Protective factors for suicidal behaviors in adolescents: Life satisfaction, reasons for living, and psychosocial resources across sex groups

Abstract

Introduction: Suicidal behaviors in adolescence are a major public health concern. Beyond risk factors, identifying protective mechanisms is essential for prevention and early intervention. Protective constructs such as life satisfaction, reasons for living, and psychosocial resources may operate differently across sex groups. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with Spanish adolescents (N = 1,061; 12–21 years; M = 15.78), categorized into girls (n = 502), boys (n = 406), and non-binary/other (n = 7). Multiple regressions were performed separately by group with suicidal behaviors as the dependent variable, assessed with the Adolescent Suicidal Behavior Assessment Scale (SENTIA). Age was entered in Step 1. Step 2 included protective predictors measured with the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS), the Reasons for Living Inventory–Adolescent version (RFL), and selected scales from the Sistema de Evaluación de Niños y Adolescentes (SENA) assessing social resources and perceived family, school, and community context. Results: Age did not predict suicidal behaviors in any group. In girls, the protective model was significant (F(8,491) = 24.11, p < .001): suicidal behaviors were mainly explained by reasons for living and life satisfaction, with an additional contribution from social resources. In boys, the model was also significant (F(8,396) = 15.69, p < .001), but a different pattern emerged: school context showed a distinct contribution, whereas global wellbeing indicators (SWLS/ RFL) were less salient once psychosocial variables were included. In the non-binary/other group, the full model could not be reliably estimated due to the very small sample size and limited statistical power. Conclusions: Protective pathways differed across sex groups. From a gender-informed perspective, girls may benefit more from meaning- and wellbeing-focused prevention, whereas boys may require stronger school-based and relational protective contexts, given gendered differences in emotional expression and help-seeking. Larger non-binary