentage (%) of respondents by gender category in 2019, 2021, and 2024. Year Male Female Other Missing Total 2019* 2099 (70.9) 862 (29.1) - 2 2963 2021 1603 (65.9) 776 (31.9) 11 (0.5) 44 2434 2024 1147 (60.5) 724 (38.2) 24 (1.3) 40 1935 *Only binary data (Male/Female) based on Finnish ID was available. The data selected for this study consisted of three items measuring perceived mental health and wellbeing (MHW). First item was: “Have you been worried about your coping during the last academic year?” with answer options “no”, “yes, rarely”, “yes, several times” and “yes, constantly”. Second item was statement “I feel like I am in over my head with the amount of work related to my studies”, with responses on a five-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Third item was the current state of “Mental wellbeing (incl. mental balance)” with answer options “very good”, “good”, “somewhat ok”, “poor” and “really poor”. These three items were selected to obtain an overall understanding of how the students experience and perceive their own abilities to cope with the amount of work and stress related to their studies. Spearman’s rank-order correlation showed that the items have a moderate (-.398 – .588) yet highly statistically significant correlation (p<0.001). Data from 2024 represented most recent situation and functioned as the starting point of the analysis. Year 2021 was selected to represent the impact of the COVID19 pandemic. Since wellbeing and coping as a topic of inquiry was first introduced to the survey in 2019 and it reflects the situation before the COVID-19 pandemic, data from this year was also selected for the comparison. Albeit some respondents were likely to be the same in two or even three surveys, the data used in this study was anonymous and thus did not allow longitudinal analysis of individual students. Instead, the data from each year was considered cross-sectional and comparisons were made on gender category level (Man/Woman/Other). 2.3 Data analysis Statistical analyses were done with the statistical software SPSS (version 29). KruskalWallis tests, including pair-wise comparisons, were used to assess differences by gender category for 2024 data, with significance level of p<0.05. Crosstabulation by gender category (Man/Woman/Other) was used to assess distribution of scores within 2024 data and means over time. Due to limitations of space, further analysis of changes over time was omitted from this paper. 3 RESULTS 3.1 Gender differences in mental health and wellbeing The main results from 2024 data are presented in Table 2. Because the scales and their directions vary, Figures 1-3 further depict the distribution of the scores by gender category. The distribution of the mental health and wellbeing (MHW) scores were not similar for all groups, as assessed by visual inspection of the boxplots. The differences between gender groups were statistically highly significant (below p < 0.01) for all three items (Table 2). Nevertheless, the effect sizes were small, and none reached even moderate level, remaining below 0.06. The small effect sizes presumably reflect the unequal number of respondents in the three gender categories, as these ranged from 1147 (Man) to 24 (Other). Table 2. Perceived mental health and wellbeing (means) by gender category, 2024. Question item Man (mean, SD) Woman (mean, SD) Other (mean, SD) Krusk.- Wallis H p (asympt.) Effect size MHW1. Have you been worried about your coping during the last academic year? [1=no, 4=yes, constantly] 2.18 0.917 2.62 0.868 3.00 0.834 111.69 <0.001** 0.058 MHW2. I feel like I am in over my head with the amount of work related to my studies [1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree] 2.80 1.048 3.13 1.027 3.54 0.884 53.49 <0.001** 0.027 MHW3. Mental wellbeing (incl. mental balance) [1=very good, 5=really poor] 2.41 0.911 2.66 0.895 3.00 0.834 45.07 0.005** 0.023 **highly significant difference Results in Table 2 and Figures 1-3 reveal that male respondents perceived their MHW to be better than women or non-binary respondents. For example, 26% of men reported that they have not been worried about their coping during the last academic year whereas the percentage shares were 10% for women and 4% for others (Figure 1.). Conversely, 9% of men stated than they are constantly worried about coping while the same was said by 16% of women and 29% of non-binary respondents. Fig. 1. “Have you been worried about your coping during the last academic year?” (MHW1). Distribution of scores by gender category, 2024. Similarly, over 60% of non-binary respondents agreed that the amount of work related to their studies is overwhelming whereas the corresponding numbers were 25,9 % 10,2 % 4,2 % 38,4 % 33,3 % 20,8 % 27,0 % 40,9 % 45,8 % 8,6 % 15,6 % 29,2 % 0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % Man (n=1147) Woman (n=724) Other (n=24) no yes, rarely yes, several times yes, constantly 39% for women and 26% for men (Figure 2). Furthermore, while none of the nonbinary respondents described their mental wellbeing as really poor, 25% described it as poor, and only 16% perceived it to be good or very good. On the other hand, 59% of men described their mental health as good or very good. Fig. 2. “I feel like I am in over my head with the amount of work related to my studies.” (MHW2). Distribution of scores by gender category, 2024. Fig. 3. “Mental wellbeing (incl. mental balance)” (MHW3). Distribution of scores by gender category, 2024. The pairwise comparisons further showed that for all three items, there were statistically highly significant differences between respondents in categories “Man” and “Woman” as well as “Man” and “Other”. On the other hand, the disparities between females and others were not significant for any items. 10,4 % 5,4 % 0,0 % 30,1 % 22,6 % 16,7 % 33,5 % 33,1 % 20,8 % 20,7 % 30,8 % 54,2 % 5,3 % 8,0 % 8,3 % 0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % Man (n=1147) Woman (n=724) Other (n=24) 1=strongly disagree 2 3 4 5=strongly agree 13,5 % 6,9 % 8,3 % 45,3 % 39,3 % 8,3 % 29,7 % 37,1 % 58,3 % 9,3 % 14,0 % 25,0 % 2,2 % 2,6 % 0,0 % 0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % Man (n=1147) Woman (n=724) Other (n=24) very good good somewhat ok poor really poor 3.2 Changes over time To explore changes over time, main results from 2019 and 2021 surveys were compared to those obtained in 2024. The findings revealed that gender differences for each MHW item appear constant and consistent, despite some fluctuation between years (Table 3). The COVID-19 pandemic, reflected in the results of 2021, was clearly related to a worsening in MHW for all gender categories, while 2024 scores are close to the pre-pandemic levels (Table 3). Compared to women or non-binary respondents, men reported throughout less concern about coping (MHW1), felt less often that the amount of work is overwhelming (MHW2), and more often described their mental health as good (MHW3). Nonetheless, the means for the scores in 2024 remained at slightly elevated level compared to year 2019. Table 3. Perceived mental health and wellbeing: Means by gender category and year. Question item Gender category 2019 2021 2024 MHW1. Have you been worried about your coping during the last academic year? [1=no, 4=yes, constantly] Man (mean, SD) 2.17 0.869 2.30 0.915 2.18 0.917 Woman (mean, SD) 2.62 0.840 2.79 0.812 2.62 0.868 Other (mean, SD) . 3.45 0.820 3.00 0.834 MHW2. I feel like I am in over my head with the amount of work related to my studies Man (mean, SD) 2.77 1.080 2.90 1.070 2.80 1.048 Woman (mean, SD) 3.17 1.065 3.37 1.011 3.13 1.027 Other (mean, SD) . 4.18 0.751 3.54 0.895 MHW3. Mental wellbeing (incl. mental balance) Man (mean, SD) 2.34 0.932 2.55 0.931 2.41 0.911 Woman (mean, SD) 2.58 0.888 2.85 0.892 2.66 0.895 Other (mean, SD) . 3.64 1.120 3.00 0.834 3.3 Limitations The study has limitations. The study covers the situation in one country (Finland), and the results could be different in other countries. Due to the small number of respondents in the gender category other, and this category missing in 2019 data, the results for this group can only be considered indicative albeit they are consistent, and the differences in 2024 are statistically significant. Another limitation is that MHW is measured with only three individual items and thus do not allow comparison with verified instruments (such as those used by Mirabelli et al., 2025 or Jensen & Cross, 2021). Moreover, following the MHW of individual students across time would be advantageous to improve understanding of MHW, but the anonymous data used in this study did not allow that. Finally, limitations of space hindered the possibilities to further analyse changes over time. 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This study contributes to the growing literature on the mental health and wellbeing (MHW) of engineering/technology students by comparing MHW as perceived by men, women and non-binary students in universities in Finland. In line with certain international studies and as anticipated, men perceive their MHW to be better than women or others. There are marked and statistically highly significant differences between men and women, and even starker disparities between men and non-binary students. However, that does not mean that men do not worry about their coping or experience stress related to studies. Some studies indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic had a deteriorating impact on MHW of engineering/technology students (e.g. Danowitz & Beddoes, 2020). The findings of this study suggest that although COVID-19 caused the perceived MHW to worsen, the effect was temporary. The MHW scores of engineering/technology students in Finland have, in general, regained their pre-pandemic (2019) levels. Nevertheless, the impact of the pandemic merits further investigation. Overall, the results are worrying and even alarming, particularly pertaining to women and non-binary students. It is worth noting that the items in this study did not measure whether engineering/technology students ever experience stress. Instead, the respondents were asked if they have been worried about their coping (MHW1) or feel that the amount of work makes them feel they are in over their head (MHW2) during the last academic year. Moreover, while majority of respondents in all gender categories describe their current mental wellbeing (MHW3) at least “somewhat ok”, those describing it as poor or really poor amount to 11.5% of men, 16.6% of women, and 25% of others. Hence, our conclusion is similar to Asghar et al. (2023, p. 14): “the current condition of MHW of undergraduate engineering is unsatisfactory for supporting academic performance and retention in undergraduate engineering programs”. Asghar et al. (2023 summarize that heavy academic workload, trouble with sleeping, and engineering education culture hinder MHW in engineering education. Therefore, like for example Jensen et al. (2023) and Sanders et al. (2024), we call for a culture change towards increasing wellness for all who are part of this culture. This also means consistent efforts to improve inclusion, because experiences of exclusion are linked to lower MHW (Jensen & Cross, 2021). A prior study finds that in Finland, women students were less likely than men to feel they belong in engineering, and the belonging of non-binary students was even weaker (Bairoh & Naukkarinen, 2023). Our findings corroborate these results and underline the need to address the MHW of women and non-binary students in Finnish engineering/technology universities. Targeted interventions (see e.g., Asghar et al., 2023) as well as supporting the MHW of all students could reduce the likelihood of engineering/technology students being exhausted by their studies.